Obama willing to compromise on offshore drilling
US News
Aug 2, 2008, 5:55 GMT
Older Talkback
His record is non existent and his words mean nothing.
He simply stands for absolutely nothing what so ever.
He lied about Campaign matching funds.
He lied about filibustering telecom immunity.
He flip-flopped on the DC gun ban.
He flip-flopped on Iraq troop withdrawals
He flip-flopped on the government's eavesdropping program.
He flip-flopped on late term abortion and then re flipped.
He flip-flopped on gay marriage.
He flip-flopped on NAFTA.
He flip-flopped on The Cuba embargo.
He flip-flopped on welfare reform.
He flip-flopped on Donations from Lobbyists.
He flip-flopped on serving his full term as senator.
He flip-flopped on Meeting with Foreign Leaders like Iran.
He flip-flopped on tossing Jeremiah Wright under the bus.
He flip-flopped on Jerusalem being undivided.
He flip-flopped on the PATRIOT Act.
He flip-flopped on Coal mining.
He flip-flopped on 'PAYGO'
He flip-flopped on legal Immigrants getting Driver's Licenses.
He flip-flopped on school Vouchers
SINCE HE HAS NO RECORD TO RUN ON (other then cultivating relationships with anyone who has said that they hate the USA.) AND YOU CAN'T BELIEVE WHAT HE SAYS WHAT ARE PEOPLE VOTING FOR?
.
I'd like not to respond to above ranting ,too paranoid for me .
It could be a good idea however to exploit off-shore resources given the right circumstances .Possibly that is what Obama thought.I don't really know,above poster certainly doesn't know and doesn't care .
What if oil reserves could be used to the advantage of the americans,that wouldn't be bad,nobody could oppose that .Just let's find out if those sources can really profit the american people,not the greed of the allready too influential oil tycoons .Nationalizing those fields would be the first step ?Now funny enough I expct to be covered with criticism from the very same neocons and republicans that want the exploitation too .At least in my scenarion all the profit would go to you all,badly in need for revnues to fill the gap in your budget without aving to raise taxes .All the revenue that spells,,wouldn't that be nice .what would above poster have to say about that ,so concerned with the flipflopping of Obama?
Barack Obama as next President of The United States of America
The die is cast and for reasons that only a privileged few know, you Sir, will be the next President of the United States of America. Your next 4 years will be a turning point in US history and planet earth. CHANGE, your advisors and high stake investors offer the nation will undoubtedly be the same rhetoric and empty promises that make up a political campaign, that campaigns for appointment for any public office in America.
The White House will be the Black House to some, the Aryan Brothers of America will not be so happy, but yet will blame you and your staff if you fail, which will reinforce their belief that the Aryan Nation is the true leader for America. The religious zealots will be busy bees making nests to survive the onslaught of lies, corruption and deceit. Business enterprises and other competing nations will capitalize off of your inexperience in the art of corruption and murder. The organized crime organizations from different nations including our own will benefit from the lack of control over national crime.
Military governments including our own will test your tolerance to pain and deception and trick you into needless and profitable domestic and international conflict. You will no doubt attempt to colorize your staff to soften the race conflict once in office.
As President you will be President. Nations will respect you only for your title of office. Americans will soon see after your appointment as President that your intentions were manipulated by those that make the rules. You will fill the spot in history as planned, and nothing more.
You will never while in office be able to pull the troops from conflict in any land we are engaged in. As a matter of fact we as a nation will be engaged in a new conflict of war, which will galvanize Americans to seek a different form of government and a different and honest Congress.
You will attempt to shore up Americas problems with false promise and lies, because you cannot directly affect the CHANGE you promised.
Your frustration will be your downfall while in office, and your co-dependence on those that you trust will also add to your demise.
Our Armed Forces in rank will respect you as good soldiers they are, but those under them will not, and for good reasons, that only a good soldier knows.
America will not be America until its government respects the People, and tells the truth. America is a Republic, not a Democracy or Fascist Government or is it?
