Oil as a political pawn

Did you know that there are 90 billion barrels of oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) that accounts for an estimated 22% of the unexplored resources on Earth? Did you know that there is pending legislation in Congress that would open the Arctic Energy Slope to energy exploration and would be limited to a 0.01% development footprint? Did you know that the bill would grant coastal states the authority to keep exploration 100 miles away from their coast, that they would share in the revenues received, and that additional revenues would be invested in long-term alternative energy trust funds to promote renewable and cleaner energy sources? And did you know that there has never been an oil spill or disaster (even through the fiercest ocean storms imaginable) related to offshore drilling? In sum, this legislation would drive down the price of gasoline, enrich the coffers of struggling coastal states, and would actually fund additional development of alternative energy sources. And did you know Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to even allow the House to vote up or down on the legislation before adjourning for a 5-week recess? Remember the strategy of the Democrats: do everything possible to block anything that might boost our economy, talk only of gloom and doom, and hope that the masses will somehow be unaware that the Dems are the ones stifling economic reform and blindly buy into their "hope and change" presidential candidate. They don't care one bit about how their obstructiveness affects the pocket books of Americans. They will do anything to get elected. As Speaker Pelosi begins her 5-week vacation without even allowing a vote on the legislation, many Americans will now have to decide if they can even afford a vacation.

Barack Obama is taking narcissism to new heights. Never has there been a nominee with a wider gap between his evaluation of himself and the sum total of his achievements. He has not produced even one important legislative achievement in his three years in Washington (maybe because for the past 18 months he's been campaigning for the presidency) instead of dealing with the significant issues of our time. As a law professor at Harvard, he never produced a single notable published piece. His best known work is a biography he wrote about, you guessed it, himself. He articulates a Middle East policy without visiting Iraq or Afghanistan, nor meeting with our top military leaders. He wants our children to speak Spanish, but he does not. Recently, he put a quasi-presidential seal on his podium. Because he has no foreign policy experience or credentials, he now is planning to visit Europe, with awe-struck American journalists in tow, so he can "look" presidential. Obama may think that he can dazzle us with rallies and "feel-good" rhetoric, but there is no substance to him. His resume is empty. His long relationships with a race-baiting preacher, unrepentent American terrorists, and convicted felon are proof that he will associate with anyone and say anything that will advance his personal agenda, and then disown them at the drop of a hat. Obama has never done anything that remotely qualifies him to be President. In my lifetime, he is easily the most unprepared and therefore dangerous nominee. I'm not ready to turn my country over to him.

The truth about oil prices

A vote for a Democrat this year will insure that the price of gasoline, and most other staples too, will never go down in your lifetime. Why? Because the Democrats are beholden to the ultra environmentalists who want to de-industrialize America, the exact opposite course that has lead to our greatness. Democrats, as far back as Bill Clinton, have refused to allow our oil companies to tap the vast seas of oil that sit right under our own land and on the outer continental shelf, insuring our dependence on foreign oil. The Democrats want the price of gasoline to stay right where it is now, believing that maintaining the hardship will rally the suffering public to want "change" and carry their candidate into the White House. The gamble is that the public will not exercise any critical thinking as to the real reasons and the real culprits in this sham. The futures markets will continue to pummel the price of oil because the Democrats' policies insure America of a continued shortage. The price of gasoline has gone from $2.10 to $4.60 in the two short years that the Democrats have controlled Congress. The rising price of oil permeates every sector of our economy, but especially the poor. Do the voters understand that the Democrats want their vote but don't care one bit about the economic havoc they are causing them? Do you really believe that the prices will ever go down if we refuse to bring up the oil that sits right under our feet?

Economic truths

Count on the national media to shun their homework (and the facts) and only report what fits their own agenda. The present state of America's economy is the latest example. The national "talking heads" uniformly trumpet comparisons to the Great Depression of the 1930's, and the unmistakable inference that only political "change" can avoid a repeat of history. Conveniently, actual facts are ignored because they do not fit the game plan of the national press. Firstly, America is not in recession. A recession is defined as two quarters of negative economic growth. WE HAVEN'T EVEN HAD ONE QUARTER OF NEGATIVE GROWTH. Secondly, America's steady unemployment rate of 5% (a good historical figure) hardly compares to the 25% rate of the Great Depression. Thirdly, today's stock market value losses of approximately 10% pale compared to the 75% losses of the 1930's. Over 9,000 banks failed in the G.D. and depositors lost over $140 billion. Nothing remotely like that is happening now. Today's economics more closely mirror the 1970's with its inflation problems than the deflation woes of the 1930's. By recklessly using phrases like "the great depression" each evening, the national press can influence the confidence and behavior of people that might aggravate our economic conditions. People might be more inclined to "change" if they think doom is on the horizon. Yes, America is in the midst of a slowing down of its growth; we're continuing to grow albeit at a slower rate. For the national press to glibly fear-monger the public with exaggerated comparisons each evening reflects the disregard of truth and responsibility that it once had, and how it is now powered by its own agenda.

