Tuesday, April 28, 2009

An Assortment of Things to Consider

With so much going on in our world today, it is hard to focus on any one thing. We do our best to keep track, but we can feel that things are spinning out of control. I have gathered a few articles that may let you think a little more deeply about some of today's concerns.

"Offshore Oil Drilling: An Environmental Bonanza" by Humberto Fontova

"Why the Law is Foreign to Ginsburg" by Selwyn Duke

"Koh Fails the Democracy Test" by John Fonte

"Nine Questions the Left Needs to Answer About Torture" by Dennis Prager

"Survival Optional" by Thomas Sowell

"Soros Show Trials" by Matthew Vadum

"Presidential Poison" from the Wall Street Journal opinion page

Those articles cover a range of issues, yet don't touch on them all. You can read one viewpoint in the mainstream media (see "Media Sharks No More" by Jed Babbin), but you may not be aware that there are other ways of looking at these issues, and what I try to do is let you be aware of those other ways.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Sunday, February 01, 2009

Environmentalism and the Economy

Conservatives support good stewardship of our earth. We depend on the earth's resources for everything we do and to trash the earth or to waste the resources is wrong and foolish and short-sighted. However, there are radical environmentalists who insist that humans are nothing more than just another species of animal and that preserving the earth should take precedence over everything else, including human life and well-being. This is a very wrongheaded view of things.

We have watched as Al Gore and his supporters have preached global warming and have blamed man for it. They have claimed that the earth is in dire straits because of global warming. They have also proclaimed that the debate is over and some have even threatened to charge those who disagree with them with serious crimes. Additionally, those who disagree with these global warming theories face loss of funding and loss of jobs.

In spite of all this noise, the earth has actually been cooling since 1998. More and more scientists are fed up with the false information being put out by Al Gore and his comrades and are speaking out, providing much data that proves the errors in the global warming theories. I have to wonder how some scientists have become so politicized. They, of all people, should support the truth and search for the truth.

Perhaps much of the problem comes from science jobs and funding being politicized and so scientists play along with the currently politically popular theories in order to get jobs and funding. This happens with evolution, as well as with global warming. On top of all that, there are people who, because of their indoctrination at school, have so bought into evolution and, lately, global warming, that they attempt to intimidate those who disagree with them into silence, shouting them down and accusing them of being ignorant. Actually, we aren't ignorant at all. We just have the good sense to search beyond mainstream media and the popular science magazines to find the facts and to not swallow whole some idea just because it's taught in school. It's certainly true that there are crazies out there supporting any and all viewpoints, but their writings are also not where we turn for facts. I realize that no one supporting either evolution or global warming will admit that those who disagree with them have any legitimate sources of information, but we do. There are scientists and journalists out there with the integrity to dig for facts and to publish them.

What brings all this to my attention right now is that our current administration is ready to push harsh environmental regulations on the auto industry, regulations that will cost so much to implement as quickly as demanded that they will likely kill the auto industry. This after the government handed over billions to save the auto industry. Kind of schizophrenic, isn't it?

Environmentalism, in going beyond good stewardship and common sense, will ruin our economy and damage our national security. Why do I say this? Because the environmental regulations being demanded will cost more to implement than our nation can afford and because wind, solar, biofuels, and other alternate sources of energy are nowhere near well-developed enough to provide this nation with all of its energy (and they may never be), yet environmentalists want to prevent us from drilling for our own oil and natural gas, using our coal, and building nuclear plants. This leaves us dependent on foreign nations, some of whom are enemies and none of whom will put our interests over their own, which is where national security issues come into play.

Forget utopia, we're headed for dystopia if these laws and regulations are allowed to be put into effect.

As usual, I will provide you with a list of articles to read and contemplate. There are many more out there, of course. This is just a sampling.

