A "flip-flop," is a sudden real or apparent change of policy or opinion by a public official, sometimes while trying to claim that both positions are consistent with each other. Often it will occur during the period prior to or following an election in order to maximize the candidate's popularity.
Flip-Flop on Oil:
Obama sure is good at this, he can do an about face on a policy or opinion without blinking an eye. This president's lack of leadership experience is showing more and more every day. Obama from day one has been touting that America has to move forward with a more greener look at the environment. That is precisely what his cap-and-trade idea is all about.
He has been consistent in moving us away from our dependency of oil, but he is in my opinion forcing us to do it - and that is wrong. But this seems to be his way of thinking. Obama, has always been against drilling for oil, but then all of the sudden he had lightened up a little just before the "2010 oil spill" - which flowed into the Gulf of Mexico for three months. He was going to allow a little more drilling, but after the oil spill occurred he stopped the drilling in the Gulf of Mexico with his drilling moratorium.
Texas-based Seahawk Drilling , the second-largest shallow-water driller operating in the Gulf, announced it had filed for bankruptcy and would be selling its remaining assets to Hercules Offshore. This would be the first off-shore drilling company in the Gulf of Mexico to declare bankruptcy - blaming the government-imposed standstill for a shortage of shallow-water permits following the summer’s massive oil spill.
Chief Executive Randy Stilley said that while the outcome is best for the company’s stakeholders, “I think it is important to note that Seahawk was forced to seek strategic alternatives only after an unprecedented decline in the issuance of offshore drilling permits following the Macondo blowout.”
Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) called the bankruptcy an economic nightmare. “I have repeatedly said that the administration’s excruciatingly slow release of oil and gas permits will cause job losses,” Landrieu said in a statement. “How many more rigs have to leave and how many more businesses have to close before it realizes the havoc the de facto moratorium is wrecking on the Gulf Coast?” Although the shallow-water industry was not part of the moratorium, the regulations set forth by the Obama administration have made it “very difficult” for anyone to conduct business in the Gulf.
The ill-considered moratorium on drilling for oil in the Gulf Of Mexico cost not only the Gulf region but also the nation billions of dollars and tens of thousands of jobs, said Joseph Mason, a professor at Louisiana State University in his testimony last week before the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Mason told the bad news in his report "The Economic Cost of a Moratorium on Offshore Oil and Gas Exploration to the Gulf Region ," published by the Institute for Energy Research.
A significant halt to oil and natural gas exploration and drilling would not just affect upstream and downstream industries, but could also impact state and local governments, as well as small retail stores, education services, healthcare assistance, and a host of other industries.
The effective six-month moratorium on offshore oil and natural gas production will result in the loss of approximately $2.1 billion in output, 8,169 jobs, over $487 million in wages, and nearly $98 million in forfeited state tax revenues in the Gulf states alone. Additionally, although a significant portion of oil and natural gas production is localized in the Gulf, the U.S. is a fully integrated economy, so there is an expectation that the loss will “spill-over” into other states. From this spillover effect, there could be an additional loss of $0.6 billion in output, 3,877 jobs, and $219 million in potential wages nationwide. Moreover, the federal government stands to lose $219 million in tax revenue. These losses are dramatic in both the context of local economies in which the oil industry operates, and on a national scale.
Obama lifted the moratorium in October, but had not released any drilling permits until March. He has even gon on to say that "Any claim that my administration is responsible for gas prices because we've, quote on quote, shut down oil production - any claim like that is simply untrue. It might make for a useful political sound bite, but it doesn't track with reality." His memory is very short.
Obama say we need to cut our demand on foreign oil and up our production of domestic oil. What? After all this time? GOP leaders have also assailed the president for saying last week in Latin America that he wanted the U.S. to be a "major customer" for the huge oil reserves Brazil recently discovered off its coast. Flip Flop Fizz Fizz, oh what a relief it is... Which is it Obama? Reduce our dependency on foreign oil or tell other countries we want to buy a LOT of oil from them?
"Here we've got the administration looking for just about any excuse it can find to lock up our own energy sources here at home, even as it's applauding another country's efforts to grow its own economy and create jobs by tapping into its own energy sources," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, (R-Ky.), said Tuesday.
Flip Flop on War:
When Obama was running for president, he clearly stated his views on a president’s authority to order a military attack. Responding in 2007 to questions from The Boston Globe, he wrote: “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."
"In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.”
So which is it Obama? Why do you constantly flip-flop on issues? You can't have it both ways. Obama has declared Libya A Success, but yet Gaddafi is still in power, and our planes continue their "missions." What is really amazing President Obama calls Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi a threat to his own people, then Obama asked Congress to increase U.S. aid for Qaddafi's military to $1.7 million - and then we bomb Libya. We send money to a country that we are now blowing apart by military force, and when we are done we will have to go in and rebuild it.
Obama must believe this is right, because this could literally explode in his face. If it is, then I'm not really sure why. It's not humanitarian issues, as we let millions die in Rwanda, Darfur, Congo you know, places with no oil. So it must be something. Whatever that is, I didn't hear it in the speech and obviously those on the ground didn't get the whole "success" memo.