# Nancy Pelosi, you ignorant slut... **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 27, 2006, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505 "2006-04-27T20:20:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![duffer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duffer/32/1026_2.png) [@duffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duffer)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/61 "2006-04-28T15:12:22Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > You know what MIGHT help, if Washington had the will and the balls to do it??? Reign in the oil speculators. Nah, that’s too obvious. :rolleyes: I assume you mean the American oil speculators. What is your Grand Plan to deal with foreign speculators? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/62 "2006-04-28T15:12:27Z")
Meranwhile back at the ranch, here’s some light entertainment, with a rhetorical question. Is it possible that Pelosi’s outrage - real or feigned - is at least partially based on what happened during the “rolling blacakout” days of the Californian “energy crisis that really shouldn’t have been”? Keep in mind that energy and oil go hand in hand. Also keep in mind that these guys had contacts in very hign places… [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/01/eveningnews/printable620626.shtml](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/01/eveningnews/printable620626.shtml) > [@CBS News](#): > > Four years after California’s disastrous experiment with energy deregulation, Enron energy traders can be heard – on audiotapes obtained by CBS News – gloating and praising each other as they helped bring on, and cash-in on, the Western power crisis. > > “He just f—s California,” says one Enron employee. “He steals money from California to the tune of about a million.” … > The tapes, from Enron’s West Coast trading desk, also confirm what CBS reported years ago: that in secret deals with power producers, traders deliberately drove up prices by ordering power plants shut down. > > “If you took down the steamer, how long would it take to get it back up?” an Enron worker is heard saying. > > “Oh, it’s not something you want to just be turning on and off every hour. Let’s put it that way,” another says. > > “Well, why don’t you just go ahead and shut her down.” … > > “They’re f------g taking all the money back from you guys?” complains an Enron employee on the tapes. “All the money you guys stole from those poor grandmothers in California?” > > “Yeah, grandma Millie, man” > > “Yeah, now she wants her f------g money back for all the power you’ve charged right up, jammed right up her a------ for f------g $250 a megawatt hour.” > > And the tapes appear to link top Enron officials Ken Lay and Jeffrey Skilling to schemes that fueled the crisis. … > > Before the 2000 election, Enron employees pondered the possibilities of a Bush win. > > “It’d be great. I’d love to see Ken Lay Secretary of Energy,” says one Enron worker. > > That didn’t happen, but they were sure President Bush would fight any limits on sky-high energy prices. > > “When this election comes Bush will f------g whack this s–t, man. He won’t play this price-cap b------t.” … > > “We will not take any action that makes California’s problems worse and that’s why I oppose price caps,” said Mr. Bush on May 29, 2001. > > Both the **Justice Department** and Enron tried to prevent the release of these tapes. Enron’s lawyers argued they merely prove “that people at Enron sometimes talked like Barnacle Bill the Sailor.” ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/63 "2006-04-28T15:21:45Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > Meranwhile back at the ranch, here’s some light entertainment, with a rhetorical question. Is it possible that Pelosi’s outrage - real or feigned - is at least partially based on what happened during the “rolling blacakout” days of the Californian “energy crisis that really shouldn’t have been”? Keep in mind that energy and oil go hand in hand. Also keep in mind that these guys had contacts in very hign places… > > [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/01/eveningnews/printable620626.shtml](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/01/eveningnews/printable620626.shtml) You know what’s pathetic? I knew about those tapes years ago from The Daily Show. I had to Google them to verify that they were real (it came up in a lwasuit in Washington State). Why the hell did it take so long for anyone to report on this? I apologize for the hijack. Though I’m not sorry enough not to do it again. They did this hilarious bit where Stephen Colbert played Grandma, calling Enron to get her power turned on, and getting verbally abused by Enron employees. It was evil. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/64 "2006-04-28T15:27:06Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > I’m simply amused by the sight of the same poster who defends the appointment of Tony Snow as WH spokesman on the grounds that his job is primarily political spin concurrently claiming outrage over the statements of an official whose job is primarily political spin. Nancy Pelosi’s job is “primarily spin”? Wow, you learn something new every day! :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/65 "2006-04-28T15:27:59Z")
