What was he thinking? Or, more to the point, what was the group around him - his advisers- thinking when they scheduled an address from the Oval Office to speak about the Gulf oil spill? He was seated behind his desk and was obviously not comfortable with the arrangement. This is a man who stands and reads a teleprompter. He gestured with his hands, non stop, which made him look nervous and distracted the viewer. It is said that his advisers were trying to conjure up the recollection of the fireside chats given by FDR. The difference? FDR actually gave his ideas and solutions to the nation's pressing problems. FDR was a comforting figure to nervous Americans, while this is clearly not the case with Obama. His is a cold, detached persona.
This was the first address from the Oval Office by this president and it was a wasted opportunity.
The substance of the address was odd. There was no 'there' there. The president started out with the war talk with how the disaster will be treated.
The continued whining about the previous administration is just too much. It continues now into the middle of the second year of a four year term. His swipe during last night's address was claiming that "for over a decade" the MMS was riddled with corruption and lax regulation enforcement. That may be true of the agency but if Team Obama is chock full of the smartest people on the planet, why is their reform so slow? Why did the MMS, led by a director Obama chose, approved BP's drilling plans? Why was Barack Obama the recipient of the highest amount of oil industry contributions, ever? There is no doubt that MMS needed reform measures taken. However, to think the solution is more bureaucracy with yet another commission and more czars brought in will not help, it will hinder the reforms. The oil drilling industry is the most regulated and taxed industry in our country today. If the current regulations on the books aren't being adhered to, what good are more layered on top of those already in place?
The predictable whining about the previous administration shows the president to be a very small man. He asked for the job of president. He promised he was up to the job - that he had the answers needed to solve the problems presented to him. He has yet to move from campaign mode into leading the nation.
Last night's address was not the time to talk, in vague terms, of the cap and tax legislation he hopes to pass as new energy policy. Not only is that legislation vastly unpopular and shown to be a job killer, he still does not speak in concrete terms about how the changes would be of benefit to the consumer. All we hear from him is that 'sacrifices' will have to be made. That is code talk for higher taxes and more pain by the taxpayer already struggling to keep up with the current economic conditions.
From Roger Simon at Pajamas Media: Also not in evidence was the most serious solution to the problem — nuclear energy. We had the usual palaver about solar and wind, but no reference to the energy source employed so successfully by the French and the Japanese, the one source that could change the situation with some rapidity. Obama probably didn’t want to mention it because his left would be offended. Again, frightened.
Still, he managed to recite that litany of “clean” energy sources, following the by now nauseatingly familiar Rahm Emanuel dictum about never missing a good crisis. No mention, of course, of the studies that indicate wind energy causes more environmental damage than it cures. Or that solar would require we cover half the world with panels in order to generate sufficient electricity to power society. This isn’t about science. It’s about pose.
No mention either of what every one of us, if we are being honest, knows: No oil. No modern life.
Oil is not just used for gas in your car's tank. It is used in almost everything you purchase. To advocate the elimination of its production is so ignorant it is laughable. Sure, it's fun and cool for those outside of the drilling industry to make 'big oil' the enemy but it is just downright silly and anyone suggesting otherwise is not to be taken seriously. It's a simple as that.
Green energy is decades away, if ever. Solar panels require too many of them to be of use for anything other than a small space. And, yes, petroleum is used in their production. Wind machines are proving to be very damaging to the environment and flying creatures. Guess what is needed for wind production? Yes, that's correct - petroleum.
Natural gas is a common sense solution. We are geared up for it. Natural gas is produced by drilling for oil, too. And, our nation has an overabundance of the stuff. Why not set about converting to natural gas?