Non oil state GOP politicians don't really want Democrats to cave
anytime soon either.

As with abortion, the issue is more effective for Repugs to
perpetually dangle in front of the ignorant.

If Dems actually supported drilling ANWR then prices will still resume
their spiral and what would Repug talking points be then?

"You ignorant poor will have to cycle for the next 20 years?"

The bluff is easy to call. A provision could be bundled into a
comprehensive energy bill that allows more drilling but if the price
of oil tops, say, $180/bbl in 3 years then the drilling halts and a
hefty fuel tax-rebate program becomes effective.

How would Repugs oppose such a bill?

"You ignorant poor will have to cycle for the next 20 years?"

Bret Cahill

I think you are right. The best thing for republicans is if democrats
continue to oppose drilling for oil in the US. The worst thing for
republicans is if, before November, they flip flop on the issue, and allow
drilling in the US. But I am betting, they will not do that, neither will
Obama. Besides, even if they do, it puts Obama in a tough spot. He is
against drilling and if his party changes their position, they have just
hung him out to dry. So, on balance, they seem to be in a no win situation,
unless my analysis is wrong.

peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:53428ac6-d169-4ed2-b158-3d59b53a7b96@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...

On Aug 12, 8:53 am, BretCah...@peoplepc.com wrote:

No. It'll be far more beneficial to allow the drilling to
begin as soon as possible, such that the job creation
begins as well.

Actually, beginning such drilling would encourage
the bursting of the current oil bubble. How do we
know there's a bubble? Because the rate of
increase has been greater than exponential.

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:14:29 -0700, Shrikeback wrote:

Does the lying ever stop? Renewable energy creates much more employment
opportunity than continuing the oil monopoly. The price of fuel at the
pump may be higher for renewable fuel but that cost is paid out primarily
as wages and those wages stay right here in the the USA. I am not going to
defend the "broken window" fallacy. But don't blather about job creation
from offshore drilling.

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:25:31 -1000, Jerry Okamura wrote:

Your "analysis" is as wrong as it usually is, Jerry. The Democrats do not
oppose drilling in the US. They have no problem with the oil companies
drilling where they already have lease or dulling in the...

Democrats can always force Repug politicians to admit what they really
think but are trying to keep from their ignorant base.

The "quick drill our way out of misery" scam is a case in point.

The only way Repugs could oppose the bill would be to admit that they
think the price of gas will be over $6/gallon in 3 years.

Most of ignorant GOP base won't find the Repug "solution" acceptable.

Bret Cahill

Fundamental Theorem of Pseudopopulist Demagoguery:

"For every pseudopopulist gambit with political effectiveness delta
there is a Jeffersonian populist response with an effectiveness
epsilon where epsilon is greater than delta."

On Aug 12, 7:44 pm, The Trucker verizon.net> wrote:

On 2008-08-13 19:05:51 -0400, Shrikeback@gmail.com said:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:05:51 -0700, Shrikeback wrote:

The argument is simple:

Hydrocarbon based fuel will necessarily become a commodity only burned
by the rich.

Gas and oil and their uses and extraction, has less and less to do
with the issues and concerns of the American _people_.

Bret Cahill