Obama Offshore Drilling Drift

FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP, for the love of god, is there any policy that Obama has not shifted?

Now they call a severe flip-flop a drift. Last week it as NO and tax the LLLL out of the oil companies as stated by Obama. Today- some drilling is ok.
Oil companies profit margin is 8%, much lower than most large corporations.
Maybe Obama made his decision based on the opinion of 70% of citizens who are for oil well drilling. Does anyone really know how many barrels of oil could be produced from now capped oil wells? He should listen on other issues too such as illegal imminagration.

Obama is still against drilling. He just wants a compromise on the issue.
McCain had Obama’s position. He did a complete 180/flip-flop for drilling for political reasoning; for his base.
Obama landslide

Smart strategy.
This was the one issue that favored Republicans and now Obama has taken it off the table.
While McCain is using distractions and attacks to go after Obama, Obama looks like a leader who is willing to compromise to end gridlock in Washington and achieve something for the American people.
Brava!!!

Why does the media frame everything is a flip flop? He’s against it but willing to compromise to get something done. So he’s an adult instead of a kid throwing a tantrum because he’s not getting his way. It’s so frustrating! The media needs to stop being McCains base!

So Obama is willing to compromise and the McCain people are up in arms. He’s a flip-flopper, he’s posturing, he’s saying what people want to hear, so on, so on , so on. Isn’t compromise what McCain claims earned him his so called “maverick” persona? Why is it flip-flopping if Obama does it, but compromise and negotiation when McCain does it? Because republicans are hypocrites, that’s why.

alpaig52,
I strongly disagree. McCain is only against drilling in anwar. He’s for it in California and Florida etc. Obama wants to a find a compromise.
What do you say about McCain shift on his Iraqi policy. Endorsing Obama’s 16 months plan. Also endorsing Obama 2-3 more brigades in Afganistan.
McCain who touts his experience on foreign policy is basically adopting Obama’s positions and touting them as his own.

McCain came out in favor of offshore drilling, when the price of gas went through the roof, as a way of helping the Americasn taxpayer by damaging futures speculation.
Obama came out as unopposed to it yesterday, months after gas prices went through the roof because he saw polling numbers that showed him losing badly on this issue. He reacts to poll numbers; McCain reacted to a national crisis. Obama is the flip-flopper.

Marty -
McCain is not a flip-flopper because he changed positions first? LOL! You guys are such a hoot!

Flippin’ and a Floppin’ ….
The Obama Campaign slogan.

“There would be no potential for a serious withdrawal in 16 months had” John McCain and Bush decided not to invade Iraq.
Had McCain and Bush followed Obama’s position on Iraq we would not be in this stupid war. All the money we spent on the war could have gone to education, infrastructure, energy, research…
The war in Afganistan could’ve been won and the people responsible for 9-11 could’ve been defeated.
Obama’s opposition to the war is the judgement we need.
Also, McCain was against a surge of troops in Afganistan, he’s now for it. Obama’s position remains the same.

Had McCain and Bush followed Obama’s position on Iraq we would not be in this stupid war. All the money we spent on the war could have gone to education, infrastructure, energy, research…
_______________
Only problem was, Obama’s “judgement” at that time was only “words, just words” because he was only a STATE Senator at the time with NO legitimate input. Plus he said himself, he didn’t have all the information available on the decision, and may have decided for the war if he had, and could he have voted …once again he was irrelevant.

Thinking about McCain political nama calling of the week one can conclude that “For a man who will turn 72 this month, he’s a surprisingly immature politician”

Obama: “I was against drilling before I was for it.”
Sound familiar to anyone?
Of course Barry’s for drilling now. FlipFlop, take a poll, any way the wind blows. That’s change we can grieve in!

Obama’s statement arose from consideration of a compromise bill being offered by “The Gang of Ten,” a bipartisan group of Senators including Mary Landrieu (LA), Kent Conrad (ND) and Saxbe Chamblis (GA). It allows, among other things, limited off shore drilling and taxes Gulf drilling in order to pay for alternative energy development.
God almighty…Republicans and Democrats working together to get something done instead of snarling slogans at one another over the barricades and trying to score cheap political points!
Good on “The Gang of Ten” and on Senator Obama for being open to a bipartisan compromise.

BTW, Obama’s base is already grumbling over this. By the time this election season is over, much of the enthusiasm for Obama will be greatly diminished.
Love it.

