Phil Cogan's arguments strike us nothing more than some fancy footwork intended to divert attention away from the fact that neither he nor anyone representing President Obama has answered Palin's question:
"So why is it that during these tough times, when we have great needs at home, the Obama White House is prepared to send more than two billion of your hard-earned tax dollars to Brazil...?"Petrobras, which is owned by Brazil's government, has had its share of low earnings during the lean months that most of the world's oil companies have experienced due to low market prices for crude. But the company, in a recent report by Zack's, an investment research firm, should see its earnings increase in the medium term. And with Latin America's largest economy, Brazil, according to Reuters, appears headed for recovery. So why does it need our money?
A recent IBD editorial lists several reasons, some of them political, why the loan doesn't seem like such a bad idea to the editors. But none of the arguments on either side of the issue strike us as being relevant until Sarah Palin's question is answered. In fact, the IBD editorial poses essentially the same query:
"If lending money to Brazil for oil is a good idea, isn't freeing our own companies to develop America's vast reserves an even better one?"So it would be helpful if the Obama administration would answer it instead of taking cheap shots at Palin like this footnote to the Politico piece:
"This is like her and her death panels," the official said.That doesn't answer the lady's question. But clearly that wasn't the intent of the anonymous White House source who planted it in Politico's fertile dirt.
While we're waiting on an answer to Sarah Palin's question, we have one of our own. If this loan, from one leftist government to another, is simply an attempt to purchase political goodwill from the Brazilians, why doesn't the Obama Administration just stand up and say so?
Related: Flopping Aces exposes the Soros connection here, and Examiner Nola Redd has some good questions of her own about the deal here. Carlos Echevarria's take is here.
- JP
But there is a more fundamental question here.
ReplyDeletePres. Lula da Silva, a leftist, went center right in his first term, was re-elected in '06 but has now gone hard left again and is a de facto member of the ALBA, friendly with both Venezuela and Cuba.
His corrupt government is seeking the election of his chief of staff next year, an erstwhile guerrilla fighter, Dilma Roussef...
Moreover, the Brazilians with Chinese and Indian support are even proposing a new intl currency to substitute the US dollar as the currency of preference.....
Brazilian armed forces in the Amazaon are already making direct threats and using caustic, belligerent rhetoric against any US personnel that will be stationed in Colombia, under the bases accord.
Why doesn't Lula ask his partner in crime Hugo Chavez for the 2 billion????????????? or the Chinese? or the Russians?
Palin is totally right on the underlying political issue but this even transcends the political discussion of energy.
But what is to be expected from this new regime in DC>>>>
Excellent insight, Carlos. Like we said, "from one leftist governmjent to another."
ReplyDelete- JP
thanks buddy for the hat tip...
ReplyDeleteWhy does Left is strongly against cigarettes but promotes drugs? Well, most unstable regimes and sundry Leftist governments depend on drug money to survive.
ReplyDeleteThe same thing applies here. They want to suppress domestic American production so that cost of oil is high which in turn will buttress anti-American forces like Russia, Iran etc.
The left wants to undermine American "hegemony" at any cost. That's their underlying goal and they'll take any road to achieve that.