Loading ...
Sutton Focused On Real Energy Solutions
- Filed under: Sutton / Potter
- Date: Aug 19,2008
First of all, let me say that my conservative co-blogger Ben did correctly quote CNN in his recent post criticizing Congresswoman Betty Sutton's position on drilling. However, CNN got their quote wrong and has issued a correction, which can be found at the bottom of the article. Why is this correction important? Meet Dave Potter. He is the Republican running against Congresswoman Sutton. If you visit his website, you will see that Ben's piece is posted in the middle of the page - under breaking news - with this particular quotation from CNN front and center on the homepage. Since CNN has issued their retraction and correction, it is important to give team Potter the opportunity to do the same. This is that opportunity.
The transcript from Congresswoman Sutton's opening statement shows that she stated, "Drilling in ANWAR is not the answer. Not only will that oil fail to reach us in any timely way, weaning ourselves off oil is the answer." To be clear, Congresswoman Sutton is not opposed to drilling. She is opposed to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. That is an important distinction. Congresswoman Sutton's statement is a part of the official record of her testimony, which I would be happy to provide to anyone interested.
So, I look forward to Mr. Potter removing the quotation and link from his website in an effort to communicate accurate information to the voters in Ohio's 13th District. I'll go ahead and start the clock now and see how long it takes to get things fixed.
Anyone who has been following the cost of gasoline this summer realizes that the reason prices have gone down is because Americans are driving less. Democrats are willing to look at more drilling, but we have so much more we can do. Republicans seem hell bent on belittling any suggestions to increase efficiency, develop alternative energy, or protect the environment. We can do both and house Democrats recognize that.
11 Responses for "Sutton Focused On Real Energy Solutions"
Mr. Potter needs to replace the quote with a clock showing how many days its been and Betty Sutton still refuses to sign the discharge petition to increase offshore drilling.
While it mentions ANWAR the corrected quote doesn't establish the distinction you're pushing.
How does 'weaning ourselves off oil' translate to not being opposed to drilling? Is their evidence that Sutton believes drilling in other areas will be more timely?
Potter's website is more accurate than your post, as far as the reasoning behind Sutton's statement.
Sutton supports the Drill Responsibly In Leased Lands (DRILL) Act. Nice acronym. Larry D, here is your evidence that Sutton believes drilling in other areas would be better.
Here is a portion of her remarks:
"The truth is that the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, also known as the NPR, is home to 20 million acres that could produce 10.6 billion barrels of oil.
This area has been set aside for oil and gas exploration since the 1920's — but not a single oil company is producing oil there…"
"The DRILL Act will accelerate the development of the NPR by requiring the Bureau of Land Management to offer annual lease sales of the land.
Our bill also calls for the President to facilitate the completion of oil pipelines into the NPR and to speed construction of a natural gas pipeline to the continental United States to move the product to market.
When this natural gas pipeline gets built, NPR will be even more important as it holds over 60 trillion cubic feet of gas, nearly 16 times what ANWR holds.
The DRILL Act also incorporates important "use it or lose it" legislation, which requires oil producers to drill on the leases they already have before asking us for new ones.
Again, the truth is that big oil holds leases on 68 million acres in the U.S. that they could drill on, but they are not doing so." - Congresswoman Betty Sutton, July 17, 2008
The price of oil was still spiraling out of control and continued to go up even after reports that Americans were using less and less gas. Drop in usage has little to do with it. If you remember every time there was an outbreak of rcok throwing in Nigeria it went up a few dollars even after Americans used record setting lower levels of gasoline. Oil and gas didn't go down unti George Bush lifted the ban on offshore drilling. Oil and gas immediatetly dropped and has dropped since. Even when there have been threats of storms and hurricanes and bombings of pipelines in Georgia and rock throwers in Nigeria.
3 months ago these threats would have added $30 per barrel. The alarmist AP and other media sources have tried to scare people that it was going to go up which could trigger a justified raise in price, but speculators know better. They also know that 2009 technology can bring oil to Americans in less than 2-3 years if the environmentalist influence and the bureacracy and lawsuits are minimal.
