Skip Nav
Relationships
9 Signs of a Man Who Will Never Stop Loving You
Sex
40 Sexy GIFs So NSFW They'll Get You Fired
Wedding Decor
47 Ways to Add Literary Charm to Your Wedding

Bush, Reid Drilling Each Other Over Oil, McCain Turns Green

Ah, the search for energy that doesn't come from a Red Bull. . . . When President Bush broached the subject of nixing the ban on offshore drilling this week, the idea fueled a whole gusher of tension. Here's where it stands today:

President Bush called out Democrats for parking in the way of energy relief (via drilling) in his radio address this morning. Bush said:

One major deposit in the Rocky Mountain West alone would equal current annual oil imports for more than 100 years. Unfortunately, Democrats in Congress are standing in the way of further development. I ask them to reconsider their positions. If congressional leaders leave for the Fourth of July recess without taking action, they will need to explain why $4-a-gallon gasoline is not enough incentive for them to act.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says that Bush's claims of stonewalling are crude and baseless — if the president wants drilling, he doesn't even need Congress. To see why,

.

Reid says,

What the president is doing is unfair to the American people to indicate, 'We will let Congress do something about it.' He has the authority to do it himself. This is typical Bush White House politics. It's Orwellian. He has the power, with the signing of a pen, to release more options for offshore drilling — he has the power to do this.

Is it an energetic fight between Republicans and Democrats? For his part, John McCain announced a goal of creating 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030 this week, and the Times pointed out McCain's willingness to "break completely" from previous energy policies. To enhance his planet-saving cred, McCain released a powerfully pro-earth ad this week.

Is McCain the energetic answer to calls for, "Reform. Prosperity. Peace?" Who's on the right side of this oil-fueled debate?

Source

Around The Web
Homemade Liquid Laundry Detergent
All-in-One Laundry Bombs
Paint Sample Crafts
DIY Cleaning Products

