Flipflops and misstatements short-circuit McCain's energy policy »
Posted by: ybdogsct 2 months, 2 weeks agoMcCain has spent the week focusing on energy policy, making some surprising, and inaccurate, statements. His reactionary flip flopping in response to the recent, inflated oil prices demonstrates how little McCain knows about the economy
Read Full Story at factcheck.org
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 65
-
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
John McCain said that ending a moratorium on offshore oil drilling 'would be helpful in the short term in resolving our energy crisis.' But according to the EIA, offshore oil wouldn't have much of an impact on supply or prices until 2030.
McCain tried to paint Obama as an opponent of nuclear power, yet Obama has said he is open to nuclear energy being part of the solution and has supported bills that contained nuclear subsidies.
McCain has soft-pedaled his cap-and-trade proposal for greenhouse gases, even denying that it would be a mandate. The cap is a mandatory limit, however, and McCain even says so on his Web site.
In McCain's new ad, images of windmills and solar panels are misleading because he supports subsidies for nuclear power, which isn't pictured, and opposes them for wind and solar energy.
McCain says that a suspension of the federal gas tax will lower prices for consumers, though hundreds of economists-including several Nobel Laureates-say McCain is wrong.
Reply-
0%
Goppy2 months, 2 weeks ago
Since Right Leaning Corporations, with heavy interest in an Oil Based Economy control Mainstream Media ... this is the only place this kinda information is to be found.
Well, Popieller AND factcheck dot org.
Thats how we Right Wingers stay in power!
Do yall actually believe we stay in power on the merits of our message?
LOL!!!
Reply-
0%
cowboygrandpa2 months, 2 weeks ago
Goppy:
"Do yall actually believe we stay in power on the merits of our message?"
LMAO. The message of. "We think we are better than you!!!!
We were meant to control the world. We deserve all the good things. While we think you should die for our privileges. Don't argue with us we know it all. Because we have God on our side. And even if he isn't we think he is and that is all that matters to us. Peasants assume your lowly place we are the royalty of this earth."
That message Goppy?
Of course it is spun to make it palatable to those who don't or won't see the real message. Sadly LOL
Reply
-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
Even conservative Fox News pundit Michelle Malkin excoriated McCain for his flip flopping on energy policy.
http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/06/19/...
"McCain on offshore drilling - For it before he was against it before he was for it again. Update-McCain's astounding flip-flop on windfall profits tax:
Mr. McCain has a mixed record on the issue in the Senate. In 2001 and 2006, he voted in favor of offshore oil drilling in Florida, but in 2003 he voted against it in Florida and other states.
McCain was AWOL on the windfall profits tax debate in the Senate. He had nothing to say about Rep. John Peterson's effort to lift the offshore drilling ban when it was up for a vote last week. Now, he's announced he wants to lift the offshore drilling moratorium. He was for it before he was against it before he was for it again. Positively Kerryesque."
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
"McCain is now bashing Obama on the failed windfall profits tax. I remind you again of what McCain was telling voters about it LESS THAN 1 MONTH AGO. From the video clip:
MCCAIN: 'I don't like obscene profits being made anywhere. And I'd be glad to look at, not just the windfal profits tax -- that's not what bothers me -- but we should look at any incentives we are giving to industries destroying the market."
Mind you. This was from the website of CONSERVATIVE FOX NEWS employee Michelle Malkin.
Reply-
0%
Lurch2 months, 1 week ago
I can just hear the kool-aid crowd trying to spin that one away now..."er, that was a teleprompter misfunction, does not count! Some socialist must have sabotaged his lines and we just now figured it out. Sneaky liberals."
It`s getting so ridiculous you can guess their spins before they even get the talking points from above.
Reply
-
-
0%
dunkirk2 months, 2 weeks ago
I was waiting for him to be for it at the beginning of a sentence but against it at the end of the sentence. Kinda like a new high in the art of flip-flopping the REPUBLICANS so like to exhibit.
Reply
-
-
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.10 Replies
-
-
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
I agree.
McCain continues to lie by saying that drilling offshore would fix today's inflated oil prices. This is CATEGORICALLY FALSE.
Government studies have shown that offshore drilling wouldn't have an effect on pricing until at least 2030, if it would have any effect at all. Therefore, offshore drilling is NOT a SHORT-TERM FIX.
