Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Spill, Baby, Spill!

Wow. We have uber-conservatives like Rush Limbaugh calling the Gulf Oil Spill "Obama's Katrina," and the infamous Michael "Brownie" Brown opining on FOX News that the President "delayed" on purpose for political gain:

I think the delay was this: It’s pure politics. This president has never supported big oil. He has never supported offshore drilling. And now he has an excuse to shut it back down.
Of course, the whole idea of a "delay" that is similar to President Bush's on Katrina is ludicrous. In the first place, as Media Matters has thoroughly documented, there was no "delay" by the Administration, especially in light of the information provided by BP in the early days of the spill. In the second place, Hello Capitalists! The BP rig was PRIVATELY OWNED, unlike the levees.

But wait, there's more . . .

Sarah Palin, the half-term former Governor of Alaska (there's a lot of stress running a sparsely occupied state, you know) still believes that the ANSWER to all our problems is to DRILL, BABY DRILL . . . according to the New Orleans Times-Picayune and the Los Angeles Times. The Times reports:

The Alaskan who made "Drill, baby, drill" a standard term in the modern American political lexicon says the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, potentially the worst ever off-shore from American coastlines, is no cause for giving up on off-shore drilling.

Sarah Palin, whose home state suffered the worst spill before this, the Exxon Valdez incident in 1989, has reached out to the 1.5 million followers of her Facebook page with an expression of sympathy for the working people along the gulf facing loss of livelihood.

* * * *

Yet, Palin contends, "even with the strictest oversight in the world, accidents still happen. No human endeavor is ever without risk -- whether it's sending a man to the moon or extracting the necessary resources to fuel our civilization.

"I repeat the slogan 'drill here, drill now' not out of naivete or disregard for the tragic consequences of oil spills.... I continue to believe in it because increased domestic oil production will make us a more secure, prosperous, and peaceful nation."



Jim said...

OK, so we stop drilling. What's your alternative for the near future?

Jim Craig said...

Did I say STOP drilling? There's a difference between doing what we are doing now, and the increased effort that Ms. Palin supports.

Ricky Bishop said...

The Problem is Obama would rather point fingers at who is to blame than deal with the problem. Yes, Sarah is right this was a horrible accident, but we do not stop drilling because of it. We did not stop making cars after auto maker fault crashes occurred, we learned from the mistakes to ensure the problem does not occur again. As Sarah states, if we do not drill here, now, our country is less safe because we are too dependent on others for oil.

Tom Wright said...

I don't mind drilling as long as there is strong government oversight -- if it's such a national security priority, then I believe it requires powerful supervisory checks and balances. But a lot on the Right seem to feel this is the only answer or the top answer to our questions on energy independence. And I find that foolish. And I really don't believe people like Sarah Palin give a flying damn about Mississippi fishermen.

Matt Eichelberger said...

I think many people are falling for the false choice being pushed by Republicans on this issue. It's not an either-or proposition. We don't stop drilling under anyone's plan. In fact, President Obama's energy plan starts with an increase domestic oil production in the short term. (He wants to place more oil in our reserves than we import in 10 years.) That doesn't mean we have to be irresponsible about it, though. One of the main reasons the Deepwater Horizon gusher is difficult to control is that it's a mile underwater. Perhaps we should re-evaluate our ability to safely drill in deep water. That doesn't mean we stop; it just means we need to make sure we can do it safely before we continue.

Second, Obama wants to make alternative energy a national priority. The goal is for 25% of U.S. energy consumption to be "green" by 2025. That doesn't eliminate the need for domestic oil, but it certainly drives down the demand for foreign oil.

Which is the point, isn't it? The real end game? Every time politicians discuss the possibility of increased regulations on drilling, folks on the far right start talking about national security, and how we have to be energy independent. Well, what on earth could make us more secure than being able to tell the nutjobs in the Middle East and in Venezuela to go drink their damned oil? No matter how much we "drill, baby, drill," we'll still be dependent on foreign oil without alternative energy.