Bush to congress:

[CCTAU 3,357]

See typical dim response below.

And of course there is the great McCain "flip-flop". I mean why drill now that gas is $4 a gallon instead of when gas was $1.54 a gallon? Makes no sense, huh?

Bush to Congress: Embrace energy exploration now

By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer 26 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - With gasoline topping $4 a gallon, President Bush urged Congress on Wednesday to lift its long-standing ban on offshore oil and gas drilling, saying the United States needs to increase its energy production. Democrats quickly rejected the idea.

"There is no excuse for delay," the president said in a statement in the Rose Garden. With the presidential election just months away, Bush made a pointed attack on Democrats, accusing them of obstructing his energy proposals and blaming them for high gasoline costs. His proposal echoed a call by Republican presidential candidate John McCain to open the Continental Shelf for exploration

"Families across the country are looking to Washington for a response," Bush said.

Congressional Democrats were quick to reject the push for lifting the drilling moratorium, saying oil companies already have 68 million acres offshore waters under lease that are not being developed. (And we all know that oil is EVERYWHERE, so why can't they just drill where they are. Maybe run a 2000 mile pipe in circles underneath where they need to be from where they are allowed to be. DOLTS!)

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called Bush's proposals "another page from (an)... energy policy that was literally written by the oil industry — give away more public resources."

Sen. Barack Obama, the Democrats' presumptive presidential nominee, rejected lifting the drilling moratorium that has been supported by a succession of presidents for nearly two decades.

"This is not something that's going to give consumers short-term relief and it is not a long-term solution to our problems with fossil fuels generally and oil in particular," said Obama. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, lumping Bush with McCain, accused them of staging a "cynical campaign ploy" that won't help lower energy prices.

"Despite what President Bush, John McCain and their friends in the oil industry claim, we cannot drill our way out of this problem," Reid said. "The math is simple: America has just three percent of the world's oil reserves, but Americans use a quarter of its oil."

Bush said offshore drilling could yield up to 18 billion barrels of oil over time, although it would take years for production to start. Bush also said offshore drilling would take pressure off prices over time. (No we should sit back and do nothing. Kinda like the Dims SS plan)

There are two prohibitions on offshore drilling, one imposed by Congress and another by executive order signed by Bush's father in 1990. Bush's brother, Jeb, fiercely opposed offshore drilling when he was governor of Florida. What the president now proposes would rescind his father's decision — but the president took the position that Congress has to act first and then he would follow behind.

Asked why Bush doesn't act first and lift the ban, Keith Hennessey, the director of the president's economic council, said: "He thinks that probably the most productive way to work with this Congress is to try to do it in tandem."

Before Bush spoke, the House Appropriations Committee postponed a vote it had scheduled for Wednesday on legislation doing the opposite of what the president asked — extending Congress' ban on offshore drilling. Lawmakers said they wanted to focus on a disaster relief bill for the battered Midwest.

Bush also proposed opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for drilling, lifting restrictions on oil shale leasing in the Green River Basin of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming and easing the regulatory process to expand oil refining capacity.

With Americans deeply pessimistic about the economy, Bush tried to put on the onus on Congress. He acknowledged that his new proposals would take years to have a full effect, hardly the type of news that will help drivers at the gas stations now. The White House says no quick fix exists.

Still, Bush said Congress was obstructing progress — and directly contributing to consumers' pain at the pump. ( As they have been FOR YEARS. We are now paying for it.)

"I know the Democratic leaders have opposed some of these policies in the past," Bush said. "Now that their opposition has helped drive gas prices to record levels, I ask them to reconsider their positions."

Bush said that if congressional leaders head home for their July 4 recess without taking action, they will need to explain why "$4 a gallon gasoline is not enough incentive for them to act. And Americans will rightly ask how high gas prices have to rise before the Democratic-controlled Congress will do something about it."

Bush said restrictions on offshore drilling have become "outdated and counterproductive."

In a nod to the environmental arguments against drilling, Bush said technology has come a long way. These days, he said, oil exploration off the coastline can be done in a way that "is out of sight, protects coral reefs and habitats, and protects against oil spills."

