I thought there was something like this afoot.  Great work!

Jerome thought we needed to roll on the gas tax holiday as well.

Why was Obama on the backhand on the oil drilling?
If the polls said it was a gooder. He should have went for it.
He needs bold set pieces and it would have been perfect for him.

Oh well there is School vouchers and affimative action.

the NYT notes that there aren't enough modern oil tankers to drill for the offshore oil that's already legally cleared to be pumped:

If this is true, then granting the permission to drill will have no effect on the actual drilling itself.  Why are you not FOR allowing increased drilling in that case?  

Yeah, seriously, this is an issue where Obama needs to be a little more flexible on.

And if McCain hits him for changing his mind, he can hit right back, point out McCain did the same thing.

I'd also note that gas prices have gone up a lot since the gas tax debate.

Promoting another diary won't make us agree with you.

A single poll won't make cowards of us.  There's no need to "compromise" on something that will do more harm than good.  We have the Legislature, we set the agenda unless we surrender.  

Has anyone considered simply promoting ways to use less oil, and less energy for that matter?

It seems so simple, yet no one, not even Barack Obama, seems to have considered this (publicly).

Maybe we're the problem, and not the oil companies.

*gasp.

First off, drilling in ANWR/offshore won't help and is stupid, however,

If we put a deal on the table where we said you can have your ANWR and offshore if we can have an Appollo size energy program wouldn't it be worth it?

To get solar panels on 50% of all homes and businesses and small wind powering 15% of all homes, and massive research into new energy solutions?

I have been totally self righteous about ANWR being comepletely off limits and a line we should never cross, but if we could give up ANWR to save humanity, shouldn't we?

P.S. It is about saving humanity. The planet will surivive just fine without us. We don't need to save the planet, we need to save ourselves and our children.

We still have another 16000 Oil drilling sites but the oil companies refused to drill those. How about lets educate the public about those 16000 sites and make sure that they are all drilled first before we touch any other areas. The Federal Government gives Exxon Mobil alone 4bil annually to locate more sites to drill but instead in their annual report they said it's sufficient at the moment and thus split the 4bil into dividends. Are we going to do anything about this too?

The public wants it and the GOP is lining up to give it to them.

Please spare us the chicken little routine every time McLame tries a new version of an old gimmick that didn't work.

What the hell happened to Jerome? He used to be reasonable. Did he suddenly blow a gasket?

This proposal for drilling is an OUTRIGHT FRAUD and Obama and everybody else needs to stand up and say so forthrightly. That's leadership.

We say this is a stupid idea that isn't going to work. It's NOT going to give you ANY relief on the price of gas, period. We need a serious energy policy that reduces the NEED for oil by converting as much of our economy to renewable energy as we can as quick as we can.

We need to MAKE the oil companies stop hording oil in sites that haven't been drilled in 30 years, because it's more profitable to keep them on the books that way.

All Obama has to do is say "if this were going to lower oil prices at the pump or solve the energy crisis I'd be for it. But, it won't do either. It's a PHONY solution that only lines the pockets of the big oil companies, which is exactly why Bush and McCain are for it."

the great mogambo at asia times had this to say about the recent congressional hearings about the price of oil"

"I'll gladly answer that question, senator! The reason that oil costs so much in dollars is that the purchasing power of the dollar has dropped by 40% in five lousy years, thanks to you letting the Federal Reserve create so much damned money, you lowlife scumbag! If the dollar still had its buying power, oil would still be US$25 a barrel like it was in 2002, but nooOOoooo! You dumb, stupid, ignorant congressional morons decided to borrow and then spend so insanely much money that the Federal Reserve was required (and only too happy!) to create all the money and credit needed to finance the disgusting orgy of your irresponsible government spending, now totaling $9.4 trillion in national debt, because if the Fed did not create the money, your enormous borrowing needs would have sucked up every freaking dime of savings in the country a dozen times over, driving interest rates through the roof, called the 'squeezing out effect'. That's why oil costs so much, you ignorant, preening Congressional moron!"

