May 20, 2004
KERRY'S GRAVITAS PROBLEM:
Kerry the energy guzzler (Washington Times, 5/20/04)
In September 2000, George W. Bush was surely right to criticize Bill Clinton for playing politics with America's long-term national security. (Mr. Clinton released tens of millions of barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) in an effort to force energy prices down in order to increase the presidential prospects of Al Gore.) Today, President Bush is right to reject demands from Sen. John Kerry and other Democrats to divert oil from the SPR to the market in order to force gasoline prices down.Mr. Bush's rationale today is the same as it was nearly four years ago. "The strategic reserve is an insurance policy meant for sudden disruption of our energy supply," Mr. Bush asserted in September 2000. The SPR, he rightly argued, "should not be used as an attempt to drive down oil prices right before an election. It should not be used for short-term political gain at the cost of long-term national security."
Strange thing about the conventional wisdom, which holds the President a lightweight and the Senator a heavyweight--the former remains anchored in position while the latter blows around like a feather in the political winds. Posted by Orrin Judd at May 20, 2004 12:38 PM
John F. Kerry has all the weightiness of vapour.
Posted by: jim hamlen at May 20, 2004 1:14 PMEvery time there's a jump in oil prices, we see the same rituals, of which this is one. Some of the others are--
* Morons trying to organize selective boycotts of local gas stations.
* Politicans call for investigations of oil companies for price gouging and price manipulation.
* TV reports featuring various losers who claim this will actually cause gross hardship.
* Environmentalists calling for forced conservation measures.
And don't forget:
*Bored citizens turning off their TV's in disgust.
P.S.: Why am I not hearing that "we should be paying European gas prices" argument that kept coming up during the '70s energy crisis?
John:
We should be, though the extra cost should be taxes, not ill-advised regulations.
Posted by: oj at May 20, 2004 2:27 PMJohn:
Andrew Sullivan called for a $ 1/gal gas tax in the 19 Apr '04 issue of 'Time' magazine.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at May 21, 2004 4:09 PMAndrew Sullivan does not own a car, so his proposal is similar to me proposing a tax on leather bondage gear and rainbow flags.
Posted by: Jason Johnson at May 21, 2004 7:05 PMI'm certainly willing to pay slightly more for my leather bondage gear, if it will help the nation.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at May 22, 2004 12:28 AM