Obama’s position on domestic oil doesn’t matter. If Obama were to become president, Pelosi, Reid and crowd WILL NOT LET OBAMA DRILL…. ANYWHERE!!!!
McCain 08

Moonstruck supporters for Obama full of their own hype have no idea what they will be getting from him and no idea how far down he will bring this country with failed European programs – no, USA far from bottom now, but will be on bottom with BO.

Looks like Obama is always trying to play catch-up. When the recent polls showed lopsided support for Mccain over Obama in fields of foreign policy and national defense, Obama tried catch-up via his trip – REVERSE RESULTS. Now, when the American people are clamoring for drilling, Obama jumps on the bandwagon. I’LL TAKE MCCAIN, THANK YOU!
McCain 08

Vanessa.
GLAD FOR OBAMA? HOW? NO DOMESTIC OIL, TAXES THRU THE THE ROOF TO PAY FOR FAILED EUROPEAN PROGRAMS – BUSINESS DRIVEN AWAY, MILLIONS WHO DEPEND ON CAPITAL GAINS TO PAY FOR UTILITIES WILL SEE THOSE TAXES DOUBLED. MORE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, NO IDEA ON FIGHTING TERRORISM, AND …. I LOVE THIS – SAN FRANCISCO COMES TO REST OF USA!!

Give Obama a break – he only flip flops if polls tell him he needs to change his position.

Obama said he would “consider” offshore drilling. He did not say he would support it. All the media have continually stressed in a negative manner that Obama would not support offshore drilling.
Obama is being pressured by the polls. The media never explains the entire issue. I just heard cable media (FOX) repeat the false statement that oil prices went down because Bush removed the ban on drilling. Demand went down substantially in the US and China. In preparation for the Olympics, China shutdown things and put a limit on driving to help clear the pollution in the air.
The last failed bill did not include provisions for speculators and did not mention California.
States on the east cost have to approve drilling, except Florida does not have to approve the drilling.
The polls in Florida had 60% of voters in favor of drilling.
“But the package does include one lightning rod: Florida.”

James,
Ask yourself why refineries have been closed down, why current refineries are only at 85% overall capacity, and why millions of acres of leases sit dormant, untapped right now? Then ask yourself why you haven’t done your homework, and why you actually believe that adding any more drilling leases to the pile is going to help you fill up your SUV.

Manitu….you are right…but it ain’t just truckers…factory workers….farmers….and also people with brains!

Vanessa.
YOUR OIL INFORMATION IS DATED. THERE ARE AT LEAST SEVERAL APPS BEFORE CONGRESS TO BUILD NEW AND…. UP TO DATE REFINERIES – STALLED BY YOUR DEM LEADERS. Another poster was correct – even a hint that the US is going with more domestic drilling will bring price down.

Jake can you do some research for us on one issue I am wondering about…has John mccain called the oil companies to task to drill in the areas that don’t have the profit margins they want but have oil.
Seems to me I have never heard John McCain call the oil companies to task once.
did I miss him doing that.
seems he is pointing at obama and offshore drilling and the people who are trying to protect our planet and the people who are trying to protect their coastlines…
but can anyone show me one time …
anywhere that Mccain called the oil companies to task…
never mind a proposal that puts the focus on getting THEM to do something…
is that whacked or am I imagining it.
I don’t think he has…ever…I am wondering can anyone else come up with something anything anytime that he took the oil comapny to task for this…seems he is always siding on their side of the argument.
Please somebody help me track something down.

Obama said having a gas tax holiday this summer would be “pandering”. I and millions of others could have used that holiday.
Now he is saying that he will support offshore oil drilling – something which will have harmful effects on the environment and whose effects we won’t see for years! Who’s doing the real pandering?

I don’t believe Obama knows what he is for and what he is against. It is as if somebody was whispering into his ear and when the whisperer changes, his stands on issues change. And his handlers seem to change daily!

Max
what Obama did today was brilliant…
it is a carrot.
there is oil in those millions of acres that the oil companies asked for.
if it is a question of more oil …why aren’t they drilling more there?
“cost prohibitive”
hard to swallow coming from a company like one of theirs Exxon…making more money in a quarter than any corporation in the history of our country.
Obama just said…
you know what we can talk about offshore when you start getting the oil that is already at your access.
we are being played by the oil and energy companies…
Barack also didn”t say like McCain repeal the whole national sanction letting the oil lobby have access with their millions to local small time state officials…
He said we can offer you this …but you need to do something…
something John McCain has never done.
ever.

