Republicans and Democrats might not agree on whether we should drill in Anwar, but when they pontificate on "energy independence" -- the idea that America should supply all of its own oil and gas -- their talking points are pretty much interchangeable. Obama wants to be "independent" in 10 years; McCain is also a hawk on the issue and might have brought Sarah Palin onto his ticket, in part, because she's the governor of energy-rich Alaska.

This "energy independence" consensus seems to derive less from environmentalism than from a general distaste for the people who sell us the crude. Although no politician would ever make it explicit, the image evoked is of a cruel desert sheikh, lounging on cushions while being fanned by his 50-odd wives and using all his oil revenues to fund terrorism or build ridiculously tall buildings in Dubai. Such a character might shut off supply, "blackmailing America" with oil, or some other dastardly deed.

Though it's true that there are some rather unpleasant people in the global oil biz, the U.S. imports most of its crude from non-threatening Canada. The dreaded Middle East accounts for only 17 percent of U.S. consumption.

More importantly, there's the question of whether oil can actually be used as a weapon by any rabid sheikh or crazed dictator.

After Saudi Arabia and Mexico, the largest supplier of oil to the U.S. is Venezuela -- yes, the country run by Hugo Chavez, who's built his international reputation on denouncing the imperial, perfidious Yankee and who, many neoconservatives warn, is a threat to the American Way. Why is it that Hugo sells so much oil to a country he so despises? The answer has little to do with foreign policy or ideology and everything to do with geography. Oil is priced on a global commodities market; however, where we actually get the black stuff is dependent on pipelines and ease of transportation.

So, let's say that Hugo really wants to stick it to Uncle Sam by cutting off all oil to the country, as he's sometimes threatened. As David Henderson points out in his study of the "oil weapon," the Venezuelan dictator could do this in one of two ways.

Either he could dramatically reduce production -- which for him would mean drastically reducing revenues. (And let's not forget that much of "21st-century socialism" is funded by Hugo's state-run oil company, Citgo.)

If Hugo doesn't want to lower production, then he'd have to find a new buyer of the crude he usually sells to Uncle Sam. Let's say he insists on selling solely to China. Well, if the Chinese decide to work with Hugo, this means that either they or their former providers would soon have a glut of crude on their hands -- and be looking for another buyer. Sooner or later, the excess oil would be sold to America, with the added transportation costs bumping up prices at the pump only slightly.

Put simply, the "oil weapon" fires blanks, and there are far better things for politicians to worry about than "energy independence." For if Hugo Chavez and anti-American sheikhs are willing to sell us the black stuff, then probably most anyone would.

[Photo credit: Department of Energy]