The Audacity of Contempt
Take gas prices, the most pressing issue on the minds of Americans. Offer a blatant ploy that in fact won't help -- but will profit Big Oil. Pocket over a million in contributions from oil executives and use the money to put up an ad promising to take on Big Oil.
Call it the audacity of contempt. John McCain seems intent on proving that it is possible to scorn Americans into voting for him. Consider McCain's latest ad in the context of his "drill, drill, drill" energy policy. The text of the ad reads:
"Washington's broken. John McCain knows it. We're worse off than we were four years ago. Only McCain has taken on big tobacco, drug companies, fought corruption in both parties. He'll reform Wall Street, battle Big Oil, make America prosper again. He's the original Maverick...
"Battle Big Oil." Say what?
This is the same John McCain who just made off-shore drilling for oil a centerpiece of his campaign, reversing his longstanding opposition to it. He did so, not incidentally, while on his way to Texas for a series of fundraisers. The result unleashed a gusher of donations for Big Oil executives -- according to Campaign Money Watch, a nifty 1.2 million from Texas gas and oil interests in June alone, the very month McCain came out for drilling. He no doubt was told what to expect from the dozens of oil company lobbyists and retainers that reportedly are working with or raising money for his campaign.
Exxon reports an $11.7 billion profit for the last three months -- a new record in the history of corporatedom. The big five pocketed more than $140 billion last year. So Barack Obama suggests that we provide every American with a $1000 tax rebate to help pay for rising prices, paid for by levying an excess profits tax on the oil companies.
What does the maverick battler of big oil say? No way. McCain angrily dismisses the idea, saying that it would lead the oil companies to reduce their drilling in the US.
Now, all of this is based upon what might generously be called a big lie. The Big Oil companies, who hold leases for millions of acres that they aren't drilling on, have no intention of drilling for oil off our shores in the near future. They are simply looking to use the crisis to accumulate rights to drill in the future.
Moreover, even if they started tomorrow, it wouldn't help. As Bill Sher of the Campaign for America's Future detailed, Bush's own Energy Department reports that off shore drilling would produce no relief until about 2030. (McCain disputes that saying that we'd see oil in a year or two. His source? Anonymous Big Oil executives who no doubt have only the public's interest in mind). And once the oil came on line, the Energy Department tells us, it would save us about 6 cents a gallon off the price of gas. (Ironically, McCain regularly sneers Obama for suggesting that simply filling our tires would have more effect on supply and demand than drilling off shore. But again, according to the Bush Environmental Protection Agency, Obama had that right. If every American kept their tires filled, they'd save the equivalent of 12 cents a gallon starting tomorrow. Drilling sounds muscular but it is simply hot air that would be better used filling up tires.
But this isn't about policy; it's about politics. McCain pretends he's for action now. He paints Obama as out of touch. The fact that the plan would cater to the interests of the oil companies and not the pocketbooks of Americans is beside the point. After all, John McCain is the maverick, ready to "battle Big Oil."
Will it work? Daily tracking polls suggest McCain has been gaining on Obama. And other than Nancy Pelosi, Democrats have been deciding to switch rather than fight on off-shore drilling.
But there is one problem. Americans really are hurting this year. It isn't just a "mental recession," it's the real deal. And they are paying greater attention than ever before. This week, Obama released a full-scale plan to move to energy independence, investing $150 billion over 10 years in renewable energy and conservation, providing subsidies to ensure that the US captures some of the new green auto and appliance markets of the future. That puts us on a long-term path to a sustainable energy future. In the short term, Obama takes on big oil with the excess profits tax to help Americans struggling with the cost of gas and food. McCain has a pretty good long term plan also. The differences would be worth debating.