"She said oil companies already lease about 68 million acres of land that is not being drilled. She questioned why oil companies were pushing to open up the ANWR in Alaska when so many acres they currently hold are not being developed.

On that point, a group of Democratic lawmakers introduced legislation that would compel oil companies to drill in lands they are now leasing from the federal government.

"Oil corporations are trying to take control of as much land now during the oil-friendly Bush administration years, but are holding off on drilling until the price of oil soars to $200 or $300 a barrel so they can make even greater profits," said Rep. Maurice Hinchey, a New York Democrat and a sponsor of the drilling bill."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080612/pl_n m/usa_congress_energy_dc

I believe this is as this blurb suggests that this is a land grab by the oil companies. 68 million acres is a bit over 100,000 square miles or about the size of the U.K.!!! and they are no drilling on it. This is a gimmick.

It is a total gimmick.  Points:

1.  Refineries.  They are currently running at 86-89% of capacity.  Normally, except for the maintenance time, they run around 95%.  WHat happened?  They dealt with this part on CNBC last week.  When oil was $50/barrel, refineries pulled out ~$22 profit per barrel.  Once oil hit $100 their profit went to $8/barrel.  Not sure why it is not a linear drop to $11, but there it is.  As profits decline, refineries lower production to keep prices or REFINED products up.  No longer supply/demand per se.

2.  South Dakota, during the primary, authorized the building of a refinery in the state.  There is your new refinery IF they actually build it.

3.  As stated, this really is a land grab by oil companies while they can get it...they see a big Democratic Win in Nov. (and hostile environment after) and want to get all their "unbreakable" contracts lined up before January.  So who cares if they cannot drill for x-years?  Well, eventually they will get to drilling.  Even if the US miraculously goes all renewable in the next 5 years, many countries like India or China will not.  So demand of some sort will always be there.  And all it takes is one screwup by oil companies much more interested in profit than in responsability and tourist communities will wither off.  It will be a disaster that, as seen in the past, takes a LONG time to clean, is very expensive, and that Oil Companies love to worm out of.  And then there is the money needed to help the actual communities effected because of loss of livlihood.  Just a all around looser.  I don't trust oil companies one inch...period.

4.  Look at the Iraq land grab going on...and tell me the war was not infuenced in any way over that.  Right before the war, French and Russian oild companies were concluding deals with Iraq for access to the oil.  Now it is the "victors" oil companies that are moving in instead.  Sounds like oil warfare to me...

5. WHy compromise?  Instead, push for BETTER SOLUTIONS.  Like electric cars, personal energy production (solar/wind/whatever), and conservation.  Use government rebates and incentives, real ones, to push HARD for this.  Funding for it...the money that is being pumped into Iraq, the 4 Bil the oil companies are not paying that they should, and removal of incentives for oil companies.  I also say that all money for research into alternative energy should be made re-competative.  Giving big oil the leadership role to replace themselves is a BAD IDEA at this point.  Let them COMPETE for the future market and I swear we will have major innovation faster than anyone thinks.  Who here honestly believes that BIG OIL is really working to replace oil right now?

I just want to say that this is a GOLDEN opportunity for the Democrats to come out swinging and really hit this one out of the park.  Competative renewable energy research and implamentation between new companies and Big oil means a win for America.  Implementing a total restructure of public energy consumption, from the White House to the local court house, based on being energy independant through use of wind/solar/whatever.  Create Jobs making those products in the USA.  Create jobs in maintenance of those products.  Hell, create a Dept of public energy production.  COMPETE and WIN.

I think we both agree, oil has to go, but like you said get a compromise, CAFE standards as I said in the other thread. Something. If we don't do anything, McCain wins, even if it is on misinformation.We need to MAKE the oil companies stop hording oil in sites that haven't been drilled in 30 years,because it's more profitable to keep them on the books that way.