The Energy Debacle: John Kerry Was Right Last Year

Things look bleak in the realm of “oil- supply-and-demand.” Although Congress just passed the long awaited Energy Bill, it will have no effect on the oil crisis. None what so ever – “zero, by even its supporters’ admission.”

According to the Energy Department, for the next 18 months, the demand by ravenous consumers, not just here but most especially in the developing world, with China in the lead, is going to keep escalating. In the United States, demand should ratchet up to 21.3 million barrels a day as the economy keep growing slowly.

Over time, however, it gets worse, a situation completely ignored by last week’s energy legislation, which is likely to be the last major word on the subject until President Bush is safely retired to Texas.

This bleak outlook on The Energy Debacle is neatly explained in Thomas Oliphant’s column today. He also points out alternatives that could have made a difference in the Energy Bill and he ends by echoing words we’ve all heard a lot recently… “John Kerry was right last year.”

To do stuff like this responsibly, there would have to be a reliable stream of revenue — and it could have been tapped simply by diverting existing revenues from the royalties energy companies are already paying the government. The flow of funds would have been at least $2 billion annually, enough to carry out the alternative policy.

That, oversimplified, is what one of Congress’s most effective leaders on energy and environmental matters proposed. Senator John Kerry was right last year, and his ideas remain to mock the outrage of what has actually transpired.

The irony is that as America’s energy situation worsens, Kerry’s ideas remain the ones most likely to be followed — once the country wakes up.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to The Energy Debacle: John Kerry Was Right Last Year

  1. Indie Liberal says:

    Is there anything he hasn’t been right about? Too bad so many stayed at home cause Kerry “didn’t inspire me and it’s about the lesser of two evils.”

  2. Marjorie G says:

    You forget that he wasn’t anti-war enough by the IWR vote.

  3. Indie Liberal says:

    True Marjorie.

    Was he really Anti-War? I know some were calling him a Pro-War, Bushlike stay the course candidate.

  4. Indie Liberal

    Some people will never see the light or understand what true inspiration is.

  5. Marjorie G says:

    Indie, that was a throw away remark. JK never wanted wanted war, before, during or after, and definitely not for regime change.

    Despite against all those unjust wars, he wasn’t purist enough for what was in the middle of a media enhanced fear campaign. It was a tough campaign.

    Just yesterday, here in NY, I heard that what we need is an anti-war candidate in ’08. With terrorism not ending anytime soon, without having a pro-security Kerry, we’ll have another McGovern/McCarthy.

  6. florida dem says:

    Yeah, on DK most of the posters seem to be throwing their support (so far) at Wes Clark because he has always been what they term “anti-war.” I like Wes Clark too but this belief that only the candidate who’s always been “anti-war” should be the 2008 nominee bothers me for several reasons:

    -Most annoyingly, it continues the myth of what the IWR was really about.

    -Second of all, the view that the 2008 candidate has to be someone who either didn’t vote for, or was consistently against, the IWR is just simply not true. That’s like saying only a prochoice or antichoice candidate can get elected. This speaks more to the candidate preferences of the Dean and Kucinich wings of the party than the majority of the party, or the majority of American voters for that matter. In 2008, Americans will be looking for someone to keep us safe and get us out of Iraq as soon as possible and as smoothly as possible. The truth is the Deaniacs are looking for someone who was, or in Clark’s case would have, voted against the IWR to make up for having a candidate who did begrudgingly support the IWR in 2004. This is similar to all of their fervor about making Dean chair of the DNC – it was all about making amends for his primary loss. Plain and simple, alot of these folks are still fighting the primary battle and will continue to in 2008.

  7. Indie Liberal says:

    I agree 100% florida dem. The General (Clark) wins every single poll at DU. I like the General, it just feels like some of his overzealous supporters turn me off sometimes.

  8. BlueWashington says:

    Hi florida dem,

    I hear you in regards to the Deaniacs over at DK. It still looks like those guys are trying to figure out where to hang their hats, whether it be Clark (an interesting choice for them), Finegold (I’ve heard his name tossed around over there) or someone else.
    I do know this, my guy Kerry has been working behind the sceens for various politicians and events around the country. For example – Kerry sent a letter to folks here in WA to help fund Maria Cantwell’s re-election campain; also I noticed Kerry sent out a letter to those folks in the East for a Civil Rights get-to-gether over the weekend in Atlanta. Does Kerry need the Deaniacs, not really. But, it looks as though JK is working on building collateral with the general Democratic caucus – which is fine buy me.

  9. florida dem says:

    In the last election, the Internet proved to be a wonderful, indispensible tool. The only real negative imo is that it helped to create these intense, sometimes vicious, factions of Dems who think they have more people power than they actually do. Deaniacs and the MSM believed that the strong online presence Dean had meant he was a shoe in for the nom. However, they learned his strong online presence was in fact deceiving and didn’t account for the majority of Americans who are not online political junkies. Deaniacs’ one true advantage remains the same however, despite what happened with Dean, the MSM still takes alot of their cues from the blogger community. So if liberal bloggers are cool towards a candidate, the MSM reports Dems are lukewarm about said candidate. That, in turn, is repeated by the collective herds of jaded journalists and then it becomes the public perception that’s continually reinforced with repetition. The only reason MSM isn’t reporting on how the liberal blogs are cool on Hillary is because they are all for Hill running because it’s truly a good, history-making news story and a ratings winner which means the newtorks will make lots of $$$.