"Tear Down the Amazon Rainforest Idol" at World Net Daily (which also links to an article in The New York Times (!) titled "New Jungles Prompt a Debate on Rain Forests" by Elizabeth Rosenthal )

"Lefty, It's Cold Outside" by Deroy Murdock (It's good to know that not everyone on the Left is fooled!)

"The Rise of Self-Defeating Industrial Policy" by Rich Lowry

"California's Carbon-Tax Lesson for America" by Edward John Craig (on the Planet Gore blog at National Review Online )

"Who is the 'They' Now in California?" by Victor Davis Hanson (This piece talks about more than just the environment, although that is in there, too.)

"Anthropogenic Global Warming: The Greatest Fraud in History?" by James Lewis

"Mileage Standards: Not the Way to Energy Independence" by Brian Douglas

"All Seriousness Aside" by Paul Chesser

"His Winter of Discontent" by William Tucker

That will give you sufficient reading for now. In addition, several of the above articles have interesting links in them.

Whether we are talking about "stimulus" bills or environmental regulation bills, it is so important that we stop the panicked rushing about and think these things through carefully, gathering actual facts to use in making the decisions.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Saturday, November 15, 2008

My Opinions

I am still pondering all the implications of an Obama presidency, coupled with a Democrat majority in Congress. I try to be optimistic and think that things won't be so bad and we'll get through this and be a stronger country for it. It is, however, very difficult to hold on to that viewpoint for very long.

Although Obama, assisted by the mainstream media, tried to keep the American people in the dark as to his real plans for America, enough information slipped out to cause serious concerns for those who care about our country and its Constitution. One issue is Obama's association with radical leftists. Whether we are talking about William Ayers or Rev. Jeremiah Wright or the others whose names you've seen here and there, we are talking about people who hate America and all she stands for. And we're going to let these people run the country?! Where are Obama's more moderate friends? Did he not have any? Let's face it--friends and associates and allies shape one's outlook a great deal.

Another issue is economics. Obama is definitely a taxer and a spender. He has plans for spending a trillion dollars of our (the taxpayers) money on various programs that have as their ultimate objective redistributing wealth. What Obama doesn't understand is that when there are wealthy people, those people invest, start businesses, and otherwise use their money to strengthen the economy and create jobs for others. The left doesn't seem to understand the difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. The former is good and right and lets everyone have a chance. The latter is bad and wrong and punishes success while rewarding failure (often brought about by laziness). This applies in all issues, not just economic ones.

There are also issues of life. Obama is one of the most radical supporters of abortion in existence. He not only supports early-term abortion, but also late-term abortion, partial-birth abortion, and allowing babies who survive abortion to die alone without any care at all.

President Ronald Reagan said that government isn't the solution, but rather the problem. Yet Obama supports big government to an extent not before seen. He thinks government should rule every aspect of our lives--what we eat, the media available to us, how our children will be educated and at what age, our religious lives (or lack thereof), what transportation we can use, what products we can purchase (are they "green" enough?), etc.

Another issue is energy. Obama has sent signals that he wants to reinstitute bans on drilling, building coal plants and nuclear plants, and other necessary items that will allow America to become energy independent (at least as much as possible) and keep energy available while the various other energy sources (wind, solar, etc.) are developed and experimented with to see if they can become viable (they are not viable now) replacements for fossil fuels.

There are national security issues. Obama thinks he can talk our enemies into being our friends. He seems very concerned with dismantling our military as much as possible. Common sense says that a strong military is the best advocate for peace, but Obama would take that away from us. He wants to prevent our military personnel from being able to do their jobs fully and freely--something that is necessary for success. There has also been talk of his wanting to create some sort of civilian force, ostensibly to do community service, but how long before they would become enforcers of politically correct behavior in ordinary citizens? Obama wants them to be as well-funded as the military is now. What will that mean?

Obama seems to have some dreamy idea of utopia. This is not grounded in reality. If he studied history and economics, he would soon see the massive failures that ideas like his have inflicted on people in the past. Obama also seems to have the idea that once he is inaugurated, he will be the absolute ruler, that everyone will do whatever he wants them to do. If they don't, he thinks he will be justified in suppressing them and silencing their voices. He has already tried this during the campaign.

