U.S. to Open Public Land Near Parks for Drilling

[grondramb]

This certainly sounds positive on the surface - we need all the domestic energy production we can get to keep those dollars here.

They oil wells right inside L.A. without noticeable environmental impact. Its a question of how careful they are willing to be.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/08/us...rssnyt&emc=rss

National Park Service officials say that the decision to open lands close to Arches National Park and Dinosaur National Monument and within eyeshot of Canyonlands National Park was made without the kind of consultation that had previously been routine.

The bureau’s new maps, made public on Election Day, show not just those empty areas but 40 to 45 new areas where leasing will also be allowed.





The tracts will be sold at auction on Dec. 19, the last lease sale before President Bush leaves office a month later. The new leases were added after a map of the proposed tracts was given to the National Park Service for comment this fall. The proximity of industrial activity concerns park managers, who worry about the impact on the air, water and wildlife within the park, as well as the potential for noise, said Michael D. Snyder, a regional director of the Park Service who is based in Denver.

[DH]

Originally Posted by grondramb

This certainly sounds positive on the surface - we need all the domestic energy production we can get to keep those dollars here.

They oil wells right inside L.A. without noticeable environmental impact. Its a question of how careful they are willing to be.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/08/us...rssnyt&emc=rss

Just one of several exciting things we can expect from Dubya on his way out the door. We can also look forward to uranium mining at the Grand Canyon (which he is going to do in subversion the direct will of Congress) and allowing coal companies to dump rubble from coal mountaintops so that they bury streams and shit. Yee fuckin' haw!

And then of course there will be the probable full pardons of Scooter Libby, Jack Abramhoff, and Bob Ney.....

Oh, and I always think of Los Angeles in the same way as I do a pristine national park.......

drill baby drill! (even though the oil compamies claim they don't even have the equipment to drill on the current leases they already have.......)

[jgerry]

I'm less pissed of about this "drill baby drill" stuff than I should be. Why? Because nothing short of letting them drill offshore, and pretty much wherever else they want, is going to placate these people. When it finally comes around that this will have done nothing but give us maybe 1% or 2% of our domestic consumption, well, so be it. I think it's incredibly short-sighted, but I'm sick of being the environmental wacko.

There are good reasons to drill, especially offshore, or at least to let the states actually decide for themselves. And we need more nuclear, and I personally need to stop hearing the "drill baby drill" wackos screaming all the time. So I simply have to give up this fight. Drill baby drill.

[pgogborn]

According to various press reports President Obama is going to reverse a long standing ban on offshore drilling for gas and oil along a large stretch of the Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska.


New York Times

Early in his campaign Barack Obama said "When I’m president, I intend to keep in place the moratorium here in Florida and around the country that prevents oil companies from drilling off Florida’s coasts. That’s how we can protect our coastline and still make the investments that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil and bring down gas prices for good".

After that specific campaign call out to Florida I am left wondering why it is that Florida could now see new off-shore drilling and the contiguous West Coast continues to be left untouched.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by pgogborn

After that specific campaign call out to Florida I am left wondering why it is that Florida could now see new off-shore drilling and the contiguous West Coast continues to be left untouched.

Because he's making good on his promise to remove all troops from Iraq, and it's cheaper to bring them home over the Atlantic to have them drill for oil. Oh wait, you mean Obama lied AGAIN?

[keirgrey]

You can tell when he's lying: His mouth is moving. (In other words: He's a politician.)

[5thcrewman]

Originally Posted by jgerry

...I'm sick of being the environmental wacko...

Which wacko do you want to be?

[fake]

Originally Posted by jgerry

I'm less pissed of about this "drill baby drill" stuff than I should be. Why? Because nothing short of letting them drill offshore, and pretty much wherever else they want, is going to placate these people. When it finally comes around that this will have done nothing but give us maybe 1% or 2% of our domestic consumption, well, so be it. I think it's incredibly short-sighted, but I'm sick of being the environmental wacko.

There are good reasons to drill, especially offshore, or at least to let the states actually decide for themselves. And we need more nuclear, and I personally need to stop hearing the "drill baby drill" wackos screaming all the time. So I simply have to give up this fight. Drill baby drill.

You know why Obama may indeed be the worst President of all time, and is worse than Bush is not simply because he has continued most of the wrongs of the Bush years, but his lie, and con was so good that as the people he conned come to realize this they will just give up. Bush couldn't get this done with a republican congress. Obama did it with a democratically controlled congress. We are still at war, we are more in debt, we have less environmental protection, a worsening recession, payoffs to the big financial firms.

When will the Obama cronyism scandals begin to break? He only knows Chicago politics, and it is obvious. He is corrupt, and just as the people who wanted to believe in Bush could never admit his failure, the people who need to believe in Obama will never allow themselves to see his failure.

[smak]

Originally Posted by fake

You know why Obama may indeed be the worst President of all time, and is worse than Bush is not simply because he has continued most of the wrongs of the Bush years, but his lie, and con was so good that as the people he conned come to realize this they will just give up. Bush couldn't get this done with a republican congress. Obama did it with a democratically controlled congress. We are still at war, we are more in debt, we have less environmental protection, a worsening recession, payoffs to the big financial firms.

When will the Obama cronyism scandals begin to break? He only knows Chicago politics, and it is obvious. He is corrupt, and just as the people who wanted to believe in Bush could never admit his failure, the people who need to believe in Obama will never allow themselves to see his failure.

Is any of the above even close to the truth?

Obama promised we wouldn't still be in Iraq & Afhganistan in April 10? - No
More in debt - yes
Less enviromental protection - no
worsenning recession - no
payoffs to the big financial firms - happened in 2008

so you're 1 1/2 for 5.

-smak-

[fake]

Originally Posted by smak

Is any of the above even close to the truth?

Obama promised we wouldn't still be in Iraq & Afhganistan in April 10? - No
More in debt - yes
Less enviromental protection - no
worsenning recession - no
payoffs to the big financial firms - happened in 2008

so you're 1 1/2 for 5.

-smak-

Well he just approved offshore drilling so yes that is less environmental protection.

As far as the economy goes we are losing more jobs. So there is more people unemployed today than a month ago that means a worse economy.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...5pL7BSTM&pos=2

He has escalated the war in Afghanistan. Bush clung to Iraq, Obama clings to Afghanistan. Afghanistan the country that beat the U.S.S.R. What a waste of time.

He even did the silly bush stunt of going on some secret mission to see the troops and had a press conference.

[smak]

Originally Posted by fake

Well he just approved offshore drilling so yes that is less environmental protection.

As far as the economy goes we are losing more jobs. So there is more people unemployed today than a month ago that means a worse economy.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...5pL7BSTM&pos=2

He has escalated the war in Afghanistan. Bush clung to Iraq, Obama clings to Afghanistan. Afghanistan the country that beat the U.S.S.R. What a waste of time.

He even did the silly bush stunt of going on some secret mission to see the troops and had a press conference.

Offshore drilling is one aspect of environmenntal protection. There are plenty of other aspects you seem to be ignoring.

You changed "recession" to "economy" and/or jobs. Nice trick.

Obama said he would pull out of Iraq and expand in Afhganistan. Which is what he's doing.

Not sure how all this adds up to Chicago politics, etc.. etc.. yawn.

He's either a ruthless corrupt Chicago politician, or he's green and is in over his head.

Make up your mind.

-smak-

[fake]

Originally Posted by smak

Offshore drilling is one aspect of environmenntal protection. There are plenty of other aspects you seem to be ignoring.

Sure it is one aspect. Obama eliminated a long standing ban on drilling right off our shores. So he has reduced our environmental protections. He took some away and didn't add others to make up for it. That is what is known as less.

Originally Posted by smak

You changed "recession" to "economy" and/or jobs. Nice trick.

