Though it received an intense amount of scrutiny and was branded as an “incredible faux pas,” Michele Bachmann’s remark that she wouldn’t be opposed to drilling for oil in the Everglades isn’t going away. In fact, the GOP presidential candidate is going even further with her claims, arguing that only “radical environmentalists” would oppose drilling in the Everglades.

During a visit to Sarasota last weekend, Bachmann caused a stir with her comment that she would support using the Everglades as an energy resource. ”The United States needs to be less dependent on foreign sources of energy and more dependent upon American resourcefulness,” she told the Associated Press. “Whether that is in the Everglades … we need to go where the energy is. Of course, it needs to be done responsibly. If we can’t responsibly access energy in the Everglades then we shouldn’t do it.”

Yesterday, Tampa Bay’s News 10 published new footage of Bachmann in Miami, in which she elaborated on the comment. “Let’s access this wonderful treasure trove of energy that God has given us in this country,” she said. “Let’s access it responsibly.”

Those who oppose the idea, she says, are likely just “radical environmentalists.” ”The radical environmentalists put up one roadblock after another to prevent accessing American energy,” she said.

But it isn’t just radical environmentalists who oppose drilling in the Everglades — in fact, many have noted that there isn’t any viable oil in the area, to begin with. Even members of Bachmann’s own party, like Rep. Allen West, R-Fort Lauderdale, have reprimanded the Minnesota congresswoman for her comment. Earlier this week, West promised to “straighten her out” for what he called an “incredible faux pas.”

Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., also spoke out against Bachmann’s claims this week, saying: “To go in the middle of the Everglades and to spoil the river of grass just because somebody wants to, that’s not a wise thing to do.”

You May Also Like

Florida water rules delayed

On Monday, only hours before they were slated to go into effect, a federal judge postponed the implementation of a portion of a set of federally-mandated water rules. Those rules, which should have gone into effect today, have been delayed until July.