- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
The Note: Obama Gets Aggressive on Energy
August 05, 2008 8:39 AM
ABC News' Rick Klein writes in Tuesday's Note: When is the flop less dangerous than the flip? (When it costs $75 to fill up your Jeep.)
Who knows better than Bill Clinton what it takes to be a president? (Nobody -- which is why evasion is interesting.)
What beats 200,000 screaming Germans? (Maybe 50,000 roaring Harleys -- but were their tires inflated?)
What did Sen. Barack Obama really want for his birthday? (Hint -- John Kerry knows, though Obama could have done without Kerry’s decision to label Sen. John McCain as “dangerous.”)
It’s energy week on the trail, and a second policy shift by Sen. Barack Obama hardly registers as a surprise. Both candidates are following the voters here -- and they realize that there’s more peril in standing firm than in allowing a touch of policy flexibility into your thinking.
In the process, might conventional wisdom be shifting? Should we still be certain that sky-high gas prices will be a drag on Sen. John McCain -- guilty by association with an oil-soaked GOP?
Read the rest of The Note -- and get all the latest on the 2008 election, Congress, the White House and the wide world of politics every day -- from Rick Klein by bookmarking this link.
A party looking for a new brand may be finding one with its new standard-bearer, along with an energized congressional contingent that’s found a winner, and a prop the GOP and its allies are quickly learning to love.
McCain, R-Ariz., visits a nuclear power plant outside Detroit on Tuesday -- finding another area of distinction with Obama, D-Ill., on energy policy; Obama has two energy town halls in Ohio (and brings a new, sharper message).
“Energy has become a pivotal issue in this increasingly competitive election, as voters fret over high gas prices, which have hovered around $4 a gallon, and their impact on food and transportation costs,” Amy Chozick and Elizabeth Holmes write in The Wall Street Journal. “Sen. McCain has successfully seized on the issue to gain ground against Sen. Obama, who continues to lead in most polls.”
Obama is adjusting mid-course -- and he’s fortunate that this is a story about energy, not about flip-flopping: “Obama's proposal includes two reversals of positions he has taken in the past: He had fought the idea of limited new offshore drilling and was against tapping the nation's emergency oil stockpile to relieve gasoline prices that have stubbornly hovered around $4 a gallon,” per USA Today’s write-up.
Continue reading today's Note by clicking HERE.
ABC News' John Santucci, Hope Ditto and Amanda Temple contributed to this report.
August 5, 2008 in Hunter, Duncan, Kucinich, Dennis, Palin, Sarah, Romney, Mitt, Tancredo, Tom, Thompson, Fred, Veepstakes | Permalink | User Comments (35)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Got this from another blog:
"I’m strongly encouraged by Senator Obama’s speech on America’s energy future. Foreign oil is killing our economy and putting our nation at risk," wrote T. Boone Pickens, a billionaire oil man.
Posted by: Paul | Aug 5, 2008 8:49:12 AM
From the above article: "Obama is adjusting mid-course -- and he’s fortunate that this is a story about energy, not about flip-flopping."
Strikes me as an odd characterization. Did Obama change positions? Yes. Did McCain change positions? Also yes.
ABC - Why just call out Obama?
And let's not forget that McCain also changed positions on negative campaigning. He said we deserve better, and that he'd rather lose the election than not give us a positive campaign. Guess he wasn't being honest with that one, huh?
Posted by: Paul | Aug 5, 2008 9:05:01 AM
ABC, --- why are you focusing only on obama's changes in position.
Mccain has changed his positions on numerous issues including energy. What's going on here?
Posted by: Commonsense | Aug 5, 2008 9:16:59 AM
Obama lies about everything. The hyprocrosies show through the man evetytime. His inexperience is very telling. Lying, hypocrisies and inexperience, combined, lead him to indecisiveness. That's why we keep seeing him posturing for political positions all the time. Obama is mostly about showmanship
Posted by: young_voter | Aug 5, 2008 9:21:22 AM
It seems odd that Senator Obama gets both the negative coverage (flip flopping) and positive coverage (getting aggressive - I guess that's positive). Isn't there someone else who has equally flip flopped on this issue and gotten aggressive - Mc... something or other.
Posted by: jhw539 | Aug 5, 2008 9:21:50 AM
ABC is focusing on Obama's change in position because that is all he knows how to do well.
Obama lost me with that speech he gave in Germany. We are a young country and still have much to learn. However, to bash or own country to foreigns is inexcusable. As well as spewing out our faults - Obama should have also touted our positives. I am so tired of this empty suit. The whole europe show was just marketing.
Obama said he wanted to use Public financing but he opted out of that. Obama has been negative on McCain all summer.
Posted by: Frank- South Hampton | Aug 5, 2008 9:29:16 AM
didn't mcbush flip-flop on this issue at the end of june?
just asking?
why was it not reported?
Posted by: johnosahon | Aug 5, 2008 9:34:48 AM
I like people who change their mind/positions. This shows that they are thinking. And its all about compare and contrast and not sticking on: Am right, am right, am right!
Posted by: Peace | Aug 5, 2008 9:48:58 AM
Hey Arrogant,
What is the last time you saw McCain get Europe to come out and rally behind the United States? Never.
You know what you see in Obama? It is called leadership.
Posted by: John's conscience | Aug 5, 2008 10:13:13 AM
Well, let's put it this way. For those of you against a person who is willing to admit they were wrong and thus "flip-flop" to what the majority of Americans want, good thing you had Bush for the last 8 years. He stood by what he said and wanted to do no matter how wrong he was. He sure was no flip-flopper. And good thing...he has ensured that America has remained strong, both politically and economically.
Posted by: LOfromMO | Aug 5, 2008 10:15:44 AM
Unfortunately, through this whole race, McCain has been getting a free ride from the press. It started with his two spiritual advisor who hated gays, to memory slips on worls leaders. I guess they want to give the "old guy" a little leeway...
Posted by: thoughtful | Aug 5, 2008 10:16:47 AM
What is wrong with the canidates changing their minds with the changing of situations we have had a president for the last 7 years be a my way or the highway unwilling to compromise unwilling to change with changing events is that what you people want another president stubborn like bush LOOK AT WHERE THAT GOT US!! it would be wrong to not change your mind depending on the situation enough with the FLIP FLOP THATS OLD POLITICTS!!!!!!!!
Posted by: angie | Aug 5, 2008 10:24:41 AM
I don't think labeling Senator McCain as dangerous is off the mark not when you consider his postions on matters of national security and his lack of understanding of economic issues. He continues to promote old ideas that have been cast aside by even our current President. He seems confused when talking about the Sunni and Shia and Kurds in Iraq and his way of dealing with Iran is to sing a song titled, "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran". Oh, and don't forget that he has ignored the problems in Afghanistan up until now. Circumstances there have been bad for at least a year. And, He admits he knows little about ecomomics and yes, he can hire experts, but if he can't grasp what they are saying who is going to make these very important decisions regarding our economy? The term- take advantage of comes to mind.
Frankly, this country can't go through another 4 years of policies so closely in line with President Bush's. And, when you consider all of the above, I think Kerry was right on the mark.
Please stop playing defense for McCain.
Posted by: MAC | Aug 5, 2008 10:27:01 AM
To me, the most eggregious flip flop of the entire campaign cycle has been McCain previously saying:
The American people deserve a positive campaign for president, and I'd rather lose the election than give them anything less...
And running the kind of childish and even dishonorable campaign he has been since saying those words.
Posted by: Paul | Aug 5, 2008 10:55:47 AM
Mac: "I don't think labeling Senator McCain as dangerous is off the mark not when you consider his postions on matters of national security and his lack of understanding of economic issues."
Let's not give McCain any passes - that's the media's job. Let's call him out for the ignorant comments he's made on national security and foreign affairs, too.
The conventional wisdom is these were all 'mispeaks,' and some even see them as signs of dementia. But what if he really doesn't know anything much about these issues, too?
The growing view of McCain is one who sees things in simplistic terms; no shades of gray. The question I have is whether he bothers to learn the details underlying those simplistic views?
Posted by: Paul | Aug 5, 2008 10:59:28 AM
Maybe someone should run an ad that says:
Low-road John; he was against negative campaigning before he was for it. But the question remains what else is McCain for? We know he's against losing. We know he's against anyone than him being the next president. We know he's against properly inflating your tires. But what's he for? Oh, right, an oil spill off every beach.
Would it be a completely fair ad? No. Does the McCain campaign deserve fair ads? No.
Posted by: Paul | Aug 5, 2008 11:04:27 AM
McCain has certainly gone on the attack, but I wouldn't call it "low road". It's a bit humorous, and meant to point out flaws without pure negativity. Were Obama running these ads people would be raving how funny they are.
That said, Obama's race baiting is negative politics par excellance.
Funny how things turn out. The "post-racial" nominee turns out to be the "race baiter" nominee.
Posted by: JA | Aug 5, 2008 11:12:48 AM
Aggressive? It's pathetic.
After this much hypes, all this empty headed phony could come up with is 1 million, less than 0.77% of current number of vehicles on the road, electric plug-in hybrids, 10% of corn energy, and making you to keep your house 15% colder in the winter of Maine, and 15% hotter in Florida.
Did he tell you the electricity he wants you to run the pathetic 0.77% plug-ins is generated by burning coals and natural gas?
Yuk, do you know what that gives you? Aside from 80% less efficient than directly using gasoline?
It's a phony to the bone policy, directly aired out from a clueless empty suit.
Posted by: fact check | Aug 5, 2008 11:20:02 AM
"making you to keep your house 15% colder in the winter of Maine, and 15% hotter in Florida.
Did he tell you the electricity he wants you to run the pathetic 0.77% plug-ins is generated by burning coals and natural gas?"
"making you"
I don't think he is forcing it. Its more like an urge to the Americans. Its like the old war poster..."I want YOU to save some resources."
but he needs to flip flop for nuclear energy and he needs to flip flop about 1 million hybrids. 1 million FCX are an investment...hybrids will be useless when the gas is 8 bucks. Even though your mileage will be double, so will the gas prices be. It will be exactly like present day situation. FCX = $21600 right now. We just need to help them get more H2 fuel stations all around US. 127 horsepower sucks but a little more than Prius at 110 and way more useful for energy situation.
Posted by: Sean | Aug 5, 2008 11:33:47 AM
New creation by Gov. Richardson, 0bama's chief energy adviser:
Carbon clean coal energy!
Yup, coals that will not produce CO2!!!
That explains why 0bama is so hyped to use electricity generated by burning coals to pump your electric plug-ins for his long-term energy strategy.
Posted by: fact check | Aug 5, 2008 11:37:24 AM
Post a comment



