![](http://floppingaces.net/wp-content/uploads/956-20080728_OILSHALE.large_.prod_affiliate.91.jpg" "956-20080728_OILSHALE.large.prod_affiliate.91")
So the Republican led House passes three bills to expedite and expand drilling for oil:
In a 243-179 vote Thursday, the House passed a measure that would open up areas off the West and East coasts, Alaska and the eastern Gulf of Mexico to drilling. The Obama administration pulled back on leasing in some of those spots after the Gulf oil spill last year to further evaluate the environmental consequences. It never considered drilling in the Pacific.
Obama doesn’t like it one bit:
The White House had announced its opposition to all three bills, which are unlikely to pass the Democratic-controlled Senate, saying the measures would undercut safety reviews and open environmentally sensitive areas to new drilling.
But wait a second…is Obama starting to see the light or is he just blowing smoke up everyone’s a**es?
Facing continued public unhappiness over gas prices, President Barack Obama is directing his administration to ramp up U.S. oil production by extending existing leases in the Gulf of Mexico and off Alaska’s coast and holding more frequent lease sales in a federal petroleum reserve in Alaska.
Obama said Saturday that the measures “make good sense” and will help reduce U.S. consumption of imported oil in the long term. But he acknowledged anew that they won’t help to immediately bring down gasoline prices topping $4 a gallon in many parts of the country.
Given the fact that all he is doing is extending already existing leases for oil drilling, he’s blowing smoke. None of his “new” idea’s on drilling will add much in the way of capacity, which means speculators will continue to force the rise of oil prices. The problem is not about existing oil production, but expanding our oil production.
His media can now spin this, after this announcement, to make it appear Obama is doing something rather than nothing. Especially after his Senate votes down bills that would actually increase capacity.
Now that’s leadership
Sigh….
See author page
Pulling oil out of many of these existing lease areas is just not economically feasible …. or oil companies holding those leases would drill from them.
But better areas are off-limits …..and Obama aims to keep it that way while – at the same time – berating oil companies for NOT drilling where it is not feasible to do so.
@Nan G:
Our wonderful central planners at their best. Who better, but our federal government, to tell businesses where, when, and how, they can conduct business.
Some thoughts:
That 4 billion that the federalis want to eliminate. Big oil is not in on this. This is for medium to small companies that stimulate old wells. They are depletion allowances for wells that pump more salt water than oil. Old wells wax themselves off. You swab these. You can do reentries. You can frac and acidize these. You can try secondary recovery- steam and detergent. Salt water disposal is extremely expensive. Whatever works best.
These companies front the money and get some pay back on their taxes. There are over 4 million Americans who depend on this type of restimulative recovery.
I don’t like the new oil and old oil differentiation. That’s government sticking their nose in there to grab more taxes. Just another scam for money. Jobs are at stake. That 4 billion is reinvested back into the economy many times over
These high fuel prices, a promise that Obama managed to keep, are killing us. It’s not the price at the pump, oh no! that’s only a small portion of the destruction to the economy. You are now paying 20% to 50% more for everything you buy. If you aren’t an Elite, that cuts into disposable income and business costs for us little businessmen ‘muy pronto’. Soon the economy is strangling, even if you have a friggin government job or belong to some Commie front group like the SEIU or an ACORN derivative. You are being slowly suffocated, but take heart our foolish subsidies in ethanol, solar panels, and wind turbines will be ready to pull our country out of Third World Poverty and maybe China will farm out manufacturing to the US once Obama has broken the back of the US economy.
Of course, Alberta is supporting Canada by drilling for oil and working the shale deposits, but that would be unwise for the US. We need to take an Obama ass whipping, because he and Moochelle are mad at the US. Pay your dues America and get a three wheel bicycle. It really cuts down on transportation costs. You can always sell fruit and vegetables, there may be a lot of competition in the market, but that is what makes free market economy strong. Government workers, welfare entitlement types, and union people may drive a hard bargain, but we must work as a collective to demand the best prices from the Socialist swine. Welcome to the Obamanation.
Better Idea: release 1/2 of the emergency petroleum reserves, this will do 2 things. First, it will have an immediate impact on the cost at the pump, and second, in doing so it will punish the speculators who have been the primary people pushing up the price in the first place!
Why not cut federal and state taxes on gas and diesel, there will be an immediate 30% drop in the cost of fuel.
How about just letting the friggin’ free market decide where and when those “evil” oil companies drill?
You see, that answer just makes too damn much sense for the likes of Obama…
I do not believe this for a second.
Yet, the Obama administration is still trying to halt oil production in parts of Texas due to an “endangered” lizard. The problem is that these dimwits in D.C. don’t seem to understand that the reason the lizard is endangered is because is it a favorite food of the wiley roadrunner.
Perhaps Obama can get Eric Holder to sue the roadrunner.
If you believe this crap from Obama, I have a bridge I would like to sell you. Obama just wants media space and news bite attention. There are concurrent promotions on TV and elsewhere, some by MobilOil, that reference getting more oil in the U.S. However, you can believe that Obama is counting on his liberal earth-saving radicals to save his behind by opposing drilling tooth-and-nail — to the extent that with Obama there will be no drilling in the U.S. Besides, the application and implementation of drilling plans takes years. Obama will be gone much sooner than in just a few months.
Obama’s approval rating is going down again; down now to 48% and falling. It’s no wonder that Obama is making more lies. Too bad for Obama, the overwhelming majority of people in the U.S. don’t want to be lied to any more.
With Obama’s lies about the economy, gitmo, jobs, unemployment, etc., he’ll be lucky to get just a few votes for re-election. Conservatives are as good as in again … everywhere.
adrians says ” Obama lucky to get just a few votes for re-election.Conservs are as good as in again … everywhere.” RCP POLL OF POLLS F.A. APPROVED 5/15/2011 51.5%-42.6%+ 8.9%. Let’s keep it real.
You’ll have trouble selling your bridge
note to ot2 I don’t initiate these poll debates
@little dickie wheeler: And Obama’s biggest cheerleader raises his ugly head, once again.
You cited a poll that is the average of many different polls. Those polls combine the categories “adults,” “registered voters” and “likely voters.” Of the 12 polls RCP used, only ONE poll was likely voters and that showed Obama at 48% approval. The one registered voters had him at 52%, which raises questions about their sampling. The other TEN polls are simply “adults.” As has been discussed here on FA before, that category is the least accurate.
But since none of this reality means anything to you, dickie you will surely crow about his “high” favorability rating.
You will grasp at any straw to prop up your zero, er I mean hero, Obama.
mini-me #12 Whatever
75 Degrees and Sunny with Ocean Breezes here in San Clemente. That’s a fact. Carpe Diem
@little dickie wheeler: What’s the matter? Cat got your tongue???
HR is correct when he says that when confronted with the truth, with reality you have no intellectual answer and fall back on insults, ad hominem, changing the topic or simply ignoring that reality.
Thanks for proving HR correct.
.
.
mini-me The truth is you buy the Rasmussen poll and I as well as many here buy the RCP poll of polls that averages Rass. with 11 others.Insults,attacks??
Please note I’ve been keeping in mind how fragile you and H.R. can be.
Dr.J. I provided my occupation on your request. I then requested yours.?
@little dickie wheeler: So you feel that the average of 12 polls, 10 of which utilize sampling that does not represent likely voters as more accurate than 1 poll that does so?
Interesting, however I feel that it is probably due to the fact the polls which keep away from likely voters give you the results you oh so sorely wish were true.
To follow your logic, that would be like asking 1000 people who cannot digest dairy products if they like cheese pizzas and then deciding, based on that poll that Americans no longer like pizza…
With every post, you reveal yourself to be the far, far, FAR lefty you are.
Have a nice day!
.
.
mini-me You pick one poll, Rass. 48-51 and disregard TEN others including Gallup,CNN,ABC,NBC,Reuters ETC ETC. that have BHO ahead on approval*.You think all TEN MEANINGLESS. You think respected polls like Gallup and Reuters “keep away from likely voters?” Talk about illogical.
BTW Let me know when ANY poll including Rasmussen has ANY Repub ahead of BHO head up.Hint You can’t do it.
* newsweek 48-49 down
I had a great day.Thanks
@rich wheeler: You said:
Well since RCP shows that both of those polls ONLY sampled adults, then the illogical one here is you.
Tell you what little dickie, I will do something you never do, I will provide the link to the poll YOU cited.
RCP Obama Approval Ratings
You can clearly see that only the Rasmussen & Quinnipiac polls use voters. The other ten polls simply poll adults which is never as accurate as a poll of likely voters. What part of that don’t you understand? I thought you were some hot shot whiz kid lib who had the answers to everything.
I know! I will type slower next time – just for you, dickie.
MINI-ME Thanks much for providing RCP link which today, Mon., shows Obama overall approval has improved to +9.1% and Ras. at 49%-50%. Who will you cite when he goes up in Ras?
Where is Dr. John?
Semper Fi RJW 66 yr old “hot shot whiz kid lib” I LIKE IT
But of course Obama would “extend” existing leases… why wouldn’t he? The feds collected $40 bil in leases, bids, royalties on oil/gas leases between 2008 and 2010. Easy money.
The larger question is the forked tongue gripe about the large percentage of undeveloped nonproducing leases.
This is why Markey and the WH/Interior Dept are pushing additional fees for nonproducing leases.
