I heard the words "Shale Gas" come out of Obama's mouth on the radio today. I thought that was great until I Googled it:

Shale gas is part of US-China clean energy accord
It may have been toward the bottom of the list. But US President Barack H. Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao did include a shale gas resource initiative in their Nov. 17 announcement of measures to strengthen clean energy cooperation between the two countries.

“Under the initiative, the US and China will use experience gained in the United States to assess China’s shale gas potential, promote environmentally-sustainable development of shale gas resources, conduct joint technical studies to accelerate development of shale gas resources in China, and promote shale gas investment in China through the US-China Oil and Gas Industry Forum, study tours, and workshops,” the White House said in a statement posted at its Web site.

That just pisses me off. To "...use experience gained in the US to assess China's potential..."? To "...accelerate development of shale gas resources in China..."? To "...promote shale gas investment in China..."? Why doesn't Obama promote US shale gas for the benefit of the US?

Views: 99

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Sad part is that many of his ideas are actually good... he just lacks the experience that is needed for the office as well as a real understanding of the 'real' American people. And he is not really doing doing the job any worst than some of the former Presidents, it just that in this modern age, there is no chance to 'take a mulligan'.... once a motion or jesture is made, it is history and published everywhere.
Obama has made many grand gestures that sort of resemble a Chicago Divorce Attorney taking on an experienced country Lawyer from East Texas in a land use/mineral suit... sure there is a basic understanding, but the playing field just is not level and a blind man can forecast the outcome as he pleads the case in front of a Southern Judge and Jury...
Attachments:
Bill R,
what do you mean by 'real' American people ?
The 'real' American people are the ones paying taxes and working for a living, those that want to build the United States back into a energy indepenent nation. Obama 'talks the talk', but it appears so far that he 'walks the walk like a one legged duck on ice'.
In explanation... Obama puffs up his chest and makes a lot of promises, however continues to fail in providing the actual on those promises... the 'real' American people do not want promises... they want action and proof that that action is going to improve their lives.
A better analogy of the job that Obama is doing would be recast the characters of the old western, "Rio Bravo".... in this case, picture that Barrack Obama would be Jerry Lewis and would play the Sheriff that John Wayne protrayed.... as you see, while we still have a Sheriff, he just does not give the same persona to the character portrayed in the role.... all we have is a squeaky voice, grinning kid where we actually expect a gruff, battle worn man. The 'real' Americans are the 'average Joe' that want someone that will go toe-to-toe with the bad guys like John Wayne. Not someone like Jerry Lewis who goes all submissive by bowing incorrectly while shaking hands, stumbles through protocols, pats the bad guys on the back, and finally even hands the the keys to the city in the form of a technological advancement giveaway as part of his China policy exchange.

Oh, and Hillary is playing the Sheriffs side kick character that was played by Walter Brennan. As for Biden, he of course is playing Dean Martins part (he just never sobers up) and ends up following the Sherrif and standing around shaking his head in agreement.

By the way, I didn't vote for any of the bozo's that ran, I wrote in Colin Powell for President... He reminds me more of the John Wayne image.
><((((({ * >
Bill R
what do you mean by 'real' American people
dont seems like 'real' American people.....seems like 'make-believe' and the world is a stage.
Alas, this is more true than I would care to admit... and unfortunately it is the world we will probably have to continue to live with... and we have set the stage props up for ourselves to bump into and trip over...
this is a good topic and i think it is inherently political, so i for one would like to see it moved
re. " Why doesn't Obama promote US shale gas for the benefit of the US? "

Perhaps the President is attempting to entice Chinese investors to "contribute" to US lending for E&P so that we can start moving on what we've got, so that we can fund R&D to expand the use of nat gas? The trade off ... they are privy to the information they help pay for.

IMO, that IS promoting US shale gas for the benefit of the US. After all, at this time it's not likely we're going to bottle it up and send it to them. :0)
I'm afraid that may just be wishful thinking.
Okay, and it's tied to the US debt to China AND the push to reduce CO2 emissions as China ramps up industrial development.

The Brookings Institution 2009 Report provides some insight ...

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2008/10_global_ec...

from p. 18 (last page)...

"Because China is building one power plant each week to sustain its high
rate of economic growth, it is the ideal location for these experiments on how to harness alternative fuels, burn coal cleanly, and scale up prototype green power plants."
Spin it how you want. Obama cannot bring himself to promote natural gas because his party is so opposed to "Big Oil" companies. It would be like admitting that abortion takes a human life, or lowering taxes stimulates the economy, or that you can't have the universal health care plan without raising taxes on those who make less than $250k per year.
How about Ken Rogoff was wrong in his economic prognostications in 2007?

http://www.brookings.edu/testimony/2007/0626budgetdeficit_rogoff.aspx

To these questions ...

"Many observers are asking whether U.S. indebtedness to foreigners might pose any subtle hidden threats to the U.S. economy or even to U.S. national security. With China alone holding $1.2 trillion in reserve assets and foreigners collectively holding more than twice that in U.S. Treasury securities, is there any risk that the United States might be subject to economic blackmail?"

Rogoff answers ...

"Doomsday scenarios, while theoretically possible, seem remote. However, although these extreme risks are remote, the United States massive dependence on foreign borrowing remains an important vulnerability."

So, look where we are today. Now we pay the piper. :-P

RSS

© 2020   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service