Oh Joy. $8/Gal Gasoline is Here

Just in time for the election, Drudge has this up at his place.


UPDATE: Ooops. Make that $9 per gallon.

Mitt Romney Releases His Energy Policy

While President Obama hobnobs with NBA stars, Mitt Romney addresses the issues.

Over at Yid with Lid, there's an outline of Mitt's energy policy, along with Romney's plan from his campaign website. From what I can see, it's quite good, especially the part where millions of new manufacturing jobs are created. Mitt even goes as far as predicting that his plan will make the US energy independent by the end of his second term in office.

In other words, he'll begin to do what we should have been doing all along. If he does, expect to hear the howls of the Chicken-Little enviro-nazis far and wide.

Here are a few highlights:

State regulatory processes and permitting programs for all forms of energy development will be deemed to satisfy all requirements of federal law.

Establish a new five-year offshore leasing plan that aggressively opens new areas for development beginning with those off the coast of Virginia and the Carolinas.
 

And here's my personal favorite, the one that will doubtless cause lefty heads to get all 'splody:

Prevent agencies from using “sue-and-settle” techniques behind closed doors to circumvent the public rulemaking process, impose onerous regulations, and tie the hands of future administrations.
 

And...

Disclose federal funds spent reimbursing groups for lawsuits against the government.
 

Now this last one is an item that I'd like to see completely eliminated. Why are we paying tax dollars to environmental groups to sue our government to restrict our energy supplies? Whatever it would take to stop this insanity should be done, even if it means the repeal of the Clean Air and Water Acts. At the very minimum, they should be amended to remove these absurd provisions that have held us hostage to fringe radical environmental groups for decades, caused our energy prices to increase and added unnecessary costs to virtually every item produced in the US.

Of course, the Dimocrats will scream that "Those eeeevillll Republicans want dirty air and water and we're all gonna DIE!!!!Eleventy!11!111" In fact, they've already started doing that very thing.

The fact is that our air and water are cleaner now than forty years ago, which is a testament to our efforts so far. But instead of finding a point beyond which we don't need any more onerous regulations, the Obama administration's EPA is imposing new, unnecessary regulations that are closing down perfectly good coal-fired power plants, driving up the cost of energy for all of us. Nothing is ever enough for those who would keep a boot on the neck of our energy producers.

So, under a Romney administration, we can look forward to cheap, abundant energy, which is the foundation of a free market economy. Lower electricity and gasoline prices will provide an immediate kick-start to the economic boom that's just waiting to happen.

I can't wait.

U.N. Has a Lucid Moment, Questions US Ethanol Policy

You know, a few hundred more of these types of requests from the idiots at the United Nations, and I might just start to think they're OK.

Dimwit Energy Policies,Record Corn Prices and UN Pleas to Change US Ethanol Policy; Obama Consistently Wrong, Romney an Energy Pretzel.

No cut-paste-fu on this article for some reason.

Another Big Green Myth Demolished - We Have Vast Energy Reserves Right Here

Here's a bit of good news. Over at American Interest is this article by Walter Russell Mead that outlines a fact that will make environmentalists cry tears of oil: we're sitting on an energy goldmine.

Forget peak oil; forget the Middle East. The energy revolution of the 21st century isn’t about solar energy or wind power and the “scramble for oil” isn’t going to drive global politics. The energy abundance that helped propel the United States to global leadership in the 19th and 2oth centuries is back; if the energy revolution now taking shape lives up to its full potential, we are headed into a new century in which the location of the world’s energy resources and the structure of the world’s energy trade support American affluence at home and power abroad.

Outstanding. As great as that sounds, it gets even better...

Additionally, our natural gas reserves are so large that the US is likely to become a major exporter, and US domestic supplies for hydrocarbon fuels of all types appear to be safe and secure for the foreseeable future. North America as a whole has the potential to be a major exporter of fossil fuels for decades and even generations to come.

Since the 1970s, pessimism about America’s energy future has been one of the cornerstones on which the decline theorists erected their castles of doom; we are now entering a time when energy abundance will be an argument for continued American dynamism.

One more pullquote to whet your appetite, and then you can go over there and read the whole thing.

The energy revolution is first and foremost a revolution that affects jobs. We are in the very early stages, but since the financial crisis of 2008, fracking alone has created something like 600,000 new jobs in the United States, says the FT. Throw in more jobs in both extracting and refining the new energy wealth, and add the manufacturing and processing industries that will return to US shores to benefit from cheap, secure and abundant energy and feedstock, and it is clear that the energy revolution will be a jobs revolution.
These jobs pay well; for the first time in a generation we are looking at substantial growth of high-income jobs for skilled blue collar workers. Some of these jobs, especially with overtime, will pay in the six figures; most offer wages well above the national blue collar average.
The boom has the potential to change the debate over immigration. The best blue collar jobs in the new oil and gas patches will demand workers with good English language skills and some technical background — good junior colleges and strong vocational high schools will prepare workers for these new jobs. Low skilled, non-English speaking workers will have a hard time competing for these jobs but will work instead in less well paid jobs servicing the energy sector and its workers. They will build houses for the oil workers to live in and staff the restaurants where they eat. As more blue collar native-born Americans see their living standards rise, it is likely that (legal) immigration will lose some of its political salience.

Let's get to it!

(h/t to Instapundit)

Obama Causes Our Energy Prices to Skyrocket

The next time you pull up at a gas pump and see the price has risen again (awarding you with this weeks prize: a cut in your paycheck!), you can thank President Obama. His cancellation of the Keystone Pipeline will be part of the cause.

In an interview with former U.S. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) in D.C. yesterday, Harper explained that Canada will now seek to expand its export market to Asia and will also cease to supply oil to the United States at a discounted rate.

 (Emphasis mine)

And here I was, thinking that he'd never get elected after this little soundbite made the rounds to the general populace:

Silly me.

Even though he was talking about electricity rates, he was basing his plan on the now-disproven Hoax of Man-Made Global Warming.

It's still his goal, the truth be damned. Is it November yet?

Infinite Oil?

Here's an idea that's been circulating around the Intertubes for a while, and if you haven't heard about it, please click on this American Thinker link and prepare to be surprised.

What if Oil and Natural Gas are Renewable Resources?

I've often wondered a couple of things about the theory that oil was made from compressed dinosaur. First off, if we're drilling hundreds or thousands of feet below sea level in places that have pretty much always been covered in water, how did these zillions of Dino's get there? What were they eating? Has any Dino DNA ever been found in oil?

This idea needs further exploration.

Gasoline hits $4 per Gallon Again, How High Will It Go?

Gasoline prices just reached $4 per gallon in California. (h/t Drudge Report)
If you think that our president is at all concerned about the negative effect that high energy prices have on the country and the economy, you'd be wrong. (h/t IBD)

It's funny, I don't recall telling anyone in Washington that I wanted expensive gas...

Economics ala Obama - What Private Sector?

Good Monday mornin', y'all.

Economics has been referred to as "the dismal art." As it's being practiced by the Obama administration these days, that description hardly begins to describe it. Dismal is what we're seeing, hearing and feeling with every new economic report.

Every economic indicator that should be up is down, and vice-versa. There are record numbers of Americans living in poverty and on food stamps, record numbers of Americans out of work or working in jobs outside their chosen field for far less money than a few years ago. Inflation is way up, led by energy prices. One big reason for the high cost of groceries has to do with energy: we're using foodstuffs, primarily corn, for fuel.

The Obama administration concocted the Cash for Clunkers program that, while nice in theory, was a disaster in practice. Recently constructed vehicles were destroyed by the program, skewing the price of used vehicles and putting a reasonably priced used car out of reach for many Americans.

These are but two examples of the many wrong economic notions that this administration has glommed onto. It seems that Obama and his economic team have a penchant for pursuing all the wrong policies in trying to control our economy and get it back on its feet.

In short, Mr. President, you're doing it wrong.

It's not just the practices and false theories. There are plenty of those to go around. We're getting many lessons in what not to do. Destroying perfectly good vehicles isn't a good idea in any economy. Neither is using food for fuel, especially when we have vast reserves of oil and natural gas that we aren't allowed to harvest.

I fear is that, as we watch more and more questionable economic policies and theories being employed by Obama, we're in danger of forgetting how it's really done. We have some recent history to guide us in making sound economic decisions, but no one inside the Beltway seems to understand it.

