Obama Set to Introduce Offshore Oil Proposal

[Cephius]

So what are you, again, Kuya?

better than all of us, clearly

[Kuya]

better than all of us, clearly

Hey, if you want to get butthurt about the fact that it's true (american liberals being walking welcome mats) then you can go right ahead, but i would hope you at least acknowledge it, it might be the first step to understanding why the US has been steadily heading right-wing since the late 70s.

[Cephius]

Hey, if you want to get butthurt about the fact that it's true (american liberals being walking welcome mats) then you can go right ahead, but i would hope you at least acknowledge it, it might be the first step to understanding why the US has been steadily heading right-wing since the late 70s.

I'm not going to feel bad for being the only non-douchebag in a room full of douchebags. I live in Jersey after all, I'm used to it.

[Maxxthepenguin]

Hey, if you want to get butthurt about the fact that it's true (american liberals being walking welcome mats) then you can go right ahead, but i would hope you at least acknowledge it, it might be the first step to understanding why the US has been steadily heading right-wing since the late 70s.

Only the Puerto Rican dudes, who look like chicks, with a bone to pick about circumcision, and utter hatred for the US and all who reside within have any integrity left, right?

You should read Catcher in the Rye. You and Holden seem to share a similar worldview on hating phonies.

[Kuya]

Only the Puerto Rican dudes who look like chicks, with a bone to pick about circumcision, and utter hatred for the US and all who reside within have any integrity left, right?

You should read Catcher in the Rye. You and Holden seem to share a similar worldview on hating phonies.

No one seems to be denying what i said, but rather struggling, take note of that.

With that said, i did not mention anything about integrity, don't know where you got that from. The comment about me hating americans is to be expected, it's not uncommon for people to confuse criticism of their government with criticism of their culture, especially in a country that tends towards jingoism. I don't feel i need to defend myself entierely about the hating-america charge, if you think that believing that makes my criticism irrelevent, than it would be an excellent coping mechanism.

[Headspace]

First Obama tried to push that green energy shit on us

Now he's pushing offshore drilling on us.

I hate him for both

[Acturus]

Pretty sure Dubya's aim was to open up restricted land in Alaska to be drilled, along with the offshore drilling. This is clearly just offshore drilling.

Still, it takes forever to build an oil rig in the middle of the ocean. Won't see anything until Obama is long gone.

Ah, yes, Alaska.

I live in FL, and there's a lot of pressure here for and against opening up derricks on our shores.

I believe the concern also is (or was) that there's a chance China may fund Cuba to tap into the Gulf areas, and they could come all the way up to a mile off our coast where it's still international waters, unless we get there first or something.

[Maxxthepenguin]

No one seems to be denying what i said, but rather struggling, take note of that.

That's because BG has become a forum full of passionless dorks who don't care about issues as much as care about making pseudo-intellectual jokes to try to show how e-cool they are. It's not a struggle, they just don't care.

The fact is, offshore drilling was always an issue that was a soft no from most liberals. Few have vehemently argued against it, most would just rather not have it done.

With that said, i did not mention anything about integrity, don't know where you got that from. The comment about me hating americans is to be expected, it's not uncommon for people to confuse criticism of their government with criticism of their culture, especially in a country that tends towards jingoism. I don't feel i need to defend myself entierely about the hating-america charge, if you think that believing that makes my criticism irrelevent, than it would be an excellent coping mechanism.

You seemed to be arguing against liberals fighting against offshore drilling then mostly not caring when their guy lets it happen. That's an integrity of convictions issue.

And lol@most of that paragraph

[Cadsuane]

Only the Puerto Rican dudes, who look like chicks, with a bone to pick about circumcision, and utter hatred for the US and all who reside within have any integrity left, right?

You should read Catcher in the Rye. You and Holden seem to share a similar worldview on hating phonies.

