ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Dems slam McCain on off-shore drilling

Posted: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 1:36 PM by Domenico Montanaro

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
In advance of McCain's energy speech in Houston, the Obama camp attacked the presumptive Republican nominee by saying he's “flip flopped” on drilling off shore and that his energy policy “does not represent the change we need.”

VIDEO: MSNBC analyst Chuck Todd weighs in on the effects of our oil crisis on the upcoming election. He wonders if anybody can win a coastal state while trying to lift the ban on offshore drilling.

The Obama campaign rolled out two more former Clinton supporters, former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack and Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, to make the points.

McCain has “flip-flopped on drilling off the coast,” Nelson said. “He used to be against it; he's for it now… drilling off shore does not lower oil prices.”

McCain is proposing a “gloss over” as a way of “pandering” and what the country needs is a long-term strategy, Vilsack said. “We need to move away from oil, not more oil,” Vilsack said.

Nelson added that the U.S. only has 3% of the world's oil and uses 25% of the world's oil. “It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know” that “you can't drill your way out of this problem,” he said.

“America has never needed an energy policy more than it needs one today,” Vilsack said, citing high gas prices, the loss of manufacturing jobs and a “shrinking middle class.”

Nelson claimed that “speculators” are the biggest problem and should be the biggest target in order to lower prices. He added, “This is the Richard Pombo plan being pulled up the shelf for his speech today. That was soundly defeated back then.”

Pombo lost his reelection bid to Jerry McNerney in 2006. Defenders of Wildlife called Pombo “the biggest anti-environmental extremist in the House of Representatives.”

*** UPDATE *** McCain camp had this response: “Just as he demonstrated with the ‘Surge’ strategy in Iraq, Barack Obama is now faced with the challenge of skyrocketing gas prices, but is once again driven by partisan ideology, ignoring facts on the ground and failing to take principled action for the American people.  Hardworking people are struggling with record high fuel prices, but Barack Obama has opposed gas taxes relief, refused to allow individual states to increase energy exploration and threatened important trade agreements that provide more affordable forms of energy.”

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

We could just end this debate right here by firing missles and blowing him up or some special forces person shooting him.  Why hold him over for trial?  I would support having him helf in Afghanisatn, let him be tortured and his fingernails pulled out.  I could care less about any terrorist getting anykind of help in any American court, just shoot them and let's move on!
jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:46 AM)
******************************************************
Great point Jerry! Why don't we do that? Why don't we march into Pakistan and take him out? Your the right winger around here so tell me why we havent done that in 7 1/2 years? I am a native New Yorker and lost my closest friend on 9/11. I have been waiting and waiting for Bin Laden to be captured or better yet killed so why hasn't that happened?
Here's my take on it. Your bunch of good 'ol boys in the White House took a tragedy and turned it into an opportunity to attack a country that was absolutely no threat to us. They took our soldiers from a noble cause and sent them to kill for oil and pride. Your heroes in the white house are afraid to cross the border into Afghanistan and piss off that lunatic dicatator Musharaf. Our supposed ally in the war on terror. Why is one of our biggest allies in the war on terror harboring the most wanted terrorist in the world? Why will your beloved Bush Administration intimidate and sabre rattle at any country in the middle east except Pakistan? What are they afraid of Jerry? You tell me. I'm one of those tree huggin' liberals that you seem to hate so much so maybe I don't understand. Why don't you explain it to me Jerry? Obama has stated clearly that he will bomb the border of Pakistan. Obama has said he will send in troops and secret service no matter what Pakistan has to say about it. Obama was against the war in Iraq because he thought it would hurt the fight in Afghanistan. Was he right or wrong Jerry?
You say you fear another attack on American soil if Obama gets elected. The only reason there would be another attack on american soil is because you republicans don't have the balls to get the job done and have allowed Bin Laden to sit and plan in relative safety under the protection of the Pakistani government.
Enlighten me Jerry.

"I'm writing Hillary in because I'm dellusional and and angry and bitter.
Bobbi, Eau Claire, WI (Sent Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:42 AM)"

Well, at least you admit it...

Per the previous thread...I am not a fan of that ad, either, but MoveOn.org has a reputation of that kind of campaigning, so it's no surprise.  Not all of us who lean toward liberalism agree with their tactics.  It does get people talking, though, doesn't it?

That being said, I have a young son as well, and I echo the sentiment.  Sadly, if McCain is elected, I fear that it won't be my choice for him to go or not...nor will it be his.

And to the fool who said it was liberals who have wanted war since the 1700's - remember, without those "liberals" we would still be under British rule.  Is that what you would prefer?
That's what I'm talking about!!  I'm so proud to see the Democrats this united and not letting the Repukes get away with ANYTHING!  

Old man yells at cloud!!

hahahahhahah!!! :-)
We don't need more drilling.  We need congress to supeona the accounts/payable and accounts/receivable for all American oil companines and have them tell the public why they haven't built a new refinery, even though it has been "talked about" for 28 years.  
The stupid oil companies don't get it-- they are destroying the country they want to live in.  Every county, every business and school budget is affected!  Not just individuals!

We need to elect all democrats to congress and call the "boys" back to the hill where they must submitt records of their profits and justifications for their prices.  

