Reader comments
Dan K. Thomasson: Politics, not principles, behind Pelosi's turnabout on oil drilling
22 comments | Read story
An intransient and rigid politician is hardly the kind we want in Washington. Likewise, a politician easily swayed and co-opted is also not desirable.
I�m no Pelosi fan, but I do think she�s more in line with what our country needs by shifting her stance. Pelosi apparently realized she was not in a good position with her resistance on this matter � good for her and good for us.
However reality is that I need a job for myself and my family, and the job I have is quite good and hard to replace, so I don't adhere to what I call my principals religiously, there are other considerations.
Perhaps, I do adhere to my principals, its just that at times they conflict. One of my principals is that I need to provide for my family in a manner that provides for them comfort and opportunity for a good life.
At times I find I have to choose the most important of my principals, I can't adhere to them all.
Since can't / won't be true to all my principals, I will not necessarily critisize Pelosi or others who find thereselves in the same situation.
I would like to have us drill drill drill in order to provide jobs for Americans and help the economy.
I would like to see if the price goes down. And stays down showing that the drilling actually works.
I would also like to see a part of the new law that prevents oil drilled on American soil from being sold outside America. If our problem is that we are importing oil such a law would help reduce the imports.
I would also like to see a return to government by the people for the people.
But what looks like intraparty tension on the surface is part of an intentional strategy in which Pelosi takes the heat on energy policy, while behind the scenes she�s encouraging vulnerable Democrats to express their independence if it helps them politically, according to Democratic aides on and off Capitol Hill.
NManmcy just wants to preserve her power.. she'll say anything to that end.
How did the "Progressive" movement become all about "Blocking" progress?
Go Cindy Sheehan!
Not to say that a politician should ALWAYS do this; there are times when standing on principle and LEADING is more important than staying in office (of course, few politicians really feel that way.)
Pelosi is in a constant "Catch-22" with these people. If she takes a stand they disagree with she is an un-American liberal nazi. If she changes her position to agree with them she is a dishonest, coldly calulating witch.
I, for one, think the Democrats have been played like a drum by the Republicans on this issue when it would be soooo easy to turn the tables on them.
Pelosi and the Democrats should say "Sure, drill wherever you want. But remember, all of the oil you drill stays in the USA. Oh, and there won't be any subsidies for you, Big Oil. One other thing, we are going to charge you for the right to tap our resources and use the money to fund alternative energy programs."
My guess is Big Oil and the Republicans would throw a fit. Then who would be seen as "hindering progress"?
Gallop's June numbers show a 19% approval rating for congress and a 30% approval rating for Bush.
RealClearPolitics lists a number of sources showing congressional approval ratings in July from 16-22%. I'm sorry, I could find Mr. Bush's approval ratings on RealClearPolitics.
Despite what "Hmmm 9:51" would have you believe, it's not just posters and the DN that have a dim view of what queen nancy is doing.
Did she not hear her constituents until she went on vacation? Are the voices of her California constituents drowned out by the shrill voices in Washington when she's in Washington?
I agree we need to be willing to change our minds on things (even though your political opponents will accuse you of flip-flopping), but exactly what has changed from the time she rushed to recess Conress before they could vote on this exact issue, to today, where she thinks we need to have the vote she blocked just weeks earlier? I wish someone could explain that for me.
"Principles" relate to your core values (lookup the word). Not something that blows in the wind depending on what the latest focus group said is most popular today.
Also, it is always corageous and smart to change your positions on something, unless your last name is Romney.
Neocons love to follow the hate-mongers.
if she has princples her stand is based on then should stick to them regardless of the Good or bad that come as a result.
If she changes her stand then, it is either politics or her original prinicples were wrong.
If her original principles were not wrong she should not be be changing her stance.
So what is it?
A true role model for the American women.
So far with the serious problems this country faces, thirty years of an economy that has hurt the middle class, a second economic recession under Bush (not that he was responsible for the first one), a health care delivery system failure, a looming energy crisis the Republicans don't seem to be offering any ideas or solutions that might help.
The only idea from the Republicans seems to be drill, drill here and drill now. It doesn't take much thinking to realize that if more drilling were to be done it should be done in concert with programs to increase alternative energy supplies and to specifically increase the work done in the future when petroleum products are burned in vehicles. For decades our government has approached problems with miserably bad partial bandages.
We should have had increased CAFE standards and alternative sources by now. But Reagan and the Republicans stopped those efforts and failed the country. And now they don't have any ideas better than to drill more.
This isn't about energy. It is about political war.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- T-Bird D fine without star player 12:32 a.m.
- Musicians leave audience in awe 12:23 a.m.
- Sports on the air 12:06 a.m.
- LDS families let TLC into home, business 12:05 a.m.
- Kehl represents faith in different blue 12:05 a.m.
- Why music lessons matter 12:04 a.m.
- Editorial: Trying to catch the wind 12:04 a.m.
- Gov't-run health-care system 12:04 a.m.
- Emotional intelligence is key to success 12:04 a.m.
- Hottest toys, superheated shopping 12:04 a.m.
- MWC expand? Get rid of deadweight
- Relieved Cougs prep for Falcons
- Wounded Utes limp home
- Jazz rookies had to grow up quickly
- Big games keep UHSAA coffers full
- Barzee is expected to plead guilty
- Sloan misses practice
- Low in vit. D? Beware heart disease
- RSL surprised by Chicago's Fire
- Jazz notes: Young bigs ride bench
- TCU creams U.
233 - BYU happy to escape with victory
232 - Editorial: Mormons and gay rights
226 - Will state consider gay rights law?
162 - RSL heads to MLS title game
134 - Can BYU root for (ick) Utah Utes?
133 - MWC expand? Get rid of deadweight
124 - TCU stays 4th in AP; Y. 19th, U. 23rd
115 - 5A: Bingham rolls to title game
108 - Bennett at center of GOP storm
89
I was a bit under the weather last week, which gave me some time to...
and no child should have to put up with sexual abuse. I know. I was abused...
So.. Government would run health care. Government option would keep others...
Good luck boys, take state for the south. Let it all go on the cold field....
I have been involved with Scouting for over 40 years and still believe it is...
To another quiz: I just took the quiz, it is very informative. I am pretty...
is long long over due...playoff between the top 8 in the league, and no silly...
That was not very good to say. Cant spell Hurricane becouse you dont live...
But did you notice Joanna did the same thing last week and still received...
Funny- Fox sports top 25 power rankings Week 11. #4 TCU #9 Boise State...
Boy, are we working hard to sell this or what? THe 45,000 homes thing is a...



But Nancy, releasing oil from the Strategic Reserve is dangerous to our national security. After all, as 70% of our oil is supplied by foreign sources. If there is an interruption in supply, then we will actually understand the necessity of the Strategic Reserve.