Jay Bookman

By Bud Wiser

July 10, 2008 7:48 PM | Link to this

Typical negativism, Jay. Yeah, it won’t do anything today, tomorrow, or next year; but whenever it does start to kick in, it most certainly will be prior to our worthless Congress doing one single thing about the energy problem at all. I am all in favor of solar, wind, geothermal and nuclear power; nuclear plant technology is already here, and so are the others, but not in the capacities required to sustain the American economy. Hell, if Ted Kennedy can block the construction of windmills on Cape Cod where the family compound is located, just because it would ‘spoil the view’, then why in the name of God should anyone buy into any portion of the Dems ‘alternative energy’ plans? It becomes them telling us “do as I say do, not as I do”, and that doesn’t go very far with the average Joe.

My car runs on gas NOW, and since it does, I need gas NOW. Drill and pump until the other technologies become efficient enough to supplant oil-based energy, but I for one am not going to stand idly or silently by while the economy sinks into the crapper because Democrats steadfastly block any attempts at drilling.

What part of the 9% approval rating (the lowest in history since such polls have been taken) does the Democrat controlled Congress not understand? You naysayers here will boo hoo George Bush and blame him, as you do, for everything from global warming to diaper rash. Yeah, he holds some culpability, but the majority of blame for the fix we are in goes back 20-30 years of absolute do nothing by the Congress that we elect. Who is the more ignorant or self centered, the people we elect, or the people that elect them?

By Bud Wiser

July 10, 2008 7:55 PM | Link to this

Let me comment also about this statement you made….”: The dangers of drilling offshore have eased, but remain real. And the benefits of drilling offshore, while tangible, aren’t very big.”

Well, the benefits of drilling may not be very big, but a little something is a whole lot bigger than a lot of NOTHING.

And I feel that the vast majority of Americans would be willing to take the risk of drilling to reap the potential reward Note I said the vast majority here, not the screaming tree huggers, snail darter lovers, mussel protectors, fictional caribou holy hunting ground saviors, et al.

Doing something is as American as apple pie. This nation was built on doing something, instead of sitting on your a* doing nothing. Doing nothing is, well, French.

By Jay's brother

July 10, 2008 7:56 PM | Link to this

My beloved brother Jay—tsk, tsk. Didn’t they teach you to always present ALL the facts of a story in journalism school? I forget, you are an OPINION columnist—objectivity is not in your soul. So here is the FULL report from MMS and not your cherry-picked statements:

The fact is, by using U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) official standards as a guide the statement is not only true, it is remarkable, especially given the intensity and destruction of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

The facts are:

As of January 25, 2007, MMS identified 125 spills of petroleum products totaling 16,302 barrels that were lost from platforms, rigs, and pipelines on the Federal Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) as a result of damages from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005.

Those spills did not occur due to loss of control of the producing wells.

There were no major spills (2,381 barrels per spill or greater) according to USCG official standards.

The USCG defines offshore spills of less than 10,000 gallons (238 barrels) as “MINOR”; offshore spills of 10,000 to 99,999 gallons (238 to 2,380 barrels) as “MEDIUM”; and offshore spills of 100,000 gallons, (2,381 barrels) and greater as “MAJOR”.

According to a report on “Oil in the Sea” from the National Academy of Sciences (1995), far more oil enters the ocean from natural, underwater seeps than from offshore production platforms. In fact, the seeps introduce about 1700 barrels of oil a day into U.S. marine waters, which is about 150 times the amount from oil and gas activities.

Over the past 20 years, less than .001 percent of the oil produced in U.S. state and federal waters have been spilled.

The loss of oil from the Federal OCS wells themselves was minimal due to the successful operation of the safety valves that are required by the Minerals Management Service (MMS) to be installed on every well at least 100 feet below the ocean floor.

All facilities on the Outer Continental Shelf in areas threatened by the hurricanes are “shut in” prior to a storm’s arrival, meaning that pipelines are closed and platforms are secured for heavy weather.

Oil losses were mostly limited to the oil stored on platforms that were damaged or oil contained in individual segments of pipelines that were damaged.

There were no accounts of spills from facilities on the OCS that reached the shoreline, or oiled birds or mammals, or involved any large volumes of oil to be collected or cleaned up.

Brother, I suppose journalistic integrity is also not a requirement for an opinion columnist—don’t worry, the folks and I still love you, we’ll still pray for you.

By SL3

July 10, 2008 8:08 PM | Link to this

Mr. Bookman does the same hatchet job when he talks about the fairtax. He must be related to the Cox family to keep his job. Bookman needs to move to San Francisco where his opinions will be welcomed and agreed with. The AJC needs a more balanced editorial staff and one that does better research.

By JAY BOOKMAN

July 10, 2008 8:16 PM | Link to this

And how does what you wrote conflict with what I wrote, “Bro”

I too quoted the section stating that “response and recovery efforts kept the impacts to a minimum with no onshore impacts from these spill events.”

I also acknowledged that the dangers of offshore drilling have eased, which is why I am now willing to discuss opening add’l areas to drilling.

But the bottom line is that a risk remains, and the benefits are minor.

By Bud Wiser

July 10, 2008 8:28 PM | Link to this

Jay, I think that you and your brother should meet in a Steel Cage match, each equipped with large, feathery boas, and whip it out till the end.

By Blogfather

July 10, 2008 8:31 PM | Link to this

Nobody knows more about the oil business than Pickens. His television spots were very encouraging. He supports wind power. He has billions, and says he doesn’t need anymore money. He’s 80 years old. Maybe big oil is finally seeing the light.

This is why I say that the conservatives are obsolete. There’s simply no room in this country for those haters. Wootie and his blowfish bloggers will righteously end up on the trash heap of history.

