Rules/ contact info

Contact us at

The forum Rules are in the House Rules and Rules of the Forum Category  and an up to date summary is available here.  Due to suggestions by our contributors, we have decided to make the rules more prominent though out of thousands of people very few seem to need the reminder.  The few who do now have in a more prominent position.  This forum is privately owned and subject to the following rules and any others which may be published at anytime including private warnings to participants. If you choose to participate by commenting or writing, you are a member of the forum subject to its rules.

It is once again necessary to remind everyone that we do not have a forum for vicious personal attacks. We have a forum for the discussion of public policy. We ask that you address the issues. Vicious attacks on our authors and commenters will not be permitted.  Violators will be subject to suspension or revocation of privileges  as two have discovered recently.  Please let this be one place where civility reigns. Thank you for your cooperation.

1. Avoid profanities, libelous statements, ethnic, religious or gender based slurs, or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment or denigrating people or groups on the basis of ethnicity, religion, gender, service to the military, family, sexual orientation, or disability.

2. Try to relate your comments to the topic.

3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.

4. Threats are treated seriously, don’t make them.

5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.

6. Illegal content is prohibited including links to such to include harassment,  pornography, or solicitation of under aged participants.  In spite of the fact this is intended to be an adult forum, all are welcomed here regardless of age therefore federal and local standards should be followed for general audiences.  Any adult soliciting a minor will be banned. We will cooperate with law enforcement.

7. You are only allowed two identities on a thread. More are subject to deletion. Also do not hijack the email address of the site or one of our contributors in the comments or claim the identity of another person.

8. We are not a forum for pet accusations, libel, or false light.

9. Do not make personal attacks against other commenters or our authors aimed at hurting their reputation, careers, family status, or driving them away from commenting.

3 thoughts on “Rules/ contact info”

  1. Valero to close Del. refinery (good job Mr. VP, evil energy co. gets its just deserts)

    Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | 11/20/2009 | staff
    Valero Energy Corp., the largest U.S. refiner, announced today that it will permanently close its Delaware City, Del., plant because of losses brought on by the poor economy. The shutdown is expected to affect about 550 employees. “A safe and orderly shutdown of the refinery will commence immediately,” the San Antonio, Texas-based company said today in a statement, adding that employees were told today of the move. The company said it expects to save $450 million in operating expenses next year by shutting the refinery.

  2. How Carbon Bill Would Hit Valero Energy
    Forbes ^ | November 13, 2009 | Christopher Helman

    Posted on Thursday, November 26, 2009 8:53:55 AM by reaganaut1

    William Klesse, chief executive of oil refiner Valero Energy, is riled up. “I think cap-and-trade is ludicrous,” he says. “The whole bill is a hidden tax.” The so-called climate bill wending its way through the Senate aims to create a cap-and-trade regime covering emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. If it passes in anything close to its current form, the bill would milk more carbon cash (payments to the government for the right to pollute) out of refiners than any other industry–somewhere between $30 billion and $110 billion a year. Valero, as America’s biggest refiner (2.4 million barrels a day), would pay on the order of $7 billion a year.

    The numbers are massive because the bill would hit refiners twice. First they would have to pay for allocations covering the carbon emissions from their factories (roughly 5% of total U.S. emissions). Then they would also be responsible for the tailpipe emissions from the combustion of all the automotive fuels they sell (roughly 40% of U.S. emissions). Klesse, 62, moans that politicians are “picking winners and losers” in figuring emissions allocations.

    One problem with this analysis: It’s motorists who will pay, as refiners simply tack carbon costs onto the price of gasoline. Valero Energy admits as much: Placards posted atop each pump at Valero’s 5,800 branded gas stations feature the iconic illustration of a finger-pointing Uncle Sam and the words, “You will pay the price.” The sign says that cap-and-trade “will cost you 77 cents or more a gallon.”

    In five years the U.S. will have the plants to produce some 70 million more gallons of fuel a day than it needs, figures Deutsche Bank’s Paul Sankey. Under cap-and-trade that extra fuel wouldn’t be exported because it couldn’t compete with new refineries, unburdened with carbon regulations

    (Excerpt) Read more at …

  3. Secret Service: Threats Against Obama No Higher than Normal

    CBS ^ | 12/3/09 | Stepahine Condom
    The director of the Secret Service today disputed widely-reported claims that President Obama is receiving more death threats than previous presidents. At a congressional hearing into the White House security breach that took place last week, when Tareq and Michaele Salahi “crashed” the White House state dinner, Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan said the current threat level against the president is normal. “The threats right now … is the same level as it has been for the previous two presidents at this point in their administrations,” Sullivan said. Sullivan was the only requested witness who agreed to testify today before…

Comments are closed.

Where public policy meets common sense

WP Facebook Auto Publish Powered By :