Congressional Democrats, joined by some GOP lawmakers from coastal states, have opposed lifting the prohibition that has barred energy companies from waters along both the East and West coasts and in the eastern Gulf of Mexico for 27 years.

On Monday, McCain made lifting the federal ban on offshore oil and gas development a key part of his energy plan. McCain said states should be allowed to pursue energy exploration in waters near their coasts and get some of the royalty revenue.

Obama retorted that the Arizona senator had flip-flopped on that issue. (Of course he did. Just like all dims went against Bush's SS overhaul. Do nothings)

LINK

[Justin5 20]

Who’s to say that the oil derived from ANWR would go to US consumers? Oil is bought and sold in a global marketplace. Who’s to say OPEC wouldn’t lower their supply by a corresponding amount therefore negating any ANWR gains?

We need to get off oil. Moving towards conservation, while painful, is a good thing for the long term. Oil is not the long term energy solution.

[RunInRed 16,602]

It's good to see that 8 years later he decides we need an energy plan. I'll bet all the money in the world that if gas was not $4/gallon this "genius" plan of his never would have emerged. Sadly, this is what we have come to expect from this administration - no action until we have a crisis on our hands and it is too little too late.

Any one else yearn for a leader who can do more than react? Who can actually plan? Who has the judgment and principles to do more than shift with the political winds?

[CCTAU 3,357]

It's good to see that 8 years later he decides we need an energy plan. I'll bet all the money in the world that if gas was not $4/gallon this "genius" plan of his never would have emerged. Sadly, this is what we have come to expect from this administration - no action until we have a crisis on our hands and it is too little too late.

Any one else yearn for a leader who can do more than react? Who can actually plan? Who has the judgment and principles to do more than shift with the political winds?

Are you effing stoopid? Nobody had a plan when gas was cheap. You act like that guy you have your head stuck up had/has a clue. At least now the president sees what needs to be done and your boy still sits there with the same old dim s***, DO NOTHING.

Everyone is beginning to see it....except achmed.

FL Governor

[Shire5k 19]

Just a convenient topic for political platform for the election. Trying to make people think this is a solution...and that it would actually happen. /yawn

Why wasn't this done when the Republicans were in control of Congress?

[AUHonors 0]

With so many Americans and governments pushing for alternative energy (I believe there was a thread about Honda's new emission-free car going into production on these very forums), what possible economic incentive could the oil companies have to drill?

We've all read that it will be a minimum of five or so years until we see any oil from this drilling. I would certainly hope that we would have made significant progress in moving away from our overuse of oil by then. Honda's hydrogen fuel-cell cars will be available in a limited fashion later this year.

This plan to just drill more is ridiculous; it is so depressing to think that we have a president and a candidate for the job who would jump aboard. The future does not lie with oil.

[Tigermike 3,086]

Just a convenient topic for political platform for the election. Trying to make people think this is a solution...and that it would actually happen. /yawn (It is part of the solution.)

Why wasn't this done when the Republicans were in control of Congress?

Why wasn't it done during the eight Clinton years? If it had where would we be today?

The last time there were efforts to become energy independent what did OPEC do? How much of an increase in production was there? Where did the price of a barrel of oil go?

All that Bush was doing was obeying the law of supply and demand. That is always a hard concept for dim libs to grasp.

[Shire5k 19]

Just a convenient topic for political platform for the election. Trying to make people think this is a solution...and that it would actually happen. /yawn (It is part of the solution.)

Why wasn't this done when the Republicans were in control of Congress?

Why wasn't it done during the eight Clinton years? If it had where would we be today?

The last time there were efforts to become energy independent what did OPEC do? How much of an increase in production was there? Where did the price of a barrel of oil go?

All that Bush was doing was obeying the law of supply and demand. That is always a hard concept for dim libs to grasp.

Who was in control of Congress during half of those years? Democrats? Nope.

Trying to place the blame on Democrats when Republicans are run by oil companies is idiotic at best. Consider the fact that Republicans were in control of Congress from around 1995-2007, and in control of the Presidency from 2000-08. Talk about "do nothings".

No, all this is is lip service from Bush/McCain to get votes from people who think that this issue can be resolved with us drilling (which it cannot). Heck, I'm a Republican and it's easy to see.

[Tigermike 3,086]

Just a convenient topic for political platform for the election. Trying to make people think this is a solution...and that it would actually happen. /yawn (It is part of the solution.)

Why wasn't this done when the Republicans were in control of Congress?

Why wasn't it done during the eight Clinton years? If it had where would we be today?

The last time there were efforts to become energy independent what did OPEC do? How much of an increase in production was there? Where did the price of a barrel of oil go?

All that Bush was doing was obeying the law of supply and demand. That is always a hard concept for dim libs to grasp.

Who was in control of Congress during half of those years? Democrats? Nope.

Trying to place the blame on Democrats when Republicans are run by oil companies is idiotic at best. Consider the fact that Republicans were in control of Congress from around 1995-2007, and in control of the Presidency from 2000-08. Talk about "do nothings".

No, all this is is lip service from Bush/McCain to get votes from people who think that this issue can be resolved with us drilling (which it cannot). Heck, I'm a Republican and it's easy to see.

Nice try at deflection, but where did I place all blame on dims? I have consistently in all of these "oil/energy" threads pushed for drilling, development of alternatives, development of more efficient automobiles and trucks. Yes I have hit the dims and for good measure. Because they have been their normal obstructionists selves.

The problem is the dims have blocked drilling in Alaska, the west coast, the east coast, nearly all of Florida, Montana, Wyoming, nearly everywhere. The dims have also blocked new refineries being built for 30 years.

Republicans were in control during those years and failed to push new energy measures through. The dims were blocking the entire time.

Great, do nothing and wait 10 -20 years or longer for all those alternative fuels.

Using your stats: Republicans were in control of Congress from around 1995-2007

What was done before then? What have the dims done since then?

What are the dims suggesting now?

1) Nationalize the oil industry. Maybe Hugo can give them some pointers. If he hasn't already.

2) Tell the oil companies to drill somewhere else. (Why the F___ drill where there is no oil?)

[Auburn85 434]

so first we hear about how there's no sense in drilling for oil as it won't be enough or it'll take years to get it in the market, or oh no, the wildlife.

now when bush is serious about drilling...." wow, only took him 7-8 years to come up with an energy plan."

so are most of the democrats satisfied and content with just monday morning quarterbacking his late plan to drill or are they going to allow more drilling? or are democrats content with Congress sitting on their thumbs until 09?

Wouldn't one step closer to cheaper energy prices look good on Obama's watch as president? Afterall, presidents get credit and blame for whatever happens on their watch.

[Tigermike 3,086]

so first we hear about how there's no sense in drilling for oil as it won't be enough or it'll take years to get it in the market, or oh no, the wildlife.

now when bush is serious about drilling...." wow, only took him 7-8 years to come up with an energy plan."

so are most of the democrats satisfied and content with just monday morning quarterbacking his late plan to drill or are they going to allow more drilling? or are democrats content with Congress sitting on their thumbs until 09?

Wouldn't one step closer to cheaper energy prices look good on Obama's watch as president? Afterall, presidents get credit and blame for whatever happens on their watch.

now when bush is serious about drilling...." wow, only took him 7-8 years to come up with an energy plan."

Very good point. So after those 7-8 years it took Bush to come to terms we have to add another 15 - 20 for the dims to come around.

[CCTAU 3,357]

so are most of the democrats satisfied and content with just monday morning quarterbacking.....

Check out anything they have discussed the last 8 years. Nothing new, just telling us what Bush and company has done wrong. But no new plans whatsoever.

[LegalEagle 22]

Here's another one to consider.

Notice in the first post the insight and wisdom of our President:

Bush said restrictions on offshore drilling have become "outdated and counterproductive."

In a nod to the environmental arguments against drilling, Bush said technology has come a long way. These days, he said, oil exploration off the coastline can be done in a way that "is out of sight, protects coral reefs and habitats, and protects against oil spills."

[CCTAU 3,357]

Here's another one to consider.

