Nancy Pelosi, apparently not satisfied with the 9% approval rating for the Democrat-controlled congress, is doing her best to get it even lower:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday shut the door on expanding oil and gas drilling beyond areas that have already been approved for energy exploration, drawing a clear distinction from her counterparts in charge of the Senate.
“This call for drilling in areas that are protected is a hoax, it’s an absolute hoax on the part of the Republicans and this administration” Pelosi said at her weekly press conference. “It’s a decoy to punt your attention away from the fact that their policies have produced $4-a-gallon gasoline.”
Not surprisingly, she neglected to mention what those Republican policies might be.
But there’s no end to Democrat policies we can point to:
For years Democrats have blocked common-sense energy solutions. As the Heritage Foundation’s Ben Lieberman writes today on Human Events Online, Democrats have thwarted drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, construction of new refineries and opposed measures to simplify the complex gasoline formula.
Now, even with gas prices on voters’ minds, Democrats are threatening to do it again. The U.S. Senate should pass the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act (S. 3711) next week, but House Republicans should demand the Senate compromise and agree to a bill that resembles the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act (H.R. 4761). That plan, sponsored by Resources Chairman Richard Pombo (R.-Calif.), could provide up to 10 times more energy than the Senate proposal.
Check out See Dubya’s chart at Michelle Malkin’s if you need a visual illustration of Pelosi’s madness.
2008 really should not be a poisonous year for Republicans.
Besides being much better on energy policy, they have been vindicated on the Iraq war. We’ve all but declared victory, and it turns out Saddam did have a nuclear program, so now the Dems can no longer say we went in under “false pretenses”.
So who are the real losers in Iraq (besides the terrorists)? Gateway Pundit picks that low hanging fruit.
The Republicans shouldn’t be looking half bad at this point to the average American voter.
Especially with Reid and Pelosi doing their darndest to get their approval ratings down to 0%.
Hat tip: Lucianne, who has some of the blogosphere’s greatest commenters, like antidem:
Dear Nancy with the 9% approval rating,
Drilling in protected areas is not a hoax. A hoax is what you pull on the American people everytime you get botox injections.
Bwahahahaha!
(Oops, that wasn’t very “nice” was it)?
UPDATE:
Here’s the video of Pelosi saying, “…It’s an absolute hoax”:
And here’s Nancy’s idea of an energy plan:
Thanks, Nancy!
July, 11, 2008 at 7:54 am
It would be fun to ask her to name the Republican policies she refers to.
Follow up question would be “come on, just name one”.
July, 11, 2008 at 9:31 am
[...] Nancy Pelosi Calls Drilling In Protected Areas “A Hoax” [...]
July, 11, 2008 at 11:56 am
Nancy is not a bright woman. When we talk about drilling to “reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” we mean just that: developing a source of oil that cannot be manipulated by OPEC. We don’t necessarily mean cheaper oil, although if we’re able to control a larger portion of the supply, it may help pull prices down.
I liked her letter to George Bush asking for him to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserves to help alleviate the crisis. She based her plea on the current price and historical examples of emergency uses of the reserve. What she didn’t consider at all (and this is so typical) is the point of the SPR, which is to provide a source of oil if our supply is interrupted. So any use should consider the risk to our supply – a point completely missed by Ms. Pelosi.
She also gota number wrong. She says that the SPR is 97% full, but the 2005 Energy Policy Act instructed the administration to expand the SPR to 1 billion barrels, meaning that it’s only 72% full.
Of course she was also a spearhead of the legislation to stop filling the reserve: meaning 70,000 barrels a day would become available on the world market. 70,000 barrels per day is only 0.33% of our consumption, meaning absolutely nothing in terms of market pricing. In fact, her demand to start tapping that reserve is further evidence that it was a meaningless piece of legislation.
Many people have pointed out the twisted logic of the Dems on the subject of oil prices. “It’s the fault of the speculators! It’s not a supply-and-demand problem!” they say. And then they make token increases in the supply to fix the problem.