Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
|
"Really?"
Yes, really.
RIROCKHOUND, forgive me, but I'm not going to say that Obama is oil-friendly, just because the Huffington Post says so. You cannot get more biased than the Huffington Post.
I could easily post stories from the Big Oil lobbyists talking about every drilling permit that Obama has denied, and how he has dragged his feet on the Canadian pipeline.
You need to consider both sides.
In any event, I never said Obama eliminated all production. I said he has prevented the oil companies from doing much of what they want to do, and that's true. If you want to learn if that's true, ask someone besides Ariana Huffington. If you're getting your news there, that explains quite a bit. Did you let your subscription to The Daily Worker expire?
Tragically, we cannot eliminate things like oil spills, no more than we can eliminate car accidents. Reasonable oversight is obviously necessary to prevent what is preventable. But with the pipeline, Obama has made it clear that no decision will be made until afetr November 2012. Why do YOU think he says that? Is it because the oversight takes precisely that long, or could the election have something to do with it.
I've heard many strange things on this forum. I never thought I'd hear the liberals deny that Obama is hindering oil production. If that's the case, liberals would have no valid concern for conservatives being in the pocket of big oil companies. would they? But I hear that all the time. Unlike you and Spence and Zimmy, I'm honest enough to admit that conservatives are going to produce more domestic oil than Obama would. I won't deny that reality just to make us seem different than what we are.
Threaded Mode