“Oil is the fuel of free nations, guns and speech the tools of free men.”

An excellent article today by A. W. R. Hawkins at Human Events about three things that are currently hot bed political fights, only because the liberals decide to misunderstand the founding fathers.

The Tools of Free Men.

Thus the three have freedom in common. Ironically, oil, guns, and free speech have something else in common as well: all three are scorned by the Left. Democrats are opposed to further oil exploration, individual gun rights, and speech that is free from the constraints of political correctness.

 

We need oil now, and there is no doubt about the amounts of untapped oil off the shores of California, under the surface of the earth in Wyoming and Colorado, and up in that pristine rock quarry called ANWR. 

The Democrats use ecological concerns as a cover for their inflexibility on this issue, yet their refusal to drill is actually contributing to ecological problems.

Continue reading . . .

One more day till congress goes home for five weeks, and we common folk wonder what have they done to alleviate the oil crisis?  Argue.  Politicize.  Talk.  Scream.  Spread rhetoric.  Spread lies.  Nada.   They can vote on apologizing to the African-Americans for their treatment by the US Congress decades ago, but they can’t even vote on opening up areas for oil exploration and drilling, even after the President implores them to do so.   Sounds like the oil part is not very important for Americans today and in the future as average Americans have to ponder their vacations because of the increase in gas.

Have any members of congress declare they were pondering whether they could afford to take a vacation this year?

So Americans will continue to pay more for the price of a fill-up and plenty more for an ear of corn.   The price of gasoline has come down some over the past week, but corn is still rising because of their desire to get off gasoline dependency, so perhaps congress is thinking that after the five weeks vacation the pump price may be low enough that Americans will have accepted it, and be thrilled it’s not over $4.00 a gallon.

Americans do have a lousy memory.

Americans accept things rather easily, rather than revolting in the streets over a simple thing like the price of gas.   “Hey, we’ll just cut down on the restaurant outings, and fire up the grill instead.”

School is starting soon and the kiddies will be riding the bus and out of our hair for the day, so the trip to the mall will help save on our gas allotment.  

Ok, so Congress is out for vacation, so what?   They usually don’t do much anyway, except complain about the republicans, and they complain about the democrats, so what’s the big deal?   It’s business as usual.  This is an election year and the news is all over the place about Obama and McCain kissing babies and the back end of special interest groups.   One day Obama is up by 4, the next day McCain is tied. and the next day the polls show Obama is up by 6, but only if you read that one poll, as other polls have a different resultant.    I suggest the pollsters should go on vacation too.

In the meantime, we the people get fleeced by the lack of willpower of those congress people wanting that vacation they’ve worked so hard for.     

Do they care at all about us?

Our only current option is to sit it out.   But don’t forget it when election time comes as there is always a newcomer wanting take over for the incumbent.  

I say let the new one have at it.

And this is the man that 1/2 the world is going crazy about.

Who’s the idiot?  You ought to read some the comments below this video from You Tube.

Now here’s a term that is being used by Barack Obama quite often as he positions himself as the savior of America.   Correcting the American Economic Justice appears to be a favorite topic of his.   Now what exactly does he mean by “economic justice”?

During his NAACP speech earlier this month, Sen. Obama repeated the term at least four times. “I’ve been working my entire adult life to help build an America where economic justice is being served,” he said at the group’s 99th annual convention in Cincinnati.

And as president, “we’ll ensure that economic justice is served,” he asserted. “That’s what this election is about.” Obama never spelled out the meaning of the term, but he didn’t have to. His audience knew what he meant, judging from its thumping approval.   INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY

What does he mean?  Is this some kind of code wording that his staff inserted into his speeches, and the followers immediately know what he is referring to? 

How about a plan to redistribute the wealth of the country to those “less fortunate”?   Plain and simple: Socialism. 

“Obama also talks about “restoring fairness to the economy,” code for soaking the “rich” — a segment of society he fails to understand that includes mom-and-pop businesses filing individual tax returns.” 

A few thoughts of my own here to make the economy fair for all.   Install the FairTax plan and everyone would pay the same tax rate at all times, and there would not be any forms to fill out either.   The rich would not be able to take advantage of high dollar lawyers finding loopholes and the poor basically would not pay any federal taxes at all.   And to top it off, all those illegal immigrants who somehow get away without paying any taxes would pay with a penalty (no monthly prebate).  And also, all of those foreign visitors we get would also contribute to our tax base.  And also, those corporations that have located their main offices overseas somewhere because the tax rates are better, would move back into the states.

Now that system would be economic justice.  If Obama is thinking along those lines, I’d vote for him, but he’s not.

“Climate change is no longer just an environmental issue. It’s now an issue of race, according to global warming activists and policy makers.

“It is critical our community be an integral and active part of the debate because African-Americans are disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change economically, socially and through our health and well-being,” House Majority Whip James Clyburn, D-S.C., said July 29.”   Business & Media Institute

When is this madness going to stop?  Come on now,  the climate, the thunderstorms, tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes don’t care who you are.  If the earth is warming up so drastically as some believers would contend, then everyone will be impacted, everyone will be devastated by the calamity that will indiscriminately hit us all, regardless of race, sex, or religion. 

For anyone to say that minorities are being targeted at a greater rate than non-Hispanic whites is playing the race card for political advantage, or for a new way of setting up the economic free market system of the US, in particular.  And that is exactly what this advocacy group (EJCC) is doing. 

Read this folks.  It’ll blow your socks off.

“There is a certain disconnect between what is good for workers, consumers, managers, and the economy on one hand and stockholders on the other,” Hoerner said. “We found that the combination of efficient market instruments, return of the revenue, cost-effective promotion of new clean technologies and efficiency, and targeted policies for low-income households grows the economy. It increases employment and profits overall, and provides a net benefit for consumers.”

     The report suggested implementing a “fee, tax or allowance auction on polluters,” which was meant to “eliminate the financial burden on low-income and moderate-income households.This would pay for efforts to reduce global warming. Hoerner said that although it would cause product costs to increase, under his policy, the revenue from the “fee, tax, or allowance auction payment” would be redistributed to consumers to offset the higher costs.

“However, this increase in profits may be smaller than the windfall to stockholders if allowances are given away for free, even though this windfall is partially offset by higher product prices, lower sales, lower production and lower profits on the firm’s output, exclusive of the value of the allowances,” Hoerner continued. “Most businesses are energy consumers, not producers, and their interests lie with household energy consumers.”  For a complete PDF report click here.

 

You know, I really don’t understand all that he is putting forth here, but one thing is certain, they want an outright tax on businesses because being in business means being an energy consumer, and businesses are also interested in making a profit.   Profit is bad.  Stockholders should be more interested in funneling the profit to low and middle income households rather than keeping the dividends for themselves or for further investment. 

There’s that old tired worn out redistribution of money scheme from those who earn it to those who don’t.   Real socialists for Utopia.

NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana (CNN) – The oil spill that closed the Mississippi River at New Orleans is costing the U.S. economy $275 million a day, the head of that city’s port authority told CNN.

A collision in the lower Mississippi river last week between a tanker and a barge carrying thick industrial fuel oil.

Ramon Antonio Vargas, The Times-Picayune — The massive oil spill that remains a major threat to the area’s fragile delta ecosystem now stretches from New Orleans to the mouth of the Mississippi River — a distance of 100 miles, Coast Guard officials said early Thursday.

So, here we go again, the environmentalists are very concerned over the very fragile eco system along the Mississippi delta.  Oil is the problem.  If it were not for our dependence on oil as the major energy source, this would not have happened.

