Nick Miller wrote on January 09, 2009 02:03 PM: I guess google did not move this down the page ranking.... funny how the the economy changed commodities prices!
http://www.regular87.com

poisonpony wrote on June 02, 2008 05:14 PM: Its my belief that OPEC is attempting to drain the US economy through high crude prices in objection to the occupation of Iraq. I've been to the Gulf and there is not enough food produced there to support the population. Most everything is imported. So the solution is simple. A bushel of wheat for a barrel of oil.

ashley wrote on November 13, 2007 08:28 AM: You should get better facts on here!

Norma Price wrote on September 24, 2007 11:29 PM: Dear Editor:
Congressman Porter, as usual, is using scare tactics instead of facts. If the high price of gasoline is what it takes to get out of Iraq, so be it. In World War II, Americans were asked to sacrifice a lot more than just gasoline. The government also rationed leather goods and rubber. New car manufacture was suspended. The price of sugar, meat and dairy products were also beyond the reach of the average person because of war rationing. We went without to support our troops in the field. The war meant something besides a paycheck for the rich.
Iraq seems unconnected and useless because we are not contributing the way we did back then.
Norma Price

willcon89018 wrote on September 21, 2007 06:02 AM: Porters election slogan should be like he votes. BLOOD FOR OIL VOTE REPUBLICAN1

gp wrote on September 18, 2007 11:14 AM: It's always been about the oil. Without a steady amount of oil coming in to run the world's economy, at a reasonable price, the economy comes to a stop. Good luck riding a bike or a horse around the country. I know it is a pain to lose someone in war, but there are many factors involved. I don't think we will ever leave the middle east. It is to unstable, you can't rely on their governments to keep things in check. Look, we are still in Germany, Japan, and South Korea. We are spending millions on a new embassy in Iraq. Leave, I don't think so, and we shouldn't. Hell, we should have stayed in Vietnam. Look how many people died when we left. It does look like, after reading all of the comments, Mr. Porter better look for another job soon. He cares about the price of gasoline, but not about the Nevada workers losing their good jobs. Go figure.

Kevin Acosta wrote on September 09, 2007 12:37 AM: I am a US Army veteran, my dad served overseas during WWII, and now one of my sons is a Marine on his second tour in Iraq. I have been speaking out against the Iraq war invasion and occupation since before it started. We were lied to about the reasons for going in. Darth Cheney and his neocons used cherry-picked intel to pull the wool over Congress and the American people.

I have not been able to talk to my Congressman (Porter) for nearly two years now. I too fill up at that Sinclair on Eastern. Maybe I'll see him there soon and let him know that this military family wants him to face the music and show some real support for our brave men and women who've been ordered into harm's way. He should stand up to BushCo and vote for our troops to come home from Iraq now.

patela wrote on September 04, 2007 06:35 PM: Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the administration start out by vehemently denying that the war because of oil? Now they are saying that we must STAY in the war because of oil. Hmm, so which is it, and why?

LALA LAND wrote on September 03, 2007 02:37 PM: So Porter thinks oil prices are more important than soldier dying in vain?

Pathetic.

That is the poorest excuse I have ever heard to stay in Iraq.

The largest incentive and recruiting tool for Osama Bin Ladin is having our troops in the Middle East.

A country's relationship with the United States, not the U.S. "State Sponsors of Terrorism" list or the country's level of religious radicalism, predicts its production of terrorists. A statistical analysis of 315 suicide attacks from 1980 to 2003 found no correlation between a bomber's place of origin and the presence of more extreme forms of Islam. Moreover, not a single attacker came from a country designated as a "state sponsor of terrorism." Most came from Muslim regimes with close ties to the United States.

Danielle wrote on September 03, 2007 02:28 PM: Propaganda! So now we are expected to support the war and support the illegal occupation and because of oil? No American soldiers should be dying for gas prices. Furthermore, the point is the war is an illegal occupation and it was a mistake to go and a mistake to stay.

Read All Comments