Posted by MataHarley on 5 August, 2008 at 3:35 pm. 9 comments already!


Politico has a piece today that echoes my original belief that Obama’s “change” of heart on drilling is nothing but a safe political ploy for election purposes. In other words, say what the public wants to hear, and deliver nothing.

Martin Kady II and Patrick O’Conner’s dual byline, “At-risk Dems back drilling”, cites Democratic aides confirming the divide in the DNC on the issue of drillling on US territories is nothing but a sham.

California Democrat Nancy Pelosi may be trying to save the planet — but the rank and file in her party increasingly are just trying to save their political hides when it comes to gas prices as Republicans apply more and more rhetorical muscle.

But what looks like intraparty tension on the surface is part of an intentional strategy in which Pelosi takes the heat on energy policy, while behind the scenes she’s encouraging vulnerable Democrats to express their independence if it helps them politically, according to Democratic aides on and off Capitol Hill.

No surprise there. Let the safe elected ones take the heat, while those up for re’election dazzle the voters with promises that will never be fulfilled. No one could better illustrate the masking of the truth better than the DNC’s slick front man, Barack Obama. As I pointed out in my Aug 2nd post, Obama “plays” bipartisan on energy, he has placed some insurmountable caveats on what any compromise that includes oil drilling must include.

Some of these, as coming out in different news reports scattered, are the lose it or drill it on the existing leases… almost all of which in the land leases are shown to be non-productive sites. Also windfall taxes (on oil companies like Chevron, who are losing their shirts at the pump, but making money for their foreign exploration and production services). Also an increased control on speculators… aka investors… in commodities.

Needless to say, this “compromise” is laden with speedbumps and unlikely to find consensus with Congress and the battling parties. Which, of course, makes all the campaign promises of the DNC, exhibiting a new open mind to drilling, nothing more than campaign staging while the DNC has their back… making sure none of those promises come to pass.

This less than genuine stance isn’t fooling the Democrat the DNC so loves to hate – Joe Lieberman.

Sen. Joe Lieberman said Sunday that Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama’s decision to embrace limited offshore drilling was halfhearted and loaded with caveats and he predicted the senator from Illinois would find a reason to change his position again if he had to vote on the issue.


Mr. Lieberman, a Connecticut independent and a surrogate for Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain of Arizona, said he was skeptical of Mr. Obama’s support of a proposal from a bipartisan group of 10 senators that Friday proposed a compromise energy plan that included drilling in areas currently off limits, renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power and nuclear energy.

“John McCain sees the crisis,” Mr. Lieberman said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Barack Obama says this weekend, ‘maybe,’ ‘eh,’ ‘and,’ ‘if,’ ‘but.’ He did not endorse, he did not come out with a strong decision.

“I predict to you he’ll find reasons not to be for it if this comes to a vote in the Senate,” said Mr. Lieberman, an ex-Democrat who formerly opposed expanded offshore drilling.

The enviros aren’t all that pleased either. But considering the praise they are heaping on Obama, despite his perceived turncoat stance, they too realize that his rhetoric is nothing but empty promises, made for political expedience.

But even while they criticized Obama’s drilling switch and components of the “Gang of 10” bill, enviros had lots of nice things to say about Obama’s own comprehensive energy plan, which he detailed during a speech in Lansing, Mich., on Monday. Largely the same as the energy plan Obama had outlined earlier, it would, among other things, create 5 million new green jobs, invest $150 billion in clean energy and job training, require more electricity to come from renewable sources, promote plug-in hybrids and other fuel-efficient cars, and give Americans an “emergency energy rebate” paid for by a windfall-profits tax on oil companies.

Karpinski praised the plan’s “tough measures to truly end our dependence on oil.” Dan Weiss, a senior fellow and director of climate strategy at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, said Obama’s plan, taken as a whole, is “a vast improvement over what anybody else has proposed.”

A Sierra Club press release on Monday ignored the offshore-drilling issue entirely and simply heaped praise on Obama’s energy platform (and scorn on John McCain’s). “Sen. Obama’s plan will put America on the path to a clean energy future because it prioritizes efforts that will benefit working families instead of the outdated fossil-fuel industries,” said Sierra Club Political Director Cathy Duvall. “Sen. Obama supports creating millions of jobs by investing in the cleanest, cheapest, and fastest technologies to meet our energy needs and stimulate our economy.”

Oh how easy it is to keep the blindly devoted… well, er… blind.

When Obama had this “change” of heart, what was obvious to those that study the campaign games pols play, is confirmed today by Democratic aids who just love to talk…. go ahead and appear independent, they whisper. The goal? Keep the Dem majority, and abscond more in November… any way possible. If they can spread this game plan around to the loyal base, and not have it hit the main stream voter, they can allay the fears of their enviro supporters, and still keep Joe Blow voter in the dark.

Of course, this could all backfire. As the Politico rightly points out, it’s gambling that the DNC will keep or increase their majority, plus own the Oval Office.

Pelosi’s gambit rests on one big assumption: that Democrats will own Washington after the election and will be able to craft a sweeping energy policy that is heavy on conservation and fuel alternatives while allowing for some new oil drilling. Democrats see no need to make major concessions on energy policy with a party poised to lose seats in both chambers in just three months — even if recess-averse Republicans continue to pound away on the issue.

“The reality is we will have a new president in three months, and what Bush and the Republicans are trying to do amounts to a land grab for the oil companies,” said one senior House Democratic aide involved with party strategy. “I don’t think we have to give in at all pre-election — we have many more options postelection.”

As they did in the 2006 mid term elections, the DNC deliberately lied to obtain power. They openly admit they are dabbling in half-truths now, again to obtain power.

So much for the promise of “the most open and honest government in history”…. To quote Pelosi herself:

“The intention of our Founding Fathers was for Congress to be a marketplace of ideas. The Republicans have turned Congress into an auction house – for sale to the highest bidder. You have to pay to play. It is just not right.

Evidently that “marketplace of ideas” requires all to be in line with Madam Speaker’s “save the planet” views… No other “ideas” are stocked in her “marketplace”

“Ours must be a government ‘of the people, by the people, and for the people.’ That means all of the American people. Republicans have made it a government of, by, and for a few of the people. America can do better. We can and we will. With this agenda, Democrats will create the most open and honest government in history, and put power back where it belongs – in the hands of all the people. Together, America can do better.”

Would that be the same people, of which the majority support US oil exploration, drilling and extraction?

And will those voters recognize the games the pols play with oil… before they head to the voting booth in November?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x