President Obama shocks every man jack of us by announcing partial lifting of the moratorium on offshore drilling. Public lands reserved from drilling by G.H.W. Bush and untouched, even by his dissolute son, are now open for drilling. Despoiling of beaches and dead animals will follow, not to mention releasing our own little store of global warming stock. Jaws drop from hard bitten Wall Street to dozy Santa Cruzzzzz.
Crazy, like a fox.
How better to define the opposition than to give them what they want, and force them, figuratively this time, to vote against it for the sake of their own political ambition? Look back now. Widely criticized on the left for giving up Single Payer without a fight, Obama has now defined the Republicans as being against the welfare of underemployed women, sick children and sufferers of hereditary disease. They are now glaringly defined as the party not only of Social Darwinism but also of Eugenics. They must now campaign in favor of human suffering and death and force their supporters to vote for human suffering and death.
Gutless or a puppet of corporate donors are the alternate explanations of Obama.
Gutless does not run for President as a black man. Gutless does not face down the Clinton political machine. Gutless does not press the flesh more than anyone since Kennedy and under threat of harm four times that of his predecessor. Gutless at negotiation does not stand alone in the Republican caucus and cajole to leave the cameras running. And, it does not rally a fainting congress to pass a bill that threatens re-election of their number.
To date, the issue of Obama's corporate subservience remains an experientially supported possibility fueled only by unilateral surrender to traditional Republican initiatives in health care, Guantanamo, lack of prosecution of Americans for war crimes, DADT, not repealing DOMA and redoubling of the Afghan involvement. Come to think of it, a long list. It is discounted only somewhat by the things that have been done without the help of a functioning Senate. Politics, and not logic, remain the arbiter of our destiny as a nation.
The man, Obama, ran on the proposal of change. Had he a mandate sufficient to have swept the Senate to his side, changes in law might have happened more quickly. Whether you believe that or not now may still be an article of faith.
Functional change is not the same as is transient change. Functional change would be the breakdown of generations long belief systems. Transient change is law. Law is far easier to do and to undo than are belief systems. This is the political reality that we refuse to face. With a yin and yang contentiousness in the electorate and in governance, no law will long stand that can't be undone on the fiat of an election cycle. Real change is not in law but in the minds and hearts of the public.
In war, strategy is essential. The first principle of military strategy is to separate the enemy from a source of supply and sustenance, through isolation or outright destruction. To that end shipping is sunk, industries are bombed, and psychological warfare is rained. In the politics of a democracy, strategy is also paramount. The resources here are money and votes. Without a strategy, any number of battles can be won and not win the war. You must destroy the base from which power is sustained or the opposition will fight another day, winning battles in kind and overturning law made.
Obama has set about change, real change, not just changing politically ephemeral laws. He is changing the nature of our politics to make it harder to make politics harder. He is discrediting the politics of confrontation by reverse confrontation. The Socratic Method is his instrument, exposing for the public and base of the Republican party, the contradictions and unintended consequences of Republican philosophy. Something they themselves have never really examined before. Through this he will destroy the Republican base of power, that base being gross oversimplification, fear and delusion. Happily, they are more than cooperating in their own destruction in the party stance of NO.
Make them reject "Drill Baby Drill" and the "mandate" for health insurance. Republicans are damned if they do and damned if they don't. This is definitely not business as usual.
The energy bill may be the straw. Reason trumps crazy, for most people.
I'd like to live in a world where I could carry out experiments - one country run entirely according to the dictates of Nancy Pelosi and one run by Ron Paul. That would be fascinating.
Back to the point, however. Regardless of whether or not Obama is a deft politician and is doing this for his own ambitions or for what he considers to be the good of the country - we're left with legislation that is "lukewarm, neither hot nor cold."
Why would any logical person oppose drilling to get energy in America?
The typical answers here are, “we need to use less oil not more†or “burning oil is bad for the environmentâ€.
Well no argument there, but I challenge anyone to explain how stopping drilling in the US accomplishes either of those goals.
If the US was an isolated country (no exports or imports), then you could make a reasonable argument that opposing drilling would lead to less petroleum use in America.
But we do not live in an isolated country. When you stop Americans from getting US oil, you do not change in any way how much petroleum we use!
You only increase imports of oil.
That increases how much money we send abroad to countries we do not like!
That exports both our money and our JOBS!
That is the only effect of stopping drilling here, it makes us poorer, we have less money for green energy or health care or education or anything else, and if you don’t believe that, google “balance of paymentsâ€.
Why would any sane American be FOR that?
As long as we are importing ANY oil it makes no economic sense to not use American energy. Most people realize this simple economic truth and they are mad about it.
Stuff like this -- this article -- is why I fanned you. Absolutely amazing; it's what I've been trying to tell people (only stated more eloquantly).
... but who CARES if the result is ultimately the same? Who gives a rat's ass how "clever" anybody looks when the outcome is identical! Drilling will happen, more pollution, more greenhouse gasses, but hey... at least the Republicans look bad, right?
How can anybody proclaim that as a victory? How asinine.