Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Arctic Oil Gets an Administration Gusher

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
nosmokes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 02:48 PM
Original message
Arctic Oil Gets an Administration Gusher

Arctic Oil Gets an Administration Gusher



original

By Dana Milbank
Tuesday, December 13, 2005; A02


Interior Secretary Gale Norton, campaigning to win oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, had the urgency of a saleswoman falling short of her monthly quota.

"ANWR would supply every drop of petroleum for Florida for 29 years," she told a friendly audience at the Heritage Foundation yesterday, "New York for 34 years, Illinois for 43 years, California for 16 years or New Hampshire for 315 years."

So how many years would ANWR's oil keep the whole country fueled up?

Norton balked at the question. "When you look at it for the whole country, you really get somewhat of a deceiving picture," the secretary answered. She said that's "not the way this operates," and said the question "assumes that unless a source of energy is going to meet all of America's needs then it's not worth looking at."
~snip~
.
.
.
complete article here


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
EstimatedProphet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. In other words, the entire US for about 1 year
and it would stay ruined forever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Squatch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. Fucking charlatans, the whole lot of them
"Selling" us a bill of goods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. Fess up, Gale - it is allgoing to be sold toJapan. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orwell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. Deception
"When you look at it for the whole country, you really get somewhat of a deceiving picture," the secretary answered.

In other words, listen to my deception, not reality. After all, that's the way we Bushies work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim__ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
5. Norton was talking ot the Heritage Foundation.
And she couldn't even handle their questions. Sorta sounds like ANWR drilling is a bad idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
6. Better: How many cars would it fuel in China. That's the destination
If anyone thinks that ANWR oil is heading south, they are clueless. It would sail west and be sold to China.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The White Tree Donating Member (630 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Is that still true?
After voting to drill there, a Democrat in the house or the Senate put forth another bill/ammendment that would require all oil from ANWR to be used in this country, a shrewd last ditch manuever that may make drilling less palatable to some.

The ammendment or bill passed overwhelmingly because even republicans had to vote for it since their argument was that we needed to drill to secure more US oil for America.

Someone referred to this when asking Norton a question about how this would affect the World Oil Market when ANWR oil had to be used in the US. She did not say anything to make it sound like that was not still the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. If they amended the bill, then no
I'm glad to hear of that minor victory. It seems that these guys can just run roughshod over us at times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
montana500 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-05 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
7. Milbank NAILED it. A desperate saleswoman. That's the exact tone.
nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC