PDA

View Full Version : Obama to open offshore areas along coasts for drilling


Fire Haley
03-31-2010, 08:15 AM
Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is proposing to open vast expanses of water along the Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska

The proposal is to be announced by President Obama and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland on Wednesday, but administration officials agreed to preview the details on the condition that they not be identified.

The proposal is intended to reduce dependence on oil imports, generate revenue from the sale of offshore leases and help win political support for comprehensive energy and climate legislation.

But while Mr. Obama has staked out middle ground on other environmental matters — supporting nuclear power, for example — the sheer breadth of the offshore drilling decision will take some of his supporters aback. And it is no sure thing that it will win support for a climate bill from undecided senators close to the oil industry

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html

-----------------------------

Obama to allow oil drilling off Virginia coast

WASHINGTON (AP) - In a reversal of a long-standing ban on most offshore drilling, President Barack Obama is allowing oil drilling 50 miles off Virginia's shorelines. Under Obama's plan, drilling could take place 125 miles from Florida's Gulf coastline if lawmakers allow the moratorium to expire. Drilling already takes place in western and central areas in the Gulf of Mexico..

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100331/D9EPI2PG0.html


===============================

"Give me cap and trade"

here's your carrot - drill baby dill

lamberts-lost-tooth
03-31-2010, 08:24 AM
:thumbsup:

Very good decision on this administrations part and they should be applauded for making a pro-American choice in drilling!!!

Those who have been critical of this administration for such things as HCR need to step up to the plate and give credit when it is due.

Whats wrong is wrong and whats right is right....Kudos to our President.

Fire Haley
03-31-2010, 08:46 AM
I don't trust him

Actual drilling in much of the newly opened areas, if it takes place, would not begin for years.

...in the meantime - Climate Change Cap & Trade will require nationalizing of the oil industry just like healthcare - what's not to love?

stlrtruck
03-31-2010, 08:53 AM
:thumbsup:

Very good decision on this administrations part and they should be applauded for making a pro-American choice in drilling!!!

Those who have been critical of this administration for such things as HCR need to step up to the plate and give credit when it is due.

Whats wrong is wrong and whats right is right....Kudos to our President.

:Iagree:

I abhor the HCR that got pushed through without a hint of concern for the American people.

But if this takes hold, this is definitely a good move.

43Hitman
03-31-2010, 08:53 AM
Yeah, I am going to reserve judgment for a day or two. Cause Obama chastised McCain for suggesting such a thing during his run for the White House. If this is legit and not some scheme to get Cap and Trade passed then kudos to Mr. Obama. I just think we need to pay attention to what the left hand is doing while the right hand is showing us this little gem.
v8fkbEuCQss

akjXqfvLu28

Fire Haley
03-31-2010, 09:06 AM
Interesting...


Obama 2008:

CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (CNN)

“When I’m president, I intend to keep in place the moratorium here in Florida and around the country that prevents oil companies from drilling off Florida’s coasts,” Obama told reporters in Jacksonville in late June. “

“It’s not going to provide short-term relief or medium-term relief or in fact long-term relief. It won’t drop prices in this administration or in the next administration or in the administration after that,” Obama said while campaigning in Iowa.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/02/campaign.wrap/

Matty™
03-31-2010, 09:16 AM
[QUOTE=Killer;792051]Interesting...


Obama 2008:

CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (CNN)

“When I’m president, I intend to keep in place the moratorium here in Florida and around the country that prevents oil companies from drilling off Florida’s coasts,” Obama told reporters in Jacksonville in late June. “

[QUOTE]

lol that is quite the u-turn

Fire Haley
03-31-2010, 09:21 AM
Not on my beach

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2378/2096019409_798eae2b8d.jpg

fansince'76
03-31-2010, 09:32 AM
Interesting...


Obama 2008:

CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (CNN)

“When I’m president, I intend to keep in place the moratorium here in Florida and around the country that prevents oil companies from drilling off Florida’s coasts,” Obama told reporters in Jacksonville in late June. “



lol that is quite the u-turn

It's also par for the course for this administration so far. I agree with Killer that this is nothing more than a carrot to get Cap-n-Tax rammed through.

lamberts-lost-tooth
03-31-2010, 09:32 AM
Interesting...


