Bush lifts executive ban on offshore drilling, assumes America hates the ocean
Posted by viveknarain on July 16, 2008
Yesterday, President George Bush lifted the executive ban on offshore drilling, a decision that is less about oil output and more about politics. Bush said, “The only thing standing between the American people and these vast oil resources is action from the U.S. Congress,” which coincidently is composed of a Democratic majority.
The executive order Bush decided to remove is the same ban that his father enforced to ensure the growth and preservation of American coastal waters and tourist economies. The present day Bush is looking for relief from high gas prices, but drilling in ocean waters wouldn’t bring us what we need. Even White House officials have said, “There is no quick fix,” in regards to the gas situation. This begs the question, whose interests are being served by Bush’s latest environment murdering decision?
So what happens if congress agrees with Bush and the ban is removed? It might knock off a few bucks from the price of gas barrels, but at what expense? We all saw the precedence that the Valdez case set. We saw how tax-abiding citizens lost their livelihoods because of the damage caused by an oil spill off the Alaskan coast, only to be awarded $55,000. Now is your livelihood worth more than $55,000 (the payout victims received) after 19 years? It better be, or you’re getting royally screwed (by that oil drill of course). You can bet oil drilling off of our coastline will do a lot more damage than the Valdez spill.
If oil prices go down, it won’t be due to offshore drilling, but because of key market factors like a strengthening dollar and a reformed American financial system. Combine this with continued development of alternative energy sources (Tesla and Chevy Volt!) and we end up with an unnecessary and disgusting permanent decoration gracing American coasts like a puss-filled zit exploding during a high school senior portrait.
When was the last time you heard about anyone drilling out of a problem? That sounds like Shredder from the Ninja Turtles… and we all know the outcome of that.
Vivek Narain on Life 
Cy Quick said
The sense in which you use the term “to beg the question” when you say above “which begs the question” is common these days and has even found its way into the Oxford Concise Dictionary. The original and extremely useful meaning is “to assume the truth of the thing to be proved”. What you might with more precision have said was “which raises the question”.
I think we ought to seek and extract oil everywhere it is suspected to exist and that, at the same time, we ought to provide a level playing field for the competing oil companies by requiring them all to be clean during and after the long operation. In the same way, all industries ought to be required to be clean, as ought citizens to be.
It is not that climate varies as per human activity. In fact, the galactic clouds affect our star, Sol, and it in turn affects Earth, causing climate variation, notably with ice caps coming (nasty) and going (nice). It is that it is beneficial to life to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and grow food in clean soil.
Cy Quick at mydigest.wordpress.com
Chris said
I think that this is a typical far-left respons e to a conservative solution! When Dem’s are caught on the wrong side of the issue ( 77% of Americans support lifting the ban ) scare people
with the enviorment. Dem’s claim that republicans are the fearmongers ( terror threat ) the
Dem’s do the same with the enviorment. To say that lifting the ban would decrease gas negligably
is very dumb; if congress passes a massive energy bill that highlights these 4 things will within 90 days of the bills passage cut gas prices in half: 1. lift the off shore Ban(not ANWAR-this actually may hurt) 2. Stop excessive energy speculation 3. conserve 4. formulate alternative energy policy ( develope algea, perfect ethonol, nuclear, solar, wind ). Of course you can chose to only do the second 2 points and continue into a deppresionand the really know just how long it takes to devolpe alternative enegy.
Chris said
sorry about the wierd spacing and bad grammar:)
Evan said
Eh, it won’t even affect the barrel price.
The details that are being left out here is that, even if the ban lifted:
1. The oil companies may not even decide to drill there. They’re not interested in helping the American people, they’re interested in controlling price. The more leases they collect, the more control they have.
2. Even if they DO drill for oil, it’s not America’s oil! Oil is traded on an international market, and any oil extracted by oil companies goes directly to that market, unless the drilling cheerleaders are suggesting we nationalize our oil, and we KNOW they’re not suggesting that. Are you kidding me? This is about making the oil companies richer. Again!
That said, har har at the Shredder reference. Well-played!