Mississippi River Oil Spill Response Inadequate.  Accidents with barges on the river are an all too common occurrence and yet we are very lucky that worse catastrophes have not occurred. We believe that there needs to be a serious review of the safety practices used for the shipping of dangerous cargo in Louisiana. Barges need to be labeled in such a way that first responders can easily determine from a distance what the barge contains so that they know what they are dealing with. Double hulled containers for petroleum products and other hazardous material should also be required. Hazardous cargo should be accompanied with an additional vessel which would act as a spotter or alert vehicle, much like oversized cargo on the road. Communication during an incident should also be improved. Local officials and responders need to be informed about an incident immediately so that steps can be taken to make sure that drinking water supplies are protected and residents can be evacuated if necessary.

Now read a more accurate account of the spill and why it happened and what could be done to prevent these spills from being a tool used by environmentalists to shut down the oil industry.

Foreign oil causes spills   By Humberto Fontova

In fact, the 419,000 gallons that spilled into the Mississippi river on July 23 consisted of fuel oil (not crude oil) from a barge that picked it up from a local fuel merchant. As it happened, this fuel oil-laden barge collided with a tanker, the Tintomara, but this tanker was also not carrying crude oil. It transported styrene and biodiesel. But the Tintomara has carried (foreign) crude oil in the past and could easily carry (foreign) crude oil in the future.

The Mississippi River below and above New Orleans typically carries a heavy traffic of tankers transporting (foreign) crude oil to refineries in this area. And accidents occur. So here, I’ll help you senatorial and media greenies establish the premise your sloppy research and wishful thinking caused you to botch on this spill. Here ya go … softly and right over home plate:

And here is the prevention message.

Well, this type of spill is the very thing that more domestic oil drilling will prevent. The transportation of foreign oil to American refineries by tankers – not the production of domestic oil, which is transported to refineries via pipeline – causes most oil spills.

Another compelling reason to get off foreign oil and drill baby, drill right here in the US, off our shores, and anywhere else the geologists find it.  There is enough crude oil and natural gas under our territory to supply the country for hundreds of years, and all congress has to do is say “OK, go get it.”  But that won’t happen as long as the EPA and their lobbyists pull the purse strings of congress persons.

As The Nancy Pelosi jets around the nation promoting her new book, the House is standing still, waiting for her and her democrat colleagues to bring bills up for a vote, or debate. 

She’s trying to save the planet.

Then, along with that Reid fellow, she is trying to compromise.

She also wants another economic stimulus plan.

She then criticizes Bush for unrestrained record deficit spending.

She is proud of the passage of the huge AIDS billion dollar give away.

She and her buddies will not to allow oil companies to get Americans more oil from our own shores.

With fewer than 20 legislative days before the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1, the entire appropriations process has largely ground to a halt because of the ham-handed fighting that followed Republican attempts to lift the moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration. And after promising fairness and open debate, Pelosi has resorted to hard-nosed parliamentary devices that effectively bar any chance for Republicans to offer policy alternatives.
“I’m trying to save the planet; I’m trying to save the planet,” she says impatiently when questioned. “I will not have this debate trivialized by their excuse for their failed policy.”

“I respect the office that I hold,” she says. “And when you win the election, you win the majority, and what is the power of the speaker? To set the agenda, the power of recognition, and I am not giving the gavel away to anyone.”

 

Just $5.00 for this 3 x 10″ bumper sticker.

CHICAGO » Sen. Barack Obama, speaking to a gathering of minority journalists yesterday, stopped short of endorsing an official U.S. apology to American Indians but said the country should acknowledge its history of poor treatment of certain ethnic groups.

“There’s no doubt that when it comes to our treatment of Native Americans as well as other persons of color in this country, we’ve got some very sad and difficult things to account for,” Obama told hundreds of attendees of UNITY ‘08, a convention of four minority journalism associations.

He also told the crowd of cheering journalists: “I consistently believe that when it comes to whether it’s Native Americans or African-American issues or reparations, the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds.”

Now what exactly does he mean by offering deeds?   Reparations?   Land for peace?   Money for votes?   

But why were these journalists cheering on Obama?

I must be mistaken or behind times a bit, but I was under the impression that journalists are supposed to be politically neutral so they can write their stories in a non biased way.   Ha, those days are long gone.  When Fox News first came on the scene, they immediately won a big share of the audience by insisting their news was presented as “fair and balanced.”   Now why would they do that?  