This administration is teaching a valuable lesson to the nation. It's doing everything in its considerable power to alter our traditionally free market. These economic gurus and guru-ettes have studied every sort of cockamamie economic theory except the one that works. And the one thing that would work would be removing the shackles of government from the market.

Capitalism is being strangled to death. And the very same ones doing the strangling are more than happy to say that capitalism doesn't work. Indeed, how can it when the Obama administration is busy churning out more and more regulations by the day? It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I get queasy when I see what the White House is doing. I'm past the idea that this is the cause of incompetence. After nearly three years, these people know what they're doing. They're trying to permanently alter our economic system so it will never again function as intended. "Fundamental transformation" is the term they use, if I remember correctly.

I'm not alone in my assessment. This link from Hot Air says it all: The vast majority of Americans believe business and consumers are over-regulated. And this post from Fox News.com puts it into perspective...

From financial services to farming, plumbing to computer repair, business owners say new regulations have them so bogged down in compliance that it is hindering their ability to plan and expand for the coming years.

Even though President Obama recently acknowledged the need to minimize regulations, the number appears to be growing. Obama administration regulations on new business rose to 3,573 final rules in 2010, up from 3,503 in 2009 -- the equivalent of about 10 per week.




Indeed, the 2010 volume of the Federal Register, the "newspaper" of regulatory agencies, stands at an all-time record-high 81,405 pages composed of final rules, proposed rules, meeting notices and regulatory studies.


"There is something like 180 million words of binding federal law and regulation. It would take a lifetime just to read it," said Philip K Howard, founder of Common Good.

But this is only one mistake this administration is making. Of course, I'm assuming they really want the economy to perk up. It would seem that after nearly three years of wrong decisions and using flawed and erroneous economic theories, they would change course and embrace the free market.

Instead, they act as though the private sector doesn't even exist when it comes to creating jobs.

I just hope we don't forget completely how it's done, reviving the economy, that is. Ace had this story from NRO in the sidebar the other day. It's long, but well worth your time to read - Houston, we have a solution. It's an economic Tale of Two Cities. And speaking of Michigan, here's a stat I've never seen before, the Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index. (Warning: the comments are NSFW, being as how they're Morons and all.)

And if you don't read anything else today, read this, also from Ace's sidebar - The Progressive and the Pencil.

At least there are a few people who remember how free market capitalistic economics is supposed to work.

We need to remind ourselves that what's currently happening to our economy need not happen. If we had the right people in the right places in Washington, we wouldn't be in the mess we find ourselves in today.

There is a right way to get our economy going again, to create jobs and wealth and tax revenue and everything else we need.

This administration refuses to do it.

Our Economic Choice is Clear – US or the World

We’ve reached an economic crossroads: there are two paths we can take. One, the path we’re on now, the one endorsed by well meaning but economically ignorant globalists, is doomed to fail. We’ve gone down this path far enough to see what it holds for us: a drastic reduction in our standard of living and the surrender of our values.

The other path is one that has been tried, proven to work, and is currently being dismantled by Progressives from both parties.

America, we have a choice to make. We can either go where the rest of the world wants us to go, or we can strike out on our own. We must choose wisely, for our future is at stake as never before.

There can be no doubt that the path we’re currently on cannot be sustained. The last four years of Progressive control of Washington have given us historic levels of national debt, rising prices for everything through careless manipulation of our money supply, and needless restrictions on capitalism that have resulted in the largest peacetime downturn in our economy in almost one hundred years.

America is just starting to awaken to the dangers of Progressivism. Their agenda is one of stagnation and decline, crafted to exact revenge on the most productive country in the world, all in the name of “fairness.”

And we brought this misfortune upon ourselves. Even when Barack Obama outlined his vision for America, we elected him anyway, despite statements such as this:

We can't drive our SUVs and, you know, eat as much as we want and keep our homes on, you know, 72 degrees at all times, whether we're living in the desert or we're living in the tundra and then just expect every other country is going to say OK, you know, you guys go ahead keep on using 25 percent of the world's energy, even though you only account for 3 percent of the population, and we'll be fine. Don't worry about us. That's not leadership.

Answer this simple question, Mr. President: why not? Why shouldn’t we set our thermostats at a comfortable temperature? Why can’t we drive what we want? And why shouldn’t we be able to eat as much as we want?

Why do you want Americans to have less of anything, Mr. President?

I know I’ll be waiting a long time, because there is no good answer. There is no reason for us to have to do any of those things. Yet this is what passes for progress to Progressives.

And this is what the rest of the world wants for us also. Less.

Less freedom. Less control. Less money.

Is that what you want?

Or would you rather have more? More freedom, control and money? We can have it, but we must start now. We start by informing our representatives in Washington that we will no longer go down the path that the rest of the world wants for us. We will go our own way. We will turn inwards and begin to renew the American values of creativity, merit, reward, and excellence.

We will start to provide for ourselves and, in the process, show the rest of the world how it’s done.

We’ll unlock the rich natural bounty that our Creator has given us. We will use the land as we were intended to do. We will grow our own food, and trade the surplus. We’ll make our own vehicles, our own computers, our own dishwashers and everything else we need.

America can become self-sufficient first, and then produce more for trade with other countries. We must not become dependent upon any other country for our needs.

This global economy has already shown how vulnerable we are to natural disasters in faraway countries. The recent earthquake and tsunami in Japan idled assembly lines here at home. There is no reason to expose us to that kind of disruption. If we were making our parts here, there would be far less chance that we would experience disruptions in our supply chain. Transportation costs would be lower due to the reduced distance parts must travel. The quality of our products would increase as well.

There are many advantages to becoming self-sufficient. As we are seeing, the rest of the world has a long way to go to catch up with us. We cannot wait for them. To do so would be to stifle our economy for no reason. We can and should be providing for our own needs and creating our own wealth.

If we choose to continue down our current path, we will diminish our nation.

That should be enough reason to choose our own way.

Obama Administration Seeks to Tax and Track Drivers with GPS Box

While the White House continues to change its story on the successful operation that took out OBL, this administration’s efforts to raise taxes and infringe upon your privacy proceed apace.
You’re gonna love this.

Under this plan, a study group would be established that would evaluate the feasibility of taxing drivers using the number of miles driven. And you’ll never guess how they plan to do it. Go on, guess. I’ll wait.

If you guessed they want to put a GPS device on your vehicle to track where you’ve been and when, then, Don Pardo, tell them what they’ve won!

Never mind that we’re already taxed for each mile we drive. That’s done through the taxes that the federal government and state and local municipalities impose on every gallon of gas we buy. Now, they want to install a GPS device in order to track the number of miles you drive. And if you think that’s all the information that will be gleaned from that little black box in your car, then, by all means, let them install one on your vehicle.

I’d rather not.

It’s crystal clear to me why the feds want to do this, as it should be to you. This is yet another of the ways the hoax of man-made global warming is being used as a political tool for the government to remove your Constitutional freedom of movement and your God-given right to privacy.

Pardon me, but I don’t remember telling any of my elected representatives that I wanted this done. And I can’t find anything horribly deficient with the current method of taxation. They seem to be able to collect a fair amount of money from us every day. What’s really funny is how this administration points to the eight cents of profit that the big, eeevilll oil companies make on every gallon as if that number is somehow outrageously high, but neglect to tell you how much money they make from that sale: an average of forty-one cents per gallon. And that’s without any of the overhead that the big, eeevilll oil companies incur in bringing that product to you.

So, pardon me once again. I fail to grasp why this is even being considered.

I can do some educated guessing, though. I can recall a time when we had enough money for what’s now called “infrastructure maintenance.” Of course, that was before the era of big public sector unions and their leech-like effect upon taxpayers. Where once we didn’t have the financial burden of paying outrageous union benefits with our tax monies, increasingly we’re seeing the decidedly negative impact of these union contracts as our roads and bridges fall into disrepair because of the sky-high benefits that the unions have extracted from the pockets of taxpayers. We used to pay taxes for road repair, but now all that money is going to fund lavish lifestyles for union members.

And I seem to recall all of the Stimulus money that was promised to trickle down to the local level in the form of infrastructure spending to do what used to be done with transportation tax money. Funny, I haven’t seen one new road or bridge being built, or even a road being repaved with any of that $800B dollars I was told about, have you?