Conservatism is dead as a door nail. Conservatism’s dog is dead. Conservatism’s inner child is dead. Conservatism’s mother is dead. Conservatism’s father is dead.

Conservatism is dead.

By Taxpayer

July 10, 2008 8:31 PM | Link to this

Bud, I just kept on reading and reading and waiting and waiting until I got to the end of your post and you closed with a question. Where were you going with all that other than pointing a [it’s 99% your fault] generic finger at the democrat politicians in Congress? If you want to pick a good starting point, try something like the Arab oil embargo and build off of that: If only oil had remained in short supply — then again, “Ifs and buts and candy and nuts…” Or, you could talk about the present and about how oil companies are now interested in returning to the US to drill for oil since they can make good money at $140/barrel on the investment they have to make upfront and that the oil companies would bail on the US in a heartbeat if there were a lower cost supply elsewhere like Iraq. You did get the point there, I hope. That is, the oil companies are OK with drilling here in the states at $140/barrel so there’s no cheap gas headed your way just because the oil companies return. After all, who in their right mind is going to set up rigs like Thunder Horse in the Gulf of Mexico if they can get more oil elsewhere quicker, with significantly less risk, startup cost, maintenance cost, etc. By the way, even without an oil spill, the loss of rigs such as Thunder Horse would still be catastrophic w.r.t. the price of oil due to the time and cost of replacing them and restoring the flow of oil. We need to be better prepared for the inevitable loss of that cheap and readily available oil. It is still cheap at $140/barrel and readily available but it won’t be forever.

By Blogfather

July 10, 2008 8:36 PM | Link to this

Nobody knows more about the oil business than Pickens. His television spots were very encouraging. He supports wind power. He has billions, and says he doesn’t need anymore money. He’s 80 years old. Maybe big oil is finally seeing the light.

This is why I say that the conservatives are obsolete. There’s simply no room in this country for those haters. Wootie and his blowfish bloggers will righteously end up on the trash heap of history.

Conservatism is dead as a door nail. Conservatism’s dog is dead. Conservatism’s inner child is dead. Conservatism’s mother is dead. Conservatism’s father is dead.

Conservatism is dead.

By Bud Wiser

July 10, 2008 8:43 PM | Link to this

All I want is for Congress to get off their fat, pork filled a*******e$, and do something. What they are really good at is telling the American people that they are protecting things the American people really don’t give a rat’s a$$ about, such as the semi-frozen tundra of the north, or the Florida beaches that virtually no one outside the state of Florida can afford to drive to, to see, to swim, to feed the sharks, whatever.

And if T. Boone Pickens is a hero to you because he is a multibillionaire, try reading Boone-T-Pickens-Jr and see if you can ‘get it’ about one of the most nefarious corporate raiders in American business history. He slobbers so badly over himself, about himself, that he comes off as one of the most ego-maniacal people of all time.

By JAY BOOKMAN

July 10, 2008 8:53 PM | Link to this

Gee, a conservative ranting about a nefarious corporate raider being one of the most egomaniacal people of all time?

As Victor says to Rick in “Casablanca,” “Welcome back to the fight. This time I know we are going to win.”

By Taxpayer

July 10, 2008 9:02 PM | Link to this

If I had 2 to 2.5 million invested at a retirement age of 54, I don’t think that I would be complaining about the cost of gas for a short trip to Florida — at least not until it topped $10/gallon. Of course, that’s IF I really had that kind of money stashed away and I knew anything at all about investing money.

By Noel Griese

July 10, 2008 9:08 PM | Link to this

The myth that there were no spills in the Gulf of Mexico as a result of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita actually originated with the American Petroleum Institute, which took out some full-page ads before the full extent of the damage from those hurricanes had been assessed. The misinformation in the API ads has been picked up many times by many people who should know better, including a politico turned Atlanta Gas Light exec. As editor of Energy Pipeline News, I pointed out the AGL exec error in a letter to the AJC editorial board around a year ago, but your editorial board chose not to print my letter, and the paper never got around to correcting the misinformation. So, Jay, I give you credit for reporting the MMS study. We’ve covered that report several times in Energy Pipeline News, which circulates to oil and gas pipeline executives around the world.

By Jay's brother

July 10, 2008 9:11 PM | Link to this

Ah my mischievous brother, your blog post indicate an unfavorable risk vs benefit ratio for new drilling. You seem to magnify the risk and minimize the benefit. Clearly, the MMS and Coast Guard seem to indicate there is no major current problem. But based on their FULL report, I would conclude the risks are minimal, although not none. Just as there a minimal risks of dying from air travel—but that doesn’t seem to scare most people away from flying.

As for the benefits, I am uncertain. It is hard to imagine that if the President and Congress authorized immediate offshore and ANWR drilling tomorrow, the same speculators who in part are driving crude prices up, will not cause a significant or dramatic drop in prices (after all it is SPECULATION on future supply). I have read conflicting thoughts from OBJECTIVE economists. You seemed to be married to the Greenpeace mantra and so CERTAIN of it.

It’s just that the same fear and scare tactics of the enviro-nuts are becoming tiresome. Give my love to Mom!

By Bud Wiser

July 10, 2008 9:16 PM | Link to this

Jay, I am conservative, but I can see legalized thievery anywhere. A history lesson here though, just to let you know that I can also rant about liberals also, with the facts as my guide…….

Franklin Delano. Roosevelt 32nd. President, Democrat Terms of Office March 4, 1933, to April 12, 1945

Franklin Delano. Roosevelt (Terms of Office March 4, 1933, to April 12, 1945), a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary,

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program,

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,

4.) That the money the participants put into the Independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month — and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to ‘Put Away’ — you may be interested in the following:

Dwight David Eisenhower 34th. President, Republican Term Of Office: January 20, 1953 to January 20, 1961

If I recall correctly, 1958 is the first year that Congress voted to remove funds from Social Security and put it into the General Fund for Congress to spend.

