Comes as no surprise that Obama reconsiders oil in an energy package, as I’m sure the handlers are ever keeping an eye on poll opinions on energy.
His restrictive energy plan, consisting of alternative energies only, isn’t going to fly in the face of Americans’ financial reality, so BHO has reversed course and said he would accept an expansion of offshore oil drilling as long as it was part of a broader package of measures that would free the logjam of energy bills in Congress.
“My interest is in making sure we’ve got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices,” Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, said in an interview with the Palm Beach Post. “If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well-thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage — I don’t want to be so rigid that we can’t get something done.”
But he has a few caveats…
Obama, through his Senate office, issued a written statement welcoming a proposal sent to Senate leaders Friday by 10 senators — five from each party — that would lift drilling bans in the eastern Gulf of Mexico within 50 miles of Florida’s beaches and in the Atlantic off Virginia, the Carolinas and Georgia, but only if the states agree to oil and gas development along their coasts. The states would share in revenue from the development.
Drilling bans along the Pacific coast and the Northeast would remain in place under the compromise.
The compromise “would repeal tax breaks for oil companies so that we can invest billions in fuel-efficient cars, help our automakers re-tool, and make a genuine commitment to renewable sources of energy like wind power, solar power, and the next generation of clean, affordable biofuels,” Obama said.
Even were they able to hammer out an agreement including these caveats, would that inspire Pelosi and Reid to allow debate and votes? And since Pelosi’s sent the House home for vacation, anything happening prior to election is highly unlikely, and perhaps under the current POTUS, even more unlikely.
Instead, Democrats crafted a rhetorical answer to the GOP’s drilling campaign, calling on companies to begin oil drilling on the millions of acres both on- and offshore that have already been leased to them but remain untapped. Obama has taken up that line as part of his standard stump speech.
But with rising gasoline prices, polls indicate voters increasingly side with the Republicans, even here in Florida, where opposition to offshore drilling has always been strong. McCain switched his own position on the issue earlier this year, as did Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R), who had also been opposed.
“It’s clear that members of both parties are following John McCain’s leadership toward an ‘all of the above’ approach on energy that includes nuclear, alternative energy, and off shore drilling,” McCain’s campaign said in a statement. “We hope Barack Obama will realize that his ongoing opposition to John McCain’s realistic energy solutions and additional off shore drilling is wrong.”
Again, the language here is laden with failure, as those existing leases are not located in the UTRR areas with plentiful oil supplies. In this way, the DNC can “appear” to be flexible, while in fact, they are not. Below is the map of the current leases. See the full page with legend of lease and production status here.
Now compare the existing land leases to the UTRR oil resource map that Mike’s A provides from his blog.
The question is, are the offshore leases – like the land leases – also located in the areas that are non-productive? Before Congress places this caveat on the oil companies, they’d better prove to the US citizen that the leases they want enforced are actually fruitful locations.
Considering the timing (unless an emergency summer session is called), and the House and Senate leadership’s schoolyard bully stance on moving energy bills, Obama is politically astute to the benefits of this change of heart. By lending his support to an “all of the above” style bill, he can appear bipartisan. But he can also rest easy that the House and Senate leadership are unlikely to allow such a bill to come to pass.
Vietnam era Navy wife, indy/conservative, and an official California escapee now residing as a red speck in the sea of Oregon blue.
Saying that drilling must be considered as part of a broader energy policy is the political equivalent of saying .. “I’d like to talk about something else” as this stance gives him the final option, most notably after the election, to simply say no.
There is no real change .. Obama just doesn’t like being beaten about the head and face by an issue that he knows will take him down. His energy policy (as outlined on his web site) has no such point that would include additional oil drilling and he has repeatedly said that it won’t help.
Campaign McCain shouldn’t take this most recent talk from Campaign Obama as anything but noise.
The democrats have been drilling dry holes for 18 months, gas prices have doubled and the auto industry has been destroyed. They destroyed the housing market, the stock market, the banking industry and the trucking industry (which moves every item you have to have to live). The only thing they have driven up ‘other than prices’ is the unemployment rate, and DA Americans still vote for them. Go figure.
It occurred to me today, that if I were someone considering voting for Obama, that I should be considering this: if Obama changes his positions so often, even if it’s “sounds” more sound (I.e. being more open to drilling now) that maybe, just maybe, if he were elected POTUS, he might just change again in ways that I would be very unhappy about. Since it’s obvious that he is not the “Anointed One”, but just another politician, how and why would I trust him to have my (the mislead Obama supporter) best interests in mind?
Those looking for a free handouts from a liberal Government under Obama might just be told “no”. They might be told they have to get a job or be thrown in the gulag.
Why is it O.K. to drill off the beaches of Florida, Georgia and South Carolina and not O.K. to drill off the beaches of California or the Northeast?
I just came from the beach on Hilton Head Island. Beautiful day today, not so crowded on the beach. I wouldn’t be able to see an oil rig 50 miles offshore even if I went out 20 miles in a boat. I can barely see Tybee Island (where there is a live atomic bomb lost offshore) and that’s only ten miles or so.
The problem we are going to have is that the “gang of 10” who negotiated this latest compromise which Obama has now endorsed will remove the issue from the campaign even though it leaves vast areas still barred from drilling.
Again, if drilling is now safe and O.K. for some areas, then let every state decide on it’s own if they want to drill offshore or onshore.
This should be a State’s Rights issue.
Bush isn’t holding up the oil drilling, the leaders of Congress are. Now Obama can get the drilling started. He could do it by telling the leaders in Congress, Democrats, that he may loose the election. As a senator he is too low on the pole to help and as president he will be in a totally different branch. As a Democratic presidential candidate he could put some fear into the Democrats and get this solved now. If he waits (wins or loses the election), he will be unable to do anything if he wanted to do anything at all.
Mike typed:
This should be a State’s Rights issue.
Nope. These are federal lands and should remain so.
We should scrutinize offshore drilling very, very carefully.
And then decline the opportunity.
How many more decades relying on automobiles for transportation do you want?
Gas is never going to be inexpensive again.
A growing middle class in India and China will see to that.
Cars. Cars. Cars.
Time to get off that merrygoround.
drill already. enough is enough. he goes one way then the other. he needs to get his crap straight. the only good thing is, the more he keeps jumping around, the worse he is looking the rest of the nation. so many dems are starting to question all of his changing on the issues. makes me crazy though to listent o those who think he is so awesome.
Arthur said,
How many more decades relying on automobiles for transportation do you want?
Gas is never going to be inexpensive again.
A growing middle class in India and China will see to that.
Cars. Cars. Cars.
Time to get off that merrygoround.
So apparently you live where there is public transportaion?
I don’t, I need my truck for transportaion and work,,,, can’t carry tools on a bicycle…
What would have us all do?
Freaking watermelons…
Nobama is such a pandering POS, I wonder if his wife keeps his balls in a jar at home because it’s obvious he doesn’t use them.
Ok,,,
here is the ultimate anti man made global warming resource…
you want links…. you have links…
Spread it around, send it to every hippie you know!!!!
http://z4.invisionfree.com/Popular_Technology/index.php?showtopic=2050
“Playing” bipartisan shows more leadership than feigning outrage. McCain could of won some his integrity points back if he had “played” up his bipartisan side more.
Fit fit
“Playing”…. WTF???
Leadership doesn’t involve “playing”…
Leadership involves “leading”… I’ve been there and still do it…
what part don’t you understand??
bigpapa wondered:
‘So apparently you live where there is public transportation?’
Uh…..yes.
I gave a little thought to where I might live and work after the OPEC crisis in, let’s see, 1973
bigpapa concluded:
‘Nobama is such a pandering POS, I wonder if his wife keeps his balls in a jar at home because it’s obvious he doesn’t use them.’
Hmmm.
Big truck, little ***k?
Holy toledo, what a nightmare that must be!
Arthur,
normal truck, (F-150, King Ranch actually) big d@@k(or so my woman says) ,,, which I’m sure you would like to see….
So,, the question is….
What are we supposed to do if we don’t drive…
How is the repairman supposed to get to your house if not in a truck with tools and parts?
How is the ambulance supposed to get to you after you OD on tofu and bean sprouts.. or semen??
Try as you might you won’t offend me,, I would have to care what you think before I would be offended…
But you still didn’t answer my question.. what are we to do????
What is your answer to the whole car delima????
Like all libs you have no solutions only whiney, cry baby bitches…
What’s the matter is your pu$$y hurting????
@ Arthur #6
First of all, please let me keep the tiny shred of respect I have for you and refute comments like a mature adult. Making fun of someone who owns a big truck? Not mature in my book.
And secondly, please re-read your comment again. What part of your “solution” sounds anything close to realistic to you? Do you really think we can switch our means of transportation with the snap of your fingers? You say it yourself:
If this is, as you say, growing into a worldwide issue not limited to the US, do you really think switching is going to be that easy? Whatever fantasy La-La-Land you’re in, please come back to Earth.
Whether you like it or not, we ARE going to be dependent on cars for decades to come. There’s nothing you nor I can do about that.
Sigh.
No one said you can’t drive papa.
It’s just going to cost a lot more to do so.
That’s just the way it is.
And the sooner we get a lot more serious about enabling people to move around in ways beyond the passenger car, the better. Public transportation? Of course.
Simple as that. Nothing new. The gasoline ‘crisis’ didn’t happen overnight but we have avoided dealing with the issue for decades.
And as for the size of your truck. I had to ask.
I often find guys who feel the need to talk the ‘balls’ of other guys often are a little insecure about their own.
Your p***y remark pretty much confirms that.
Leah, let me see if I have this straight:
rates a reprimand for immaturity, but
–all in the same post–is totally cool and not worthy of comment? In the Old Country we call that hypocrisy. Congrats! You’ve lived down to my expectations yet again.
“Arthur” It is a state’s rights issue bud. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to expand on my point in your usual snarky, know it all (know nothing) manner.
