Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiPelosi: At-Risk Democrats Permitted to Back Drilling
WASHINGTON - California Democrat Nancy Pelosi may be trying to save the planet - but the rank and file in her party increasingly are just trying to save their political hides when it comes to gas prices as Republicans apply more and more rhetorical muscle.
But what looks like intraparty tension on the surface is part of an intentional strategy in which Pelosi takes the heat on energy policy, while behind the scenes she's encouraging vulnerable Democrats to express their independence if it helps them politically, according to Democratic aides on and off Capitol Hill.
Pelosi's gambit rests on one big assumption: that Democrats will own Washington after the election and will be able to craft a sweeping energy policy that is heavy on conservation and fuel alternatives while allowing for some new oil drilling. Democrats see no need to make major concessions on energy policy with a party poised to lose seats in both chambers in just three months - even if recess-averse Republicans continue to pound away on the issue.
"The reality is we will have a new president in three months, and what Bush and the Republicans are trying to do amounts to a land grab for the oil companies," said one senior House Democratic aide involved with party strategy. "I don't think we have to give in at all pre-election - we have many more options postelection."
It's a reality that Rep. Nick J. Rahall (D-W.Va.) personally delivered to President Bush recently.
Rahall spent more than an hour last week talking to the president about energy. Bush spent the entire flight aboard Air Force One, and much of a subsequent limousine ride, grilling the West Virginia Democrat about legislative solutions to the high price of gasoline, Rahall said last week.
So, does the president think Congress can get anything done this year?
"No," Rahall replied in a short interview with Politico. "He's realistic about it."
Asked if Congress will produce a comprehensive energy bill in September before Congress adjourns again for elections, Rahall replied, "This year? No."
Instead, the chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources believes Democrats are all about 2009.
"We've laid the groundwork this year," Rahall said.
Democratic House aides say the energy agenda has been carefully gamed out in strategy sessions, and Pelosi always intended to take heat on gas prices while tacitly encouraging more vulnerable Democrats to publicly disagree with her and show their independence.
Freshman Democrats like Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania and Don Cazayoux of Louisiana have taken her up on the offer.
Altmire has said a drilling vote "will happen," while Cazayoux, hoping to hang on to his seat in a conservative Baton Rouge-area district, on Friday sent a letter to Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) demanding a vote on more domestic oil exploration.
"There will be a vote," said Altmire, who faces a rematch with former GOP Rep. Melissa Hart this fall in the Pittsburgh suburbs.
Indeed, Congress must vote before Sept. 30 to renew the annual moratorium; otherwise, it will lapse on its own, giving states the right to decide whether private companies can search for potential drilling sites three miles offshore. .
"My view is that if we have a vote, let's make it a rational policy," said Altmire, whose district includes viable coal and nuclear industries. "We can't let Republicans hold this issue hostage because of one vote."
Cazayoux, in his letter, says "the current debate seems to be bogged down in partisan one-upmanship."
To some extent, House Republicans seem to be playing right along with the strategy, taking Pelosi's name in vain dozens of times during their rebel House sessions over the past few days and making her the villain who won't allow oil drilling votes.
"It's grossly unfair to the Democrats who want a vote," said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). "[Pelosi] needs to cut that out."
The Senate has also gone with a run-out-the-clock strategy, with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) calling for a bipartisan energy summit but promising no major energy votes. Reid embraced the drilling and conservation proposals of the bipartisan Senate "Gang of 10" last week, but he made further commitment on the energy debate.
Reid, like Pelosi, is expecting to have a much stronger governing majority in the Senate next year, so he has little incentive to give in to Republicans on energy policy as long as he thinks it won't hurt Democrats.
Even as they face heat from constituents during the August break, Democrats say they aren't going to cave in to popular pressure.
"We feel pretty comfortable with where we are," said Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D-Mass.), who is close to the Democratic leadership. "This is a not a new issue. This just didn't happen today. We've been working on this for months."
Democratic insiders said that Pelosi and other party leaders were "not rattled" by the GOP floor rebellion, and at this point, it's not clear if the Democrats will even pay a price on energy. State-level polling conducted by Democrats suggests that voters still view President Bush and the GOP as the incumbent power in Washington, and Democratic strategists believe any anti-incumbent wave would hurt Republicans more than Democrats.
Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, one of the leaders of the rogue GOP House session, said he realizes that Democrats are "in a four-corners stall right now," and admits that "it gets more challenging" for Republicans if they lose more seats in Congress.
Democrats are also comforted somewhat by the fact that crude oil prices have gone down more than 10 percent from their summer highs, and if the U.S. economy enters a recession, prices may fall further due to slackening demand.
"There is no crisis on our side of the aisle," a top House Democratic leadership aide said. "We have a plan, and we will stick to it."
John Bresnahan and Daniel Reilly contributed to this story
© 2008 Capitol News Company, LLC
72 Comments so far
Show Allgood work. thank you
_______
sohbet
I sure hope sheehan beats her in november. I doubt very seriously that if an incumbent(dem or repub we don't need) dem would be replaced with a repub. What pelosi wants is more money and power. She deserves neither, as a matter of fact she needs to be working for minimum wage washing dishes and doing char work. Definitely an incumbent that needs replacing.
