Monday, August 04, 2008

Obama Setting The Energy Agenda... As McCain Scurries After Him Towards A Compromise


Obama disappointed serious conservationists and clean energy advocates when he offered to consider a compromise with the energy companies (through their bought and owned Republican politicians). Short version-- the Republicans stop obstructing alternative energy measures and he will consider environmentally safe expansion of offshore drilling. "My interest," Obama told the Palm Beach Post is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices. If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage-- I don’t want to be so rigid that we can’t get something done... I made a general point about the fact that we need to provide the American people some relief and that there has been constructive conversations between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate on this issue. What I will not do, and this has always been my position, is to support a plan that suggests this drilling is the answer to our energy problems. If we've got a plan on the table that I think meets the goals that America has to set and there are some things in there that I don't like, then obviously that's something that I would consider because that's the nature of how we govern in a democracy."

Obama's position might not seem heroic but, given the political realities, it's reasonable. Democrats need to keep explaining that Big Oil already has already leased almost 70 million acres of federal land and isn't searching for oil at all, just sitting on it waiting for the prices to go even higher. At the urging of oil companies, which have doled out countless millions of dollars to them in the last decade, Republicans voted en-masse against Use-It-Or-Lose-It proposals that Democrats had put forward to make oil companies drill on leased land or give up the leases to companies that will.

But while the media is accusing Obama of flip-flopping on oil and while a handful of congressional Oil Industry shills like Tom Cole (R-OK- $277,050), John Culberson (R-TX- $301,961), Tom Price (R-GA- $24,500), Lamar Smith (R-TX- $342,897), John Shadegg (R-AZ- $119,495), and Mike Pence (R-IN- $150,950) are planning on continuing their stunt on the House floor today, this morning's NY Times reports that McCain is running after Obama screeching "me too, me too." The McCain camp took a moment out of their racist smear campaign against Obama to make sure the poor confused old man they are backing is seen as someone willing to compromise on energy too.
Nancy Pfotenhauer, a McCain economic adviser, told CNN on Sunday that “Senator McCain is open to compromise packages” on energy.

Mr. McCain had earlier dropped his own opposition to offshore drilling, saying that soaring gas prices demanded new approaches.

Obama will be unveiling his energy plans later this morning in Lansing, Michigan. Here's the ad his campaign started running today:

Labels: , , ,


At 8:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Absolute Truth on Offshore Drilling

The price of gas is going to stay the same, regardless of whether we drill offshore or not. And by the time the gas comes to market from offshore drilling, world-demand for gas will exceed all of the oil that America and the oil producing countries can produce. Therefore, Americans need to forget about gas prices and concentrate on which candidate will put some money in their pocket to offset some of the high gas prices. To fill up my tank has more than doubled, and I have let me car sit more than triple the amount of time that I used to drive.

FORGET ABOUT THE PRICE OF GAS AS AN ELECTION ISSUE because nothing now or in the future is going to solve gas prices because world-demand is not going to let it. If America produces more oil through offshore drilling and needs less world oil, China, India and others will merely buy up our market share while still needing more oil. The demand for oil dictates gas prices, and if that world-demand is not going to decrease now or in the future because of American offshore drilling, then FORGET ABOUT VOTING BASED ON OFFSHORE DRILLING.

WHAT DO WE DO THEN? The first thing to do is concentrate on which presidential candidate will put money into your pocket to help offset the price of gas. Senator Barack Obama is offering a $1000 tax cut plus a stimulus check to help offset the price of gas; that’s a great start and seems most reasonable. Senator John McCain is offering almost nothing because he is protecting the 3.4 trillion dollars tax cut for the rich. It will be hard for McCain to do anything for the average American due to his trying to keep those 3.4 trillion dollars of tax cuts for the rich.


Senator Barack Obama is for a $1000 tax cut, plus a stimulus check for average Americans to help offset the price of gas.

Senator McCain is for keeping the 3.4 trillion dollars in tax cuts for the rich, while not being able to afford anything much for the average American.

McCain, tax cuts for the rich, nothing for the middle class!

At 8:52 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama's energy policy amounts to raising taxes and stopping the addition of oil to the strategic reserves.

Neither are a long term solution and neither will lower gas prices.

The argument that drilling for oil will not affect gas prices is a non-starter. Even Obama knows more oil on the market will lower prices, thus the suggestion to pull oil from the reserves.

Increased drilling is the only short term, and long term solution.

People should be asking themselves why Obama and the democrats are so invested in allowing foreign countries to hold us hostage while we import 70+% of our oil.

Typical democrat policy:

We (America) needs to do with less so the rest of the world can have more.

America = Bad

Rest of the world = good.

At 9:29 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jimmy Carter taxed the oil companies in the 70's during the last oil crisis. Remember what happened? The oil companies went overseas which made us MORE dependent on foreign oil. Sending out $1000 checks will do nothing to solve the problem but put increase the deficit. 'He who doesn't learn from history will repeat it.'

At 10:32 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about some common sense on the issue for once?

At 10:49 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

We don't need tax cuts. We need tax INCREASES! And we'll have to keep paying higher taxes for a few years.

If you don't like that situation, blame the assholes who voted for the criminals who looted the Treasury. Blame American voters. Blame those who voted for politicians promising tax cuts that we couldn't pay for. Blame yourselves.

At 12:19 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

I am deeply disturbed in both candidates now, they are moving discussiion of tapping into ANWR as if you can count on it as being reality now. This is fundamentally dangerous to the US in many ways. 1. It perpatually adds to global warming and does not solve the problems we face. 2. The last pristine place in the nation will be destroyed without batting an eye. 3. When we run out of our oil, think of even higher gas prices, if other oil-rich nations decide to let us live. 4. Relying on the oil companies for scratching our backs later is very scary, because they will follow where the money takes them, i.e. China nad India. 5. Finally, there is NO GUARANTEE that the oil tapped from ANWR or offshore (same thing) will ever hit the US market. It could be sold to the Chinese or India. ASK QUESTIONS PEOPLE!!!

At 12:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

oil companies already pay astronomically high taxes. exxon for example, between 03-07, paid $64.7 billion in taxes, ... which was more than their after tax profits by over $19 billion. taxing them more won't fix anything. they'll just pass the bill onto the consumer. which we'll pay for using our $1,000 check until it runs out. and then the tax will keep the costs high. learn some basic economics, it's a horrendous policy that will make things work and is socialist in nature. quit trying to make a quick buck and grab onto some morals and ethics.

At 6:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why are we talking about the differences between the 2 contenders if neither of them is the answer to our problems.... it's a bit of this or a bit of that and neither works...... So let's not waste words and time and go back to where we were before June when we, the Democratic Party dished Hillary and put our mind and soul in newcomer "Change" Obama ????
Forget Obama and go back to the economic team of Bill and HILL. It worked before and why should it NOT work for the future ?? Are we knowingly going to lose or take a chance to dig ourselves out of this quicksand.....??
'Anybody has a better answer ? Or do I have to throw in my lightweight into the ring and clear everything I have not the foggiest notion nor idea of....... God, HELP ME ......PLEASE !!! Donah////


Post a Comment

<< Home