> [@Weirddave](#): > > I know very much where that tax money goes, thankyouverymuch. Aparently you have trouble with your reading comprehension, because even thought you quoted what I said, you obviously completely missed it: > Maybe you don’t think that $3 a gallon is a bigger problem then all those things that gas taxes pay for. Fine and dandy, that’s your decision to make, but don’t pretend that what we’re dealing with here is all big, bad corporate greed and a screw the little guy mentality when the numbers show that Exxon/Mobil is posting decent but not spectacular earnings. Your arguments just don’t square up with the facts. You said > [@Weirddave](#): > > 42% of the price of a gallon of gas is going to an inefficeint, wasteful government buerocracy that generally does little or nothing except strive to justify it’s own existence The wasteful government bureaucracy you’re talking about is road building - just wanted to make that clear. 18% margin on a commodity is downright sweet. It’s interesting the oil companies only talk about margins, not profits. It’s not like an increase in the price of oil adds jobs or anything - it goes right to their bottom lines. Good business to be in. And I own oil stock, I’m not dumb. I don’t mind the CEO of Exxon caring about his bottom line. I do mind the CEO of the US caring about Exxon’s bottom line. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_One](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/45deac/32.png) [@Evil\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_One)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/66 "2006-04-28T15:41:12Z")
> [@Lord Ashtar](#): > > Bush sends as much money as he can to his oil cronies. Cheney sends another large chunk to Haliburton. The rest becomes tax cuts for the rich. Please tell me that the above was sarcasm. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/67 "2006-04-28T15:55:19Z")
> [@Weirddave](#): > > I hate to rain on a great conspiracy theory Steve (OH NOES! Cheney met with oilmen in a meeting about energy policy! Run from the black helicopters!), but maybe you can explain why Exxon/Mobil just paid $1.35/share on their stock, an nice return, to be sure, but nothing out of the ordinary to write home about. How about the fact that their profit magin is running about 18%, again, that’s about standard for a well run company in most industries. Cite? BTW, Chevron just announced that its first quarter profits are 50% higher than they were a year ago. And Exxon/Mobil just announced record profits. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/68 "2006-04-28T16:04:09Z")
When the Democrats take the House (and maybe the Senate) in 2006 and win the Presidency in 2008 and gas prices are still high we’ll be able to put this to rest. Until then I guess we’ll have to put up with the evil-Republicans-and-oilmen-are-getting-rich-off-the-little-guy conspiracy theory, no matter that it doesn’t make any sense. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/69 "2006-04-28T16:20:29Z")
Not necessarily **Doors** , you have to remember that, in general, Dems are as corrupt and inneficent as Repubs, and both get their money from corporate sources for the most part. I don’t see a Dem being any more likely to get alternative energy plans moving, or more hybrid cars on the road, than Bush has. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/70 "2006-04-28T16:26:18Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > You said > > The wasteful government bureaucracy you’re talking about is road building - just wanted to make that clear. > > 18% margin on a commodity is downright sweet. It’s interesting the oil companies only talk about margins, not profits. It’s not like an increase in the price of oil adds jobs or anything - it goes right to their bottom lines. Good business to be in. And I own oil stock, I’m not dumb. > > I don’t mind the CEO of Exxon caring about his bottom line. I do mind the CEO of the US caring about Exxon’s bottom line. > **[Oil: Exxon Chairman's $400 Million Parachute](https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1841989)** > [@ABC News](#): > > April 14, 2006— Soaring gas prices are squeezing most Americans at the pump, but at least one man isn’t complaining. > Last year, Exxon made the biggest profit of any company