Obama and Pelosi accuse the oil companies of not drilling in the areas where they already are allowed to drill. This suggests a compromise. Give them all offshore because they will not drill there anyway.
We can't keep sending these useless ass-wipes back to Washington year after year. This is our country and we have to change it to save it. Don't vote for the two war parties, and FIRE PELOSI!
Cindy Sheehan for Congress
cindyforcongress.org
Democrats say they aren't going to cave in to popular pressure.
-of course not! Democrats only cave in to pressure from Republicans, Big Oil, Big Business and the Military Industrial Complex. In that case they are pussies.
When it comes to resisting popular pressure, such as ending the war in Iraq or doing something about the rape by Big Oil ~Democrats are tough as Bulldogs!
LesserEvilismIsEvil-
You're right!
Wow, you've convinced me. You are truly a useful person.
When are you people who vote Democratic going to learn that by perpetually giving a rubber stamp to the DNC, you promote equally hard-core corporate agendas? The point is that the Dems have no oppositional party or parties to push them in the direction true progressives want them to go... and until we do meet that challenge, they will disregard our concerns and turn the other direction because we are still an insignificant threat.
The Canadian had it right:
CanadatoImperium August 5th, 2008 4:53 pm
Voting 3′rd party in Canada is a great idea. Everyone here knows that the Greens or the NDP will never win the big prize, but because so many people vote 3′rd party the Liberals (similar to the Democrats) turn left to appeal to voters. Check out the Canadian Liberal green shift package… it sure isn't a bunch of BS about oil drilling. There is both an ethical reason and a good "real-politics" reason to vote 3′rd party in the USA… and if you don't like Nader we'd love to have him on the ballot up north here
This is where activists are supposed to come in. If the polls show that Americans support offshore or increased drilling, then we haven't properly done our job of education.
By the way, the Bush Administration has been buying about 750,000 barrels of oil a WEEK for the naval reserve. That contributes to increasing prices. If they started selling some on the forward oil market, it almost certainly would help decrease the price. Not many Americans (or media outlets) seem to know this.
And by the way: the insulting comments here do not win anyone over. Calling people stupid does not win them over. Calling people cowardly does not win them over. But, as I've said before, many here do not want to win, they just want to bitch and insult people. THAT is "stupid".
What do you mean "permitted" bitch? No democrat should be following the orders of the coward pelosi.
welcome to the American Politics restaurant.
We have 3 tables for you to choose from.
The first table has a republican waiter. He will spit in your face, insult your wife, curse at you, poison your food and laugh while you choke, pausing just long enough to snag your wallet, kicking your dead body upon discovering you only had 50 bucks on you.
The second table has a democratic waiter. He will listen politely to your order, assure you he is working hard to make this the best dining experience you've ever had, and then go into the kitchen, spit in your food, make rude jokes about your wife with his brother (the republican waiter), curse about you to the kitchen staff, poison your food, and then maintain an appropriately concerned look on his face while you choke, regretfully slipping your wallet out (I mean, really, you aren't going to be needing it, so its hardly a crime, right?).
The third table has a third party waiter. He will write down your order, make phone calls to get the ingredients from an organic farmer, finds a wine that complements the meal, and get balloons for your kids. Unfortunately, the democratic and republican waiters don't ever allow the third party waiter into the kitchen, so he can't actually serve you a meal. He spends alot of his time trying to heimlich the choking patrons of the democratic tables (who perversely brandish their steak knives at him).
By the way, you can't go to another restaurant because they are full, and don't want you crowding their waiting areas and bars spouting off about how the American restaurant really is still the best because they have the most big screen tvs in town.
So, when choosing, which theory are you going to follow?
On the one hand, at least the republican waiter is upfront about his disdain. At least you know exactly how much spit is coming at you, and his laughter will be sincere when you choke.
On the other hand, the democratic waiter will make you feel like you will, at some point have a decent meal, if you just keep tipping him. Perhaps last time you didn't tip enough, so if you assure him you will give more this time, maybe things will change. And he will say nice things about you after you choke.
Of course, the last choice is the third party. Downside is that you won't get a meal tonight, course, you really aren't going to eat no matter what table you sit at, and at least the third party waiter will treat you with some decency. Together, you may even be able to revive one of the choking democratic patrons. In fact, if you did, perhaps all of you together might find another door into the kitchen just in time to avoid starving to death.
Please tell me which is the lesser of these evils?
Seriously, how are we going to get the food we need to survive - both literally and metaphorically speaking??
I am starting to believe we are going to have to go hungry till the restaurant finally closes altogether...no restaurant that kills and starves its customers can keep going forever......
Sure tetti, Whatever you say...
Keep that attitude with anyone and see what kind of chance you get from them.
Like "Hey Cocksuckers why don't you give me a Chance?"
Maybe Goebbles will help you.
I must leave this thread now so you can have the last rage.
BY BY
It's hard to have any intellectual respect for Dem Party Apologists and Lesser Evilists anymore.
The'd choose Jeffrey Dahmer over Ted Bundy to babysit their kids because the Dahmer person murdered less. Incredibly stupid. And what would 3rd party candidates do? Why don't you geniuses give them a chance by voting for them instead of electing these right-wing cocksuckers, the Democrats, over and over again for 100 years?
