Several things have occurred to me in relation to the oil leak in the Gulf and subsequent efforts to deal with the problem.
Would it be possible to work on multiple efforts for stopping the leak at the same time? It seems like they try one thing then when that fails they start on something new. How about some multitasking down there? Maybe they’re already dealing with the problem that way and I just haven’t read about it in the media.
It will be tempting to use this catastrophe as an argument against offshore drilling. But the reality is that we need oil. Some people complain about this reality, but what’s the point? Mocking people who have to drive cars to get to their jobs to provide for their families might make some people feel superior, but what would they suggest regular Americans do?
If people don’t want to drill offshore then we are going to need to drill more on land (where leaks would be easier to plug, parenthetically). Is it redundant to use the word “parenthetically” inside some parentheses? I think it might be.
In one of his State of the Union addresses, George W. Bush talked about the need for our country to invest in alternate technologies and fuel research, so we wouldn’t be so dependent on foreign oil. Too bad he didn’t push that theme harder.
If this leak had occurred while W. was still President, and he had handled himself and the situation exactly as President Obama has, would the reaction of the mainstream media be the same? Color me skeptical.
Why is it that we are losing all of this oil and gas prices haven’t shot up? Should this make me mad that gas prices were so high two years ago, or happy that they aren’t as high today?