<p>
</p>
<p>Fact check that. I don’t think it’s true. I remember Cheney said something about China drilling off our shores but that was proven untrue. I don’t know about Russia though.</p>
<p>Sorry it is 50 miles</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
You do realize how hilariously this entire post reads, right?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If Pelosi wants to save the planet she is in the wrong country. She should be in China were they are building at least one new coal fired electricity plant every week. Drilling for oil in American won’t adversely and materially affect the enviroment. All it will do is enable poor people to experience a better quality of life.</p>
<p>calmom - if Obama is such a “moderate” and a “compromiser” as you suggest, then why has he voted solidly along party lines on every piece of legislation since he’s been in the Senate? How does he get rated as the MOST liberal senator? How can you say that when he has NEVER "reached across the aisle?</p>
<p>It is McCain who has DEMONSTRATED Compromise. He has a long history of working across party line (Gang of 14, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy). Unlike most politicians, it is McCain who has truly put partisanship aside to try to get something accomplished.</p>
<p>There is no way that Obama represents ANYTHING other than MORE PARTISANSHIP, MORE GRIDLOCK, and LESS ACCOMPLISHMENT in Washington. He’s waaaay out on the fringes of Ideology - he’d have a long long way to go to even begin to be considered “moderate” and even get to the aisle to reach across it.</p>
<p>“Drilling for oil in American won’t adversely and materially affect the enviroment.”</p>
<p>It doesn’t matter where the drilling is, the resulting carbon is spewed into the world’s air.</p>
<p>“All it will do is enable poor people to experience a better quality of life.”</p>
<p>It is the poor of the world who will suffer the most from climate change.</p>
<p>As Thomas L. Friedman says:</p>
<p>“Republicans have become so obsessed with the notion that we can drill our way out of the current energy crisis that re-opening the coastal waters to drilling has become their answer for every energy question.”</p>
<p>Drilling is just ONE means to address the energy crisis we’re currently experiencing, and is but one part of Repbublicans’ strategy. </p>
<p>I disagree w/ the basis of that Friedman quote - from the promotion by Repubs of Nuclear, Wind, etc., it is obvious that Republicans have NOT “become so obsessed with the notion that we can drill our way out of the current energy crisis”.</p>
<p>This would be the same Thomas L. Friedman who was Chief Salesman (along with Judith Miller) for the Iraq invasion at the New York Times? For whom the term “Friedman Unit” (6 more months in Iraq and Nirvana will be achieved) is named?</p>
<p>At what point do we wise up and stop listening to the punditocracy? The most corrosive influence in our democracy today?</p>
<p>This is sweet:</p>
<p>Obama added: “What I will not do, and this has always been my position is to support a plan that suggests this drilling is the answer to our energy problems. If we’ve got a plan on the table that I think meets the goals that America has to set and there are some things in there that I don’t like then obviously that’s something that you know I would consider because that’s the nature of how we govern in a democracy.”</p>
<p>I guess he has not read the Lexington Project by McCain. Drilling should be part of a comprehensive solution to the energy troubles. McCain is so far ahead of this guy on the issues, Obama is beginning to look like an amateur. </p>
<p>CNN Stated: “The senator from Illinois has railed against offshore drilling since Sen. John McCain in June proposed striking down the federal moratorium banning offshore oil and gas drilling to help alleviate high gas
prices.”</p>
<p>Obama can take two conflicting positions on an issue at the same time without batting an eye. His supporters have started coming up with all sorts of explanation.</p>
<p>75% American people support off shore drilling. Obama is now changing his stance. I used to think the guy was different. He is behaving like a typical politician. Why should I vote for the change, which is more of the same? Obama is loosing my respect. I am not a ■■■■■ just fed up with these politicians who want to win without having principals. They change their position in order to win. Obama may be a nice guy. But he is behaving like a another crooked politician. I am mad that he is another politician without principals who keeps chaning to win the election. Why can not they stick to thier guns. I am so mad that I voted for him in primaries over Hilary. I even send him money. I am going to abstain from voting then voting for demagogues.</p>
<p>From today’s NYT:</p>
<p>Senator Barack Obama said Saturday that he would reluctantly consider accepting some new offshore oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico in exchange for stripping oil companies of tax breaks and extending several tax credits to spur the search for alternative fuels.</p>