Manitu
answer my question
give me a reference where John mccain talks about what other politicians like Biden and others are saying…they have MILLIONS of acreage where there is OIL.
why has John Mccain never even asked that question in public?
why
and why has there been no explanation …
because the oil companies say it is “cost prohibitive” and he takes their word while others say there is no information that proves that…
John Mccain since the beginining of this general election has been repeating almost verbatim what the oil companies have lobbied for or pitched i.e. the gas tax holiday and oil drilling.
how can you not see that?
I just want to here John mccain question the oil lobby’s motives or address it or anything…
and yes …I don’t trust the big oil companies. They are companies with shareholders. They are built to make money…not care about our environment or cutomers or our economy outside how it is reliant on their industry..

Obama switches just as I was trying to put more air in my car’s tires.

That’s why he’s starting the mumblings of
we will take away and offer it to those who will drill.
along with if you don’t start drilling with those record profits we also will slap windfall profits on you and give it to the ailing auto industry to explore and speed up r & d for alternative fuel engines…technology that may be able to forward home heating also…
to get us off your product faster…
or you can start drilling add more into the system…have your prices come down and we can talk about you drilling offshore in other areas.
That is what a president should do to ideas coming from a corporate lobby.

Jake said:
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, now says he’d be willing to consider legislation including exanded(sic) off-shore drilling if part of a larger package…
While the use of the word ‘expanded’ in the above editorial makes Jake more accurate than the rest of the media, the sentence as a whole is not strictly accurate. Most merely note that there is a moratorium on offshore drilling, which is totally inaccurate, since the moratorium is on _unleased_ drilling, in other words, a moratorium on expanding leases for offshore drilling.
It may seem that I am quibbling or arguing semantics, but this is why it is inaccurate to say that either candidate is for or against ‘drilling’:
Oil companies are not currently drilling on the 68 million acres they have already leased. By what miracle or fairy dust is adding additional leases going to increase drilling? Aint gonna happen.
Why do the oil companies want the leases expanded then? Simple – they dont want them for drilling, they want them for speculating.

Obama is sinking fast. What a real Washington Politician! How many flip-flops does this one make – lost count! Anyway, he should have consulted his leader, Nancy Pelosi, because she shut down the vote on off-shore drilling – rather rudely and juvenilely, I must say!
BTW, who is copying whom now? John McCain is the leader on this one – nice to see Obama following in his footstep! lol!

The resources spent to start up off shore drilling should be directed to an alternative to fossil fuel. Going for offshore drilling at this stage in our global crises is completely irresponsible and Obama should have stood firm on that one!

dl said:
“That’s why he’s starting the mumblings of we will take away and offer it to those who will drill.”
In fact, weeks ago (mostly) Republicans killed a bill which would have done exactly that

James Danley
“the federal government has no business mandating that a private company must conduct its business at a location that limits its profits. ”
they do when our environment lies in the balance…and they are mining a finite resource…that they do not own yet.
what you don’t get is that it doesn’t matter that they have a smaller profit margin…there profit margin increased to make more money than any corporation in the history of our country as our individual citizens and our economy suffered.
and it does not matter…
and your argument about more expensive to drill goes against the idea that this is all about more drilling…
and if it is three times more expensive and that is the reason we are repealing this rightful protection to our environment (as the earth is starting to show we are at a place that soon there may be no coming back from…and then oil and profits won’t matter to anyone if naysayers are wrong)
they need to show the numbers behind that…
and yes there are some industries that are regulated…like food, drugs and energy…
and the world is changing so we have to change with it on those issues.

James
Good post. I listed oil company profits at about seven percent for quite a few years. That seems a little high to me, but I think that is correct. Yes, volume accounts for the so called excess profits we hear so much about. Big question is why haven’t the apps for new refineries been acted upon?

DL asks “How many more excuses can Exxon give us for their ungodly profits? Why not pass along some of those profits to the consumer?”
Uh. . .it’s called free enterprise. Why punish the risk takers (who only clear 8% in profit for domestic oil) and spread their fortune to those who don’t take the risk? Sounds like socialism to me. It’s exactly what happened to the US auto industry when the unions felt it was their right to strike and hold the CEO’s hostage for not paying them an ungodly high wage for simple labor. No wonder we out source for everything now. American greed and the idea to socialize any entreprenuer’s profits among the masses (a liberal democrat mentality) is what started this whole mess.

Obama – always talking out of both sides of his mouth. (When he’s not stuttering, that is)

What in the heck does this guy stand for?

Question of the year 2010.
BARACK who?

Jimbo
Yes, really. McCain has flip-flopped more than 60 times. Google McCain and flip-flops.

Belle Starr, thanks for the info. I’m looking for some alternative candidate.