But one difference is clear. McCain's not about to support a tax on the big oil companies whose executives are helping to fund his campaign. But that won't stop him from selling himself as a maverick promising to "battle Big Oil." If nothing else, he has the audacity of contempt for the very voters he needs to win.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
For enviromental purpoeses we need to get off of OIL period, we have done more harm to this planet since we industrialized it 150 or so years ago.The right no matter what will defend BIG OIL because it is a free enterprise that gouges Americans and the rest of the world.The right will stand by and let BIG OIL do what it wants even though they pay the same amount for a gal of gas as everyone else.So to me the right are just a bunch of robots with no minds of their own and just follow the Pied Piper along(sheeple) on his merry little journey .On the other hand we on the left know collectively that we are being put through the ringer for a gal of gas, a gal of milk and food prices in general.We have a gov`t that panders to BIG OIL and will continues to do so even though Obama will do some damage to BIG OIL it will not be enough.We need to get off of OIL and get moving on alternative energy sources where the gov`t owns it and a well known company in the industry will run it The right wants the status quo for some reason and I would like to know why myself.I think it is a good trade off to pay higher taxes for a alternative energy program if not for now at least my kids and grand kids futures.
What people don't know is that OLD TANKERS ARE USED TO STORE OIL.
All around the world every old oil tankers has been pressed into service,
Many are just filled and anchored. Storage is all. Thousands sitting around incase the ptice of oil shoot high again.
Barges are filled as well, there has never been so much inventory in storage in history.
Its the biggest scam in the history of earth!
There is no doubt why John Mccain say "NO" to taxing Big Oil Companies he's not about to slap away the hand of his biggest donors.
Mccain took a little trip down to Texas and came back with a hefty 1.2 million dollars in contributions from Texas oil companies, Exon also has given big donations to Mccain.
Sen. Obama wants to tax Big Oil and give a 1000,00 rebate to the American citizenry.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why Mccain pushes DRILL DRILL DRILL !!
Whaaaa Whaaaa.
Sorry, I'd rather have the gas prices come down than to get a $1000 rebate. And anyway, the oil companies are already paying 50% in taxes... You want them to pay more... Right... That is way smart. NOT
Now, by 50% in taxes, you mean less than 10%, right? Cause that's the way the numbers are turning out!
So, he is going to take away big oil's profits like communists do, then, he will give us a 1,000 rebate check to go spend on filling up our tanks? Seems a little off.
John McCain is Big Oil's lapdog.
One could also call it the Audacity of Hypocrisy!
The Obama / Pelosi / Reid energy policy & cheap shot Marxist inspired idea of confiscating money from the oil companies and using it to buy votes should be called the "Audacity of Dopes". (Most Americans are shareholders through our retirement & pension plans or 401 k's).
While I agree with you, in that I don't like the idea of a windfall profits tax, the REST of the energy policy as espoused by Senator Obama is VERY good!
Together oil and gas companies hold leases to nearly 68 million acres of federal land and waters, yet these same companies are not producing oil or gas from these areas. Would they buy leases to this land without believing oil and gas can be produced there? Of course not. And are these companies offering to give the land back- land that could be used for wind and solar farms? Of course not.
The current oil crisis, which these leviathan companies have helped create by limiting the oil supply, provides them with a ready excuse for another land and sea grab. And if, as the Republicans wish, the oil companies get another windfall in the form of land and sea leases, is there any guarantee that these companies will immediately begin to explore and drill? Of course not. It pays them to limit the supply of oil and natural gas, keeping consumer prices high. We need to turn to alternative sources of energy to free ourselves from the grip of big oil companies, as well as foreign sources of supply.
If these companies operated, not from greed, but in the best interests of the public, their own stockholders and the long-term prosperity of their enterprises, they would now be building solar and wind farms and perhaps nuclear power plants.
Man, I've heard the non-use of leased land arguments, but I've never heard that oil companies were depriving investors of land to be used for solar farms and wind turbines.
First, in the United States, electrical power generation is currently a completely different issue than oil, which is primarily used as a transportation fuel and for petrochemicals. Converting to electric cars has nothing to do with solar and wind farms. We can convert to electric cars and still have coal power plants. We can convert to solar and wind and still need oil for transportation. It's two separate issues, and it's really stupid to try and equate them.
Localized generation through solar or wind to facilitate electric cars, may be a bit different, but I would still argue that they are mutually exclusive issues.
By all means lets keep giving the oil companies big tax breaks. lets drill although we will not see the results for at least 7 years and the impact will be small. By all means lets vote for McCain while he supports big oil, promotes our dependence on oil and ruins our future and stuffs his pocjets full from the money he is getting from oil companies. And you call us dopes? Waje up!
Big tax breaks? They are getting taxed at about 50%!
Steve, "Equitable Profit Sharing" The crude belongs to you and me in the first place.
