Center for a New American Security

There seems to be an emphasis on telling truth to power, pragmatism, and looking beyond the event horizon for "equities" or commanding heights.

We have some genuine challenges but one item I see that is consistent is the energy issue.

I think that if McCain had tapped Woolsey (not that Woolsey would have accepted) but hypothetically.. if the GOP had tried a departure from the status-quo that they might have won. The point is that Palin was kind of positioned as a gas-station to the 48 states, and of course there was that Alaskan pipe-line that was being built, and that made the GOP well Mavericky.

But even the oil companies knew that the market wanted change, the oil companies have their own think-tanks and they can tell truth to power as long as they keep the communications internal, and BP went beyond petroleum, other CEO's took a year off and toured America, but the GOP?? Well they missed the memo.

Drill Baby Drill was almost tailored to propose that we could nationalize the ubiquitous commodity oil and then put it in a mavericky pipeline that didn't exist, and then deliver it to the lower 48 who hasn't eaten moose. Or it was a repressed reference to fornication, I think the former message was the intent, I can tell the truth here with a waterboard as my witness.

But.. what if.. what if.. McCain had been a Maverick and teamed with Woolsey with a real Mavericky plan to transform our energy and national security policy? I mean talking real change????

We will never know. As a registered republican I was disappointed that the GOP did not lead on this effort, and I guess that is why we need more pragmatism than mavericky now...

Thats the truth irrespective of if it was populare or not.

Alaska oil will not be nationalized, there is no magical pipeline to the nearest walmart, we can't drill our way out of the national security challenge of energy.

I guess we needed a real plan?

I guess now that sentiment doesn't count as maverick.