Yet another Pelosi CAVE-IN: Let's drill offshore!

[garybeck]

Pelosi indicates openness to offshore drilling vote
By Mike Soraghan

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Monday night dropped her staunch opposition to a vote on offshore oil drilling in the House.

Republicans, reacting to high gas prices, have demanded a vote on additional oil exploration in the Outer Continental Shelf, where drilling is currently blocked by a moratorium. Until now, Pelosi (D-Calif.) has resisted the idea as a “hoax.” But in an interview on CNN’s Larry King Live, she indicated that she was open to a vote.


“They have this thing that says drill offshore in the protected areas,” Pelosi said. “We can do that. We can have a vote on that.”

She indicated such a vote would have to be part of a larger package that included other policies, like releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which she said could bring down prices in a matter of days.

“But it has to be part of something that says we want to bring immediate relief to the public and is not just a hoax on them,” Pelosi continued.

She even indicated that she might support a package that includes drilling. She said her decision on whether to support such legislation would depend on how the policies are packaged.

---------

Considering the history, I'd say that we can interpret the "might support" as "will support." This is thoroughly disgusting.

[Purveyor]

1. Has a grassroots campaign been organized yet to see to it that Pelosi is removed as Speaker

come 2009?

If there is, I'd like to support that effort. Might as well target Reid while were at it...

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. No. No such campaign has been organized

[Tyler Durden]

16. Actually, they have....

It's called....

Well we won't go THERE, will we?

[Freddie Stubbs]

21. using the word 'organized' to describe Cindy Sheehan's congressional campaign is like

using the word 'beer' to describe this:

[riverdeep]

22. Cindy Sheehan is on the ballot, but just barely.

I think Cindy is claiming procedures were put in place to try and block her, and that might well have been the case, but Randi also said she was in contact with Cindy and she didn't start collecting signatures until about two and half weeks ago, which left Randi disgusted and confused. Me too, if that's true.

Unfortunately, that is a really poor showing even for a third party candidate. Too bad, because it would be interesting as hell to have Cindy in the Congress and what a message it would send to the Speaker.

[Freddie Stubbs]

23. Like it or not, Pelosi is popular with Democratic voters in her district

A Kucinich supporter ran against her in the primary on a pro-impeachment platform. She actually ran radio an TV ads criticizing Pelosi. Pelosi crushed her 89% to 11%.

[riverdeep]

29. Question- do you personally think she's been a good Speaker of the House?

Just curious. I think at the very least we need to remove her Speakership at the next available opportunity.

This is someone who has admitted she was outmaneuvered and taken by surprise by the Republicans. This is someone who took away her nuclear option-impeachment- before the fight even began. Even if she had no intention of impeaching, to telegraph that was beyond stupid.

[Freddie Stubbs]

34. She's doing as well as can be expected with a slim majority and

quite a few Democratic members who represent districts where Republicans are a majority. She is quite aware that every decision she makes affects those vulnerable members.

[EstimatedProphet]

36. "We" don't get a voice in that.

[Freddie Stubbs]

39. Sure we do: just elect Democrats to Congress who promise to vote for someone else as Speaker

[roody]

2. This should change some votes to Sheehan.

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. Yeah, she may hold Pelosi to only 85% fo the vote

[Apollo11]

3. How is her position different from that of Barack Obama?

Hasn't Obama recently shifted from his outright opposition to new drilling?

[Freddie Stubbs]

5. It's the same position, except that she held out longer than he did

[Freddie Stubbs]

4. Many Democrats in the House are catching a lot of flack for opposing drilling

She is following the same path as Obama on this issue.

[garybeck]

7. Many Democrats in the House are catching a lot of flack for opposing impeachment n/t

[Freddie Stubbs]

10. There isn't much evidence of a lot of them changing their positions on impeaching Bush

[garybeck]

18. that's my point. Why listen to supposed constituents on drilling and ignore them on impeachment?

no one can deny pelosi has received hundreds of thousands of emails about impeachment. somehow she manages to ignore those emails but she listens to the ones about offshore drilling? I also am skeptical that there is that much demand for offshore drilling. remember, she also took solar energy tax credits OUT of the energy bill! she has no business being the speaker.

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. Pelosi will change her stand when Democratic members of the House ask her to

They elected her and they can replace her.

If you can convince Democratic members of the House that impeachment needs to be a priority, they will convince Pelosi. It is obvious that this has not happened.

