August 4, 2008
Aug 04 02:08 How To Spot Democrats Spinning on Energy Aug 04 12:28 Nuclear Part of Energy Solution, Too Aug 04 13:45 The Latest New Obama Energy Plan Aug 04 17:19 The Next Republican Revolution???
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
How To Spot Democrats Spinning on Energy
It isn't difficult to spot Democrats in spin mode. They're the ones peddling fables, not facts. In the fight over which presidential candidate is serious about fixing our energy crisis, consider what Obama's supporters said in this article :
Obama's supporters repeated their argument that new offshore oil exploration would take nearly a decade to produce any oil, thus not affecting gasoline prices today.There isn't an industry expert that would agree with Obama's assertion. In fact, Rep. John Peterson said that idled rigs sitting in shallow water off California's coast could be producing "within months."
Here's what Sen. McCain told FNC's Sean Hannity during their TV interview:
McCain: And the people that said that we couldn't affect the price of a barrel of oil were wrong because we tell the world that we're going to have our own reserves and we're not going to be dependent as we make this transition to independence, that it will matter in the price of a barrel of oil is concerned, my friend. And I'm confident that,as oil executives say, and I hope you have them on your program sometime, or an expert; they're telling me that we could get some of this oil within a year or 2. It's not this 10 year,Trusting people that are citing industry experts is always the wise choice. Democrats are citing the EIA report. PERIOD. Democrats aren't citing industry experts. Sen. Obama's supporters certainly weren't citing experts. Obama's supporters, like most Democrats, will cite the EIA or the Sierra Club.
Hannity: Two years Outer Continental Shelf, 86,000,000,000 barrels of oil are available there. You know, this has got to be a defining issue.
Let's also keep in mind what Sen. Obama's spokesperson said after he suggested that he's willing to consider drilling:
Obama spokeswoman Jenni Lee said the Democratic presidential hopeful is skeptical of the immediate effect of new offshore drilling, but "believes that finding consensus is essential to solving our energy crisis."I'd be more apt to trust Sen. Obama if he hadn't changed his position 3 times last week. He went from calling drilling a "GOP scheme" to saying he could support it even though he didn't think it'd help to saying that he'd support it if it was part of a comprehensive package, which is what it's been all along.
Here's what I said in this post :
We shouldn't take him at his word. Less than a month ago, he said that it wasn't $4 gasoline that bothered him so much; it was just that prices jumped too quickly. Supplies didn't suddenly tighten. Prices didn't suddenly spike. All that happened was that Sen. Obama saw this issue standing between himself and the White House.One thing's for certain: you can rely on Democrats to spin like crazy when they're on the wrong side of an important issue like drilling. They aren't letting me down this time.
Posted Monday, August 4, 2008 2:09 AM
No comments.
Nuclear Part of Energy Solution, Too
Last week, Barack Obama decided that drilling was acceptable...Sort of. To this point, though, I don't think that he's changed his opinion that nuclear power is part of the solution. According to this article , that gives Sen. McCain a major advantage in Michigan. I'll bet that Sen. Obama's mind will change on nuclear if it's hurting him in the polls.
U.S. Sen. John McCain is scheduled to tour DTE Energy's Fermi II nuclear power plant Tuesday to highlight his support for the development of nuclear energy. It's a good opportunity for the presumptive GOP presidential nominee to sharpen the contrast between his energy views and those of the leadership of the Democratic Party.Sen. McCain's Lexington Plan includes nuclear power. He hasn't backed away from it. He's been consistent, which is what clear-thinking leaders do. This proves that he's thought things through before putting the Lexington Plan together.
Michigan voters could then have a clear set of choices on the energy issue, which a recent Detroit News/WXYZ poll said was one of their top concerns. State voters, according to the poll, support the Arizona Republican's positions calling for the building of 45 new nuclear power plants and allowing oil drilling off of the nation's coasts.