Obama 2008:

CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (CNN)

“When I’m president, I intend to keep in place the moratorium here in Florida and around the country that prevents oil companies from drilling off Florida’s coasts,” Obama told reporters in Jacksonville in late June. “

“It’s not going to provide short-term relief or medium-term relief or in fact long-term relief. It won’t drop prices in this administration or in the next administration or in the administration after that,” Obama said while campaigning in Iowa.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/02/campaign.wrap/

I am going to reserve final judgement to see if the administration follows through....but I have no problem with the Dems changing their minds on bad and unpopular promises

68% Favor Offshore Oil Drilling
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/offshore_drilling/68_favor_offshore_oil_drilling

Virginia leaders express interest in offshore drilling
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/16/AR2010031604036.html

Fire Haley
03-31-2010, 09:40 AM
Call me a hippie - I'm going green on this one


Oil Rigs: A Risk Florida’s Shores Can’t Afford

At each stage of testing, exploration, and production, the oil and gas business produces contaminated water, uses toxic drilling muds, and periodically spills oil and toxic liquids into the ocean. Pollutants like mercury and persistent hydrocarbons contaminate fish and sea life near platforms and massive spills kill seabirds, sea turtles, fish and marine mammals.

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita destroyed over 100 drilling rigs and platforms and over 450 pipelines. The Minerals Management Service estimated almost one million gallons spilled during the hurricane from offshore facilities; the Coast Guard documented an estimated nine million gallons from onshore and offshore oil facilities were spilled.


A Bad Idea Then, A Bad Idea Now

Florida's environment, economy and identity are defined by our shores. That’s why for decades Floridians have been united in their opposition to offshore drilling. The risks, we said, were too high; the rewards far too small.

http://www.environmentflorida.org/issues/save-our-shores/stop-offshore-drilling

http://homepage.mac.com/jfstrain/blogpics/apr04/destin.jpg

I like my beaches just the way they are.

You want to splash around in oil crap? - go to Texas.

lamberts-lost-tooth
03-31-2010, 10:00 AM
Florida's environment, economy and identity are defined by our shores. That’s why for decades Floridians have been united in their opposition to offshore drilling. The risks, we said, were too high; the rewards far too small.

.

Actually that used to be true...now Floridians support off shore drilling by a 55% to 38% percent margin, as long as it it kept five miles of their coast.
http://tampa.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=989080

Fire Haley
03-31-2010, 10:12 AM
That's Tampa - These carpetbaggers won't do anything for Florida except destroy our beaches.

Anyone ever been to Galveston, Corpus Cristi, or along the Alabama/Miss, gulf coast? Beaches are dirty, the water is filthy.

I will vote against any politicians voting for offshore drilling. Oil companies have millions of acres under lease and should explore those before thinking about ruining our beaches.

lamberts-lost-tooth
03-31-2010, 10:35 AM
That's Tampa - These carpetbaggers won't do anything for Florida except destroy our beaches.
.

:chuckle:
c'mon

Everyone knows that no one is actually from Florida!!!

Fire Haley
03-31-2010, 10:54 AM
Everyone knows that no one is actually from Florida!!!

Yeah - that's true :wink02:


Environmentalists attack Obama plan to allow oil drilling off Florida's coasts

BY LESLEY CLARK

WASHINGTON -- Florida environmentalists are blasting the Obama administration's plans to expand offshore oil drilling, including the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Coast.

Various news reports say the plan includes allowing drilling beyond 125 miles off Florida's Gulf coastline, as well as studying the possibility of drilling off the mid- and southern Atlantic coasts.

Progress Florida, which has opposed past efforts to lift bans on offshore oil drilling, reacted quickly to the news.

``Offshore drilling, especially drilling as close as four miles from Florida's Atlantic beaches, tastes bad no matter which president from whatever party is serving it,'' said Progress Florida's Mark Ferrulo. ``The president's support doesn't change the facts. Expanded drilling won't lower gas prices and it represents a dirty and dangerous activity that risks catastrophic damage to our beloved beaches.''

Obama is hoping to get support from Republicans for a climate change bill, but 10 coastal state Democrats -- including Florida's Bill Nelson, who has vehemently opposed offshore drilling -- say they won't support a big expansion of drilling.

Republican Sen. George LeMieux has suggested he'd support offshore drilling if Florida could get a cut of the proceeds.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/31/1556579/obama-proposal-to-allow-oil-drilling.html#ixzz0jlYN3IC5

-----------------

carpetbaggers

revefsreleets
03-31-2010, 11:04 AM
Failed Bush policy adaptation #100...

Change we can believe in.

MACH1
03-31-2010, 11:13 AM
It's also par for the course for this administration so far. I agree with Killer that this is nothing more than a carrot to get Cap-n-Tax rammed through.

Yep, and a huge tax per gallon on American pumped crude.

MasterOfPuppets
03-31-2010, 11:35 AM
woohoo !!!....we gonna take over irans spot in opec....:tt03:

Iran: U.S. Expert Predicts Oil-Export Crisis Within A Decade
http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1073968.html

stlrtruck
03-31-2010, 12:37 PM
That's Tampa - These carpetbaggers won't do anything for Florida except destroy our beaches.

Anyone ever been to Galveston, Corpus Cristi, or along the Alabama/Miss, gulf coast? Beaches are dirty, the water is filthy.

I will vote against any politicians voting for offshore drilling. Oil companies have millions of acres under lease and should explore those before thinking about ruining our beaches.

So while all the people going greeen on off-shore drilling are happy that they've prevented this country from reducing it's dependency on foreign oil, foreign countries are allowed to go in to international waters and start drilling off our coast.

I feel pretty confident that if people truly wanted to drill off-shore for this country, they could find a way to prevent the beaches from getting dirty and the water filthy. Maybe it's not the off-shore drilling that's responsible for that problem...maybe, just maybe, it's the individuals responsible for it's upkeep?

I'm just sayin'!

And btw, I'm not a carpet bagger, but I do live in the Tampa area! :flap:

:chuckle:
c'mon

Everyone knows that no one is actually from Florida!!!

That's not true, I know of at least a handful, maybe a dozen children that are FROM Florida. However, I believe anyone over the age of 30, definitely not!

lamberts-lost-tooth
03-31-2010, 01:00 PM
So while all the people going greeen on off-shore drilling are happy that they've prevented this country from reducing it's dependency on foreign oil, foreign countries are allowed to go in to international waters and start drilling off our coast.



Great point...I think that we will probably take more precautions to protect our coasts...than Hugo Chavez will.

Fire Haley
03-31-2010, 01:09 PM
I do live in the Tampa area

I think we're safe


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy-graf01/31energy-graf01-popup.jpg

steelax04
03-31-2010, 01:11 PM
I HOPE this is not just a political move to get Cap and Trade jammed through...

stlrtruck
03-31-2010, 02:38 PM
I HOPE this is not just a political move to get Cap and Trade jammed through...

There in lies the problem with the dipsticks in DC. They'll make one good decision and screw up a bunch of others, thinking that it makes it ok!

Fire Haley
03-31-2010, 05:02 PM
Tell your representatives


Sen. Bill Nelson:

"I’ve talked many times to (Interior Department) Secretary (Ken) Salazar and told him if they drilled too close to Florida’s beaches they’d be risking the state’s economy and the environment. I believe this plan shows they heeded that concern. And it ought to derail the scheme in the Florida Legislature to drill three miles offshore. Now I need to hear from Defense Secretary Robert Gates. And I want him to look me in the eye and assure me that this plan will not compromise national security by interfering with the unfettered space we have for training and testing our most sophisticated military weapons systems.”


U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Tampa, “Drilling for oil off of Florida’s west coast beaches would be a serious threat to Florida’s economy and jobs. Our long-term economic health is dependent on clean beaches and clean water. I oppose any threat to jobs and Florida’s tourism and fishing industries."

Fire Haley
03-31-2010, 05:37 PM
the plot thickens


Kerry open to Obama drilling plan

Sen. John Kerry, who is leading the effort to craft a climate bill in the Senate, said Wednesday that he would consider supporting President Barack Obama's decision to expand offshore oil and gas drilling.

Kerry's (D-Mass.) spokesperson Whitney Smith said that the move could help him attract the 60 votes necessary to move climate legislation through the Senate.

“In the difficult work of putting together a 60 vote coalition to price carbon, Senator Kerry has put aside his own long-time policy objections and been willing to explore potential energy sources off our coasts as part of a suite of alternative solutions," Smith said in a statement supplied to The Plum Line. "He and his colleagues are committed to find acceptable compromises on onshore and offshore oil and gas exploration."

Kerry has been working with Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) to craft a climate bill that could get enough support to overcome a GOP filibuster while not alienating liberals and environmental groups.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/90059-kerry-endorses-obama-drilling-plan

revefsreleets
03-31-2010, 06:04 PM
This is a sop to divert attention from cap and trade. That's all it is...and the net result will be yet ANOTHER unfair tax on the very people who simply cannot afford it right now.

Cap and trade doesn't work ANYWHERE...it's so heavily government subsidized in the places is appears to work that it COULD be the tipping point for the US economy to crash into the shoals.

Want a cheap and easy "Climate Change" solution? Read "Super Freakonomics". There's a dude that can solve the entire problem forever for a teeny, tiny fraction of the cost of all this Al Gore bullshit.

chacha
03-31-2010, 07:21 PM
Want a cheap and easy "Climate Change" solution? Read "Super Freakonomics". There's a dude that can solve the entire problem forever for a teeny, tiny fraction of the cost of all this Al Gore bullshit.

