Reply #50: If you are correct, then it is a brilliant strategy.

[sabrina 1]

But what if they do discover that there is enough oil to make it worth their while to invest in drilling? Unless we are sure, isn't it a risky strategy? So far, from what I have read, the consensus seems to be that there is not enough to justify the expense. But, as I pointed out in another post, not being certain that the Caspian Sea holds the world's last major oil reserves didn't stop the Russians, and now the U.S. from investing lives and money in the rush to the be first to get there.

Also, would they allow foreign investors for whom the expense might not be a deterrent? It's a gamble at this point, for Obama politically and for any potential investors, but when has an uncertain outcome stopped a dedicated gambler?

I do see your points, you make a good case in defense of this policy.

I certainly agree with everything else you said regarding the media eg. I do remember journalistic standards. You don't have to go back to the Vietnam era to remember how it was before the Fox era. It wasn't perfect but at least there was a lot less opinion and more straight news. Murdoch has contributed greatly to the demise of journalism.

I find it difficult to just have faith that any politician is acting in our best interests. Otoh, you have presented a lot of food for thought. First, it will have to pass Congress so we will have an opportunity to gather more information on the issue.

There will be fierce resistance to it in the states that will be affected. No doubt this was anticipated as can be seen by the areas listed. States that have traditionally opposed it, are not included eg. Again, maybe this is brilliant strategy as the states listed are mostly states that could be seen as red states.

I hope you're right about the thinking behind it. And I hope that it is already fairly certain that it won't be worth the fight for those who have, for so long, wanted it.

We'll see in the coming months who is willing to back this policy with money. I would expect to see the Oil Lobby busy working on members of Congress who might be opposed, as we saw with the HC legislation. If they are not flooding DC, then that would be a good sign. But if they are, I would be very worried. Isn't that what it's all about in the end anyhow? Which I think you already said :-)