Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama: McCain Helped Create Current Energy Woes During Washington Tenure

Updated 6:48 p.m.
By Perry Bacon Jr.
DAYTON, Ohio -- Despite the news about mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, whose share prices are in freefall, Sen. Barack Obama stuck to his planned script today, pledging, if elected president, an aggressive effort to reduce American dependence on foreign oil by investing in research on alternative fuels and relying more on nuclear, wind and other energy sources.

He said the energy ideas of his opponent, Sen. John McCain, such as a gas tax holiday and more offshore oil drilling, would do little to reduce prices at the pump immediately, a view shared by many economists.

"Now, a few days ago, Senator McCain said our dangerous dependence on foreign oil has been thirty years in the making, and was caused by the failure of politicians in Washington to think long-term about the future of the country," Obama said in a speech to several hundred at a school here. "The only problem is that out of those thirty years, Senator McCain was in Washington for twenty-six ."

McCain's campaign argues that Obama's energy proposals would not bring gas prices down at all, either. McCain has also pledged to work as president to increase use of alternative fuels, particularly nuclear power.

On the mortgage issue, while McCain told reporters yesterday "we cannot allow them to fail" of the two companies, Obama's campaign issued a careful statement through a spokesman.

"Senator Obama has long believed we should take all necessary steps to ensure affordable homeownership for millions of American families, and that includes an essential role for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said.

Unsurprisingly, the McCain campaign took issue with Obama's critique. "Today, Barack Obama criticized wind, hydropower, domestic oil drilling, gas tax relief and nuclear power but did not offer a single proposal to bring down gas prices," said McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds. "The difference is Obama's 'Dr. No' approach believes that every energy source has a problem and John McCain believes that every energy source can be part of the solution Americans need right now."

By Web Politics Editor  |  July 11, 2008; 2:47 PM ET
Categories:  B_Blog , Barack Obama , John McCain , On the Issues  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: New McCain Ad Cites Service of Latino Military Veterans
Next: "It's Embarrassing" to Speak Only English, Says Obama

Comments

It's easy to criticize McCain's energy plan when he seems as of late to be more concerned with getting more oil than looking for alternate fuel sources. Obama's at least considering something different for a change, rather than go down the same tired old path which we've suffered for decades. You'd think oil becoming harder to acquire would encourage leaders to finally start looking for new possibilities, but no! Let's just try to find new sources of oil! How about Alaska? Or maybe the ocean, there might be something there, probably.

Posted by: I couldn't think of a name, I'm sorry. Please don't tell my mother. | July 17, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Agreed, Brett. Unfortunately, voters are always more inclined to support the short term solution, like lowering taxes while increasing spending for two wars, or drilling in Alaska when there's hardly going to be anything there. It's going to hurt more in the long run, but screw our grandkids. Me, me, me.

Posted by: G00ner | July 14, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Jon, you hit the nail on the head! Carter started us on the path to energy independence, then Reagan came along and stopped that effort cold!

Had Cart won another term, we wouldn't be in this mess. Long term thinking gets results; short - term thinking means repeating the same mistakes!

Posted by: Brett | July 14, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Mark, I don't mind harsh retaliation as long as it makes sense. If you can make your point well then name calling is not necessary. But, again, you will learn that as you grow up.

I just pointed out that Obama was criticizing McCains energy plan when his own was rather thin.

Posted by: danielhancock | July 14, 2008 9:49 AM | Report abuse

I wouldn't say that type of politics is dying off, because Obama is an elitist muslim who hates white people. At least that's what I hear on the internet, and you can always trust the internet.

Posted by: G00ner | July 13, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Reply to danielhancock: If you're going to make pronouncements on a public and widely read blog that so obviously disagree with the truth (contradicting the first paragraph of the original article), then you should expect a harsh retaliation. Maybe next time you should do a little bit of reading before you open your big mouth and post a libelous attack. Otherwise, you are just part of the Republican slandering and smearing machine. Hey, that machine worked very well in the last two elections, but this time people are catching on, and we're all getting sick of this type of politics. Change starts from the top!

Posted by: Mark Baity | July 13, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

"Remember in Geograpy Class, that Earth is 2/3 water!

WOW!"

Your logic confuses me.

Posted by: G00ner | July 13, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Re: McCain's Campaign

"The difference is Obama's 'Dr. No' approach believes that every energy source has a problem and John McCain believes that every energy source can be part of the solution Americans need right now."

This is a cheap shot. Do you have a brain?
Do NOT mention Obama at all.

Just release a statement based on facts.

Posted by: Premier | July 13, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

imxm369zw5j47c7 http://www.667952.com/147041.html > vq79dtdh [URL=http://www.755124.com/264438.html] 92t31ccedu8aq [/URL] tbwmy8qzgmw

Posted by: cvz2blw9nb | July 13, 2008 3:52 AM | Report abuse

k5wysdgu7b7x http://www.418074.com/738618.html > gg3p7z645mwy5 [URL=http://www.110753.com/983028.html] tg1xqsbu3m02ztj [/URL] h1sccybieipz

Posted by: 93tj8eiojv | July 13, 2008 3:36 AM | Report abuse

I'm dead center on either candidate. Both have contributed to the rise in costs of living, McCain with oil, and Obama with his corn subsidies for ethanol. But I will say this, McCain environmental stance is far more refined.

Look to Brazil, as they import absolutely no oil.

Remember, both are telling us exactly what we ant to hear.

The question... Which one will keep their word?

Posted by: Bradh2o | July 12, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

Obama simply has NOT PROVIDED A SOLUTION! He's an idiot who cuts down any soltution for america! Here stop whining America and go to this site!

http://www.americansolutions.com/

AMERICA is 1 country in the world! We will upgrade to other fuels but the rest of many other countries won't be! So in the mean time we start drilling using 2008 technologies, not 1970s, to get oil from the Majority of the Earth the Ocean! Remember in Geograpy Class, that Earth is 2/3 water!

WOW!

So what after Alaska, which is too beautiful to mess with, then what?!?! What is a permenant solution! McCain has a Plan for A REAL AMERICAN FUTURE! Idiot even changed his podium because people started seeing his change, changing his mind to get your vote and such important issues! McCain is Bi-Partisan and was actually going to become a Democrat in 2000!

Now your canidate!

Obama and Celebrities, whoopy $h@t. Who Cares!

Seperation of Entertainment and State!

There are people who think this matters! That's sad! What the hell do a bunch of Musicians and Actors really know??!?! WHO THE F CARES!

Obama is a Black Supremist (52 Sundays x 20 years in Hate Church! 1,040 Sermons!) and if he would have actually had competition in his State Senate race there's a huge chance that he would NOT even be a Senator!

