Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama Supports Offshore Drilling?????? (207 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I didn't google (0+ / 0-)

    I used the link that you finally posted.  The reason I wanted the link was not to see if the Sierra Club really blocked it but to see what their reasons were.

    Its not straw man argument, and I sketch it out in more detail below, again, in case you might take the time to try and understand it, which I am doubting.  

    You are thin-skinned and can't deal with someone challenging you.  

    Where I live the environmental groups are actively pushing alternatives, winning at the ballot measures that require investments in wind, etc.    

    My point is--regardless of the SD project which I readily admitted I did not know about--is that there are trade offs in energy production even renewables, and yes those should be considered.  

    Just as drilling is appropriate in some places, renewables are not appropriate in all.  

    I pointed out that the opponents to the SD project had reasons for their position, I never said I agreed with their position, merely that there are trade offs and that they had reasons.  Like I said, and this is the third time now, I do not know the particulars of the project, I don't have an opinion, good or bad.  

    But I do know, for instance, that lots of bats are great pollinators and that with the rapid decline in bees we need pollinators.  Other bats eat 700-1,000 mosquitoes a night.  Where I live mosquitoes carry West Nile and when there are too many they spray pesticides.  Integrated pest management is a better approach and it includes things like encouraging bats and other insect-predators.  Again, I am not saying 'save the bats-stop wind farms.'  I am saying all these issues include trade offs, its not as simple and black and white as it seems that you are portraying it as.  

    If you find that demeaning, fine.  Its not meant to be demeaning, its just that I find your arguments weak and simplistic.

    You still have not really addressed my issue, continuing to make up your own, calling me an asshat because you thought I was an earlier poster, etc.  

    I think makes you both the insulter and the one constructing strawmen arguments.  But again, that's just me and I'm just some random person posting on a blog, so you might not let it get to you so much.

    Its a political blog.  Its all about back and forth and people challenging you when they disagree.  

    •  You Challenged Me At What Exactly? (0+ / 0-)
      You seem to be saying we should weigh the plusses and minuses of each project.  Fine, I've done that and come to a conclusion.  A slightly less aesthetically pleasing park/harbor/random rural area is worth the trade off for ridding ourselves of oil.  

      The entire offshore drilling/importing of oil/etc becomes moot if we push these type of projects into fruition instead of suing them to block it.

      Your position is that you don't seem to have one - you just disagree with mine of supporting Green Energy (which is a GOP talking point!).  

      •  I have one. But I wasn't aware (0+ / 0-)

        that you are so thin-skinned.  Sorry to have pushed your buttons.  

        Like I said, where I live environmental groups have been leading the charge to develop more renewables, but I do think that in some cases they don't make sense.  

        Location matters and there are competing values that should be considered, some of those are aesthetic, and some are environmental (like species that will be impacted).  As you point out, fossil fuels are a really problem, so on balance wind and solar are generally less impactful and a better choice, but not necessarily appropriate everywhere someone wants to build a large array or wind farm.  That has been my point all along.  

        I am glad that you have weighed the costs and benefits.  The initial post to which I was responding was framed in the broadest of terms, and I think misleading.  Maybe I read it wrong, maybe you meant "and against the objections of [a few] environmentlists [like Rebert Kennedy] that oppose them..."  You'll notice in my initial post I didn't defend Robert Kennedy writing

        Environmentalists are not a monolithic block, and wealthy landowners in big homes on Cape Cod might not really be 'environmentalists.'

        Have a nice day. Over. Lefty "asshat" Wingnut

        •  Whatever (0+ / 0-)

          Define few how you want, but the Sierra Club has hundreds of thousands of members - that is a fact.  RFK Jr opposed and Teddy blocked Cape Wind (and many enviro's support Cape Wind).  My original one sentence posting could've went in more detail, but the point is that it's our side blocking these projects.  It is the work of liberals that is helping to feed Big Oil and the Climate Crisis by blocking these projects, not this ridiculous offshore drilling chatter.

          Your argument has finally boiled down to putting out vague statements (not necessarily appropriate everywhere? - is it possible to make that more vague?) - and having no opinion whatsoever on anything specific (that's how problems get solved!).  

          Sincerly,

          omgisparishiltonthinskinned

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site