RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama Offshore Drilling Drift
August 02, 2008 2:08 PM
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, now says he'd be willing to consider legislation including exanded off-shore drilling if part of a larger package, despite his long-time opposition to the idea.
I'm with my friend Marc Ambinder -- this strikes me as not quite a complete and utter reversal, but certainly a shift in tone and language, indicating a softening of his opposition and a recognition that energy legislation requires compromise.
Not unlike Sen. John McCain's statement that when it comes to Social Security reform, everything must be on the table, even though he personally opposes tax increases. (Though the back-peddling on that was confounding.)
My colleague Sunlen Miller has more on Obama and his off-shore drilling drift HERE.
- jpt
August 2, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (207)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Are you trying to say that drilling in our country will actually cause us to be more dependent on middle eastern oil????
------------
Yes. Because drilling does nothing to wean yourself off oil. The increase in demand for oil will be greater than the increase in supply.
------------
No. Because then the government can set it's own price. Instead of it costing $140/barrel, it could be more like $80/barrel.
Posted by: mike | Aug 3, 2008 3:05:50 PM
@mike "Because in the time oil is drilled, the price of gas went up due to increased demand."
Exactly. That's why it is stupid to try to drill you out of this mess, it will be impossible.
The only smart thing to do is decrease demand for oil.
Money spent on drilling for oil can not be spent on investing in green technology.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | Aug 3, 2008 3:05:17 PM
@Mike: "Are you trying to say that drilling in our country will actually cause us to be more dependent on middle eastern oil????"
Yes. Because drilling does nothing to wean yourself off oil. The increase in demand for oil will be greater than the increase in supply.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | Aug 3, 2008 3:01:50 PM
Because in the time oil is drilled, the price of gas went up due to increased demand.
Posted by: mike | Aug 3, 2008 2:57:23 PM
Two years ago, we opened most of the Gulf of Mexico — with its estimated 41 billion barrels of oil — and oil prices since then have doubled.
The remaining prohibited coastal areas have only 18 billion barrels.
Why would releasing the additional 18 billion magically drive oil price down, while the 41 billion that actually were released, resulted in doubling the oil prices?
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | Aug 3, 2008 2:54:02 PM
Exxon has still put more money into finding future resources than any other organization...
However, the news isn't going to report that information...
The media is more concerned with Obama being compared to Hilton and Spears...
Posted by: mike | Aug 3, 2008 2:48:16 PM
"I bet you would find a majority of people support the government taking over the oil industry right about now."
This is the Democrat solution. Give the government an extreme amount of control over an American industry.
Do you know of the fraud at Freddie Mac and Sallie Mae?
Do you happen to think that the same thing might happen if the government controlled the oil production chain?"
As a matter of fact, yes. This is why you cant stand Social Security and Medicare - because they work. 40% administrative overhead in private health insurance, 2% in government. Let me know when you get tired of paying more than anyone else in the world and getting less for it.
Posted by: Mike | Aug 3, 2008 2:46:26 PM
Do you know of the fraud at Freddie Mac and Sallie Mae?
Yes, thats what happens when Republicans are in power, isnt it?
Posted by: You Make ME Laugh | Aug 3, 2008 2:43:51 PM
By the way, almost half of the profits earned by Exxon went into technology developing alternate enery resources....
Ha! Sadly, no. As a matter of fact, they spent more advertising their committment to alternative energy than they spent on energy research.
Posted by: The_Original_Mike | Aug 3, 2008 2:42:44 PM
Rev. Dr. E Buzz Miller
Exactly, what have the democrats done in congress since they retook the majority of seats???
Gas at record highs, Still in Iraq and Afghanistan, Econonomy still poor...
But i think we should trust them this time.....
Posted by: mike | Aug 3, 2008 2:41:44 PM
"I bet you would find a majority of people support the government taking over the oil industry right about now."
This is the Democrat solution. Give the government an extreme amount of control over an American industry.
Do you know of the fraud at Freddie Mac and Sallie Mae?
Do you happen to think that the same thing might happen if the government controlled the oil production chain?
More oil on the world market will lower oil prices. More oil produced by us will lower the world oil price. Democrats getting out of the way of building nuclear plants will help us power electric cars, but they won't do it.
Democrats never come up with a single plan for anything, just a lot of whining, mocking and bitching.
Posted by: Rev. Dr. E Buzz Miller | Aug 3, 2008 2:36:50 PM
Willem van Oranje
Are you trying to say that drilling in our country will actually cause us to be more dependent on middle eastern oil????
Posted by: mike | Aug 3, 2008 2:33:43 PM
Isn't the point of every business to make money??? If you do not support a business, then boycott them by going to a different gas station. In which case then people will complain about that company.
By the way, almost half of the profits earned by Exxon went into technology developing alternate enery resources....
So don't complain about them only keeping their half....
Posted by: mike | Aug 3, 2008 2:30:51 PM
@Ann
And on another note: when you are worried that in 2003, 65% of our demand will still be ME Oil, then you definitely should NOT vote for McCain. He doesn't want to tell you but under his plans, we would be even more dependant on Middle Eastern oil.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | Aug 3, 2008 2:27:38 PM
AkaDad:"Why do people support offshore drilling when it does nothing to lower gas prices or get us off oil?"
They actually don't support drilling at all. Here's how to undercut the Republicans on offshore drilling: propose that the government begin to do offshore drilling.
What they support is offshore oil leasing, which is totally different, and just leads to speculation, whereas government offshore oil drilling would actually bring down the price.
I bet you would find a majority of people support the government taking over the oil industry right about now.
Posted by: Mike | Aug 3, 2008 2:26:04 PM
@Ann
I've read several post by you and I'm sorry to say but you are incredibly misinformed:
First, increased offshore oil drilling will not bring prices down, not in the short term (because it will takes decades before any oil of the increased offshore drilling will enter the markets) and not in the long term because oil is a world commodity and is sold on world markets.
Second, the amount of US resources are tiny compared to world production and world demand.
This is not my ‘belief’, this is the conclusion of the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration (EIA). Access to offshore areas currently off limits "would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030."
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | Aug 3, 2008 2:22:30 PM
Why do people support offshore drilling when it does nothing to lower gas prices or get us off oil?
Posted by: AkaDad | Aug 3, 2008 12:41:51 PM
"Is Obama copying Kerry when he says "I was for it before I was against it even though I'm now for it"?"
-----
Is he ever NOT "copying Kerry"/Dukakis? And why's The CHANGEling afraid of unscripted town hall meetings, when he's claimed he's such a bring-em-together fella?
Posted by: Belle Starr | Aug 3, 2008 12:03:43 PM
I guess Bush didn't "flip-flop" did he.
Is it good to not compromise and negotiate?
Posted by: d | Aug 3, 2008 11:55:44 AM
Is Obama copying Kerry when he says "I was for it before I was against it even though I'm now for it"? Certainly seems that way. How can anybody seriously believe a word he says? When Obama flip-flops, he does so at a very major level and always seems to convince his lemmings that he hasn't changed at all. The guy can talk but falls very short on substance!
Posted by: Truman | Aug 3, 2008 11:35:01 AM
Post a comment