Until you can walk thru the streets and neighborhoods of America unaided by Secret Service or any other law enforcement agency you will not be respected by the many, only by the fearful and selfish few. Americans can protect their leaders if they are honest and respectful of the people they were elected to serve. Our Government has forsaken us for many hundreds of years, and now we will wait until your 4 years are finished for us to come to fruition.
CHANGE FOR AMERICA FOR AMERICANS!
The American Republic
A Sovereign Republic
When someone has had time to study a program or receive more information and always refuses to change their original thinking on any matter, then those are the ones I am skeptical about - a little like our current 'Chief'.
is fishing for the republican vote.
Smart tactics!
He correctly realises he cannot win being on the wrong side of this issue, also realizing he means absolutely none of it.
'I'd like not to respond to above ranting ,too paranoid for me .'
It happens to be true. Why don't you fix your own miserable country instead of lecturing others about theirs?
Barack Obama kinda-sorta admits that his “I don’t look like those other presidents” line just might be referring to his race.
“I don’t think it’s accurate to say that my comments have nothing to do with race,” Obama said. “Here’s what I was saying and I think this should be undisputed: That I don’t come out of central casting, when it comes to presidential races. For a whole range of reasons. I’m young, I’m new to the national scene, my name is Barack Obama, I am African American, I was born in Hawaii, I spent time in Indonesia. I do not have the typical biography of a presidential candidate.”
Obama should have a word with his staff, then, so they don’t continue to reflexively deny things that are obvious to anyone with more than two brain cells.
An Obama spokesman denied that the line about “dollar bills” was related to the Democrat’s race...
mccain is a nut case so what to do now?
the country is in a pickle
Obama has to say this because he has done the polls knowing most Americans back domestic production despite the democratic position.
i bought a new pair of flip flops today at wallyworld
Did they have McCain's picture on them?
What Obama's people saw was over 70 percent approval for offshore drilling; and SHAME on the voters for seeing this fraudulent case as a solution. I realize that SP4 is a biased ignoramus; but is what he has catching?
At this point, Obama should just call McCain's entire platform a pack of lies, and make McCain prove his nonsensical claims via statements from scientists. While he's at it, put up a map of the Mideast without country names, and have McCain identify which is which; INCLUDING his stupid remark about the Iraq/Pakistan border.
We've had nothing but lies for the past 8 years from Bush et al; starting with Saddam's (non)-involvement with 9/11, and continuing with one flawed policy after another, until Petraeus figured out the answer - pay the Sunni to shoot at the bad guys, instead of us.
The GOP is running a 'medicine show', selling the public nostrums off the back of a wagon - 'we have a cure for everything'. What they HAVE done is neglect the entire energy situation for the past 8 years; aside from the hot air generated by Cheney personally.
Boone Pickems, ardent Republican, is out there publicizing the fact that we cannot drill our way out of this overall problem. The oil companies have PLENTY of offshore leases to drill on right now, and are not doing so.
www.kansascity.com/340/story/729151.html
(www.pickensplan.com/.)
Summed up, Pickens wants to:
• Boost wind production, an environmentally friendly way to provide more electricity for the county. It’s already proving to be a wise investment in parts of rural Kansas.
• Boost use of natural gas, which is cheaper than gasoline as a fuel for automobiles while less polluting.
• Slash oil consumption and America’s multibillion-dollar outlays for foreign crude.
===================
The essential problems with offshore drilling (aside from the safety factors brought to light by the government report of REAL problems with the rigs during recent hurricanes):
a). The oil is far below the surface of the ocean floor, and it's expensive to drill and not find anything.
b). Those offshore rigs are in very short supply, and expensive. Maintenance is expensive. Staffing the rig is expensive.
It would take YEARS from first ownership of a lease to get to the point of production; and the oil companies have PLENTY of leases they're not drilling on.
www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=49&entry_id=28730
According to Paul Krugman, half of voters believe that allowing drilling will bring prices down within a year. Roughly the same percentage of Californians now support offshore drilling for the same reason.
Trouble is, offshore drilling won't affect prices at all for at least 8 years. That's how long it would take to begin pumping from new sites. And the Bush administration itself predicts that even after oil begins to flow into the market from offshore rigs, the effect on consumer prices would be 'insignificant.'
It's disturbing that voters can still be so easily misled into energy policies that only help the corporations that are bleeding them dry. Perhaps they're desperate and irrational as a result of high gas prices, but I wonder if part of the problem is lack of education about environmental issues. Then again, maybe this is just another case of Democrats failing to win the battle of rhetoric, even with the facts on their side.
Yes, it is a shame that an intelligent person cannot look at their stance, study the facts and change their minds. Something these Republican't cannot imaging---changing their mind? What a joke, if they knew how to change their minds we may have only lost a few hundred troops in Afghanistan instead of the 4000+ in Iraq where they cannot even define the objective.
It is nice to realize maybe this 'brain dead' evangelical stranglehold on this country may be almost over. Lets get back to reality and start making decisions on facts and stop making decisions on what the base thinks is good.
'Yes, it is a shame that an intelligent person cannot look at their stance, study the facts and change their minds. '
You see though, If you don't have a record to run on, which he does not, all people have to go on is your words. If you take every stand on everything and if you lie, people don't have anything to go on.
Obama doesn't have a record of accomplishment other then being the most liberal member of the senate during the 143 days he served before he decided to run for president.
'instead of the 4000+ in Iraq where they cannot even define the objective.'
The objective has been defined repeatedly for you. The fact is that Obama has been consistently wrong on Iraq and after his little commander and chief summer school he has adopted the policy of someone who was right about the surge, right about the tactics, right about the general, right about getting rid of Rummsfeld and right about how wrong Obamas deadlines were: John McCain.
'Lets get back to reality and start making decisions on facts'
Your idea of 'facts' is whatever you want to believe. Speaking of the base, how do you feel about Obamas flip flops to the center on Fisa, the Patriot act, Iraq, etc? Oh right, we already sorted that out. You don't care because you are a dewy eyed dupe.
McCain was in a unique position to counter Bush's arguments when made - and long after the fact, he agrees that 'errors' were made, and that he disagreed with Bush's policies.
How does that represent leadership? 'Follower-ship' is more like it, and a vote for McCain is a vote for no solution to the larger problems of terrorism; along with energy and our financial problems. THAT'S what people are concerned about.
The problem with the surge is that it has not produced the POLITICAL results that it was proposed for, and as the recent Rand report noted, a MILITARY-ONLY solution is now what's needed; but it's all McCain understands; while Obama understands DIPLOMACY. Read the Rand report:
www.rand.org/news/press/2008/07/29/
Current U.S. strategy against the terrorist group al Qaida has not been successful in significantly undermining the group's capabilities, according to a new RAND Corporation study issued today.
Al Qaida has been involved in more terrorist attacks since Sept. 11, 2001, than it was during its prior history and the group's attacks since then have spanned an increasingly broader range of targets in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Africa, according to researchers.
In looking at how other terrorist groups have ended, the RAND study found that most terrorist groups end either because they join the political process, or because local police and intelligence efforts arrest or kill key members. Police and intelligence agencies, rather than the military, should be the tip of the spear against al Qaida in most of the world, and the United States should abandon the use of the phrase 'war on terrorism,' researchers concluded.
'The United States cannot conduct an effective long-term counterterrorism campaign against al Qaida or other terrorist groups without understanding how terrorist groups end,' said Seth Jones, the study's lead author and a political scientist at RAND, a nonprofit research organization. 'In most cases, military force isn't the best instrument.'
The comprehensive study analyzes 648 terrorist groups that existed between 1968 and 2006, drawing from a terrorism database maintained by RAND and the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism. The most common way that terrorist groups end -- 43 percent -- was via a transition to the political process. However, the possibility of a political solution is more likely if the group has narrow goals, rather than a broad, sweeping agenda like al Qaida possesses.
