Wednesday, June 18, 2008

McCain flip-flops on offshore drilling, with brother Bush right behind him

John McCain is given a lot of credit by the press for being a political maverick. Whether he is really a maverick or not is going to be one of the major subjects of debate in the coming months. He is in great danger of damaging that maverick reputation with his recent political pandering on our energy crisis.

On Tuesday Senator McCain joined up with Big Oil in calling for the end of the moratorium on offshore drilling. McCain previously had been opposed to any offshore drilling, but in January of this year, while on the campaign trail he said that the decision of whether to drill or not should be made by the individual states. Yesterday he completed the reversal of position in Houston in front of a bunch of Big Oil executives, how appropriate

Within hours George W. Bush followed suit and also called for the end of the moratorium on offshore drilling. What these two jokers aren't telling you is that an increase in offshore drilling will do nothing to help effect the market until 2030. According to the Energy Information Administration, a statistical agency crested by Congress in 1977, it will be year 2030 before any significant impact on the oil market will be achieved by offshore drilling.

Similarly, lower 48 natural gas production is not projected to increase substantially by 2030 as a result of increased access to the OCS.
The real answer is to decrease demand and invest in clean energy research, not pandering to everyday Americans who are hurting at the pump by offering a solution that sounds great but is really just a windfall in profits for the corrupt oil and gas industry. The pander strategy did not work for Senator Clinton on the gas tax holiday and won't work for McCain either. This more than any other election is shaping up to be an election centered on policy. As long as McCain keeps flip-flopping in issues , and worse flopping the wrong way, we Democrats are in good shape.

Oh the irony, John McCain's "I am a global warming hero" ad just came on while I was writing this.

6 comments:

  1. I love your nick names for the candidates. In lieu of this technique, Back-Out Barak has flip-flopped on public financing for the general. In case you have the desire to regurgitate the tag line from Bauer and Back-Out, it's not necessary unless it's for your other posters.

    ReplyDelete
  2. All of his campaign money will come from individual donors, not corporations or PAC's. The Obama campaign is truly a grass-roots effort. As far as the nicknames go, I think I have heard flip-flop before in a presidential election...

    ReplyDelete
  3. I apologize for not being specific.....

    "rubber stamp" roger
    "saint" chip
    "darth" chaney

    ..just to name a few, i just wanted to join in the fun.

    I simply assumed Barack would stand by his word in this new era of politics. But since it's a grass-root effort, i guess the back-out is acceptable? I thought the grass-root effort was on-going when he made the comment. It's cool, like NAFTA.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks but no thanks on the public financing. I don't think flip-flopping on whether or not to use public financing is even in the same area code as flip-flopping on offshore drilling, torture, or the Bush tax cuts. Especially considering he is only accepting individual donors. He just happens to have more than 1.5 million of us.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Nicknames stick when there's a pattern.

    Go ahead and use "back out" if you'd like, but it won't stick because there's not pattern.

    Rubber Stamp Roger works because not only does he almost always vote the party line, but when he went around the state introducing himself to Republicans he assured them he would not deviate from the party line.

    Darth Cheney's just fun. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  6. It's unfortunate that both of you won't admit that Barack has flip-flopped on public financing and NAFTA. You don't see me arguing a point when there is evidence to the contrary. Barack said if the rupublican candidate agreed to public financing he would. In televised debates he tore NAFTA to pieces. It hurts your credibility in this single poster's opinion. So I guess the question is this, is it possible for Cottonmouth to recognize such statements, or is the kool-aid to rich. I understand this is a left website, but it would be nice to see some level of objectivity in regards to your candidate and their policies. I guess if I want it fair and balanced I should watch FOX or Keith Olbermann. Stating an pinion is the business your both in, but you can do that while recognizing facts.

    ReplyDelete