JohnR, if we use the oil from the strategic petroleum reserve then what do we do should Iran decide to block the shipping through the Strait of Hormuz? The reserve was designed to be used in an actual emergency. To use this oil to just lower the price of gasoline is foolish and it puts us at even greater risk down the road.
Now then you wrote: “…to finance an illegal and unjust war.” There was nothing illegal or unjust about invading Iraq. Saddam Hussein failed for 12 years to comply with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire. After 12 years of diplomacy having failed to convince Saddam Hussein to comply with the conditions of the cease fire, the UN Security Council issued its final ultimatum. When the UN Security Council made it known that it had no intentions of following through on its threat, as one of the original parties to the 1991 Gulf War, the United States (President Bush) rescinded the cease fire and resumed the war against Iraq. The invasion of Iraq was under the mandate of the UN, with the authorization of the U. S. Congress and in keeping with the earlier Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 signed into law by President Clinton.

Dennis, former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan erroneously declared that the invasion was illegal. The main dispute was as to whether the UN Security Council had to declare that a material breach had been broken before the 1991 cease fire could be rescinded. The UN Security Council resolutions do not specifically require that.
On March 21, 2003 U. S. Ambassador John D. Negroponte wrote: “It has long been recognized and understood that a material breach of these obligations removes the basis of the cease-fire and revives the authority to use force under Resolution 678. In view of Iraq’s material breaches, the basis for the cease-fire has been removed, and use of force is authorized.”

Sorry Applebutter, I didn’t see your question.
First of all, several states require additives to their gasoline. Some states even require different additives for winter and summer. In the case of the latter, that means that every refinery in that state must be shut down twice a year while they switch over to the new gasoline solution. And in many cases these shut down times are timed to coincide with the normal maintainence repairs. So this adds to the delay in bringing the refinery back up and running.
I have already answered the question on the 68 million acres of leased lands. But let try again in a little more detail. Oil companies pay billions of dollars for these leases. When they obtain a lease they can’t just start drilling. That’s because these leases are for exploration (there is no guarantee that a lease will even contain any oil). The oil companies have to explore the land, conduct test drilling and then assess whether there is enough oil and if it is cost efficicent enough to actually drill. To say that these leased lands are unused is not accurate. It can take years to fully explore these lands. But even that is not as simple as it sounds. These leases do not exempt the oil companies from having to provide environmental impact statements; and does not make the oil companies immune to lawsuits from environmentalists and nearby landowners trying to block their exploration and eventual drilling. Sometimes this litigation takes years.
And then once an oil company has assessed a lease as viable, additional environmental and engineeing studies are required. Permits need to be obtained. And then it takes time to install all of the necessary equipment. And after all that there could be another round of litigation before full scale extraction begins.
Finally, obtaining a lease is a crapshoot. Sometimes oil companies spend billions of dollars exploring a lease, spending years in litigation, and then the final assessment is that there is NO OIL. Sometimes the assessment is that there just isn’t enough oil to make the lease viable for drilling. Sometimes the assessment is that it isn’t cost efficient enough to drill (i.e., having to drill thousands of feet through solid rock for one year’s worth of oil).

Obama says “no” to slavery reparations now, but you can count on him “refining” that and flip flopping it, once he is in the white house. This will bankrupt our economy. It is part of his master plan, count on it. Can you trust Obama with anything? He will do and say whatever it takes, to get what he wants. Disgusting, sends shivers down my spine.

Vanessa Have you ever heard of anything called leadership? When he was in the Senate in Illinois his fourth largest corporate contributor, Exelon, had a radioactive leak at their nuclear power plant (they are one of the largest nuclear power producers in the Country) and the residents weren’t informed. Needless to say they weren’t happy when this came to light. Obama came out and made a nice public statement scolding Exelon and wrote a bill which would require them to inform the public when such circumstances would occur again. All good. Obama then turned around and rewrote the bill to accomodate Exelon, the nuclear regulators and the Republicans. That bill never passed. It’s like his mixing up the big red and green voting buttons 6-7 times and then saying “I voted this but meant to vote that” or
his “present” votes. Don’t even go with the “but that’s an acceptable strategy in Illinois” defense. Yeah, if you want to avoid political flak. As Edwards said in one of the debates to Obama in regards to his “present” votes, you’re either for or against or
“up or down”. Compromise and bipartisan work is something we want and need in a President but Obama’s record indicates someone who has no real strong convictions that he would stand up for. How the left or liberals can justify and excuse his “compromise” on FISA is beyond me. You’re either up or down. Leadership. Is there any position he wouldn’t be willing to chip away at? Faith based initiatives under George W are scary but under Obama his supporters who would and have attacked
George W on such have found a way to
put their own principles and convictions to the side and justify Obama’s being a proponent of such. It’s really sad to watch progressives and the far left lose sight of what they really believe in .

