The Washington Post spelled out the reason why increased demonization of “Big Oil” by calling for a windfall profits taxes are wrong:

Making Exxon surrender money that is now falling into its lap would not necessarily affect its longer-term plans or incentives. Indeed, some of Big Oil’s “windfall” already will go to the government: The more profit the companies earn, the more corporate income tax they pay. But to add a five-year tax increase on top of that to pay for a one-year gift to voters would, indeed, increase the cost of doing business. That cost would be passed along in forgone investment in new production, lower dividends for pension funds and other shareholders, and higher prices at the pump — thus socking it to the consumers whom the plan is supposed to help. If oil prices fall, there might be no windfall profits to tax. Then the Obama rebate would have to be paid for through spending cuts, taxes on something else or borrowing.

The Post does a wonderful job of telling its readers why increasing taxes on oil companies will backfire on everyone. Dems continued use of “Big Oil” as a demonizing mantra is archaic. The Post editorial writers seemed to even mock its use.

So the Dems are attempting to demonize their way out of this with a an outdated populist message that is falling on more deaf ears all the time. Speaker Pelosi’s line in the sand on drilling continues to be a drag on Dem credibility on energy as Republican’s in Congress stayed in Washington to grandstand in a way thats kept the issue burning. They’ve lost a reliable ally in the Post, too.