If I recall correctly, it was a Democratically Controlled Congress.

From what I understand, Congress logic at that time was that there was so much money in Social Security Fund that it would never run out/be used up for the purpose it was intended/set aside for.

Lyndon Baines Johnson 36th. President, Democrat Term Of Office: November 22, 1963 to January 20, 1969

Question: Which Political Party took Social Security from the Independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the General Fund so that Congress could spend it?

Answer: It was Lyndon B. Johnson (Democrat, Term Of Office: November 22, 1963 to January 20, 1969) and the democratically Controlled House and Senate.

Question: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax Deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

Answer: The Democratic Party

William Jefferson (Bill) Clinton 42nd. President Democrat Term of Office: January 20, 1993 to January 20, 2001

Albert Arnold (Al) Gore, Jr. 45th. Vice President Democrat Term of Office: January 20, 1993 to January 20, 2001

Question: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

Answer: The Democratic Party, with Albert Arnold Gore, Jr. (Al Gore) [Vice President Term of Office: January 20, 1993 to January 20, 2001] casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US .

James Earl Carter, Jr (Jimmy Carter) 39th. President, Democrat Term of Office: January 20, 1977 to January 20, 1981

Question: Which Political Party decided to start giving Annuity payments to immigrants?

Answer: That’s right! James Earl Carter, Jr. (Jimmy Carter) (Democrat, Term of Office: January 20, 1977 to January 20, 1981) and the Democratic Party.

Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it! Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!

CONGRESS GIVES THEMSELVES 100% OF THEIR SALARY FOR RETIREMENT FOREVER FOR ONLY SERVING ONE TERM!!! And they do not pay into Social Security.

T. Boone Pickens apparently modeled his raiding principles from the greatest thieves of them all…. the Democratic Party, and the Congress of the United States.

By Jay's brother

July 10, 2008 9:27 PM | Link to this

Again Noel, as I told Jay, please read the FULL MMS report. Not just the part you like.

As for Boone Pickens and Windfarms—sounds like a great idea, and I support it. The opponents?? Birdlovers!!! Yup, the 1700 windfarms in the Netherlands kill 50,000 birds per year, some rare migratory species and the animal rights nuts are none too happy. And guess where many of those migratory birds from Canada fly thru—yup right thru TX and OK. While many Dutchmen argue 50K birds is a paltry sum—the environuts won’t have it. Can’t blame that one on the vast right wing agenda.

By CJ

July 10, 2008 9:50 PM | Link to this

One word: speculators.

Okay, a few more words…

“Why is speculation one of the main causes of oil price increases? Over the last year, the price of oil has more than doubled, jumping from $54.71 in January 2007 to the current high of over $143 a barrel. This unprecedented price increase has occurred despite adequate supplies, no significant disruptions and a weak global economy [I read that worldwide, demand is only up a couple of percentage points—give or take]. In addition, over the last few weeks the volume of oil traded ‘on paper’ has been more than 20 times greater than the volume of oil actually consumed. This is akin to 20 people secretly bidding on a house with no intention of owning it. These factors indicate a severe imbalance in the marketplace and a disruption in the natural relationship between supply and demand.”

Check it out and send an e-mail to your Washington reps.

On Jay’s point, I’m against ending the existing drilling moratoriums, safe or not. The earth is warming, droughts are expanding and lengthening, the North Pole is melting, links in our food chain are dying and the sea is rising. Tried and true technology exists for us to reduce our dependence on all fossil fuels, foreign and domestic. We only need the will to make it happen.

By Craig

July 11, 2008 12:08 AM | Link to this

Bud your 9:16 is nonsense. You often post some intelligent stuff, then you make yourself out to be a goofball when you cut and paste the moronic emails you receive.

The lies about social security you post have been thoroughly debunked.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/sschanges.asp

By Bill

July 11, 2008 4:05 AM | Link to this

I totally appreciate the outrage over high gas prices as I myself am a rural resident who has no other choice but to spend what it takes to drive to work or shopping. The reality of the facts are though that even if we were to open the new coastal areas to drilling that are being suggested, any reliable data show that the impact on gas prices would only be about three cents per gallon staring in 10-15 years. This opportunistic push by the oil industry for coastal drilling as a supposed path to energy independence is a total farce. Regulation of energy speculators, increasing fuel standards and making more investments in green energy is a far more prudent choice. Our coastal economies rely on a clean and pristine coastline and the risk of catastrophic oil spills and regular oil platform discharge are not worth a possible few cents a gallon years down the road. Don’t believe the oily hype.

By Bud Wiser

July 11, 2008 6:34 AM | Link to this

Jay, I would be happy to give you her name and number, however not over this forum. If you send me an email I will reply.

By N-GA

July 11, 2008 6:39 AM | Link to this

Craig,

Thanks for saving me the trouble of posting the snopes link.

Jay, Perhaps you should do a column on misinformation going around the web. It would be easy to cite examples and also to inform people about the several websites dedicated to sorting fact from fiction.

Now we all know that we need not read any more of Bud Dumber’s posts.

By Mike

July 11, 2008 6:41 AM | Link to this

“In a last-ditch effort to fend off the disaster they long claimed could never come, President Bush and others are proposing to escalate our effort in Iraq, reportedly increasing our commitment by roughly 20,000 troops.It is a futile gesture, a vain attempt to salvage what is already lost.

Jay Bookman - 1/10/07”

Let’s all listen to Bookman. He’s never wrong!

At least he never admits that he’s wrong.

By hillbilly ragger

July 11, 2008 7:23 AM | Link to this

Mornin’, rational people.

