The XX Factor: What women really think.

Obama Sells Out on Offshore Drilling

Now, though, he's taken flexibility too far, by selling out on offshore drilling. While campaigning in Florida yesterday, Obama told the Palm Beach Post that he would be willing to open Florida's coast for more drilling as part of a "comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices.'' And what's even worse than the shift itself -- yes, sometimes compromise is necessary -- is the ridiculous claim that it will bring gas prices down. It's never necessary to say something you know isn't true.

As he says, the Gang of 10 compromise put together by five Democrats and five Republicans in the Senate would do a lot of good things, like "repeal tax breaks for oil companies so that we can invest billions in fuel-efficient cars, help our automakers re-tool, and make a genuine commitment to renewable sources of energy like wind power, solar power, and the next generation of clean, affordable biofuels.''

So, as he now sees it, "if, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage - I don't want to be so rigid that we can't get something done." Gosh, no, that would be bad. If only I could remember the last time the Democrats in Congress did any such thing, maybe I'd know just how bad. And of course, he's just undercut those Democrats who were trying to hang in there. 

So what's the difference between Obama's loss of nerve and McCain's earlier switch on the same issue? In May, McCain knew offshore drilling was a step in the wrong direction, but by June, he'd seen the polling and seen the light. Now, he thinks offshore drilling is crucial.

There is no mystery about why Obama has now changed his mind, too, although his position seems to be that offshore drilling is still a bad idea, but we should do it anyway: A national poll taken last week showed that 57 percent of voters favor offshore drilling because 56 percent think gas prices would fall as a result. Only they wouldn't, and both candidates know it.

In the same interview with the Florida paper - on the day Chevron became just the latest oil company to report a record profit for the quarter -- Obama said: "I think it's important for the American people to understand we're not going to drill our way out of this problem," he said. "It's also important to recognize if you start drilling now you won't see a drop of oil for ten years, which means its not going to have a significant impact on short-term prices. Every expert agrees on that." (They also agree that if we haven't gotten serious about cutting CO2 emissions long before then, then the heartbreak of realizing that Obama has served us a baloney sandwich will be the least of our worries.)

Only, by even sorta orta backing new drilling, he is sending exactly the opposite message to the public, maintaining the fiction that there is no urgency to changing our ways, and that we can go right on consuming energy same as always. How again is this "change you can believe in"? I get that the McCain commercials blaming Obama for high gas prices are hurting him, but especially given how ludicrous this notion is, how about responding with facts? I know it's easier to assure people you'll bring gas prices down than to explain why nobody will, or should, but he's not even going to try?

His excuse might be the worst part: "The Republicans and the oil companies have been really beating the drums on drilling," Obama said in the interview. Which might give voters the impression that anyone who beats the drums loud enough and long enough will get this same "Alright already!'' response out of him. And it might give those young voters he is counting on the idea that he's not only not as different as they thought...but maybe, just not different enough.