A collecting forum. CollectingBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CollectingBanter forum » Collecting newsgroups » 8 Track Tapes
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% ofAmericans want to drill !



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 28th 08, 04:41 PM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
trippin-2-8-track
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 365
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% ofAmericans want to drill !

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...l_lower_prices


the public's opinion has changed as well- how can Democrats keep
blocking our desire to tap oil resources, when 67% of us want to
drill ?

you can't blame the Republicans for this, and you can't blame Bush for
this- it's a Democrat controlled Congress, since 2006

if you are a car guy who wants to continue to enjoy this hobby, better
get your voting priorities in line- McCain wants to drill


67% Support Offshore Drilling, 64% Expect it Will Lower Prices
Tuesday, June 17, 2008 Email to a FriendAdvertisement
Most voters favor the resumption of offshore drilling in the United
States and expect it to lower prices at the pump, even as John McCain
has announced his support for states that want to explore for oil and
gas off their coasts.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey—conducted before McCain
announced his intentions on the issue--finds that 67% of voters
believe that drilling should be allowed off the coasts of California,
Florida and other states. Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided.
Conservative and moderate voters strongly support this approach, while
liberals are more evenly divided (46% of liberals favor drilling, 37%
oppose).

Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters believe it is at least somewhat
likely that gas prices will go down if offshore oil drilling is
allowed, although 27% don’t believe it. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of
conservatives say offshore drilling is at least somewhat likely to
drive prices down. That view is shared by 57% of moderates and 50% of
liberal voters.

Nearly all voters are worried about rising gas and energy prices, with
79% very concerned and 16% somewhat concerned.

McCain is expected to formally call today (Tuesday) for the lifting of
the federal moratorium on states being allowed to explore off their
coasts for oil and gas deposits. While acknowledging it is only a
short-term response, he has described it as a good first step toward
reducing U.S. energy dependence on overseas sources.

The Outer Continental Shelf moratorium, passed in 1981, bans
exploration for offshore natural gas and oil deposits. Barack Obama,
McCain’s opponent for the White House, voted against an effort to lift
the ban last year in the Senate. He argued that it was only a short-
term solution. National Democratic Party leaders and most
environmental organizations for years have strongly opposed efforts to
explore for oil off the coast of the U.S.

According to the new survey, 85% of Republicans are in favor of
offshore drilling as opposed to 57% of Democrats and 60% of
unaffiliated voters. Those who call themselves conservatives favor
such drilling 84% to 46% of liberals and 59% of self-designated
moderates.

African-American voters are less supportive of such drilling than
whites – 58% to 71%.

Women are more skeptical than men about the impact such drilling will
have on gas prices: Nearly one out of three male voters (32%) say
prices are very likely to go down, a view shared by only 23% of
women.

Four out of five Republicans (79%) think prices are likely to fall
thanks to offshore drilling, a view shared by only 55% of Democrats.
Sixty percent (60%) of unaffiliated voters expect it to happen.

Voters also believe 61% to 22% that oil companies should be required
to reinvest at least a portion of their profits into alternative
energy research. On this question, liberal and moderate voters are
strongly supportive of the proposal while conservatives are more
evenly divided (47% of conservatives in favor, 35% opposed)

Data released yesterday showed that Americans believe developing new
energy sources is the best long-term solution to the nation’s energy
problem. Forty-seven percent (47%) said private companies were more
likely to solve the nation’s energy problem than government research
programs. But, at the same time, only 52% said companies should be
allowed to keep the profits from the discovery of any alternative fuel
sources.

See survey questions and toplines. Crosstabs are available for Premium
Members only.

Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the
collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling
information.

The Rasmussen Reports ElectionEdge™ Premium Service for Election 2008
offers the most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided
for a Presidential election.

Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an
independent pollster for more than a decade.
Ads
  #2  
Old June 28th 08, 08:53 PM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
Republican Liar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% of Americans want to drill !



"trippin-2-8-track" wrote in
message

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...l_lower_prices


the public's opinion has changed as well- how can
Democrats keep blocking our desire to tap oil resources,
when 67% of us want to drill ?

you can't blame the Republicans for this, and you can't
blame Bush for this- it's a Democrat controlled Congress,
since 2006


Why has the right been blocking oil for so long? Why didn't they open ANWR
when they had control of both branches of government? Why has the right
failed for so long to get anything done? Why has Bush been on vacation all
this time? The republicans hate America and want everyone to pay more for
gas at the pumps.