Psst. I'll feed you a line: "Failing to contest oil drilling in the name of paranoid environmentalism doesn't make us traitors to liberalism Kuya, it just makes us traitors to quick twitch paranoid environmentalism which I think I'm okay with!". See that way Kuya wouldn't have made you look like a half wit.

edit: Oh good, I didn't need to feed it to you after all. Could've done without the ambivalent posturing though.

[Xno Kappa]

It's drilling off the shores of Virginia which is a huge difference then offshore drilling in potential sites like Alaska's Chukchi and Beaufort Seas where a lot of communities depend on their fishing industry. Exxon Valdez was more then twenty years ago, technology has clearly advanced since then to help prevent such disasters. I don't see where this is an anti-liberal issue to get butt-hurt about since this is more then likely just a compromise to get more support behind Obama's alternative-fuels agenda.

But meh, people will bitch about people bitching about bitching. /em rides off in his high horse.

[Kuya]

Psst. I'll feed you a line: "Failing to contest oil drilling in the name of paranoid environmentalism doesn't make us traitors to liberalism Kuya, it just makes us traitors to quick twitch paranoid environmentalism which I think I'm okay with!". See that way Kuya wouldn't have made you look like a half wit.

edit: Oh good, I didn't need to feed it to you after all. Could've done without the ambivalent posturing though.

They weren't very soft about it when Bush was around. But i am just making a big issue out of something that is weakly related, that is, that the democrats are much farther to the right than their base, and that the base concerns itself more with the fact that the republicans are bastards over, say, the fact that the democrats are latently neoliberal.

[Beckwin]

this is absolutely retarded because even if you throw republicans a bone they will bitch and obstruct no less. see the healthcare bill; by all measures it's a huge compromise yet not a single GOPer voted for it, and virtually all of them claimed it was a baby and grandma killing nazi program.

I really don't fucking like the logic of taking a step back in order to move forward with climate legislation, especially since the step back will do nothing in getting forward-thinking legislation passed.

In a way, I almost think this is a post healthreform bandaid so Obama can make the case he doesn't hate businesses/capitalism more than trying to get people onboard for environmental/energy measures.

[Cadsuane]

They weren't very soft about it when Bush was around. But i am just making a big issue out of something that is weakly related, that is, that the democrats are much farther to the right than their base, and that the base concerns itself more with the fact that the republicans are bastards over, say, the fact that the democrats are latently neoliberal.

And I'm just pointing out that it would've taken one sentence to stomp that notion from the thread, but instead everyone chose to inadvertantly confirm it.

[Kuya]

And i would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling Canadians.

edit: but yes, the rebuttal that liberals in america simply do not feel so strongly about the environment at least in regards to oil drilling that would explain the behaviour rather than the idea that american liberals are in a weak position. To counter that rebuttal, i would have brought in the healthcare debate, for example, and other examples to show that there is a pattern to that idea. That is, that liberals are much weaker than conservatives in america. However, there are a lot of explanations for why that is, ranging from the idea that liberals are too idealistic to the idea that the conservatives have successfully made the democrats co-opt their agenda.

[Beckwin]

I'd say it's more about excessively skillful conservative framing combined with maintaining a ravenously stupid base that will elect them no matter what which puts liberals at a disadvantage. Dem politicians have a much realer potential to turn away moderate liberals/centrists than the GOP turning away joe conservative.

Stronger rhetoric would benefit the Dems a lot, as well as more forceful legislating/executive action. Time to start trying to beat the GOP at framing.

[Cadsuane]

And i would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling Canadians.

edit: but yes, the rebuttal that liberals in america simply do not feel so strongly about the environment at least in regards to oil drilling that would explain the behaviour rather than the idea that american liberals are in a weak position. To counter that rebuttal, i would have brought in the healthcare debate, for example, and other examples to show that there is a pattern to that idea. That is, that liberals are much weaker than conservatives in america. However, there are a lot of explanations for why that is, ranging from the idea that liberals are too idealistic to the idea that the conservatives have successfully made the democrats co-opt their agenda.

