Sunday Silliness: Trumped oil

I happened upon this during my travels  and thought it was a hilarious commentary on energy and politics. I’m guessing it will make some conservative and liberal heads explode equally well.


P.S. As I understand it, it is actually a working oil pump, not just a derelict with a decoration. It was in motion as I took the photo. Whether it is producing or not I can’t say, as it was behind a fence and this photo was taken through a gap in the fence.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 20, 2016 11:22 am

That’s an awful lot of ” Related Articles ” to go through for such a short ( but amusing ) post !

Reply to  Marcus
March 20, 2016 11:34 am

I don’t think they were all actually “Related” at all.
‘Emily Ann’ is rather a sweet name for a ‘nodding donkey’ isn’t it?

Reply to  Marcus
March 20, 2016 4:57 pm

Yes, that mess needs to go. Since WUWT brings so much traffic, I think you can lean on them at least a little but Anthony. That is just unacceptable.

Reply to  Marcus
March 20, 2016 11:42 pm

Marcus, ublock origin and block the element…

March 20, 2016 11:23 am

If it was in motion, it wasn’t derelict.
Nice comment on the working man’s sentiments in this election cycle.

Reply to  Tucci78
March 20, 2016 11:14 pm

Even if it wasn’t in motion at the time it still might not have been derelict. Some operate with a Pump Off Controller, where it will sit idle for a determined amount of time before resuming to optimize production.

Reply to  Anthony Watts
March 20, 2016 1:57 pm

…Were you talking to me ??? LOL

March 20, 2016 11:36 am

Hypothesis: It states “Without Trump, US oil interests have no hope.”

March 20, 2016 11:36 am

“Look! That nodding donkey has an extra ass!”
(Apologies to Trumpsters but there is a joke there somewhere)

Kaiser Derden
Reply to  LearDog
March 20, 2016 3:32 pm

says the guy/gal behind a pseudonym about a billionaire who employs thousands, had a hit TV show and a best selling book about negotiating … sweet irony …

Tsk Tsk
Reply to  Kaiser Derden
March 20, 2016 4:59 pm

He’s got really short fingers in that picture.

Reply to  LearDog
March 20, 2016 3:43 pm

Too bad you didn’t find it.

Tsk Tsk
Reply to  barryjo
March 20, 2016 4:51 pm

Oh yes he did. Twice in fact.

Reply to  LearDog
March 20, 2016 6:59 pm

I propose Trump’s running mate should be…. drum roll…. Hillary!
They’re perfect for each other: She sells access and he pays for it. What better political match could there be?

March 20, 2016 11:41 am

Another Sunday silly: Adm. Titley (Ret.) just appeared on “Weather Geeks” espousing the usual propaganda about humans causing more extreme weather events and claiming scientists are very confident that they understand the physical science underlying said events. He also reported that current climate models are good at predicting future scenarios.

Reply to  nc
March 20, 2016 1:23 pm

Very interesting read. Thanks for the link.

Reply to  nc
March 20, 2016 5:19 pm

I came across the Dilbert read elsewhere, and enjoyed it as well. Then I lost an half-hour of my valuable time skimming the comments, which took me to discussions of Sweden’s situation, irrigation in Israel, and comparisons between the Bible Belt and Islamic States.
I am trying to avoid politics, as it largely seems a waste of my bad temper, but I really found the way friends and neighbors were freaking out about Trump odd. So, with a sigh, I sat down to endure a couple of his speeches and press conferences on the web. I really didn’t see all that much to freak out about, and my conclusion is that most of the people freaking out have never actually listened to the man.
Can it be that Trump is like Global Warming, and that people freak out because they are told to freak out, and not because they have bothered to check out a few facts?

Reply to  Caleb
March 20, 2016 5:39 pm

You make some good points, Caleb.

Reply to  Caleb
March 20, 2016 6:12 pm

Caleb commented: “..Can it be that Trump is like Global Warming, and that people freak out because they are told to freak out, and not because they have bothered to check out a few facts?…”
It is the same MSM controlling the message. That, and he’s obnoxious. He’s making up a platform as he goes so it changes often and hard to pin down but he’s going for the maximum emotional reaction. Working so far. He has flashes of common sense and good governance practices but right now it’s obvious he’s after the nomination and will do/say anything.

Reply to  markl
March 20, 2016 6:25 pm

Interesting idea. Thanks. But I can’t debate, because I’m using my few remaining brain-cells to study sea-ice.
Sea-ice is more interesting. Sea-ice obeys natural laws. Politicians, on the other hand, seem to obey a law unto themselves which thousands of lawyers can only make more confusing and obtuse and, in the end, insane.
I hope you understand why I prefer sea-ice.

Reply to  nc
March 20, 2016 5:22 pm

I am just as terrified of Hillary as I am of The Donald. On the other hand, both say they are against the TPP. That’s good. The Donald says he’s for campaign finance reform. That’s good. We’ll see if he actually does anything about it.
America needs a good shaking up. Trump might do that. The trouble is that shaking breaks things.

Reply to  commieBob
March 20, 2016 5:51 pm

Why is making products and services consumers use more expensive a good thing?
Why is making it more complicated and expensive to run a campaign a good thing?

Another Ian
Reply to  commieBob
March 21, 2016 2:45 am

“America needs a good shaking up. Trump might do that. The trouble is that shaking breaks things.”
As liquid as things political seem to be you might stir up a bit of a froth

Reply to  commieBob
March 21, 2016 4:05 am

Hillary is a Bilderberg gang member. She is NOT going to ‘fix trade’ so we no longer see jobs move to Mexico. She pushed hard to create our present system.

March 20, 2016 12:29 pm

You have confused this poor Brit.
I thought the Democrats were the Donkeys so a picture of Hillary would have been more appropriate?

Reply to  graphicconception
March 20, 2016 12:51 pm

If a picture of Hillary were used three Donkeys would be implied…I think.

Reply to  graphicconception
March 20, 2016 4:53 pm

It’s called a donkey because its business end resembles a donkey’s head. It’s built that way to keep a rod moving straight up and down. link
On the pump it says Seguro #1. Seguro is a small oil well service company in Texas. link

Bruce Cobb
March 20, 2016 12:36 pm

Coincidentally, it’s on a hill called Nodding.

March 20, 2016 12:46 pm

What I would love to see is obozo,s head on a windmill

March 20, 2016 12:50 pm

Only quick match I found for the “Seguro #1” well:
The Local News, Huntington Beach

Original painting of Donald Trump on the deepest oil well in HB–the two mile deep Seguro #1, near Goldenwest and Garfield on the property of landscape contractor/oil man Ron Brindle. Brindle, a former Navy Seabee, had it created by his favorite artist, Michelle Hardesty and put on the most famousoil well in HB “because Trump is the only hope we have to bring this country back to its glory. We desperately need him!”

Paul Westhaver
Reply to  OK S.
March 20, 2016 3:46 pm

weird piece of script there…

Gunga Din
March 20, 2016 12:57 pm

OK. We’ve touched US politics and our upcoming election.
I haven’t paid much attention to what anybody said after they declared they were running. From what they said before then (the little I knew), I would have voted for Ben Carson or Ted Cruz.
If Trump is the Republican nominee would I vote for him? Versus Pillary or maybe Sanders? Only as the least of two evils.
Pay attention to who you vote for in Congress and the Senate. If the choice for President comes down to one of those, we’ll need the Congressional “brakes”, “deadlock” be damned!

Reply to  Gunga Din
March 20, 2016 3:14 pm

How anyone could even consider voting for Comrade Bernie in any capacity is beyond me. It is almost as if Millennials are clueless about Socialism …oh wait maybe they are. Nothing says economic growth like raising taxes on everyone:
* 10.56 percent lower after-tax income for all taxpayers. (After accounting for economic effects, taxpayers in all income groups would see their after-tax incomes decrease by at least 12.84 percent.)
* 9.5 percent lower GDP over the long term.
* 6 million fewer full-time equivalent jobs.

Reply to  Poptech
March 20, 2016 5:03 pm

According to an economic model. Economic models have all the accuracy of GCMs, but the main difference is that most economists will freely acknowledge the limitations of said models. Not saying his policies wouldn’t prove detrimental, just I wouldn’t rely on economic model predictions. Having a fair bit of experience with economic models I can give whatever answer you are willing to pay for…

Reply to  Poptech
March 20, 2016 5:29 pm

I switched to the Democrat party and voted for Bernie in New Hampshire. It wasn’t because I like him, beyond being a cartoon, but rather as an expression of my deep resentment towards the Clintons. (By the way, the last time I voted Democrat was when I voted for Bill Clinton the first time he ran. Big Mistake. Live and learn.)

Reply to  Poptech
March 20, 2016 5:53 pm

I do not understand how voting for a socialist could ever be considered a good thing.

Reply to  Poptech
March 20, 2016 7:15 pm

“It is almost as if Millennials are clueless about Socialism”
I would guess not so, as most would like to retire at 18 under a parents roof or on Bernie’s dole with lots of free stuff. Support of Illegals &immigrants obviously won’t hurt their tax payer supported lifestyle and provides a venue for activity and the corrupt corporate world loves that part of their psyche for the cheap and sometimes cash only labor. I sometimes believe that they create extreme PC/safe spaces/micro insults &crybullying strictly for entertainment & to relieve boredom. Unfortunately the rest of us mostly have to live with it. Probably most of them are eventually going to be working street corners when the parents & politicians wise up. The major upside is that this group can in no way be competitive in the real world of jobs or business leadership, so those with greater common sense will have a distinct advantage for the better positions.

Reply to  Poptech
March 21, 2016 2:35 am

Are you sure the income decrease isn’t by 12.83% ?

March 20, 2016 1:33 pm

I’d love to have that in my yard.

Steve Fraser
Reply to  Billy
March 20, 2016 1:45 pm

WITH the mineral rights/royalties, I presume…

March 20, 2016 2:44 pm

Trump l’oeil

Reply to  Roger
March 21, 2016 1:32 am

Nice one, Roger.

Paul Westhaver
March 20, 2016 2:48 pm

I am loath to make a judgement about Donald Trump’s nature or his motives. I only know some of what he has done.
It may be safe to say that he is motivated by self-interest. as are all politicians.
If his interests align with mine, then I would be happy if he gets the power to act on them. Also, if not Donald Trump, then who else? My interests do align with Hillary Clinton. So Ted Cruz? That is the only remaining option.
WRT oil policy does Donald Trumps energy policy align with my interests?
I think so, but I am not sure.
I predicted and welcomed a kind of fascist response to the excesses of the socialist fascism of the past 7 years. So long as the fascist agrees with me I may welcome a fascist.
So…lesser of the evils?

Paul Westhaver
Reply to  Paul Westhaver
March 20, 2016 2:50 pm

My interests do NOT align with Hillary Clinton.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
March 20, 2016 2:55 pm

..Phew …had me worried for a minute there Paul !!

Paul Westhaver
Reply to  Paul Westhaver
March 20, 2016 3:44 pm

Unfortunately for me, spell checkers don’t catch missing, extra, or wrong words.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
March 20, 2016 8:37 pm

Sure glad you fixed that!

March 20, 2016 3:07 pm

I am all for domestic energy production but true “Energy Independence” is pure fantasy spouted by those who have not looked carefully at the numbers. If people want cheap gas that means we need oil from everywhere, including Iran and especially Saudi Arabia.
At least Trump is on the right side of the climate debate.

