Here’s a few excerpts from the first FP article, titled “PIPE DREAMS – Why Mitt Romney can’t free America from Middle East oil.”, authored by Michael Levi:
“Republicans have frequently criticized Obama for his admittedly hodgepodge energy strategy, a charge repeated in the new plan. The Romney plan solves that problem by substituting a narrow fossil-fuel production strategy for a genuinely comprehensive plan. Much in that fossil-fuel strategy is reasonable. Romney would shift more power to the states by allowing them to approve drilling on their lands and near their coasts without federal intervention. He would streamline environmental reviews, in part through clear deadlines, and in part by handing more control to the states.
“If that were accompanied by more federal capacity to process permit applications — something that Romney has decidedly not promised to do — the result could be a win-win for business and the environment.”
That’s a HUGE “If…”, especially if it’s something that Rmoney “has decidedly NOT promised to do.”
“The plan is also mum on the other grave energy challenge the country faces: climate change. Reasonable people can differ on how much emphasis to place on climate change in U.S. energy policy, but it isn’t reasonable to ignore it entirely. The Romney plan does not mention climate at all. To be certain, surging production of natural gas can help curb U.S. emissions, but it will come nowhere close to delivering the reductions the country needs alone. Romney likes to quip that people “do not call [climate change] America warming, they call it global warming,” his way of saying that climate change can’t be confronted unilaterally.”
Yet Dubya Bush, supported by the Republicans, refused to sign the Kyoto Protocols, which would ‘confront’ climate change ‘globally.’ Rmoney’s “quip” is yet another example of how warped his sense of humor, his character and his logic are.
The article continues…
“There are many good reasons to embrace rising U.S. oil and gas production and to reform the way government regulates their development.”
If ‘reforming regulation’ involves eliminating regulations, then NO, there are no good reasons.
…and finishes with,
“The Romney strategy for fossil-fuel development has some reasonable proposals on both fronts. But when it comes to comprehensively exploiting energy opportunities and confronting energy-related risks, the strategy falls woefully short.”
Michael Levi’s article links to “The Romney Plan For a Stronger Middle Class: Energy Independence“, which sounds like a non-sequitur to me. But the “Executive Summary” seems even more ludicrous, i.e.:
“An affordable, reliable supply of energy is crucial to America’s economic future.
I have a vision for an America that is an energy superpower, rapidly increasing our own production and partnering with our allies Canada and Mexico to achieve energy independence on this continent. If I am elected president, that vision will become a reality by the end of my second term.” -Mitt Romney
Of course, Rmoney’s basic premise on which he builds some of his so-called “Energy Policy” is a lie:
“In the midst of the energy revolution taking place on state and privately-held lands across America, oil and gas production on federal lands somehow plummeted last year. This was no accident. President Obama has intentionally sought to shut down oil, gas, and coal production in pursuit of his own alternative energy agenda.”
In addition, Rmoney’s “Energy Policy” is extremely vague, with many of the ‘power points’ in some sections appearing to contradict other points within the same section. And quite a bit of the policy appears to be based on studies by Citigroup (“Citi GPS: Global Perspectives & Solutions, “Energy 2020: North America, The New Middle East?” Citigroup, 3/20/12”), investment company Raymond James (Raymond James U.S. Research, “Yes, Mr. President, We Believe We Can Drill Our Way Out of This Problem,” Raymond James, 4/2/12), and the Manhattan Institute (Mark P. Mills, “Unleashing The North American Energy Colossus: Hydrocarbons Can Fuel Growth And Prosperity,” Manhattan Institute, 7/9/12.)
On ThinkProgress, several recent articles demonstrated Mitt’s cluelessness and lack of ability to hear or comprehend what comes out of his own mouth. In this one, Mitt insanely states that “I am very proud of what we did [Romneycare in Massachusetts – which included an ‘individual mandate] and the fact that we helped women and men and children in our state… And then with regard to contraceptives, of course Republicans, myself in particular, recognize that women have a right to use contraceptives.” Huh? Since when, and for how much longer?
Then Rmoney gives a shout-out to the Birthers, telling an audience in Michigan, “Nobody has ever asked to see my birth certificate. They know that this is the place that I was born and raised.” Apparently Mitt can’t understand how much this one comment legitimatizes the Birther ignorati, especially in conjunction with the fact that seven (count ’em, SEVEN) Birther conspiracy advocates will be speaking at the RNC in Tampa.
While these are just a few examples of what’s been going on with Rmoney’s campaign, there’s sure to be a whole lot more interesting goings-on during the Republican National Convention, which may or may not start today. Should be fun!
This is our daily open thread — got anything to say about anything?