From a thought process standpoint, compare Sen. McCain's thinking the Lexington Plan through with Sen. Obama's trip to Iraq. Sen. McCain listened to experts, then devised a plan. Sen. Obama laid out his plan before the trip, then listened to the experts (Gen. Petraeus, Gen. Odierno), then headed off for Europe. Before returning to the U.S., Sen. Obama told Tom Brokaw that everything was as he expected and that he hadn't learned anything unexpected during the trip.
The contrast is stark. Sen. McCain listened, then led on energy, including drilling and nuclear power in his proposal. Sen. Obama still hasn't changed on nuclear power but he's done the 'Me, too' act on drilling. That isn't leadership. That's what followers do.
This contrast isn't just about energy, either. It's impossible to forget that Sen. McCain led by advocating the Surge. The statistics prove that the Surge was successful. The benchmarks getting met is another bit of proof that it worked in stabilizing the country politically, not just from a security standpoint.
Compare that with Sen. Obama initially saying that the Surge would make matters worse, then refusing to tell Mr. Brokaw that he was wrong about the Surge. Even then, he claimed that he always thought sending 20,000 troops would make a difference.
Sen. Obama is a dishonest reactionary. That isn't the mark of a leader. When Sen. Obama sees that a strong majority of people favor building nuclear power plants, I'll bet money that he'll suddenly discover a new appreciation for nuclear. I'll especially bet that he'll cite France's nuclear power plan for his change of heart.
Michigan's Fermi II plant on the shores of Lake Erie near the Ohio border, the site of McCain's tour, is one of three such plants in Michigan that supply about 25 percent of the state's energy needs. More nuclear plants, properly regulated for safety, could have a significant effect on the nation's consumption of oil, coal, and natural gas.Why don't Democrats permit nuclear power to be part of the solution? It's clean from a greenhouse gas standpoint. It's cheap. It would make a huge dent in people's electric bills. This is vitally important to main street Americans, which is why I'm predicting Sen. McCain's Lexington Plan will resonate with voters.
Posted Monday, August 4, 2008 12:30 PM
No comments.
The Latest New Obama Energy Plan
This morning, Sen. Obama delivered what was billed as a major policy speech on energy in Lansing, MI. After reading the transcript , I was wondering how this was different from Sen. Obama's plan of 6 months ago. Here's the opening to his speech:
We meet at a moment when this country is facing a set of challenges greater than any we've seen in generations. Right now, our brave men and women in uniform are fighting two different wars while terrorists plot their next attack. Our changing climate is placing our planet in peril. Our economy is in turmoil and our families are struggling with rising costs and falling incomes; with lost jobs and lost homes and lost faith in the American Dream. And for too long, our leaders in Washington have been unwilling or unable to do anything about it.That opening is all about playing on people's fears. There's nothing in this opening that isn't alarmist. What's worse is that it's either sloppily researched or blatantly dishonest.
Which thinking person thinks that our changing climate is imperiling the entire planet? I know that's religion within the left but it isn't a widely held belief elsewhere.
Here's the portion of his speech where he sounds like Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats:
I also believe that in the short-term, as we transition to renewable energy, we can and should increase our domestic production of oil and natural gas. But we should start by telling the oil companies to drill on the 68 million acres they currently have access to but haven't touched. And if they don't, we should require them to give up their leases to someone who will. We should invest in the technology that can help us recover more from existing oil fields, and speed up the process of recovering oil and gas resources in shale formations in Montana and North Dakota; Texas and Arkansas and in parts of the West and Central Gulf of Mexico. We should sell 70 million barrels of oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve for less expensive crude, which in the past has lowered gas prices within two weeks. Over the next five years, we should also lease more of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska for oil and gas production. And we should also tap more of our substantial natural gas reserves and work with the Canadian government to finally build the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline, delivering clean natural gas and creating good jobs in the process.This is the heart of the DRILL Act. Letting more leases in the NPR-A is part of the DRILL Act. Selling 70 million bbl. of oil is part of the Democrats' plan, too. What's interesting is that Sen. Obama just said he wants more use of natural gas.
The reason that's interesting is because there's vast natural gas reserves in ANWR and on the OCS. Both areas are currently offlimits. His staff will undoubtedly tell him that he's just unintentionally endorsed opening those areas up.
Here's the scariest part of the speech:
It is also a transformation that will require more than just a few government programs. Energy independence will require an all-hands-on-deck effort from America, effort from our scientists and entrepreneurs; from businesses and from every American citizen. Factories will have to re-tool and re-design. Businesses will need to find ways to emit less carbon dioxide. All of us will need to buy more of the fuel-efficient cars built by this state, and find new ways to improve efficiency and save energy in our own homes and businesses.That opening sentence should scare every taxpayer. Let's put this into context. We aren't running out of oil and natural gas. We're figuring out ways to use CTL technology that hold real promise. In other words, we've got the natural resources to us for a very long time, possibly well into the next century.
If that's true, why the need for this major transformation involving "more than just a few government programs" that will spend our hard-earned tax dollars? Reagan's way is the better way. Let's just get out of the way and let these companies innovate like they've done all their lives.
Doesn't this speech tell us that Sen. Obama doesn't trust American ingenuity figuring things out on their own? Doesn't it tell us that Sen. Obama is just like other Democrats in thinking that private enterprise isn't capable of reviving this economy without "more than just a few government programs."
This is an election about stark differences. I'm betting that more people will choose the lest costly option. I'm betting that they won't pick the option that wants to massively expand government.
Posted Monday, August 4, 2008 1:46 PM
No comments.
The Next Republican Revolution???
Based on the things I've seen recently, I believe that Republicans have finally decided that they weren't going to campaign from the fetal position anymore. I've said before that this really started when John Hoffmeister got in Maxine Waters' and Patrick Leahy's face about expanding drilling. Since that day, Republicans understood that fighting back was a productive thing.
Since that time, they've taken many more giant steps, which has led their base to get excited for the first time since 2004. I believe that we saw the start of the next Republican Revolution start last Friday when the Young Turks convinced the House GOP leadership that fighting back on drilling wasn't just the politically smart thing to do but that it was the morally imperative thing to do.
Rep. John Shadegg is one of the people who are fighting the good fight. Check out this quote in the Arizona Capitol Times :
"She's used every procedural move in the book to keep Republicans from being able to offer even an amendment or a motion to recommit to put us on the path down the road to more American-made energy," he said, adding that an Aug.1 move to offer a second motion to adjourn the House was "something I've never seen done."Democrats have blocked every Republican attempt to offer amendments to energy bills. They've done so because they know that there are enough votes to deal Speaker Pelosi an embarrassing defeat on the signature issue of this campaign.
While appearing on Your World With Neil Cavuto this afternoon, Bill Pascrell, (D-NJ), whined about how Republicans defeated 4 bills that Pelosi's Democrats offered. When Mr. Cavuto said that Republicans were the minority party and essentially powerless to stop legislation, Pascrell let the cat out of the bag. Rep. Pascrell said that they needed 288 votes because these bills were brought up while the rules were suspended.
As I noted here , the reason why these bills were brought up with a closed rule was to prevent Republicans from offering amendments permitting drilling in ANWR and the OCS.
Mike Pence is another of the leaders in this movement. Listen to Rep. Pence's confidence in this quote :
What heartens me as I hear the speeches of the men and women gathered around me is that I know in my heart we are speaking and giving voice to the will of the overwhelming majority of the American people who want this Congress to return to Washington, D.C., and give the American people more access to American oil," said Rep. Mike Pence, an Indiana Republican.I totally agree that Congress would open ANWR and the OCS if the American Energy Act were allowed an up or down vote. That thing would pass with 300-350 votes. That's why Speaker Pelosi is refusing that bill to come to a vote.
"I'm absolutely confident that, if this Congress were brought back to Washington, D.C., and given an opportunity to vote on giving more access to the American people of American oil, that there is a bipartisan majority in the Congress that would pass that measure."
More troubling, though, is the fact that Blue Dog Democrats refuse to sign the discharge petition that would demand that up or down vote. If the Blue Dog Democrats are truly centrists, they should side with the American people on this. Instead, they've supported Speaker Pelosi and the environmental extremists.