<p>At the same time, Senate Republicans appear to have dropped their insistence on opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.</p>
<p>Mr. Obama has until now opposed any offshore drilling. But in a news conference here, he noted that there had been “very constructive” talks between Senate Republicans and Democrats on this issue in recent days, applauding a plan unveiled by a group of Republican and Democratic senators to permit drilling while supporting an effort to convert most vehicles to using alternative fuels in 20 years.</p>
<p>“If we come up with a genuine bipartisan compromise, where I have to accept some things that I don’t like in order to get energy independence,” Mr. Obama said, “that’s something I will have to consider.”</p>
<p>Still, he cautioned that he was not yet “ready to sign off on any approach.”</p>
<p>75% American people support off shore drilling. Obama is now changing his stance. I used to think the guy was different. He is behaving like a typical politician. Why should I vote for the change, which is more of the same? Obama is loosing my respect. I am not a ■■■■■ just fed up with these politicians who want to win without having principals. They change their position in order to win. Obama may be a nice guy. But he is behaving like a another crooked politician. I am mad that he is another politician without principals who keeps changing to win the election. Why can not he stick to his guns. I am so mad that I voted for him in primaries over Hilary. I even send him money. I am going to abstain from voting then voting for demagogues.</p>
<p>if only more people had realized this before the primary ended…</p>
<p>“At what point do we wise up and stop listening to the punditocracy?”</p>
<p>Some also consider Friedman a world-class author, journalist, researcher and economist, in addition to columnist.</p>
<p>We should listen to all such people, then calmly choose the views we think are the best, and call the rest pundits. ;)</p>
<p>Re post #52: If you had listened to Obama at all, you would know that his message from day #1 has been that he wants to end the partisanship and divisiveness, and work for more comprehensive solutions. That means working for constructive compromise. </p>
<p>I am saying this as a person who supported another candidate who promised to dig in his heels and fight the right wing on everything. I would rather have had my true-believer progressive candidate, but as I watched my candidate go down to crushing defeat and saw Obama succeed, I at least had the brains to realize that maybe that is because his message of embracing disparate points of views to work for constructive solutions resonates with a significant number of people who are sick and tired of the red-state/blue-state divide, the filibustering in Congress, and the hate and antagonism spouted on the cable news stations. </p>
<p>I think your 75% figure is wrong - I think the polls show something more like 52% support for off shore drilling – but do you really “respect” a leader in a democratic country who would shut his mind to the majority will?</p>
<p>Don’t blame the voters. Most Democratic primary voters voted for the candidate with a consistent 35 year track record on progressive issues. </p>
<p>The DNC and the Superdelegates gerrymandered a 48-state process and will award to the nomination to The One despite that fact that he staggered across the line bleeding profusely in state after state including almost all of the big states that are so important in the fall. The party has the candidate it wanted and will sink or swim accordingly, without the voters disenfranchised by the process.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh puhleeze. Look what he has done promoting partisanship and divisiveness in his own party. He spent the entire year smearing the only Democratic elected to a second term in the White House since FDR and has driven a wedge through the Democratic coalition. Does anyone still believe the nonsense about ending divisiveness?</p>
<p>The Democratic Party is more fractured today than at any time since 1968.</p>
<p>From CNN, July 30:</p>
<p>"More than two thirds of Americans say they favor increasing drilling efforts off America’s coasts while only 30 percent disapprove of such action. </p>
<p>…</p>
<p>The poll also shows Americans are divided when it comes to the effect of offshore drilling. Just over 50 percent think it will reduce gas prices while 49 percent say it will not."</p>
<p>aapride:</p>
<p>Obama is no idealist; he’s a realist. This was a good move on Obama’s part because now he looks like the one who is willing to reach across the aisle to get things done. This all fits in with his message of bringing people together.</p>
<p>Also, by saying he does not agree with giving the oil companies tax breaks he is stymieing the oil companies’ ability to drill offshore. Without tax breaks the oil companies will have to invest their own money in new equipment and such. By adding these obstacles, Obama would force the oil companies to be smarter about offshore drilling.</p>
<p>interesteddad:</p>
<p>Can you please knock off the mud slinging?</p>
<p>Mudslinging? Didn’t you write:</p>
<p>
</p>