Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It appears even if you find oil now the government will take you to court and try and take it away and force delays in development. Better to send money to Brazil to make Obama's buddy soros even richer then develop our oil fields. And people wonder why companies are leaving our shores for a more friendly business environment.
I agree with you here. I support Obama, but that doesn't mean I agree with 100% of his administration's decisions. I think in cases like these, states that would be directly affected by a spill should have a vote or their governors should vote and if they approve then allow drilling.
It appears even if you find oil now the government will take you to court and try and take it away and force delays in development. Better to send money to Brazil to make Obama's buddy soros even richer then develop our oil fields. And people wonder why companies are leaving our shores for a more friendly business environment.
Why don't you tell the story HONESTLY instead spinning it to suit your I HATE PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA AGENDA!
Quote:
Exxon Mobil Corp. is fighting with the U.S. government to keep control of one of its biggest oil discoveries ever, in a showdown where billions of dollars hang in the balance for both sides.
The massive Gulf of Mexico discovery contains an estimated one billion barrels of recoverable oil, the company says. The Interior Department, which regulates offshore drilling, says Exxon's leases have expired and the company hasn't met the requirements for an extension. Exxon has sued to retain the leases.
The court battle is playing out at a time in which the Obama administration has made an issue of unused leases, which deprive the Treasury of valuable taxes. It also comes as regulators are being careful not to be seen as lax in their dealings with large energy companies in the wake of last year's BP PLC spill.
The stakes are high: Under federal law, the leases—and all the oil underneath—could revert to the government if Exxon doesn't win in court.
Quote:
In February 2009, the government denied Exxon's request for an extension and after a brief appeal denied it again that April. Exxon said in a letter at the time that it was "committed" to producing the oil, but the government said it didn't present a specific plan. The government contended this didn't meet legal requirements and denied the application.
More appeals followed, but Exxon lost its final appeal in May. The final decision hinged on whether Exxon had a concrete "commitment" to produce the oil in December 2008, when its lease expired. The director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals at the Interior Department ruled that it didn't.
If Exxon doesn't produce oil from the field SOMEBODY else will. The United States Governent will maintain control until such time the fields are leased with a plan to develop them.
Why don't you tell the story HONESTLY instead spinning it to suit your I HATE PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA AGENDA!
If Exxon doesn't produce oil from the field SOMEBODY else will. The United States Governent will maintain control until such time the fields are leased with a plan to develop them.
Maybe you should pay attention to copyright violation like I do now and read the link and stop attacking folks for posting the story?? That should be a good start.
It appears even if you find oil now the government will take you to court and try and take it away and force delays in development. Better to send money to Brazil to make Obama's buddy soros even richer then develop our oil fields. And people wonder why companies are leaving our shores for a more friendly business environment.
Maybe you should pay attention to copyright violation like I do now and read the link and stop attacking folks for posting the story?? That should be a good start.
Why don't you present the story as it was written instead of spinning it to suit your agenda?
The only thing you post proves IS YOU DON'T LIKE BEING PRESENTED WITH THE FACTS!
Why don't you present the story as it was written instead of spinning it to suit your agenda?
The only thing you post proves IS YOU DON'T LIKE BEING PRESENTED WITH THE FACTS!
JTG, are you questioning the link and the story as it was written up or are you just going after the chief because you don't like what little he said. I read just what he said there in the link other than the part about helping Boss Spooky Dude. You are the one doing the spinning and I think you don't like it because we see through your Alinsky method of spinning.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