It's hard to have any intellectual respect for Dem Party Apologists and Lesser Evilists.
The'd choose Jeffrey Dahmer over Ted Bundy to babysit their kids because the Dahmer person murdered less. Incredibly stupid.
Goebbels,
Thanks for your advise...that sounds like something your namesake would say.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels
Jim Glover sez: "Voting third party is like going into a restaurant really hungry and ordering whatever they don't have."
***
Actually, voting in "America" is more like going into a restaurant, ordering a salad and getting tripe. There may be selections on the menu, but you're gonna get whatever the Supreme kitchen decides you're gonna get.
If you folks are going to find a way to nationalize industries, I'd suggest starting with the voting industry.
Is the public not the biggest villains in all of this? Is it not obvious that drilling will not only do little to nothing about oil prices (oil prices SHOULD be high anyway, there are ecological costs associated with their consumption that aren't included in prices and the supply of oil is finite in amount. Why should something go down in price that creates ecological costs that aren't accounted for and the resource becomes more scarce over time? The problem here is who the profits are going to)? Does lower prices anyway not mean more consumption, more pollution and more environmental destruction?
The other problem, as people said above, is that the Democrats really don't have principles. They are incapable of standing for polices that are currently unpopular because they believe in them, they are not willing to try and convince people to change their position (and how hard would that be with this illogical crap?) because they really don't care about much of anything enough to waste their time. I'm so disgusted with this country I could scream.
Thanks Richard,
Yes I saw it and it was cool.
Even us Sheeple know when we are gettin Fleeced.
Bush is one of those "END EVIL" guys and look what he has done.
How much evil is done in this world by those seeking to end "EVIL" ?
Look it up...
-------------------
How many third party candidates are running for the house and senate? If they all were elected would there be a majority? Which of any of the candidates is going to re instate the Constitution? Is there a time limit on Impeachment and Prosecution? If a third (-4-5) party candidate were to win, who would he draw upon for his cabinet and could they work with whom ever holds the house and senate?
Yes, sheeople these are serious questions and because I have called us (which includes me) sheeople you will not answer let alone consider these questions? Just go on calling each other names and spouting that if only you were running things or your ideas were put in place everything would be fixed in a NY minute (as the phrase goes)
By the way have you seen Paris' new commercial in response to the Mc Cain add? Check it out.
Hey little brother,
Don't tell me about Florida.
I asked help from the Greens in Florida to stop Bush in 2000 but they treated me just like you are doing now.
You helped the greatest Evil in our time as you are still doing and I don't like that.
So Which branch of the third party is gonna end evil and corruption?
A question for our Evil experts and political exorcists:
Which branch of the third party is gonna end evil and corruption?
formernadervoter, the elections board threw out, what, 43% of the signatures Sheehan submitted?
One can only hope that the fix isn't in, and that Sheehan's candidacy will be nixed by the simple act of the board blowing off her nominating petition.
I have no idea what the due process is, but it's like the rigged elections in Florida, Ohio, and who knows where else-- there are a few individuals or organizations still trying to expose the fraud. But no one's about to UNDO anything.
The worst part is that if they do clothesline Sheehan, the corporate media will handle it exactly as they're handling the "anthrax terrorist suicide" story.
Keep your fingers crossed!
Why does Nancy Pelosi, who is almost 70 years old, look as young and even younger than her own children? Not one grey hair, whitened teeth. You'd think she was a movie star instead of a politician who supposedly represents us. What's she good for? Maybe she's the one that should be pictured with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, not Obama.
The surge has worked!....again!
Just another reason we need Cindy to defeat Pelosi.
www.cindyforcongress.org
OK tetti Have it your way.
Now, voting for which 3rd party is going to stop corruption and dishonesty?
Who is gonna deliver? The world wants to know... this is important stuff you are selling.
Corruption needs to stop now before it is too late, who is gonna do that?
Jim Glover how can you have the bravery, not to say BALLS, to ask me to vote Democratic after reading the list I just posted? This talk about changing the Democratic Party from inside was ridiculous in 1968 and it's more preposterous now 40 years later. It's never going to happen, you can't change something that doesn't want to be changed.
We don't need to stop McCain, we need to stop McCain AND Obama, our task is much more difficult. Your willing to compromise with corruption and dishonesty won't do the job, sorry. In fact, it's counterproductive.
The responsibility of each person is to evaluate information that supports their candidate as well as negates their candidate.
For those people who are too fearful to vote for someone else other than Obama because it would mean a McCain presidency, they should do a little more homework. In either case, we get the corporate agenda. More war, more corporate profits, all at the expense of the American people, and those people that we are oppressing in other countries.
If you think that you are 'playing the game' by voting for Obama (by being strategic, or realistic, or some other justification), don't worry, the corporate elite and its parties are happy because they have co-opted you.
My vote for a third party candidate is not a vote for McCain (it isn't true no matter how many times people repeat it), and my vote for third party in the last two elections hadn't put Bush into the presidency. First off, he stole it. Second, if Gore demanded a full recount of Florida he would have won. Third, he didn't even win his home state. Fourth, he picked Lieberman. And so on, he didn't even mention global warming.
It would be nice to see people who were originally together on issues (end the war being one of them) could have stayed together on supporting a common candidate. It seems that all people have different strategies to who they should support. In my opinion, supporting Obama is not just a compromise, but counter to the basic principles that support peace and justice.