You too, Mike @ 6.41. Bookman was right in 1/10/07. It was a futile gesture, it was throwing good money and lives after bad. Every dollar we throw down the toilet in Iraq is wasted, Mike. America knows that and wants someone who’ll change course.

Bookman was right then, and he’s right today in his column which, if you didn’t bother to check, is about offshore oil drilling, not Iraq.

But if we’re going to go off-topic and address character issues about AJC columnists, why don’t you explain why it’s ok for Jim Wooten to lie about Obama’s tax proposal (or, if you prefer, for Jim Wooten to pass along Saxby Chambliss’ lie, uncritically?)

And why don’t you explain why your hero Jim hasn’t had the balls to answer my repeated inquiries about this lie?

By Osama

July 11, 2008 7:28 AM | Link to this

Jay, just letting you know you left your Koran at our last terrorist meeting. I must say I liked your new Turban. Keep up the good work!

By hillbilly ragger

July 11, 2008 7:36 AM | Link to this

N-GA, Bud Wiser posted a similarly dishonest email about Obama a couple of days ago.

Any man who would copy/paste someone else’s screed that he knew to be false (as he surely did about this stupid Social Security thing he’d posted) is not worth reading.

Henceforth, if Bud attempts to address one of my posts, I’m simply going to link to his lie, posted here today. If I feel like it, that is.

Bud Wiser is a liar, and not a very good one, either.

By Mike

July 11, 2008 7:37 AM | Link to this

By hillbilly ragger “And why don’t you explain why your hero Jim hasn’t had the balls to answer my repeated inquiries about this lie?”

Maybe because he thinks you are an annoying and sad little person who has nothing to do with his life but hurl vile and childish names at strangers behind the veil of anonymity all day. Even Bookman has stated that he thinks you are vulgar and annoying. I know that I fee like a loser for even responding to you.

Just a hunch.

By Bud Wiser

July 11, 2008 7:46 AM | Link to this

I figured that the moronic left would refer to another moronic left at snopes.com as their Koran for the truth. Too bad that you were born without brains.

Snopes has for years never once claimed that their information was true, but that it was a compilation of their ‘facts’ from statements, etc., that fit their effort to debunk.

Your dependence on someone else’s research however, does not surprise anyone, as your tiny minds are spoonfed daily from the same garbage pail.

Enjoy.

By Choir

July 11, 2008 7:52 AM | Link to this

All together now, “Good Morning, Hillbilly Ragger!”

Are you preaching to me again.

By Gahorn

July 11, 2008 7:57 AM | Link to this

Jay, The ability to control these “spills” is part of the modern technology that makes offshore drilling friendly to the environment. Wake up!!

By hillbilly ragger

July 11, 2008 7:58 AM | Link to this

Mike @ 7.37, I’ve never encountered Bookman calling me “vulgar and annoying.” Actually, I can’t recall him ever addressing anything specific that I’d posted on his comments section, since I’m generally with him on a lot of topics (not always). Can you provide a cite, or at least tell me of the context in which this dressing-down supposedly occurred?

As for Wooten, actually, I’ve emailed Wooten directly on previous occasions and done some back and forth, back in the days before he had a blog. He used to be a good deal more reasonable than he is these days, and I think he’s become more radicalized since the Democrats won the 2006 mid-terms. The prospect of a President Obama seems to have turned him particularly shrill and mean-spirited. It’s a little sad; I’ve been reading him for the better part of a decade and I’ve expected better.

Back to my specific charge which he’s chosen not to address (although a simple, one-sentence correction to his post would’ve been sufficient) I’ve been willing to acknowledge that he might not have realized that Chambliss’ cite of 600,000 Georgians was bogus, and that Wooten isn’t technically a liar for having passed that misinformation along.

Anyway, I’ve gotta go put food on my family, but I will check back later.

By Dennis

July 11, 2008 8:08 AM | Link to this

I think that the problem here is the headline: “The facts about offshore drilling.”

I am almost certain that Jay’s original headline was: “The facts that I have personally selected because they support my position about offshore drilling.”

By Taxpayer

July 11, 2008 8:18 AM | Link to this

The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. If someone were simply interested in “the truth” then why is it necessary, at least in a court of law, to ask for it as though it exists in three distinct sets within a person’s mind and that the union of these sets shall, in their entirety, provide that which is sought. And, if that truly is the case, then what about Sybil. I think there may even be some “Sybils” running around here. I may even be a “Sybil” but how would I know.

I say “enough” with the truth. It is subject to too much subjectivity. I much prefer Mr. Bookman’s approach — dealing with the facts. For once you are given just the facts, you are free to create an infinite number of “truths” from them. That’s how the FairTax[tm] was created and life on mars and the abominable snowman and politicians and the never-ending oil supply right under our feet, inside a sphere of finite dimension, in a world where conservation of mass has yet to be refuted. But, I ramble.

By BoneHead

July 11, 2008 8:42 AM | Link to this

Let’s get to the real facts; the congress and senate are NOT oil people. Would you go to a lawyer for medical advice? If we said to the oil people here you can drill where you want, but we want oil on the US market in 1 year, I would bet you a million dollars they would do it. The other fact is that when the first rig starts to drill the OPEC cartel will drop their price; they want to make it unprofitable for us to drill. At today’s prices it is worth us drilling, but if the price was $100 a barrel it may not be. What do we have to lose, drill in my back yard if you want?

By Road Sholar

July 11, 2008 8:56 AM | Link to this

OK BWiser, let’s drill.But just a few facts that may alter your view:

Where do we get the ships that drill? All existing drill ships and new ones coming on line are booked already for the next 7 years.

World demand will eat up any increase in production.

Since drilling in other states’ coast lines suits your fancy, pardon the placement of high voltage lines over your house. They only have a slight chance of causing a problem for you, much like your view of a slight chance a spill will occur in an area you do not live in.