I can also guess that someone in a cubicle somewhere in the bowels of the Transportation Department crunched the numbers on the reduced amount of tax revenue the government would realize as a result of encouraging us to purchase more fuel-efficient vehicles and use public transportation and other modes of getting around.

So, why not just raise the gas tax? Why go through the trouble and expense of outfitting every vehicle in the US with a GPS device to track our driving habits? I wonder who would benefit from the contract for such an expensive undertaking. GE maybe? Or another of Obama’s corporate cronies with strong union ties? The public-sector unions who would doubtless people the new departments(s) required for this massive new program and their Democrat supporters?

Regardless of who benefits, this is an idea that should be squashed right now. There is no compelling need for this at all. Our travels are our private business and no one else’s. And we're taxed enough already.

This administration just might find a bit of resistance to this program.

Just a bit.

The Latest Laugher from the Make-Believe Media – Why You Should Love $5 Gas

I suppose it was inevitable. Someone somewhere in an office at MSN told a “reporter” to write a puff piece about the high price of gasoline, “Make it sound as credible as possible. Try to make people think it isn’t as bad as it really is. If you have to stretch a few facts, go ahead. But have it in by tomorrow afternoon.”

And this is the result.

“Why you should love $5 gas. Stop grousing about the numbers on the pump. All of this could be good for you and good for America” by Lynn Mucken.

When I saw this yesterday in the sidebar over at Ace of Spades HQ, I read it. Then I reread it. And just for good measure, I rereread it. I still can’t find anything that approaches reality in it, nor can I find a good reason to fall in love with something that reduces my standard of living for no good reason.

There is a goodly part of me that tends to dismiss this outright. I first thought this was a satire, but the author seems to be quite serious. But occasionally, it’s fun to see just how much bullshit can be packed into an article in an attempt to spin something from a negative into a positive.

This one was all kinds of fun.

Ten talking points. Ten separate parcels of bovine excrement. Zero sense. Anyone with two functioning neurons to rub together can dissemble this in the time it takes to read it. In fact, you can do it on the fly as you’re reading.

Put on your hip waders, boys and girls…

1. Fewer people will die on the road.

Ok, that sounds plausible. The author then goes on to contradict herself by pointing out that the reduction in highway death statistics for 2008 were mostly due to decreased speeds. Hmm, I haven’t heard of any states that lowered their speed limit. The author then notes that more people will die on motorcycles. So, what’s that advantage again?

2. Demand for high-mileage cars may grow.

The author then shows a correlation between high gas prices and sales of more fuel-efficient vehicles. Sounds kinda like President Obama condescendingly chastising an audience questioner at his town hall meeting two weeks ago, “You need to buy a hybrid van for your ten kids.” Good advice, except that no one makes them. Also note the word “may.” And with a higher percentage of your income going towards increased gas prices, won’t you have less money to buy that new car with?

Oh, here’s a good one.

3. Shorter security lines. Airlines fares are extremely fuel-price reactive. Soon, hardly anyone will be able to afford to fly willy-nilly around the country or globe. You will breeze through the maze of airport checkpoints.

Hmm, if hardly anyone will be able to afford to fly willy-nilly, how can they breeze through airport security? Won’t they, like, not be flying at all?

4. Less pollution.

Sorry darlin’, but any figures you cite from the EPA are automatically filed in my mental circular filing cabinet. They lost any credibility they had long ago, right around the time they became infested with people who think people are the most horrible thing to happen to Earth since, well, forever.

5. Less congestion. Ever notice how well rush-hour freeway traffic flows on the minor holidays when most of the rest of us are working?

No, I had never noticed that there is less traffic on the roads when there are fewer folks driving.

6. High prices lead to lower prices. Mackubin Thomas Owens, a professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College and editor of Orbis, the journal of the Foreign Policy Research Institute, theorizes that if gas prices rise enough, the government will open up areas now closed to oil production, and oil companies will be able to invest in more-expensive methods of extracting oil. Soon we will be drowning in the stuff, and prices will drop again.

Pretzel logic: it’s not just the name of a Steely Dan album. We already have inexpensive methods of oil production, we’re just not allowed to use them anywhere, thanks to our very own government and president.

And pray tell, when will this miracle occur? $6 a gallon? $7? $10? $15?

7. More exercise. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development estimates that by 2020, three out of four Americans will be categorized as overweight or obese. So, it can't hurt to walk the three blocks to the grocery or bike to school or work.

Ok, maybe the walk three blocks to the grocery store is doable. Walking back with an armful of groceries might present a bit of a problem. The closest grocery store to my house is two miles away.

It’s right about here in the article that the BS gets piled just a trifle higher…

8. End of wars.

Wars can be fought inexpensively? Who knew?

9. Local businesses may profit. If you can't afford to drive out to the Wal-Mart or The Home Depot, you may be buying instead at the local supermarket or neighborhood hardware store. In addition, as the cost of transporting, say, grapes from Chile, goes out of sight, you may turn to regional farmers for your produce.

Remember the grocery store that’s two miles from my house? Guess what? It’s a Wal-Mart!

And now for the money shot.

10. It's all about democracy. If we let up on the gas pedal, we'll starve those oil-rich despots out of existence. Oh, we import as much from Canada as from Saudi Arabia and Venezuela combined.

Umm, we’re a republic. A democratic republic. But I’m going to assume that this author has a recent degree from a liberal college where American history isn’t taught well, if at all. And we have the means and the resources to starve all those evil, oil-rich despots out of business today. We just need to clean house in Washington and get rid of the likes of Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, Durbin, Boxer, Waxman, Sunstein, all the Jacksons, Wasserman-Shultz, Nelson, the entire EPA, and the rest who, for whatever reason, are preventing us from harvesting our own vast natural resources.

Notable by its absence is any awareness of the devastation that rising gas prices are having on the recovery and the economy in general. Seniors on fixed incomes, the poor, and the sub-employed will all suffer. Grocery prices will continue to skyrocket, as will the price of any item that is transported by land, sea, or air.

The best summation of this article was in the comment section:

“There has to be a pharmaceutical explanation behind this article. There just has to be.”

Obama’s Clueless Energy Policy on Parade

In a speech yesterday at a town hall meeting at Gamesa Technology Corp., a Spanish-owned company that makes wind turbines, President Obama mocked one questioner in the crowd complaining about the high price of gasoline.



“Let them eat cake!”

OK, that was Marie Antoinette, but the sentiment was the same. An out-of-touch, narcissistic leader, well insulated from the masses, makes a condescending remark to the honest concern of an average American about high gas prices. Out loud. "You may want to think about a trade-in."

Clueless Incompetence, thy name is Obama.

Or, is that what it really is?

As you should know (as a regular reader of this blog), candidate Obama very simply and succinctly laid out his energy agenda thusly:



Is there any doubt that he’s pursing that strategy with vim and vigor? The saddest part (heh, I almost typed “the sadist part”) is that we don’t need to be held hostage by high energy prices. But in the town hall meeting yesterday, he tried to sell his energy policy as one that will help America by becoming “energy independent.”

Now, that’s not a bad idea, in and of itself. Other countries are striving to do that very thing, realizing that it’s in their national interest. There’s only one thing wrong with the approach that Obama wants: it defies the laws of physics and economics.

Obama wants to make a major shift in the nations’ energy production into “green energy.” Ask Spain how many private sector jobs are lost for every one “green energy” job. The answer is 2.5. Aside from the problem I just outlined, he blissfully ignores another fact or two: we already have in place a large and efficient infrastructure for the distribution of the best form of portable energy currently known to man, oil.

Physically, oil is the most energy-dense substance on Earth. It can be made into many things. Ironically, it’s the primary component in helping to achieve higher mileage in cars due to its light weight, replacing heavier metal parts. As I’ve pointed out before, you probably had some of it rubbed on your bottom as a child. It’s not the evil substance that it’s made out to be by the rabid enviroNazis. It’s such a vital component of everyday life that to reduce its use would be a serious economic blow, and a stupid one at that. We’re not “addicted to oil” like some helpless junkie. We use it precisely because it is useful in a staggering variety of ways. That isn’t addiction, it’s common sense.

But that doesn’t stop Obama from peddling his mistaken beliefs on an increasingly unwilling nation. His actions and policies are the main reason we now have to pay twice the amount for a gallon of gas than we did on the day of his coronation. Illegal drilling moratoriums while helping a foreign competitor (and Soros investment partner Petrobas) are directly responsible for the unnecessarily high prices we now pay, high prices that can only stifle the very fragile economic recovery that we’re told is happening.

Evidence is coming to light that this is bad policy, but you knew that already. Every time the price goes up at the pump, you receive a cut in pay. If you’re poor, a minority, or a senior living on a fixed income, the increased costs of energy are an even larger burden. Nancy Pelosi railed against President Bush when the cost of gas was over $3.00 dollars a gallon. Don’t you find her silence as prices exceed $4.00 just a bit odd? It seems that high gas prices under a Republican president are outrageous, but just hunky-dory under a Democrat president.

It’s funny how that works.

Obama seems to think that alternative fuels are the answer. As we’re slowly finding out, making fuel from food sources isn’t all that good. The regulatory rush to mandate the use of biofuels has some very bad results, as this article points out. Skyrocketing food prices and deadly food shortages are just two of the results. But, of course, you already knew that, too.

There is a sensible solution to our energy problems, the very same problems that were brought about by the childish belief in the Global Warming Monster. It doesn’t exist, it never did exist and it never will exist. Mankind is incapable of inflicting any form of long-term damage to the Earth. But it provided a handy excuse for political radicals to use to weaken America from within. Repetition of this lie has cost us trillions in wasted time, jobs, and capital.

It’s time to put that belief in the Global Warming Monster back under the bed where it belongs. Or back in the closet.

And to tell the truth to the children in charge of our national energy policy.

Fisking Obama’s Speech on “Energy Security”

President Obama gave a speech yesterday to the Hoyas of Georgetown University on the subject of energy. Since I haven’t fully examined all the nuances and subtleties contained in one of his speeches in a while, I thought I’d have a bit of fun today.

Understand that this isn’t hard to do. Dear Leader is still being trained while on the job: basically, what we hear is his childlike wonder at discovering things for the very first time. Community organizing is so hard, rousing that rabble leaves so little time to fully comprehend just what it is that your railing against.

We sympathize, we really do. It’s just so precious watching a President take his very first steps…

After the shout-outs and a recap of the news, He Begins.

“In an economy that relies so heavily on oil, rising prices at the pump affect everybody -- workers, farmers, truck drivers, restaurant owners, students who are lucky enough to have a car. (Laughter.) Businesses see rising prices at the pump hurt their bottom line. Families feel the pinch when they fill up their tank. And for Americans that are already struggling to get by, a hike in gas prices really makes their lives that much harder. It hurts.”

Which makes your campaign pledge to “make everybody’s utility bills necessarily skyrocket” so poignant.

“If you're somebody who works in a relatively low-wage job and you've got to commute to work, it takes up a big chunk of your income. You may not be able to buy as many groceries. You may have to cut back on medicines in order to fill up the gas tank. So this is something that everybody is affected by.”

Or, Barry Discovers Economics.

Then comes the by-now mandatory dig at the Tea Party…

“Now, here's the thing -- we have been down this road before. Remember, it was just three years ago that gas prices topped $4 a gallon. I remember because I was in the middle of a presidential campaign. Working folks certainly remember because it hit a lot of people pretty hard. And because we were at the height of political season, you had all kinds of slogans and gimmicks and outraged politicians -- they were waving their three-point plans for $2 a gallon gas. You remember that -- "drill, baby, drill"-- and we were going through all that. (Laughter.) And none of it was really going to do anything to solve the problem. There was a lot of hue and cry, a lot of fulminating and hand-wringing, but nothing actually happened. Imagine that in Washington. (Laughter.)”

Wow, this really takes me back to the days when a practical energy policy wasn’t mocked or derided. How time flies.

“The truth is, none of these gimmicks, none of these slogans made a bit of difference.”

The reason why none of it was really going to do anything to solve it is because we’re prevented from harvesting our rich natural resources by you and your Progressive cronies and your belief in the Global Warming Monster.

“Politicians of every stripe have promised energy independence, but that promise has so far gone unmet.”

We know. We’re still waiting.

“The United States of America cannot afford to bet our long-term prosperity, our long-term security on a resource that will eventually run out, and even before it runs out will get more and more expensive to extract from the ground.”

Um, we’re finding new oil reserves pretty regularly, and in places where we didn’t expect to find large populations of compressed dinosaurs, like the bottom of the ocean.

“But our best opportunities to enhance our energy security can be found in our own backyard -- because we boast one critical, renewable resource that the rest of the world can't match: American ingenuity. American ingenuity, American know-how.”

The world breathless awaits the first flight of the first ingenuity-powered jumbo jet.

“To make ourselves more secure, to control our energy future, we're going to have to harness all of that ingenuity. It's a task we won't be finished with by the end of my presidency, or even by the end of the next presidency. But if we continue the work that we've already begun over the last two years, we won't just spark new jobs, industries and innovations -- we will leave your generation and future generations with a country that is safer, that is healthier, and that's more prosperous.”

Will we be using something like that Ghostbusters capturing thingy? Also, continuing the work you’ve done over the past two years will only insure more poverty, more folks on food stamps, more rising debt and more malaise. We’d be better off with the ghosts.

“So today, my administration is releasing a Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future that outlines a comprehensive national energy policy, one that we've been pursuing since the day I took office. And cutting our oil dependence by a third is part of that plan.”

Doubtless, your illegal drilling moratorium is part of that grand Blueprint?

“This begins by continuing to increase America's oil supply. Even for those of you who are interested in seeing a reduction in our dependence on fossil fuels -- and I know how passionate young people are about issues like climate change -- the fact of the matter is, is that for quite some time, America is going to be still dependent on oil in making its economy work.”

Barry discovers physics. The cuteness, it hurts.

“Moreover, we're actually pushing the oil industry to take advantage of the opportunities that they've already got. Right now the industry holds tens of millions of acres of leases where they're not producing a single drop. They're just sitting on supplies of American energy that are ready to be tapped. That's why part of our plan is to provide new and better incentives that promote rapid, responsible development of these resources.”

No, they’re sitting on land that has yet to be explored. There’s no guarantee that there’s any oil there. Those evil oil companies are merely complying with yet another burdensome regulatory system, one that adds to the cost of production and higher gas prices and is responsible for our increasing national trade imbalance.

OK, now it’s time to sing “Big Yellow Taxi.” Everyone please stand up and put your hand over your heart. In the key of “E,” one, two, three, four…

“I give out this statistic all the time, and forgive me for repeating it again: America holds about 2 percent of the world's proven oil reserves. What that means is, is that even if we drilled every drop of oil out of every single one of the reserves that we possess -- offshore and onshore -- it still wouldn't be enough to meet our long-term needs. We consume about 25 percent of the world's oil. We only have 2 percent of the reserves. Even if we doubled U.S. oil production, we're still really short.”

Yeah, we’re the world’s biggest consumer of energy. But you never say what we do with all that energy, like developing life-saving drugs and medical procedures, or finding new ways to produce energy. Stuff like that.

“Now, another substitute for oil that holds tremendous promise is renewable biofuels -- not just ethanol, but biofuels made from things like switchgrass and wood chips and biomass. If anybody doubts the potential of these fuels, consider Brazil. As I said, I was just there last week.”

Yeah, with two billion of our tax dollars we can’t afford, so they can increase their oil production. By the way, Barry, how is George Soros’ Petrobras stock doing these days?

“Half of Brazil's vehicles can run on biofuels -- half of their fleet of automobiles can run on biofuels instead of petroleum. Just last week, our Air Force -- our own Air Force -- used an advanced biofuel blend to fly a Raptor 22 -- an F-22 Raptor faster than the speed of sound. Think about that. I mean, if an F-22 Raptor can fly at the speed of -- faster than the speed of sound on biomass, then I know the old beater that you've got, that you're driving around in -- (laughter) -- can probably do so, too. There's no reason why we can't have our cars do the same.”

No reason other than the fact that ethanol is far less efficient than gasoline and eats up old fuel systems that weren’t designed for it. And that we’re using food for fuel, driving up the cost of everything we use corn for, like beef, corn syrup, cereal, and all that. We have a global food shortage, too. Those two factors couldn’t possibly be connected, now could they?