Freakonomics Guys Flunk Science of Climate Change: Eric Pooley
Share Business ExchangeTwitterFacebook| Email | Print | A A A Commentary by Eric Pooley



Oct. 20 (Bloomberg) -- Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner are so good at tweaking conventional wisdom that their first book, “Freakonomics,” sold 4 million copies. So when Dubner, an old friend, told me their new book would take on climate change, I was rooting for a breakthrough idea.

No such luck. In “SuperFreakonomics,” their brave new climate thinking turns out to be the same pile of misinformation the skeptic crowd has been peddling for years.

“Obviously, provocation is not last on the list of things we’re trying to do,” Dubner told me the other day. This time, the urge to provoke has driven him and Levitt off the rails and into a contrarian ditch.

Their breezy take on global warming unleashed a barrage of highly detailed criticism from economists and climate experts, including a scientist who is misrepresented in the book.

Dubner wonders why everyone is so angry. In part, it’s because the book’s blithe remedies -- “We could end this debate and be done with it, and move on to problems that are harder to solve,” Levitt told the U.K. Guardian newspaper -- are an insult to the thousands of scientists who have devoted their careers to this crisis.

One of the injured parties is Ken Caldeira, a climate scientist at Stanford University who is quoted (accurately) as saying that “we are being incredibly foolish emitting carbon dioxide.” Then Dubner and Levitt add this astonishing claim: “His research tells him that carbon dioxide is not the right villain in this fight.”

Provocative, Untrue

That’s provocative, but alas, it isn’t true. Caldeira, like the vast majority of climate scientists, believes cutting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse-gas emissions is our only real chance to avoid runaway climate change.

“Carbon dioxide is the right villain,” Caldeira wrote on his Web site in reply. He told Joe Romm, the respected climate blogger who broke the story, that he had objected to the “wrong villain” line but Dubner and Levitt didn’t correct it; instead, they added the “incredibly foolish” quote, a half step in the right direction. Caldeira gave the same account to me.

Levitt and Dubner do say that the book “overstates” Caldeira’s position. That’s a weasel word: The book claims the opposite of what Caldeira believes. Caldeira told me the book contains “many errors” in addition to the “major error” of misstating his scientific opinion on carbon dioxide’s role.

Why does this matter? Because there’s a titanic battle going on over whether and how to reduce carbon emissions, and this soon-to-be bestseller tries to convince people that we don’t need to do so. Dubner and Levitt trumpet their “wrong villain” line in their table of contents and promotional material. On National Public Radio the other day, Levitt said, “The real problem isn’t that there’s too much carbon in the air.”

Multiple Villains

“SuperFreakonomics” never identifies the “right villain,” so I called Dubner and asked. “I don’t think anybody knows for sure,” he told me. Then he acknowledged that the chapter’s most newsworthy claim “could have been better phrased, as ‘carbon dioxide is not the only villain.’”

That’s a huge admission. No climate scientist believes carbon dioxide is the only villain: methane, nitrous oxide and other gases need to be reduced too. But that basic truth wouldn’t have drawn attention. It wouldn’t have given Levitt a bold contrarian line for NPR.

Dubner and Levitt acknowledge that the planet has warmed but pretend that cutting emissions is a hopelessly old-school response. “It’s not that we don’t know how to stop polluting the atmosphere,” they write. “We don’t want to stop.” They ignore the fact that U.S. emissions have dropped 9 percent since 2007 -- not just because of the recession but also thanks to energy efficiency and cleaner fuels.

Chance of Catastrophe

They exaggerate the cost of climate action and underestimate the likelihood of runaway global warming, pretending that the “relatively small chance of worldwide catastrophe” isn’t worth getting bothered about.

They dismiss global warming as a “religion” and rehash the so-called “global cooling” scare of the 1970s, a favorite skeptic myth. (A handful of scientists warned of a coming ice age, a false alarm in no way comparable to today’s scientific consensus on warming.)

They trumpet the “little-discussed fact” that the average global temperature has decreased in recent years. This is accurate according to one set of global data -- the other shows an increase -- but scientists say it proves nothing. Imagine the Dow climbing to 14,000, with a wobble to 13,950. That’s what global temperatures have done. Even with small fluctuations, this decade is by every measure the hottest in recorded history. The second hottest is the 1990s. The third hottest is the 1980s. Get the picture? Levitt and Dubner don’t.

Shooting Sulfur Dioxide

Having downplayed the problem, they try to solve it with a set of silver-bullet technologies known as geoengineering. One would shoot millions of tons of sulfur dioxide 18 miles into the air to artificially cool the planet. This could work; it also could have dire unintended consequences.

