Tom Friedman of NYTimes gives Kerry some praise

[TayTay]

From Today's NYTimes OpEd page (subscription only) http://www.nytimes.com/pages/opinion/index.html

The defeat of Senator Joe Lieberman by the upstart antiwar Democrat Ned Lamont
has sparked a firestorm of debate about the direction of the Democratic Party.
My own heart is with those Democrats who worry that just calling for a pullout
from Iraq, while it may be necessary, is not a sufficient response to the
biggest threat to open societies today -- violent, radical Islam. Unless
Democrats persuade voters -- in the gut -- that they understand this larger
challenge, it's going to be hard for them to win the presidency.

That said, though, the Democratic mainstream is nowhere near as dovish as
critics depict. Truth be told, some of the most constructive, on-the-money
criticism over the past three years about how to rescue Iraq or improve the
broader ''war on terrorism'' has come from Democrats, like Joe Biden, Carl
Levin, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Bill Clinton.

But whatever you think of the Democrats, the important point is this: They are
not the party in power today.

What should really worry the country is not whether the Democrats are being
dragged to the left by antiwar activists who haven't thought a whit about the
larger struggle we're in. What should worry the country is that the Bush team
and the Republican Party, which control all the levers of power and claim to
have thought only about this larger struggle, are in total denial about where
their strategy has led.

Besides a few mavericks like Chuck Hagel and John McCain on Iraq and Dick Lugar
and George Shultz on energy, how many Republicans have stood up and questioned
the decision-making that has turned the Iraq war into a fiasco? Had more of
them done so, instead of just mindlessly applauding the administration, the
White House might have changed course when it had a chance.

I highlighted Dick Lugar for a reason above. I have been meaning to post this really wonky stuff for a while now and just haven't had time. Sen. Lugar is one of the better Republicans on the Hill and has been good at trying to point out the dangers of America's current policies and especially good this year at holding hearings on the broader issues involved in our Middle East policies.

The wonky part: I call your attention, during this Congressional recess, to a series of hearings that Sen. Lugar has called to discuss the role of oil in our foreign policy and how we have to change course. This, for my money, was one of the best set of hearings held this year, even if Sen. Kerry didn't attend. (Well, he does know this stuff already and staff was there.)

These hearings can be found at:

The Hidden Cost of Oil

Energy Security and Oil Dependence

Oil Dependence and Economic Risk


The first hearing, Hidden Costs of Oil, had some great testimony appended to it that you can peruse on the web site. In particular, I recommend the testimony submitted by Milton R. Copulos, President, National Defense Council Foundation. This is a mind-blowing bit from that paper:

In 2003, as noted, we estimated that the “hidden cost” of imported oil totaled $304.9
billion. When we revisited the external costs, taking into account the higher prices for
crude oil and increased defense expenditures we found that the “hidden cost” had
skyrocketed to $779.5 billion in 2005. That would be equivalent to adding $4.10 to the
price of a gallon of gasoline if amortized over the total volume of imports. For Persian
Gulf imports, because of the enormous military costs associated with the region, the
“hidden cost” was equal to adding $7.41 cents to the price of a gallon of gasoline. When
the nominal cost is combined with this figure it yields a “true” cost of $9.53 per gallon,
but that is just the start.

Because the price of crude oil is expected to remain the $60 range this year, expenditures
for imports are expected to be at least $320 billion this year. That amounts to an increase
of $70 billion in spending for foreign oil in just one year. That increase would raise the
total import premium or “hidden cost” to $825.1 billion, or almost twice the President’s
$419.3 billion defense budget request for fiscal year 2006. If all costs are amortized over
the total volume of imports, that would be equivalent to adding $5.04 to the price of a
gallon of gasoline. For Persian Gulf imports, the premium would be $8.35. This would
bring the “real” price of a gallon of gasoline refined from Persian Gulf oil to $10.86. At
these prices the “real” cost of filling up a family sedan is $217.20, and filling up a large
SUV $325.80.

I found this stuff really, really important, especially when talking about the real cost of our being in Iraq and the real cost of not having an energy policy in this country that is truly based on the actual costs of energy. Sen. Kerry undoubtedly knows this stuff and it is great background for what he said in his energy speech at Faneuil Hall in June. I highly recommend this series, or at least skimming the docs that are posted at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee web site for an eye-opening look at what the hell the US is and isn't doing about oil. Ahm, dammit, it got me to praise a Republican, Dick Lugar, for holding these hearings in the first place. It must have a lot of merit for me to do that.

Hey, occasionally, I assign homework. Eat your spinach and go read some good stuff. You'll thank me later on, promise. (Mom, no more homework, it's summer. But this really good stuff and sometimes you need a good dose of the wonk. Honest.)

[karynnj]

1. It is nice that he listed Kerry

It's interesting that he listed Bill and Hillary as their criticism or their alternatives has been uuh understated.

I'll try to do the homework.

[TayTay]

2. Thanks! Summer school is the worst, I know.

But I swear, even a skim of the submitted testimony is good. Honest.

Lugar did good work in holding those hearings.

Friedman owed Kerry that much. And, for what it's worth, Kerry's statement son Iraq are so much more in-depth and substantive than what the Jr. Senator from NY has been saying.

[Blaukraut]

3. An incredible wealth of info in the hearings statements

A lot of it we already know - just as our good senator already knows - but to see numbers and figures and dates assigned to what was only an abstract to me before is pretty frightening.
Dr. Huntington had it right when he said the better course of action is not just reducing or dependence on imported oil, but reducing our dependence on oil. Period.
Thanks Tay. Bookmarking those links.