JamesInFlorida
Senior Member
- Dec 18, 2010
- 1,501
- 186
- 48
Except you're making the assumption that being against offshore drilling is being for higher gas prices. That's a poor assumption to make. That's like a moron saying that someone who is against gun control is for children to be killed by guns.
Furthermore, Mr. Chu's position is not the position that President Obama holds.
From December 2008:
Obama Energy Pick Backs Higher Gas Tax - The Note
The only one who claims Obama doesn't favor higher gasoline prices is the reporter, Ted Davis Roberts. Nowhere does he quote Obama saying he is opposed to higher gasoline prices. Furthermore, Obama and his energy secretary have both said they support higher gasoline prices. The accusation isn't based solely on his policy of denying all permits to drill offshore.
Obama has said he supports higher prices for gasoline, and he is pursuing a policy that will produce the desired results. It's virtually impossible for anyone who isn't suffering from brain damage to believe he doesn't want higher gas prices.
President Obama also had nothing to do with Shell's permit revoked.
Offshore Drilling - Shell Oil Offshore Drilling in Alaska - Shell Suspends Plans to Drill Offshore in Alaskan Arctic
In fact, the so-called "evil" EPA had granted the permits in the first place.
So on all three major points you made in your post, you were dead wrong on all three. Batting a nice .000 so far.
Want to keep going?
The Environmental Appeal Board is an arm of the EPA. So the EPA ruled against itself. The claim that Obama isn't responsible for what the EPA does simply doesn't pass the laugh test. Obama could can everyone on the so-called Environmental Appeal Board tomorrow if he wanted to.
Liberal gullibility truly is astounding!
Seeing as though the EPA answers directly to the POTUS...
According to your logic since the EPA answers directly to the POTUS then Obama is responsible, is that correct?