ever, $36 billion, and its retiring chairman appears to be reaping the benefits. > Exxon is giving Lee Raymond one of the most generous retirement packages in history, nearly $400 million, including pension, stock options and other perks, such as a $1 million consulting deal, two years of home security, personal security, a car and driver, and use of a corporate jet for professional purposes. > Last November, when he was still chairman of Exxon, Raymond told Congress that gas prices were high because of global supply and demand. I wonder, since this is a retirement package, is anyone worth almost half a billion to NOT work anymore? I could possibly ask questions about how the government subsidies, tax breaks, cheap access to federal lands, relaxations of pollution standards (Clean Air Act?) etc etc etc that make this sort of ridiculous thing possible. It’s a **retirement package**. How can anyone sit at home and be retired and be worth .4 Billion? I wonder if maybe it’s time to bust up the oil companies. Sort of like the “baby Bells”. Just for past history, Exxon used to be Esso, which was once Standard Oil. They were in the middle of many anti-trust and scandal ridden activities in the past. The leopard changed its name, but not its spots. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/71 "2006-04-28T16:29:29Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > When the Democrats take the House (and maybe the Senate) in 2006 and win the Presidency in 2008 and gas prices are still high we’ll be able to put this to rest. > > Until then I guess we’ll have to put up with the evil-Republicans-and-oilmen-are-getting-rich-off-the-little-guy conspiracy theory, no matter that it doesn’t make any sense. In case that was directed at me, I don’t think there’s a vast conspiracy. I’m saying that “18% profit is standard for a well-run company” is laughable. Even during the 90’s, when the stock market was skyrocketing, and P/E’s got way out of hand, stock prices didn’t go up 18% annually. If stock prices go up less than 18%, whiole Price-to-Earnings ratios go up multifold, I think it’s safe to say “standard 18% profits” is crap. I also agree with **John Mace** that what Nancy Pelosi _said_ - that there’s a direct cause-effect, was stupid. I’m going to guess that’s not what she _meant_ - I’m guessing she meant that very oil-biz friendly anti-environment policies, and the Iraq war, and less successful “jaw-boning” than Clinton did with the Saudis, have left us at this juncture. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/72 "2006-04-28T16:46:12Z")
> [@bup](#): > > BTW, Chevron just announced that its first quarter profits are 50% higher than they were a year ago. And Exxon/Mobil just announced record profits. If Ford or Microstoft or Intel or Dell or HP just announced that, everyone would be cheering. Why is it necessarily bad when an oil company does it? (Apologies if you didn’t mean that it was “bad”, I’m just assuming you did.) As I said earlier, I’m all for getting rid of tax break, special subsidies, or any other kind of sweethear deal the oil companies have. But profit is good in a capitalist economy. if there’s price fixing or other illegal anti-competitive practices, let’s prosecute. But just complaining about oil companies making a profit doesn’t make any sense to me. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/73 "2006-04-28T16:47:46Z")
> [@bup](#): > > In case that was directed at me, I don’t think there’s a vast conspiracy. It wasn’t directed at you. It was, however, a statement of my exasperation with the whole idea that the oil companies are cheating us. We have been living in Fantasyland for years with the idea that we could maintain cheap oil forever. Most other people long ago came to grips with it and adjusted accordingly. Of course oil companies are going to get rich off the increase in oil prices. That’s what they are in the business of, oil. I think what people don’t like is that the wealth is concentrated in the hands of relatively few people. It’s funny. We fight tooth and nail to convince ourselves that we can become anything we want to be if we work hard enough at it, but as soon as we see some guy living it we tax him into oblivion or complain that he’s cheating us. We’re all just socialists at heart, petty, jealous people that can’t stand it that someone is making money off of us. The oil companies are bringing us a product that we desperately need, and in spite of the increases they are doing it at a reasonable price. Sure, they’re making a profit doing so, but so what? Now there’s a proposal for “windfall” taxation, because they’re making too much money. It’s just nauseating to me that people make a grab for money that’s not theirs every time they see the chance. As long as the prices for gasoline are in relative proportion to the price of crude, refinement, and distribution, I don’t see a problem here. There’s no gouging. This is not the return of the Standard Oil trust. This is the “free market” in action. And amazingly, when it works we immediately start yearning for socialism because it’s not fair. How ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/74 "2006-04-28T18:22:10Z")
Well I jsut don’t want to win the battle and lose the war. I don’t believe it is the President’s responsibility to make gas cheaper, or to keep it from getting too expensive. Ms Pelosi is foolish enough to think that it is. Which means that when a Democrat is elected, he will also be saddled with the job of encouraging Americans to increase their consumption of fossil fuels and their emission of greenhouse gases. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/75 "2006-04-28T19:03:10Z")
> [@saoirse](#): > > Ms Pelosi is foolish enough to think that it is. Knowing what her job is and knowing what will happen in 7 months, you believe what she says is really what she thinks anyway, huh? Ri-i-i-ight. Go take a seat in the corner next to **John**. ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/76 "2006-04-28T19:18:56Z")
Hmmm. Seems like John Mace and Airman Doors said just about everything I was planning to say in their last posts. Well said guys. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/77 "2006-04-28T19:24:25Z")
So do you have a cite for, or retract your ridiculous statement that 18% profits are standard for a well-run company? Because your buds **John** and **Airman** didn’t answer that for you. ---
**Author:** ![NurseCarmen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5daacb/32.png) [@NurseCarmen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NurseCarmen)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/78 "2006-04-28T19:51:50Z")
I really don’t have a problem with the oil companies having a windfall. They are in the commodoties business, and they take the risk of feast or famine. Right now, it’s feast. My problem is with the political giveaways that allow the oil companies to have the benefit of no risk whatsoever. Now if you don’t mind, I’m going to refresh my E-Trade page. The moment the government puts the money I’ve lost taking risks back into my account, I’ll stop complaining. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/79 "2006-04-28T19:59:22Z")
> [@bup](#): > > So do you have a cite for, or retract your ridiculous statement that 18% profits are standard for a well-run company? Because your buds John and Airman didn’t answer that for you. Well, I don’t know what ‘standard’ profit is, but 18% doesn’t seem all that out there for a well run company. I’m looking to see if there are any historical trends in profit in the oil industry, but so far no luck on anything easy to put in a thread (charts and graphs and such). My impression is that when the price of a barrel of oil rises rapidly that refining and distribution companies generally have large profits (due to how oil speculation works and the ability to draw down on oil already purchased at the cheaper price while rising the price at the pump in anticiaption of the higher future costs)…while when the price of a barrel of oil drops so do the profits. Such profits are definitely temporary. Long and the short of it is that unless someone can prove that the various refiners/distributers are colluding together to fix prices there is nothing illegal or even wrong with companies making a profit. And its the business model itself that dictates the kind of profits we are currently seeing in the oil industry, no ‘greed’ on the part of Big Oil™, or Bush and his evil henchmen. Yeah, I know that in some circles the word ‘profit’ is a bad word, but really there is nothing wrong with a company making money. 😛 -XT ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2006, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505/80 "2006-04-28T20:05:22Z")
> [@NurseCarmen](#): > > My problem is with the political giveaways that allow the oil companies to have the benefit of no risk whatsoever. Now if you don’t mind, I’m going to refresh my E-Trade page. The moment the government puts the money I’ve lost taking risks back into my account, I’ll stop complaining. Take away the oil subsidies. I’m all for it. Of course, this will mean that the price of gas at the pump will be completely dependent on _gasp_ the Free Market, without all that well meaning government ‘helping’ we’ve grown used too. 😛 I doubt many folks REALLY want to do this…they just want to stick it to Big Oil™, since this will allow them to keep the price of gas artificially low…and then we can remain fat and happy. Until we hit the wall of course… -XT [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-pelosi-you-ignorant-slut/354505.md?page=5)