Obama 08--Elect only democrats!
It's good to see moderate Dems like Vilsak and Nelson also standing with Obama.  The vast majority of Hillary supporters will definitely be voting for him this November also.  There is some chatter from her most illogical and rabid supporters that they will undermine the election - but their numbers are small.  If you look over at the C.O.U.G.A.R site, you'll see that they only have a few hundred (sometimes up to 1000) comments.  Most of these are by the same people, and the reason they're being so loud is they want to appear bigger than they are.
The party is unified enough for a big victory this November.  Bring on change to Washington!
Obama could care less about the price of oil.  He has alrady stated that he cannot do anything about the price of gasoline in this country.

Liberals could care less about the price of gas either.  They are the type of folks that would rather just pay $10.00 a gallon as much as anyone.  They do not care if Americans have to pay higher prices for everything.  Just ask people in San Franscisco, they love paying higher prices for gasoline.  Just like all the folks in California, they wonder why the price does not go higher.  They could care less about poor people and jobs.

Liberalism is a disease.....
Hopefully common sense Americans won't let it run amuck in our country......
It's true the US needs a long-term energy solution. However, we also need relief in the short-term. If drilling here and now will help, then let's do it. Obambi hasn't come up with any short-term solutions. In fact, his response last week was basically we'd have to "learn to live with it" regarding high-priced gas.  What I want to hear from both of them is 1) what can be done now and 2) what about the long term.  Further, what will be included in the long-term.  It has to be a combination of several new energy types.
Hey McAmbush, if it's all about oil ... let's invade Canada and Mexico.  Then we can drill off their coasts as well.  Think strategry man, we need to bump up that 3% to 25% and in a big hurry.  Next we need to take over OPEC so we can finally control the price of oil, maybe.  Stop pandering let's invade and bring back the draft!

Finally the truth. This drilling is just a way to get donations from BIG OIL. At best experts say it could lower gas prices by 3 cents.

What's happened to John McCain?

I used to think he was sincere about the environment.

I've heard he has the same people whispering in his ear that pulled GW's strings. I'm starting to believe it.
Speculators are the cause of gas prices.

We seen what happened when the housing buble burst. What happens when the oil buble bursts?

The futures market is a ticking time bomb. If oil drops $40, it could turn into a catastrophe. The hedge funds would implode and banks could fail.


 This is unbelievable.  McCain is proposing a step toward energy independence.  His diversion from a previous position (politicians can do that, Barry has done it too) is based on the fact that the circumstances have become dire.  What is Obama's proposal for energy independence?  Oh that's right, tax the oil companies.   Yep, that'll make a difference.
  Reading Senator Nelson's comments make me realize yet again that the problems this country finds itself facing now are all directly attributable to the dysfunctional Congress.  All of you Obama-bots are quick to blame President Bush for everything, but somehow it's never mentioned that Congress' approval ratings are at a historic low, and half that of the President's.   Wake up people and realize how the government really works.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/17/the-real-mccain-coming-up_n_107582.html

By the way, the McCain camps non-response responses become more and more laughable every day.
Its a shame to see McCain bend to the pressure of the oil company lobbiests who are looking for a quick buck.

How is someone going to be able to lead a country if they can't stand up to the lobbiests in their own campaign?
Hmmm, let's see...oil is formed when plants and animals deteriorate over the course of thousands of years.

Maybe we ought to drill John McCain.  Maybe we'll find out what he is storing in those cheeks.
Why shouldn't the states decide if they want drilling or not?  

I thought this was what a federal system was supposed to be about.  ANWAR is different as it is federal land.  Most people in Florida are against off-shore drilling because of the effect on tourism.  Why are you against the people closest to the effect making the decision?  

As far as I can see we have two bad choices for energy.  More nuclear power (with the resultant waste) but at least it's a reality and we know it will not add to global warming, or an unknown clean, renewable source of energy that will exist in the future.  We don't know exactly what (hydrogen, wind, geo-thermal....), or when it will be available but the government is going to spend $50 billion of taxpayer money to create and to pick the "right" solution out of many.  (They already have an excellent record by subsidizing ethanol which apparently adds to global warming and costs almost as much in energy to make as it supplies).
Yeah, Florida and California can use a few more toxic black beaches for the sake of about 5 cents less for a gallon of gas.  They don't need the tourist dollars or the recreation.

Just ask South Korea (12/09/07), Russia (11/15/07), San Francisco Bay (11/09/07), Guanagara Bay, Rio, Brazil (01/18/2000), or Prince William Sound (Exxon Valdez 03/24/08).  Billions of dollars and very few of the oil companies held responsible for the cost or the damage.

Downright stupid.  Time to move on from oil and into the hydrogen economy.
Aside from the name-calling, I'm glad to see some real numbers here - with the small size of our reserves as compared to our consumption, how would an incremental increase in oil production help us, exactly?  I starve for energy proposals based on fact!  What are the prospects for clean coal, for non-crop biofuels, for artificial photosynthesis even?  There is no short-term solution to our energy problem, and the first candidate to make that crystal clear will earn a lot of points in my book.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1149369

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google