But McCain himself said on the transcendent issues of the day, he is in agreement with Bush.

So I guess McCain must not feel that energy is a transcendent issue, putting him at odds with the American people.

Man, there is so much fodder for the Obama campaign to work with here.

As a casual observer, I found it hard not to conclude that Obama's criticisms of the gas tax holiday is what helped the swing in Indiana and North Carolina. I'm open to being corrected, but I am inclined to believe the Obama campaign learned the same lesson.

As such, I think we should expect, in that first town hall/debate, Obama will hit hard the false promises inherent in the off-shore drilling proposals out of the McCain campaign.

Furthermore, I suspect that the Obama campaign might be holding back some criticisms on this and other issues (McCain's law-breaking regarding public financing) to have some zingers at their first debate.

Sounds like McSame's internal polling is showing the same thing.
Why else the pander-a-day reversals on many issues:
off-shore drilling, "may revisit ANWR," gas tax holiday, mega-million prize for a battery-operated car.

of course obama holds a lead over mccain on energy mccain has flip flopped so many times on this issue that we dont even know if hes still talking about energy

http://www.sensico.wordpress.com

Let's look at H.R.6. passed in 20005. This bill passed and it is one of the reasons why gas prices are so high.

Now let's look at the who voted for that bill:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00213

If you aren't familiar with the ramifications that were known beforehand, see this report by the House Oversight Committee:

http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20050726164801-76366.pdf

Parts of the report are here:

H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2005, takes the United States in the wrong
direction on key energy issues. It has four fundamental flaws:
• H.R. 6 undermines national security because it does not address U.S.
dependence on foreign oil and makes nuclear materials less secure.
• H.R. 6 harms the environment because it opens new loopholes in
environmental and public health laws that threaten water supplies, public
lands, and public input. It also fails to address global warming and authorizes
pre-drilling activities in coastal areas.
• H.R. 6 wastes tax dollars because it provides huge new subsidies for the oil,
gas, coal, and nuclear industries.
• H.R. 6 fails to protect consumers because it increases gasoline prices and does not prevent energy market abuses.

There is a strong rationale for providing government financial support to new
technologies and industries, where such investment will speed their development
and provide substantial societal benefits. However, the rationale for giving taxpayer
dollars to mature and wealthy industries is less clear.
H.R. 6 provides billions of dollars in tax breaks and direct spending to the oil and
gas, coal, and nuclear industries, and it authorizes tens of billions more.17 Some
of the subsidies include the following:
• Subsidies to the Oil Industry. The bill provides over $3 billion over ten
years in tax breaks and direct spending to the oil and gas industry, and
authorizes at least an additional $1 billion of subsidies. The oil and gas
industry is experiencing record profits.
• Subsidies to the Coal Industry. The bill provides roughly $3 billion over ten
years in tax breaks and direct spending to the coal industry, and authorizes
billions more.
• Subsidies to the Nuclear Industry. The bill provides an insurance policy to
the nuclear power industry for development of new plants that could cost taxpayers
roughly $2 billion. It also provides nuclear power over $1 billion in
tax breaks and at least another $1 billion of authorized subsidies.
Major deficiencies in the legislation that affect consumers include the following:
• No Provisions to Reduce Gasoline Prices. Gasoline prices have reached
record highs this year, with prices per gallon regularly exceeding $2.00. H.R.
6 does not contain provisions that would provide consumers with relief from
these rising fuel prices.
• An Expensive Ethanol Mandate. H.R. 6 requires motorists to use 7.5 billion
gallons of ethanol per year by 2012. A recent report by the Energy
Information Administration indicates that in 2012 this mandate will result in
an increase in consumer costs of $1.7 billion.18 This is due to the fact that
gasoline will cost more and consumers will need to use more of it, since
ethanol only contains about two-thirds of the energy that gasoline does.
• Denial of Refunds for Western States Overcharged by Enron and other
Energy Companies. Enron, Reliant, and other energy companies
manipulated Western energy markets in 2000 and 2001 to charge excessive
prices for energy. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has acted to
arbitrarily limit the amount of refunds available to Western consumers. H.R.
6 fails to contain provisions that would reverse this FERC policy and ensure
that consumers in the West are refunded their overcharges.
• Inadequate Market Manipulation Penalties. In case after case, companies
that have manipulated the energy markets in order to increase their profits
have had penalties assessed that were insufficient to recoup the profits
generated by the illegal market manipulation. Conferees rejected an
amendment that would have allowed FERC to assess treble damages in cases
where it was warranted by particularly egregious behavior.

And in case you didn't follow the link to see who voted for this bill, It was Obama. McCain voted against it. McCain is more responsible when it comes to handling the energy crisis. Obama is for big business... actions speak louder than words.