Reply to  Poptech
March 20, 2016 4:22 pm

March 20, 2016 at 3:07 pm
I am all for domestic energy production but true “Energy Independence” is pure fantasy spouted by those who have not looked carefully at the numbers. If people want cheap gas that means we need oil from everywhere, including Iran and especially Saudi Arabia.
At least Trump is on the right side of the climate debate.–
Hmm, not sure what side climate debate Trump is on. I tend to imagine he has other things which he is concerned about. Or to have a side on climate debate requires wasting a lot of time- ie it’s not actually “settled science”.
As far as Energy Independence it is sort of pure fantasy. It’s sort of like sustainable living or being “self sufficient”.
I don’t have a problem is related to finite resources, or the US could have goal of being at Net exporter of energy in same way it’s a net exporter of crop production. And one could think of crop production as energy production- solar energy production. So being net exporter of carbon based energy is something the US could do- not a fantasy. But being a net exporter of energy does not make the US Energy Independent. Or US could still import carbon based energy, despite making surplus which is exported.
Now if you expand the energy mix to include nuclear energy this seems to allow greater potential in terms of making more energy. And doing something like being exporter of nuclear reactors could be like exporting cars. So, something along of the lines of what Bill Gates is attempting to do.
But biggest and best answer in terms of global energy seems related to space exploration.
One could lower cost of getting into space, and thereby allow the harvesting of solar energy in the space environment.
And path towards getting there is exploring the Moon and developing more markets in space.
Such as rocket fuel market in space. Settlements on Mars. Etc.

Reply to  gbaikie
March 20, 2016 4:36 pm
Here’s where the GOP field stands on climate change:
Donald Trump
The GOP front-runner doesn’t believe humans are causing the planet to warm, arguing it amounts to “weather.”
“Unless somebody can prove something to me, I believe there’s weather. I believe there’s change,” Trump told radio host Hugh Hewitt in September.
Trump has rejected many of the climate change policies presented by the Obama administration, including the president’s contention that climate change is one of the most pressing issues facing the world today.
“I mean, Obama thinks it’s the number one problem of the world today,” he told Hewitt.
“And I think it’s very low on the list. So I am not a believer, and I will, unless somebody can prove something to me, I believe there’s weather. I believe there’s change, and I believe it goes up and it goes down, and it goes up again. And it changes depending on years and centuries, but I am not a believer, and we have much bigger problems.”

Reply to  gbaikie
March 20, 2016 6:29 pm

“Unless somebody can prove something to me, I believe there’s weather. I believe there’s change,” Trump told radio host Hugh Hewitt in September. ”
And that the view of most American and large amount of the rest of the world.
The only thing required is looking at polls of what people think are important matters- and “climate change” or “global warming” are not it.
But, though it’s probably unlikely, it’s possible that evidence of humans effecting the global climate could occur in the future.
And one could have issues related to human activity affecting regions of the world’s climate.
So all this is telling me, is the Trump is generally informed about the issue and does not pay lip service
to the lefty crazies [if there was a larger part the population of true believers- or part of his base of supporters believed, he might state it in less definite terms].
I would guess it’s the media hysteria about global warming which is part of reason he has a low opinion of the media. Which again is a common perceived problem of the Media. Or WUWT is a very popular website regarding issues related to climate change- for good reason, the lack of good reporting about
climate issues.

Michael J. Dunn
Reply to  gbaikie
March 21, 2016 10:09 am

You grope at the obvious: with the use of nuclear power, energy independence is assured, including the ability to synthesize hydrocarbon fuels from scrap carbon (coal, wood, sewage) and water.

Reply to  gbaikie
March 22, 2016 12:21 pm

I said “Such as rocket fuel market in space. Settlements on Mars. Etc”.
To explain further.
The government policy related to this, is explore the Moon to determine if and where there is minable
lunar water at lunar poles. And in regards to Mars settlements, explore Mars to determine if and where
human settlement on Mars could be most viable.
The lunar water can be split to make rocket fuel [liquid hydrogen and oxygen]. A possible price of rocket fuel on the lunar surface could be around $1000 per kg for LOX and $4000 per kg of Liquid Hydrogen.
And within a decade such prices could be halved. And within 50 years such prices could 1/10th or less.
But without lower by half or 1/10th, such prices would reduce the cost of going to the Moon by 1/2 or less and it lower the cost of a NASA Mars exploration which determine whether human settlement on Mars is viable.
The government does not pay for lunar mining or Mars settlement, rather it does the exploration that allows this to be possible or to be considered worth the private investment to do such activities.
And within 50 years of finishing such exploration, people on Earth could getting energy harvested from the Space environment transmitted from space to anywhere on the Earth surface.
Or 50 to 60 year after one has a market for rocket fuel in space. So one converting electrical power into the chemical energy of rocket fuel, and this makes a market for electrical power in space, and once this electrical grows and matures as market, one can export this electrical energy [which has been made cheaper per kwh in space] to the earth surface.Or at the moment the price of electrical power in space is too expensive, but it could become dramatically cheaper by creating a electrical market in space.
Or roughly at time people are settling Mars, one will have electrical power harvested in space and shipped to earth surface- about 50 to 60 years from now- if we start now, exploring the Moon, and etc.
And such exploration could cost no more than we are currently spending on so called space exploration- it’s a change of policy, rather than increase of money spent by government- of course the private sector would be significantly increasing the amount it invests in space markets- but that would involve making profits- making money, rather than spending public money.

March 20, 2016 3:38 pm

Trump scares people because they see their worse fears coming true if they don’t trust America with a and they know it. Win or loose he’ll change politics going forward for the better because it can’t get worse and he’s sounded the wake up call.

March 20, 2016 3:40 pm

That was supposed to say “if they don’t trust America with – enter derogatory adjectives here – and they know it.” Word Press must not like lesser/greater than signs.

Reply to  markl
March 20, 2016 9:36 pm

Word Press snips what is between the symbols for “less than” and “greater than.” For example when submitting the following statement I put the words “empty set” between those two symbols, so you won’t see the words “empty set” as the subject in this sentence: The is a subset of every set.

March 20, 2016 4:14 pm

Inquiring minds want to know…
Since the post doesn’t specify an exact location, a picture like this begs the question:
EXACTLY where is the Trump Pumpjack located?
It’s a puzzle to be solved.
I believe the answer is:
33.689299°, -118.006649°
It is just 50 feet west of Goldenwest Blvd in Huntington Beach, Ca, and just north of the intersection of Goldenwest and Garfield. It’s easily visible from the street. This identification might be wrong, but if you zoom in with Google Earth you’ll see the color and profile matches the pumpjack in the picture, including the trees in the background.
h/t to OK S. for providing enough information to locate it on Google Earth.

March 20, 2016 4:17 pm

I am not American, although I am a big fan. The US presidential election process is baffling and I would not be surprised to see it on the curriculum at Hogwarts(i.e. its all magic and mumbo jumbo to me).
Having said that, I look at the US debt clock and it makes the hairs on my neck stand on end.
THAT is a problem worth focussing on. forget CAGW

Tsk Tsk
Reply to  EternalOptimist
March 20, 2016 5:00 pm

Then Trump isn’t your guy. He’s not the least bit interested in fixing entitlements which are bankrupting the country.

Reply to  Tsk Tsk
March 20, 2016 6:31 pm

And Hillary isn’t your “guy” either since she would increase entitlements.

March 20, 2016 5:55 pm

Trump said he was interested in the “Penny plan”, a plan to cut one percent out of every federal budget except national defense. Trump even said he thought he might be able to cut more than one percent of spending, while still maintaining most services, and was going to look into it.
Trump is not for raising the age to start receiving Social Security, and thinks he can solve a lot of the funding problem by getting the American economy going again.
Trump is going to fix U.S. finances, one way or another. Without economic security we cannot have national security, and Trump knows that and will be focusing on this issue.
And it can’t come too soon for our economy or our national security. The U.S. needs a big shakeup, and Trump is the one to do that shaking. Business as usual is not good enough.

Reply to  TA
March 20, 2016 6:04 pm

Anyone wanna suggest another candidate, from either party, who would suggest a similar plan? Here in Canuckland, Just-in is going all-in the other way. Dan Quayle without the brains.

Reply to  TA
March 20, 2016 6:06 pm

The only way to “fix” our financial situation is to drastically cut government spending (including eliminating various departments) and that includes entitlements. And yes even social security – the retirement age will have to be raised at some point.

