Much buzz has occurred over one particular portion of Woodward's new book, the part about there possibly being an offer by the Saudis to lower oil prices in time for the election.
This has been roundly criticised as a "bad thing" -- foreign interference in our election, additional confirmation of the dark and sinister ties between Bushco and the House of Saud, further evidence of the lengths to which the power elite will go to manipulate outcomes to their favor, etc.
However, here at Kerry's website, I see a clear call FOR Saudi intervention, to be initiated by bush*!
http://blog.johnkerry.com/blog/archives/001556.htmlLast night on CBS's "60 Minutes," Bob Woodward, senior editor at the Washington Post, said Saudi Arabian Prince Bandar pledged to increase Saudi oil production and thereby lower gas prices before the 2004 election. This pledge has cost US consumers literally billions of dollars in higher gas prices.
During a debate in 2000, George Bush said, “What I think the President ought to do is he ought to get on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say we expect you to open your spigots.” He continued: “The President of the United States must jawbone OPEC members to lower the price.”
Lets send a message to President Bush: Pick up the phone and and start "jawboning" OPEC and the Saudi Government to lower oil prices and stop trying to influence American elections by manipulating the price of oil.Now, to me, this sounds like asking the Saudis to manipulate oil prices for a favorable election outcome. What kind of sense does it make to campaign on an issue by demanding that your opponent exercise HIS power and influence in an area where HIS power and influence is deemed to be suspicious at best, and quite alarming at worst?
How can we mount an attack based on the close ties between bush* and the Saudis when our own candidate is calling upon bush* to USE those ties?
Why isn't Kerry out there explaining to the American people all about how the oil industry controls our politics and what we can do to take back some power of our own?
I just was struck by the irony.
And in case you haven't seen this, TPM shows how Woodward is backing away from Saudi/oil price fixing story himself:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/Even odder is that Woodward now seems to be backing off the original claim. At least that's what I gleaned from this exchange from last night between Bandar and Woodward on Larry King (a cast of three characters about whom many funny things could certainly be said) ...
KING: The story that Mr. Woodward has about the promise to lower the oil prices by the election. Your government has denied (this).
WOODWARD: That's not my story. What I say in the book is that the Saudis, and maybe you looked at this section of the book, Ambassador, that the Saudis hoped to keep oil prices low during the period for -- before the election, because of its impact on the economy. That's what I say.
BIN SULTAN: I think the way that Bob said it now is accurate. We hoped that the oil prices will stay low, because that's good for America's economy, but more important, it's good for our economy and the international economy, and this is not -- nothing unusual. President Clinton asked us to keep the prices down in the year 2000. In fact, I can go back to 1979, President Carter asked us to keep the prices down to avoid the malaise. So yes, it's in our interests and in America's interests to keep the prices down.
Clearly we're in good hands.sw
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
