President Barack Obama faced a backlash from angry environmentalists after announcing he was opening up huge areas of American waters to oil and gas drilling.
The policy was welcomed by cries of “drill, baby, drill” from Republicans repeating a slogan from their 2008 election campaign. Their leaders on Capitol Hill claimed credit for encouraging the move and said they were ready to work with Mr Obama.
Exploration could lead to new oil and natural gas platforms in waters along the southern Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and part of Alaska. Proposed contracts in Alaska’s Bristol Bay, however, were cancelled over environmental concerns.
Drilling could take place as close as 125 miles from Florida. It is already occurring in western and central areas in the Gulf of Mexico.
“This is not a decision that I’ve made lightly,” Mr Obama said in anticipation of the outcry from environmentalists, stressing that it would be done “in ways that balance the need to harness domestic energy resources and the need to protect America’s natural resources”.
Brendan Cummings, senior counsel at the Center for Biological Diversity said that the announcement was “all too typical of what we have seen so far from President Obama – promises of change, a year of ‘deliberation,’ and ultimately, adoption of flawed and outdated Bush policies as his own”.
He added: “Rather than bring about the change we need, this plan will further our national addiction to oil and contribute to global warming, while at the same time directly despoiling the habitat of polar bears, endangered whales, and other imperilled wildlife.”
[More]
Related:
Analysis: Barack Obama’s oil drilling bargaining chip
Notes:
Is there anything Sarah Palin can’t do?
There’s something more going on here than we know. I’m thinking of Iran and a possible interruption in our oil flow through the gulf. It’s just a guess.
Trying to get a deal for carbon emission laws by doing the opposite at the same time and steal some of the Republican voting base ? Shelf game, keep your eyes on the pea while the shells are moved around in distracting patterns ?
Trying to give the impression of trying to govern from consensus with ” bipartisan ” measures to counteract the effects of the bulldozing through of the health bill maybe ???
Well maybe now that the Czars are running Government Motors, they had to inform Obama that his earlier preaching won’t work. Obama had actually mocked Sarah Palin’s “drill baby drill” and had preached “There are things you can do individually, though, to save energy. Making sure your tires are properly inflated –- simple thing. But we could save all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling –- if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You’d actually save just as much!”
So now the progressives have checked their tires and had tune ups and guess what? They still need gas.
He said it would involve a ‘mix.’ But those are huge drilling initiatives. He did say on the campaign trail to the effect he was listening to where Palin was going OR where she’d already been — making plans for drilling all over the place. His job becomes that much easier as he listens to her recommendations.
Things to think about;
- Where is Soros on this file? How does he benefit?
- Exploration is not the same as drill drill production
- The devil is in the details, apparently Obama cut off production in Alaska in one spot but approved new exploration in a new spot. Immediate flow traded for possible flow in the distant future. Is this just a game of hide the pea?
- Is this just triangulation before cap and trade
- Is this a good thing and we’re looking for the bad? Are we just paranoid now?
- Think positive, maybe drilling in Gitmo will be next.
Obama is trying to encourage the first American boom in a long time that isn’t based on bullshit. Oil is tangible and useful, unlike dotcom pipedreams or derivatives of subprime loans. Now, if he can manage to keep his grubby government paws off the direct revenues (trusting that his IRS folks will take the proper share of the wealth via taxation) he might be in great shape by the end of the first 4 years.
Good questions, Nom, seeing ahead. Cy, it’s been reported that the 20-30 somethings’ legislated health insurance fees will be UP by 17 percent when it kicks in in 2014. UP, Cy?? Do the math.
Also being reported is that the BILL allows the insurance providers to be charged $100 per person if they fail to provided that life saving operation for various reasons. heh what are they going to opt for — paying the $100 fine for non life saving medical procedures or pay that $100,000. operation. The bill’s a legalistic fraud to all appearances. It may drive the tea partiers to take a little brandy, eh. The anger’s at a fever pitch, while you focus on one kooky militia whose hiding behind a ‘Christian face.’ As to the other up to three hundred militias, up til now, they’ve reportedly been in support of local authorities and interested in home guard operations should another 9-11 episode transpire. They would have been picked up by now if it was otherwise. Some, many on the right are getting pretty annoyed with being labeled ‘radical’ nutcases. It’s not the case and most of us know it. Let’s keep cool.
Who says this? The insurers under the current system?
Are they factoring an average based on ALL people in the age bracket or just those who had health insurance to begin with? If it’s the former then those numbers are exceedingly dishonest. After all, isn’t this one of the age brackets with the largest proportion of people with no health insurance at all? Any increase in their premiums is adding to the numerator and not the denominator.
Problem, Rhoda, is I do the math … and know all the tricks.
Not much to this.
They are allowing EXPLORATION in areas where it is unknown whether there is oil there or not. At the same time they are refusing to allow drilling where there are known, proven oil deposits.
Even if they find oil off the east coast, it will be many, many years before there is any production.
It might seem like some kind of good will on one hand, but I am waiting to see what’s in the other hand.
Cy, it’sdefinitely reading to include all those in the age bracket. So, yes you’d be right. Exceedingly dishonest. And yes, I know you know the math. I’m rusty. But now we know why tens of thousands are showing up at these rallies and townhalls. Also, it’s being reported that children are covered BUT not for six months. Why the delay. Oh, bureaucracy problems, no doubt. Bureaucracy IS the problem. Too many job losses involved.
as nom said the devil is in the details. We all should be following the details if we can stomach them. This deal is ‘no deal.’ Hence, the rising anger.
So Oblamebush announces offshore exploration initiatives scant hours before his henchmen are to declare that CO2 is a danger to the environment and about to put in the most noxious restrictions in the free world. So if you distract the masses with your right hand then sucker punch them with your left hand is the punched masses any better off?
Well, Rhoda, the bottom line is that, despite their protests out of fear of losing the argument over an unfortunate label, the conservatives have truly earned their rep:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YRQlUsdA3U
That’s about 3 posters from here rolled up into one. If you don’t want to be associated with the duck then stop quacking (not you personally).
Regarding statistics, most journalists don’t even understand what they’re reporting when it comes to numbers so all newspaper statistics must be viewed very critically.
Regarding details … the fact that there are so many is the problem. How hard would it have been for Obama to create a quick insurance program for the 15% who are dissatisfied or going without? If 85% of the population are willing to pay in (indirectly) and take nothing back (in favour of their private plans) then it would stand to reason that there will be more funding for people who are truly in need. It’s not rocket science – not sure why Obama wouldn’t go for that approach.
Re #11 Don’t disagree with the view Joe but it (the carbon tax) is going to happen anyway.
The issue is whether anyone takes up the “Dirll Baby Challenge” during the current Presidential term. If they do, then at least P.O. is following Palin’s advice. If they don’t then P. P. (President Palin) can just implement new found P.O ‘s policy starting in 2013.
Helpful either way, the good news is that the USA is finally beginning to act in a strategical manner in areas that count.
A minor but welcome change from the current policy of p**sing off its allies at every turn. (UK in the Falklands, Canada in the Arctic etc.)
Carbon tax is not an inevitability. The longer the debate drags on, the less like it will ever come to pass since India and China steadfastly refuse to sign on and they are two of the worst polluters -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions
China has 2.28x the intensity of America when it comes to carbon emissions and leads the world by volume. Why should Europe and North America cripple their economy if two considerably dirtier economies of comparable scale will not?
If ever I thought Oblamebush and the backroom boys actually cared about the environment I might be tempted to agree with Cy. However as Dead Fish once said, “Never let a crisis go to waste”. In other words the carbon tax has nothing to do with controlling the climate and everything to do with controlling the economy.