Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
June 19, 2013

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     chris hedges     economy     nsa     politics     robert scheer
Most Read

Reporter Who Brought Down the 'Runaway General' Dead at 33

Sen. Elizabeth Warren's Supreme Court Warning

Warren Opposes Obama Nominee, Lawmaker Urges Gender-Role Class for Kids, and More

The Terror Con

Rachel Maddow Gives Emotional Tribute to Michael Hastings

Most Comments
Most Emailed




The Unwinding


Truthdig Bazaar
Critical Thinking Unleashed

Critical Thinking Unleashed

By Elliot D. Cohen
$39.10

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Pelosi Takes the Heat on Drilling

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Aug 5, 2008
Flickr / ccgd

According to the Politico, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has given her blessing to vulnerable Democrats to rebel against the party’s position on offshore drilling. The strategy goes something like this: Pelosi plays the liberal from San Francisco while representatives of more conservative districts berate her. With a majority intact, the Democrats push through a comprehensive energy policy sometime in 2009.


The Politico:

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.

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.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Sue Cook, August 6, 2008 at 10:26 am Link to this comment

Rowman,  Brava! Good post.  It’s what I’ve been saying all along.

The Dems. (Pelosi, Reid, Rangel, Dean, Brazille) are salvatating at the propects of holding a majority in congress come January.  Obama fits right in their mold.

That’s why we need to stress to all who will listen having a democratic president, and congress is too scary to even think about. We need to keep a mix in the fold.

It’s the best scenario for our country and for us, especially the middle class who always seem to be paying the price for the poor and the rich.

Report this

By David Model, August 6, 2008 at 8:45 am Link to this comment

HELLO!! Oil companies, Democratic, and Republican members of Congress.  Apparently the aforementioned do not read environmental news or do not care about global warming since their solution to the oil crisis is based on the assumption that the real problem is either a shortage of supply or high prices.  Apparently these people do not read any analysis other than the mainstream media for their understanding of the impact of global warning.  Most of these people have children and grandchildren and it defies common sense that they would willingly bequeath a severely damaged planet to their loved ones.  So read other sources.

The real problem is the consumption of fossil fuel irrespective of the price or availability.  Clearly and simply, fossil fuels contribute to greenhouse emissions which are already approximately 60% above the levels needed to sustain our planet.  Increasing current consumption levels cannot possibly be the solution in the short or long term.

Compounding the problem is the fact that oil is either close to or past its peak.  That means that oil is guaranteed to become more expensive and dirty as producers extract oil from less efficient sources.  For example, the Tar Sands in Canada has catapulted to number one in known oil reserves.  It is extremely costly and dirty to extract and destroys the environment in a large area.  Greenhouse emissions will skyrocket as people begin to consume more oil from these dirty and inefficient sources.

Offshore drilling will have no real impact on either the supply or cost of oil while at the same time ignoring the essential principle that the best way to solve the fossil fuel problem is to leave it in the ground. It will take ten years for that oil to come on line and it would account for less than .2% of world production. As well, he is making an unrealistic assumption that the first priority of the oil companies that produce the oil will be to sell it to the United States. The oil will belong to the companies and their one and only mandate is to maximize profits and if that means selling elsewhere, they will.

Confusing our understanding of the problem is the discussion about the price of oil.  Obviously, the oil companies want you to believe that it is related to the supply of oil and hence the solution is to produce more oil.  Surprise! Surprise!  The real problem is neither the supply which has been fairly constant nor the demand which is rising due to the increasing consumption in countries such as India and China but can still be met for a while given current reserves.  The real problem is speculation.  Speculators are not only betting on the price today but the price well into the future.  It is their predatory betting for quick profits that is driving up the price for consumers.

Possibly the problem would be fully addressed if those with ties with the oil companies, including oil company executives, shareholders, lobbyists, and politicians who are in a bed of oil with the oil companies, paid more attention to the fate of their younger relatives than to the ever-increasing profits of oil companies.

http://www.stateofdarkness.com

Report this
Purple Girl's avatar

By Purple Girl, August 6, 2008 at 6:17 am Link to this comment

Pelosi has proudly played the ‘devil advocate’ while giving the nod to everything this admin and their foreign and Corp sponsors have asked for.
The Dems who have been in Congress for the last few decades are just as corrupt as their Co worker across the aisle (Co workers for the Corps, Not US)
Pelosi was propped up to give th appearance, and a crumb to liberals who have known the Oil Corps and their Oil’Royals’ have been fucking US for decades.
As a Life long Dem- i refused to vote during My MI primary (yesterday) to give Sen Levin another shot at fucking Us again.I also saw Kildees real allegience and did not make his name either - nor his brother who is trying to ride his coat tails in to office.
If these Covert Operative for the Corps think Dems will blindly vote for them this year, just becasue we support Sen Obama- they are sorely mistaken. when faced with Only a Repug or a co conspirator Dem- i’ll leave it blank. but given an opportunity to vote for a 3rd party new comer, I’ll cast my vote for them. I’d rather gamble on inexperience then conitinue to be had by those who serve the Corps.
Inexperience can be rectified, but immoral and unethical personality traits can Not (unless we throw them in prison, and make an example out of them).The Neo Cons from both sides have met their Reckoning days. I would love to have a concerted effort to run them all out of Public office- We need help from the ‘Old School’Republicans- what few are left. I am all for Sen Obama naming Sen Chuck hagel for VP-  kicking the Neo con & clinton machines’ right in the Balls!


OBAMA/HAGEL ‘08 !!!

Report this

By rowman, August 6, 2008 at 5:36 am Link to this comment

Would you expect anything less from the Puppet Master?

A vote for Obama is NOT a vote for change. It is a vote for these worthless Democratic leaders who control the strings.

They supported Obama because they knew they would not have total control over Hillary. Obama is beholden to his leaders and it is they who call the shots!

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.