Caldeira, who is researching the idea, argues that it can succeed only if we first reduce emissions. Otherwise, he says, geoengineering can’t begin to cope with the collateral damage, such as acidic oceans killing off shellfish.

Levitt and Dubner ignore his view and champion his work as a permanent substitute for emissions cuts. When I told Dubner that Caldeira doesn’t believe geoengineering can work without cutting emissions, he was baffled. “I don’t understand how that could be,” he said. In other words, the Freakonomics guys just flunked climate science.

43Hitman
03-31-2010, 07:28 PM
^^ Link?

chacha
03-31-2010, 07:37 PM
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aVKXZg_Z.vMY

Borski
03-31-2010, 07:53 PM
I heard a report on the local news down here in FL and the amount of Oil thats off the Florida coastline would be used up in about a week under current USA consumption rates, and might even cost more to Drill there then they would get out of it.

I oppose drilling in thous reserves if thats the ones he is referring to.

I don't know how much is in ANWAR but if its economical feasible and theres enough oil to justify the cost of drilling then I am fine with it.

What I really support is looking into alternative renewable fuels such as Bio-Diesel, EV's for transport, and Nuclear, Geo-Thermal, Wind, Wave, Water Turbine and Clean Coal for power stations in order to make us energy independent.

steelax04
03-31-2010, 07:54 PM
So how does the email scandal play into Mr. Pooley's arguments? This article was prior to those headlines. I tried to find some of his articles written post November 2009 and haven't come up with anything. Now with NASA saying their data is even worse than East Anglias... Cap and Trade doesn't have a scientific foot to stand on right now. Will it in the future? I don't think so

GoSlash27
03-31-2010, 10:30 PM
He's got little choice but to swing right after that whole health care thing. By all means, I support this decision. Stop bombing and start drilling.

KeiselPower99
03-31-2010, 11:21 PM
I gotta give Obama credit on this one. He realized we cant be dependant on foreighn oil and need to drill in our own yard. I just hope he dosent have another reason for doing this.

MasterOfPuppets
04-01-2010, 12:17 AM
is the oil gonna be free ? :noidea:

HometownGal
04-01-2010, 06:29 AM
I gotta give Obama credit on this one. He realized we cant be dependant on foreighn oil and need to drill in our own yard. I just hope he dosent have another reason for doing this.

Obaaaaaaama yet again changes his stances - this time on offshore drilling. Sarah Palin was all for offshore drilling during the '08 campaign and guess who was opposed to it?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/20/loan-brazilian-oil-company-riles-conservatives-favor-offshore-drilling/

SCSTILLER
04-01-2010, 07:52 AM
My question is, why is Bristol Bay off limits? Doesn't Bristol Bay have a large oil deposit? Is this going back to the fear of another Exxon Valdeez, or is he just trying to please someone?

Like Rev's said, Cap and Trade is going to be jammed down our throats soon. I think this is a political ploy to say "look, we gave the repubs offshore drilling which they wanted, now will they support my crap and tax bill or will they just be the party of no again."

revefsreleets
04-01-2010, 09:14 AM
Obaaaaaaama yet again changes his stances - this time on offshore drilling. Sarah Palin was all for offshore drilling during the '08 campaign and guess who was opposed to it?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/20/loan-brazilian-oil-company-riles-conservatives-favor-offshore-drilling/

Actually he was against it, then for it, then against, now for it...

Flip.
Flop.

chacha
04-01-2010, 11:47 AM
:thumbsup:

Very good decision on this administrations part and they should be applauded for making a pro-American choice in drilling!!!

Those who have been critical of this administration for such things as HCR need to step up to the plate and give credit when it is due.

Whats wrong is wrong and whats right is right....Kudos to our President.


Good post, too bad some people will still complain even if they agree with this decision since it's Obama who made it

revefsreleets
04-01-2010, 11:58 AM
Good post, too bad some people will still complain even if they agree with this decision since it's Obama who made it

Actually, as is the case for MOST of the solid decisions Obama has reached, this is simply taking a "failed Bush policy" and making it his own.

Which, as you embrace it, you also embrace the hypocrisy the left has shown throughout. When these policies were explored and implemented under Bush, they were evil and awful. Suddenly, when a Democrat embraces and implements the SAME EXACT POLICIES, they somehow are scrubbed clean and are resurrected and reborn as fresh, new, exciting, and, most mysteriously, GOOD policy ideas.

It is the apotheosis of hypocrisy...

Fire Haley
04-01-2010, 12:12 PM
Let's see, Haliburton&Blackwater still making billions on the war?, check.

Insurance companies to cash in with Romney-care? check

Sarah's "Drill baby Drill" in effect? check

Patriot Act intact? check


It's like McCain was elected

Dems are embracing republican policies now - that's change that should make the lefties howl

revefsreleets
04-01-2010, 12:22 PM
Let's see, Haliburton&Blackwater still making billions on the war?, check.

Insurance companies to cash in with Romney-care? check

Sarah's "Drill baby Drill" in effect? check

Patriot Act intact? check


It's like McCain was elected

Dems are embracing republican policies now - that's change that should make the lefties howl

Taxing Cadillac health insurance plans? Check.
Building more nuke plants? Check.

These were ALL horrible, evil, awful ideas............................back when McCain endorsed them.

Fire Haley
04-01-2010, 12:30 PM
Not the nuke plants - I'm all for that.

Where can I get some Obama bumper stickers?

WH
04-01-2010, 12:41 PM
Nuclear power is where it's at. If they built 1000 of those, and take care of them properly. It's celebratable.

When McCain was running against Bush. He seemed sharp and confident. When he ran for President in '08....something seemed to be missing.

revefsreleets
04-01-2010, 12:43 PM
Nuclear power is where it's at. If they built 1000 of those, and take care of them properly. It's celebratable.

When McCain was running against Bush. He seemed sharp and confident. When he ran for President in '08....something seemed to be missing.

Money. He was outspent by as much as 8-1 in key battleground states. That's what happens when one side lies about accepting public funding then reneges....

But that's another subject entirely...fact is, Obama was dead-set against Nukes. Now he's all for them.

WH
04-01-2010, 12:57 PM
But that's another subject entirely...fact is, Obama was dead-set against Nukes. Now he's all for them.

He can change his opinion like any other man, woman, or child...can't he? And even if he is still against them, doesn't that mean he's putting aside his personal opinions to accomplish things that will be good for the US?

WH
04-01-2010, 12:59 PM
double post. stupid firefox.

Venom
04-01-2010, 01:28 PM
When Bush wanted to drill for oil off shore, the Liberals in the media went nuts about it. Now that the great NObama wants to do it, not one word from the left -wing media bashing him. Shocking ! :popcorn:

Fire Haley
04-01-2010, 02:24 PM
We're waiting for the other shoe to fall, when the big CO2 Tax hits on everything, we'll all be paupers.
Just like he promised.

atlsteelers
04-01-2010, 02:59 PM
Actually, as is the case for MOST of the solid decisions Obama has reached, this is simply taking a "failed Bush policy" and making it his own.

Which, as you embrace it, you also embrace the hypocrisy the left has shown throughout. When these policies were explored and implemented under Bush, they were evil and awful. Suddenly, when a Democrat embraces and implements the SAME EXACT POLICIES, they somehow are scrubbed clean and are resurrected and reborn as fresh, new, exciting, and, most mysteriously, GOOD policy ideas.

It is the apotheosis of hypocrisy...

speaking of hypocirsy? this was too easy of a search

As i understand it Bush was never for additional oil exploration on the coast of florida. his brother jeb was agianst it. but when oil prices spiked in 2008 he was for it agian...and his brother already got elected. i guest another case of flip floping.

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/news-story.asp?date=053002&ID=s1156519

just a sample of the article

Bush prevents oil, gas drilling off Florida coast
Government to buy back leasing rights


From wire reports

Associated Press
President Bush and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush meet in the Oval Office on Wednesday.



WASHINGTON -- With his brother, Gov. Jeb Bush, looking on, President Bush sealed a deal Wednesday to prevent further oil and gas drilling off the white sand beaches of the Florida Gulf Coast and in the cypress swamps near the Everglades.

The unexpected announcement would require the federal government to repurchase $235 million worth of oil and gas leasing rights in the Destin Dome area, about 25 miles south of Pensacola, and in three wildlife areas including Big Cypress National Preserve.

Jeb Bush acknowledged that the Oval Office announcement would boost his re-election campaign in Florida, the swing state in the 2000 presidential election and a tourism mecca where polls show 75 percent oppose offshore drilling.

Afterward, the clearly buoyed governor spoke to Florida reporters on a car phone and was not at all flustered by a suggestion that his brother George W. Bush was only mining environmental votes in Florida and oil contributions in Alaska, where the presi
dent supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

revefsreleets
04-01-2010, 03:35 PM
So "Bu-bu-bu-Bush" it is, then.

It's old. It's tired. And it's irrelevant. You are attempting to slice the argument REALLY thinly to deflect from the fact that Obama was against additional drilling, then for it, then against, and now for it.