Blind allegience to the democratic party is just that. Blind allegience has never served the interests of any society.
Tetti,
You have done a good job listing all of the Congress's giving in to the War Paranoia. War makes Freedom, justice and truth the first victim always. It is human nature... we all have faults and weaknesses. We all can't be perfect like you want but reality is always messy with good and bad.
Things could be worse... We could have impeached Bush and got Cheney.
Cheney and the neocons had this all figured out... how to use War to control the public opinion and defeat Justice. These guys are the American version of the new Nazis and this is why we need to stop the slide.
Voting third party will help this right wing no matter how weak the congress is.
There are many progressive Dems who did not go along on most of the failings that you list but what to do about a bad situation... we need more progressive Dems like Dennis and Wexler to go forward.
If I thought that voting 3rd party would help anything of the mess were in, I would vote that way, but no matter how much this congress fails, the 3rd parties will not get one person elected who can do anything.... That is just reality.
A Meet Beetle has listed many new stories that convince me even more how important it is to stop McCain.
Bush told the FBI to find Moslems guilty of the anthrax to justify this illegal war! I can't see Obama doin this kind of shit and I don't see any chance that McSame would free Sami al Arian.
If 3rd party people help Progressives stop McCain, Progressives will be united for the first time in our history and have much greater influence in the future.
Calling all Dems including the progressives "Bush cocksuckers" does not help anyone.
If we don't stop McCain, there might not be a future worth fighting for anymore.
That is my worry. I wish you could help but you seem to have no mercy...lots of anger which is justified but we need to stop the slide to fascism.
I hope you will reconsider in the next 3 months. There is still time to think about consequences... what will happen if we don't unite.
Peace
Tell 'we the sheeople' what ever you think they want to hear. If they don't vote by Sept. 30 the moratorium will lapse on its own. Hello that means no Federal restrictions on off shore drilling and leaves it up to the states. Well sounds much like their pay raises which they must vote not to receive. Then will they tell us I didn't vote for it?
And wasn't there a shortage and the world was almost out of oil during Nixon's Presidency? Which was followed by a shortage of many other things sugar, toilet paper, dry wall board and anything else they wished to raise the prices of.
Seems to me the only shortage we have is memory, brains, a middle class, value of our currency. Certainly no shortage of gaul especially in this government/corpocracy/msm.....no, just tell the sheeople anything doesn't matter what, yes some things you may have to repeat, longer and more often but, don't worry the sheeople will eat it up....they are really good sheeople they do as they are told.
Yes, believe that one of the parties or the other is going to fix things and save you and/or this country......which isn't really a country without the US Constitution. Or, maybe you've been so busy just trying to survive you missed the fact that the Constitution has been repealed.
What, when, I didn't hear or see anything about the end of the US Constitution, not on MSM or even here at common dreams. Think ol' Paine has lost it, doesn't know what he's saying, nut case......well fellow sheeople just take a look at what has been done to this country since 9/11 all in the name of keeping you safe. Patriot Act to FISA all against the constitution yet both sides of the aisle have gone along as have 'we the sheeople'.
And now they want drilling rights to everything upon the outer banks of this nation while they empty and close the banks within. Not what you wanted to hear...sorry, I'm not a politician, just one man speaking truth to power......the power of we the sheeople which saidly we don't realise we have any more than you realise the Constitution no longer exists within this government.
enough said...is it time to awaken yet?
And wasn't Ted Kennedy one of the big (BIG!) movers and shakers behind the no child left behind "education" scam?
tetti_tatti--
Don't forget the bankruptcy bill. Dems helped make that a reality too.
crooked7 good point.
of course ezeflyer Dem Party Apologist and Lesser Evilist of the frivolous kind can't name anything Obama or Democrats have achieved because they have achieved NOTHING, except:
voting "YES" for the USA PATRIOT ACT,
voting "YES" for two illegal wars and subsequent funding,
voting "YES" for Alito,
voting "YES" for Roberts,
voting "YES" for Mukasey,
voting "YES" for Gonzales,
voting "YES" for Rumsfeld,
voting "YES" to authorize Bush's spying
voting "YES" in the Senate (97-0) for the resolution to threaten Iran.
voting "YES" for the FISA travesty, etc.
refusing to impeach Bush.
Note that they could've TRIED to filibuster at least one out of so many Bush crimes, even when they were in the minority. Instead, these Bush cocksuckers gave him everything he wanted. The Democratic Party must be wiped off the face of the electoral map.
Getting off oil as a transportation fuel can be done in 10 years. But we need oil during the transition. There are two choices. Foreign oil or domestic oil. Why pay $140 a barrel for foreign oil when the oil owned by the people of the United States can be produced for $20 a barrel? Remember Adam Smith and natural price?
if the Republicans are so concerned about people paying outrageous prices for gasoline why do they want to let the oil companies charge the world price for oil that belongs to the people of the US? The public obviously doesn't want to sell oil to itself at the world price. People obviously don't want to price gouge themselves. If the Democrats started talking about producing US oil for the cost of production +1% profit for the producing companies, the Republicans would call it communism and socialism. Adam Smith called it "natural price" - the cost of production + the cost of transportation + the cost of refining + a small profit.
It won't help at all to lease land to the oil companies before the election. Why would the oil companies spend money to produce more oil when they can just jack up the price on what they have? The only thing that will help right now is taking oil out of the strategic petroleum reserve, and restricting the oil futurers market to refiners & retailers of oil.
I don't mean need much gasoline, I'm retired. But there are people who have to put more than an excuse on the table every day. They need cheap gasoline ( or electric cars) if the economy is ever going to recover. Green Manufacturing, infrastructure projects, and government stimulus checks are not going to bring the economy out of recession. More disposable income will. Putting US oil on the US market for the cost of production will bring the economy out of recession, reduce inflation, strengthen the dollar, and reduce the world price of oil- which will do more to repair the US image than empty political rhetoric.
youbetterwork August 5th, 2008 12:43 pm - "Check the polls too - this is working for the republicans… I can't understand why people are so stupid."
Two words: T.V.
"Ignore the positive things Obama and progressive Dems have achieved."
Yeah sure, name some why don't you.
How to beat the Democrats and win it for the Republicans:
--Firmly assert that the Dems are just as bad or worse than the Repugs.
--Plead constantly for all to vote for a losing candidate or party, or vote for the Repugs and McCain directly.
--Ignore the fact that not voting or voting for anybody but Obama will give us McCain/Repugs.
--Base your arguments on the righteousness of voting for fantasy candidates and 3rd parties.
--Use the lesser evil argument at every opportunity.
--Furiously attack Obama in every article or thread.
--Rage about how you hate Repugs but you hate Dems more.
--Make a list of the things you don't like about Obama and the Democrats and post it on every thread.
--Ignore the articles and threads that detail how Bush and the Republican Party have destroyed the country.
--Ignore the positive things Obama and progressive Dems have achieved.
--Insult pro-Obama posters.
--Keep repeating the above mercilessly.
--Gather your troops on Common Dreams blog in overwhelming numbers.
I don't really trust Nancy Pelosi.
I made the mistake of looking at her voting record a couple of years ago and as far as I am concerned she is too Conservative for my tastes.
I just heard on the news that gas prices have gone down.
Does this mean that my electric bill will go down?
I think not.
And if you want to get a handle on what the high gas prices are really about just look who is on the boards of the major Utility Companies.
This boondoggle started with Enron and will continue until We the People decide that we aren't going to take it any more.
Getting rid of people who play both sides of the fence like Ms. Pelosi woild be a good start.
"Voting third party is like going into a restaurant really hungry and ordering whatever they don't have."
Were Obama not such a slippery eel, and he had not decided to flop to the right so vulgarly, you Democrats wouldn't be so worried. And worry you should.
"WASHINGTON (AP) - The Iraqi government could end this year with as much as a $79 billion cumulative budget surplus, based largely on ever-increasing oil revenues, congressional auditors say."
A surplus? Maybe this will work for Mister Bush's America - start with the Beltway and bomb the country back to the Stone Age...
Samson,
Dreaming on Common Dreams, I like that!
If the Dems can win over this, great!
If Exxon was gonna drill they would be suckin up the Billions of barrels in Montana.
This is just a divisive issue about as consequential as your bridge for sale.
In general, watch Actions.
The Action here is the Dems jumping on the Republican bandwagon for more drilling. That's the REAL thing they are doing.
Sure, the Dems toss out lots of pretty words where they try to pretend they are different. But watch ACTIONS. The action is the Dems giving key votes to the Republicans to pass a Republican policy. Gee, where have we seen this before.
Sure, the Dems will pretend they oppose this. I guess this time its Pelosi who's going to pretend to be the opposition. Maybe she needs the help because she sees CINDY gaining on her. But they always play games on votes and bills, once there's enough votes to ensure passage, the others can posture to their hearts content.
But its all bull. Watch the ACTIONS. The ACTION is the Dems giving key votes to the Republicans to pass a Republican policy.
Surprise, surprise, surprise, yet another Republican bill passing the Dem majority Congress. Seems to happen every week now. The roles have changed a bit in the political theater, but that's just to confuse the masses.
OIL COMPANIES: FUTURE GENERATIONS NOT PROFITS
HELLO!! oil companies, Democratic, and Republican members of Congress. Apparently the aforementioned do not read environmental news or do not care about global warming since their solution to the oil crisis is based on the assumption that the real problem is either a shortage of supply or high prices. Apparently these people do not read any analysis other than the mainstream media for their understanding of the impact of global warning. Most of these people have children and grandchildren and it defies common sense that they would willingly bequeath a severely damaged planet to their loved ones. So read other sources.
The real problem is the consumption of fossil fuel irrespective of the price or availability. Clearly and simply, fossil fuels contribute to greenhouse emissions which are already approximately 60% above the levels needed to sustain our planet. Increasing current consumption levels cannot possibly be the solution in the short or long term.
Compounding the problem is the fact that oil is either close to or past its peak. That means that oil is guaranteed to become more expensive and dirty as producers extract oil from less efficient sources. For example, the Tar Sands in Canada has catapulted to number one in known oil reserves. It is extremely costly and dirty to extract and destroys the environment in a large area. Greenhouse emissions will skyrocket as people begin to consume more oil from these dirty and inefficient sources.
