Bipartisanship, perhaps an oxymoron already, brings us an apparent oxymoron: "Drilling for Clean Energy" from Representatives Jim Marshall and Roscoe Bartlett, writing in the WaPo:

...a strategic plan to use the remaining value of our federally owned oil and natural gas reserves to fund a clean, affordable and independent energy future for America, a goal worthy of short-term environmental concessions and risks.

Their idea is to open up ANWR and offshore for drilling, but under changed financial terms that would capture more of the revenues for the federal government, and ensure that the money goes to develop solar, wind, nuclear, and "better" biofuels. Read more…

As a more famous blogger regularly observes, please kill me:

Shifting from his previous opposition to expanded offshore drilling, the Illinois senator told a Florida newspaper he could get behind a compromise with Republicans and oil companies to prevent gridlock over energy.

Republican rival John McCain, who earlier dropped his opposition to offshore drilling, has been criticizing Obama on the stump and in broadcast ads for clinging to his opposition as gasoline prices topped $4 a gallon. Polls indicate these attacks have helped McCain gain ground on Obama.

"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama said in an interview with The Palm Beach Post.

"If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage — I don't want to be so rigid that we can't get something done."

Oh noes!

Those are the mad negotiation skillz that are going to get us universal health care?

And on the question of whether it's better to be rigid or to get something done, one acronym: Read more…