I share your disdain for Congress and Pelosi and Reid need to go. Replace them with someone who can grasp the real problems and find responsible solutions (I did not say all would like them).Get energy tax breaks for solar and wind technology development, manufacturing and installation (jobs!) now. Set a national goal for alternate renewable energy like Germany has (20% by 2020).

And by the way, you blog with the anger of Andy.Get over it!

By T

July 11, 2008 9:06 AM | Link to this

In the begining, I did not want drilling off shore or in ANWAR. Now, I feel that thought is just like the people in Florida that wanted to see the muscles live and HUMANS live without water. I drove by a gas station that said 4.19 and wanted to throw up. How can we really expect the average working class to be able to feed themselves? Our past ideas got us into this C@$#. No one candidate has said or no party has done C@#$%, but aide in the destruction of the average American society. Really, no one at all saw this coming. Really?

By TopCat

July 11, 2008 9:09 AM | Link to this

I think it is time to buy some stock in “SINOPEC” The Chinese have beaten us to the moon in this race, it’s called slant drilling. Why bother with Florida and the EPA when you can just lease all the territory you could want from a friendly communist country like Cuba, just sixty miles south of Key West. Now if we could just get them to build floating refineries we could all have this gas thingy’ beaten like a red headed step child!

By Daedalus

July 11, 2008 9:21 AM | Link to this

Hey Jay’s Brother — did you miss the part of the blog where Jay addressed the right-wing claim that:

“that there were no oil spills in the wake of the 2005 Gulf hurricanes.”

But there were spills, there are always some spills some from offshore drilling, and there were spills during Katrina. You even said so yourself.

I’m in favor of offshore drilling, and nuclear power, but I’m tired of right-wings nuts claiming that oil drilling doesn’t cause spills or that nuclear power is completely safe. It doesn’t and it isn’t. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t pursue those sources of energy — it just means we should be careful, very, very careful. And given the Bush track record on safety and enviro compliance, I’m not sure he’s the man to trust.

What amazes me about so called “conservatives” is that you don’t believe in conserving energy and oppose measures like raising the CAFE standards.

Had the GOP 7 years ago proposed off-shore drilling, drilling in the ANWR and nuclear power plant expansion — coupled with a robust conservation plan, raising the CAFE standards and then give the same corporate welfare to alternative energy producers that it does to big oil (or at least scrap the giveaways to big oil) I would have completely supported that — but you didn’t. It was just drill, drill, drill, so we can fuel up the hummers.

Sure the democrats are whacky and silly, but the GOP is corrupt and venal. What a great choice.

By T

July 11, 2008 9:24 AM | Link to this

TopCat

Interesting stuff.

By Morningstar

July 11, 2008 9:34 AM | Link to this

Thanks Jay. Great article.

Methinks many here to tend to ‘run on.’ It appears that ‘reasonable’ people would have no objections to drilling. However, to assume that drilling will fix it is absurd. To drill or not to drill?

Neither argument will save our hides. Time is of the essence, and doing nothing is called procrastination. I believe reasonable people would not object to drilling, if we can be assured safety measures are upheld. But drilling without going forward ‘in hot pursuit’ of alternative sources is plain crazy.

If you’re one of those who fail to see the need for alternative sources, better buy your kiddie a horse, or stop objecting to those bicycle trails. Everyone knows T Boone Perkins made a lot of money as a corporate raider, but what does that have to do with the price of tea (excuse me-oil)…? He has a plan, and one can’t deny he’s a good business person.

Here’s a quote from AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE magazine, one of my favorites. The article is OIL SLICK and was posted 6/17/08. (((The notion that The U.S. will have some secret stash that allows us to detach entirely from the global energy market is nonsense, as Senator McCain surely knows. Developing alternative sources would mean less need to draw from the global oil supply, which would be a good thing. But he’s looking for answers in drilling - and there’s no way that dumping a bit more into the big bathtub will eliminate our dependency))).

It’s time to be reasonable, and move forward with all we have.

By Jay's brother

July 11, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this

Daedalus, once again you misrepresent Jay and the facts. The Academy of Science reports that due to NATURAL seepage in the sea floor, there is 1700 barrels daily of crude spilled into US maritime waters. That translates into 620,500 barrels each year—far more than the 16,000 barrels spilled by oil platforms last year.

I suggest you hire John Edwards and Barack Obama and other lawyer politicians to file a class action tort against Mother Nature for willful negligence of the seashore

By HIllbilly Deluxe

July 11, 2008 9:47 AM | Link to this

Renewables.

By Taxpayer

July 11, 2008 10:10 AM | Link to this

Thunder Horse is certainly an engineering marvel in its own right. I mean to tell you, it’s truly impressive and well done based on what I’ve read about it. Yet, it is built by humans just like space shuttles, levees, etc. There are even calculations for failure probabilities in each and every one of these human “creations”. Why? Because any good engineer knows that he/she is human. That said, I was a little surprised to read that they had hydrogen embrittlement problems with some manifold welds. I’ll bet their engineers were as well. It reminds me of that bumper sticker, “It Happens”.

By The good side

July 11, 2008 10:11 AM | Link to this

Bud wiser!

Are you a real person or just plain lacking common sense!

You posts about changes in the social security system is just plain stupid.

Where were the Replublican on each of these important matters? They could not fila buster the law? Or they just voted for the law!

The Congress and the House can override and President law with a majoriy vote.

Stop lying so much youe life will become better!

First our the oil infostructure needs to be changed so we can have major installations of natural gas and ethanol gas pumps.

So far the oil companies have not allow their retail operations to install alternative energy pumps here in mass.