Offshore drilling will have no real impact on either the supply or cost of oil while at the same time ignoring the essential principle that the best way to solve the fossil fuel problem is to leave it in the ground. It will take ten years for that oil to come on line and it would account for less than .2% of world production. As well, he is making an unrealistic assumption that the first priority of the oil companies that produce the oil will be to sell it to the United States. The oil will belong to the companies and their one and only mandate is to maximize profits and if that means selling elsewhere, they will.
Confusing our understanding of the problem is the discussion about the price of oil. Obviously, the oil companies want you to believe that it is related to the supply of oil and hence the solution is to produce more oil. Surprise! Surprise! The real problem is neither the supply which has been fairly constant nor the demand which is rising due to the increasing consumption in countries such as India and China but can still be met for a while given current reserves. The real problem is speculation. Speculators are not only betting on the price today but the price well into the future. It is their predatory betting for quick profits that is driving up the price for consumers.
Possibly the problem would be fully addressed if those with ties with the oil companies, including oil company executives, shareholders, lobbyists, and politicians who are in a bed of oil with the oil companies, paid more attention to the fate of their younger relatives than to the ever-increasing profits of oil companies.
http://www.stateofdarkness.com
BTW, I've heard this "we'll fix it after the election" line before. Its what Bill Clinton was saying about Welfare Reform during 1996. He said he had to do it to get re-elected, then he'd fix the awful bill afterwards. Still waiting for that.
If you believe the Dems will fix this after being elected, I've got a nice full-size replica of the Brooklyn Bridge you can have for only a couple of millions dollars ... cash only, unmarked bills please.
The key point is that the Dems will do whatever the people with money tell them to do. And Exxon has lots of money. If you think electing Obama instead of McCain will change any of this, you are dreaming.
There is one point I keep coming back to ....
The only thing the Democrats care about is 'winning'. They want to grab power for themselves. There is not a single principle or policy that they give a damn about. Nothing matters to them. They only care about 'winning' and anything can be tossed overboard to get there.
They have no problem with seeing American beaches covered with oil if it wins them an election.
The "strategy" is a loser. The republicans are dominating the air waves and the Dems are leaving Obama all alone in this fight. He will lose this fight unless he can change the discussion from production and "independence" to conservation and the failures of the republicans. My guess is he can't and the Democrats will be shocked at the results of the election. Greed conquers all.
OK Words,
Our goals are the pretty much the same.
I believe in progress towards those goals... by stages step by step. Eugene Debs was a good man, but could not deliver.
If a third party cannot deliver it is giving false hopes.
Now if you want to build a united 3rd party force that learns how to form coalitions to get more progressives elected, that has a better chance with Obama than McCain in my opinion because if McCain wins, progressives will blame 3rd party voters and we will be split again as usual.
The people united cannot be defeated, but as long as we are divided by false promises and votes meant to lose as you would rather do, the center right status quo is safe from any progress.
Anyway if you want to make things as bad as can be so that a revolution will occur, that is the usual reasoning of violent revolutionaries, but I don't see that kind of revolution doing anyone any good.
If that is your goal I can not argue except that things are bad enough now without consciously attempting to make them worse by not stopping the worst possible outcome which under Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran McCain, could practically end the world. Would that make you Happy?
But you are free to do that.
If you would rather lose than stop McCain and what he promises...He can win wars right?... then you will not help 3rd party goals, just the opposite.
Yes the system is rigged and 3rd parties are good for education but if the candidates can't deliver it is because 3rd parties are in the system too and they serve to divide the votes of those of us who don't believe in utopia and false promises but to make things better because as you say things are bad enough already.
So you have made it clear what you would rather do. But I see it as a vote for making things worse while doing nothing to make things better because like you say you would rather lose.
Debs was a union man http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_V._Debs and if he was here today, I think he would do what he could to stop the regressive union buster Republicans.
Maybe you could consider these consequences and if Obama starts singin Bomb Iran, I'll vote for the 3rd party of your choice.
Deal?
I'm with you Words--3rd party. I'm through with only being offered two ever-so-slightly different possibilities.
I remember just days before the 2000 election, I was visiting a friend one evening. A Gore campaigner came to the door and said he was specifically visiting people who had Nader lawn signs in front of their houses. We talked to the young man about a variety of issues. When we came to the environment, specifically our Oregon forests, the Gore rep told us, "If Bush gets elected all the trees in the Willamette National Forest will be gone in ten years. If Gore gets elected it will be more like 15 years." That told me all I needed to know about the difference between Democrats and Republicans: No matter which party holds power, our fate is exactly the same--it will just be a little slower getting here if we elect Dems.
The last time I voted for a conventional Democrat was Carter. With every subsequent election, local, state, Congressional, I have voted a mix of third party for every office. I have no guilt, nor regret, for that.
All the people I believe to have been the real leaders for accomplishing meaningful change in this country are dead. The good ones now that are derivatives, and brave souls in their own right, are blacked out.
But, I am to old to change. I will continue to vote for those that don't sell their positions to the corporate pimps at the expense of the planet and the mass of humanity that lie awake at night worrying about food in the morning and who the next bastard will be trying to take what's left from they and their family.
The vote is the only realm left to vote your dearest belief.
Short of 40 million Americans with the guts to march on Washington D.C. and reclaim their inheritance.
Voting 3'rd party in Canada is a great idea. Everyone here knows that the Greens or the NDP will never win the big prize, but because so many people vote 3'rd party the Liberals (similar to the Democrats)turn left to appeal to voters. Check out the Canadian Liberal green shift package... it sure isn't a bunch of BS about oil drilling. There is both an ethical reason and a good "real-politics" reason to vote 3'rd party in the USA... and if you don't like Nader we'd love to have him on the ballot up north here :-)
To Jim,
Reality may be important, but you also aren't limited to the two choices they are telling you is on the corporate menu.
I'm voting third party and hopefully more and more people will get on board (naive thinking?). I understand the reality that people are fearful of actually acting on their beliefs when they have already gotten used to the status quo. It worked for Hitler, it worked for the Communist totalitarian governments and most other dictatorships.
And things really haven't gotten that bad yet, have they? We are only involved in an illegal and immoral war that is killing thousands of innocent people; we are turning the responsibility of our environment to the ones who have already shown their vested interest for financial gain even if it is destroying the very things we need to survive; the lack of national health care; the death penalty; the unsustainable war based economy; campaign financing, etc.
Is that the reality you are talking about? Sorry, that is not my reality or vision.
"I would rather vote for what I don't want and lost, than vote for what I don't want and win." Eugene Debs
Pelosi will no-doubt be remembered as the absolute worst speaker the US has ever had. She's an expert at misdirection and mirrors. It is quite possible that her hypocrisy rivals bush himself.
She isn't trying to "save the planet", the "party", or anyting else. She is doing what she is PAID to do. Money is her only motive. She's not a very good actress but is able to fool SOME people.
The old Texas two step. Now you see it now you don't. And the party elites scratch their heads and wonder why the electorate is cynical? Man, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
1/3 of all energy consumed in the us is for home heating and cooling.ths fossil fuel use (coal/gas and oil)is obviously a problem. experts frequently advise us of the currently marginal contribution of renewable energy to the enrgy supply and the likelihood it will remain that way.
the question is - does it have too?
before obama spends that next trillion (mcain a lot more?) - to keep the oil secure-
wind power today costs 5cents/ kwh to generate
solar energy costs 30c/ kwh hence to generate 10000 kwh it will cost 3000 dollars
double the cost for energy storage and connection to the grid
still, for that proverbial family of 4- the next trillion -
1000, 000, 000, 000/ 300 000 000 x4 = 12000 dollars,
enough to generate 20000 solar kwh and link to grid - enough for the heating/ cooling needs of that home.
would go a lot more towards a secure, renewable energy supply than keeping the troops there, and the earth somewhat cooler.unless the trillion is not to be repaid.
Words Are Important,
Reality is also important!
Voting 3rd party supports the status quo because no third party candidate in the USA today has a prayer to get elected for anything.
But you will make Rush and the Neo Cons happy.
When the 3rd parties get organized and unite, they will have some voting influence, now they are just the little league.
Voting third party is like going into a restaurant really hungry and ordering whatever they don't have.
The oil market has being carefully manipuated by vested interests to the point where the price per barrel has reached record levels. Much of the motivation for this chicanery is to have the drilling prohabition on public lands removed so that the oil companies can continue to reap record profits and for them to maintain total control over our national energy resources. The obvious answer to this unethical and immoral activity is to NATIONALIZE OUR RESOURSES on PUBLICLLY OWNED LANDS and use the PUBLICLLY OWNED RESOURSES for the PUBLIC GOOD instead of for PRIVATE ENRICHMENT. I mean, DUH!
When has the democratic party leadership stood for anything? This applies to Pelosi, Obama, Bill Clinton (and Hillary) and the rest of the gang. They have folded each and every time. Other than shifting who gets a share of the stolen money, none of them have protected the public trust first and foremost, and neither is Obama.
The democratic party leadership will support anything if they think it will get them a vote or campaign dollars (the campaign dollars trump votes). Drilling? Sure. Universal health care, the campaign dollars say no. Withdrawing completely from Iraq? No. Death penalty? No.
This is not just 'posturing' by the democratic party. It is their position. They support the corporate elite while we go off to fight the wars that guarantee corporate profits. The last few wars have not been for national security. And neither will the next one.
Vote third party, stop supporting the status quo because then you will only get more of the same.
Actually, if oil prices drop below $100 or $90 a barrel before November, this whole issue will go away. Unfortunately, so will Americans' interest in conservation.
I am sure that the oil companies know that alternatives are the future ...they are even investing in it like T Boons Pickens and other capitalists.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Jivb7lupDNU
This is just a political football because if the oil companies wanted to drill and lower prices they would be drilling in Montana (cheaper than off shore rigs) and Billions of barrels waiting.
The politicians have no power over this. Why should the oil companies drill off shore when they could keep the price up by not doin anything while there is not much extra refining capacity in the US anyway.
If the oil companies wanted to they would drill in Montana and until they do this is all bullshit.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/05292008/business/montana_governor_is_sitting_on_an_oil_mi_113005.htm
Drilling is just for Dentists these days!
The Dems say they have a plan. Exactly what is it?