Fact: Bush was for drilling in ANWR.
Fact: Bush was for drilling in Bristol Bay
Fact: Bush was for drilling off the East Coast
Fact: Bush was for drilling off the West Coast

Bush was evil for wishing to drill off the coasts of the US. Now Obama is saintly for suggesting the same. THAT is the salient point. The left will play word games, and spin and twist, deflect and project, babble "Bush Bush Bush!" all the live-long day, but all the excuses and empty rhetoric cannot and will not change the fact that this was BAD when Bush suggested, and now it's GOOD that Obama is suggesting it.

I have yet to hear a single liberal here, or anywhere for that matter, make a compelling and legitimate argument as to why the same exact policies that are bad when the other guy pushes them are suddenly good when THEIR guy pushes them.

In fact, NOW you are trying to say that Bush was BAD for protecting the environment! How do you guys manage to pull off these ridiculous mental gymnastics? I mean, it's laughable!

HometownGal
04-01-2010, 09:36 PM
Good post, too bad some people will still complain even if they agree with this decision since it's Obama who made it

All that Obaaaaaaama did was his usual - flip flop and embrace GOP ideas that he abhored during the '08 campaign. The very same man (and his drunk sidekick) who poked fun at Palin for her "drill baby drill" statement.

MACH1
04-02-2010, 12:25 AM
All that Obaaaaaaama did was his usual - flip flop and embrace GOP ideas that he abhored during the '08 campaign. The very same man (and his drunk sidekick) who poked fun at Palin for her "drill baby drill" statement.

Oh come on, you know they were all original obaama ideas. Nobody ever thought of any of these things until he came along.

Borski
04-02-2010, 12:42 AM
Oh come on, you know they were all original obaama ideas. Nobody ever thought of any of these things until he came along.

All hail our glorious all knowing leader!

WH
04-02-2010, 07:05 AM
So if Obama works with republican ideas and he's a flip flopper
and when he doesn't work with republican ideas he a bipartisan hardliner.

hmmmmmmmmm

HometownGal
04-02-2010, 08:07 AM
So if Obama works with republican ideas and he's a flip flopper
and when he doesn't work with republican ideas he a bipartisan hardliner.

hmmmmmmmmm

You mean the same "ideas" he ridiculed and vehemently abhored - the same "ideas" he now wants to take credit for?

http://www.patriots4americatoday.com/photos/Obamas%20Position%20on%20Bussing/BarackObamaBus_FlipFlopExpress.gif

WH
04-02-2010, 09:14 AM
Show me where he's claiming them to be his own ideas.

chacha
04-02-2010, 09:34 AM
Show me where he's claiming them to be his own ideas.

she cant, but it makes them happy to insult him obviously! :noidea:

HometownGal
04-02-2010, 10:13 AM
Show me where he's claiming them to be his own ideas.

1. He and his buffoon of a sidekick took shots at Sarah Palin during the 2008 election at her "drill baby drill" statements. Palin is a huge supporter of off-shore drilling. Obaaaaaama and the lush abhored her theories.

2. Lo and behold - Obaaaaaaama decides that offshore drilling just might not be such a bad idea, but thus far, has not acknowledged that former Governor Palin's theories held credence.

1 +1 = 2.

she cant, but it makes them happy to insult him obviously!

WH's post was directed to me not you.

http://jc-schools.net/tutorials/vocab/flyswatter.gif

chacha
04-02-2010, 10:18 AM
WH's post was directed to me not you.
]

I was writing to HIM not YOU.

HometownGal
04-02-2010, 10:21 AM
I was writing to HIM not YOU.

No - you were piling on which you have the audacity to :crying01: about others doing.

43Hitman
04-02-2010, 10:51 AM
I knew he wouldn't last.

WH
04-02-2010, 01:14 PM
Well, now that that's settled.

1. He and his buffoon of a sidekick took shots at Sarah Palin during the 2008 election at her "drill baby drill" statements. Palin is a huge supporter of off-shore drilling. Obaaaaaama and the lush abhored her theories.

2. Lo and behold - Obaaaaaaama decides that offshore drilling just might not be such a bad idea, but thus far, has not acknowledged that former Governor Palin's theories held credence.

1 +1 = 2.

Sarah Palin only spoke of drilling in Alaskan wilderness during her campaign. Something that even McCain was against.

McCain was for offshore drilling, but not ripping up the Alaskan wilderness. as mentioned here:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-11-palin-interview_N.htm

Sarah Palin was a hack then, is a hack now, and will always be a hack. (opinion)

Obama changed his mind from what he said during his campaign in Jacksonville, so what? He's trying to work with Republicans and not be a hardlining bipartisan jag off.

He promised an attempt at lowering gas costs and getting an effective comprehensive energy bill passed, if he has to open up the coast to drilling to accomplish that (by scratching the GOP's back)...why not? It's what the Republicans wanted during the '08 election...

http://environment.about.com/od/environmentallawpolicy/a/obama_offshore.htm

MACH1
04-02-2010, 01:32 PM
Well, now that that's settled.