2nd your The oil majors will sell the oil to the highest bidder so even if we allow them to drill in Anwar America may not get that oil. The Oil majors already sell some of the oil from the Alaskian pipeline to Asia countries!

Last, Bush do his part in sending a bill that lifts the drilling morotorium in Anwar,oil shore and in the midwestern states.

Mr. Bush is urging Congress to take the lead!

Call Mr. Bush so he can introduce the bill for to lift the bill for drilling like he did for the war!

By CommunistAJC

July 11, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this

When are all of you going to wake up and understand that politicians and the media are both against drilling? Oil spills are going to happen. Get over it and clean up. We have more people and animals dying by way of car crashes than oil spills. More trees are cut down to provide paper for the meaningless AJC. How come no one talks about that? Jay, feel free to ban me, again, from commenting.

By JAY BOOKMAN

July 11, 2008 10:20 AM | Link to this

So “Brother,” that’s 1,700 barrels of natural seepage distributed across the more than 12,000 miles of US coastline, vs. far more concentrated manmade spills in more confined areas where it can do a lot more damage, right?

By Taxpayer

July 11, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this

I’m with Commie on this one. I say we ban running over bears with cars in Cobb County. It just isn’t right.

By zeke

July 11, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this

WHAT AN IDIOT! LIBERALISM IS DYING THANK GOD! LIOBERALISM IS THE BIGGEST ENEMY OF FREEDOM! LIBERALISM PREYS ON THE WANTS OF THE MASSES TO BE ABLE TO TAKE FROM THOSE WHO WORK HARD, RISK FAILURE AND BECOME SUCCESSFUL! LIBERALISM WILL EENTUALLY DIE FROM ATROPY!

By mel

July 11, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this

I guess with outlying areas in Alaska being overtaken gradually by the ocean, and ice melting in winter in Argentina, I guess we have nothing to worry about Yes, let’s continue to be the “instant gratification” society we continue to be and only worry about today. If you think drilling here will lower the price you really do have your heads in the sand.

Brazil produces ethenol and has done so for decates but they can’t export here because the US ethenol industry is subsidized and thus they have a hefty tariff on any imports. How did Brazil surpass us in this technology? Why don’t we have more solar power being used, lord knows, here in GA we have lots of sun, why not harness it? The major cities around the world have mass transit systems, why is it only now that GA is thinking about expansion now that gas prices are so high?

History is a great teacher, if only people in this country took the time to pay attention, but “closing the barn door after the horse has bolted” seems to be what we do well these days. I can still remember when people around the world only wanted to buy things made in America. What a shame. The greater Third World is now our banker, and our leaders are ok with that. All you have to do is Google who holds our debts and it should scare everyone into realizing we have a problem, and it’s not the “liberal media” misleading us.

How long will it take before we are taken seriously again…without having to bomb someone to get respect that is?

By Believer

July 11, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

Mr. Bookman,

I believe that “Jay’s Brother” is one of “those people” that also claims 1) that the economy is in a “soft patch”, 2) that since one tax cut increased tax revenues then more tax cuts will have the same effect, 3) that there was a real increase in household incomes that just happened to coincide with the so-called tax rebate, 4) etc. I also believe that he’s either corporate management material or a politician or both.

By CommunistAJC

July 11, 2008 10:48 AM | Link to this

Taxpayer, Bears in Cobb County?

By Bud Wiser

July 11, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this

‘The good side’ at 1011a.m. gets a failing grade in spelling.

By Jay's brother

July 11, 2008 11:06 AM | Link to this

Again my dear brother, you seem to be misrespresenting the facts. Is there risk?—of course, just like risk of airline crashes, car accidents, etc. But if a category 5 (it was a cat 5 when over water in the Gulf) hurricane Katrina could not topple these engineering marvels known as oil platforms, I think it’s safe to say it passed the ultimate saftey test. That is why I take issue with your initial blog post which was disingenuous at best, particularly when you read the entire reports from MMS and Coast Guard. But with high oil prices and economics which make it much more favorable for companies to drill domestically rather than import oil from volatile regions, why shouldn’t we drill here? Your saftey issue is an emotional canard—Katrina proved that. Increased domestic production is just a PART (but an important part) of the current energy crisis, along with conservation and “GREEN” energy. But those who think “GREEN” energy is right around the corner, are not realistic. That is why the “NO DRILL” mantra of the left is illogical and silly.

As for Believer and your less than insightful comments, I’ll just leave you guessing.

By JAY BOOKMAN

July 11, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this

Critiquing someone’s spelling on the Internet is like critiquing them for neatness on the battlefield.

By T

July 11, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this

By mel

Nice post.

Oh, the gas crisis in the 70’s is what caused Brazil to say never again.

Switch grass can also be turned into ethanol and it is stronger than corn ethanol.

I’d like to see a little drilling too. I don’t think we can refreeze the north. Now everyone is going to have to tell their children that we killed Santa too.

I would love a mass transit sytem that worked. instead of repaving 75. HHMM But what would mass transit do? Oh, I don’t know, maybe cause new and lasting paying jobs increasing the amount of money spent in the economy. Maybe, less use of oil. Who wants that?

By Believer

July 11, 2008 11:20 AM | Link to this

As for listing 20 to 30 degrees versus toppling, what’s in a definition. Perhaps Jay’s Brother just likes to play with words. Then again, there’s no guessing involved there. Katrina proved a lot of things. It proved that certain levees could not resist her. She was just so attractive. But what about more of the story. Thunder Horse didn’t list as a direct result of being hit by a hurricane — certainly not Katrina. It was a little ole’ pipe that done it and it was founded by somethin’ that some referrs to as “root cause” analysis. I’ll jest leave you guessin’ as to the meanin’ of that, Jay’s O’brother. How’s that for inciteful.

