I just made my daily visit to El Tinklenberg’s blog and found a laugher quote in this post:

Rep. Michele Bachmann, who has called for domestic drilling in Alaska, once again proved that she favors extremist partisanship over moderate compromise. The 6th District doesn’t need a representative who demonstrates my-way-or-the-highway leadership that looks out for the pocketbooks of Big Oil over the pocketbooks of Minnesotans.

Michele Bachmann voted against this gimmick of a bill. This wasn’t a compromise. It would’ve been total surrender to the short-sighted CYA policies (I use that term lightly) of Pelosi’s Democrats.

Questions for the Tinklenberg campaign: If this was such a moderate compromise, why did Democrats bring this up under a closed rule? If it’s such a moderate compromise, why didn’t they allow any amendments to the bill? Why didn’t Speaker Pelosi let many Democrats vote to open drilling on the OCS? Considering the fact that there wasn’t a chance for real debate or compromise, who’s the “my-way-or-the-highway partisan”?

Mr. Tinklenberg talks about Rep. Bachmann’s “my-way-or-the-highway leadership.” Why isn’t he complaining about Nancy Pelosi’s “my-way-or-the-highway leadership”? After all, Ms. Pelosi’s leadership didn’t allow any amendments. Rep. Bachmann didn’t have any say in that closed rule.

Now that we’ve established the facts of this short-sighted legislation, it’s time to ask Mr. Tinklenberg if he would’ve supported legislation that wouldn’t have allowed a vote on actually increasing oil production? Would Mr. Tinklenberg support bringing adequate supplies of oil online? Or would he have blindly followed Ms. Pelosi’s instructions?

Finally, would Mr. Tinklenberg have sided with 74 percent of likely voters who favor opening up exploration on the OCS? Or would he have voted for band-aid solutions instead of voting for real solutions?

Technorati Tags: Gas Crisis, Nancy Pelosi, El Tinklenberg, Amendments, Oil Exploration, Michele Bachmann, OCS, Election 2008

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog