As far as I know anyone can speculate in the oil markets. Private individuals like John Adams, or groups like HEDGE FUNDS can speculate on oil. Just a reminder: Madam Hillary Clinton nee Rodham, speculated with $1000 dollars on cattle futures, and came out with $10,000. What may not be known is speculating on futures is a zero sum gain. That means for every position holder that makes money, there is a position holder that loses money.

The tank producers of WWII bid on the opportunity to create tanks. They were not nationalized as implied above. The producers had a profit motive.

The U.S. government has a lot of oil stored in the strategic reserve. This is the oil that will be used by the military to protect the U.S. when every other oil source goes dry. Regular citizens will have to figure other ways of getting to work, because this oil isn’t for them.

Since the dollar is weak, the U.S. will be a destination for a vacationing world. U.S. products are more affordable overseas. Unfortunately it is a burden here.

Please tell me she was on crack. In these uncertain times, I need some assurances.

We have the potential to significantly decrease consumer cost under esentially a competitive licensing plan. You cant really count Chavez as a operations standard bearer though.. he is essentially using the state oil revenue MONOPOLY as a giant bribe to underwrite/reward his lackeys there and abroad.

If we refuse to regulate speculation, then the alternative is to increase competition. Move from a straight legacy royalty scheme for public land to a controlled site licensing system, and if the major players dont want to involve themselves domestically in a plan that builds a profit into the license, then we benefit from a resurgence of small AMERICAN companies who want to profit from those public site licenses, instead of a globalist conglomerate that has grown contempful.

When we utilized auto manufacturers in WWII to build tanks and typewriter manufacturers to assemble Carbines they didnt take it to court, or threaten legal action, they said they wanted to do their part for the nation. Make no mistake, THAT WAS nationalizing industry, and it won us WWII.

When you embrace the Neocon globalization of industry that we have been taught to love as so `conservative` guess what?.. that isnt `american` industry anymore, even though it may have the same name, it doesnt have the same interest and its welfare no longer rises and falls with that of its parent nation state.
Anytime we hear talk of promoting `business` and `trade` listen very closely, because US NATIONAL interests are likely about to get shoved in the backseat or the trunk, while globalist interests move to the front seat.
Globalism and NATIONALISM are not compatible as the former requires a donor state oblivious of its own potential dismantlement(globalism) and the latter requires a vigilance to its own individual economic interest.

We can for minimal cost add what would essentially be an available 10% federal cushion to our current refining capacity, use it process stock rotated out of the emerg. reserve, and pay for a at least a significant part of continuing sytem operations/maintenance in that manner- when you need it to expand refining operations, you have that option.