“Now, we went through 30 years where we didn't raise fuel efficiency standards on cars. And part of what happened in the U.S. auto industry was because oil appeared relatively cheap, the U.S. auto industry decided we're just going to make our money on SUVs, and we're not going to worry about fuel efficiency. Thirty years of lost time when it comes to technology that could improve the efficiency of cars.”

Which thirty years are you referring to? The last thirty have seen more and more emission and mileage standards imposed than the previous thirty. Cars got smaller and accidents became much more dangerous as a result. There’s a real sense of safety that comes from being surrounded by large sections of sheet metal, as any soccer mom will tell you.

“This summer, we're going to propose the first-ever fuel efficiency standards for heavy-duty trucks. And this fall, we'll announce the next round of fuel standards for cars that builds on what we've already done.”

Oh boy! A Smart Truck! It won’t be able to haul anything, but it gets great mileage. 0-60 in two days!

“We've also made historic investments in high-speed rail and mass transit, because part of making our transportation sector cleaner and more efficient involves offering all Americans, whether they are urban, suburban, or rural, the choice to be mobile without having to get in a car and pay for gas.”

You might want to ask the Japanese about all that high-speed rail and how mass transit in the wake of the power outages, doesn’t run. How are you going to feed your family if you can’t get to the grocery store?

“Still, there are few breakthroughs as promising for increasing fuel efficiency and reducing our dependence on oil as electric vehicles. Soon after I took office, I set a goal of having one million electric vehicles on our roads by 2015. We've created incentives for American companies to develop these vehicles, and for Americans who want them to buy them.”

You liked them so much, you bought took over the company.

“And for those of you who are wondering what that means, the thing that's been holding back electric vehicles is the battery that stores that electricity, that energy. And the more efficient, the more lightweight we can make those batteries, the easier it is to manufacture those cars at a competitive price.”

Right now, trial lawyers are licking their lips in anticipation of the first accident where one of those batteries explodes. Good times await.

“Now, one other thing about electric cars -- and you don't need to talk to Chu about this -- it turns out electric cars run on electricity.”

Had you not told me, Mr. President, I never would have known. You, Sir, surely rank amongst the finest minds this country has ever produced, like Einstein, Marconi, and Tesla.

“Today, our homes and businesses consume 40 percent of the energy that we use, and it costs us billions of dollars in energy bills. Manufacturers that require large amounts of energy to make their products, they're challenged by rising energy costs. And so you can't separate the issue of oil dependence from the issue of how we are producing generally -- more energy generally.”

“The nice thing about energy efficiency is we already have the technology. We don't have to create something new. We just have to help businesses and homeowners put in place the installation, the energy-efficient windows, the energy-efficient lighting. They'll get their money back. You will save money on your electricity bill that pays for those improvements that you made, but a lot of people may not have the money up front, and so we've got to give them some incentives to do that.”

Hmm, that sounds like Cash for Caulkers. Funny thing about that is that when utility companies see reduced demand, they raise their rates. It’s almost like they’re running on a razor-thin profit, or something.

“So a clean energy standard will help drive private investment in innovation. But I want to make this point: Government funding will still be critical. Over the past two years, the historic investments my administration has made in clean and renewable energy research and technology have helped private sector companies grow and hire hundreds of thousands of new workers.”

Yup, workers who were promptly laid off when the subsidies ran out and the companies closed.

“I've visited gleaming new solar arrays that are among the largest in the world. I've tested an electric vehicle fresh off the assembly line. I mean, I didn't really test it -- I was able to drive like five feet before Secret Service said to stop.”

Sooo, it’s not just the country that doesn’t trust you to operate complex machinery…

“Unfortunately, some folks want to cut critical investments in clean energy. They want to cut our research and development into new technologies. They're shortchanging the resources necessary even to promptly issue new permits for offshore drilling. These cuts would eliminate thousands of private sector jobs; it would terminate scientists and engineers; it would end fellowships for researchers, some who may be here at Georgetown, graduate students and other talent that we desperately need to get into this area in the 21st century. That doesn't make sense.”

We are so glad you finally understand that. It certainly makes no sense to pump billions of tax dollars we don’t have into immature technologies that have yet to prove themselves in the marketplace. Private sector jobs that depend on government subsidies aren’t really private sector jobs.

Wait! I think we’re about to hear Little Barry’s first words. It’ll be nice not to hear him babble anymore…

“God bless you. God bless the United States of America.”

Don’t you feel proud?

Should Fact or Fiction Guide Our Energy Policy?

Sometimes my curiosity gets the better of me. I did a search for the term “global warming theory” and got over 1.5 million results. Then I did a search for “global warming postulate,” you know, a theory that’s been proven to be true.

I got 9 results.

Naturally, your mileage may vary. But that's a pretty big difference in results.

Now think of all the environmental rules and regulations that have been passed in the last twenty-five years or so. What have they been based upon?

A theory. An unproven theory. Not a postulate, a theory. Something might or might not be happening. It could be, but then again, it could just as easily not be. Could go either way. Tough to tell.

Kind of fills me with, um, well, I’m not really sure what it fills me with. It ain’t confidence, that’s for sure.

You see, I sort of expect people to automatically recognize what is true. Having spent my entire life in the manufacturing arena, I’ve dealt in absolutes: something either works or it doesn’t. When I made a part, it either passed or failed inspection. There was no in-between and no grey area. This was particularly important when making parts for the military, or the medical industry, or Space Shuttle flight hardware: someone’s life could very well depend on the part I made. Failure was not an option.

In fact, the term “true” applies as a principle in manufacturing. A round part is said to “run true” only if it doesn’t deviate from indicated zero. If that same round part rotates, it has to run true in order to be balanced and eliminate vibration.

If absolutes didn’t exist, nothing in our world could operate. Planes wouldn’t fly, autos wouldn’t run, and buildings wouldn’t stand. This simple fact of life also reveals the absurdity of postmodernism wherein no absolutes exist. Nothing could be further from the truth.

But I digress.

While I realize that the rest of the world doesn’t always deal in absolutes to quite the degree that engineering and manufacturing do, nonetheless the world must adhere to them. When it comes to human nature, not so much.

Now, let’s apply the notion of absolutes to politics and government. For generations, those in government were generally guided by absolutes, popularly known as the truth. Take our interstate highway system as a relatively recent example. The need for an efficient, high-speed network of roads across the country was met with a natural, common-sense response based on simple absolutes. This was how things once were.

However, today we have a much different method of operation when it comes to setting policy in Washington. Truth and absolutes have somehow taken a back seat to vagaries and possibilities, not actual outcomes. Gauzy thought and “what if” scenarios have replaced concrete results.

Nowhere is this more evident than in our national energy policy. Rather than examining our needs and meeting them with proven technology, we’re being forced to use so-called “green technology” that has yet to mature and cannot sustain itself except through large blocks of taxpayer money in the form of one-time grants. It causes further damage in the form of displaced jobs from traditional energy sectors.

All of this is based on a theory. That theory is called “man-made global warming.” It’s premise is that mankind’s actions are causing the climate of the entire world to change in the long term.

And it has yet to be proven true.

But that hasn’t stopped the supporters of this unproven theory from forcing their belief upon the rest of us. Look around you, the evidence is everywhere. From incandescent light bulbs that will soon be illegal, to aerosol propellants, to the reduced energy that our gasoline now has due to the mandated use of ethanol.

All based not on sound science, as we are told, but on a theory.

Now, before the rabid environmentalists begin their cry that BackwardsBoy wants us to have dirty air and water and we’re all gonna die, let me say for the record that I don’t want any of that. I’m all for reducing pollution within reason. But the argument that mankind has the capability to negatively affect the world’s climate is outrageous on its face, and is being taken to its absurd extreme by people who see an opportunity to gain power and to exert control over our lives.

Even the catastrophe in Japan is being blamed by some on this theory. Already, politicians on the left are marshaling their forces in an effort to eliminate nuclear energy. Is nuclear energy dangerous? As we’re seeing in Japan, there are natural forces that can destroy the most well designed reactors. But as a result, we now have more information that will enable us to design new and better reactors, so even this unfortunate event can provide us with better nuclear technology than we had before. That, my friends, is real progress.