It wasn't a trick. A trick is when someone says hey we calculate that GDP grew by such and such, but we are still loosing tens if not hundreds of thousands of jobs per month. Recession, economy, jobs. Those are what normal average people care about. Until we have jobs being added each month instead of loosing them one can not honestly say the economy is improving.

Originally Posted by smak

Obama said he would pull out of Iraq and expand in Afhganistan. Which is what he's doing.

Obama portrayed himself as the anti war candidate. He isn't anti war. Have any troops come home?

Originally Posted by smak

Not sure how all this adds up to Chicago politics, etc.. etc.. yawn.

He's either a ruthless corrupt Chicago politician, or he's green and is in over his head.

Make up your mind.

-smak-

I think Obama will considered a worse President than Bush. He is a lot like Bush. He has worshipers who will never see the bad policies he is implementing.

In three years people like you will still be blaming Bush for Obama's failure as President.

[TheIndependent]

Originally Posted by fake

Have any troops come home?

yes, Iraq troop#s are down from a high of 150k+ to just under 100k at this point IIRC. also IIRC, he added approx 30k in troops to Afghanistan...

[keirgrey]

Originally Posted by fake

In three years people like you will still be blaming Bush for Obama's failure as President.

Obama's not going to be considered a failure. The health care bill alone will see to that. He did something that even the Democratic Reagan couldn't do (Clinton).

So...so much for that talking point.

[InigoMontoya]

Originally Posted by pgogborn

the contiguous West Coast continues to be left untouched.

I'm confused.....

The last time I was at the beach (Long Beach, CA), I could see oil platforms in the distance.

[JP]

Originally Posted by keirgrey

Obama's not going to be considered a failure. The health care bill alone will see to that. He did something that even the Democratic Reagan couldn't do (Clinton).

So...so much for that talking point.

You seem to be under the misapprehension that any of those have to comply with reality. They only have to make sense in the conservative unreality bubble, which I assure you they do. In there, Barack was a failure as president before he was even sworn in.

[pgogborn]

Originally Posted by InigoMontoya

I'm confused.....

The last time I was at the beach (Long Beach, CA), I could see oil platforms in the distance.

I should have said California will not be seeing any new platforms. Perhaps President Obama owes a Congresswoman from California a favor.

[pgogborn]

The Huffington Post pins the "Drill Baby Drill" refrain on President Obama and remembers when Obama campaigned against off-shore drilling.



But the HuffPuff also gives space to a piece by Raymond J. Learsy headlined Obama's Brave Decison to Drill Offshore

In an act of vision and courage, given the hostage the nation has become to the oil industry, oil interests, and the likes of OPEC, the Obama administration is proposing opening vast expanses along the Atlantic coastline, the Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska to oil and natural gas drilling.

This is a momentous moment and brings to mind the leadership of another time and another president. In the depth of the depression, President Roosevelt, with courage and imagination, sought different solutions... >
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raymon..._b_519836.html

The visionary, courageous and momentous reminder of the leadership of President Roosevelt sounds like a liberal reality bubble to me (or not).

[fake]

Originally Posted by keirgrey

Obama's not going to be considered a failure. The health care bill alone will see to that. He did something that even the Democratic Reagan couldn't do (Clinton).

So...so much for that talking point.

He failed to find bipartisan support for health care. The bill didn't pay for itself, and rely on future congress to do the heavy lifting to pay for it. He says this bill will reduce the deficit, but all he has really done is kick that can down the road. If the future leaders don't do as Obama needs them to, then the bill is a failure.

Obama has destroyed the coalition that elected him. In just his first year and a half he has broken nearly every campaign promise he ever made. He has broken more promises than Bush Jr., and broken the same promise the made Bush Sr. a one term President.

Most open administration in history. Fail
End the Wars Fail
Protect the environment Fail
Provide health care to all Americans Fail
Turn around the economy Stimulus Fail
Over turn don't ask don't tell or support equality for all Fail


The failure isn't all Obamas fault. Clinton failed on health care when it mattered most that he fail. It is obvious that good legislation can not come from one party rule. One of Clinton's biggest achievements (Welfare reform) only came after the Republicans came to power. Perhaps if Obama is forced to work with a future Republican congress he will get something passed that does some good.