Obama’s reluctant concession to some offshore oil production is only further evidence of longstanding Democratic disdain for US energy production by US owned energy companies.
Democrats under the leadership of Barack Obama want to effectively give away in trust our offshore exclusive economic zone by preventing any current offshore development.Under the 1982 United Nations Law of the Seas Convention the US has an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles and mineral seabed rights up to 350 nautical miles extending along the Continental shelf. A nautical mile is 6080 feet so our exclusive economic zone extends about 240 miles and mineral seabed rights extend 420 miles. The US has the world’s largest offshore exclusive economic zone totaling 4.4 million square miles. In comparison, the total land area of the United States is only 3.4 million square miles. Because we have the world’s largest offshore coastline which is twenty-five percent greater than our land area, it only makes common sense that we exploit our offshore resources to achieve our energy independence.
The John McCain campaign should use as an example Chevron’s discovery 270 miles southwest of New Orleans and 175 miles offshore. The first discovery well produced 6000 barrels of oil a day. At 44 gallons to a barrel, this first single well is capable of producing a quarter of a million gallons of gasoline a day for US automobile tanks. This well named Jack 2 was drilled nearly 21,000 feet below the surface of the Gulf of Mexico in more than a mile of water. Imagine, they drilled almost five miles deep. This well is within our exclusive economic zone. If Barack Obama and the Democrats had their way, we would not have this production available for the American public.
The Canadian Hibernia oil platform 280 miles southeast of St John’s Newfoundland Canada is also a poster child of Democrat led US hostility to energy production. The first Canadian well at Hibernia came in with daily production of 50,000 barrels a day, almost the equivalent of 2 million gallons of gas a day. Fifty additional development wells have been drilled at Hibernia. Interestingly tugs capture and divert potential icebergs that could hit the drilling platform that also serves as a holding reservoir for over one million barrels of oil. This is the world largest oil platform that was drilled with the help of Mobil Oil and Chevron and loan guarantees by the Canadian government. Obama and the Democrats would never consider government loan guarantees for a sure thing that will produce energy for the American gas tank. Democrat loan guarantees and earmarks are only reserved for off the wall improbable future technologies such as hydrogen power that offer no short term chance of solution for our energy problems.
Democratic disdain for energy production by US companies is evident with the current ownership of former US energy companies. Is it any surprise that the jewell Arco Oil Company which owned 80 percent of our Alaska Oil Reserves was bought out by British Petroleum Corporation at the end of the Clinton administration due to the hostile Democratic attitude toward energy companies. It is no accident that the largest US builder of nuclear power plants, Westinghouse’s Nuclear Power Construction Division was bought out by Japan’s Toshiba Corporation. While 80 percent of France’s electricity is generated by nuclear power, only twenty percent in the US is generated due to the successful efforts of Democratic party to kill the US nuclear power industry. Significantly, nuclear power is not considered a mainstay of Democratic plans to address our energy crisis.
There is also a worldwide shortage and backlog of orders for oil drilling platforms and oil drilling ships but US shipyards are not building these ships. Only one percent of the world’s commercial ships are built in US shipyards. Hold your breath for the Democratic outcry and push for government help to US ship builders to build oil drilling ships in the US.

There are those who cannot even hear the name Obama before they start bending out of shape. Democracy is a form of government designed for resolving political problems through negotiations and compromises. You cannot go into a negotiating table under democratic dispensation to say that either your opponents agree with you or highway. That is foreground for gridlock.
McCain for starters does not even understand what has to be done before oil is pumped out to the refinery and sold to the consumers. The process of obtaining lease, environmental approvals and EIS, commissioning the contract for prospection, analyzing seismic studies, drilling, purchasing right-of-way parcels of land for laying pipelines, building refineries will take over 8-years. It is very naïve to think that drilling for oil would instantly lead to reduced price of gas at the pump. If you think so, go and find out if the cost of gas is cheaper in US and Norway (North Sea Oil) than in Germany and Italy. The price of crude oil is determined by the global market rather than local production, unless subsidized by the native government.

some of mccains ideas for energy will take some time to come to fruition, but he has the ideas, and they are all on the table for the good of the people and the country.
if we do not start now, then when? in 8 years we will still be saying it will take 8 years.
isn’t bho’s idea of “stimulous money” a gimmick?

mike h,
you are kidding…campaign finance reform, nafta, fisa, drilling, abortion, etc….bho has certainly done a lot of 180′s since hillary suspended her campaign.