When the leases were negotiated the grant tor, We the People were not suffering from the price of our own commodity. We need good faith renegotiations for all royalty and lease agreements that address the clear imbalance in the present agreements.
When one party is damaged in a contract, it is no longer enforceable.
"Equitable Profit Sharing" its the right course to take.
So we are now commies? Great. Communism has been so successful in the past. Can't wait!
"(Most Americans are shareholders through our retirement & pension plans or 401 k's)."
Do you have any provable numbers to back up this claim? I don't believe "most" Americans have stock-based retirement & pension plans or 401k's. I imagine you're very comfortable with McCain as it would be similiarly difficult for you to recognize when he's out of touch with many Americans.
If Mcain is right - doesn't this show that we do not have capitalizm - that market forces do not control - that industry controls. That is oligarchy!
If we buy this load of cr@p we will continue to deserve everything we get. Big oil, and big corps. have had their way with this country for the last 8 years. We should have seen that after 4 yrs, yet we apparently did not. If these thugs continue in the white house, God help us all. He will be the only one who can.
OPEC is making a boatload. Some American companies are making ggod money which at the end goes to Americans - to executives, employees and shareholders and to the government as taxes. Evidently Exxon paid more in taxes in the last 5 years that profits!! Obama advisor Goolseby was speechless this morning on CNBC when told that!! If you can somehow tax OPEC to give money to the people, great!! But lay of off successful American companies you socialists!!
taxes are on revenue, not profits, as a result, they are paying a relatively small fraction of they're revenue, and thus not enough
Taxes are on taxable income.
And you decide what is not enough?? Or the Governmemt decides? Try to figure out a way to tax OPEC instead of American companies!!
oh wahh wahh tye poor rich oil companies us socialists are just picking on them. Meanwhile many families cannot afford gas for their cars to go to work and cannot afford to put food on their tables. You want me to feel sorry for the oil companies? get over. Cry me a river.
I don't think Nofuzzy is trying to make you feel bad for oil companies. You shouldn't feel bad for them if they go bankrupt.
What Nofuzzy is trying to point out, is that it is ignorant to assume that what you would call Big Oil (which is primarily American Companies) has not positive impact on America. OPEC is much bigger than all the Big Oil Companies.
Sounds like you are the one crying. What do you expect? You tax the hell out of them at record highs and you nickel and dime them with fees every chance you get. Yea they are getting "record profits" but they are also paying "record expenses." Until they start getting "record profit margains," keep your mouth shut.
Your whinning about 7-11% profit margains. Diamonds mark up prices 1000%. Resturants mark up food about 500%. Microsoft has profit margains around 27%. The list goes on.
Now your talking about taking away their profits becuase they are outrageous? Its called capitailsm. Obama didn't seem to care when he made a killing off his book. His profit margains were higher than oil companies. Are we taking his profits too just to be fair?
Red herring! The oil companies are posting huge profits. End of story. HUGE PROFITS. If a company expands they deserve bigger profits. The oil companies are just sitting there raking in the money. They are not even providing more jobs for hard working Americans.
Oil profits are irrelevant, a side issue we yammer about every few years. What's more important is that one industry (oil) is destroying another industry (transportation) and upsetting equilibrium in the market. That's the issue that needs to be addressed. The us produced versus foreign produced argument is specious; oil is imported for the very simple reason that it is cheaper to import than it is to drill.
Cafferty on his game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyaArMOBg9s
It's the audacity of fascism. Some stupid politician deciding a company made "too much" money, and therefore justifying stealing it. America is over.
That's socialism, not fascism.
Let me assist you in viewing this issue from a somewhat different perspective.
The crude that is the basis for these enormous profits is the property of the People of the United States and the rights to extract same have been granted based on much lower pricing structures. The current pricing as well as it's profound impact on the individual American and our economy could not have been considered in the negotiations that took place with the parties for parcels that are currently producing the vast majority of crude domestically.
The only equitable solution is a renegotiation of the basic sharing arrangment between the parties.
Clearly the royalties and leases are not in line with the damage being suffered by the granting lessor.
The language of this dialog must be framed as a participation agreement or "An Equitable Profit Sharing" This is not a tax or a windfall profit tax. The partnership between the parties is to intimate for such an unbalanced distribution of the profits when the granting party suffers as a direct result of the price run-up, when the primary commodity is the property of that granting party.
Any judge would rule that these leases are not equitable in their present moment and order a renegotiation of the terms.
If you believe otherwise, please present your argument in a factual manner that we my review it and discuss it openly.
Re frame the language, this is "Equitable profit sharing" not a tax!
Wow, someone who understands the issue. I agree 100% on your assessment of lease terms and what should be done to make sure the American people are receving their fair share for these resources.
However, I will caution that a majority of the profit of American Oil companies comes from overseas upstream, not just domestic upstream. I would be worried, that Oil's profits would still be way too large in this scenario for politicians to actually drive a solution like this. It simply won't be satisfying for many on the left to do this equitably as you describe. They'll want more.
Look up the word faxcism. You are confused
Now look it up and see how much the rich hedge fund groups and managers make who seem to all support Obama.
And don't forget Ms. 9% approval rating House Speaker Pelosi has been saying to members of the House and Senate to say whatever they have to, to get re-elected, because they are banking on having a democratic house, senate, and presidency in which they will be able to lie their buns off for at least 2, maybe 4 foreseeable years.
LOL you have been listening to Hannity and now are parroting every word je said. Are you incapable Coat of thinking for yourself. If we drill you fools we will see nothing for 7 years and even then it will make a small difference. McCain and the others are hoodwinking you. By the way The House passed a wind/solar energy bill it is being blocked in the Senate by the obstructionist Republicans
Does anyone here know how to read a financial statenment?? I am posting in response to everyone responding to my orginal post. I don't want this to get lost in the trail of posts.
Total revenue: 404,552
Total costs: 334,078
Taxable income: 70,474
Income taxes: 29,864
Ok lets do some basic math again. 29,864 is 42% of 70,474.
There is no bull crap here, it's all in the income statement. Learn how to read one before you make a comment.
Total revenue: 404,552
Total TAXABLE revenue: 404,552
Total taxes: 29,864
Total PERCENTAGE of taxes: 7.38%
Have you ever taken an accounting class?? Do you know how income tax works in the US? Do you know how to compute income tax percent.
US taxes based on taxable income. Taxable income is Profit minus Expenses.
And don't complain that this is not how your personal income tax is computed. It is. You pay tax based on taxable income.
Drill, drill, drill mentality won't work? Hmmmm......Bush lifts the off shore drilling ban and the price of oil drops dramatically. The market responds to the potential for more oil being available to the world market (which by the way is betting on oil futures 5 years from now) by dropping the price per barrel.
Does anyone here see or even understand how the free market economy works? Does anyone on this blog not understand that our refusal to drill our own oil has placed our economy, not to mention billions of our dollars in the hands of those who would seek to do us harm? Does anyone understand that the "green" energy that is wanted will take time to develop and become an cheap and economical way to power this nation?
The hate big oil arguement as presented by obama and the rest of his party is not how we should be deciding on what to do about our energy issues. Taxing the profits of big oil will only pass down higher costs to those who can not afford to pay more. Research the "windfall profits tax" placed on oil under the Carter administration.
"our refusal to drill our own oil has placed our economy, not to mention billions of our dollars in the hands of those who would seek to do us harm?"
The fearmongering argument killed all the rational points you made there. It was unnecessary, and makes you looks like a troll, even though the rest of your statement appears otherwise, I strongly recommend you be more careful in your phrasing in the future
"Does anyone here see or even understand how the free market economy works?"
Obviously, you, 2warv, do not understand supply and demand.
Prices are too high for Americans to buy much gas so they're driving less. That reduces demand. Reduced demand reduces prices. Oil prices have dropped as speculators realize that the continuous upward spiral will only spur more alternative research (way overdue), further reducing demand and further reducing prices.
Prices have not dropped because Bushie and McBushie and blathered about offshore oil drilling. To believe that is just silly!
The thories you are looking for are supply curve, demand curve and equilibrium point. Supply up + demand down = lower prices; Supply down + demand up = higher prices; Equilibrium point is where these to theories meet and how a fair market price is established.
So based not only on less driving, but the potential for increased supply because the US is drilling means lower prices on the oil futures market, which is still betting on oil supply 5 years from now. Get it now?