Thanks to Rep. Pence, Rep. Shadegg and the House GOP leadership team, there isn't room for fencesitters in this debate. You're either all in or you're busted. Had this group chosen not to fight, Blue Dog Democrats would've been able to play both sides. That isn't a viable option.
What's worse for Democrats is that this shutdown has been given a not-so-flattering nickname:
The lights have been dimmed and Congress has gone home, but a couple dozen House Republicans continued their floor protest today of what they're calling the "Pelosi shutdown", the decision by Democrats last week to adjourn for the previously scheduled August recess without voting on opening new areas to drilling.By the time Congress reconvenes, Pelosi's national approval rating will make her wish for the days when it rivaled Richard Nixon's during Watergate. In addition to attempting to shut down the House last Friday, Ms. Pelosi also mandated the closed rules on the Democrats' non-energy energy bills so she wouldn't be embarrassed.
Let's be blunt with this. Speaker Pelosi and the rest of her leadership team are on the wrong side of too many issues to be effective. The signature issue of the 110th Congress thus far is passing a minimum wage bill, which was only achieved by attaching it to an Iraq supplemental bill and by including small business tax cuts. That's hardly a shining moment, an achievement worth bragging about.
The main reason, though, why I think this is the start of another Republican Revolution is because John McCain will embrace the Young Turks' anti-earmark agenda. If and when they get serious about fighting the John Murtha/Paul Kanjorski/Jim Oberstar porkers administration, taxpayers will notice. Those taxpayers won't just notice the difference. They'll appreciate the difference, too.
This article by Jackie Kucinich and Jared Allen tells about how the American people are jumping on the Republican bandwagon in significant numbers:
"When we began this on Friday at 11:20 a.m., we didn't know where it was going to lead," said Rep. Tom Price (Ga.), who has been directing the group of some 30 Republican members who have stayed or returned to D.C. to protest the House's adjournment.It's exciting to see the American people rallying to the Republicans' common sense solution to energy independence. It's even more exciting to see Republicans leading on this important issue. While Democrats call this revolution a political stunt, the American people see a group of politicians proposing a viable solution to a distressing problem. Don't think that they won't remember that this November.
"But we have been buoyed and heartened by the American people. And what they have said is 'Thank you for leading'," Price said.
Think of this dynamic, too: When people know that they were right in trusting Republicans to solve the biggest issue this election season, they'll trust them on other issues too. The minute that happens, Speaker Pelosi had better prepare for being called Ms. Minority Leader again.
Yesterday, I talked about how to spot Democratic spin on this issue. Here's today's dose of Democratic spin:
"For six years, Republicans controlled every branch of government and did nothing while America became more dependent on foreign sources of oil," Hoyer said in a release Monday. "House Republicans now want to dust off old proposals, rejected by Congress on a bipartisan basis as bad ideas, and claim they have put forward 'solutions'."People like Rep. Pence, Rep. Price and others are telling everyone that's listening that it isn't the policies that failed. It's that the Senate Democrats filibustered bills that included drilling in ANWR. Furthermore, people don't care about the past. They care that 85 percent of the known reserves in the United States is currently offlimits. People have told pollster after pollster that they simply want drilling in ANWR and the OCS to start ASAP. They don't care whether it's a longterm fix. They want relief ASAP.
What's happening is that Republicans are responding to the American people's needs while the Democrats twiddle their thumbs. That's how revolutions get started. I suspect that that's what's happening right now.
Posted Monday, August 4, 2008 5:21 PM
Comment 1 by Walter hanson at 04-Aug-08 09:53 PM
Gary:
One thing that made the contract with America in 1994 such a good idea and why I hope that the Republicans in Congress adopt one this year was the promise to bring up for a vote (even if it might not pass) on a bunch of issues Americans wanted votes on.
A real up and down vote on drilling with ANWR with a promise for the minority Democrats to propose amendments.
Nancy has been assuming I'll hang on to November and next year I'll have a sixty plus seat margin to work and President Obama to sign our bills. She'll be lucky to be called minority leader next year at the rate she's going.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