(It was NEVER about winning; but rather to allow the Iraqis to get into position to do the job. We have not reached that point. Every military action by the Iraqi army is backed up by U.S. forces, intel, and equipment. The government cannot agree on oil revenues, and the latest problem is the Kurds looking to become their own country, in effect)
www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=3738
Q: Colonel, this is Courtney Kube from NBC News. You answered Will's question by saying that your mission right now is to drive down the level of violence to a manageable level for the Iraqi security forces to handle when you guys leave. So is it fair to say that your mission is then -- is not to actually win, not to beat the insurgency, but just to drive it down to a lower level?
COL MACFARLAND: Well, I think so. You know, an insurgency is a very difficult thing to defeat in a finite period of time. It takes a lot of persistence -- perseverance is the actual term that we like to use. And who knows how long this is going to actually last.
But if we get the level of violence down to a point where the Iraqi security forces are more than capable of dealing with it, the insurgency's days will eventually come to an end, and they'll come to an end at the hands of the Iraqis who, by definition, will always be perceived as more legitimate than an external force like our own. And there is no single military answer to an insurgency, it's a combination of multiple approaches, both kinetic, which is to say violent, or non-kinetic, which includes financial, governmental, and other types of approaches.
And the Iraqi police are really the most ideally suited to bringing that to closure.
What gave you the impression that anybody cares that you were impressed? What a lonely life you lead, EssPee.
'You see though, If you don't have a record to run on, which he does not, all people have to go on is your words. If you take every stand on everything and if you lie, people don't have anything to go on.'
Who said anything about his record. We all know he has limited experience and we are OK with that. I guess your little neo-con mind cannot grasp the fact that we have had it with experience---experience had not worked out real well. It is only a lie if it is Obama changing his mind? I guess it is Ok that McSame changed his mind on drilling? That must make him a liar?
'Obama doesn't have a record of accomplishment other then being the most liberal member of the senate during the 143 days he served before he decided to run for president.'
So what? See comments above same applies. And by the way he did not 'decide to run for president' he had to earn the right and he won fair and square (just like he is going to do in November).
'The objective has been defined repeatedly for you. The fact is that Obama has been consistently wrong on Iraq and after his little commander and chief summer school he has adopted the policy of someone who was right about the surge, right about the tactics, right about the general, right about getting rid of Rummsfeld and right about how wrong Obamas deadlines were: John McCain.'
Just because you have tried to define the objective and I do not agree does not make you right and me wrong. 4000 + dead troops along with over 20,000 wounded 5,000 seriously for a country that is going to become part of Iran as soon as we leave is not what the dead troops would consider a good definition.
'Your idea of 'facts' is whatever you want to believe. Speaking of the base, how do you feel about Obamas flip flops to the center on Fisa, the Patriot act, Iraq, etc? Oh right, we already sorted that out. You don't care because you are a dewy eyed dupe.'
Again says you! I think the same about your facts. I am happy with him being able to look at things and change his mind, I don't care what it is about. I don't mind McSame changing his mind, done in an intelligent manner is good leadership. Not admitting you made a mistake and continuing the mistake even though people are getting killed is not leadership that is stupidity.
Similar articles
- Obama edges out McCain in scramble for the green vote (Feature)
- Energy independence: The great challenge for Obama, McCain (Feature)
- Obama calls for end to foreign oil dependence in 10 years (Roundup)
- Obama calls for end to foreign oil dependence in 10 years
- McCain scolds oil nations, touts US reserves; Obama cries flip-flop
Latest Headlines in US
- 1. Catholic bishop says no communion for Kennedy over health reform
- 2. New York man kills fellow commuter over seat on train
- 3. Computer glitch causes delays at major US airports
- 4. Pentagon launches review in wake of Fort Hood rampage
- 5. Oprah to declare 2011 end to landmark talk show
News from Other Sites
Your Talkback on this Story