Practically Speaking

The whole Outer Continental Shelf drilling discussion is such a case of wishful thinking.  Here is your government's analysis:

"The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017. Total domestic production of crude oil from 2012 through 2030 in the OCS access case is projected to be 1.6 percent higher than in the reference case, and 3 percent higher in 2030 alone, at 5.6 million barrels per day. For the lower 48 OCS, annual crude oil production in 2030 is projected to be 7 percent higher—2.4 million barrels per day in the OCS access case compared with 2.2 million barrels per day in the reference case (Figure 20). Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant."  Full quote at:

www.eia.doe.gov/.../ongr.html

On the other hand, aggressive conservation can help today and tomorrow.  Slow down, coast to the light, pump up your tires, dump the SUV, etc. etc. will help more than drilling.  The key point, Kyle, is that you and your pro-drilling friends distract us from the real task at hand. We have 4% of the world's population, but use 25% of the energy resources.  We also have incredible technological know-how that could make us the net exporter of renewable technology. Ten years from now, we should be rapidly reducing our dependence of oil (foreign or otherwise), not waiting for a few drops to come from the OCS.

So are we really better off with the old republican telling us to rely on the meager supplies off-shore, or should we try to lead the world away from the oil-based economy?  Should we let McCain tell us that an easy fix is at hand, or have Obama lead us to do the hard work we must do?

Kyle's reply: What if you already do inflate your tires properly, coast to the light, take off slowly, conserve trips, don't drive a SUV, etc.?

I am for opening drilling off shore and on land. The oil shale deposits are clean oil and are reportedly quite large. I don't see why it always has to be "inflate your tires" and do nothing else for the democrats. Why not do everything we can?

Some people attribute the price of oil dropping recently to Americans conserving a few percentage points. If such a little amount can influence oil prices, why not drill more and increase the supply? We should have been doing this all along. 

Other developing countries are going to be using more and more oil. Conservation alone won't solve the problem.

You are right about our incredible technology. We can be working on cleaner gasoline/diesel burning cars and trucks. I heard the new diesels will be emitting very clean air. (I don't think that is necessary, but it shows it can be done.)
 

Kyle, I had a little extra time so I went to your Mark Levin link, then to "Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism."  What a frightening vision Obama has for the United States.  What has happened to our democracy that Americans are falling for his Socialist plans?  Obama's followers should just move to Cuba and leave the United States alone.  There are plenty of European countries to choose from too.

I'm glad, Kyle, that you're doing the right things, but it will take a concerted effort by all to drop our overall usage.  We will need polical leadership to get there, and misleading the people into believing that off-shore drilling will solve our problems is wrong.  You would help your country more by dropping references to a silly petition about drilling that solves nothing.

Sadly, Americans have a short attention span, and sometimes aren't too analytical.  We need the honest truth about a path to energy independence, and no one in the know believes that we can drill our way out. Make no mistake:  McCain is pandering on this one, and Obama is speaking the truth, even though McCain has the feel-good solution.

Kyle's reply: Would that "concerted effort by all to drop our overall usage" include Al Gore and those who go to see him? 

Al Gore is a great American.  He has sent a message to the world that our current path will lead to ruin.

Your link nibbles at the edges.  Yes, people do run too much A/C., and yes, Al Gore gets around in jets.  However, some arriving by cab may not even own a car, and may often get around by public transportation.  They should not be criticized for riding a cab one day when their overall carbon footprint may be smaller than yours or mine.  The smug narrator has too little information to pass judgement.  To suggest that European unemployment is solely tied to energy costs is purely simplistic.  

We do need to make better decisions, which is why Al Gore took steps to markedly reduce energy use in his home.

This is still no excuse for John McCain advocating a fairy tale as a solution to our energy needs.  There is still no justification for silly petitions to drill more.  McCain is still wrong, Obama is still right.

Kyle's reply: This is America. So far, you still have the right to voice your opinions. I just don't share them.

Your devotion to Al Gore is amazing. Your comment that McCain is "advocating a fairy tale [in drilling] as a solution to our energy needs." but previously cite Gore "taking steps to markedly reduce energy use in his home." is pretty ironic:

"The new report shows Gore actually increased his energy use despite all the supposed efforts to make that ol' carbon footprint equal "zero."

In the year since Al Gore took steps to make his home more energy-efficient, the former Vice President’s home energy use surged more than 10%, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research."

Since the vast majority of Americans advocate domestic drilling, I don't consider petitioning our congress to bring domestic drilling to a vote and act on our behalf "silly." 

. .

Why are the Baby Boomers (BB) flocking to Obama, it's simple, they are lazy. Obama is a socialist and is all in favor of things that BB must have, due to their incredible self indulgent lifestyles. Let me illustrate:

1) Health Care: Obama wants Nationalized Health Care. For many BB they are in bad shape when it comes to health care. Many BB want to retire as early as possible (they need to drop out of their high stress jobs) but cant because their job provides their health insurance. So government must provide. Also studies indicate that the vast majority of BB have failed to purchase Long Term Care

Insurance so if they do get sick and need care they will have to pay for it themselves.

2) Retirement: The vast majority of BB have no where near the funds needed to continue on in the lifestyle that they live now and are not going to adjust their lifestyle one bit. So Obama needs to raise Social Security taxes to fund their lifestyles. He is in favor of raising the income threshold to over 250K to tax the rich to feed the boomers. So instead of changing their self indulgent lifestyles, they will vote for Obama who will take care of it for them.

3) Gas prices: Obama wants to nationalize the oil companies to confiscate their profits and reinvest them in politically correct technologies. While I am in favor of different energy sources Obama makes the US out to be the bad guys in this global debate. What about China? The Chinese government subsides the cost of gas to encourage its use. When gas in China is sold at well below market prices it only encourages wasteful consumtion. All Wisconsinites could park their cars for a week and not drive at all and it would not effect world consumption because of India and China. So we need to find our own reserves and begin the process of transitioning to a new energy source. Look to Brazil as a country who have taken the needed steps to find their own oil reserves and provide for themselves. They should be the model we follow.

In conclusion, Obama provides easy answers to BB who have taken the easy way out for much of their lives and McCain represents the generation who raised these self indulgent brats. I hope that McCain wins and people realize that there is no easy answers and that we need to get back to hard work and sacrifice to keep America the great country it is.

Kyle's reply: Thanks for your comments, but please don't lump all of us Baby Boomers together! I am a BB and I am a Constitutional Conservative and very much against Obama because of his socialist stances.  

Great comments, Irwin.  But like Kyle, I'm also a baby boomer.  I think you have to revise your "Baby Boomers" to the "entitlement generation" or something that came along after us.

In reading your comments, it hit me how much Obama sounds like Hugo Chavez.  In my research, I found Obama closely linked to Saul Alinsky and the Industrial Areas Foundation.  Some of Obama's community organizing was based in this radical left-wing group.  They work under many different names, but their aim is Socialism.

Perhaps this would be a good time to refocus this discussion.  We've talked about older folks and entitlement, and air conditioning in waiting limos.  What about our energy future?

Check this out:www.time.com/.../0,8599,1829354,00.html

Turns out, Obama was right.  We can conserve and tackle our energy problems now, or capitulate to the oil companies to get a small amount of oil in 20 years.

With glee, the McCain camp is giving away tire gauges for a $25 donation.  It seems to be important to make fun of conservation, the only technology that can help in 2008, or 2009, or 2010.  

Skip your conservative or liberal bias.  Which candidate can help now?  Hint:  misguided attacks from John McCain won't get us anywhere.