What did Obama do in that first run for political office?

A.) Registered more new voters than any Illinois State Senate candidate

B.) Vowed to never cast a "present" vote if elected

C.) Knocked all of his opponents off the ballot so he could run unopposed

D.) Ran with the slogan: "We did it for Harold, we can do it for Barack!"

(C) Is the correct answer!

Obama challenged the nominating petition signatures of the incumbent, Sen. Alice Palmer, and three other rivals

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-0704030881apr04,0,6468332.story

Seek the Truth, not what an entertainer says! If you don't know the truth and your opinions are borrowed, you're an idiot!

McCain 08' "Because there is No Other Solution!"

Posted by: OBAMA offers NO SOLUTION! | July 12, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Do you people realize that we could separate Iraq from OPEC by signing an agreement with them to buy as much oil as they can produce for the next ten years? They would make money on their oil like its going out of style, which it is, and we would have reasonable energy prices again. At the end of the ten years, all transportation could be either ethanol or electric power, which is even cheaper than cellulosic ethanol. Things are getting better, not worse, and we have may options and opportunities. Thank you, technological progress! Oh, and screw you OPEC!

Posted by: George W. | July 12, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

Hey Danielhancock, both you and McCain are retarded apparently since you both think he hasn't stated any plan despite the fact that his plan is mentioned in the first paragraph:
"investing in research on alternative fuels and relying more on nuclear, wind and other energy sources."
YOU IDIOT!
Posted by: Mark Baity | July 12, 2008 8:51 AM
--------------------------------------
Mark, I know it will be hard to equal your intelligent and eloquent response but I will try.

First it is not evident that Obama made this statement in the article about nuclear and wind power that you cite in this speech. It might have been background information that the author of the article got from Obama's website. Website information can be changed at any time with the click of a mouse as polls dictate. I would like to hear Obama make more specific statements on his own on his energy plan.

I did hear Obama speak on nuclear power but it was a for and against type statement. He is for the power generated without any CO2 emissions but he is against the nuclear waste if it can't be stored safely. Pretty non committal.

As for wind power. It may be able to help at the margins but can never really be the backbone of of our energy supply. At any rate, we need the energy now and if he is calling for investment in alternative fuels than it means they are quite a long way from being developed.

Also calling someone an idiot and retarded does not increase the strength of your argument but you will learn that as you mature.


Also calling people retarded or an idiot does not

Posted by: Anonymous | July 12, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Hey Danielhancock, both you and McCain are retarded apparently since you both think he hasn't stated any plan despite the fact that his plan is mentioned in the first paragraph:


"investing in research on alternative fuels and relying more on nuclear, wind and other energy sources."

YOU IDIOT!

Posted by: Mark Baity | July 12, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse

Okay Barack, we get your point. John McCain's energy plan sucks. And your plan is?

Posted by: danielhancock | July 12, 2008 1:06 AM | Report abuse

The linkage to the radical environmentalists. It started in the late 70's. Oil and gasoline were linked to all the ills. So it went by many Congesses and countless state government since then. None have acted except Alaska, they tried real hard though. Now we have two options. Come up with a new energy source overnight, get it into production within a year. Or work on solution A at a reasonable pace and also get the industries that exist online to do more.

We must now jump in and change everthing. Any solution is going to take time.

We are about to defy common sense again

Posted by: thelaw | July 11, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

ounwudp6 http://www.266441.com/404842.html > dqnhj85li2r [URL=http://www.748326.com/960971.html] vpy03wfdakvzqw55 [/URL] yclcntmoo5wcb

Posted by: rwhbno9guf | July 11, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

I'm assamed to say I am a republican. Look back at the last 8 years of failure by the Bush administration. Too bad Bush was not a democrat because he would not have been appointed dictator by the Supreme Court, would not have been allowed to proceed with the illegal war, and would have been impeached several years ago.

Since Bush took over, gas has more than tripled, the Bush Iraq invasion/ocupation is costing us around 2 trillion (or about $400 million a day!!!) with no end in sight.

McCain is just like Bush. He changes his story and his positions almost daily.

We cannot affort to continue to grow the government, spend and borrow with no end in sight as the republicans in office continue to do.

Wake up everybody - too bad that too many people a just politically motivated by what they say and do instead of doing what is right for the majority.

Posted by: jhnnybgon | July 11, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

We the people are going to hell in a hand basket and we are so stupid we look to two common men to try to fix it for us! Grow up America we have been in worse times than this and it was OUR initiative that got us through! If your family is going hungry and cold you are going to look at these two to fix it. What would our forefathers think of us a bunch of Pansie waisted useless people. Winter is coming do you heat with oil? Well if you do you better have very deep pockets and hope it is there to buy. Now is the time to look to an alternative heat source for your family. Electricity is increasing what up to fifty percent this year so that is out what is left? Gas just as costly as oil. Where do you turn? Think America we are going to have more than cold feet this winter. Maybe in fifteen years Obama might have an idea but YOU are going to be in the cold this winter and many more to come. If it comes down to keeping your family warm and drilling in some god forsaken place in Alaska guess who wins? It sure isn't Obama or McCain it is we the people that have the will of the land not two common men! When it comes to dog eat dog we the people will raise our voices so loud that Washington will not be able to cover their ears and look the other way. United we stand divided we freeze our a$$es off. Or do what I do heat with coal, cheap and warm, raise most of your own food, good exercise and all organic, and those guns we hold dear will put meat on the table plus a nice heard of black Angus helps too. Just keep in the back of that small mind if there is no gas no food moves from the fields, no gas means no food on the shelves you might have lots of money but what good is it if there is nothing there to buy, never had money soup but you never know it might be tasty.

Posted by: I take care of my own,can you | July 11, 2008 10:34 PM | Report abuse

If you look back and remember all the intelligent answers that Obama gave to UNSCRIPTED questions asked of him you would notice in an instant what a total idiot he is. And that only happened one time when he allowed that, because he was made to look like the fool he is. Why do you think he doesn't want to participate in the town hall meetings where anyone can ask anything to the canidates. He wouldn't do that because he has no real solutions and would have to answer to the American people for the choices and bad judgements he has made most of his life. He constantly shows his real arrogant self by putting his foot in his mouth and then the next day after his advisors correct him, then he starts his flip flopping. Jesse Jackson had it right when he said Obama talks down to black folks except that he talks down to all folks with his empty speeches and promises.

Posted by: jewels | July 11, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

on drilling - - who looks at immediate and short term when considering things like becoming energy sufficient?

to say "it will only make a difference of... whatever..." blows my mind and i condintue to be baffled how supporters of obama's could still support anyone with that kind of vision.

just the act of preparation will deter the midEast to reconsider how they treat us with regard to energy because it threatens their own income. that is economics 101.

Posted by: chooseestCandidate | July 11, 2008 9:52 PM | Report abuse

just like Ronanl Reagan, JOHN MCCAIN will be elected in large part due to the McCain-Democrats!!!

every week some bad fact is being confirmed obout obama. that and obama's own goofups is making it abundently clear obama is not ready to lead anyone, much less a nation, and far less the lead country in the Western World.

Posted by: ChooseBestCandidate | July 11, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

if obama fancies visiting foreign countries, how about he begin with HAITI who are suffering and in need of diretion - - maybe he could practice his two french words.

how about visiting KENYA - where a civil war rages?

where is his TRUE ABILITY to make a difference due to his unique UNIFICATION AND LEADERSHIP skills??????????????

Posted by: chooseBestCandidate | July 11, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Are people are so dogmatic and have knee-jerk reactions to drilling for oil instead of being pragmatic. Answer me this: is it possible to increase domestic production of oil while decreasing overall domestic consumption? If you answered YES, then you are a reasonable American! Folks, our oil use has already declined 2% and we can put a floor on gas prices if need be.

Listen, we all want the same thing which is to reduce dependence on foreign energy sources while also reducing our C02 emissions. However, just because we want to cut our emissions drastically as of yesterday, it's just not feasible or realistic. In fact, that's like me saying I want to run a marathon tomorrow yet being only in pretty good shape. Readying to run a marathon takes a lot of preparation and in the mean time, one can't drastically change their lifestyle so quickly for fear of injury or sickness.

Anyway, my point is that oil will be a part of our economy whether we like it not. Might as well get it from domestic sources to create tax revenue (hopefully mostly for alternative energy research so we can move away from oil) and many many jobs which will create more various forms of tax revenue. Basically, our great nation is capable of doing two things at once and that's cutting consumption (and thus C02 emissions) while raising domestic production...the two are not mutually exclusive!!!

Posted by: Ceall | July 11, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

I think its hilarious how Democrats keep harping how drilling for oil in the OCS and ANWAR, exploiting our natural global advantage in massive coal reserves and shale oil, will not have an 'immediate' effect on lowering gas prices.

Alternatives will have NO effect on gas prices. Ever!

If Clinton hadn't vetoed drilling in ANWAR in 1996, and if the Democrats hadn't blocked drilling every year after that veto, it is a FACT gas prices would not be as high today as they are.

Drill Now! Exploit our Coal advantage! (Clean Coal) Develop Alternatives! Save America from spending 700 Billion USD per year on Oil from nations that hate us.

700 Billion American Dollars! That should go to American workers!

Posted by: Homunculus | July 11, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

ya can see everything ya need to see about the right's energy policy by watching the enron film, smartest guys in the room

Posted by: republicenron | July 11, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

As many people know the GOP has come to stand for the Grand Oil Party. Republicans do not really care about high gas prices paid by persons in this country, they will to their best to defeat an oil excessive profits tax or regulations on speculators.

There needs to be laws passed this summer reducing the speed limit to 60 mph maximum and significantly higher mph standards, to be implemented in a few years. The federal government needs to make development of an alternative fuel for cars as high a priority as the mission of sending humans to the moon was during the 1960's.

Posted by: Independent | July 11, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

Republicans have big oil in their back pocket. For all his maverick talk, McCain hasn't really been a proponent of the environment, as Obama pointed out. Pat Robertson isn't my favorite person in the world. But when a wingnut televangelist admits that the radical Repub position on the environment has been based on falsehoods and deceit, Repuglicans have problems. Repubs are a little bit funny when they pick and choose Bible verses to justify their hatred for minorities, women, and abortion, but doesn't the Bible say something about "subduing" the Earth? It's funny how fundamentalists such as W. took that to mean "mess it up." Their monkey business there has got to stop if they want Earth to remain in existence.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | July 11, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Cap & Trade greenhouse gas emissions!

It will create a market for old SUVs.

(they'll be worth more dead than alive)

Posted by: Rwolf01 | July 11, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

How much richer are Cheney and Bush because the oil price? these couple of demons couldn't be happier and laughing at our misery.

Posted by: VIDAL GUS | July 11, 2008 8:02 PM | Report abuse

McCain is too old to have any energy at all

Posted by: Not this country for old man | July 11, 2008 8:02 PM | Report abuse

In the Global War on Terror (GWOT), we have to remember that Sen McCain has zero experience actually commanding real units in the field, being a jet jockey who got shot down due to slow reaction times.

Where is al-Qaeda? Well, actually, Pakistan and Afghanistan - but their primary supply line is from one country only - Saudi Arabia, where they get more than 90 percent TODAY of all their money and volunteers worldwide.

Sadly, the only way to fight an enemy at a Strategic and not a Tactical level, is by a combination of: Chaos Projection, Economic Warfare on Supply/Base, and Redefinition of the Battlefield.

We've failed on all three counts. Which, if Sen McCain had not been at the bottom of his class, he'd know.

So, to speak plainly, continuing in the failed strategic energy policies of the McCain/Bush 08 camp for a Third Term would literally HELP al-Qaeda, by providing their sources more money and more volunteers able to equip themselves to fight America.

The only way to fight them is to bring the battle to them both on the economic side - by cutting the supply of US dollars given to oil - you can't just stop buying Saudi oil since we have third party suppliers - and putting the money we waste in Iraq, which helps them recruit more volunteers, into US-based alternative energy sources resistant to attack by outside forces.

Not nuclear - since it's too easy to attack a central plant and get dirty bomb materials from the waste products and supply train for fission.

But instead American supplies of wind, solar, tidal, geothermal, hydro, and clean coal.

Anything less means you're not fighting the WAR.

PERIOD.

You're either a Patriotic American - or you're a Red Bushie who thinks McSame's plan makes sense.

You can't be both.

DECIDE.

Your country needs you to do the right thing!

Posted by: Will in Seattle | July 11, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Republicans serving Big Oil interests have kept alternatives from being explored and invested in for over thirty years. If not for the Republicans, we would wouldn't be in this mess. Now that we are in this mess, we need to invest heavily, (as a national emergency) in alternative sources regardless of its impact on Big Oil. The bottom line on why Republicans have squelched clean energy is that the oil companies would stand to lose money. What a crying shame it is that Big Oil and the GOP have crippled our ability to progress. Oil is an archaic energy source that we are insane to perpetuate exploring as a future staple. If we were to offer a billion dollar endowment to the first university to come up with a clean alternate, we would have it inside of a year. Float this idea and watch who goes on the atack. Big Oil and the GOP.

Posted by: Kevin Morgan | July 11, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

"Nationalize U.S. Oil Today For National Defense" seems to think that the GOP is responsible for oil being $145.Bbl.

Actually, in 2006 Nancy Pelosi & the Dems ran on the promise of lowering the price of gas. But, since the Dems took ver the House & Senate, the price has done nothing but go up.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Maybe because there's oil under ANWR and not some of the other areas. Leave it to the Democrats to look for oil in the wrong kind of rock.

Posted by: Chatard | July 11, 2008 5:32 PM
===========================
Or maybe it is because the oil company does not presently hold the drilling rites to this land but would like to have those rites in addition to the rites that they already have. And I would bet that even if given those rites, they will still not drill domestically.

This is a ploy. Domestic drilling will not supply America's demand. It will be too expensive to drill here and it will not compete with the world market. Why do you think we buy oil? Because the cost of production makes the retail cost too high for America to sell to itself.

The answer to high gas prices is higher gas prices until it gets to the point where we are not willing to pay for it thereby forcing conservation and rational alternative energy thinking. Until this happens we will be talking about oil prices no matter who is president!

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Obama is an idiot--period!

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse

nuclear, wind and solar. it is about time that alternate energy sources got plugged. bush had also funded tidal energy development in WA state. let's get off oil, for sure. meanwhile, how do i get to work and run the lights in the meanwhile? open offshore oil to beat the arabs' prices. gas is never going to be cheap again. it has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with world markets.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

U.S. CONSTITUTION - WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES


DEMOCRAT $24 BARREL OF OIL
DEMOCRAT $1.50 A GALLON OF GASOLINE


OIL WAS $24 A BARREL WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE
OIL WAS $24 A BARREL WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE
OIL WAS $24 A BARREL WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE


A GALLON OF GASOLINE WAS $1.50 WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE
A GALLON OF GASOLINE WAS $1.50 WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE
A GALLON OF GASOLINE WAS $1.50 WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT OFFICE

GOP REPUBLICANS TOOK OFFICE TO CHANGE OIL TO $145 A BARREL
GOP REPUBLICANS TOOK OFFICE TO CHANGE GASOLINE TO $4.50 A GALLON


GOP REPUBLICAN $145 BARREL OF OIL
GOP REPUBLICAN $145 BARREL OF OIL
GOP REPUBLICAN $145 BARREL OF OIL

A GALLON OF GASOLINE IS $4.50 UNDER THE GOP REPUBLICANS
A GALLON OF GASOLINE IS $4.50 UNDER THE GOP REPUBLICANS
A GALLON OF GASOLINE IS $4.50 UNDER THE GOP REPUBLICANS

YOU DO THE MATH AND DECIDE IF TEXAS OIL MILLIONAIRES WARRANT INVESTIGATIONS TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE


GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND STEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES TREASURY.


GOP REPUBLICAN ABUSIVE POWER AND BLIND GREED RUN AMOK TO TRANSFER THE AMERICAN ECONOMY INTO THE PRIVATE CAPITALISTIC POCKETS OF THE SUPER RICH WHO OWNS AND RUNS WALL STREET.


GOP REPUBLICANS ARE MANIPULATING THE MARKET SYSTEM TO MAKE THE MANY (95 PERCENT OF AMERICAN CITIZENS) SUFFER AND SERVE THE SUPERWEALTHY FEW (5 PERCENT WALL STREET SUPERCAPITALISTS).


GOP REPUBLICAN MCCAIN-MCBUSH III TRILLION DOLLAR WAR CRISIS


GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET MILLIONAIRES ARE PAYING THEMSELVES $10,000,000 BONUSES FROM MONEY STOLEN FROM THE U.S. TREASURY, WHILE SENDING OUR AMERCAN JOBS OVERSEAS. RECKLESS OUTSOURCING IS DESTROYING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.


NO MORE GOP REPUBLICAN LIES, CONSPIRACIES, AND GRAND LARCENIES.


GOP REPUBLICAN $155 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $175 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $195 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $215 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $235 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $255 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS


GOP REPUBLICAN $4.50 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $5.00 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $5.50 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $6.00 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $6.50 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN $7.00 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS


WHEN DOES IT STOP IF EVER?


GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET GREED SPECULATION DOES NOT WORK.
GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET GREED SPECULATION IS HURTING AMERICA.
GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET GREED SPECULATION IS HURTING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.


STOP GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET OIL SPECULATIONS TODAY
STOP GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET OIL SPECULATIONS TODAY
STOP GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET OIL SPECULATIONS TODAY


GOP REPUBLICAN OIL ADDICTION HAS BECOME THE NEW CRACK DRUG AND WE BETTER GET OFF SOON
GOP REPUBLICAN OIL ADDICTION HAS BECOME THE NEW CRACK DRUG AND WE BETTER GET OFF SOON
GOP REPUBLICAN OIL ADDICTION HAS BECOME THE NEW CRACK DRUG AND WE BETTER GET OFF SOON


GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET MILLIONAIRES ARE PAYING THEMSELVES $10,000,000 BONUSES FROM MONEY STOLEN FROM THE U.S. TREASURY, WHILE SENDING OUR AMERCAN JOBS OVERSEAS. RECKLESS AMERICAN JOB OUTSOURCING IS DESTROYING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.


NATIONALIZE U.S. OIL FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE.
NATIONALIZE U.S. OIL FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE.
NATIONALIZE U.S. OIL FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE.


CLEAN NUCLEAR ELECTRIC ENERGY IS THE ANSWER


WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.


BARACK OBAMA WILL BRING BACK OUR UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND RIGHTS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.


GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET MILLIONAIRES ARE PAYING THEMSELVES $10,000,000 BONUSES FROM MONEY STOLEN FROM THE U.S. TREASURY, WHILE SENDING OUR AMERCAN JOBS OVERSEAS. RECKLESS OUTSOURCING IS DESTROYING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.


STOP GOP REPUBLICAN MCCAIN FROM SELLING OUR AMERICA.


This remarkable unleashing of deep Democratic energies went hand in hand with clever GOP Republican efforts to subvert the will of the American People, whether by overt corruption or covert manipulation. This corruption or manipulation resulted from the widespread market activity that was incompatible with the good of the American Public. American Citizens were well aware that the voices of the People could be offset by powerful GOP Republican market elites bending the system to serve the interests of the few. The economic power of the GOP Republicans were recognized to be the primary source of Wall Street speculators' corruptions.

Democratic dialogue was motivated by opposition to the market-driven greedy GOP Republicans obsessed with obscene quantity of moneymaking with little regard for the quality of the Public's Democracy. Democratic love of wisdom was contrasted sharply against the GOP Republicans love of money.

Posted by: Nationalize U.S. Oil Today For National Defense | July 11, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

I saw this coming......any number of stories I've read describe in detail how cursory McCain's economic policy really is.

McCain's Power Outage
Contradictions and misstatements short-circuit McCain's energy policy pronouncements.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/142500

About those 300 McCain-loving economists?
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16138.html

John McCain has ramped up his fake-populist rhetoric recently, saying that helping the people who are struggling to pay their mortgages, fill their gas tanks, and put food on the table will be his "first priority in setting the economic policies of this nation." [johnmccain.com, accessed 4/17/08]

Yet at the same time, McCain has said that some of the problems families are facing are "psychological." In fact, according to McCain himself, his proposal to suspend the gas tax this summer--one of the main focal points of his new economic plan--is nothing more than "a little psychological boost." [CNN Debate, 1/30/08; Your World with Neil Cavuto, 4/16/08]

RUSSERT: The fact is you are different than George Bush.

SEN. McCAIN: No. No. The fact is that I have agreed with President Bush far more than I have disagreed. And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I've been totally in agreement and support of President Bush.

Here. Listen to McCain and decide for yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtZlR3zp4c&NR=1

Posted by: ApostasyUSA | July 11, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Sorry for typo.

Posted by: WillSweet | July 11, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse

ApostasyUSA - Unfortunately, most people would love to have someone like Phil Gramm in that position. It would be an integral part of the total devastation of the U.S., our Constitution and the planet in general. Most people have a huge lust for this type of devastation and want no benefits at all. It is being proven right here in this blog. Just read the comments so far. It's astounding.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Bill Mosby

Yes...it's called regenerative breaking.

And yes....friction is an electromagnetic property.

Posted by: ApostasyUSA | July 11, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Yo, FactChecker, check this:

"(did you know that a hybird car recharges its batteries from the friction created when using the breaks?)"
--------------------
Perhaps my driving one gives me an advantage, but the recharge comes from the wheels driving the motors, which then act as generators and recharge the batteries. It might actually be feasible to use friction, but not as efficient and a lot more cumbersome

Posted by: Bill Mosby | July 11, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

scootmanbubious,
You just nailed it.

Posted by: WillSweet | July 11, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse


There are many reasons we need to get off our oil addition and to start thinking green.......... jobs, environment, energy independence from tyrannical leaders of the world..................

Or we can just keep it the same and buy gas to build the roads and bridges in Canada instead, or help Saudi Arabia buy some more missiles for their army..........and continue to produce crappy gas guzzling trucks that no one can afford........while watching Toyota and Honda build and sell the cars Americans are increasingly interested in buying...............

We can continue to pay to inefficiently transmit electricity great distances from expensive coal plants................while we dig and drill frivolously to catch up with demand for power, scaring our back yards with huge holes and stinky refineries.........

It's about time...........and slowly but surely..........the obstruction to this fight "Republicans", are a dwindling few.

Posted by: ApostasyUSA | July 11, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

There are plenty of other sustainable energy resources out there other than ethanol. But the oil companies probably won't profit so they aren't explored or supported by those that are benefitting from that money. A lot of the posters on here must really be rolling in the dough from their ties to the oil industry. I would've never guessed that all of you would be posting on the WaPo's website at this time of day...shouldn't ya'll be on your yachts or something? I mean, it's friday and you guys got money to burn right?

Posted by: ConradH | July 11, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

McCain lobby running our economic policy?

Sen. Phil Gramm. Eight years ago, as part of a decades-long anti-regulatory crusade, Gramm pulled a sly legislative maneuver that greased the way to the multibillion-dollar subprime meltdown. Yet has Gramm been banished from the corridors of power? Reviled as the villain who bankrupted Middle America?

Hardly. Now a well-paid executive at a Swiss bank, GRAMM COCHAIRS SEN.JOHN MCCAIN'S PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN AND ADVISES THE REPUBLCIAN CANDIDATE ON ECONOMIC MATTERS. He's been mentioned as a possible TREASURY SECRETARY should McCain win. That's right: A guy who helped screw up the global financial system could end up in charge of US economic policy.

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2008/07/foreclosure-phil.html?ref=patrick.net

Posted by: ApostasyUSA | July 11, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

O come on ethanol boy, you and your ADM boss are the cause of high food price and inflation, which are partly responsible for the high fuel price. Obama also is the one who voted for Bushes energy bill.

Posted by: God Father | July 11, 2008 6:41 PM | Report abuse

heck 26 years ago, Obama was high.

Posted by: kevin | July 11, 2008 6:35 PM

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I would bet that he wasn't nearly as high as the majority of republicans that you support. Not even close pal.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 6:41 PM | Report abuse

Not raping and destroying the only planet that humans can live on in our solar system, should not be something that only environmentalists are interested in. Doesn't that make sense to anybody? Comfort? You have no idea what the definition of comfort and uncomfortable will be in 50 years.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

If the energy policies crafted by the Cheney administration were truly policies that had Americans best interests at heart, why were they conducted behind closed doors, with boss Cheney still unwilling to provide details about the participants, or what was discussed?

Since when has the thought process behind a nation's energy policy been necessary to be kept shrouded in secret?

Unless, of course, the plan was to enrich energy companies, and friends of BushCo, at our expense?

Posted by: scootmandubious | July 11, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

McCain has hardly been a Washington insider during his career. I guess besides being unfamiliar with geography in the US, Obama is also unfamiliar with anything else that didn't happen in Chicago during the last 26 years- heck 26 years ago, Obama was high.

Posted by: kevin | July 11, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Speculation will only "drop" after the oil future's market's are regulated again. Everyone know's this. Only then will the price drop up to 50% in one day. McCain used to advocate this, and now he mysteriously never mentions it...hmmmmm....

Posted by: ConradH | July 11, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

The Greenies don't want any power generation. They don't want:

Nuclear power because it's Atomic;

Wind power because it's bad for birds (and harms the Kennedy's view of the sea);

Hydroelectric power because it's bad for fish;

Coal power because it's dirty and dangerous;

Oil power because it's oil;

Thermal power because it hurts the earth.

So, what do they think will run our, businessesm stoves, heaters, and TVs? They don't care. They're Environmentalists! The comfort of others is not their problem.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Check out this link...it will tell you all about the flip flops of McSame.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16124.html#more-16124

Posted by: ob08 | July 11, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

And the people responded..."WE WANT MORE DESTRUCTION AND DEVASTATION!" "WE DON'T HAVE ANY RESPECT FOR THE EARTH, ON WHICH WE LIVE!" And...I'm sure this will all be the unfortunate reality. Man, human beings are truly unconscious. Unconscious to the point that they lust for self-destruction. Vote McCain, and let's speed up the process and just get it all over with. Who cares about future generations, afterall, all that matters is right now.