Nice straw man but it won't scare any crows. The price fluxuations associated with policy statements have little or no effect on the long term price of oil. Nice try.
Oh, by the way, "Does anyone here see or even understand how the free market economy works?"
Here's how it works DA. Oil drilled off the shores of the USA does not go to USA refineries. Why? We are at capacity. Any new reserves tapped off the coast of California will be sold to Japan and, you guessed it folks, China. Yes, that China, the ones who hold the IOU's to our countries future.
It's breathtaking how dumb republicans are. Check the Sturgis videos.
Weeks ago the big oil companies agreed to increase production to bring prices down. This has nothing to do with offshore drilling. B O O S H is BSing us again.
You can blame the "ENRON LOOP HOLE" for the impact of "Oil Futures" on the market...and who brought us the ENRON LOOP HOLE?? why Phil Gram that's who...and what was/is he doing??
He's developing the McCain Economic Plan..that's what...and where did his wife go to work soon after the ENRON LOOP HOLE was put into legislation?? why ENRON OF COURSE...
I'll let you connect the dots...
Gee, oil is so bad we should get Mexico, Canada, Venezuala (sp?), Denmark, Britian, Russia, China, future Cuba, Saudia Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, and all the other African countries to stop drilling for oil. Of course, we are the bad guys here, not innocent like the above listed countries who will continue for an indefinite time drilling and charging us whatever they want for what we have right here in this country. That being said, I would never want to stop the advance of solar, wind or nuclear energy.
Never mind that a trace element, CO2, has gone up at .0001 in the last one hundred years, all due to US dirty old oil burning. We all know, the dabate is over, .0001 of CO2 will destroy the world.
If I am inaccurate on the above claims, prove me wrong!
The progressives will twist themselves into a knot to find a way to hurt the US citizens and blame the worlds problems on Bush and Cheney. No logic, just finding a way to rationalize hurting those nasty old republicans. I'm happy to cut off my nose to spite my face.
Quote your source of your information, THEN ask someone to refute your claims. How do you know your CO2 info does not come from globalwarmingisahoax.comhoax.com".. like there is so much money to be made in us making it all up!!
Also, how do you know that little rise isnt all it takes to destroy an atmosphere... only takes a little dust to kill off entire species, or 1 degree change to shift an ecosystem... so get wise.. heres a penny.
According to NOAA, "Atmospheric CO2 levels have increased from about 315 ppm in 1958 to 378 ppm at the end of 2004, which means human activities have increased the concentration of atmospheric CO2 by 100 ppm or 36 percent." 36% in less than 50 years sounds fairly significant to me. And to most scientists.
Do some research before you type. We are drilling in the U.S. this argument is so silly, they are leases that are not being used by the same companies that are asking for the offshore leases. You have mud cats here in Texas drilling, they are drilling in Montana, they are drilling all over the country. It is cheaper for big oil to drill off the coast of Africa because they get better terms, 90% from a country like Equatorial Guinea, and Gabon, as opposed to a much smaller % that a state like Alaska, or Texas, or Louisiana will give an Exon Mobil. It is all about profit, it is cheaper to deal with a dictator like Obiang, than all the environmental standards that the U.S. requires, that is why they are not drilling in the U.S. Do not be fooled.
We are drilling in the US. The US is a very stable environment for investment due to reduced threat of nationalization compared to many overseas environment. Exxon is actually buying back its stock, because its worried about overextending itself on major capital investments with nationalization threats so high.
Never mind the fact that this same trace element (CO2) is at the highest level that we can see in the last several million years, while at the same time we are seeing the highest average temperatures during that same time..... Hmmmm, I wonder if there's any correlation there......
Now then, is it possible that we are NOT causing global climate change? Yes. It's possible that we are not the cause. However, if we are NOT the cause, then for us to stop our carbon spewing would not cause any harm. By contrast, if we ARE the cause, then us stopping our carbon spewing would do a LARGE amount of good. Which path should we take????
Stopping carbon spewing will cost money, due to the nature of our current infrastructure. I think it's perfectly reasonable to have an honest discussion about what the economic impact is of changing vs. staying the course. I would never expect either side to be capable of doing so, which unfortunately will result in the issue continuing to be used as a political tool, with no consequential action being taken.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