George Bush did the right thing and lifted the ban. This is how you handle rogue speculation. Not by wanting to open the Strategic Reserves. (Especially when we have a war in Iraq potential problems around the world and problems stirring up in Europe. This was the most irresponsible statement I have ever heard from the Democratic party and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are the reason I won't vote for Obama. As well as Al Gore, T Boone Pickens and George Soros all opportunists that have helped create this so called "emergency" and have Obama and the rest of the Democratic Party in their pockets. I really thought Pickens wanted to help Americans without an alternative agenda until I found out he owns a windfarm and wants to build more on his many thousands of acres around the US. Another phoney saleman)
Things will not change until the environmentailsts are held to a reasonable power. Already there are lawsuits being filed because of the effects windfarms are having local environments. So they don't want us to have wind, nuke, oil, gas, coal etc. Do you think that maybe these groups like Sierra are becoming a bunch of power brokers swinging their weight around and controlling things that aren't in the best interest of the US citizens? This has to stop for Americas sake.
Another thing that has to stop(off subject) is the conspiratorial writings of authors and movie producers like Jerome Corsi and Michael Moore as well as the legion of partisan bloggers and other media sources that twist truths to fit their agendas. If everyone watched the CNN Saddleback Church candidate information show the other night objectivly, and not as if it were a debate and there was supposed to be a winner, They could have picked their candidate that night. Both if those men were asked questions directly and answered them directly. No arguing, no back biting, no smart-aleck responses just giving their opinons and sharing their political values and vision for Americas future. This is what we need. We are letting the media sources elect our presidents for us through half-truths, sound bites and conspiracies. I watched that show and I didn't see any evidence that Obama was an evil Marxist that wants to kill the American dream, nor did I see McCain as a feeble old man that was out of touch with the world. It's too bad that the media portrays them as such.
I have contacted Betty Sutton about this, and have gotten a letter that is nothing more than the party line. She is a useless member of congress, and a follower not a leader.
She would much rather put the party and its economically distructive policies before the people of Ohio.
We need to get her, and anyone else opposed to drilling for our own oil out of office. Alternative fuels will not pave roads, make plastics or fly airplanes. Electric cars need electical generation plants, where will all the new ones come from if we continue to block Nuclear power. And the answer is not blowin in the wind. Just more hot air in Washington.
Wean ourselves of oil?
Well I guess deindustrializing the U.S. and turning us into a banana republic would do that.
"Anyone who has been following the cost of gasoline this summer realizes that the reason prices have gone down is because Americans are driving less. Democrats are willing to look at more drilling, but we have so much more we can do. Republicans seem hell bent on belittling any suggestions to increase efficiency, develop alternative energy, or protect the environment. We can do both and house Democrats recognize that."
Huh? You're kidding, right? Less consumption has lowered prices?
Extrapolating out your economic news, where is the glut of gas causing this unheard of drop in the price of gasoline? You should add to your argument that the democrat's threat to drill where ever there is no oil will really drive down prices.
I appreciate your commitment to alternative energy sources, but are you in the nuclear power corner or the solar powered airplane corner? Maybe both because democrats recognize that?
I will change the quote. Thank you for pointing out the corrected version. As one of my favorite baseball broadcasters, Larry Andersen, always says "It's all about accuracy."
It still doesn't mean Sutton supports drilling that will help the average American and there isnt another sentence I will change. The overall theme is still correct. I can say I am the second baseman for the the Phillies, but that doesnt make it so. Just the same, because Betty Sutton, according to you, is supposedly for drilling now doesnt make it so.
It appears the polling she has been doing in the district indeed did tell her people here support drilling. Those results must have come back after she sent out the district wide mailers that did not mention her "support of drilling" but instead told us to air dry our dishes. Why didnt she mention her support of drilling to the common people of the 13th? She didnt even parrot the Dem line of the 68 million acre hoax.
Maybe Betty Sutton should run an ad touting her backing of drilling. I think 5 seconds of airtime should be fairly cheap.
One last note.
The original article was published May 7. Then it was updated May 9. Then I used the one from June 10. Now the same article says last updated August 18. That is yesterday.
Why is the article - of an event that occurred in May - being updated so many times? Who is requesting all these changes? It seems pretty straightforward.
When I used the one from June 10, it said at the bottom "An earlier version incorrectly quoted Rep. Sutton." Apparently I shouldnt have assumed that an article that was already corrected from a month prior would be right.
ALSO: Dave Potter will be on AM 640s Matt Patrick's show tonight on at 6:05 PM.
Kyle, I disagree with your blanket statement that Republicans are uninterested or resistant to alternative sources of energy and uninterested in protecting the environment. While all Republicans (and some Democrats) may not be jummping aboard the new/alternative sources of energy bandwagon as quickly as some people would like, the interest in diversifying our sources of energy is not limited to one party. The Republicans would be foolish to let the Democrats co-opt this issue for themselves. Energy diversification is a critical priority and needs the immediate attention of all parties and all Americans.
Leave a comment