Notice in the first post the insight and wisdom of our President:

Bush said restrictions on offshore drilling have become "outdated and counterproductive."

In a nod to the environmental arguments against drilling, Bush said technology has come a long way. These days, he said, oil exploration off the coastline can be done in a way that "is out of sight, protects coral reefs and habitats, and protects against oil spills."

MMS may have been doing a better job while he was president.

And it CAN be done in a safe way. Other are still doing it now.

[autigeremt 6,786]

Who’s to say that the oil derived from ANWR would go to US consumers? Oil is bought and sold in a global marketplace. Who’s to say OPEC wouldn’t lower their supply by a corresponding amount therefore negating any ANWR gains?

We need to get off oil. Moving towards conservation, while painful, is a good thing for the long term. Oil is not the long term energy solution.

I agree with you Justin....we need to get off oil. However....what's the reality of PAINFUL for liberals? $8.00 a gallon gas? $9.00 a gallon? Or even worse, seeing that every thing we use right now has petroleum in it....$5.00 for a 16 oz. Coke? Oil change for you car at $90.00? Cooking oil at 10.00 a quart? A ball point pen that costs $3.50? I think we should explore every option, derive it from domestic sources, and get a REAL energy plan in place. Obama wants control. He doesn't give a damn about who is left in his wake. He could care less about energy plans and offsets. We must become energy independent. The French, for all their idiocy at times, has proven what nuclear can do. Sure, it has one main drawback, but we must use the same science on radiological waste as liberals would want for wind, solar, etc.

It's easy for establishment liberals and conservatives to hold the rest of us by the throat because of their safety net. Whether it's environmental issues or religion, the establishment mentality in this country has GOT TO END!

[TitanTiger 20,561]

Here's another one to consider.

Notice in the first post the insight and wisdom of our President:

Bush said restrictions on offshore drilling have become "outdated and counterproductive."

In a nod to the environmental arguments against drilling, Bush said technology has come a long way. These days, he said, oil exploration off the coastline can be done in a way that "is out of sight, protects coral reefs and habitats, and protects against oil spills."

MMS may have been doing a better job while he was president.

And it CAN be done in a safe way. Other are still doing it now.

However, when you have a blowout like this and you keep hearing that such and such method hasn't been tested at this depth...that's not doing it safe. If you don't have methods you've thoroughly tested at the depths and conditions you're wanting to drill at that can stop or contain a serious leak, then you shouldn't be drilling at that depth either.

[CCTAU 3,357]

Here's another one to consider.

Notice in the first post the insight and wisdom of our President:

Bush said restrictions on offshore drilling have become "outdated and counterproductive."

In a nod to the environmental arguments against drilling, Bush said technology has come a long way. These days, he said, oil exploration off the coastline can be done in a way that "is out of sight, protects coral reefs and habitats, and protects against oil spills."

We have already established that the greenies pushed drilling out so far. The fail-safes were tested, but drilling was allowed to continue when tests were not up to standards. Goes back to my "MMS" statement. If the rig had been shut down until the correct standards of testing were reached, then this multiple failure catastrophe may not have happened. There is plenty of blame to go around, but to stop all drilling is foolish to say the least.

MMS may have been doing a better job while he was president.

And it CAN be done in a safe way. Other are still doing it now.

However, when you have a blowout like this and you keep hearing that such and such method hasn't been tested at this depth...that's not doing it safe. If you don't have methods you've thoroughly tested at the depths and conditions you're wanting to drill at that can stop or contain a serious leak, then you shouldn't be drilling at that depth either.

We have already established that the greenies pushed drilling out so far. The fail-safes were tested, but drilling was allowed to continue when tests were not up to standards. Goes back to my "MMS" statement. If the rig had been shut down until the correct standards of testing were reached, then this multiple failure catastrophe may not have happened. There is plenty of blame to go around, but to stop all drilling is foolish to say the least.

[TitanTiger 20,561]

Oh, I agree. I don't have a problem with a temporary moratorium though to review inspection standards and such. But we can't just stop drilling. Not right now anyway.

[arnaldoabru 11]

Just a convenient topic for political platform for the election. Trying to make people think this is a solution...and that it would actually happen. /yawn (It is part of the solution.)