Reply to  Poptech
March 20, 2016 6:26 pm

I ve been paying into social security for 40years, and will for 10 more, it beter be there when I retire, it s my bleebing money

Reply to  Poptech
March 20, 2016 6:50 pm

Except retirees get more than they paid into it and the money you paid into it is already spent.

March 20, 2016 6:27 pm

Bleeping money

March 20, 2016 6:38 pm

Widow’s peak oil, perhaps? 😉

March 20, 2016 8:18 pm

Lot’s of comments on Trump, but the most obvious points by him (for anyone listening) is that corporations through lobbyists (~12,000 in number spending ~3 billion a year/that’s a lot of congressional influence) control nearly all aspects of the economy. Think bulk purchases of drugs & medical supplies would reduce medicare expenditures, lobbyists got it nixed. How about open books on inflated hospital and doctor charges (secret charge master lists), nope.Think ethanol, green energy/other projects should be done away with, guess who inspires them. Banks say they need fewer rules to promote more wall street gambling with depositor money (think 2008), you guessed it. There have even been plans to shift SS to the banks/wall street (now that would be the epitome of security) except so far public backlash has prevented it. And on and on. Trump’s claim is that he can’t be bought because of his wealth and can therefore provide a counter balance. While how much of that he can get done with a mostly corporate controlled congress would remain to be seen, he at least should be given the chance. Also if congress became intransigent, he is the one persona that might be able to get the public interested in changing congress’s corrupt mentality.
Crude at times, yes but many other politicians have also been so (see short list below). It’s only in this age of extreme PC that it gets noticed and attacked so vehemently, especially by the millennial & DC supporting left wing press that loves taking many of his comments out of context.

Reply to  BFL
March 20, 2016 9:09 pm
Reply to  Poptech
March 21, 2016 8:04 am

Yeah, stand corrected on that one, but at least he had a decent reason:
“Trump tied ethanol to his campaign slogan “Make America Great Again,” saying ethanol reduces dependence on imported oil, which helps energy independence.”

John Robertson
Reply to  Poptech
March 21, 2016 10:45 am

The US produces more oil than it consumes these days, and has since 2013 – so you folks are already independent.
(Viewed from the North)

Reply to  Poptech
March 22, 2016 3:24 pm

Making gasoline more expensive by forcing it to be mixed with Ethanol only robs Americans of their wealth.

Reply to  BFL
March 20, 2016 10:33 pm

Andrew Jackson was waaaaaay worse than Trump. It’s not like we haven’t seen this before. All the sissies clutching their pearls, or trying to terrorize people to stay neocon.

March 20, 2016 11:25 pm

Why, that’s one them thar Trump pumps ain’t it?

March 21, 2016 2:51 am

Because you KNOW he is lying
The thing I like most about Trump is his insincerity.

Reply to  M Simon
March 21, 2016 8:31 am

Well if you dislike his “flexibility for negotiation” so much then vote for that honest bunch on the other side (Hillary/Bernie).

March 21, 2016 4:49 am

The Washington beltway is never going to be the same.

Reply to  Pointman
March 21, 2016 8:28 am

You got this right:
“To be pro AGW was seen as being somehow virtuous, forward thinking and stylish but in my view, hiding behind the AGW facade were always the forces of creeping totalitarianism.
That might seem like an extreme statement but it seems self-evident to me. When a political movement tells me I should feel guilty about taking a jet flight to go on holiday, that it’s wrong to have a decent car, that I should feel happy to accept a lower standard of living, that I should have only a certain number of children, that I really shouldn’t eat meat, that I should be glad to pay higher utility bills, that I’m suffering from global warming when I’m freezing, that I should pay carbon taxes when I’m a Carbon-based life form and that I am even obliged to use ‘low-energy’ light bulbs which not only contain lethal chemicals but provide terrible light, then I know I’m dealing with a bunch of Fascists. If it looks like a Duck, waddles like a Duck and even quacks like a Duck, then it’s probably a bloody Duck.”

James at 48
March 21, 2016 10:51 am

The people who painted the old Soviet posters seem to have a new gig.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights