July 14, 2008
Reuters: Offshore Drilling Ban Revocation “Symbolic” [Dan Collins]

Why is it an empty gesture?

U.S. President George W. Bush plans to lift a ban on offshore drilling on Monday to combat soaring energy prices, a largely symbolic move unlikely to have any short-term impact on the high cost of gasoline.

Because it’s not a short-term solution.

25 Comments  :::   Post a comment »

  1. Comment by Sdferr on 7/14 @ 10:25 am #

    Q:Why did the Reuters headline cross the road?
    A:It didn’t.

  2. Comment by Urainium238 on 7/14 @ 10:28 am #

    They are really more checkers than chess players.

  3. Comment by royf on 7/14 @ 10:34 am #

    I just read that the Congressional ban expires in Sept, 2008. This should get very interesting, I suspect the Dems will be the cowards they are and just let it expire. But if they don’t it could radically change the election.

  4. Comment by syn on 7/14 @ 10:39 am #

    Isn’t a little late to be thinking short-term energy solutions after three decades of Democrats saying NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO ad nauseum to long-term solutions.

    What other country in the world has their very own citizens continually voting for politicians who systematically restrict all access to the country’s own natural resources?

    WE, in the America of the US, have screwed ourselves to the point of being out of Energy.

    A viagra pill won’t be enough to get it up.

  5. Comment by TheGeezer on 7/14 @ 10:43 am #

    The supreme idiocy of it all: true liberal energy beliefs revealed.

  6. Comment by Dan Collins on 7/14 @ 10:44 am #

    royf–

    Linky?

  7. Comment by dre on 7/14 @ 10:47 am #

    I found this:

    Congressional Off-Shore Drilling Ban Expires Sept. 30, 2008 — Unless Congress Renews
    Monday, July 14, 2008 | Kristinn

    Posted on Monday, July 14, 2008 12:17:01 PM by kristinn

    For those of us with limited knowledge of the ins and outs of the debate on off-shore drilling along American coastal waters, it is important to understand this fact:

    The ban by the U.S. Congress on off-shore drilling has to be imposed every fiscal year and is scheduled to expire Sept. 30, 2008.

    This explains President Bush’s announcement that he will repeal a separate executive order on off-shore drilling leaving only the Congressional ban in place.
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2045230/posts

  8. Comment by royf on 7/14 @ 10:49 am #

    Read it on a post by Kristinn on FreeRepublic

     http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2045230/posts

     

  9. Comment by happyfeet on 7/14 @ 10:50 am #

    Do you have a Reuters link Dan? I read AP’s short piece this morning. They said…

    White House press secretary Dana Perino says Bush is acting now in hopes of spurring Congress to act. So far, lawmakers have
    shown no interest in doing so.*

    But that’s wrong cause it’s only Democratic lawmakers that have shown no interest in producing more oil. NPR repeated the no interest thing verbatim too. Why do they lie like that? I think it makes it harder to be an informed citizen when they lie like that.

    Oh. That link is to a slightly updated piece but it’s still a lot mendacious.

  10. Comment by Karl on 7/14 @ 10:51 am #

    OT, but Dan-centric:

    Not only did the “civilian national security force” post get Insta-lanched, but it’s also Jonah-lanched.

  11. Comment by MayBee on 7/14 @ 10:53 am #

    Obama’s long-term, non-gimmicky solution is to send out another round of rebate checks.

  12. Comment by Dan Collins on 7/14 @ 10:56 am #

    Thanks, Karl.

  13. Comment by J Barton on 7/14 @ 10:57 am #

    Would someone care to look up how reuters referred to calls to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum reserve? Was these utterly symbolic and futile proposals referred to in the same way?

  14. Comment by St Wendeler on 7/14 @ 11:00 am #

    Won’t the expected increased production from lifting the ban force those evil speculators to trim their future forecasts? Although, with the Obamassiah and his disciples in Congress, they will resurrect the ban on the Third Day after the inauguration.

  15. Comment by happyfeet on 7/14 @ 11:01 am #

    OT some more: Karl, I want to jump all over that civilian national security thinger but the sourcing issue thing gives me pause. Here. Where exactly did that quote come from exactly?

  16. Comment by Christopher Taylor on 7/14 @ 11:07 am #

    If it was up to President Bush to do that before what the hell was he waiting for?

  17. Comment by happyfeet on 7/14 @ 11:09 am #

    Here is the latest Reuters article.

    Bush’s move is largely symbolic, however, because Congress too has a ban on offshore drilling and while it expires on September 30, it could be renewed.

  18. Comment by happyfeet on 7/14 @ 11:10 am #

    Oh. Reuters answers Christopher’s question kind of.

    White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said initially the president wanted to move in concert with Congress but decided to go ahead alone after being rebuffed by Democratic leaders and a relentless upward spike in energy prices.

  19. Comment by happyfeet on 7/14 @ 11:13 am #

    Neither the AP or Reuters has an estimate of how many jobs offshore drilling would create. I think the answer is probably more, but it’s probably a good idea to wait until the AP or Reuters finishes investigating before going out on a limb like that.

  20. Comment by Rob Crawford on 7/14 @ 11:33 am #

    If it was up to President Bush to do that before what the hell was he waiting for?

    All he’s doing is rescinding an EO banning exploration. Actually taking the discoveries to production was banned by Congress.

  21. Comment by kelly on 7/14 @ 11:55 am #

    “Actually taking the discoveries to production was banned by Congress.”

    Now there’s a shocka.

  22. Comment by Dan Collins on 7/14 @ 12:09 pm #

    Thanks. I found the version I used.

  23. Comment by NukemHill on 7/14 @ 1:42 pm #

    Thus the narrative continues. Anything that provides a long-term solution that is not supported by the Dhimms is recast as an attempt to provide a short-term solution. A failure by its very definition.

    However, for anyone who understands Futures (and I only claim a superficial understanding–I’m in the process of exploring them more myself), they will see that a short-term impact is, in fact, in the offing. Because Futures are all about, you know, the future, if Futures buyers and sellers see that more oil will come out of these actions in the future then, interestingly enough, Futures prices will go down. And it is Futures prices on petroleum that is driving the high cost of gasoline. Period.

    Law of supply and demand, writ large. Econ 101, gang. But expecting news agencies to understand that is out of the question. And expecting Democrats to understand, and support, that is the very definition of insanity.

  24. Comment by Christopher Taylor on 7/14 @ 8:41 pm #

    It doesn’t matter what actual effect this will have it should have been done years ago.

  25. Trackback by Lesbian midget sex. on 8/12 @ 5:28 am #

    Midget lesbian thumbnails….

    Lesbian midget sex. Midget lesbian sex….

RSS feed for comments on this post.

TrackBack URI: http://proteinwisdom.com/wp-trackback.php?p=12847

Leave a comment

If you want to leave a feedback to this post or to some other user´s comment, simply fill out the form below.

(required)

(required)