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

Join The Conversation
rabidmoon rabidmoon 7 years
Drilling for more oil as an energy solution is, quite frankly, a bandaid at best, and natural areas that could be targeted for drilling will not recover; meanwhile the oil produced would be a temporary measure amounting to little more than a few drops in a barrel that still will run out much sooner than people want to talk about. Not to mention the fact that when oil supplies actually DO start to dwindle, how do you think governments are going to react? India and China's use of oil is skyrocketing, not the opposite. Oil companies in the USA are already buying up water rights. Energy solutions are not to be found by drilling for more oil, ever. It was a finite source the first day they struck "Black gold" and it is still a finite source, only now its in its twilight days.
harmonyfrance harmonyfrance 7 years
I'll take one of each please.
harmonyfrance harmonyfrance 7 years
I'll take one of each please.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
Well I'm not sure where you've been stiletta but we are a consumer nation and have been increasingly so since the 1980's which would clearly indicate that we have been moving in a post industrial direction for the past twenty five years. Having cleared that up you're correct most industry needs oil for operation regardless. This is precisely why we are focused on reforming energy use for transportation as I mentioned above. This would provide more than enough oil for generations or at least until science yields another method of manufacturing.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
Well I'm not sure where you've been stiletta but we are a consumer nation and have been increasingly so since the 1980's which would clearly indicate that we have been moving in a post industrial direction for the past twenty five years. Having cleared that up you're correct most industry needs oil for operation regardless. This is precisely why we are focused on reforming energy use for transportation as I mentioned above. This would provide more than enough oil for generations or at least until science yields another method of manufacturing.
UnDave35 UnDave35 7 years
And we can see how well being a pre-industrial agrarian based society is doing for Mexico, and South America...
stiletta stiletta 7 years
If you are an industrialized nation you need oil. If you need oil, you have to drill for it. This isn't rocket science. When we are a post-industrialized nation, we'll need something else, but for now, it's either oil or the we can go back to being a pre-industrialized 19th century agrarian-based society.
raciccarone raciccarone 7 years
*governments ... obviously.
raciccarone raciccarone 7 years
I'll bet India and China will probably learn from our mistakes and move more quickly to oil alternatives. Their government's aren't as beholden to big oil as ours and are probably less likely to screw themselves the way we have.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
That is not my data GS that is a direct quote from a variety of news casts that I have watched over the past two weeks. From NBC, Fox, and CNN in their discussions about developing new oil fields. They all said in their discussions that we would not see product from those oil fields on a mass scale for at least ten years. Now the info could be wrong but I'm just going by what I've heard from a variety of sources. Having said that I guess my point is whether it’s 10 years or 3 years the end result is the same. We need to wean ourselves off of oil as our major energy source for transportation. China and India are only in the toddler stages of an industrial market revolution. When they learn how to run the draw on oil will break us all. I say its time we learn how to fly if we want to stay ahead.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
That is not my data GS that is a direct quote from a variety of news casts that I have watched over the past two weeks. From NBC, Fox, and CNN in their discussions about developing new oil fields. They all said in their discussions that we would not see product from those oil fields on a mass scale for at least ten years. Now the info could be wrong but I'm just going by what I've heard from a variety of sources. Having said that I guess my point is whether it’s 10 years or 3 years the end result is the same. We need to wean ourselves off of oil as our major energy source for transportation. China and India are only in the toddler stages of an industrial market revolution. When they learn how to run the draw on oil will break us all. I say its time we learn how to fly if we want to stay ahead.
Great-Sommelier Great-Sommelier 7 years
Hypno, the only problem I have with your post is that it in no way takes ten years to get the ball rolling with drilling. Being from Texas and having family in the oil business (our family has derricks) I have seen how quickly drilling can begin once oil is discovered.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
My question is why entrench our selves in at least a decade of sight development before we can even begin to draw and refine the oil when we have proven green technology literally waiting in the wings to take the stage? We must have faith in our ingenuity we must have faith in our ability to rise to occasion. This is a matter of will not wits. My room mate’s parents are visiting from England. The first thing out of their mouth when they say all the hullabaloo on the news about $4 per gallon + was we've been paying that for years, welcome to the real world America. I suggested this a few weeks ago on another article and as of Thursday night past Bill O'Reilly even said it on his show. Congress should mandate flex fuel production of new cars. If the technology has proven its worth then what in the world are we waiting for? I remember from that post as well there were a lot of people concerned about the flex fuel batteries and how bad they are for the environment once they've run their course. There is a new battery that has been developed in response to that point which has a longer life and is not as toxic as its predecessor. Honda and BMW each have mid sized sedans which are hydrogen powered as well. The options are here we simply need to turn our attention to them. Another point I made on another post is that 9 out of 10 people who own a vehicles do not keep up with standard maintenance which collectively has a huge impact on gasoline burned. My point is there is just so much we can do that there is no longer a reason to develop new oil fields other than we are either blind or indifferent to any alternative. I would like to think that we are not that thick headed.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
My question is why entrench our selves in at least a decade of sight development before we can even begin to draw and refine the oil when we have proven green technology literally waiting in the wings to take the stage? We must have faith in our ingenuity we must have faith in our ability to rise to occasion. This is a matter of will not wits. My room mate’s parents are visiting from England. The first thing out of their mouth when they say all the hullabaloo on the news about $4 per gallon + was we've been paying that for years, welcome to the real world America. I suggested this a few weeks ago on another article and as of Thursday night past Bill O'Reilly even said it on his show. Congress should mandate flex fuel production of new cars. If the technology has proven its worth then what in the world are we waiting for? I remember from that post as well there were a lot of people concerned about the flex fuel batteries and how bad they are for the environment once they've run their course. There is a new battery that has been developed in response to that point which has a longer life and is not as toxic as its predecessor. Honda and BMW each have mid sized sedans which are hydrogen powered as well. The options are here we simply need to turn our attention to them.Another point I made on another post is that 9 out of 10 people who own a vehicles do not keep up with standard maintenance which collectively has a huge impact on gasoline burned. My point is there is just so much we can do that there is no longer a reason to develop new oil fields other than we are either blind or indifferent to any alternative. I would like to think that we are not that thick headed.
Great-Sommelier Great-Sommelier 7 years
Go Georgie!
Great-Sommelier Great-Sommelier 7 years
Go Georgie!
rabidmoon rabidmoon 7 years
Ah ha ha ha ha, naughty, hypnoticmix! But.. soo funny. :D
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
The headline brings an image to mind that tickles me pink. Teehee.
jennifer76 jennifer76 7 years
Reid isn't taunting Republicans into drilling - he's completely lying. Yes, there is an executive ban that Bush needs to rescind. But, there is also a Congressional moratorium that will prevent him from drilling and exploration regardless of what he does with his pen. :oy: Typical BS.McCain's ad is a lot more specific than Obama's "this will be the moment the oceans slowed their rise and the earth began to heal blah blah blah".
jennifer76 jennifer76 7 years
Reid isn't taunting Republicans into drilling - he's completely lying. Yes, there is an executive ban that Bush needs to rescind. But, there is also a Congressional moratorium that will prevent him from drilling and exploration regardless of what he does with his pen. :oy: Typical BS. McCain's ad is a lot more specific than Obama's "this will be the moment the oceans slowed their rise and the earth began to heal blah blah blah".
stephley stephley 7 years
Yeah, but if Dems say 'bu!!sh*t' they get censored.
True-Song True-Song 7 years
I applaud the Republican use of the word "relief." Whenever they want to do something, they call it tax relief, energy relief. I don't usually agree with their positions, but their use of language is always impressive. ("Death tax," anyone?) Democrats, on the other hand, need to stop using the word "Orwellian." (I'm looking at you, Senators Reid and Kerry!) Yes, they usually use it correctly, and it's generally an apt description of the situation. But no one knows what it means, and it only fuels the arugula-eating, Volvo-driving stereotypes of the elitist left.
stephley stephley 7 years
Not one of these guys is on the 'right' side - Reid's taunting Bush to release the off-shore options, so that the oil gets drilled but the Dems can blame the Repubs... McCain's ad isn't powerfully pro-anything, it makes a couple of claims over pretty pictures. It's a lot of talk that amounts to nothing said.
Latest Love
X