No-Drill Democrats

[jgaffney]

You may have heard that the Democrat Congress has thrown in the towel on the "Drill Here Drill Now" argument, and will allow the offshore drilling moratorium expire on Sept. 30. I'm sure that they are smug with the fact that any attempt to drill in new leases will be tied up in lawsuits by the Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity.

Now, we learn that the Democrats are betting on an Obama victory and a Democrat majority in the 111th Congress. The Hill has this:

Asked whether the moratorium will resurface as an issue in the 111th Congress, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) said: “I expect it will be, and I expect that many of us will be pushing for a moratorium to [protect] our beautiful coastlines where it would be inappropriate to set up oil drilling.”

House Republicans, who on Wednesday had declared victory on an issue that had gotten them significant political mileage, said they were not shocked to learn of the Democrats’ plans.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if they pulled another bait-and-switch on the American people,” said GOP conference Chairman Rep. Adam Putnam (Fla.).

So, the bottom line here is that the Democrat Party doesn't care about what we have to pay for energy. They are going to drag us into a new energy future, no matter how much it costs. Rather than a programmed transition, that provides for our needs in the interim period, they want us to go nearly cold turkey on petroleum while they roll out our next form of energy. As long as it's not nuclear.

[bolverk]

Democrats are stoooopid.

[jgaffney]

But, wait! There's more!

Sen. Jim DeMint reports That Sen. Majority Leader "Dingy" Harry reid plans to sneak a ban on oil shale development into a must-pass bill before the end of this Congress:

We’ve just been alerted that despite House Democrats relenting on extending bans on offshore drilling and oil shale in the continuing resolution (CR) appropriations bill, Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid has decided to sneak an extension of the oil shale ban through as Congress fights over the financial bailout. Oil shale in America’s West is estimated to hold be between 800 billion and 2 trillion barrels of oil — that is more than three times the proven oil reserves in Saudi Arabia alone.

Here is the text of Reid’s proposed new ban on oil shale, that he is trying to add as an amendment to the CR or move seperately as a “stimulus” package, or we should say an anti-stimulus package if this is included.

Sec 1602 continues ban on oil shale. The language follows:

SEC. 1602. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 152 of division A of H.R. 2638 (110th Congress), the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009, the terms and conditions contained in section 433 of division F of Public Law 110–161 shall remain in effect for the 19 fiscal year ending September 30, 2009.

It would be an insult to all Americans if Senate Democrats worked to bailout Wall Street while damaging our future prosperity by banning development of vast energy reserves in oil shale.

So, let me make sure I've got this straight. The Democrats do not want us to develop any of our domestic supplies of petroleum because they "believe" that we must move to an alternative source of energy - as long as it's not nuclear. However, they are making no provisions for the period between now and when they can actually roll out those new sources. The Dems want us to go cold turkey on petroleum, regardless of what the cost will be to society.

Did I get that right, Saunterelle?

[jgaffney]

Just in case you're worried that the ban on offshore drilling, which the Democrat Congress allowed to lapse this week because they couldn't get their act together behind a viable energy alternative, will mean drill rigs sprouting off Bodega head (remember that one?), have no fear. The Sierra Club stands ready to fight any effort to bring energy independence to America.

This is from The Hill:

The offshore drilling moratorium that has protected our coasts since 1981 expired this week after Congress failed to reach an agreement on its future. Sadly, all the debate about drilling this year accomplished nothing other than serving as a distraction from real answers to our energy crisis. Each time our leaders have tried to pass real clean energy solutions, the oil industry and its allies have demanded a ransom. In this case, it was our coasts.

But this is not the end of the story for the drilling moratorium.

The drilling ban could very well be restored by a new Congress and president who understand that more offshore drilling will do nothing to lower gas prices or solve our energy crisis.

The lapse of the moratorium does temporarily leave the fate of our fragile coasts in the hands of the Minerals Management Service, a scandal-plagued agency that has demonstrated beyond a doubt that it is far too cozy with the oil industry.

While there are efforts underway to accelerate new coastal drilling, we are confident that we can beat back these measures. It’s unlikely that any coastal state would risk its tourist economy by allowing drilling within three miles of its beaches. However, we will continue to watch vigilantly over the next few months to ensure that the Bush administration doesn’t give away the store before they leave town.

We’re already suffering from years of putting our energy policy in the hands of the oil industry. While Americans struggle to fill up their tanks, oil companies are raking in record profits. Instead of more offshore drilling, we need a comprehensive energy plan that will put Americans to work and infuse new life into our economy.

Once the politically-charged election season is over we’ll be able to revisit this issue as part of a comprehensive energy bill that will put Americans first instead of Big Oil.

By Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope

So, if Obama is successful in November, we can look forward to $7 a gallon gas, but it'll be good for us, right?

It didn't take long for the response to come:

Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope says more offshore drilling will do “nothing to lower gas prices” and bemoans the fact that Americans now “struggle” to fill up their tanks. But since when does the Sierra Club care about high gas prices? The Sierra Club likes higher gas prices.

Here is the same Carl Pope in an op-ed on the Sierra Club’s own website with the sub-headline, “We’re better off without cheap gas”:

Every civilization has its blind spots - ideas so profoundly embedded in the culture that they are rarely even debated, but so fundamentally flawed that they can steer a whole society onto the rocks…Our own folly is cheap fuel.

Yet instead of celebrating the high gas prices they have always wanted, the Sierra Club is now trying to convince us that they’re on our side. Sure.

And ask yourself, who benefits from the higher gas prices the Sierra Club and Pope advocate? I’ll let Pope answer: “While Americans struggle to fill up their tanks, oil companies are raking in record profits.”

For those of you what are confused, here is Pope’s’ position in a nutshell: The Sierra Club supports the higher gas prices that lead to the record oil company profits that the Sierra Club now condemns in a blog post bemoaning high gas prices. Got it?

Apparently chutzpah is not an endangered species at the Sierra Club.

-Freedom’s Watch Chief of Staff Joe Eule

The Sierra Club supports the higher gas prices that lead to the record oil company profits that the Sierra Club now condemns in a blog post bemoaning high gas prices. Unbelievable!!

[bolverk]

Duplicity is such a fine word.