Mr OBAMA I do believe you may have lost your chance-when you said no to Hillary for your v.p.thought you could make it with out her,,let wait and see..You sure lost my vote and all my familys my friend also..i thank you treated her and Bill bad,bad,bad,now your chicken may come home to youI thank the dem party has made a joke out of it self

perhaps some of you will realize how much power big oil has in our country.—-the oil owned polititions are already telling obama thet if they do not get their way to some extent THEY WILL OPPOSE THE ADVANCEMENT OF ALTERNATE FUELS AND ENERGY—–YES GANG THEY WANT THEIR SHARE—I CANNOT WAIT FOR THE DAY WHEN WE CAN SAY GOODBY TO THE BIG OIL COMPANIES—if everyone parked their vehicle for 1 day a week you would see them squirm—why do you think our government has not done a thing about the situation over the last 8 years.this is a nobrainer–the proof is obvious.

Ahhh yes. Big oil. The scurge of the world. The democrat’s boogey man. We should really plunder all of their profits because (gasp!) they raked in 7.6% return on investment.
I haven’t seen anybody mention that Exxon-Mobil paid over 3 billion in taxes. I wonder why.
I haven’t seen anybody mention that other companies, like Coca-Cola for example, had almost a 20% ROI.
Nope. It’s big old bad oil. It’s HalliCheney, or whatever tired slogan comes to mind.
Get a grip, people. This is America, and no matter how large a company is, they are allowed to make a profit.

Edmonsky, you wrote: “It is very naïve to think that drilling for oil would instantly lead to reduced price of gas at the pump…”
Yet, look what happened when President Bush signed an executive order rescinding a previous executive order that banned offshore drilling. This is technically meaningless since it still requires Congress to rescind its ban. Yet, almost immediately the price per barrel of oil dropped $10; and the price of gasoline has dropped a bit as well.
There is a psychological effect in play. If Congress were to rescind the ban, one might expect an almost immediate sell off of oil futures by the speculators. Should that happen, prices will drop significantly…years before a drop of new oil is extracted.

Edmonsky.
EIGHT YEARS? Then if Bush could have gotten his way, we would be gushing with oil… RIGHT NOW – EXCEPT THE DEMS SHUT BUSH DOWNN ON OIL TOO!!! I have heard experts in the field say that it could take much less time than that if everyone cooperates. You are wrong on price also – even a hint that we will start drilling in earnest will cause drop in price – history has shown this to be accurate.

“he is calling the oil companies to task…
something McCain has never done.
adn do you not think that is weird.”
Calling the oil companies to task-
For what? Making a profit?
Since when did that become a crime? Why is that liberals think that profitable corporations need to be punished- to be “called to task”?
Once you’ve punished this industry, which one is next?
Microsoft made a 29% profit last year? Should they be “called to task” also?
If not, why not?
It’s Hitleresque to demonize an industry for making money. Where was all your sympathy for them when oil was only $1 a barrel?

it is hard to believe you defend big oil –when they make billions a year—and you are paying record high prices —i hope you heat your home with oil this winter—-maybe the lesson will stick. or perhaps you work for oil company==as you do not share public concerns

Enough oil in Colorado and Alaska alone to last us well over 200 years – experts say.

pickens is promoting wind generation and natural gas—-oil is definately on a downhill trip —also you may not realize oil is sold on the world market and you will see very little or no change in price but big oil will make billions more—-OIL IS NOT RENEWABLE ENERGY.

I WOULD GUESS YOU WERE NOT AROUND IN THE 70S—OR YOU WOULD HAVE LEARNED A LESSON.

I was around.
There was thing called the Arab Oil Embargo, Rodney. That means they reduced supply to us. Lowering the price of a commodity tends to increase the price, Rodney.
Then the addle-brained Congress tried windfall profits taxes and that was a miserable failure too.

just another flip or flop or lie or broken promise. it keeps adding up and up. this guy is a fraud. he cant be trusted to keep his word especially if it changes every other day.

There was thing called the Arab Oil Embargo, Rodney. That means they reduced supply to us. Lowering the supply of a commodity tends to increase the price, Rodney.
-sorry about that-

OIL COMPANY PROFITS?
STEADY 7-8 PERCENT PROFITS FOR AS LONG AS I CAN REMEMBER. EXCESSIVE? MOST ON LEFT CONFUSE INCOME WITH PROFIT!!! AS ON THIS SITE!!