Likewise, offshore drilling doesn't address the fact that fossil fuels are a nonrenewable resource. Therefore, offshore drilling is NOT a LONG-TERM FIX either.
McCain was against offshore drilling before he was for offshore drilling. His reactionary, knee-jerk response to today's inflated oil prices only serves to demonstrate:
1) how little McCain truly understands the economy
2) that McCain will pander to different audiences and say ANYTHING to win.
Reply
-
-
0%
CHAM2 months, 2 weeks ago
Good Post Ydogsct
McCain is not what this country needs. He is the premonition of our worst nightmare and to fulfill the prophecy all he needs to happen is for a misled America to elect McCain.
Reply -
0%
cowboygrandpa2 months, 2 weeks ago
You know we have so many people saying what we should do economically. I really don't think anybody knows what to do.
I do know this. When you continue to value money over people and make money the standard by which all are measured.
You continue the insanity of this world. Yes we all need money or something to exchange for goods and services. Values must be placed upon these goods and services. But what has come up missing is the value of helping ones fellow man.
McCain and all the others seem to forget we are people not machines. We don't need their greed.
They have made the populations of this world seek money, power and pleasure as the answer.
In my eyes we need to change back to seeking to enrich the lives of people world wide. Not kill them for the oil or other wealth their countries possess.
See to me they have gotten us way off base as to what needs to be done. They have guided the talking points to enriching the wealthy while destroying the majority.
Reply-
ML2007Comment removed: User banned.
-
0%
cowboygrandpa2 months, 2 weeks ago
Yeah,
Sure made yourself look good here didn't you.
You just don't get it do you. Fools like you have no place on this planet. We have enough insane killers out there.
Why don't you just do the world a favor and shut up and learn from your betters. LOL
Reply -
0%
dunkirk2 months, 2 weeks ago
ROFLMAO, there is an old saying its one thing to be a fool its quite another to open your mouth and remove all doubt. Thanks for removing the doubt.
Reply -
0%
cowboygrandpa2 months, 2 weeks ago
mad-eye oops grindelwald sock puppet. Dumb as* Donkey whatever you are.
Your hatred is clearly showing. LMAO
Your tiny little mind has no value nor does your pathetic soul. You remind of a Darth Rove type of Idiot.
Full of stupidity, waiting to unleash it upon this world.
Tell you what. Climb back into the tight little crevice where your head usually rests and be at fowl peace with yourself. No that wasn't a spelling mistake. I'm calling you a no good chicken wth less sense than a turnip.
You are not here to live your life for anyone. There is no value in helping my fellow man.
Ahhhhhhh!! The true heart of a neocon. Not a Republican, Not a Democrat, Not a lbertarian, but the snake in the grass neocon. Full of greed and hate.
Take a good look people this is the type of leaders they would be.
You are one pathetic example of a human being. Those who would back you would also back the Devil.
Reply
-
-
0%
scott42612 months, 2 weeks ago
Great post, ybdogsct!
What is painfully obvious to me is that John McCain has really been consistent on very little. And even the Republicans know this: You can check a list of the regular conservative participants on propeller and you would find that they - almost every one - did not trust McCain before he was the nominee. But - almost to a person - they have now become as diligent apologists for McCain as the have been for George W. Bush.
Have they changed their minds about McCain? Not really. And facts such as those cited in this article on energy policy do little to sway them. What really drives these people is their visceral hatred of liberalism, the Democratic Party and - yes - Barack Obama (and the same would have been true for Hillary Clinton - who they really DO hate, regardless of what they tell you - if she had become the Democratic Party nominee)...among other things.
This insanity HAS to end! Time to turn the page and take our country back.
Reply -
0%
Ratskii2 months, 2 weeks ago
Don't you understand, if it's your side he's a flip-flopper but if it's our side he's remaining open to change and revising his opinions in the face of changing information.
Reply-
ML2007Comment removed: User banned.
-
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
RATSKII:
"Don't you understand, if it's your side he's a flip-flopper but if it's our side he's remaining open to change and revising his opinions in the face of changing information."
I understand what you're saying, RATSKII, and it's a valid point. Certainly, it's inadvisable to stubbornly continue down a wrong course for fear of being labeled a flip flopper.
But, to judge McCain's switch in position, it's important to consider exactly WHAT INFORMATION McCain is responding to. Is he switching positions in response to economists and energy specialists who are all advising we lift the moratorium on offshore drilling? If so, then McCain's actions would be laudable, instead of suspicious.
But the answer is NO. In fact, economist (including many Nobel laureates) and energy specialists seem to agree that lifting the moratorium will NOT be an effective short-term or long-term fix because it is the weak dollar and speculation that is responsible for the price inflation.
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
Here are some of the reasons why offshore drilling will not succeed as a short-term nor as a long-term fix:
1) U.S. oil consumption is growing and it would take 10-15 years to develop the infrastructure to mine ANWR. By that time, rising U.S. oil consumption would far outpace additional oil output ANWR.
2) Demand from emerging economies, particularly China and India, is growing exponentially and will outpace the modest rise in oil output from ANWR, the Dakotas, and Gulf of Mexico.
3) Due to the weak dollar, oil companies actually make more profit by selling oil to Europe and its strong Euro. Increased oil production would not necessarily make it to the U.S.; it would go to the highest bidder.
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
4) There is not enough oil in ANWR to achieve energy independence right now. And that will be even more true in 10 years when the infrastructure has been built to extract the oil from ANWR.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/fs-0028-01.htm
http://www.doi.gov/news/030312.htm
A Dept of Interior study projected that ANWR could produce a mere 1.4 million barrels of oil per day, which would increase U.S. production by ~25%.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil...
However, that 1.4 million barrels per day is still insufficient to wean the U.S. from 10.1 million barrels per day which the U.S. must import from other countries, including the 5.6 million barrels per day we import from OPEC.
Even if we started drilling in ANWR today, we wouldn't see a drop of that oil for 10-20 years, which is how long it'd take for the infrastructure to be built. By then, increasing demand from China and India would offset the increase in supply.
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
The Energy and Information Administration concluded in a 2007 survey that drilling in the Pacific, Atlantic, and Gulf regions wouldn't have an impact on prices until 2030, if they had an impact at all.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/o...
"The projections in the OCS (Outer Continental Shelf) access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.
Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant."
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
5) The current rise in oil prices is NOT being driven by a lack of supply, but rather by the weak US dollar. Therefore, pumping even more oil into the market will have little effect on the prices because that's not what's driving high prices in the first place.
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P100650.asp
"Every dollar increase in the price of a barrel of imported oil increases the size of the U.S. trade deficit, which puts more pressure on the value of the U.S. dollar, which leads to a weaker dollar, which makes OPEC countries want to raise the dollar-denominated price of a barrel of oil to make up for the dollars fall, and so on."
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/06/news/economy/ga...
"If the euro gains, oil becomes cheaper, European investors buy more oil, raising the price of oil in U.S. dollars."
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
http://in.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idIN...
"OPEC sees oil prices offsetting weak dollar. The surge in oil prices to record highs will shield OPEC nations, some of which peg their currencies to the U.S. dollar, from current dollar weakness, a Saudi newspaper quoted OPEC sources as saying on Saturday."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/10940...
"The immediate cause of rising oil prices is the weak dollar. Oil-producing countries are requiring more dollars to purchase the same barrel of oil because the dollar is worth less today than it was a few years ago. Center for American Progress estimates that 'nearly 40% of the increased price American consumers are paying for oil is attributable to the weak dollar," even after factoring in the effects of increased global demand from countries such as China.'"
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
6) Oil in ANWR would have done little to change oil prices, as OPEC would simply readjust their output to offset the relatively small in increase in domestic oil.
Besides, the currently inflated global oil prices have more to do with the falling dollar, futures trading, and Middle East instability, than with oil in ANWR.
http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Oil/idUSL207...
"OPEC has consistently argued there is a large speculative element in the oil market. The senior OPEC official said the problem was more one of speculation than any fundamental shortage in the supply of oil."
Reply-
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/06/18/...
"Since oil and gas are fungible commodities, the price in the open market would still be based upon the so-called free market. We know that the oil cartel does not allow for a free market. There would still be a worldwide need for oil at the market price.
Unless the U.S. oil companies would be willing to sell domestic reserves at a lesser price, the price of oil and gas in the U.S. would be the same no matter where it came from."
Reply
-
-
0%
ybdogsct2 months, 2 weeks ago
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/o...
"Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant."
So if the experts are saying offshore drilling will NOT be an effective short-term fix, then what prompted McCain's flip flop?
Well, it must be the voters' fear over rising energy prices. McCain is responding/pandering to that fear in an attempt to score political points, DESPITE the advice of the experts.
