Can One Spill Shut Down Gulf Drilling?
Never letting a crisis go to waste, liberals have advanced the idea that all drilling in the ocean should be stopped and no new drilling allowed.
May 11, 2010 - 12:00 am
In the weeks since the British Petroleum (BP) drilling platform exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, environmentalists have warned that the ecological sky is falling. They assure us that the resulting oil spill, which is just now beginning to reach the shore of some Gulf States, is certain to bring with it a disaster of cosmic proportions.
One environmentalist in particular, the Sierra Club’s Michael Brune, has grown so hysterical that he’s decided to speak for everyone by declaring: “Americans are horrified.” And although “almost 40 years have passed [without] an incident” of this kind, Brune is certain the BP explosion proves “there is no safe way to drill for oil in oceans.”
In other words, in classic Rahm Emanuel style, Brune is seizing upon a terrible accident, turning it into a crisis, and then making sure that no crisis goes to waste. Therefore, as far as the BP spill goes, Brune hopes it can be used to end offshore drilling once and for all. And he’s getting help from groups like Oceana North America, which openly admits the silver lining in the oil spill is that it has “galvanized opposition to offshore drilling.”
On May 1, Louie Miller, one of Brune’s fellow Sierra Club comrades, did his best to further the feeling of crisis surrounding the BP explosion by proclaiming: “The genie is out of the bottle with this oil spill, and I don’t think I’m overstating the case by saying this is America’s Chernobyl.”
And not surprisingly, his solution to “America’s Chernobyl” involves banning offshore drilling altogether. Said Miller: “The risk associated with offshore oil and gas drilling or offshore oil drilling … [is] unacceptable … at this point in time.”
Have you ever noticed how liberals desire to be judged by open minds and met with understanding when their policies fail, while all the while they’ve zero tolerance for anything less than perfection in their political opponents? If so, you only have to remember they view “big oil” as an appendage of the Republican Party to know that one major spill in forty years is no better in their eyes than one major spill every two years.
They are inconsistent because it benefits their own agenda to be so.