But even though energy production is dangerous, we've been doing it safely for quite a while. There is also another tendency for those on the left to shrink from any endeavor due to danger. This attitude is effeminate in nature, and is not conducive to the advancement of technology, or life, for that matter. Just because something is dangerous is no excuse not to do it. Danger can be contained.

My point is that environmentalism has been fundamentally transformed from a common-sense effort to curb excessive pollution into a political excuse to impose an ever more intrusive government on a people who don’t want or need it. For too long, our politicians have blindly accepted this theory as truth, and legislated badly as a result. Instead of exercising a healthy skepticism, they have swallowed every prediction and believed every doomsday scenario forwarded by these environmental zealots. Let’s forget about the large sums of money that environmental groups pour into the campaign coffers of these pols for a moment and focus on the truth of their premise.

Year after year of increasingly stringent pollution regulations aren’t enough to satisfy them, even though our air and water are cleaner than ever. Nothing is ever enough, and the continued push for more restrictions on our energy supplies should tell you something else is at work. We’ve passed the point of merely curbing unhealthy pollution and have moved into an area where we are being told that by simply living our lives, we’re causing devastation on a helpless planet. This guilt allows unscrupulous politicians to do things that, once upon a time, would’ve been considered far outside the realm of politics. But now, they have what seems (to them) to be the perfect excuse and they use it often.

“How can you be for pollution?” they ask. “Don’t you care about the effect of pollution on people’s lives? What about the children?” Invariably, big corporations are targeted too. In their mind, everyone is guilty of wanting to kill the planet just by being born. Only they have the necessary morals and high purpose to “care” enough to do something about it, just ask them.

It’s time for us to put aside this national notion of mankind as some parasite on Earth. As we’ve seen in Japan, the planet is far more powerful than man is, and can confound and destroy anything that we’ve done.

It’s time to dispense with the theories and start basing our national decisions on the cold, hard facts.

In other words, it's time to get real about our energy policy.

Coming to England – Government Mandated Blackouts

Imagine that your government controls when you have electricity and when you don’t.

Imagine a refrigerator full of spoiled food.

Imagine that you can’t turn on the TV.

Imagine that you can’t access the Internet.

Imagine children dying from extreme heat because the power is off.

Imagine your grandparents dying from extreme cold because the power is off.

Imagine you or a loved one who relies on a medicine that must be constantly refrigerated.

Imagine you can’t charge your electric car and cannot travel, even for a medical emergency.

All this and more is the result of so-called “Green Technology” and the socialistic control of what was once considered a public utility – electricity. And it’s coming to Britain.

Ace of Spades HQ had this post up yesterday, The Coming Dark Ages. Here’s the article from their link.

Wind power will require lifestyle change


Electricity consumers in the UK will need to get used to flicking the switch and finding the power unavailable, according to Steve Holliday, CEO of National Grid, the country’s grid operator. Because of a six-fold increase in wind generation, which won’t be available when the wind doesn’t blow, “The grid is going to be a very different system in 2020, 2030,” he told BBC’s Radio 4. “We keep thinking that we want it to be there and provide power when we need it. It’s going to be much smarter than that.


“We are going to change our own behaviour and consume it when it is available and available cheaply.”


Holliday has for several years been predicting that blackouts could become a feature of power systems that replace reliable coal plants with wind turbines in order to meet greenhouse gas targets. Wind-based power systems are necessary to meet the government’s targets, he has explained, but they will require lifestyle changes.


Under the so-called “smart grid” that the UK is developing, the government-regulated utility will be able to decide when and where power should be delivered, to ensure that it meets the highest social purpose. Governments may, for example, decide that the needs of key industries take precedence over others, or that the needs of industry trump that of residential consumers. Governments would also be able to price power prohibitively if it is used for non-essential purposes.


Smart grids are being developed by utilities worldwide to allow the government to control electricity use in the home, down to the individual appliance. Smart grids would monitor the consumption of each appliance and be capable of turning them off if the power is needed elsewhere.


Holliday’s startling comments on BBC Radio 4 were reported by The Daily Telegraph.


(Emphasis mine.)

This, my friends, is the future as envisioned by our energy overlords. Even the idea of a battery backup is excluded.

I’m not even sure I need to expand on the insanity of this policy, as the examples I’ve outlined above should suffice. I’m sure you can think of a few more.

How the notion of moving civilization backwards ever caught on in political circles is beyond my comprehension, despite this blog’s title. But rest assured there are many in Washington with the same goal. One need look no further that the Obama administration’s continued illegal moratorium on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico to see where we’re headed.

We’re being constantly bombarded with the idea of some sort of new “green energy economy” as the self-avowed communist Van Jones puts it. The more we hear about this supposed need to rely on technology that has proven unreliable and has failed in the marketplace, the more it crowds out the fact that there are proven technologies that are being shoved aside. It won’t take long for folks to forget that there are such things as clean coal, natural gas and nuclear power. Even petroleum power is far cleaner today than it was a generation ago, and the overall improvement of air quality in many major cities proves it.

Yet this isn’t enough for the environmental movement. Now, it’s becoming clear how truly radical this movement is. They are intent on retarding mankind’s’ progress. This is truly ironic since the so-called political “progressives” are the ones promoting this madness.

They must be purged from American politics. They have proven themselves to be the enemy of mankind. Why this is so is anyone's guess, but the fact remains: this will be American if they are allowed to continue to restrict our ability to harvest our natural resources.

We’re Becoming a Nation of Busybodies

I’ve noticed a trend lately. It seems as though everyone is trying to tell me how to live.

Animal rights groups don’t want me to wear fur or eat meat or go hunting or fishing

Greenies don’t want me to drive a car.

Unions want to me to become a member so they can take my dues and support candidates I don’t agree with.

Islamists want me to convert to a religion I don’t believe in.

Charlie Sheen wants me to think he’s normal.

(I just threw that last one in there. Who’dathunk that Two and a Half Men was a documentary?)

I understand the strong urge, when one discovers a new lifestyle choice, to share it with their friends. I really do. And there’s nothing wrong with that. You want to be a vegetarian? That’s wonderful. Oh, you’re a pacifist now? Splendid. You’ve suddenly become aware of this or that cause and now want to tell the world about it? More power to you.

Umm, guys (and gals), I don’t need you to tell me what to do, or what to think, or how to spend my money, or what to teach my kids, or do any of the other things that you seem to think I need to do.

I’ve got this.

There also seems to be a trend within this trend: all of these folks who’ve gathered together for what they see as the Betterment of Mankind are on the political left. Somehow they don’t seem content to let me live as I see fit. Their growing numbers enable them to raise money for political contributions to candidates that agree with them. Once these candidates reach office, they start to push for legislation to elevate their cause into law, thereby forcing their beliefs on the rest of us.

Take the environmentalists (please). For generations, these folks have been convinced that we’re somehow doing irreparable damage to the Earth by going about our daily lives. That by going to work and caring for our families every day, we’re a pox on the planet and must be stopped. That by taking what we find and making it into something that helps to make our lives easier, we’re somehow the enemy. By their thinking, businesses are evil, profit is the Devil’s lucre and anyone who works for them is a little Hitler, raping Gaia for their own selfish gain. How do we sleep at night?

You don’t have to think for long about how difficult it would be to live without all our modern creature comforts: all you need to do is read a book to find out how it used to be. We’ve managed to do a pretty good job of beating back disease and famine to take our rightful place at the top of the food chain.

And that is somehow wrong? And being born in America makes me evil?

Granted, we were pretty sloppy once upon a time. But we’ve managed to clean up our act quite a bit since the Cuyahoga River Fire of 1969. You’d think that environmentalists would be happy that we’ve gotten a lot more responsible and that they’d declare “Mission Accomplished.” You’d be wrong.

Instead, these groups have infiltrated government and now tell us that we can’t even use incandescent light bulbs. In fact, the EPA has more power to pass more regulations than ever and looks to enact even more. This is a major reason why we don’t drill for our own oil in the face of rising gasoline prices, we don’t construct new nuclear power plants or build new refineries. We even have a hard time building new roads and bridges due to lawsuits brought by environmental groups.

Our own president even said that under his Cap-and-Trade plan, our energy bills would “necessarily skyrocket.” And that helps us how, Mr. President? Sir, in case you haven’t noticed, we’re not all rich.

A proper balance seems increasingly hard to reach. And with more pushy people comes more peer pressure to conform to what they think is the right way to live instead of what we know in our own hearts.

You can look at life any way you want. But with that freedom comes the responsibility to make damn good and sure you see things as they are, not as someone else sees them. You see, power makes folks think things that aren’t true and see things that aren’t there. Just listen to these groups scream that anyone who disagrees with them is full of hate. That’s now how adults operate.

But then again, we’re not dealing with adults, are we?

There’s a big difference between someone who wants to throw their weight around and someone who wants to accomplish a worthwhile goal that benefits everyone.

It's the difference between harvesting grapes and peeling them. Although, it makes for a cute tune...

The Great Wall of Washington

There is a wall in Washington. It’s well constructed and apparently impenetrable. It’s nowhere and everywhere, invisible yet pervasive. This wall has no name, but is well defined. It isn’t meant to keep out invaders. This wall is designed to keep those in our current administration separated from reality and common sense.

The wall is evident in many ways. Take the current turmoil in the Middle East. In times past, America was somewhat insulated from the effects of political unrest half a world away. But this New World Order that’s being constructed, often by persons unknown and unelected by us, we’re being shepherded into a global economy that just plain isn’t working.

Nowhere is this more evident that at the gasoline pump. As you’ve no doubt noticed during the past week or two, gasoline prices are going through the roof. Now think back on all the times you’ve heard politicians say we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil supplies. Compare that to the reality of what you’re paying today.

That, gentle reader, is The Wall.

I can think of no other reason for high gas prices than the effect of this Wall. To each and every sentient citizen, the answer is extremely simple: we should be actively and aggressively harvesting our natural resources. Do you think that if we were doing what we once did, we’d be suffering at the pump?

By now, we should all know the answers as to why we aren’t pursuing a national energy policy of drilling and refining American oil. For generations, we’ve been prohibited from doing this by environmental groups and their handmaidens inside the Beltway. Lie after lie has been foisted upon the public claiming that we’re “destroying the planet” by using fossil fuels (even that description is debateable) despite a yearly tsunami of new and ever more restrictive environmental regulations. Even after the hoax of man-made global warming was revealed, politicians continued to pursue their misguided policies restricting our ability to generate energy as though nothing had happened.

I don’t need to tell you how rising fuel prices will kill our economy. You’ve already received a cut in pay over the last weeks, and this is just the beginning. Remember back to 2008 and how high gas prices rippled throughout the economy, raising the price of just about everything we make and consume.

Now, as a thought experiment, try imagining what it would be like if we had mature, responsible, and thoughtful leadership in Washington. We’d be drilling and refining our own oil today. Oil would be far less expensive, well under the $100/barrel we’re seeing today. Jobs would be created here, wealth would be created here. More Americans would have more buying power. World oil prices would fluctuate much less and political unrest in faraway lands would have less of an impact here at home. We'd have the money to effectively research viable alternative sources of energy that actually work.

Kind of like how it used to be.

OK, back to the real world, where logic, nor common sense, nor the laws of physics, nor concern for the nation can penetrate The Wall. Expect more empty words from this administration, more counter-intuitive ideas, more belief in the fairy tale of mankinds destruction of the planet. Expect more of what got us into this mess instead of a concrete, proven plan to get us out of it.

Such is the power of The Wall.

The Conservative Candidate for 2012 - Mr. Issues, Part III

or, the final installment of The Post That Wouldn't Die. Continued from yesterday...

The next issue that needs to be addressed is our national energy policy.


Currently, it’s “NO!” No, we can’t drill for our own oil, despite years of politicians claiming to want to rid us of our dependence on foreign oil. No, we can’t build any new nuclear plants, when other countries such as France are relying increasingly on nuclear power. No, we can’t build new infrastructure to meet the needs of our growing population. No, we can’t grow our own food because we can’t water our crops due to some insignificant fish.

This must change. We must elect a president who will be willing to take a good, hard look at our energy policies with an eye towards repealing the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. While we’re at it, we should also look at repealing the Endangered Species Act, too.

Before coffee comes out your nose from incredulity, understand that the goals of having clean air and water were accomplished years ago. Our water and air are much cleaner today than they were forty years ago. You will no doubt notice the absence of flaming rivers in the news. This responsibility can now be shifted onto the individual states, where they can be managed more efficiently.

Today’s environmental movement has become the home of radical leftist, anti-capitalists whose goal is the elimination of our free market system, to be replaced with some flavor of Marxism, Socialism, Communism, or perhaps a hybrid of these methods of failed societal control. It’s all been tried before; it has all failed in spectacular fashion before. It’s time for us to reexamine the role that these unelected groups have in preventing us from utilizing our rich natural resources and stop their efforts cold. It’s happening all over.

I’m sure all of you have heard local stories about this or that environmental group filing a lawsuit to prevent this or that project. A road, a bridge, an oil refinery, a nuclear power or coal plant, the specifics aren’t as important as the overall goal of stopping real, tangible progress. These groups have as their agenda the crippling of our ability to increase our energy supplies in every way possible. They were handed this ability with the passage of the aforementioned Acts.

We’ve been told a lie for so many years about our environment, that some people still believe that we’re poisoning the planet and that somehow, mankind has the ability to alter the very climate of an entire world. Even more preposterous is the idea that we can somehow “save the planet.” How can this be true, after forty years of more and more environmental laws, regulations, and departments? Have our efforts so far proved useless, that we need even more laws? Is nothing enough?

This is the stuff of fiction, folks. And it’s time someone told you so. Moreover, we need a president who understands this simple truth.

It’s a sad fact that many of our elected officials have blindly believed in this fairy tale, even going so far as to enact legislation built on its flimsy suppositions and wildly inaccurate predictions. When they should have been far more inquisitive before introducing these bills based on such dubious (and, as we know today, falsified) data, they forged ahead bravely, thinking they were at the forefront of Something Important, when in fact, they were being used by our domestic enemies.

Witness the witlessness of the effort to ban Di-hydrogen Monoxide. An equal amount of intellectual heavy lifting has gone into most environmental bills. And we’re paying an unnecessarily high price for allowing our elected officials to get away with enacting such laws. What they should be doing is getting out of their offices and getting some first-hand knowledge of the laws that they’re proposing, asking questions, and gathering information from those Americans with actual experience with an issue, not some special interest groups’ well-rehearsed spokespeople. The president could do this on his own as an example to the rest of those in Washington whom we send to act in our stead.

Onward to National Security.

Ronaldus Magnus (aka Ronald Reagan) had the right idea when he proposed his “Star Wars” defense shield. The years since have seen great technological advancements that can make this a reality. His idea for an impenetrable defense to shield us from attack should be made the highest priority. This should be combined with a policy of not being the police officer for the world.

Imagine the possibility of living without the threat of a nuclear missile destroying New York for a just a second. Since the majority of us have lived with this thought lurking in the back of our consciousness since childhood, we should grab this chance and hold it firmly in our national grasp. We should pursue a missile shield, so that we might live in true peace.

This would require a president who wants what Americans want. Our current president has embraced our sworn enemies, bowed to them and abandoned our stalwart friends. We don’t wish to impose our will upon anyone else, except perhaps to show them the benefits and blessings of freedom. In this effort, we should be willing, when asked, to help other nations craft a course that we have successfully navigated. Failing that invitation, we should mind our own national affairs. We have plenty here to keep us busy.

When they considered a national symbol for America, our Founders thought a rattlesnake would prove worthy. This creature lives a solitary life, hunting and eating rodents. It strikes in self-defense, only when provoked. “Don’t Tread on Me.”

We are entering a new era in the American Experiment. Quietly and stealthily, our enemies have amassed. Cloaked in respectability and importance, these enemies have taken positions of power within our very own institutions. However, they are today being exposed, for they can no longer disguise their true intentions. We have seen them operate, using deception and rhetoric before their constituents, then retreating to the halls of Congress to accomplish their nefarious agendas. Massive bills passed in the dead of night, without being openly considered and honestly debated, are the methods by which these enemies work their plans. Are you aware that there are proud Socialists in our own Congress? The mere fact that they define themselves as anything other than Americans should tell you there is something wrong in Washington, something very disturbing. Never doubt their seriousness and sincerity about their intentions. For too long, we have dismissed political rhetoric as mere posturing. We continue this at our peril. Our enemies are committed, as we must be in our vigilance and determination to root them out.