[warren pease]

31. And most democrats don't have the slightest idea how to get their point across because...

...they wouldn't know street theater, marketing, PR, message delivery or media manipulation if it came over and pissed on their $500 shoes.

Consider the SCHIP debacle. Their "strategic advisers" are about as strategic as a buggy whip, wouldn't understand branding if their lives depended on it. So they use names like S-CHIP. Sheer genius, as I've come to expect from the democratic party's deep thinkers.

The GOP would have called it "The Keep Our Kids Healthy Act" or something catchy like that. Dems, however, chose to continue referring to it by an obscure acronym that sounds like a computer component. No wonder nobody besides those who were seriously screwed by Bushie's predictable veto really gave a shit.

And then, when the veto gave them the opportunity to get out there and trash the little jumped up czarist bastard who's only concern is the welfare of the "haves and have mores" while he remains intentionally oblivious to the plight of poor kids in dire need of access to health care...

Great opportunity. And they were silent. They just sat down and shut up and took their defeat with a resignation that suggests they're hard wired to accept constant failure, which is just about the last characteristic you want in an opposition party.

If I didn't know better, I'd think democrats were bought and paid for by the same malevolent corporate bastards who've given zillions to the GOP to buy their slavish loyalty to all things corporate and underwrite their campaign of sabotaging all initiatives that might actually improve the lives of the proletariat.

And yes, I'm getting a little goddamn sick of this corrupt, collaborating group of center-right reactionaries who have stolen the only political voice the people still had in this banana republic of corporate dominance and world-beating wealth distribution inequity.

Can we at least get rid of Pelosi and Hoyer this November? That's not so much to ask.


wp

[zorahopkins]

9. She Did Say One Refreshing Thing

My blood did a slow boil last night as I watched Nancy Pelosi agree to the possibility of off-shore drilling.

She did, however, say one thing that I thought was very refreshing.

She said that the oil and natural gas that is off-shore belongs to the American people!

Not to Exxon.

Not to BP.

Not to anyone but the American People!

Off-shore drilling? Sure -- but let's make sure there are NO PROFITS FOR BIG OIL!!

The profits belong to the American people!!

[Freddie Stubbs]

11. Why would any oil company drill if there was no profit in it?

They aren't in business just for the fun of it.

[truebrit71]

12. That's why it's a clever move...Okay the drilling, but mandate no profits for Big Earl...

...Put the rethugs in the corner..if they vote it down THEY will have to explain why corporate profits trump 'relieving the price at the pump'....

[CatWoman]

14. you're so smart

:)

:loveya:

[Freddie Stubbs]

15. Would 'small oil' be permitted to drill and profit?

:shrug:

[truebrit71]

19. Define "small earl"...

...I don't think "small earl" has any of the leases offshore do they? :shrug:

[spin]

20. No profit...would you go to work for free?

If there's no profit I predict there will be no drilling by oil companies.

[warren pease]

30. And I trust her implicitly...

I trust her to fold like an origami master at the first hint that the GOP might be getting a little impatient with her. Bipartisanship is everything, and it just won't do to offend her soul mates in neocon loon land.

I trust her to exceed even my most cynical expectations for cheating the American people out of what little they still have. I trust her to be among the most active accomplices in the Bushies non-stop international crime wave.

And I trust her to continue working tirelessly to keep them out of prison, filthy rich and hopscotching their way into some non-extradition treaty paradise. The recent election of a leftist social reformer as president of Paraguay screwed up Plan A, but there's a big wide world out there full of fascist hiding places just waiting for them and their money.

So she's going to endorse yet another give away of public lands to further enrich to our big-hearted friends in the oil extraction business, which is so stupid in so many ways that it's exactly the kind of reactionary garbage you'd expect would get her enthusiastic support.

Never mind that these parasites already hold leases on between 42 million and 68 million acres of public land -- the numbers vary depending on the source -- and they haven't done a damn thing with it. Never mind that the industry itself estimates it would take a decade before any oil from new off-shore leases they're now demanding could hit the market.

For every phony excuse to give away more of the peoples' land, there are actual facts available that completely destroy all the bullshit propaganda mass media is trying to sell us.

But the stupidest thing of all is the tacit acceptance of the oil industry's line that they're our only salvation and that only by burning ever more fossil fuels and sending millions more megatons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere each year, we'll prosper and the American lifestyle can continue uninterrupted.

But Nancy isn't one for logic or science, apparently. Not when she's in the middle of an election campaign and can use all the corporate bribes she can wheedle out of her sugar daddy "investors."