Barack Obama-gasm

The national media has been busy trying to induce an extended Obama-gasm for the electorate with no end in sight. Largely liberal in perspective, Obama is the feature story each day with the national media as he is portrayed as a messiah-like figure ready to right all wrongs using buzz words like "hope" and "change", but usually short on actual details. Obama's lack of legislative experience, campaign gaffes, questionable acquaintances, naive policy positions, and razor thin resume (quick, tell me anything that he has accomplished) are either ignored or glossed over. Obama's appeal is real. His charisma, good looks, and oratory skills are undeniable. But, in the end, those kinds of assets are more Hollywood than Washington DC. His pledge to unite the country is pure drivel. A democracy works best when there are polar feelings. And besides, he can't even unite his own party, fellow Democrat Hillary actually received more popular votes in the primaries. And his seriously lame excuses and standard formula answer that his long friendships with an unrepentant terrorist, a sleazy Chicago felon, and a race-baiting preacher are simply "not the person that I knew" are not believable. Equally, his belief that simply sitting down with rogue dictators who have promised the destruction of America and Israel could some how get them to change their attitudes and actions toward America is downright scary. I guess after Ahmadinejad nukes Israel, Obama would solemnly announce that "Mahmoud isn't the man I knew". Voters, please think past the sweeping, feel-good rhetoric that Obama expertly spouts. Frankly, I'm sure Obama is a terrific person, father, and husband, but the toughest job in the world requires so much more than he brings to the table. These are serious times, and Obama's attributes simply don't translate into the national and international experience that the job demands.

Naive foreign policy

Approximately 50% of all American soldier deaths in Iraq can be traced back to the arming and training of foreign fighters from Iran. Its President denies that the Holocaust ever took place, and regularly threatens to "wipe Israel off the map". It has an aggressive nuclear program that very soon will be weapons grade ready. Syria is a state sponsor of the terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah whose stated purpose is the elimination of Israel and who are active every day in that pursuit. Syria was in the final stages of a nuclear facility (one they continually denied every even existed) until it was recently bombed by Israel. North Korea was/is the primary nuclear vendor to Syria and has arguably the world's worst human rights record as its people literally starve. Democratic candidate Barack Obama has stated, but rival Hillary Clinton has not, that he would meet with these nations' leaders "without preconditions". This is naive foreign policy. Meeting with these terrorists, and yes they are unabashed terrorists, would only boost their domestic stature and political stability. And exactly what would we be negotiating? That they would reverse their stated goals, stop their targeting of innocent civilians (and the killing of their own suicide terrorists) and live peacefully beside a suddenly recognized Israel? That is Alice in Wonderland thinking and dangerous to its core. It's great sounding domestic rhetoric, but naive foreign policy. Economic sanctions, the withholding of foreign investments, and diplomatic isolation are the best tools to employ against these rogue nations. Negotiating with them without preconditions is unproductive appeasement. On this specific point, President Bush is spot on.

Judicial Activism

The recent underwhelming 4-3 decision by the California Supreme Court to reinterpret the centuries-old meaning of marriage was a frightening example of judicial activism and callous disregard for the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box. This activism could have been applied to any issue, not just marriage, and that's the dangerous precedence. The ruling flew in the face of the most basic premise of the people's right to decide fundamental issues of public policy for themselves. In my view, the Court overstepped its role in substituting its own social views, contrary to the people's will and age-old global societal norms, by concluding that our Constitution suddenly demanded a redefinition of marriage. How pompous and arrogant that four robed justices, with no accountability at all as to the repercussions of its ruling, could force its will on all of us and invalidate the citizen's standing as the ultimate lawgiver in a free society. This was a shameful abuse of power by a tiny few who thumbed their noses at centuries of established societal order.