TNR BLOGS

August 29, 2008 | 4:54 PM
August 29, 2008 | 4:44 PM
August 29, 2008 | 4:42 PM

August 27, 2008 | 11:42 PM
August 27, 2008 | 6:45 PM
August 27, 2008 | 6:43 PM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

August 29, 2008 | 6:47 PM
August 29, 2008 | 4:44 PM
August 28, 2008 | 6:37 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
04.08.2008
Green Gold for McCain

Readers of the Post already know that campaign contributions from large oil companies fairly gushed into the coffers of team John McCain after the candidate's June 16th flip flop on the moratorium on offshore oil drilling. And we know that his stance on the environment, while being marketed as both serious and moderate, has shifted rapidly and should now be viewed as gimmick-ridden and reactionary. But in case it wasn't clear, here (via TPM) is more damning evidence that, unfortunately, John McCain's various waffles on the environment may have finally settled--on the polluter's plate.

Ten senior Hess Corporation executives and/or members of the Hess family each gave $28,500 to the joint RNC-McCain fundraising committee, just days after McCain reversed himself to favor offshore drilling, according to Federal Election Commission reports.

Nine of these contributions, seven from Hess executives and two from members of the Hess family, came on the same day, June 24th, the records show. The total collected in the wake of McCain's reversal for the fund, called McCain Victory 2008, from Hess execs and family is $285,000.

When the Post story broke, the McCain campaign called any intimation that their candidate calculated his political stances for fundraising purposes "completely absurd." But it's not really a matter of current timing--it's one of future causation. The Hess cabal (which includes homemaking wives and suspiciously wealthy office assistants) is flexing its financial muscle and sending a clear signal to its wayward son: "More like this, please."

Of course, Hamburgling soft cash from a derrick-hugging corporation should seem particularly distateful to someone pretending to be a pro-environment reformer and a campaign-finance maverick. But in an election during which McCain's opponent has raised nearly $300 million without batting an eye, "more like this" is bound to occur. For the record, "more like this," while still trying to get elected means more

--hints at opposition to a "mandatory" tax on carbon (that's what cap-and-trade is--in or out, John?)

--fuzzing a position on votes for cap and trade

--huzzahs for a gas tax holiday that would pick the pocket of "pork barrel" programs such as highway repairs to pay oil companies like Hess.

It may even mean a total abandonment of prior principle to cling to an idea that would not relieve gas shocks or reduce emissions (where we began).

Last week McCain tried to skewer Barack Obama with Obama's own 2007 "straight talk," calling for a moratorium on mindless bashing of oil company profits. But just as Hillary Clinton's enormous haul from defense contracting companies, and both her and Obama's popularity with Wall Street banks are fair game for criticism, McCain's nonplussed acceptance of these greased handshakes is cause for concern. (As if on cue, Obama's camp releases "Pocket"--which you can see in full over on the Stump.)

--Dayo Olopade

Posted: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:59 PM with 6 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

jemerk said:

What is the point of owning a political party if it will not do your bidding?  These guys are going to lose a lot of "influence" shortly, they are going to play trumps while they still have some value.

August 4, 2008 6:45 PM

dcwood10 said:

Both candidates' caution on energy has me scratching my head - totally baffling.  No one can take Obama's nomination cinch away.  No oil man or company can take McCain's nomination away.  Neither candidate needs money, what they need are votes.

It is hard to imagine how either candidate could possibly be hurt by being perceived by voters as the most aggressive on US energy independence.  A CNN poll showed 85% of Americans favoring an "Apollo program" for energy independence in 10 years.  I think that if he clearly tied it to achieving energy independence McCain could even PROMISE to raise taxes and still stay ahead with GOP and Dem voters alike, party elite and donor opprobrium notwithstanding.

McCain has nothing to gain from $20K or $300K from oil men and everything to gain by being radical about energy alternatives.

August 5, 2008 1:38 PM

jwl2672 said:

Big Oil loves McCain? So? Al Qaeda loves Obama.  Hezbollah loves Obama.  Almondjeans loves Obama.  I suggest you idiots stay away from issues regarding who loves whom.  Because your candidate's list of supporters is a whole lot sketchier than that of McCain's.

August 5, 2008 2:15 PM

teplukhin2you said:

"in an election during which McCain's opponent has raised nearly $300 million without batting an eye"

Dayo - really, now, you're too smart to write nonsense like this. Obama has not only batted both eyes, he's been making sheep's eyes, and groveling, and preening, and pleading for donations from his "bundlers" (= Bush's "Rangers' and "Pioneers" from '04) for _going on FOUR YEARS NOW_.  And sucking up egregiously to a group of fed-gaming Wall Street greedheads who make XOM et al look like pikers. (At least the oil companies are competent and haven't cratered this nation's financial system). This is an old story, but the Times finally broke down and reported it in detail: www.nytimes.com/.../06bundlers.html

I mean, really, the shmooping is making you guys look ridiculous. You're smarter than that.

The Green Gold here is sloshing into Obama's coffers at least as fast as into McCain's. Faster, actually. Please get a little critical distance back. I miss the old TNR.

August 6, 2008 4:55 AM

cspencef said:

Nice.  Two completely off-base and nonfactual observations in a row.  

August 6, 2008 11:12 PM

r-ennis said:

"Sometimes I think environmentalists would rather see you jobless, homeless or even dead than to support fossil fuel use. The fear and loathing some have for oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear power is no excuses for us, our policy makers, or our courts to ignore energy reality and widen our energy gap by promoting renewable illusions and closing off access to the real energy we need.”

Roy Innis

Congress of Racial Equality

August 7, 2008 4:15 PM