At his inauguration, Obama will take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. He has already taken this oath when he has been sworn in to the public offices he has held to this point. He has done nothing to show me that he has any intention of taking this oath seriously. He has, in fact, stated that he wants to break free of the restraints put on us by the Founders in the Constitution. This is not the type of person who should be President (or a Senator, for that matter).

This all sounds extreme, but it is not my opinions that are extreme. It is Obama who is extreme.

So how did this man get elected? I suppose his charisma had something to do with it, although as the campaign progressed and he had to do interviews and not just give teleprompted speeches, it became clear that he was not a particularly good speaker without a prepared text and no interruptions for questions or comments. Frankly, I think a good part of the problem has come from education--from the public schools to colleges and universities. These sources of education have steadily drifted to the left, embracing baseless self-esteem and teaching tolerance of all things leftist--socialism, Marxism, communism, secularism, multiculturalism, and any other -ism you can think of (as long as it is a leftist -ism). Now we have a population who doesn't know much accurate history or civics and has had it drummed into their minds that there is nothing wrong with those leftist -isms. So when anyone tried to warn of Obama's socialist tendencies, they were greeted with a collective yawn and a "So what?"

The left has also been waging a battle for a long time now to eliminate religion from the public square. When religion goes, so do morals and common sense and the realization that there is right and wrong, good and evil. Everything is relative, according to these secular leftists. They have also been fighting free speech, defined by them as anything said that doesn't agree with their views. They are all for free speech and tolerance as long as it supports leftist views. If it disagrees, it has to go. For one example, take Prop 8 in California. It passed and its opponents are acting in very ugly ways. They are also being quite dramatic in discussing their pain at the defeat of Prop 8, but let one person try to inject a little reason into the conversation and the left shouts them down and accuses them of bigotry and hate. If Prop 8 had been defeated, you'd better believe the left would be gloating and would be quite hateful toward anyone who expressed even a little sorrow at its defeat. Yet said leftists don't even seem to be aware of their hypocrisy--they are too busy denouncing those who disagree with them to stop and consider their own viewpoints and those of others and think about whether they might be wrong. Nor can they seem to understand that some things are just plain wrong, no matter how sugar-coated they might be. Those on the left do not seem capable of debating the actual issues. They seem only capable of shouting down the opposition with name-calling.

For too long now, America has been dumbed down. Even those whose values and beliefs are conservative are gullible to the leftist propaganda. Many do not have the discipline or even the interest in educating themselves to correct what they learned in school or see in the mainstream media. Many have just bought into whatever they have been told. To be fair, I believe a lot of ordinary citizens who buy into leftist propaganda are well-meaning people who want to be fair and compassionate toward others. I just think that they aren't thinking the issues through and seeing the problems that will arise down the road.

The whole situation we are in makes me sad and a little frightened. Yes, we have survived many hard times before, but it hasn't been easy, and we were a stronger people then. Are we strong enough now to understand what is right and what is wrong and to fight for the right? Certainly, there are individuals who are strong enough, but are we, collectively, strong enough? I hope so, but I'm not sure. It just seems that there are many people who either don't think at all or at least don't think for themselves--they just buy into whatever the intellectual elite says they must think. This is so ironic because one thing leftists accuse conservatives of is marching in lockstep with their leaders. Yet it is leftists who are the real conformists. It is leftists who would squelch freedom and liberty.

Conservatives are not perfect. Still, conservatives recognize that there is such a thing as good and evil, right and wrong. They recognize that equality of opportunity is not the same thing as equality of outcome. The former can and should be supported, the latter should not be. Conservatives tend to be interested in thinking through the issues. Conservatives tend to be more mature in their outlook on life, recognizing that good needs to be fought for, defended, even sacrificed for. They recognize that life is not easy and it is not about getting whatever we want to satisfy our selfish desires. It is about caring for and about others and being of service and allowing others to be free, as well as themselves. Conservatives are not afraid of change. They just believe in considering the changes carefully and don't get caught up in thinking that change for its own sake is a good thing.