Posted by: ConradH | July 11, 2008 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama is an idiot. Play the blame game but has no solutions. If Congress Approves off shore drilling today, oil prices would drop instantly since long term speculation would drop, the market would stabilize, and opec would wise up and sell more oil while they can.

Democrats want to see the country go to its knees so they can get their idiot in the white house. It may backfire I hope

Posted by: ziggy1 | July 11, 2008 6:22 PM

__________________________________________________________________________________-___

Every last word of this is completely untrue.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Does Obama believe that building nuclear plants will bring substantial energy any sooner than allowing more drilling by a Congressional vote in the next week or month?

Don't we have long range problems that can only be solved with long range solutions?

Aren't we in all the energy trouble we are in precisely because we have failed to take meaningful long range steps?

I like nuclear, as I like more offshore drilling -- most of our oil spills are from tankers, not from offshore drilling, if I rememember correctly. Let's do something right for once and do both, and a lot more.

Posted by: John | July 11, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Obama is an idiot. Play the blame game but has no solutions. If Congress Approves off shore drilling today, oil prices would drop instantly since long term speculation would drop, the market would stabilize, and opec would wise up and sell more oil while they can.

Democrats want to see the country go to its knees so they can get their idiot in the white house. It may backfire I hope

Posted by: ziggy1 | July 11, 2008 6:22 PM | Report abuse

Theaz, you're wrong, there are solar cars! Toyota has put a bunch of research and development into putting solar panels on top of their cars. Once solar technology is further developed, we'll be able to power a car fully.

Posted by: Bill | July 11, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Tom in Alabama - You're screename explains it all! I'm sure you are rich enough not to care. I bet you really benefit highly from a rebublican government. You must be an oil executive.

Posted by: ConradH | July 11, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Lakisha - Be forewarned..you are looking at this from the surface level. Judging by what you wrote and the way you wrote it, I can assure you that you are not on Barak Obama's level. Although I agree with you about what the white race has done to this country and the world. Barak Obama doesn't equal a free ride for you. However, he is the best candidate by far.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Lets drill like hell for oil in the USA so we can avoid making tough choices like (A)developing alternative energy sources and (B)conservation. Those most opposed to A & B are "big oil" and their political arm (Bush/Cheney), the petro-dictators and rabid Republicans marching in lock-step with loser party politics.

Posted by: Tom in Alabama | July 11, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if Lakisha and Diane72 are the same person?

Posted by: Joe | July 11, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Why do Republicans and the like always have to advocate the most destructive and pro-pollution evironmental policies? This is the way it is 100% of the time. And in the case of drilling for oil, it's not only destructive, but it's not going to do anything for the average american dealing with high gas prices ever. It is amazing that anyone with a brain, that lives on this planet would stand behind this horrible destruction of everything...they are like this with social issues as well, and the majority of people that vote for them get the least benefit from these policies...Do they not realize that we all actually live on earth and that the earth is whats gave us life and there is no where else that we as humans can live? That says to me that it's probably not a great idea to trash it, especially for money and special interests that are interested in more money. It's seems like even the most retarded person with half a brain could figure that out. I didn't want to believe this but, I guess that the republican supporters must just not care at all about any of our futures. Or they are just so ungodly rich that humanity doesn't matter at all to them.

Posted by: ConradH | July 11, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

"Why you think he was a one term-er? He was pitiful and those four years were miserable!"

he told the truth and few could take it.

But here we are again! Deja vue all over again.

Just call it bad news:

"Before you vote for him He is bad news."

Posted by: Gary E. Masters | July 11, 2008 5:58 PM | Report abuse

all white folks is racist. they have ruined this country. but that alright cause we are taking over in novemeber. just like the inventer of the peanut said, george washington carver, the black man will not be free unitil he get up inside the white house.

Posted by: Lakisha | July 11, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

I could tell you, but you probably willnot believe me.

"Could someone please tell me, if they know, why the oil companies want to drill in ANWR rather than on the 68 million acres that are already open to drilling?"

ANWR is a side show. Political playground. Ignore it.

Go to the off shore areas in Gulf, Pacific and Atlantic and there wis the prize.

The unused leases are mostly dry.

The answer is to go where the oil and gas are.

But that is too easy.

Better to blame the Republicans. Then after you get your side elected, change your mind. Drill like crazy.

Posted by: Gary E. Masters | July 11, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

...Carter put together a huge alternative energy research program that would have had us energy independent by now...
===========================
Like want alternative did Carter plan out for us? Like corn-gas that now helping cause famine in other parts of the world, or I remember him turning off the street lights in the urban areas. Yeah it was a sad time with a very sad President! Why you think he was a one term-er? He was pitiful and those four years were miserable!

Posted by: theaz | July 11, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Please folks I beg you to do your own research and go to the Library and check on John McCain- Before you vote for him He is bad news.

Posted by: Westexacan | July 11, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse

"We have enough oil in our country to serve our country, which is critical for our economic and security stability!"

Total idiocy. According to the best estimates, United States oil reserves (including protected areas) would run out in 3 years at current consumption rates, assuming we could get it out that fast. Of course, we can't. But even at current domestic production rates, which meeet only 1/3 of demand, proven reserves will be exhausted in all of 11 years.

The faster we pump it, the faster it will run out, and the faster we'll be *truly* SOL. So why not leave a little for later, and concentrate on slowing our current GLUTTONOUS use while we transition to sustainable energy?

Posted by: frededias | July 11, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

You know when you meet an enviro-freek, they typically need a remediation project on their own personal hygiene! The earth is cleaner then they are, and so no worries about mother earth!

Posted by: theaz | July 11, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

Sam

"a wicked gang of neocons" Oh come-on. That sounds like a bad quote from Pravda during the Cold War.

Posted by: Bob | July 11, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

O Bamma is so full of himself he gets lost in his own rhetoric. Just what plan does he have? None if you listen to his words and not his cacaphonic musings which seem to have an Hitlerist trance on the masses. A vote for Bamma is a vote for higher taxes, socialist government program increases and not a panancea for what ails America now - a seemingly "what about me" attitude that does not want to accept responsibility for its own actions.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Whether it's political positioning or not remains to be seen, but Obama has repeatedly stated that his support for ethanol stems from its value as a transitional setp. Cellulosic ethanol is the end game, corn ethanol is how we get there.

Posted by: ben | July 11, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Could someone please tell me, if they know, why the oil companies want to drill in ANWR rather than on the 68 million acres that are already open to drilling?

Posted by: Wondering | July 11, 2008 5:26 PM

=================================
Yeah like the false comment that it would take ten years to get market, when we went to the moon in less time over forty years ago. We have enough oil in our country to serve our country, which is critical for our economic and security stability!

Posted by: theaz | July 11, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Or maybe look to the Republicans to make up a diversionary story rather than answer the question

Posted by: wondering | July 11, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Here is what I want! I want the President to be honest A saint not a (you know what). I want the MAN to not deal in corruption and war. I want a man in February to work well as the President of the Most Great Country of the Free World & to do a great days work and let all of us enjoy our lives without hearing Nails Scratching On the BLackBoard everytime he opens his mouth. Peace working for people, That MY FRieNDS WILL BE BARACK OBAMA Cheers! to men women and children all around the world, hurray!

Posted by: I Like Obama | July 11, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Maybe because there's oil under ANWR and not some of the other areas. Leave it to the Democrats to look for oil in the wrong kind of rock.

Posted by: Chatard | July 11, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

John Mc Cain, Bush, and Cheny are members of a wicked gang of neocons who have damaged the economy of this country and started unnecessary wars that cost us billions of US$ and thousands of the lives of our young and brave soldiers. They have lied to all Americans about WMD in Iraq and unfortunately got us stuck in a quaqmire with no way out in the near future.Nobody can trust or tolerate such wicked clowns for another presidential term under any circustances. The proper place for John Mc Cain is a suitable oldman house, not the White House nor even the Senate.

Posted by: SAM | July 11, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Could someone please tell me, if they know, why the oil companies want to drill in ANWR rather than on the 68 million acres that are already open to drilling?

Posted by: Wondering | July 11, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

captbilly,
Are you aware that OPEC is simply refusing to increase production? It is not impossible or even a problem for them to, they just want to make as much money as possible. One solution might be to get Iraq, whose government we are friends with, to increase its production, perhaps just to export to us to lower our costs. If they could break with OPEC to do this, then they could make buckets more money and lower oil prices world-wide.

Posted by: Geroge Keith Watson | July 11, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse


As soon as Obama trades his campaign jet for a fleet of Prius's, reverses his support for coal, and stops backing ethanol, he'll have some credibility on the issue.

Posted by: WylieD | July 11, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Ok you enviro-despots, where do we use gasoline for generating utility power? Maybe some natural gas, but primarily coal and nuclear power for electric power plants and natural gas is a different by-product that can be captured while drilling oil. So I want gasoline for my car! Where is the mass technology now for a wind or solar car or any other alternative? It not here where is it? People right now are losing their jobs and paying high prices for food you fools. We have oil reserves that could last for couple hundred years, but I figure at least couple decades to replace the current automobiles and infrastructure that supports their use.

Posted by: theaz | July 11, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

OK hera's the story. It is absolutely true that our politicians are to blame for the current crisis in energy costs. In the 1970s OPEC embargoed oil sales to the US and we had an energy crisis where people were only able to buy fuel on alternate days and big gas guzzlers were sold for pennies on the dollar. Carter put together a huge alternative energy research program that would have had us energy independent by now.

Then Reagan got elected. His advisors told him that if we used our military as a threat, and made illegal deals with Iran and others, then we could drive the price of oil down to levels that would make alternative energy not cost effective. Within a year or two almost all alternative energy research was stopped and because oil stayed pleantiful and cheap our politicians refused to face up to the fact that we would eventually (like about now) reach a point where the supply of oil couldn't keep up with demand. So for the 30 years since the oil embargo we have mostly played with ourselves rather than making significant progress on energy independence.

Now we will have to go into crisis mode try and make up in a few years what was supposed to have happened over several decades. The real problem is that we have politicians who think in terms of what they can achieve in 2, 4 or 6 years, but we have a problem that will not be solved in that time frame. So the politicians did virtually nothing and now we are screwed.

You are correct to think that we will have to make sacrifices, but now those sacrifices will be much much greater than they would have if we had paid attention to this for as long as we were aware of the problem. Eventually we will not have to use wind powered cars and bicycles, but over the next ten years we are going to have some really serious issues with energy supply.

I hope the change that Obama speaks of includes changing the relatively small amount of power that politicians are willing to ceed to civil service people, because the only way that we can solve long term problems is with people who can plan long term. The energy department needs to be able to plan 50 years ahead and do the reseach and push the necessary legislation to encourage industry and citizens to move to other forms of energy, before those forms of energy are completely cost effective. Politicans can't do this because they are focused on doing things that will get them reelected.

Posted by: captbilly | July 11, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

The increase in the price of gas is directly caused by the increased demand for oil in the two largest and fastest developing economies in the world, China and India. OPEC is refusing to increase production in order to drive the price up, and they're making buckets of money as a result. Mr. Obama doesn't say exactly what Mr. McCain has or hasn't tried to do about our foreseeable situation. Perhaps he doesn't know and is relying on Democratic Party provided rhetoric.

The sad fact is that it is better for the world environment if we drill offshore here, with good regulatory reporting (in place for many years now), rather than let countries with no regulatory reporting we have access to drill and spill for us. Even with as little as we know about foriegn producer oil spills, the U.S.'s record is still better than that of foriegn oil producers over the last fifty or so years. Further, by far the most dangerous activity is shipping oil in supertankers, something only importation requires. Oil platforms require much smaller ships and much shorter trips, making them far safer for the environment than importing oil.

Why have the environmentalists been successful in barring oil production here at home when it is clearly better for the environment for us to drill and produce here? Must be successful left wing propoganda making the politicians worry that if they don't flatter popular misconceptions, they won't get (re)elected.

Posted by: George Keith Watson | July 11, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

for all those that think that simply turning to alternative, green energy is the way to energy salvation, they are in for a rude awakening. The Oil and Power Companies are busy buying up and fronting new alternative energy companies. A Friend of mine is working for a company that makes parts for wind turbines in Iowa. The owner of the company has started and sold three companies making parts in the same industry. All of these endevours have been financed by British Petroleum who is obviously poised to assume direct control over a good chunck of the industry. This is Corporate Heaven. Until corporate power is successfully challenged the possibillites of "green power" will not be realised

Posted by: Stephen Townsend | July 11, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Sadly, we wouldn't be in this mess now, had President Carter's visionary Energy policies, not been obliterated by Reagan.
Back in the late 70s, America was waking up... people were becoming aware of conservation. Action was being taken, to end any dependence on foreign oil, & oil in general.
Then, Reagan and the GOP did their thing, ignoring reality - - the sheep followed blindly... and now the mess.
And more importantly, it seems Americans have become more spoiled, wanting that quick fix, & not wanting to conserve - - do their part.
Bottom line - - you wanted Reagan, & the Bushes - - you voted against your best interests, and this is what ya got.
And sadly, I imagine many of these same people will vote to continue this, by voting for McCain.
They never learn...

Posted by: jon | July 11, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Why do people like thaez get to vote?

Posted by: Sigh | July 11, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

If I was paranoid, and I'm not, I would think that the high price of oil, blamed on speculators, is actually a calculated effort on the part of this administration and their friends in the oil industry to (a) rip off the American public as much as possible; (b) get their hands on all those environmentally sensitive and protected areas (like ANWAR) -- something the oil industry has been wanting for ages. If I was paranoid, I would think that this administration has sold us to their "buddies" the Saudis (the same ones who have supported Bin Laden as long as he leaves them alone). If I was paranoid, I would think that this administration (which is the worst on record), would do anything to help big business and the rich at the expense of the rest of America.
Hmmm. Maybe the last idea isn't paranoia....
The last thing we need is four more years of a Republican administration.

Posted by: abby0802 | July 11, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Much as I like Obama, though, his support for corn ethanol is pretty hideous.

Posted by: aleks | July 11, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Also, I understand we have more oil reserves then anybody in the world!
Posted by: theaz | July 11, 2008 3:11 PM

In the future, you should probably assume that any statement you feel like prefacing with "I understand," "I think," "I believe," or "I know," is hilariously far from true.

Posted by: aleks | July 11, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

WE TRIED THE OIL MAN WHO SAID HE'D PRESSURE HIS FRIENDS THE SAUDIS TO REDUCE OIL PRICES WHEN THEY SKYROCKETED OVER $1.00 A GALLON UNNECESSARILY. LITTLE DID WE KNOW THAT HIS KIND OF PRESSURE AND HIS KIND OF FRIENDS WOULD BE SO HELPFUL THAT GAS IS ONLY AROUND $4.50 A GALLON NOW.===IT'S TIME FOR A PRESIDENT WHO AT LEAST HAS WIND, SOLAR AND HYDROGEN CELL POWER FRIENDS IN THE UNITED STATES, THEN WHEN THEY GET THE MONEY, WE CAN AT LEAST CUT BACK ON SENDING OUR MONEY TO FOREIGNERS====MCCAIN??? OBAMA??? HAVE YOU GOT ANY WIND POWER FRIENDS??? ANY SOLAR POWER FRINDS??? ANY HYDROGEN CELL POWER FRIENDS??? WE'VE GOT TO START SOMEWHERE, SO WE MIGHT AS WELL START HERE!!

Posted by: benighse | July 11, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

theaz.......are you the azz.........nuclear energy can be used for most of the major consumers of petroleam based products like power plants and huge energy using things which saves more gas for our cars.....so think a lil theaz and you won't sound like the azz

Posted by: lol fool | July 11, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

like when Barak obama voted yes on Cheney's energy bill?

Posted by: lndlouis | July 11, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Theaz, I'm not sure where you are getting your data from, but I'd strongly encourage you to do a little homework before forming too many opinions on these issues. Your suggestion that we have more oil reserves that anyone in the world is just flat wrong. The USA contains a mere 3% of the world's known oil supplies. 3%. That's all. The US doesn't even make the top ten in terms of known oil reserves (feel free to check my facts here: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2178rank.html). Yet, by comparision, we still utilize more than 25% of annual consumption, so even if we could rapidly withdraw the 3% we have, we'd still need to import the remaining 22% that we need.

As for putting a sail on your car, maybe that's not a half bad idea! :) But, more to the point - when the US has invested our intellectual, industrial and monetary resources in solving problems, we've acomplished some quite amazing things: We've essentially erased a number of terrible illnesses from our shores; 2) we invinted the car, mass rail systems and nuclear powered naval ships; and 3) were the primary driver behind the information age which has transformed all aspects of our lives, including the fact the we are having this very conversation in this way. Oh yeah, and remember that bit about landing a man on the moon? Something tells me this is a problem we can solve as well once we decide to put our minds to it. So, while I doubt that Senator Obama is ready to suggest you go and get your car fitted for sails, I do believe that he has a faith in our collective ability to focus our inventivness and capacity for creativity and bring new fuels to the table - be they self-generated electricity (did you know that a hybird car recharges its batteries from the friction created when using the breaks?), hydrogen fuel cells, or bio-fuels or very possibly something we don't even know about yet. Each of these represents an interesting prospect - and each of these represents a possible path to break our dependence on oil, be it domestic or foregin in origin.

So, what are we waiting for?

Posted by: Fact Checker | July 11, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Theaz, you're right--you really can't continue to drive wherever and whenever you want. None of us can. Fact is, oil is a finite resource and you and I and the rest of the world that have come to depend on it must change our ways. If we have more oil reserves than "anyone in the world," that would be news to the Saudis. The fact is that easy oil in the U.S. peaked in the seventies under Jimmy Carter. Talk to any U.S. oil man and he'll tell you this. The drilling that they want to do now is to go after the not so easy oil--shale and deep, deep (sometimes more than a mile under ground in deep ocean waters)reserves under the ocean floor. The fact is, that both Republicans and Democrats are to blame for our current situation because they haven't wanted to tell the truth to people like you who refuse to give up anything. Is there a train or a bus (or a bicycle) that can get you to work? The only way we will overcome this impending crisis is if we ALL make some sacrifices, like it or not.

Posted by: Katie of St. Paul | July 11, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Hey, theaz, the oil companies don't want to drill for oil here. It's too expensive. They have uncounted millions of acres of land under lease already that they're not drilling. Why not? Because they can make a few more pennies by buying off our "leaders" with favors and contributions and then order them to invade a country that never lifted a finger to us and steal their oil, which is lying under a few feet of sand and easy to tap. That's why 4,000 brave Americans have died there instead of finding bin Laden, because the oil companies would rather make those few extra pennies than worry about their country.

Putting a mast and a sail on your car sounds ridiculous, but it's the kind of aggressive, hands-on kind of thinking that made our country great once, before we allowed ourselves to be ruled by fools. There are cars right now that run on water. Do they go more than 50 miles without needing to refuel? NO. Do they go 100 MPH and make that neat "vroom" sound? No. But that's the kind of sacrifice a great nation has to make at some point, whether it's water cars or solar cars or wood-burning cars or whatever, instead of electing former oil company executives to trash our Constitution, interfere in the business of sovereign nations and cultures to the point where they attack us, and generally shifting the whole burden of our failing economy onto our children.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

OK Senator Obama how am I going to drive my car to work NOW with nuclear, wind, or solar energy? Sounds great but doesn't make sense, do I put a mast and sail on my car that I'mcurrently making payments on. Also, I understand we have more oil reserves then anybody in the world! Why then are we depended on foreign oil? Again doesn't make sense! The answer seem simple, use our oil until you invent that solar car!

Posted by: theaz | July 11, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company