By Taxpayer

July 11, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this

The important thing to be considering now — before we get an abundance of electric vehicles on the road — is compatibility. After all, we’re bound to be expecting to just pull into the re-fueling station as we venture farther and farther from home on — no gas required — battery power. We all know, or should, that batteries cannot be instantaneously recharged (now would be a good time to put in a PLUG for fuel cells) so another approach would be to have a stockpile of charged batteries at these stations that can be quickly swapped out for the depleted ones. Lithium — the new “texas tea”. Or, is it wind or silicon — there’s plenty of alternate resources to work with there.

By Likud Or Not

July 11, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

The funny part is, none of Jay’s naysayers have been able to disprove the fact that offshore or ANWR drilling NOW will have no appreciable effect on gas prices.

Sure, there’s a lot of boilerplate liberal bashing and name-calling, which is inherent in all conservative debate, but it’s all bait and switch in the end.

Drill Here, Drill Now is the same mantra as No Gay Marriage was in 2004. It’s pandering to the conservative base, it’s misdirected, it’s dishonest, and it’s Republican sloganizing at its worst…and most dangerous.

By Copyleft

July 11, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this

But it’s simple, and it fits on a bumper sticker. And that’s what really matters to most of the uninformed public.

By The good side

July 11, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this

Spelling or not!

Bud Wiser you need to get the facts before speaking on issues you have not done any research!

Politicians on both sides will not react unless the people of America demand what is needed to make it in America.

Realize this Corporations run this country and they do not give a _ _ _ _ about you and I.

Case in point!

They listed the salaries of the CEO of 4 American Oil companies who sell Alaskan oil to Asia.

Each one of those CEO’s are making over 40 million dollars.

So do you get it now?

By Larry the cable guy

July 11, 2008 12:16 PM | Link to this

Let’s all harness the power of Methanol…..I have a life time supply!

By Mike Hussein S

July 11, 2008 12:19 PM | Link to this

Great point, The Good Side. I’m sure those high salaries — did you include stock options and tips? — are what has the oil barons so hepped up to find more places to drill.

Two more facts: Alaska has the highest gasoline prices in the nation. despite the wells there that have been worked for decades. It’s like the golden goose is being plucked.

The next (last?) great hope of many conservatives — baby brother JEB — and the only Republican politician who even seems to be capable of thought — Schwarzenegger — both oppose offshore drilling. (At least JEB did when he needed Florida votes.)

By Algonquin J. Calhoun

July 11, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this

Drilling for oil will have benefit -to the companies doing the drilling. The same people who question whether water boarding is torture, surprisingly, don’t give a damn about the environment either. They, as one illiterate has already posted, have no compunctions about destroying life in the environment just to get some oil. They have high hopes of getting gasoline back to some sort of reasonable price so they can go on driving their Hummers and fantasizing that they are the toughest Nazi on the block. It’s really odd that ‘conservatives’ would loathe conservationists but then nothing about them makes any sense anyway.

By BT fan

July 11, 2008 12:49 PM | Link to this

How many post mention if we start drilling now, it would help prices and Mid-East dominance for our CHILDREN and GRAND CHILDREN? OPEC would drop prices immediately if we started drilling especially Alaska..Jay, you and Cynthia are two peas in a pod, how does Cox keep senting you all a check??

By Emmanuel

July 11, 2008 12:57 PM | Link to this

it is o.k

By JackLeg

July 11, 2008 1:08 PM | Link to this

Maybe I am being way to simplistic but, why not create a new non-profit oil company that serves only the US with US oil at cost?

By Likud Or Not

July 11, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this

BT Fan

Come up with some proof that drilling in Alaska would cause OPEC to immediately drop oil prices.

It would fly in the face of the official report recently released by the Bush GAO.

Waxing poetic about our children and grandchildren is certainly sentimental, but making statements of fact without factual back-up is…well…lying.

By George Hussien Washington

July 11, 2008 1:15 PM | Link to this

Well, George is happy, oil is up, gold is up, silver is up, Euro is up, Dow is Down, Nasdaq is down….George is winning….

By T

July 11, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this

JackLeg

Ooooo. Interesting thought.

That would be unglobalized of us. Thinking soley about the benifit of the American people, shame on you. Next thing you will want to keep our own technology and food supply making things cheaper for the average citizen. What’s next a booming American economy owned by the American people. How about not outsourcing keeping jobs at home instead of abroad. Shame, Shame.

By Algonquin J. Calhoun

July 11, 2008 1:19 PM | Link to this

BT fan, I bet you believed Bush when he said the Iraqi oil would pay for the war, didn’t you? All that’s going to make the price of oil go south is when there are alternative means of fueling personal conveyances. The few little dribblings of oil to be found in Alaska is not going to make Opec quake in their sandals. Get a clue Goober!

By T

July 11, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this

Anyone else find it embarrassing for the President to go over and beg for more Suadi oil a couple of months ago? I would assume it would be embarrassing to beg for anything from a man in a dress.

Sorry letting a little of my hate show. Just tired and fed up.

By Algonquin J. Calhoun

July 11, 2008 1:39 PM | Link to this

T, not only did he beg, Bush, literally, held his hand.

By Hillbilly Deluxe

July 11, 2008 1:42 PM | Link to this

No matter how much oil we find or drill for it’s a finite resource. It’s long since past time to find something renewable. Preferably more than one source. Ethanol can be made from a great many things besides corn. Dumps have methane gas. Up here in North Ga we have an overabundance of chicken poop. Fuels can be made from pine tar. There are many possibilities. Different things would be feasible in different areas. Hopefully we’ll have sense enough to not put all our eggs in one basket when we do find alternatives.