JIMBO
IF YOU HEAT YOUR HOUSE YOU WILL GET A LESSON THIS WINTER AND I CAN ASSURE YOU NEXT YEAR WILL BE WORSE—OIL IS NO LONGER THE ANSWER–WE ARE TRULY AT A CROSSROAD.

Rodney.
Guess you don’t know that there are new methods for speeding up mother nature’s creation of oil by ten fold. Coming in near future. Windmills, experts say, might produce at most five percent of our CURRENT electrical needs – IF THE WIND BLOWS!!

DRJON
i told a person on here that he could produce biodiesel for around a dollar a gallon–and i got ridiculed to no end—-HOWEVER HE CAME BACK AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH AND APOLOGIZED TO NO END STATING HE WAS TOTALLY IGNORANT ON THIS FACT,we have the tec and we have the ability—all we need to do is get rid of the corruption brought on by big oil.

SAM
I AM SHOWING YOU THAT DRILLING WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING—–AND I KNOW YOU DO UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM SAYING.
THANKS

jim
if he does he also will pay the price–as the present administration is.

Jake great job on This Week today…
seriously…perfect back and forth between you all…and you added a lot to the discussion.
I see your appearances going up in the future…
“ditz”…perfect…and whether you were right or wrong…the discussion had a younger energy…and that si what they need.
they had dueling youth “tests” with you on this week and Chuck T. testing on MTP
as if we could not tell that they are testing imagery between Andrea Mitchell and Chuck T. on MTP…
I think having you on This Week…and Chuck T. on MTP actually showed where both network sunday mornings need to go (not that George S. is going anywhere but)…. even if you guys (pardon my honesty) still have a little green around the edges… the energy is the right place to go.

I agree, dl, Jake did a good job but because he seems to be the only one willing to talk to the evidence. He’s become the young kid noting the emperor is naked.
Yet once again, the panel and yourself want to play the age card. When will you get around to looking at the facts on the ground about the economy and admit that that the goal of the Obama campaign is to give away the wealth of America. You will bankrupt the country to purge your self-absorbed guilt.
We have real change to make. It will take leadership across the aisle to accomplish it. It will take a heart to heart with the voters. Instead, you offer guilt and warfare on the middle class. That’s not change. That’s a strap across our backs. In my experience all that achieves is to make people resentful and angry.

During Q2 Exxon profits at the rate of $90,000 per minute and invests twice as much of its profit in share buy backs as it does in exploration.
Greed is good…particularly when corporate America’s M.O. has always been to “privatize profits” and “socialize losses” by making the rest of us pay.

I think we need to regulate companies on a dollars per minute basis, too. And then we can make sure that they spend that profit the way we want. Hugo and I agree on that point.

b obama
you are the one paying the bill.

John McCain was making progress due to his stance on drilling, so it is only natural that Obama now flip-flop to get the votes. He can simply say that he has always been for anything that will help the US energy crisis, that has been his stance all along, everyone will buy it. Why did he wait until the very day that Congress closed and Ms. Pelosi turned out the lights for the summer break for 5 weeks? They can’t vote on it now—another LONG delay ahead.

i have to say this before i go
WHEN YOU SEE PEOPLE DRIVING MILES OUT OF THEIR WAY TO BUY GAS AT 1 CENT PER GALLON LESS AND NEWS PEOPLE TELLING THEM TO DO SO—IT IS A BLATENT EXAMPLE HOW DUMB THE PUBLIC CAN BE—–10 GALLONS OF GAS SAVE 10 CENTS AND SPEND A DOLLAR TO DO IT –NEED I SAY MORE

Rodney, you wrote: “WOULD GUESS YOU WERE NOT AROUND IN THE 70S—OR YOU WOULD HAVE LEARNED A LESSON.”
Wasn’t it in the 1970s that the Democrats and environmentalists began their crusade to get us off oil by banning offshore drilling, blocking the building of new refineries and blocking the building of new nuclear plants? Oh! And look it up…in the 1970s we only imported 30% of our oil. Today we import nearly 70%.
Why should we only wait for just the one solution (lowering demand of oil), which will take 20 years to get us just beyond the break even point–50.01% alternative energy vs 49.99% oil? That’s right in twenty years we will still be relying on 49.99% oil for our energy–and importing nearly 80% of that oil.
The quickest way to lower the price of gasoline AND end our dependence of foreign oil is to drill here (offshore) and NOW; build nuclear plants here and NOW; develop renewable energy here and NOW.
People wake up. The Democrats don’t care how much you pay at the pump. They will do anything to get rid of the “evil” oil companies. Why do you think they are so adamant about blaming them for global warming? They are using that bogus issue to convince the American people that we need to end our dependence on oil right now (as in 20-30 years) in order to save the planet.
Vote Democratic and pay higher prices for energy!