Sarah Palin only spoke of drilling in Alaskan wilderness during her campaign. Something that even McCain was against.

McCain was for offshore drilling, but not ripping up the Alaskan wilderness. as mentioned here:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-11-palin-interview_N.htm

Sarah Palin was a hack then, is a hack now, and will always be a hack. (opinion)

Obama changed his mind from what he said during his campaign in Jacksonville, so what? He's trying to work with Republicans and not be a hardlining bipartisan jag off.

He promised an attempt at lowering gas costs and getting an effective comprehensive energy bill passed, if he has to open up the coast to drilling to accomplish that (by scratching the GOP's back)...why not? It's what the Republicans wanted during the '08 election...

http://environment.about.com/od/environmentallawpolicy/a/obama_offshore.htm

Don't kid yourself. Obaaaama isn't trying to work with the R's. Only thing he's doing is trying to save his ass. If he was trying to work with the R's, deathcare wouldn't be as much of a scam. He's one and done, get used to it.

You do know Palin was gov of Alaska, right. She was for drilling before '08. Who nailed the oil companies in Alaska for the people of Alaska. Because of her the people of Alaska get a bigger pay back from the oil every year. Unlike obaaaaama she stood up for the people, not trying to find more ways to screw them.

I'd think a little harder about whining about political campaign promises if I were you.

fansince'76
04-02-2010, 01:39 PM
McCain was for offshore drilling, but not ripping up the Alaskan wilderness....

The ANWR debate has never been about "ripping up the Alaskan wilderness." It's about opening up a tiny sliver (2,000 acres located entirely in the coastal plain) of a gigantic wildlife refuge that is almost 20 million acres in size (about 9 times the size of Yellowstone) to oil exploration and development. 2,000 acres sounds like a lot, but in reality it equates to about one hundredth of one percent of ANWR. Further, most Alaskans support it.

WH
04-02-2010, 04:55 PM
He's one and done, get used to it. Then the Republicans will have power again, they'll say FU to the Dems, push through a bunch of crap and make the American people mad at the Republicans. Then the Dems will get power again, they'll say FU to the Republicans and push through a bunch of crap that will make the American people mad at the Democrats.

I hope you don't want progress, because as long as the D's and R's are doing this Tit for Tat horseshit....you aren't getting any.


You do know Palin was gov of Alaska, right. She was for drilling before '08. Who nailed the oil companies in Alaska for the people of Alaska. Because of her the people of Alaska get a bigger pay back from the oil every year. Unlike obaaaaama she stood up for the people, not trying to find more ways to screw them.
Yes, I know she was governor of Alaska. Yes, I know she was for drilling prior to '08. I never said she wasn't. The only area she spoke about drilling in during her '08 campaign for VP was in the Alaskan Wilderness. Why are you pointing out obvious crap about Sarah Palin? It's obvious you love her (figurtively) but I'm not even attacking or saying anything mean about her....why the lecture?

I'd think a little harder about whining about political campaign promises if I were you. I'm not whining about anything. Saying that I am is just catty.


The ANWR debate has never been about "ripping up the Alaskan wilderness." It's about opening up a tiny sliver (2,000 acres located entirely in the coastal plain) of a gigantic wildlife refuge that is almost 20 million acres in size (about 9 times the size of Yellowstone) to oil exploration and development. 2,000 acres sounds like a lot, but in reality it equates to about one hundredth of one percent of ANWR. Further, most Alaskans support it.

I'm not totally against it. But 2000 acres is still going to be ripped up. If they allowed that land to be used, they need to restrict it so that's the only land being used. Because you know what happens when you give a Mouse a Cookie (if you don't get the reference it's to a childrens book about one thing leading to another, than another, than another, until you're giving up alot more than you once thought you would be)

43Hitman
04-02-2010, 05:06 PM
Because you know what happens when you give a Mouse a Cookie (if you don't get the reference it's to a childrens book about one thing leading to another, than another, than another, until you're giving up alot more than you once thought you would be)

Same principle applies when the government gets involved in our lives. Like HC for instance. And the Patriot Act, which Obama was against but promptly renewed.

Indo
04-02-2010, 05:10 PM
Because you know what happens when you give a Mouse a Cookie (if you don't get the reference it's to a childrens book about one thing leading to another, than another, than another, until you're giving up alot more than you once thought you would be)

Sorta like this whole Obaaaaama Healthscare thing, ain't it---before you know it, you're giving up a whole lot more than you thought you would be giving up----
---But I digress...