Originally Posted By dshyates <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/150340" target="_blank">http://www.newsweek.com/id/150340</a> Obama has had a very bad week politically in my eyes.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I for one am glad he is willing to at least rethinkpart of his position as the economy continues to falter here. The effect of such drilling is years off anyway, but there needs to be a 'plan' So yeah, techincally it is flip flopping to some extent, and yes McCain would be crucified by the press if the shoe was on the other foot, but I am glad to read this article. The media would run a picture in the paper of McCain standing next to W and talk about the rich oil barrons - ofcourse in thiscase itwill be the superior intellect of Obama that caused him to look at this. In a way ( a smallway) I actually feel slightly sorry for Obama in that he could never - ever liveup to the media hype of who he is. Lucky for him he is a very smart man and will make his way -
Originally Posted By Dabob2 < So yeah, techincally it is flip flopping to some extent, and yes McCain would be crucified by the press if the shoe was on the other foot, but I am glad to read this article.> Actually, McCain DOES have a similar flip-flop on offshore drilling; his opposition was less recent (not all THAT long ago, though), so far from being crucified, he's kind of skating on it.
Originally Posted By dshyates I think the fact that McCain didn't get crucified on his recent change of heart on Off Shore drilling is what lead to Obama backpedaling on the issue.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 That, and the fact that the "we need to drill offshore" message is one of the few that the GOP has found traction with lately. Unfortunately, it's based on the misleading idea that drilling more will lower prices at the pump in the short term, but the GOP is hammering at it anyway (that's what they were talking about when they stayed past the recess time in Congress and all that) and it appears to be working in certain swing states; so Obama follows along. It doesn't bother me particularly that EITHER of them reversed themselves on this, because I don't think more drilling is necessarily a bad thing, provided it can be done in an environmentally sound way. I do think Obama is more likely to invest more in alternatives, though, which is what is needed long-term.
Originally Posted By planodisney We are 1 of the only industrialized nations in the world not looking for more places to drill, not building more refinaries, not looking to build nuclear power plants and so on and so on. The reason is that the Democratic party has sold out to the environmental extremists and have put us in the horrible situation we are in now. McCain hasn't been ANY better on this issue over the years. It is easy to be idealogically extreme on issues when everything is going great, but eventually a crisis comes along to prove how stupid you were.
Originally Posted By dshyates "The reason is that the Democratic party has sold out to the environmental extremists and have put us in the horrible situation we are in now." Sounds like you have bought into the talking points spewed by right wing talkers. The last refinery that the Dems shot down was in 1978 in SoCal. Since then they have been the scapegoat for price gouging by the oil companies. Yes, the bill to drill in ANWAR was shot down which gives the right wing more ammo, but it was shot down for various reasons, namely it won't provide a drop in the bucket. No the Repubs are terrified that the Enron loophole will be undone and have circled the wagons around that one. So blaming the Dems is classic political tactics, but the issue far more complex than that.
Originally Posted By dshyates Here is some interesting info regarding oil spills caused by Katrina and Rita. <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/06/19/mccain-katrina-spills/" target="_blank">http://thinkprogress.org/wonkr...-spills/</a> If you think this is left wing/Democrats drivel, follow the links provided in the article to the actual reports. Note that in the reports the oil spillage is listed in barrels, and in the article its listed in gallons. I have not been against offshore drilling, but I think I may be changing my stance. Do we really need to spend 10 years to get this oil, when we should really be focusing on alternatives?
