Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #1

    Oct 9, 2008, 07:23 AM
    Obama's unchallenged assertion about American Oil
    "we have 3% of the world's oil reserves and we use 25% of the world's oil. So what that means is that we can't simply drill our way out of the problem."
    He has said it a few times and it has become a standard Democrat talking point . But is it the truth ?

    Well his assertion about the usage is generally correct . We do use about 25% of the oil consumed worldwide. That is largely because we produce about 28% of the worlds goods and service.

    But his numbers about our reserves are completely out of date and McCain should challenge them on the stump and in the next debate .

    Current estimates that the US has 20 billion of the 1.3 trillion barrels of the world's crude reserves do not include the 1.2 trillion to 1.8 trillion barrels of shale oil in the Green River Formation ;200 billion barrels of oil below shale in the Bakken Formation ,the 130 billion barrels off our coasts that Congress had placed off limits;and 10 to 20 billion barrels untapped in ANWR .Currently, the United States is the only industrialized country in the world not actively seeking to explore new offshore resources.

    Once Canada was locked in as the 21st largest Oil reserves. Then when they began to tap into the 175 billion barrels from the Alberta tar sands they jumped to 2nd. Canada is now our largest oil supplier.

    Now I agree that drilling is only a part of the solution to the goal of energy independence . But it is a step we could begin to take immediately . The Democrats should not be allowed to make their claim to a national audience unchallenged.
    Galveston1's Avatar
    Galveston1 Posts: 362, Reputation: 53
    Full Member
     
    #2

    Oct 9, 2008, 04:27 PM

    I'm sorry if I offend someone, but Obama has said so many different, sometimes contridictory things that I have no confidence in anything that he says. It is all to get elected, and then all promises will be forgotten. All a voter can do is observe what he HAS done and remember that the past is prologue. Of course, that can be said of any politician. So CHECK THE RECORD.
    Trandy's Avatar
    Trandy Posts: 123, Reputation: 9
    Junior Member
     
    #3

    Oct 9, 2008, 04:55 PM
    I truly believe that Obama has spent his entire career with one goal in mind.
    He did not "decide" to become president just recently.
    All of the choices he has made were steps to where he is today.
    McCain on the other hand is tired of politics as they are. He has decided to take a stand, and the strongest position for him to take the stand he knows this country needs is President.
    McCain doesn't want to become President of the United States of America to further his career, he wants to make an impact on his world. He wants to leave America better for his grand kids grand kids than what has been left for us!
    Obama just wants that feather in his hat. He'll say whatever he needs to (different things for different circumstances)in order to win over VOTES. McCain wants votes too, but only so that he can take the position of the ultimate "Maverick"
    It's what our country needs.

    Oh... and I agree, I hope McCain does a better job of rebutting Mr. Career Enhancing Politician Obama's eyerolls than he has been.
    Want four more years of beurocracy at it's finest?
    ( BUREAUCRACY. The abuse of official influence in the affairs of government; corruption. This word has lately been adopted to signify that those persons who are employed in bureaus abuse their authority by intrigue to promote their own benefit, or that of friends, rather than the public good. The word is derived from the French.)

    Or someone who will step up to the plate, and open up the doors and curtains of the White House... Congress... and the Senate, so that politicians will make real informed decisions for the benefit of the country? Rather than a nay or aye in representation of the highest bidder!
    BABRAM's Avatar
    BABRAM Posts: 561, Reputation: 145
    Senior Member
     
    #4

    Oct 9, 2008, 06:40 PM
    The statement is true according to the Energy Information Administration. However, personally I thought, perhaps you did too, that the three percent figure was considering proven oil reserves, not all our oil reserves. Anyway, as for McCain going after Obama, it's just not an easy subject to convey to an audience during a debate. Quite frankly, I don't think McCain truly understands this anyway and therefore his handlers know better than to encourage him on it. Besides it wouldn't help his argument when pushing to get free of oil altogether is the focus of Obama's view.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #5

    Oct 10, 2008, 02:19 AM

    Your right McCain doesn't understand it or else he would not stubbornly still oppose exploration in ANWR .

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Obama's logo [ 10 Answers ]

Is there anyone out there who knows what Obama's logo signifies? Most logos mean something.

Obama's Intelligence? [ 22 Answers ]

Seems to be directly linked to his teleprompter. How could he be shocked at the fact that the US Troops watch Fox News, almost exclusively? He even insinuated that President Bush must have issued an executive order making Fox the only channel available to the troops overseas! Is he really...

Obama's donations . [ 23 Answers ]

Are they all legal ? He is getting record amts of $$$$ ;mostly from on-line donations (most under $200). Pamela Geller who writes the blog 'Atlas Shrugs' has some legitimate questions she raises . Atlas Shrugs: Obama, who is Jeanne McCurdy? She obtained a list of his donors ;a list she says is...

Obama's worldwide war on poverty [ 70 Answers ]

Have you heard anything about Obama sponsored legislation that would take .7% of our gnp and use it to fight world poverty? The account I read says it could come to vote in the Senate very soon. I guess he is not satisfied with the 300 billion or so that we now send abroad. We can't afford him in...


View more questions Search