Those who describe themselves as “progressives” have in mind not progress, no, not the progress that our Founders envisioned of a nation of freemen, conducting their affairs in private, with honor, truthfulness, and a shared sense of community with their fellow citizens. Theirs is instead a world of control over the citizens of America, lording over each and every action of a people who should, by all rights, be free from their meddling, as our Founders intended. These “progressives” have no faith in their brothers nor in the concept of freedom, nor in the bedrock of our society as laid out in our Constitution. They seek to twist and distort the plain meaning of our supreme law, claiming that it somehow means something other than what it says. You will know them by their actions. Are these self-proclaimed progressives promoting freedom and liberty by removing barriers, or imposing more laws and regulations on us? The truth is plain to see, you need only know what to look for.

Indeed, the issues are what we should be focusing on. We need an articulate candidate who will craft his or her message around these issues.

The sooner, the better for America.

Rhetoric vs. Reality: Obama Promises Regulatory Review Just as EPA Shuts Down Mine

In the wake of last November’s shellacking, President Obama has promised a government-wide review of the regulations that are strangling the nations’ economic growth. After two years of unprecedented intrusion by Washington into the private sector, Obama would have us believe that he's had a change of heart and now wants what we conservatives have wanted for years, a realistic reassessment of the negative effects of government regulations upon American businesses.

This is bullshit.

I know it, you know it, and everyone who is currently out of a job knows it. What’s worse is, Obama himself knows it. He has no interest in reviving the private sector. In fact, he is anti-business, as we’ve heard in his speeches. His open hostility toward the private sector and anyone in it is unique in modern times. He has consistently and uniformly criticized the creation of wealth and it’s benefits. He is playing the counterculture drumbeat that began in the ‘60’s.

Obama clearly has no understanding of how our free-market economy works. He has never run a business, in fact, his role as a community organizer was expressly designed to damage businesses. Only 19% of his advisors have any experience in the private sector.

Even his childhood primed him to be hostile to business in any form. His mother was a political radical, as was his mentor, the communist Frank Marshall Davis. All radicals hate business in any form. It’s what makes them part of the counterculture in the first place. They uniformly believe that wealth is evil.

It’s a perversion of the Bible verse, “Love of money is the root of all evil.” Notice it doesn’t say that money itself is the root of evil, the love of it is. What those “revolutionaries” lack is perspective, among other things. In their misguide quest to perfect humanity, they think that if money was eliminated, all of the ills of society would be cured forever. Ask yourself if their previous efforts to solve this problem have produced anything other than untold death and destruction to the society that they claimed to “help.”

But, I digress.

I’m sure you remember the famous conversation between Obama and Joe the Plumber during the campaign. Obama said, “When you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” The absurdity of his comment is evident in the fact that everyone who works receives a paycheck. These “evil corporations” that leftists regard as the devil incarnate do, in fact, spread the wealth around in the form of paychecks and stock. They also pay taxes. Remember that the next time you hear a Nancy Pelosi or a Barney Frank castigate business. This is another manifestation of what I call "progressive political psychosis" where a radical leftist politician demonizes an American institution that it depends on for its' very existence.

While progressive politicians love to point their bony fingers at business, we are somehow supposed to overlook their greed. “Corporate greed” has been supplanted with “government greed.” What is the one characteristic of liberal, “proud progressive” politicians that differentiates them from conservatives? Like knights on a modern-day Crusade, it is their holy quest to raise taxes, taking as much money as possible from business and consumers.

Who are the truly greedy ones again?

The timing of Obama’s claim just happens to coincide with the EPA’s cancellation of a four-year-old mining permit in West Virginia, shutting down a working coalmine, forcing hundreds of Americans out of work and reducing our supply of energy, in keeping with his campaign pledge to make everyone’s utility bills “necessarily skyrocket.” The mining company had dotted all the “i’s” and crossed all the “t’s” according to West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, when the EPA suddenly decided that the company must halt operations.

If President Obama were at all serious about reducing federal regulations, he would start with this incident. He has an opportunity to prove his intentions to the country by making sure that this mine is reopened as soon as possible.

Will his actions match his words? We shall see.

I’m not holding my breath while I wait.

Oil Prices Rise, Obama Does Nothing Despite New Field Find

Drudge has this link up today: Rising oil price threatens fragile recovery (sorry, the link is for subscribers only, although I was able to read it earlier). In this “water is wet” story, rising oil prices are ready to stymie the world’s economies by rising to unnecessarily high levels at a time when they should remain low.

Thank you, President Obama.

It goes without saying that this situation doesn’t need to happen. If we had an administration that was at all interested in lifting America out of the depths of the worst economy since the Great Depression, we wouldn’t be in this mess right now. We’d be doing the things that we all know should be done to get our economy going again.

What we have instead is an administration that seems intent upon prolonging America’s suffering. Based on their actions, they apparantly want high unemployment and people without jobs. The reason why is anyone’s guess. But the fact that this recession has gone on this long, longer than any other recovery on record, tells us something.

In fact, we’re not even in a recovery. Our current rate of growth is hovering around the 2.5% mark. While that's technically positive growth, economists say that this is barely enough to tread water. It needs to be around 9% to start to see any real positive effect. That is possible, but this administration seems to look at our economy much as a caveman would look at a car. It’s a wonder to behold, but it does so much more when you know how it works.

Take oil for example. If you’re in business, I don’t need to tell you what high fuel prices do to your bottom line. If you go to the grocery store, you see the effects of increased transportation costs in the form of higher prices. If you work and drive to get there, you know that when gas prices rise, you receive a cut in pay. When the cost of gasoline goes up, everyone pays for it.

The worst part of all this is that none of it needs to happen.

None of it.

Let that sink in for a moment.

By now, you should be intimately familiar with the negative effects on our nations's energy production from the Big Green Movement. Radical environmentalists, (there is no other kind) despite being unelected, have been dictating our energy policy for over a generation. These groups have blocked or slowed every effort to increase our nation’s energy supplies. Want to build a new oil refinery? Expect some fat-cat, left-wing environmental lawyer to beat you to the courthouse with a lawsuit to stop it. Want to build a new nuclear power plant to fill the needs of a growing community? Expect demonstrations against it led by more radical, left-wing environmental lawyers and their stooges. Drill for oil? You’ve got to be kidding. The Obama administrations position is that, despite a Federal court’s decision citing the unconstitutionality of it, there’s still a moratorium on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, putting thousands of people out of work, further slowing any chance of recovery.

In other words, our own government is making sure that we never use traditional energy sources again. It’s their misguided idea that we’re supposed to be forced into some sort of “green economy.” There’s only one problem with that idea: it doesn’t work. Alternative energy has been studied for nearly forty years and has yet to become viable. The only way to force the country to use it is to shovel massive amounts of tax money into temporary government programs. Spain tried it and failed. For every “green job” their government created, 2.5 private sector jobs were lost.

In short, our own government, under the control of eco-freaks, has tied our hands when it comes to energy production. We could be drilling for our own oil. We should be building new refineries, since we haven’t built one since the ‘70’s.

And you do know that Global Warming was proven to be a hoax, don’t you? There is no reason for us not to be developing our own energy supplies. Not one.

Yet for years we’ve heard politicians in Washington say we need to become less dependent on foreign oil. Of course, their actions prove that they’re not serious when they say that, else we’d see less restrictions on oil drilling, not more moratoriums.

Two facts make it abundantly clear that this administration doesn’t want a recovery to occur. One is the financing of Petrobras to the tune of some $2B so they can expand their drilling operations. The other is that our own US Geological Service has discovered a major new crude oil field. In fact, this is the largest oil field they’ve ever discovered.

It’s in Montana.

Now, in a sane world, we’d already be pumping oil out of it, creating jobs and wealth, increasing the retirement portfolios of Americans who own oil company stock and generally acting for the general welfare of the country. The fact that we aren’t, and aren’t even planning to exploit this valuable natural resource speaks volumes about the current mindset in Washington.

We need energy, we have sources of energy, yet we aren’t developing our own resources of energy. No other country is doing what we’re doing to ourselves.

Does that seem like a sensible thing to do?