OBAMA Says NO off shore drilling!
OBAMA MAYBE off shore drilling.
OBAMA off shore drilling? Yeah, why not.
John McCain is getting votes for his stance on off shore drilling, and I want those votes.

James Danley
I just realized who you are
calling global warming that “bogus issue”

dl, you are correct! The stats are now coming in…it is all bogus. Man does have an affect, but it is no more that 5%. The cosmos causes the rest. If man really caused global warming then how is man causing the other planets to be in a warming trend?

dl –Go to Obama’s website
Go to Issues
Scroll down to Energy section
Scroll down to Set American on Path to Oil Dependence
Obama’s plan will reduce oil consumption by at least 35 percent, or 10 million barrels per day, by 2030. This will more than offset the equivalent of the oil we would import from OPEC nations in 2030.
I printed the truth and I am sorry if you do not like it. That is 22 years from now and we would still require 65% of our oil from the Middle East under Obama’s plan, of course we will have to wait 22 years to see if it works.
America is a great nation and full of experienced, capable, highly scientific experts in technology—we do not have to wait 22 years and still get our oil from the Middle East. We can drill and forge ahead with what made us great to begin with our American resources of intelligence. We can be responsible in 6-8 years and NOT WAIT 22 years and still get most of our energy source from the Middle East. Wake Up.

I guess Bush didn’t “flip-flop” did he.
Is it good to not compromise and negotiate?

Why do people support offshore drilling when it does nothing to lower gas prices or get us off oil?

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.

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….

“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.

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.

“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.

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?

@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.

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.

Ultimately it comes down to how long it will take to find other resources…
Since we do not know the answer to that then I believe the best time to start drilling is asap.
It is definately an arguable case of when to start. However, to say NEVER is the worst possible idea.

I think the “discussion” of checking the air in your tires is emblematic of why so few things get accomplished in this toxic political environment.
Obama makes a common sense suggestion on how to increase gas mileage and save a few dollars. The requisite political snarks start kicking in and the suggestion is ridiculed. Some of the McCain surrogates are even suggesting that this is his “energy plan.”
This stuff is so pathetic…I feel like I’m watching a sixth grade class president election (although I expect they’re more civil).
If paying what you’re paying for gas doesn’t bother you, leave your tires and air filter alone. If it does bother you, check your tires and air filter and you’ll save some money.

Don’t forget that Senator McLame flip flopped on this VERY ISSUE a couple of months ago. I agree with the author, however. Sen. Obama is not for off-shore drilling, but is willing to compromise on bi-partisan bill to get to the long-term goal of weaning America off of oil.

Riley, President Bush has already received numerous requests from senators and congressmen to call for an emergency session of Congress. At least for now, President Bush says he prefers to let the Democrats hear the anger from their constituents back home. This being an election year every member of the House and 1/3 of the senators are up for reelection. So either they listen to their constituents and pass a new energy bill that rescinds the offshore drill ban when they return or they may face defeat in November.
Just a few weeks ago it looked like the Democrats would likely gain 30+ seats in the House and possibly 5-8 seats in the Senate. But all bets are off should the Democrats not rescind the ban on offshore drilling before the general election.

If this is so important, which it is, why did the marvelous Democrats run away to take a wonderful vacation rather than work something out that might help us?
Were they just so busy that nothing could be done to alleviate the gas price problem?
Or do they want it to go high, like Barry Obama’s advisor’s wish that we all adopt wind power for our cars?
What a joke the Dems are on this subject. How many years must we submit to this nonsense?

Buzz, why did the Republicans kill the bill 2 weeks ago that would have forced the oil companies to give up the leases they refuse to drill on?
That just proves that this isnt about drilling at all, but speculation and oil company profits.

Obama drifting on drilling……….So, what did you expect? The polls MADE him to do it.

It would be fun if next month the poll shows opposite from now.
He would change his position again.

And so it came to pass that the “Anointed One” while speaking to the multitudes found a way in his infinite wisdom to transform his views to fulfill the prayers of the masses.

Shawn Curtis,
Most of people know that ABC is on Obama.
Especially George S is a loyal Democrat.
He said on “This Week” this election is about Obama.
I could not believe what I heard.