Obama talks about more offshore drilling and raiding the light crude in the federal energy reserve and replacing it with heavy crude, which is harder to refine. Both solutions are short-sighted, counter-productive and guaranteed to produce more pollution and global warming.
He gives lip-service to sustainable energy, but says almost nothing about conservation (the quickest and most efficient short-term tactic to eventually achieve sustainability).
He told the US Conference of Mayors that they should not expect any additional federal "help" from the Obama adminstration, but city people need to take more responsibility for their lives. Apparently urbanites are no longer part of the U.S., until we build up our responsibility bona fides.
Most importantly, he says absolutely nothing about federal spending for public transportation, which is another key to get to sustainability.
So what's the plan? Methinks it is hidden in the same closet as Nixon's "secret" plan to end the U.S. wars in S.E. Asia. Following his election, millions more died, hundreds of millions (both S.E. Asians and U.S. citizens) had their lives ruined/changed forever; and hundreds of billions, if not trillions, of U.S. tax dollars were wasted.
Democrats should be using this month off to get out there and tell the people exactly what's what with the push for off-shore drilling. We hear it on C-SPAN, and read about it on-line, but those who only watch what Britney and all the other in gaga land don't know there's plenty of oil just sitting here waiting to be pumped. Or that once the off-shore drilling is done, they ain't gonna give it to the American citizens. Just like all our farm produce, it'll be shipped to foreign countries, and things won't change at all. It's one big ploy to gain control of the worlds supply of oil.
I keep thinking of how coincidental that Bush and Cheney both made trips to the middle east, and soon after that gas started going up. And when Bush drops the presidential ban on drilling, gas went down.
It's such a damned set-up. I hope the dems don't fold on no drilling. The high gas prices will do so much for the people of this country. They've already been going to different means of transportation, or cut way back on driving - which means less trips to the fast food places, so that's good for the weight problem. They'll be eating at home means more family time, and many have gotten creative in other ways because they're finally having to think for themselves again.
"Reid, like Pelosi, is expecting to have a much stronger governing majority in the Senate next year"
Let the Demoks rest on their burning laurels. When third party candidates take 10 to 20% of the vote Demoks will be shifting their crispy butts much farther to the left than they ever imagined.
"Democrats are also comforted somewhat by the fact that crude oil prices have gone down more than 10 percent"
Each time the extreme right gets into the White House and creates geo-political chaos it's going to be a commoodities speculators' bonanza, and a bonanza for the refining/distribution cartel, and all the rest.
But it's also well understood among the elites that when the election season comes around, the bonanza should be over and done, the fires put out and the ashes swept up. Thus, oil prices are slated to decline to a predetermined level for election day.
The bonanzas are seasonal, the seeds are sown under the Demoks and the harvest is slashed/burned under the Repuks. Without the the oil price drop, the fire would reach Washington and burn them all alive.
A possible compromise would be to offer the oil companies the latitude they claim they need for drilling, if congress is given access to all information regarding our current secret energy policy. Until that happens, the dems should stand pat.
Check the polls too - this is working for the republicans...
I can't understand why people are so stupid.
The people of the world need to limit the use of oil, gas and coal to what the Earth can dispose of. We must cut back on these selfdestructive fuels or else cut way back on the number of humans on this planet.
Lessons from history abound with stories of populations outgrowing what the Earth can provide for them. We can either learn from the past and adjust our behavior and population of face disaster. Mother Nature does not care what we do, these are the rules that we will live with or die by. If we fail then Nature will just pick another species to play with.
Drilling or digging our graves deeper and deeper looking for fule to power our cancerous spread is terminal. Nature gives sunshine and rain to everyone - let everyone be thankful and enjoy the gifts that we are given without avrice.
Whatever the right-wing is doing, it's working. Check out all the blogs. Drill, Drill, Drill!!!. Democrats = High Gas Prices! Obama, he doesn't want to drill in Alaska. How in the hell can I fill up my Cadillac Escalade? He MUST be with the terrorists, I mean, Fox news said so then it must be true.
http://www.gizmag.com/compressed-air-car-set-for-us-launch-in-2010/8896/
I'm not convinced they will drill for expensive oil anymore. Transportation may look completly different 10 years from now.
"Peak oil" is only real when the consumers are paying through the nose. Global warming and the runaway methane release aren't real yet. We live in a country where buying things on credit with usurious interest rates is a good idea.
At these oil prices, the Dems will cave on ANWR too.
I think we don't want to drill simply because we can't afford the extra carbon in the earth's atmosphere. Successfully and safely getting the carbon dioxide back out will be a terribly expensive project.
Global warming disaster aside, (besides that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?) my instinct is to not imagine that the U.S. won't declare bankruptcy (make the dollar worth a dime). If we really want that last few billion barrels of oil, we should wait until after the bankruptcy. Jilt our stupid international partners first, wait a few years, then pump out the last drops for a little temporary succor in Hades.
Check out "hydrogen from water" on YouTube. It's amazing how many people are trying out these cheap and simple contraptions at home and saving around 40% on their gas costs. You'll probably say "Wow! Why didn't I think of this before!"
Jim Glover sez: "Voting third party is like going into a restaurant really hungry and ordering whatever they don't have."
What if all the restaurant serves is two steaming bowls of crap? Are you saying we should eat one?