Oh yes, hypothetically that counter would have worked too, though it's moot since you've already been proven correct, and it would be at the cost of abandoning the oil drilling discussion which is clearly going to happen anyway since Obama's name was in the headline. That raises the question of whether we'd prefer a derail into right left dichotomy analysis or a politically agnostic one about oil dependence and alternative energy.

[Beckwin]

it's a step backwards to keep fostering conditions for sustained oil consumption when you're supposed to be pushing alternative sources. obama did much better when he announced a new nuclear plant- it's something conservatives and a considerable portion of liberals agree on, and the timeframe for it being productive is roughly on par with new offshore drilling, yet isn't contingent on the ebb and flow of oil markets for being a profitable venture.

pushing more nuclear instead of this drilling would've been much better all around- he gets real credit for pushing American energy production while showing some environmental consciousness and it'd still be tough for conservatives to claim he wasn't doing anything or that all the sudden nuclear power is bad.

[Kuya]

When it comes to oil and alternative energy, i always hear the same response provided. That we need to invest in alternative energy in order to decrease the dependence on oil. I don't know how politically plausible that would be, because it would require major government investment and adventure and the American public does not seem used to or fond of that strategy unless its government investment in weapons technologies.

Oil dependence is a problem for America because it is part of what fuels American interference in the sovereignty of foreign nations near oil and gas resources. Except for anti-imperialist americans, i am not so sure there is much interest in in the public because it is not well known what the US government does and perhaps they simply do not care what they do to foreign peoples. Take Iran around 1953 as an example. What i do often notice, and this is what Juan Cole mentions in his book Engaging the Muslim World, that part of the interest some americans have in oil independence is drenched in anti-muslim sentiment. Then there is also the issue of the environmental consequences of continuing to use oil and such.

To make a quick list:

Some americans worry about the environmental damage of oil and want alternative energies because of it.

Others worry more about dependence on foreign oil and drilling locally is enough of a solution to them.

Others are concerned that oil is one of the dynamos of american imperial overstretch.

Others are simply worried about the volatility of oil.

To someone like me who cares more about ending american imperial meddling and to a lesser extent decreasing environmental damage, massive funding of alternative energies would be the goal, however the consequence of that is an increase in oil (and perhaps gas) prices and thus an increase in the cost of living for americans (this would also include territories like Puerto Rico). One could either make the argument that americans either need to deal with higher energy prices as an inevitable reality and argue that energy prices are actually artificially kept low, or that we need to invest more in other sources of oil and gas near the US (whether it be because you hate muzzies or because you don't think americans will ever accept higher energy prices- like i do- and thus we have no choice but to drill where we can).

[Cadsuane]

it's a step backwards to keep fostering conditions for sustained oil consumption when you're supposed to be pushing alternative sources. obama did much better when he announced a new nuclear plant- it's something conservatives and a considerable portion of liberals agree on, and the timeframe for it being productive is roughly on par with new offshore drilling, yet isn't contingent on the ebb and flow of oil markets for being a profitable venture.

pushing more nuclear instead of this drilling would've been much better all around- he gets real credit for pushing American energy production while showing some environmental consciousness and it'd still be tough for conservatives to claim he wasn't doing anything or that all the sudden nuclear power is bad.

Oversimplified. Nuclear replaces geothermal, hydroelectric, and natural gas but can not solve the problems that combustion engines do. Propping up nuclear power or any other alternative energy source as a replacement for oil or biofuel is a fallacy until that fact changes, and since fossil fuels are only rarely used in centralized power production anyway, it's dubious that the use of nuclear power plants even significantly mitigates oil dependence.

[Bingbong]

American public does not seem used to or fond of that strategy unless its government investment in weapons technologies.

Wait wut?

http://en.wilogo.com/blog/wp-content...ersaire_50.jpg

Adventure, check
Government investment, check
Weapons...
And yes, Public support of Nasa has been waining, however, it's still operational, and has been for over 50 years.