Obama: Drill, Brazil, Drill!

Discussion in 'Economics' started by Tom B, Mar 22, 2011.

  1. Tom B

    Tom B

    Obama: Drill, Brazil, Drill!
    Posted 03/21/2011 07:08 PM ET

    Energy Policy: While leaving U.S. oil and jobs in the ground, our itinerant president tells a South American neighbor that we'll help it develop its offshore resources so we can one day import its oil. WHAT?!?

    With Japan staggered by a natural disaster and a nuclear crisis, cruise missiles launched against Libya in our third Middle East conflict and a majority of U.S. senators complaining about a lack of leadership on the budget, President Obama decided it would be a good time to schmooze with Brazilians.

    His "What, me worry?" presidency has given both Americans and our allies plenty to worry about. But in the process of making nice with Brazil, Obama made a mind-boggling announcement that should make even his most loyal supporter cringe:

    We will help Brazil develop its offshore oil so we can one day import it.

    We have noted this double standard before, particularly when — at a time when the president was railing against tax incentives for U.S. oil companies — we supported the U.S. Export-Import Bank's plan to lend $2 billion to Brazil's state-run Petrobras with the promise of more to follow.

    Now, with a seven-year offshore drilling ban in effect off of both coasts, on Alaska's continental shelf and in much of the Gulf of Mexico — and a de facto moratorium covering the rest — Obama tells the Brazilians:

    "We want to help you with the technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely. And when you're ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers."

    Obama wants to develop Brazilian offshore oil to help the Brazilian economy create jobs for Brazilian workers while Americans are left unemployed in the face of skyrocketing energy prices by an administration that despises fossil fuels as a threat to the environment and wants to increase our dependency on foreign oil.

    Obama said he chose Brazil to kick off his first-ever visit to South America in recognition of that country's ascendancy. He has also highlighted one of the reasons for America's decline — an energy policy that through the creation of an artificial shortage of fossil fuels makes prices "necessarily skyrocket" to foster his green energy agenda.

    In an op-ed in USA Today explaining his trip, Obama opined: "Brazil holds recently discovered oil reserves that could be far larger than ours. And as we seek to increase secure-energy supplies, we look forward to developing a strategic energy partnership."

  2. Odumbo not only wants to "spread the wealth around" from the "producers" and "doers" to the "vote Democrat and get a check" have-nots in the US... he also wants to spread America's wealth to other countries.

    Weakens us economically as well as in other ways.

    Isn't there a word for someone who harms and betrays his own country?

  3. Tom B

    Tom B

    I agree. This policy makes no sense.
  4. For the last 40 years each American president got elected on promising cutting down foreign dependence on oil.

    For the last 40 years US dependency on foreign oil has done nothing but grow.

    This leaves us with a couple of possibilities.

    - There simply is no alternative.

    - It is bipartisan tactic to drain foreign oil reserves paying for them with funny money.

    - Oil companies dictate energy policy regardless of who is in charge.

    Did I miss an option?
  5. As long as the USA is buying foreign oil, why not at least buy it from a friendly ally? Canada has the second largest proven oil reserves in the world, and is already the #1 oil exporter to the USA. Would you rather buy oil from Canada or Saudi Arabia?

    Support for the Keystone Pipeline will help:

  6. The tar sands (I actually have exposure to them trough COS) are quite controversial really and I don't believe you have to be a Green veganist to question some parts of the process wouldnt you agree?
  7. I would agree. I am no environmental expert though, so I can't really comment on specifics. What I do know is that much of the anti-oil sands rhetoric is somewhat exaggerated. And new technologies are constantly improving the processes, making them more efficient and environmentally friendly. I get the sense through the Canadian media that companies involved are very concious of the need to limit the impact on the environment. The high price of oil is making research and development into this issue a viable undertaking.

    On the upside, there is no risk of an oil well blowing up, or an oil tanker leaking.
  8. Agreed.

    On another note...

    I once read the cost of the Afghan and Iraq war could have put solar power on the roof of every American household.

    I guess as a society as a whole responsibility must be taken for the choices made by each party be it citizens, politicians or businesess rather than placing the blame when predictable strains grow more obvious over time.
  9. If only government would come up with some sort of way to coerce citizens into using "clean" energy...some sort of tax perhaps...we'll even give it a catchy name. We'll call it carbon tax. :p :D
  10. #10     Mar 22, 2011