  10. florida dem says:

    Hi Blue-
    If JK decides to run, getting the nom in 08 will be tough because the other candidates will, directly or indirectly, label him a loser who doesn’t deserve a second shot. They will make Dems, who are so desperate for a victory, scared to vote for him for fear he will cause a third consecutive Repub presidential turn. It won’t be pretty. The Repub’s race won’t be either, btw. By the time the noms are decided, most Americans won’t want to vote for either person.

    The 08 race will be interesting because it will be wide open for both sides. Lots of potential for history-making moments from Hill – and JK too. That’s why the media is so consumed with 08 now.

  11. BlueWashington says:

    I don’t know florida dem,

    If there is a new crop of candidates, then perhaps the loser tag might fit JK. But those who were were in the running in the caucus’ and primaries last year don’t have much room to talk.

    As far as Hillary goes, I’m sorry, but she’s way to divisive. You think the Swift Boaters were bad? Lord, I just shake my head. She really should just stay Senator from New York.

    THat’s just my really concerned opinion.

  12. Florida Dem

    I think “if” JK decides to run in 08, he won’t have that tough of a time. He’s been building on his already strong base and he’ll have a couple of advantages that the others don’t. One being his 3 million strong email list that has grown since the election. It’s my understanding that he has not lost his fundraisers also, so that another plus. Hillary will fizzle in my opinion and the SBL will tear her to bits. They won’t have anything on JK that hasn’t already been disproven.

    As for the rapid’s on DK… well one thing that is needed is to build up a strong alternative. I hope that the Dem Daily will become that for many. In less than 2 weeks online today’s traffic was off the charts thanks to links from other big blogs. I’m open to adding more voices to DemDaily as well, so if anyone has stuff to submit, let me know.

  13. Indie Liberal says:

    florida dem and anybody else,

    If JK decides to run, how can he win over people who say he doesn’t deserve a second chance cause he lost to “The WORST President Ever?” It would be unfortunate he were to run, but not win the nomination.

    I know the Dems don’t believe in second chances. There are some people who say that a Northeastern Liberal won’t have a chance in the South. I think the MSM made he and Momma T look very disconnected from the American people. Yet, Kerry gets blamed by everyone for not pointing out how bad Bush really is/was. Wasn’t that the job of the Democratic party too?

    I am still somewhat mad at this woman (the day after the 1st debate) saying that the Dems should have nominated someone else cause Kerry didn’t close out strongly.

    Plus what about his Senate seat in 08?

  14. Blue Washington…

    LOL! We ain’t seen nothing with Hill yet… they haven’t even started on her.

    By the by I’m in LA and I got the Civil Rights March in Atlanta, email too.

  15. Indie Liberal says:


    It’s good to hear that Kerry is spreading the word about the Civil Rights March. Only question is will anybody listen to him? I know Jesse and others were none to happy when he conceded so soon, as well as use MLK Day to talk about voter disenfranchisment when he could have said that in his DNC acceptance speech and on the campaign trail.

    These aren’t my words. I just remember reading Rev. Jackson’s reaction to Kerry’s concession, and Tavis Smiley’s remarks.

  16. Indie Liberal

    JK would have to give up his Senate seat as MA will not allow him to run for both. The tide is turning for JK… I know this. I watch the blogs… DK may have a lot of traffic and DU too, but other well known blogs are posting more and more of JK’s stuff. I know this because I send it to them and they link to it.

    The whining, pissing and moaning is turning off a lot of Dems. We need cohesion, not divisiveness. Hillary is blowing hot air with this early stuff, before she has even secured her Senate seat.

    The press is also far more complimentary to JK then they were for a long time. Got to have faith and tell all the whiners to stuff it!

  17. Indie

    Never look a gift horse in the mouth. If JK gets people there and helps to raise money to get people there, that’s what counts. Right now JK is doing everything he needs to do. He’s showing himself as the leader of the Dem party, whether some people want to admit it or not. He’s getting more press, taking more action than most and he’s got a lot of clout being the 2004 Dem candidate. A lot people still feel the election was stolen, and JJ and T Smiley can complain all they likem but anyone with any smarts knows that fraud is the hardest thing in the world to prove.

  18. Indie Liberal says:


  19. Nick says:

    Indie Liberal

    I can’t tell for sure, but I sense that you have heard (probably both before and after November 2) that a NorthEast liberal can’t wn votes in the South. Two things about that: 1) Its probably true and 2) its irrelevant. Florida is a swing state now, and there’s really no reason to waste time in the South. Except for NH in 2000 (when Nader cost Gore that state) all 20 Kerry states (including Washington DC) have voted Dem since at least 1992 and some since 1988. These Dem 20 (while they are all not yet safely blue) give Dems a base of 252 Electoral votes (EVs). WHo needs the South?
    More importantly, any Democrat who wins only the Northeast and the 4 Midwest states that Kerry (and CLinton and Gore) won, wins 175 EVs. The South in contrast, only has 161 EVs. Dems do need to broaden their appeal in rural areas, and Kerry’s 40% of the rural vote was a step in the right direction. His 40% of the rural vote (while winning the urban and nonsouthern suburban vote) was a better rural showing than all Democrats since 1976 except for 1996 Clinton (44%) and “Massachusetts Liberal” Mike Dukakis (44%). If he runs again, hte questions Kerry must answer (and for whose solutions he should help achieve in 2006) are: 1) Senator, how can Dems consolidate and expand down ballot in the Kerry 20 and 2) Senator, what makes you think you can improve on your 2004 totals in rural areas?
    And don’t worry about Kerry’s Senate seat folks. If he runs for it in 2008, he’ll win. If he vacates it, well, no Republican has been elected to the Senate from Massachusetts since Sen. Brooke (a black Republican) was re-elected to a 2nd term in 1972. Ted Kennedy’s seat has been Democrat since his brother won it in 1952, and Kerry’s seat has been Democrat since 1978, when Tsongas was elected to his one term as Senator.

  20. Nick says:

    Some facts y’all should be aware of:
    In 1964-the big 8 swing states (Ariz. Colo., Nev., NM, Iowa, Missouri, Ohio, and West Va.) accounted for 72 EVs. In 2004 they STILL count for 72 EVs (albeit with a slightly greater SW flavour than in 1964). Had the election of 2004 had the 1964 electoral map (or for that matter the 1980 map), Kerry would have won 270 EVs to W’s 268 with just the states he carried in 2004.
    Unfortunately, while the “Swing 8” stayed at 72 EVs, the Kerry states lost 18 EVs (mainly from NY and Pa.) while the 23 Bush states (the 11 GOP nonosouthern states and the 12 southern states (11 Confederate states plus Kentucky) had a net gain of 18.
    Some will argue, as they already have, that the Dems can’t renominae Kerry, their nominee must appeal to the South. My answer: actually we can win without the South, but appealing to Florida would be nice (and JK got 47% of the Florida vote in 2004). As for the other southern states: You won’t bring home dinner if you hunt where the ducks aren’t.
    From 1964-2004, some Bush states had the same number of EVs as before. Here’s the breakdown of the Bush states that gained and lost EVs:
    Indiana (-2)
    ND (-1)
    SD (-1)
    Kansas (-1)
    Oklahoma (-1)
    Kentucky (-1)
    Louisiana (-1)
    Mississippi (-1)
    Alabama (-1)
    Utah (+1)
    Virginia (+1)
    NC (+2)
    Georgia (+3)
    Texas (+9)
    Florida (+13)!!!!
    The GOP gains in Utah, Va., NC, Georgia, and 4 of Texas’ 9 are cancelled out by the GOP states that lost EVs. So Texas accounts for 5 of the GOPs growth of 18. Meanwhile Florida not only grew more EVs than any other state, but its 13 new EVs account for OVER TWO-THIRDS of the growth in GOP EVs. Fortunately, FLorida has shed its old image (1952-1992) of a safe GOP state to become a swing state (albeit with GOP leanings). Make Florida a Dem state (or even a Dem leaning one) and the other 11 states are just points on the map, just like Zimbabwe or Abu Dhabi, (no offense to anybody from those countries of course).

  21. Teresa says:

    Kerry is a live act. As soon as he gets on the road and in front of crowds, he shines like no other. He totally loves it and the people respond in a huge way.
    If he decides to run, he’ll win everything easily. He has a magic with people that will come back to life in an even bigger way, since this country senses that they it was cheated out of the man it wanted.
    They will embrace him even more. The left wing anti Kerry bloggers are a small and very insignificant group. Getting smaller.
    Just ask a farmer from the heartland, and you’ll get a truer picture of what Kerry will do.

  22. Teresa says:

    I’m also beginning to think about this Iran Contra group and Kerry. Instead of seeing their downfall and incarceration, maybe his greatest triumph would be assuming the Presidency and fixing the wrongs they have done. Thus exposing them for the sham leaders they were, and coming up clean and with dignity, as is his nature.

  23. Teresa

    We’ve missed you!

    You are so right. The l-w anti Kerry bloggers group is getting smaller everyday and it will continue to get smaller. The best thing we can all do is continue to put the word out there wherever we can.

  24. Nick

    That’s the stuff. We need that stuff frontpage!

  25. Teresa says:

    In a way, I think Kerry built his base in the last campaign, which isn’t Democratic. It’s all his own and it comes from his direct link to the people. A lot of Democrats don’t understand him or are envious. He is so singular. I’ve never seen anything like it, and I don’t get enthused about politicians at all. I find them to be dishonest low lifes in general with desolate interior landscapes. But Kerry is remarkable. He got MY attention. I know he is capable of great things.
    He doesn’t pander which is why people overlook him, but when he’s out there among them, they follow out of instinct.