So I trust her to continue to suck up to the Bushies. I trust that, when given an array of choices on any given issue, she'll take the stupidest one available -- as long as it further enriches the rich and doesn't give the people anything useful.

I know it's unlikely, but I dearly hope Ms. Sheehan pulls the upset of the century and absolutely kicks Pelosi's incompetent, collaborating, cowardly ass through the uprights at Candlestick on a crisp November afternoon. Gawd knows she's earned it. Firing her would be among the most positive steps in reclaiming the democratic party from its corporate employers.

It would also serve notice on all democrats in congress and in state houses across the country that if we can fire the speaker, we can damn well get rid of them too. We need to make it plain that they'd better return to their populist roots as the party of working people and start promoting progressive issues or we'll pick them off one by one until the last remaining member of the DLC still in office retires rather than face the wrath of voters and suffer the indignity of losing by a double digit margin.

wp

[bdamomma]

37. talk is cheap, and we will not see any of those resources.

[Parche]

13. Vote

She probably will hold a vote in Septembra...instead of the Repube demands of August vote

:hi:

[Enrique]

17. time to contact my Republican congressman again

it'll be the third time he's heard from me on this issue, thanking him for continuing to oppose offshore drilling in the face of all the pressure.

Now that it might come to a vote, we all have to do our best to make sure this thing doesn't pass.

[riverdeep]

25. This follows the Pelosi Pattern™.

The Pelosi Pattern™ initially uses strong language and rails against Republicans, giving the constituents of her party the false hope that she will actually fight for them. If the issue is serious enough, like taking a nation to war and bankrupting it in the process, or spying on its own citizens, the Pelosi Pattern™ will include the use of the nuclear option- THE STRONGLY WORDED LETTER.

After a sufficient amount of time has passed and the Speaker notices her opposition not only isn't backing away but gaining momentum, she then backpeddles as quickly as possible on her previous deeply held beliefs while simultaneously raising her hands in air claiming she has once again been outmaneuvered but it's not her fault since there aren't enough Democrats to oppose whatever current affront the Republicans have pushed through.

This even though the Republicans are currently a minority and were somehow even able to stifle any legislation they disagreed with when Clinton was in office (opposition President, majority in Congress, like now with the Dems).

[western mass]

26. STOP calling it a cave-in.

They are not caving-in. They are collaborating.

Stop painting corporate democrats as well-meaning but weak & incompetent.

They are doing exactly what they mean to do, which is collaborate with the right.

[Canuckistanian]

27. I'm thinking that one of her grandkids is being held hostage

Or that they're threatening her husband with some kind of sex charge.

Or maybe that she knew all of these plans in advance and was paid off some way.

Yeah, I know. I'm crazy.

She's an intelligent woman. SOMETHING must be making her do these IDIOTIC things.

[Freddie Stubbs]

40. Perhaps she is just following Obama's lead--He has the same stance on this issue

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. And, they wonder why people can see little difference between the parties and don't vote.

She helps out the Republicans and then calls for party unity.

[riverdeep]

32. There's at least one thing I don't understand.

The oil companies say they can't drill on the land they already own because they don't have equipment and it would be too expensive. How then is this equipment going to suddenly appear and for a cheaper price when drilling offshore, and let's face it, ANWR (cause it's just a matter of time before Pelosi caves on this too).

Also, has Pelosi read this letter?

"Economists' Letter on Offshore Drilling"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3782924

This is caving in to irrationality of the highest order. Congressional ratings are the lowest they've been. Why not just do what's right for a change?

[spanone]

33. why do we have an opposition party?

[bdamomma]

35. she is such a waste of time

and she is destroying this environment.

[MadHound]

38. Once again, the two party, same corporate master system of government rears its ugly head

Of course Pelosi was going to wind up supporting this, as was Obama. Too much oil money has been thrown their way for them to ignore this paying constituent. As far was what the rest of us want, you know, mere voters, well that, as always, comes in a distant second, third, or last, depending on how large a monied interest is.

Bought and paid for corporate whore, that's what our so called leaders are, including Pelosi.

[bdamomma]

41. Pelosi can go to hell

nothing like caring about the environment NOT!!

[Freddie Stubbs]

42. Should Senator Obama go to hell too?

How does Pelosi's stance on this issue differ from Obama's?

[bdamomma]

43. there are other alternative ways of energy, what don't these

politicians get, that drilling will do nothing.