By Taxpayer

July 11, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this

I find Bush’s public display of “concern” for the average American over high oil prices to be about as shallow as the water 100 feet from shore in Panama City Beach. After all, we are talking about a son of the man that originally imposed the off-shore drilling ban, aren’t we? That’s what I have read. And, what about George’s brother, Jeb. I seem to recall Jeb being opposed to the drilling — a reflection of his Florida constituency. Of course, neither of them matter now since they’re both out of office. So, it’s easy for George to insinuate that the Democrats are to blame for something of significance. I don’t hear George talking at all about the Gulf waters that are already being explored and drilled below or the time constraints involved in actually going from rhetoric to pumping crude. His words will be enough to satisfy some though. After all, before I started actually checking into his statements, I didn’t realize just how incomplete he is with his “presentation” on so many topics.

By Algonquin J. Calhoun

July 11, 2008 3:12 PM | Link to this

Typical negativism, Jay

Facts are neither positive, nor negative. they are facts, truth. You, like most Republinazis, can’t handle the truth!

By Ralph

July 11, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this

er….wrong again, Jay. Since congress is now desparately pointing fingers at the oil speculators and current policies as the cause of the problem, I fail to see how you dont see MAJOR benefits of starting drilling. Specualtors are concerned with future oil production- when we drill here more, that future oil supply will be greater and in turn drive down the prices some. Secondly the current policies are the limitations of drilling, refining,, and tax adjustment (either up or down), and Pelosi stated two years ago, her congress would fix 2.50 a gallon oil…..maybe we should have been clearer about the county wanted that fixed….

By Fred

July 11, 2008 4:28 PM | Link to this

I keep hearing Liberals yacking about how drilling will not bring down the price of gas. Nancy Pelosi has demanded that the Bush administration tap the strategic reserves to bring down the price of gas. Here is a quote from her letter -

“But further action is needed to protect our economy. I call on you to use your authority as President to draw down a small portion of the oil held in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in order to expand available supplies and help reduce the record prices that are helping push the economy toward recession. “

If drilling and pumping oil won’t impact the price, why do the Democrats want to tap our strategic reserves to bring the price down. Kind of funny how the price of gas has doubled since Democrats took control of Congress in 2006…. Democrats think we are stupid.

By T

July 11, 2008 4:40 PM | Link to this

I think we are going to have to understand that it is going to get worse before it gets any better. I do not think that one of the candidates offer any real solutions for this energy crisis. It is going to take more than the next 4 yrs. to fix the past 30 or 50 yrs of blatanant oversight. It is going to take a lot of different means for the American peopleto get through this. Oil can no longer be the only source of fuel. However, we still need it now.

By The Peoples for a Nuked Amerika' Century

July 12, 2008 8:08 AM | Link to this

-=-

OK - Lets say we decide to drill for oil in both Alaska and offshore. There is no doubt that pollution will increase. That’s just a price we pay. Oil spills, and more oil released from the ground, burned, and put into the air. If we can deal with that and obvious risk to the environment that feeds our families, and provides us other important life gving resources - so be it!

But anyone that thinks this will help reduce gas cost at the pump is living in a make believe fantasy land.

First - Which foreign owned oil company will be doing the drilling? There aren’t many USA owned oil companies left.

Second - The oil then goes into the company’s stockpiles and begins to be marketed. This would be sold of course to the buyers for the highest profit for the company. (Again not guaranteed to USA gas retailers and at no guaranteed price). So the gas will still go up in price for us as individuals.

Third - There is no guarantee that the oil drilled on our sovereign soil will go to this country. I mean Alaska is real close to China and an oil company would be wise to save shipping cost by exporting to the Chinese.

After all this is how Alaska Salmon is done. It’s fished in Alaska rivers, shipped to China and Taiwan for processing. Then a major portion is sold in China for there part in this. Then we get sold our own Alaska salmon from Chinese companies.

Last are the foreign oil speculators. We may have laws for speculators reselling oil barrels back and forth many times to each other to raise it’s final cost. But this rule/law does not apply to all countries, and the oil companies know this. So our laws do nothing to stop this practice.

Time to re-think our strategy and get off the oil addiction!

Thomas

By Greg

July 24, 2008 12:03 PM | Link to this

“Energy has enormous implications for our economy, our environment and our national security. We cannot let another year go by without addressing these issues with a comprehensive and balanced package (including): New drilling for more oil and gas, and new refineries; building of nuclear power plants; revamping the U.S. electricity grid; and $10 billion in tax breaks to help push energy efficiency and alternative energy.”

Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it?

These words were spoken by President Bush in June 2001, just after he proposed a comprehensive energy bill. But Congress would not act on the issue. Again in 2002 and 2003 Bush pushed for an energy plan, only to have Congress ignore it.

That was a Republican Congress.

Bush has failed us then, and he has failed us now when it comes to this issue.

Don’t blame JUST the left on this one!

If Ronald Reagan had followed the plans Jimmy Carter had in place for renewable and alternative energy back in the 70’s we’d be in good shape today.

By finley

September 30, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this

Jay, I’m on your side. I began reading other posts and all anyone has to say about your opinion is that it’s wrong and all that is being said is about oil spills or lack there of. I think what people are forgetting is what offshore drilling has done to our coastal ecosystems. The loss of the Wetlands along the La and Miss coasts ultimately caused all that destruction. How did we lose our wetlands? By creating oil pipelines and dredging out canals to host the vessels that will bring out precious liquid gold to us. For all those people out there that think off shore drilling is such a wonderful idea go on YouTube and look up pictures of the Katrina aftermath or even our most recent Gustav and then talk about how fantastic offshore drilling is. Or maybe you should put a few calls into people who were born, raised and lived out their lives in New Orleans who now live in Denver because their homes were completely destroyed when the leeves breached. Yes, the levees that were built to protect the city so that the ships could bring us oil. These are just a few things to think about to your readers.