This is NOT an example of McCain being open to change. This is an example of McCain being open to pandering, flip flopping, and saying whatever McCain feels is necessary to win the election.
I'm TIRED of McCain's fair-weather flip-flopping, manipulative politicking, and fear-mongering. This is NOT the McCain I would have considered voting for in 2000.
Reply -
0%
dunkirk2 months, 2 weeks ago
Amazing how information changes from one day to the next with McLame or ins some instances from the beginning of a speech to the end of one.
Reply
-
-
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
-
KvilleTXComment removed: User banned.
-
KvilleTXComment removed: User banned.
-
-
0%
CrusaderRabbit2 months, 2 weeks ago
I can say that McCain flops around like a fish on my line. He isn't the man for the Top Job. In his years in getting to top level of government he has a lot of favors to satisfy. I think that his recent comments have been trying to play to 'his' field and taken in context of his associations aren't the sign of an addled individual.
He's just trying to reinforce a base early into this campaign. He needs to pick up every part of the oil-based Bush vote he fought against in his early years.
I wouldn't vote for him in any way.
My only problem with the Obama camp are their answers to my questions about health care for people with minor disabilities. I get the baxic stonewall technique. 'The current health care programs will assist you', or my favorite; 'aren't you covered by SSI?'. The answer is NO. There are many somewhat disabled Americans in or outside the workforce that are assets not lingering on some kind of assistance that should have a better quality of life. See part two.
Reply -
0%
CrusaderRabbit2 months, 2 weeks ago
Mr. Obama has said many things about health care for children, those individuals on welfare and social security but nothing about the members of our society that could contribute if they could get health care that bankrupt their employer.
I've been lucky up to this point. Being a hemophiliac in Indiana is probably better than other states. I have a job and base-level coverage that the federal government refuses to provide. Thanks to one Indiana Governor (Otis Bowen) and the strength of the associations that were built I have the basic care I and many others with bleeding disorders need. Over the good years it has been expanded to assist many other groups within the state.
Since this is getting to long for the meager abilities of this website I'll try and finish up briefly.
For Citizens of the State of Indiana; The Republican administration is ready to eliminate just about every health-care program funded with state funds if re-elected. See part three.
Reply -
0%
CrusaderRabbit2 months, 2 weeks ago
We need to remove Daniels and his majority if we want continue to provide basic health care for ALL citizens of Indiana. I found it very funny that Googling the phrase Indiana Governor gave me a top response for an Insurance quote website. This former insurance company executive, (that went belly up) needs to go away along with the rest of his party supporters.
Like the many past years of voting errors we can nip this in the bud. We need to move away from the small view era of Daniels and his predecessors like Orr. Also move away from the outright criminality linked to the Daniels insurance debacle that reminds us of Watergate and the Nixon Impeachment. We can no longer vote from an agricultural base in this newly forming economy. Vote for democratic candidates where you can and please vote for Jill Long-Thompson for Governor. Hopefully we can unite the small urban areas of our State with our agricultural base to improve all of the lives of our citizens.
Reply -
0%
doggammit2 months, 2 weeks ago
Busy dog days... so -just a quick thank you to bark my appreciation for this story and the excellent research efforts posted on this thread. I note also that the "sinks" department is functioning at its usual deficit - a 12:1 ratio this time - and their silence here is deafening. Do I hear the sound of Darth Cheney's "Energy Policy" echoing though the nothingness? Yes I believe so.. as a disturbance in the repubicon force field. The oil issue is key...
Reply -
0%
thoughtforsale2 months, 2 weeks ago
The idea behind what John Mc Cain proposed, is one of the basic laws of capitalism: rare goods are expensive and enlarging the production will lower the prices. In the case of oil, we are dealing with a raw material that will end up in fourty or fifty years, if our consumption stays constant. So, it is really a myopic view on the problem not to invest in renewable energy and energy saving technologies or making the use of nuclear energy as safe as possible, but only speeding up the end of the oil resources. This statement reminds me of a politician, who wants to fight against inflation by using a printing machine.
Reply -
purposeComment removed: User banned.
Submitted By:
ybdogsct
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Also Propping This Article
TimALoftis
Helixbuilder
ciera-marie
berkeley
bonaroo
Ratskii- TGrass3001
chuck-the-canuck
Eagle_Eye
DarkWizard
Groups Watching This
No groups are watching this story. Why not share it with your group?