Why wasn't this done when the Republicans were in control of Congress?

Why wasn't it done during the eight Clinton years? If it had where would we be today?

The last time there were efforts to become energy independent what did OPEC do? How much of an increase in production was there? Where did the price of a barrel of oil go?

All that Bush was doing was obeying the law of supply and demand. That is always a hard concept for dim libs to grasp.

Who was in control of Congress during half of those years? Democrats? Nope.

Trying to place the blame on Democrats when Republicans are run by oil companies is idiotic at best. Consider the fact that Republicans were in control of Congress from around 1995-2007, and in control of the Presidency from 2000-08. Talk about "do nothings".

No, all this is is lip service from Bush/McCain to get votes from people who think that this issue can be resolved with us drilling (which it cannot). Heck, I'm a Republican and it's easy to see.

Nice try at deflection, but where did I place all blame on dims? I have consistently in all of these "oil/energy" threads pushed for drilling, development of alternatives, development of more efficient automobiles and trucks. Yes I have hit the dims and for good measure. Because they have been their normal obstructionists selves.

The problem is the dims have blocked drilling in Alaska, the west coast, the east coast, nearly all of Florida, Montana, Wyoming, nearly everywhere. The dims have also blocked new refineries being built for 30 years.

Republicans were in control during those years and failed to push new energy measures through. The dims were blocking the entire time.

Great, do nothing and wait 10 -20 years or longer for all those alternative fuels.

Using your stats: Republicans were in control of Congress from around 1995-2007

What was done before then? What have the dims done since then?

What are the dims suggesting now?

1) Nationalize the oil industry. Maybe Hugo can give them some pointers. If he hasn't already.

2) Tell the oil companies to drill somewhere else. (Why the F___ drill where there is no oil?)

Oil companies bought up independent refineries,shut them down, as well as their own. They want to control the supply. All this "new oil" wouldn't bring down the price of gas one iota.

[Tigermike 3,086]

Just a convenient topic for political platform for the election. Trying to make people think this is a solution...and that it would actually happen. /yawn (It is part of the solution.)

Why wasn't this done when the Republicans were in control of Congress?

Why wasn't it done during the eight Clinton years? If it had where would we be today?

The last time there were efforts to become energy independent what did OPEC do? How much of an increase in production was there? Where did the price of a barrel of oil go?

All that Bush was doing was obeying the law of supply and demand. That is always a hard concept for dim libs to grasp.

Who was in control of Congress during half of those years? Democrats? Nope.

Trying to place the blame on Democrats when Republicans are run by oil companies is idiotic at best. Consider the fact that Republicans were in control of Congress from around 1995-2007, and in control of the Presidency from 2000-08. Talk about "do nothings".

No, all this is is lip service from Bush/McCain to get votes from people who think that this issue can be resolved with us drilling (which it cannot). Heck, I'm a Republican and it's easy to see.

Nice try at deflection, but where did I place all blame on dims? I have consistently in all of these "oil/energy" threads pushed for drilling, development of alternatives, development of more efficient automobiles and trucks. Yes I have hit the dims and for good measure. Because they have been their normal obstructionists selves.

The problem is the dims have blocked drilling in Alaska, the west coast, the east coast, nearly all of Florida, Montana, Wyoming, nearly everywhere. The dims have also blocked new refineries being built for 30 years.

Republicans were in control during those years and failed to push new energy measures through. The dims were blocking the entire time.

Great, do nothing and wait 10 -20 years or longer for all those alternative fuels.

Using your stats: Republicans were in control of Congress from around 1995-2007

What was done before then? What have the dims done since then?

What are the dims suggesting now?

1) Nationalize the oil industry. Maybe Hugo can give them some pointers. If he hasn't already.

2) Tell the oil companies to drill somewhere else. (Why the F___ drill where there is no oil?)

Oil companies bought up independent refineries,shut them down, as well as their own. They want to control the supply. All this "new oil" wouldn't bring down the price of gas one iota.

So not drilling will bring the price of gas down? Kind of like the dims goal of spending our way out of debt.