John McCain gave another energy speech today (bringing the grand total in the past week to four), this one in Las Vegas. It seems like the big new thing in this speech is that he's given a name to the various components of his energy plan that he's rolled out slowly over the past week: "The Lexington Project."
"In recent days I have set before the American people an energy plan, the Lexington Project -- named for the town where Americans asserted their independence once before," said McCain. "Let it begin today with this commitment: In a world of hostile and unstable suppliers of oil, this nation will achieve strategic independence by 2025."
The plan includes initiatives he's announced over the past weeks: Ending the moratorium on offshore drilling, offering cash incentives for innovations in electric cars, promoting energy efficiency, curbing energy speculation, and addressing climate change.
Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama gave a speech in Nevada yesterday in which he accused McCain of "offering the same old gimmicks" when it comes to energy policy. His campaign announced today that they have created a new website to promote the differences between the candidates' energy plans.
McCain also touted his plan to build 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030 and set a goal of building a total of 100 over time, which is pretty ballsy considering he was speaking in Las Vegas, which is a mere 100 miles from Yucca Mountain. He still hasn't really addressed the problem of where all this waste from those new reactors would go, and most Nevadans oppose plans to dump it in their state.
McCain says that his plan is meant to rally Americans around domestic energy options and promote independence.
"This pledge is addressed to all concerned -- to those abroad whose power flows from an accident of geology, and to you, my fellow Americans, whose strength proceeds from unity of purpose. Together, we will break the power of OPEC over the United States. And never again will we leave our vital interests at the mercy of any foreign power."
In recent speeches, McCain also taken to referring to Obama as "Dr. No" for his opposition to offshore drilling, the "gas-tax holiday," and expanding nuclear power. The campaign put out a new ad today on this theme:
Americans United praises Congress for passing ACES
Ask Umbra’s video advice on sunscreen
Warren Buffett repeats GOP talking points on energy plan
Comments View as Flat
Sean Casten Posted 8:45 am
25 Jun 2008
Lexington? Bah!
Bunch of Massachusetts liberals!
Permalink
BFR74 Posted 9:16 am
25 Jun 2008
Terrible Ad
That ad was awful. If you blindfolded me and just had me listen to the audio and asked me who sponsored it, I'd really have a hard time guessing.
Permalink
morganmghee Posted 10:02 am
25 Jun 2008
This Proves It
The Republicans really don't like their candidate, letting him run on an energy/environment platform that has been rejected in this country for 15 years. A good number of the oil lobbyists have flipped over to contributing to the Dem's in anticipation of the new administration, they couldn't even spare enough for a decent commercial.
Permalink
David Roberts Posted 10:08 am
25 Jun 2008
Wow
That's just awful. "Obama rejects McCain's silliest energy gimmicks!" Honestly, if the Obama campaign made that video I'd think it was effective.
grist.org
Permalink
Sean Casten Posted 11:20 am
25 Jun 2008
No kidding
I should have watched the video before my first comment. It's worse than I thought!
Apropos of nothing except that it's funny (and probably something else that Dr. No is opposed to), this made me laugh.
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 11:56 am
25 Jun 2008
The scary thing
I thought that was a Youtube only thing made by some blogger.
Until I saw the "Paid for by John McCain 2008".
Message asside, the production quality on that video was horrible.
_
That said, what pisses me off is that Obama is letting McCain get away with this oil drilling fiasco.
Which yesterday McCain (once again) mentioned how his new Oil plan would only amount to a "psychological benefit".
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/24/mccain-psychological- ...
Even though the report put out by the Fed last week or so points that the impact of drilling for oil would not only be non-existent now, but it would be insignificant in the future. And they extend their projections all the way out till 2030!
http://theoildrum.com/node/4174
The thing most Americans fail to realize is that when they say oil is "Trading at $140 a barrel". That that price is GLOBAL. Every country pays the same price for a barrel of oil!!!!
So in order to make a dent in the global commodity price, (For which we pay!) you have to make a supply increased thats larger on a global scale.
And then PRAY that Saudi/Venezuela/Russia/etc don't cut back their daily production rate by the same amount as your increase.
_
This is very similar to McCain's gas tax holiday, except that it's significantly more complex, and less bluntly obvious to be a total gimmick.
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 12:05 pm
25 Jun 2008
heh
Oh come now, thats easy to top ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G9jA-FGGd8
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:47 am
26 Jun 2008
Gina Sanchez, California Endowment
On the effect of unregulated trading (speculation) on oil prices. It creates demand nearly equal to the demand China has in oil markets. Hmmm, wonder if that raises prices?
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=779174815&play= ...
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
KenG Posted 3:28 am
26 Jun 2008
Trading Impact
It would seem to me that trading (regulated or unregulated) can only make a temporary fluctuation in price. The contracts must always be closed with delivery.
On the other hand, permanent price increases can be the result only of true commodity shortage or monopoly/cartel/government action to restrict supply or set prices. Traders do not have the necessary supply control to have a long term impact on prices.
If the current bubble is really due to trading manipulation, hang on to your SUV. Prices will be back down within 6 months. (I'm not betting on that.)
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 7:08 am
26 Jun 2008
Yes Ken
That does represent the "conventional wisdom". An oxymoron for sure.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink