Articles by David Roberts

He doesn’t want the Saudis getting all confused, you know

Well, it looks like administration backpedaling away from Bush's SOTU pronouncements on energy has gone into overdrive. As noted, the day after the speech the energy secretary and national economic advisor told journalists he didn't really mean it.

Now the Vice President has been activated and launched from his underground coffin bunker to ease the fears of conservatives and oil companies. This is from Maureen Dowd's latest column (yes, I know you can't read it -- sorry):

Conservatives were so gobsmacked by W.'s promise to have the government drum up nonpetroleum energy options -- Robert Novak huffed that it not only violated G.O.P. free-market philosophy, but it also had "a lengthy pedigree of failure" -- that the vice president had to swiftly lumber onto conservative radio shows to praise drilling and gas guzzling.

Asked by Rush Limbaugh if drilling in Alaska was now out, Mr. Cheney said: "No, it's not off the table by any means. We'll keep pushing it because we think it makes eminent good sense."

Asked by Laura Ingraham if he agreed with Tom Friedman that the administration should impart pain with a gas tax, Mr. Cheney demurred, "Well, I don't agree with that." He said that he and W. are "big believers" in the market and letting the market work, and that people "make decisions for themselves in terms of what kind of vehicle they want to drive, and how often they want to fill up the tank, and from the perspective of individual American citizens, this notion that we have to 'impose pain,' some kind of government mandate, I think we would resist."

Here's the full Ingraham interview. Below the fold, I've excerpted the relevant Q&A:

Hint: he’s from Alabama

Kevin Drum says:

I don't know if George Bush loves switchgrass because he got a visit from the switchgrass lobby or because someone just whispered the word in his ear, but who cares?

Well, if you happen to care, you may be interested in what David Bransby, professor of energy crops at Auburn University, said Wednesday on NPR's All Things Considered. He has called and emailed regularly with the office of Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.). One of the last emails claimed, in Bransby's words, that switchgrass "was a last minute inclusion in the speech, and it was Senator Sessions that helped get it into there." Sessions' spokesflack later confirmed that Sessions had a heart-to-heart with Al Hubbard, the chairman of Bush's National Economic Council, last Friday.

This AP story has Sessions reacting enthusiastically:

U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions praised the president's plans for energy reform, saying his goal to replace more than 75 percent of the country's oil imports from the Middle East by 2025 is a "big challenge" but one that Alabama could play a role in accomplishing.

"He really made some big commitments concerning bio fuels," Sessions, R-Mobile, said. "He talked about using wood chips and switch grass (in ethanol production) and Alabama's got great potential for that."

Sessions said he's supported research at Auburn University involving switch grass for the past several years, and "it looks like we're at a point where 'swithcraft' could help."

Why might Sessions be so psyched about switchgrass?

SOTU: Carl Pope proves his brilliance by saying something I said

Earlier this week, I argued that it is significant that Bush used the phrase "America is addicted to oil," even in light of the pathetic inadequacy of his proposed solution.

Today, Carl Pope, who's clearly following my lead (cough), argues the same:

On energy policy and global warming, as pollster Frank Luntz has repeatedly told the Administration, the public will demand action once it gets the facts. His counsel, consistently, has been to frame energy and global warming as complex, long-range, controversial, scientifically unresolved issues. Millions, perhaps billions, of dollars have been invested by the carbon lobby into driving these messages home to the public. Now, with a single phrase, President Bush has opened a tear in that fabric of denial. Instead of saying, "Oh, he doesn't really mean it. He's insincere," we ought to be rushing to convert that tear into a rent and to drive home a single fact to the American people:

If our President states that our energy policy amounts to a dangerous addiction to oil, we need to take action now. We need to figure out how to beat this addiction today. Because although the Bush administration's solutions are weak, distant, and ineffective, ours are imminent, rapid, and powerful. The President has given us the best grounds we could imagine for immediately mobilizing our nation behind smart solutions to our energy, global-warming, and oil-addiction challenges. We should forget about him for the moment and start talking about the task at hand, as if it were today's problem -- not tomorrow's -- because it is.

Exactly. This is a golden opportunity -- not to bash Bush, but to take him at face value.

SOTU: The Dean of Shrill responds

Ah, The Mustache is not the only NYT columnist to take on Bush's energy plan today. Unlike Friedman, Paul Krugman, the Dean of Shrill, does not temper his comments:

There is a common theme underlying the botched reconstruction of Iraq, the botched response to Katrina (which Mr. Bush never mentioned), the botched drug program and the nonexistent energy program.

John DiIulio, the former White House head of faith-based policy, explained it more than three years ago. He told the reporter Ron Suskind how this administration operates: "There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus. ... I heard many, many staff discussions but not three meaningful, substantive policy discussions. There were no actual policy white papers on domestic issues."

In other words, this administration is all politics and no policy. It knows how to attain power, but has no idea how to govern. That is why the administration was caught unaware when Katrina hit, and why it was totally unprepared for the predictable problems with its drug plan. It is why Mr. Bush announced an energy plan with no substance behind it. And it is why the state of the union -- the thing itself and not the speech -- is so grim.

Feel the shrill!