Steve Maley over at Redstate took them to task for their coercive assault… noting that the majority of the nonproducing leases are located in deepwater and, unless the field is large enough to justify the expense, are not feasible economically. Especially with the fall of gas prices post 2008-09. Then, of course, there is the difficulty of obtaining permitting with the Obama imposed moratorium.
Obviously there is no benefit for a company to hold on to a lease that doesn’t offer some potential under the right economic/regulatory circumstances. But apparently this admin is bound and determined to nail them to the wall for additional cash to do so. It seems it’s holding them over a barrel if the hold up is permitting. However if it’s economic feasibility, I’m quite sure the feds will figure out a way to extract more cash for the leases… raising “the rent”, so to speak. Just seems odd to consider it a penalty if the lack of development is not the fault of the company, but the US regulations and moratorium.
i.e., a report by IHS noted that the moratorium constrained a healthy rebound for the GOM offshore sector.
Here’s a link to the GOM active leases as of May 2011. You can then compare that to the USGS map of oil and gas fields.
What’s always important to keep in mind is that the US is not under a monarchy, and that a new admin with different appointees and policies for the MMS and DOI, can reverse the trend. However extending leases, not to mention tapping the companies for additional fees, cannot be equated with allowing production.
In the meantime the REAL cost of so-called ”sustainable” energy sources is becoming more clear.
And it is not a pretty picture!
$8935.
What does that buy you?
Enough wind energy to light a 100 watt bulb for less than 3 months!
The number-crunching is here.
PS, if we actually wanted to pay to lower the global warming 1 degree Celsius at that rate, it would cost the planet’s 7 billion people $13 quadrillion or a mere $6.3 million each.
Still want to go there?
@little dickie wheeler: Caution! I a m t y p i n g s l o w just for you, dickie.
First of all, polls are like opinions, everyone has one. You can alter a poll in the way you ask the question, your sampling method and even your scoring method. So polls are not the end all and be all of politics.
However, that being said, I still refer to scientific polling methods and as pertains to politics, the best, most accurate method of sampling is A. sample size and B. likely voters.
So to answer your question, no matter what the Rasmussen polling shows, I will always look to it as more accurate as long as they continue with their tried and true methods.
Pardon my calling you a kid, I momentarily forgot to show proper respect to my elders. I had no idea you were a senior citizen, maybe I ought to take it a bit easier on you from now on. It would bother me greatly to cause you stress at your advanced age…
anticsrocks (aka mini-me) and Dr.J. I give you name ,rank,age, occupation when asked and you guys hide in cyberspace.C’mon out.
Last Pres. poll that mattered was 2008 (How’d that turn out for ya) and next is 2012. Let me know when you get a candidate.In the meantime I AGREE WITH OT2.
BTW Pound away. I believe this old Marine’s health (perfect) is better than yours.
@little dickie wheeler: Scroll up and check dickie, I never asked you what you did for a living, nor do I give a crap.
Hiding? Me?
From what? You?
😆
😆
😆
😆
@little dickie wheeler: That’s what I thought…
MINI-MI Dr.John asked my occupation. I gave him requested info and asked that he recipricate.No response.
@little dickie wheeler: Oh? So when you said –
– you weren’t accusing me of hiding in “cyberspace?”
.
.
anticsrocks You have my full name and age both of which you’ve disparaged. I’ve called you mini-me regarding your similar views to Dr. J. It’s really Herr Dr. who’s in hiding.
Let’s move on.O.K.?
@little dickie wheeler: Move on? Sure thing, just don’t accuse me of hiding when I am not.
And as far as why you called me mini me to Dr. John, it was not because I held similar views. In the thread in which you started that, I put my two cents in on a fierce debate between him and Mata. I called it down the middle and gave points to both sides.
Let me be clear (thought I would borrow a phrase from your hero), the reason you called me mini me was as some perceived insult on your part.
Nice try, thanks for playing.
anticsrocks Lets face it, you just enjoy the fight.Me too. Did you notice your favorite Rasmussen poll has Obama up 50%-49% today.When do you think you might find a candidate to back in that stellar Repub. field? Is ANYBODY within 20 points of Obama? 2012 is looking pretty bleak.Even my friend John Galt appears ready to throw in the towel.
No worries Rubio will have a good shot in 2016.
@rich wheeler: Yes, I give as good and usually better than I get. Looks like you finally learned that.
As for your continued hand wringing over a GOP “star” to emerge in opposition to Obama, well you are really jumping the gun.
* Reagan announced his run for the GOP nomination in November of the year before the general election, Nov 13th, 1979 to be exact.
* Bill Clinton announced his run for the Democratic nomination on October 3rd, 1991, which was 13 months before the general election.
Since we are now a full year and a half from the 2012 general election, it is way too early and the field is wide open at this point. There is no hurry, and a good, strong candidate will emerge from the trial by fire that the presidential primaries are.