Drilling in SC would take place offshore from our beaches and it’s our economy that would benefit from drilling. And under the current legislation Republicans have been pushing in Congress we in SC, like those in Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia and Alabama would get to decide if we wanted drilling or not. While those in other states would still have the federal government deciding what is best for them.
And of course there is a lot of “federal” land in Alaska, but it’s still in Alaska. And last time I checked they were still a state.
Then of course there is the oil shale in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah. Again, all three are states.
Nothing I have read indicates that this compromise would permit those states to harvest the additional resources they have.
Ah, DW shows up around here to try to take me on again. Alas, but again, fails.
Arthurstone started the immature genitalia insults. If it hadn’t been for that, bigpapa wouldn’t feel the need to write the things he did. I’m not defending nor condoning what bigpapa did. There’s no, “Good job, bigpapa!” there, and there won’t be. It’s just regretful that commenting and insulting has been reduced to that.
That was another pointless attempt to make me look like I don’t know what I’m talking about. Thanks for that diversion, again. Next time, can you comment when you have something interesting and valid to say on the topic?
And Arthurstone #16: it’s not as easy as you make it sound. I take public transportation myself, but it doesn’t reach everywhere, and it can’t reach everywhere. I still need to drive to actually get to the train or the bus station. Your problem’s not with the cars, it’s with the zoning laws. Either way you look at it, (just like that commercial that ran a few years ago said), life sucks without a car. It’s not like in some countries in Europe where everything’s literally walking-distance from your house.
Arthur,,,,
“Sigh.
No one said you can’t drive papa.
It’s just going to cost a lot more to do so.
That’s just the way it is.
And the sooner we get a lot more serious about enabling people to move around in ways beyond the passenger car, the better. Public transportation? Of course.
Simple as that. Nothing new. The gasoline ‘crisis’ didn’t happen overnight but we have avoided dealing with the issue for decades.
And as for the size of your truck. I had to ask.
I often find guys who feel the need to talk the ‘balls’ of other guys often are a little insecure about their own.
Your p***y remark pretty much confirms that.”
Sorry for my brief absence,, I went to visit family for a few days.
You are well and truly pathetic AS…S….
The “crisis” happend due to the pathetic greens and the pandering of the democraps to them.
Look to your lovely party for the crisis,, it’s that simple..
You may have to lay off the weed or du or KOS for a while to be clean enough to see the truth but that is the truth and it started with jimmah catier… idiot presidente’.
And if you had any brain cells at all,,, you would know my truck is normal size..
And you are the moron that started with a comment about the size of my cock… I just assumed you were interested.. after all you brought it up.
OH and lastly, you’ve offered no examples of how we’re supposed to achieve this magical transformation to “public” transportation… because you have none.. . you pussy 🙂
I know I probably don’t have enough clout here yet to even say anything, but I am starting to get concerned about some of the explicit language I’ve been reading on Flopping Aces recently as it relates to the human anatomy, if you get my drift. No one has made me the expletives police, and understand 1st Amendment rights of everyone here…guess I’m just exercising my 1st Amendment right to express a concern! I’m really and truly not picking on any one person, even though this is following bigpapa, but a few different folks who have a LOT of passion about the issues. One thing I really like about Flopping Aces is that it seems to be fairly clean for the most part, unlike some blogs where it seems anything goes with regards to language. Folks at FA pretty much disagree respectfully, and I’ve appreciated that.
O.k., I’m done preaching…thanks for reading!
SoCal,
As far as I’m concerned you’re welcome to express yourself as you see fit.
Obviously you’re referring to me and I would appreciate it if you would be forthright enough to call me out on it.
I’ve only felt compelled to respond to Arthur in the same terms as obviously that’s what he/she feels compelled to do.
Don’t act like a wussy liberal,, I’m man enough to take criticism and if you just ask I’ll respect your wishes..
Anyone can ask and I’m gentleman enough to comply but blanket, vague statements are annoying..
bigpapa,
LOL, wussy liberal I am not, but I do understand how it could sound that way. I always try the diplomatic approach, and I’m sure that can be annoying to someone who’s a no hold’s bar straight shooter like yourself. I respect that about your blogs, btw.
I honestly wasn’t just referring to you, but yes, your post is what prompted my comment. I know that Arthur initially prompted this unfortunate discourse on this thread, but I thought there were others as well who were getting a little too expressive for my taste. Maybe I’m incorrect about that–I don’t always remember who said what.
Okay, bigpapa, you want it straight? I’m asking you to “cowboy up” and at least do what you can to be the bigger person here, and not let someone else drag you down with them. You seem like a good-hearted person, and one who is able to do that, so how about it?
(That’s about as straightforward as I’m going to get…hope it suffices!)
No worries SoCal,,,
I don’t do cowboy but since you ask I’ll try to refrain..
I can respect that..
If you’ll forgive me the once in a blue moon indiscretion?
Seriously, that’s fine..
Regards
Thanks, bigpapa. You’re a good man.
I trust you’ll express yourself as you see fit…as I said, I do enjoy your candid and straightforward approach!
No problem SoCal,
Thank you and you take care.