  #3  
Old June 28th 08, 09:01 PM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% ofAmericans want to drill !

http://home.att.net/~meditation/ANWR.html

The costly symbolism of ANWR

The United States is in serious energy crisis today, in part
because of the triumph of symbolism over substance in the United
States Congress. Our political pundits have elevated the 19.6 million
acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, better known as ANWR (see map),
into a sacred mythical land that no man dare tread upon, least they
spoil its great natural beauty forever (picture of drilling area). In
reality, any future ANWR oil exploration would only take place in the
desolate, treeless area designated as "10-02," which represents just
8% of ANWR's land area, and which encompasses the Coastal Plain north
of the Sadlerochit Mountains. Of that 8% of ANWR land, federal law
states that only 2,000 surface acres could ever be used for actual
drilling purposes. This 10-02 area was set aside specifically for oil
and gas exploration and is not legally defined as a "wilderness" or a
"refuge." None of Alaska's ANWR region is legally defined as a
"park." We allow roads, campgrounds, hundreds of toilets, hotels, and
hoards of tourists to violate the sanctity of Yellowstone (2.2 million
acres) and Yosemite (.76 million acres), which are both legally
defined as "parks," but do allow much needed oil drilling on just
2,000 acres of ANWR, which has 3.7 times the land area of the State of
Massachusetts (5.3 million acres).

Does any member of the United States Congress really believe that
drilling for oil on just 2,000 acres will destroy all wildlife and
vegetation, leaving behind nothing but a smoldering toxic wasteland?
Using directional drilling techniques, one single oil drilling station
can snake underground pipes out to 8 miles in all directions, so the
tiny footprint of oil recovery operations in ANWR would be
inconsequential to the local ecology. When the oil is gone and the
drilling equipment removed, any evidence that there was once oil
exploration at ANWR would soon vanish. Drilling in ANWR would be like
throwing a single peanut on the wall-to-wall carpet of a very large
living room floor; hardly a cataclysmic event.

Why are we paying Canada, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia so much money
for imported oil when we could be producing that oil ourselves and
giving Americans high paying jobs in the process? Some of the same
environmentalists who oppose ANWR drilling support wild solar power
schemes that would cover 21.76 million acres (34,000 square miles) of
our beautiful Southwestern desert with of solar panels. Solar panels
on a roof are fine, but when you cover virgin land with them you
create a DEAD ZONE that will remain dead until the panels are removed
and the land has time to heal itself. Other environmentalists support
the building of thousands of wind turbines, which in addition to being
unsightly are very effective bird and bat killing devices that end the
lives of many thousands of our flying friends every year. Why is
damage done by solar and wind power schemes politically correct, but
benignly extracting oil from Alaska politically taboo?

The Congressional Research Service (see 76kb pdf) estimates that
if oil recovery was allowed in the 10-02 area of ANWR, it would be
worth at least $94.8 billion in federal income taxes and $42.8 billion
in royalties, totaling $138 billion. This study uses the most
conservative estimate of recoverable oil; 10.4 billion barrels. The
actual oil treasure could climb to well over 20 billion barrels as new
discoveries and improvements in oil drilling technology increase the
size of extractable reserves. Oil drilling is supported by the
Alaskan Native communities that live in ANWR, the State Government of
Alaska, and over 75% of Alaskan residents. Declaring a huge area of
land untouchable to oil recovery at a time of national energy crisis
is irresponsible energy policy. As long as so many American political
leaders place symbolism above substance, we will never solve our
strategic national energy problems.
-----------------------------------------------------------
SEE http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html - Why
biofuels are a total global disaster, and how clean nuclear energy can
provide 10,000 years of $2.00 per gallon synthetic gasoline.

Christopher Calder

  #4  
Old June 29th 08, 12:51 AM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
Republican Liar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% of Americans want to drill !



wrote in message

http://home.att.net/~meditation/ANWR.html

The costly symbolism of ANWR

The United States is in serious energy crisis today,
in part because of the triumph of symbolism over
substance in the United States Congress. Our political
pundits have elevated the 19.6 million acre Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge, better known as ANWR (see map),
into a sacred mythical land that no man dare tread upon,
least they spoil its great natural beauty forever
(picture of drilling area). In reality, any future ANWR
oil exploration would only take place in the desolate,
treeless area designated as "10-02," which represents
just 8% of ANWR's land area, and which encompasses the
Coastal Plain north of the Sadlerochit Mountains. Of
that 8% of ANWR land, federal law states that only 2,000
surface acres could ever be used for actual drilling
purposes. This 10-02 area was set aside specifically for
oil and gas exploration and is not legally defined as a
"wilderness" or a "refuge." None of Alaska's ANWR region
is legally defined as a "park." We allow roads,
campgrounds, hundreds of toilets, hotels, and hoards of
tourists to violate the sanctity of Yellowstone (2.2
million acres) and Yosemite (.76 million acres), which
are both legally defined as "parks," but do allow much
needed oil drilling on just 2,000 acres of ANWR, which
has 3.7 times the land area of the State of Massachusetts
(5.3 million acres).

Does any member of the United States Congress really
believe that drilling for oil on just 2,000 acres will
destroy all wildlife and vegetation, leaving behind
nothing but a smoldering toxic wasteland? Using
directional drilling techniques, one single oil drilling
station can snake underground pipes out to 8 miles in all
directions, so the tiny footprint of oil recovery
operations in ANWR would be inconsequential to the local
ecology. When the oil is gone and the drilling equipment
removed, any evidence that there was once oil exploration
at ANWR would soon vanish. Drilling in ANWR would be
like throwing a single peanut on the wall-to-wall carpet
of a very large living room floor; hardly a cataclysmic
event.

Why are we paying Canada, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia so
much money for imported oil when we could be producing
that oil ourselves and giving Americans high paying jobs
in the process? Some of the same environmentalists who
oppose ANWR drilling support wild solar power schemes
that would cover 21.76 million acres (34,000 square
miles) of our beautiful Southwestern desert with of solar
panels. Solar panels on a roof are fine, but when you
cover virgin land with them you create a DEAD ZONE that
will remain dead until the panels are removed and the
land has time to heal itself. Other environmentalists
support the building of thousands of wind turbines, which
in addition to being unsightly are very effective bird
and bat killing devices that end the lives of many
thousands of our flying friends every year. Why is
damage done by solar and wind power schemes politically
correct, but benignly extracting oil from Alaska
politically taboo?

The Congressional Research Service (see 76kb pdf)
estimates that if oil recovery was allowed in the 10-02
area of ANWR, it would be worth at least $94.8 billion in
federal income taxes and $42.8 billion in royalties,
totaling $138 billion. This study uses the most
conservative estimate of recoverable oil; 10.4 billion
barrels. The actual oil treasure could climb to well
over 20 billion barrels as new discoveries and
improvements in oil drilling technology increase the size
of extractable reserves. Oil drilling is supported by
the Alaskan Native communities that live in ANWR, the
State Government of Alaska, and over 75% of Alaskan
residents. Declaring a huge area of land untouchable to
oil recovery at a time of national energy crisis is
irresponsible energy policy. As long as so many American
political leaders place symbolism above substance, we
will never solve our strategic national energy problems.
-----------------------------------------------------------
SEE http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html
- Why biofuels are a total global disaster, and how
clean nuclear energy can provide 10,000 years of $2.00
per gallon synthetic gasoline.

Christopher Calder


There isn't squat in ANWR that would do anything to lower the price of oil.
Get over it. The high cost of oil has very little to do with supply and
demand. Get over that too. You must be one of the most gullible fools ever
to waste so much time on nothing but total BS.

Get a life.



  #5  
Old June 29th 08, 02:28 AM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
Phisher KIng
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% of Americans want to drill !

"Republican Liar" wrote in
erio.net:



wrote in message

http://home.att.net/~meditation/ANWR.html

The costly symbolism of ANWR

The United States is in serious energy crisis today,
in part because of the triumph of symbolism over
substance in the United States Congress. Our political
pundits have elevated the 19.6 million acre Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge, better known as ANWR (see map),
into a sacred mythical land that no man dare tread upon,
least they spoil its great natural beauty forever
(picture of drilling area). In reality, any future ANWR
oil exploration would only take place in the desolate,
treeless area designated as "10-02," which represents
just 8% of ANWR's land area, and which encompasses the
Coastal Plain north of the Sadlerochit Mountains. Of
that 8% of ANWR land, federal law states that only 2,000
surface acres could ever be used for actual drilling
purposes. This 10-02 area was set aside specifically for
oil and gas exploration and is not legally defined as a
"wilderness" or a "refuge." None of Alaska's ANWR region
is legally defined as a "park." We allow roads,
campgrounds, hundreds of toilets, hotels, and hoards of
tourists to violate the sanctity of Yellowstone (2.2
million acres) and Yosemite (.76 million acres), which
are both legally defined as "parks," but do allow much
needed oil drilling on just 2,000 acres of ANWR, which
has 3.7 times the land area of the State of Massachusetts
(5.3 million acres).

Does any member of the United States Congress really
believe that drilling for oil on just 2,000 acres will
destroy all wildlife and vegetation, leaving behind
nothing but a smoldering toxic wasteland? Using
directional drilling techniques, one single oil drilling
station can snake underground pipes out to 8 miles in all
directions, so the tiny footprint of oil recovery
operations in ANWR would be inconsequential to the local
ecology. When the oil is gone and the drilling equipment
removed, any evidence that there was once oil exploration
at ANWR would soon vanish. Drilling in ANWR would be
like throwing a single peanut on the wall-to-wall carpet
of a very large living room floor; hardly a cataclysmic
event.

Why are we paying Canada, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia so
much money for imported oil when we could be producing
that oil ourselves and giving Americans high paying jobs
in the process? Some of the same environmentalists who
oppose ANWR drilling support wild solar power schemes
that would cover 21.76 million acres (34,000 square
miles) of our beautiful Southwestern desert with of solar
panels. Solar panels on a roof are fine, but when you
cover virgin land with them you create a DEAD ZONE that
will remain dead until the panels are removed and the
land has time to heal itself. Other environmentalists
support the building of thousands of wind turbines, which
in addition to being unsightly are very effective bird
and bat killing devices that end the lives of many
thousands of our flying friends every year. Why is
damage done by solar and wind power schemes politically
correct, but benignly extracting oil from Alaska
politically taboo?

The Congressional Research Service (see 76kb pdf)
estimates that if oil recovery was allowed in the 10-02
area of ANWR, it would be worth at least $94.8 billion in
federal income taxes and $42.8 billion in royalties,
totaling $138 billion. This study uses the most
conservative estimate of recoverable oil; 10.4 billion
barrels. The actual oil treasure could climb to well
over 20 billion barrels as new discoveries and
improvements in oil drilling technology increase the size
of extractable reserves. Oil drilling is supported by
the Alaskan Native communities that live in ANWR, the
State Government of Alaska, and over 75% of Alaskan
residents. Declaring a huge area of land untouchable to
oil recovery at a time of national energy crisis is
irresponsible energy policy. As long as so many American
political leaders place symbolism above substance, we
will never solve our strategic national energy problems.
-----------------------------------------------------------
SEE http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html
- Why biofuels are a total global disaster, and how
clean nuclear energy can provide 10,000 years of $2.00
per gallon synthetic gasoline.

Christopher Calder


There isn't squat in ANWR that would do anything to lower the price of
oil. Get over it. The high cost of oil has very little to do with
supply and demand. Get over that too. You must be one of the most
gullible fools ever to waste so much time on nothing but total BS.

Get a life.





These are the same guys who poo-pooed Carter's conservation measures in
the seventies. If we had done half the stuff Carter recommended, we
wouldn't be in the mess we're in now.
  #6  
Old June 29th 08, 03:17 AM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
Eat the rich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% ofAmericans want to drill !

I wish you would do some research before posting. Only takes a second
with the internet. The United States has in oil reserves at current
consumption rates a little more than three years of oil, if you were
to exclude oil from other countries.

Remember when the genius Ronald Reagan ripped the solar panels off of
the White House. Remember all of the Republicans and some Democrats
who voted to keep subsidizing oil companies with tax breaks and who
voted against funding the research and development of alternative
energy sources? And all of you yahoos who can't do math or do a
little research before barfing up your drill-more nonsense posts,
you're partly to blame, too.
  #7  
Old June 29th 08, 08:09 PM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% ofAmericans want to drill !

On Jun 28, 12:53*pm, "Republican Liar" wrote:
"trippin-2-8-track" wrote in


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...l_lower_prices


the public's opinion has changed as well- how can
Democrats keep blocking our desire to tap oil resources,
when 67% of us want to drill ?


you can't blame the Republicans for this, and you can't
blame Bush for this- it's a Democrat controlled Congress,
since 2006


*Why has the right been blocking oil for so long?

.
We haven't.
.
Why didn't they open ANWR
when they had control of both branches of government?

.
Because we didn't have a filibuster-proof majority.
.
Why has the right
failed for so long to get anything done?

.
Because the Democrats have been obstructionists.
.

  #8  
Old June 29th 08, 08:18 PM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% ofAmericans want to drill !


There isn't squat in ANWR that would do anything to lower the price of oil.

..
So, in your world view, increasing production DOESN'T lower the price
of a product?
..
Get over it. The high cost of oil has very little to do with supply and
demand. Get over that too. You must be one of the most gullible fools ever
to waste so much time on nothing but total BS.

..
So, the basics of economics doesn't apply, because someone who calls
himself "Republican liar" says so.
..
Fortunately, the American people know better. Last I saw, the
percentage of Americans who want to expand drilling is up to 74%.

And the Democrats have chosen to tell 74% of the American people to
**** off, we're going to have sky high oil prices because the
Democrats want to make America a third-world country with very rich
liberals on private jets and serfs waiting in the rain for an
unreliable bus.

Yeah, that's a winning strategy. Remember that in 06 the Democrats
won both houses with about 85,000 votes out of 85,000,0000 voters. Is
this really the time to **** off 74% of the population?

  #9  
Old June 29th 08, 08:27 PM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
Justin Case
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% of Americans want to drill !


"Eat the rich" wrote in message
...
I wish you would do some research before posting. Only takes a second
with the internet. The United States has in oil reserves at current
consumption rates a little more than three years of oil, if you were
to exclude oil from other countries.

Remember when the genius Ronald Reagan ripped the solar panels off of
the White House. Remember all of the Republicans and some Democrats
who voted to keep subsidizing oil companies with tax breaks and who
voted against funding the research and development of alternative
energy sources? And all of you yahoos who can't do math or do a
little research before barfing up your drill-more nonsense posts,
you're partly to blame, too.


Try including oil shale, nuclear and coal technology into the equation. New
technology sounds fine but first something has to be developed, tested,
improved upon and proven to be of a practical nature. Then the next huge
step is a distribution, supply and maintenance system to support it.
Hydrogen cars would be great except there are almost no places to refuel
such cars. Of course, we could encourage thousands of refill stations be
established but, hey, that would mean a few entrepreneurs would become quite
wealthy and, well, we can't have some ******* actually make a lot of money.
But then again, we could tax the hell out of him and his companies.

Many new products are found to have unwanted consequences so we have to be
careful. The creation of asbestos was great until we found out about
health hazards of exposure. And the unexpected realization that
discontinued use of the standard light bulb in favor of the new ugly bulb
involves a hazardous waste problem. No more throwing your expired bulb in
the trash can.

Yes, by all means look to new technology to reduce consumption of oil but
right now we use oil. We can't run our cars today on the promise of maybe
something better ten years from now.


  #10  
Old June 29th 08, 09:22 PM posted to alt.politics,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
Republican Liar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Democrats in Congress choking off USA oil supply-when 67% of Americans want to drill !



wrote in message

There isn't squat in ANWR that would do anything to
lower the price of oil.

.
So, in your world view, increasing production DOESN'T
lower the price of a product?


Not if there is no competition fool.

.
Get over it. The high cost of oil has very little to do
with supply and demand. Get over that too. You must be
one of the most gullible fools ever to waste so much
time on nothing but total BS.

.
So, the basics of economics doesn't apply, because
someone who calls himself "Republican liar" says so.


This is not about standard economics. You aren't shopping at Walmart fool.

.
Fortunately, the American people know better. Last I
saw, the percentage of Americans who want to expand
drilling is up to 74%.


Not to long ago most Americans thought Iraq had something to do with 911 and
the place was over flowing with WMD. I bet you are one of those loons that
is still looking.


And the Democrats have chosen to tell 74% of the American
people to **** off,


The lies come from the right moron. You are just one of the ignorant fools
that swallow the latest line of BS.


we're going to have sky high oil
prices because the Democrats want to make America a
third-world country with very rich liberals on private
jets and serfs waiting in the rain for an unreliable bus.


Tell me this fool. Why has the right voted to block drilling for so long?


Yeah, that's a winning strategy. Remember that in 06 the
Democrats won both houses with about 85,000 votes out of
85,000,0000 voters. Is this really the time to **** off
74% of the population?


For some reason you seem to think that the right is just loved by America
and Bush is some kind of hero. Man are you a stupid one.

Here's one more chance. Tell me why the right has voted to block oil. Why
haven't you morons opened ANWR while you had control of both houses and the
WhiteHouse?

Crickets.....................................

Man you RightTards are a stupid bunch.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA: 1-Day, Machinists Jacobs Drill Chuck, ½ inch Arbor, No. 6 fishnet General 0 April 19th 06 12:24 AM
Boy dies choking on cent John Stone Coins 0 August 12th 04 12:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 CollectingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.