[keirgrey]

Originally Posted by fake

He failed to find bipartisan support for health care. The bill didn't pay for itself, and rely on future congress to do the heavy lifting to pay for it. He says this bill will reduce the deficit, but all he has really done is kick that can down the road. If the future leaders don't do as Obama needs them to, then the bill is a failure.

Obama has destroyed the coalition that elected him. In just his first year and a half he has broken nearly every campaign promise he ever made. He has broken more promises than Bush Jr., and broken the same promise the made Bush Sr. a one term President.

Most open administration in history. Fail
End the Wars Fail
Protect the environment Fail
Provide health care to all Americans Fail
Turn around the economy Stimulus Fail
Over turn don't ask don't tell or support equality for all Fail


The failure isn't all Obamas fault. Clinton failed on health care when it mattered most that he fail. It is obvious that good legislation can not come from one party rule. One of Clinton's biggest achievements (Welfare reform) only came after the Republicans came to power. Perhaps if Obama is forced to work with a future Republican congress he will get something passed that does some good.

So what? The point is, in the eyes of the American public, he got it done. Doesn't sound like failure to me, except from the Republican's side.

You keep trumpeting the "He failed" line, though.

[JP]

Originally Posted by keirgrey

So what? The point is, in the eyes of the American public, he got it done. Doesn't sound like failure to me, except from the Republican's side.

And that's not even considering the other thing fake is failing to consider - not just whether Barack is seen as a failure, but whether the other side has anything and anybody they can put up as a viable alternative.

Dems and Indeps are going to think "Barack didn't get us out of Iraq fast enough and the healthcare bill wasn't all bipartisan-y, so I'm voting GOP" ? I don't think so. But then again, neither does fake.

[grondramb]

I think the health care bill will be judged on whether people like the health care bill and drilling thing will little political impact except on the few people who are not polarized. For me I think its another positive about him - he realizes we can go all new agey and fuel the country but there is so little oil left here it does make sense to rip the environment apart too much. But I'm in a small minority.

The real decision is on coal not oil. Let's see what he does there. We have enough coal to replace half of imported oil until the next generation of nuclear and alternative are ready but that will be a tough political row to hoe.

[fake]

Originally Posted by JPriller

And that's not even considering the other thing fake is failing to consider - not just whether Barack is seen as a failure, but whether the other side has anything and anybody they can put up as a viable alternative.

Dems and Indeps are going to think "Barack didn't get us out of Iraq fast enough and the healthcare bill wasn't all bipartisan-y, so I'm voting GOP" ? I don't think so. But then again, neither does fake.

It is not as oversimplified as didn't get out of Iraq fast enough or that the healthcare bill is " all bipartisan-y. It will be the long culmination of broken promises, back room deals, strong arm political maneuvering, that breaks the coalition. He will not again be able to inspire the youth vote for hope and change. The independents will are not automatically his, and for that matter

I don't even think he will have a motivated base. Why would the base be motivated? Will all people be treated equally under the law when the next election comes? Will we still be mired in war? What will the number unemployed and under employed be? Will gas prices be higher or lower? What will the debt be. Will taxes be higher or lower.

Obama already became the first black president so he won't have that going for him.

[keirgrey]

What? He'll suddenly be the second black president?

[JP]

Originally Posted by fake

It is not as oversimplified as didn't get out of Iraq fast enough or that the healthcare bill is " all bipartisan-y. It will be the long culmination of broken promises, back room deals, strong arm political maneuvering, that breaks the coalition.

Makes some part of it break for... where? There's Barack and the Dems, and there's the GOP. You figure the colossal fuckup that is the current GOP will be forgotten by then? That the idea of letting those chuckleheads have the White House again won't be motivating to liberals? Having a Dem in the White House has certainly been motivating for the GOP too, of course, but it's all coming out as obstructionism on the part of the pols and total nuttiness on the part of the "grass roots", i.e. the teabaggers.