Interesting article.

You are right, many of the things you say about the republican logic, may well be true.

However, when you come to the second half about giving the benefit of the doubt to the democrats, you have a couple of things that just don't make sense.

One is the issue of how long before we could tap into ANWR, and offshore.

While the timelines are somewhat long, the fundamental flaw in the democrats logic, is ongoing. They've been stopping offshore drilling and new alaskan drilling for at least two decades now.

If it wasn't for their efforts to stop drilling (and yes there are republicans on that list, but mostly it's a democrat thing), and we started just 10 years ago, nevermind 20, we would have that oil flowing freely now, and, we would be supplying about 40% of our requirements, not 20% or so.

In other words, we wouldn't be paying $4.00 today at the pump. I'm not saying we'd be back at $1.50, but life would be much better for everyone in the US.

Next point - yes their could be a spill, but technology keeps improving - when was the last major spill in the gulf? Exactly.

Nevermind that Cuba, with China's help will be doing their offshore thing - and our Florida beaches are far, far more likely to get damaged by their mistakes, than if we were doing it. We can't stop Cuba from drilling, but, BEWARE:

Like w drill in the North Slope, no doubt a lot of those reserves that Cuba gets, is in the same large area we would also be drilling - basically, as things are, Cuba will get most of the oil, and us, none of it.

Lastly, even with the go ahead to do both, ANWR and offshore, the announcement may help, but we definitely won't see the price of gas drop by half, even after production is in place.

So, GM et al, will still kill off their larger SUVs.

And we aren't talking about needing 30 years of supplies or longer. Plug-in electrics, and other technologies (hydrogen?), will start replacing the traditional gas engine vehicles over the next 3- 5 years, and by 10-15 years, we really should need far less oil

Knocking $1.00 off the price of a gallon, at the pump is not going to put a dent into the drive for more efficient vehicles.

IF GM, for example can take their Volt plug in tech and offer that through most of their lineup, we are talking 100+ mpg equivalents (average driving), and the first of those is due in less than a year.

So, let's get off our asses, and stop being held hostage to OPEC. (or at least less so).

BTW, Russia and Canada are energy exporters - because they do drill in the great white north. We choose, instead to be victims - of our own policies.

A reminder - our Big Oil companies now only account for (I think I recently read), only 3% of actually oil recovery outside the US. OPEC and other players are huge by comparison. It's been a long time since they had any significant control over international oil pricing.

Democrats - and Republicans have to stop letting hard core environmentalists run our energy policy. There has to be compromise: Nothing pleases them (environmental groups - no nukes, wind power that might kill birds, large solar arrays that require huge amounts of desert to be "paved" with them. No doubt many major projects will be killed or delayed, or scaled way back, because of this endangered, bug, or that endangered turtle, etc... Even Schwartznegger was complaining on TV about how one of his solar energy proposed projects in the california deserts, is already being delayed by environmentalists.

Those same folks also demand low density housing, which, of course is the least energy efficient. Low density means public transportation isn't practical. Instead of 100,000 - 250,000 homes, etc. on 50,000 acres, they aren't happy, unless it's 4000 homes maximum on that much space. Terribly inefficient!

OK, enough. Mull it over. It's not about democrats vs republicans, it's about energy, and possibly maintaining our economy over the next couple of decades. -art