Pelosi flips. Will it be a flop?

14 08 2008
“There are a dizzying number of economic and national security arguments for drilling at home: a $700 billion oil balance-of-payments deficit, a gas tax (equivalent) levied on the paychecks of American workers and poured into the treasuries of enemy and terror-supporting regimes, growing dependence on unstable states of the Persian Gulf and Caspian basin.” – columnist Charles Krauthammer.
A democrat, doing what democrats do best, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi stuck her finger into the air and got herself a good feel on which way the wind is blowing. She now seems to want to support a vote on allowing drilling in the now banned areas off our shores. ‘Seems‘, however, may be the operative word here.

Not a single argument seemed to move her. Not the high cost that our public was suffering under. Not the very security of our country. No argument about self sufficiency or money flowing to foreign dictators mattered one iota to Madam Speaker. What seems to have turned her head is what typically tend to turn liberal heads – votes. Voters anyway.

Of course her new response is also the typical democrat response – word games.

It seems that what Ms. Pelosi now supports is some kind of roundabout, tied together, lumped with and full of issues and projects and programs that wouldn’t normally even see the light of day package to put up for vote. All of the above has now seemingly become everything but the kitchen sink or nothing. A plan that she can expect to go down to defeat, thereby preserving what she wanted in the first place, but at the same time allowing her and her cronies to stand before the American voter and say that it wasn’t her who stood in the way of oil independence. She’s already made the play that what the republicans want is some kind of fraud on the American public.

Several times over the past few weeks she and other dems have stood before microphones and made the statement that “it’s the President [Bush]” who hasn’t offered an energy package that would have prevented all of this. But that’s just wrong. Bush made the case and offered the plan back in early 2001. Democrats and republicans alike didn’t listen back then. But the plan was on the table. That was then, and they didn’t see any compelling reason, but this is now… and their memory doesn’t seem to go back that far. So they keep giving the same excuse… takes too long… up to ten years.

We should see no surprise with Pelosi. She marches to a different drummer… or something. She certainly sees things in a bit of a different way. And being the skilled San Francisco politician that she is she’s able to read events and results in a much different way than many. While most of us saw the ‘surge’ in Iraq as a rousing success and heaped the credit onto our troops (where it belonged) for all their hard word, sacrifice, and the resulting vast improvement in the stability and security of that country, Pelosi said, “Well, the purpose of the surge was to provide a secure space, a time for the political change to occur to accomplish the reconciliation. That didn’t happen. Whatever the military success, and progress that may have been made, the surge didn’t accomplish its goal. And some of the success of the surge is that the goodwill of the Iranians – they decided in Basra when the fighting would end, they negotiated that cessation of hostilities – the Iranians.”

In other words, to her, more Americans died in vain… it was not the success we were looking for at all. Somehow, as glaring as it is to everybody else, she fails to even see the vast political change in Iraq as well as the improvement in security there. Even though it has been headlines in several papers, and scrolling across the bottom of the screen in our televisions. What IS easy to see, however, is why – because to do so would be giving credit to Bush. What’s more important? Reality, or Bush bashing? I wonder, would she turn back the clock on that surge?

Sooner or later the House will find itself back in session. Will the democrats have bought enough time so this issue isn’t as important to the public as it was just weeks ago? Will something else come along to sweep our need for domestic energy independence off the radar and out of the voting publics mind, or will she have to bite the bullet and allow a vote? And if the vote that’s allowed will it be something worth voting on…, or some poisoned package put together to assure she can protect the special interests that is her base? Time will tell.

Meanwhile, McCain and Obama duke it out over who has the better approach and plan to alleviate the demands of the public. Neither relish the thought of drilling in these now protected areas. McCain seems to see the reality and necessity of gaining more independence in our energy sources. He supported much of what’s offered up for a good long while. Obama, it seems, has seen the light (or wind direction) and now has changed his stance to support more domestic production by allowing access to those forbidden areas. At least he now says he does. That’s subject to change again as well.

There is a lot going on in the world right now, and the price of a barrel of oil has started down now that the talk about expanding production has started for real. Will any of this still be a issue come November? It’s an issue that, in the long run, won’t go away. So, we shall see.





Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: