Dems Feeling Unintended Consequences of Foreign Oil Rhetoric

-- Scott Paul
...Unfortunately, the folks promoting smart energy policy have exacerbated the problem by continuing to promise an end to U.S. dependence on foreign oil. Speaker Pelosi has led the charge here. Sen. Obama, among others, has gone along too (and it's in the final Democratic Party platform). Not even the most enlightened officials on energy -- I'd include Sens. Lugar and Biden and Gov. Richardson in this group -- have not resisted the temptation of "foreign oil dependence" rhetoric when they speak publicly, their sound policies notwithstanding.

At the end of the day, it's Obama who is paying for this. While it makes little sense policy-wise, Sen. McCain's "all hands" approach, which includes drilling offshore and in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, is the more direct and intuitive response to the challenge of weaning ourselves off foreign oil. Obama and my allies in the climate movement typically respond that we can't drill our way to energy independence. While it's a nice soundbite and a sound foundation for policy, I'm afraid it will fall on deaf ears with a public that has been told year after year that anything we can do to weaken the influence of those bad oil producers is a step in the right direction.

I should mention, by the way, that there actually is polling to support this -- this isn't just my guesswork. I saw the polls while I was abroad but didn't save the link, so you'll have to take my word for it. Sorry, readers!

In the end, energy will probably be a split decision this year from a political perspective. McCain will win points for his "use every tool" approach and his longstanding commitment to action on climate change, but his party affiliation will tie him to seven years of bad policy, rising gas prices and coziness with industry. If there were any justice, he would also take a hit for his flip-flop on the Law of the Sea Convention, but that's clearly not going to register.

It's probably too late to reframe this debate for the '08 election, but we should hope that we hear more about the importance of breaking our addiction to oil and gas altogether and less about the threat of those nasty foreign oil producers in the future.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/08/dems_feeling_un/

my local paper has been publishing article after article of 'letters to the editor' about McCain and his *oilly willingness to do what is needed to help lower oil prices at the pump* :crazy:

Here's the latest one...

To the Editor:

While Russia and China are securing energy resources domestically and around the world, our Congress recently had a chance to vote on domestic oil drilling, but Nancy Pelosi and the “do-little” gang shut out the lights on debate and went on vacation for five weeks.

Meanwhile, Harry (“The War is Lost”) Reid was in the Senate whining about oil companies not drilling on land that has no oil.

Until recent polls came out showing 70 percent of Americans favor domestic drilling, Barack Obama’s plan was not to drill at all domestically. He also wants to raise taxes on gasoline and just about everything else he can.

There is no feasible alternative to oil. Ethanol is more costly to make, is subsidized by the government and raises food prices. It’s a bad idea, period. Wind mills, solar power and batteries have been around many years. Where are the great advancements? There are none. My car won’t run on wind and sunshine. We need oil.

One 42-gallon barrel of oil creates 19 gallons of gasoline. The rest is used to make such things as ink, tires, golf balls, paint, film, crayons, dyes, detergents, shampoo, soap and thousands of other goods. Not producing more oil would do nothing but make life harder for every American family.

The last thing this country needs is a Marxist president with a socialist agenda.

Tim XXXXXXXXX

What is really too bad is that the corporate media continues to avoid pointing out that McCain is lying when he says that drilling everywhere will have any short term effect on oil supply and prices, that any oil from such drilling will take 10-15 years to get to the market, that the amount of oil that might be derived from such drilling is not enough to have any major effect on global oil supplies and thus will not alter the price of oil, that the areas currently off limits are off limits because they are environmentally sensitive, and that the oil companies are sitting on nearly 70 million acres of domestic oil leases in far less sensitive areas that they currently aren't drilling.

What is really too bad is the numbers of fools and/or liars who keep repeating the McCain bullshit.

succinctly? I posted this yesterday on the environmental board which asks and answers the question What Happens If Congress Lifts Drilling Ban?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnews/20080815/ts_usnews/whathappensifcongressliftsdrillingban

Big oil has us 'over a barrell' as long as they keep advertising to the fools that they are doing all they can to protect the environment as they steal 'our' land to make and take the money right out of our pockets while doing it.

That is what he is doing and we have to start calling him out on it directly.

Very smart idea. You do know that in the bill of the Gang of 10 that Florida's coasts can be drilled as close as 50 miles. Outstanding. That is the bill Obama supports.

Has any Democrat stood up and said that US oil companies are shipping record amounts overseas?

Since last year they are shipping a third more over seas.

So yes, let's all jump on the bandwagon if the polls say so.

So much easier than telling the truth.

The oil belongs to the company that pulls it out of the ground and the last time I looked, they will sell it to whoever pays the most. There are no "American" companies selling oil at bargain rates to Americans only.

So unless we nationalize an oil company here or there, the only way America gets money from these guys is to insist they incorporate in the U.S. and tax their asses....

The nanny corproate 'welfare' protectors won't like that notion. haha