oldguy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,817
- Likes
- 78
- Points
- 48
Quite the contrary, they oppose the moratorium.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...resented-views-justify-offshore-drilling-ban/
So, what....Is this just a silly mistake on Mr. Salazar's part? That seems like a stretch to me. Seems a lot closer to flat out lying to the President. He provided a report that showed, to any reasonable person, that oil industry experts were in favor of the moratorium.
Let's have a show of hands. How many of you think that you should not alter a signed document without acknowledgement by the people that signed it?
The moratorium will create a lot of hardship for the people along the Gulf Coast. Those oil families will have to find (probably lower paying) new jobs during a time of double digit unemployment. They will be paying less in taxes, which doesn't help with this country's budget crisis. Of course there will be lots of those folks that won't find jobs, and they'll have to start taking from the government, instead of giving in the form of taxes.
I'm no expert on the oil industry, but seems like having the floating rigs move on to someplace they are needed is not a good thing for the US.
This seems like it would be story that people should know about, I think. I checked the Register Guard, nada. Was this reported in the Oregonian?
Go Blazers
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...resented-views-justify-offshore-drilling-ban/
The seven experts who advised President Obama on how to deal with offshore drilling safety after the Deepwater Horizon explosion are accusing his administration of misrepresenting their views to make it appear that they supported a six-month drilling moratorium -- something they actually oppose.
The experts, recommended by the National Academy of Engineering, say Interior Secretary Ken Salazar modified their report last month, after they signed it, to include two paragraphs calling for the moratorium on existing drilling and new permits.
Salazar's report to Obama said a panel of seven experts "peer reviewed" his recommendations, which included a six-month moratorium on permits for new wells being drilled using floating rigs and an immediate halt to drilling operations.
"None of us actually reviewed the memorandum as it is in the report," oil expert Ken Arnold told Fox News. "What was in the report at the time it was reviewed was quite a bit different in its impact to what there is now. So we wanted to distance ourselves from that recommendation."
Salazar apologized to those experts Thursday. ...
So, what....Is this just a silly mistake on Mr. Salazar's part? That seems like a stretch to me. Seems a lot closer to flat out lying to the President. He provided a report that showed, to any reasonable person, that oil industry experts were in favor of the moratorium.
Let's have a show of hands. How many of you think that you should not alter a signed document without acknowledgement by the people that signed it?
The moratorium will create a lot of hardship for the people along the Gulf Coast. Those oil families will have to find (probably lower paying) new jobs during a time of double digit unemployment. They will be paying less in taxes, which doesn't help with this country's budget crisis. Of course there will be lots of those folks that won't find jobs, and they'll have to start taking from the government, instead of giving in the form of taxes.
I'm no expert on the oil industry, but seems like having the floating rigs move on to someplace they are needed is not a good thing for the US.
This seems like it would be story that people should know about, I think. I checked the Register Guard, nada. Was this reported in the Oregonian?
Go Blazers