“When Obama walked on stage at the McCormick Center, many journalists in the audience leapt to their feet and applauded enthusiastically after being told not to do so. During a two-minute break halfway through the event, which was broadcast live on CNN, journalists ran to the stage to snap photos of Obama.”

There’s the answer. 

LOS ANGELES (AP) - The Los Angeles City Council has approved a one-year moratorium on new fast-food restaurants in a low-income area of the city.

The moratorium unanimously approved Tuesday is a bid to attract restaurants that offer healthier food choices to residents in a 32-square-mile area of South Los Angeles.

And why would they do that?   Because that part of the city has the largest obesity problem.   Because they want to attract restaurants with a healthier menu.  And which restaurants are those?   Those restaurant chains that decided not to enter that market.  And why?  Probably because the people of that area do not like the food or do not like the prices that the higher end places serve.  Will Applebees, El Chico, T.G.I. Friday’s, Steak and Ale, Chili’s, or Loan Star Steakhouse and Saloon make an entry into the area now?    Hey, the size of the servings at these places are enough for doggie bag take homes.   So that won’t help the obesity problem either. 

So, what would be next?  Regulating the size of the servings?

And after that?

But here again is an example of government trying to do the right thing for all the wrong reasons by using all the wrong methods.  Get the people to eat healthier is the motive.  And how do you do that when the people have their own wills and freedom to choose between eating healthy or eating fast.   Personal choice?  You can’t regulate it.

Hey here’s an idea to help the obesity problem in America.  We all know that people who choose to smoke cigarettes do not have the tendency to gain much weight, so encourage smoking.

And then think about this.   If so many people cannot rationally choose to eat a balanced diet, then how can we trust them to rationally choose to vote in our elections, so if you’re overweight then you can’t vote.  It just might be an encouragement to change their eating habits.

Will taking away the wrong choices help?  No, they’ll just drive farther to get to the next McDonalds across the line.   Just as the smoking crowd does when the taxes are lower in a neighboring state.   Just as the lottery players or casino players do when the next county or state has one.   Just as a government bureaucrat will do also. 

But it gets lots of media attention and votes.  

A study by a major University supposedly is showing that we should be thankful for the high price of gas because less people are dying in traffic related accidents. “Motor vehicle deaths dropped 22 percent in March and 18 percent in April, while gas sales dropped and estimated miles driven fell roughly 4 percent and 2 percent for each of those months.” Detroit News.

Hey, these guys are onto something there. A new program that would guarantee to lower accidental deaths due to motor vehicle accidents. Not one of those government programs where the safety regulatory issues only touch a small segment of society, but this one would eliminate all the deaths attributed to vehicle accidents, everyone of them. No more people dying from faulty mechanical breakdowns, or faulty individual mishaps, cell phone usage while driving, and all those things that spoil our concentration while behind the wheel. No one getting killed by a drunker driver. No children dying in a horrible traffic accident. No more fear and/or anxiety while driving.  Wow, who could be against such a deal.

Start by raising the price of gasoline so high that people would literally have to decide between food or gas, perhaps at $15.00 gallon to start with $11.00 of that price in new taxes pledged for new infrastructure. Then just eliminate all cars, and trucks too, because trucks do run into each other, and let’s not forget motorcycles also. Open the current roads to bicycles, electric golf carts and roller skates and expand the pedestrian safe walk ways. Still people would need to get around, going to work and the stores and the doctors office etc. quicker than bikes could do, so the government would take that money saved and pour it into absolutely safe public transportation systems from coast to coast, from city to city, from neighborhood to neighborhood. All solar electric, of course.

And the corker of all, is that these programs would save one heck of a lot of carbon dioxide polluting the atmosphere and the earth would be saved in the process also.

No more guilt feelings about not doing enough to save the planet.

That’s some kind of change we can believe in.

Yea, some of these studies are actually worth something - - - they expand the imagination.