I have not linked to articles supporting my opinions in this post. I have been doing that repeatedly in previous posts. This post is just to express my concerns and the concerns of many other Americans as we face some potentially disasterous changes in our way of life, and to give my readers some things to consider.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, November 01, 2008

Last Minute Thoughts

Three days to go before election day on 4 November. I hope and pray that everyone who intends to vote is studying the issues and the candidates, local and state as well as national.

While I disagree with John McCain on some issues (for example, global warming), I am certain that he will be a better president for America than Barack Obama. Senator McCain is a known man of character and courage. He is far more knowledgeable about foreign affairs and other important issues than Barack Obama. We can count on him to not make foolish diplomatic errors that could prove disasterous not only for ourselves, but for other countries around the world.

Senator Obama is secretive and evasive and a known ally of socialist/Marxist/communist people and organizations. He has lately been lowering the taxable ceiling from $250,000 to $120,000 annual income in various speeches by himself and his supporters. His planned expenditures total several trillion dollars. The only way he can pay for all that is to tax more and more people. Too often, the words "redistribute wealth" make people think of taking money from millionaires and billionaires and distributing it to the poor. There aren't enough millionaires and billionaires to pay for all of that, so much of the middle class will find their incomes taxed to the max. What people aren't thinking about, either, is the fact that it is the people with the most money who invest and start businesses and give to charity (usually--the Bidens and the Obamas haven't been all that generous with their own money). It is the wealthier citizens who do things that create jobs and other opportunities, which is far more helpful to people than just giving them some dollars.

There are also countless questions about Senator Obama's honesty. Why won't he prove that he is a naturalized citizen and therefore eligible for the office of President? Why won't he release his donor lists? Why won't he get specific about his plans for America? And what about the known instances of him and his campaign trying to intimidate to silence those who disagree with him? He's tried that in Missouri and in Pennsylvania, at least. What about ACORN's voter registration fraud being investigated in a dozen states?

Another thing about Obama that would be funny if it weren't so serious for our country is his lack of accomplishments. And yet his campaign dares to claim that Governor Sarah Palin isn't qualified! That is laughable. She has far more serious, executive experience than he has. She is far more ready for higher office than he is. Then, too, there is the race issue. It is Obama's campaign and not McCain's that has been playing the race card by labeling everything as racist.

America was founded on freedom and must remain that way. Why are we strong? Because we have had the freedom to work our way up from wherever we start to wherever we want to be. We have had the incentive to create and invent and improve life for all. We have had the freedom to create a strong military. That will all disappear if Obama's wealth redistribution, reduction in military, and other socialist policies are put into practice.

When it comes to healthcare, the more the government interferes, the more it costs. Let the free market capitalism reign. We will see competition driving prices downward. It's the same with education. Let there be competition among public and private schools. Let people have vouchers so that they can choose the best schools for their children. Competition will improve the quality of education faster than any government program.

And let's talk military. Senator Barney Frank wants to cut the military by 25%. If we do not have a strong military run by men of character who know what is at stake, we will never have world peace. Other countries will see no reason to hold back on their attacks, including here in the United States, if our military is weakened. Preparation for war is the best incentive for peace.

The last thing our wonderful country needs is to be run by liberal Democrats such as Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi. They want to cripple our economy by preventing our use of our own energy deposits, by going along with extreme environmentalists, and by taxing and spending. We all know it was liberal policies by Democrats and a refusal to heed warnings made by conservative Republicans that caused our current financial problems. That is just a sample of what we can look forward to if we elect those who ignore the Constitution or reinterpret it to suit their own agendas. Make no mistake about it--it will not be the elite liberals whose wealth is redistributed. They will exempt themselves from the policies they wish to inflict on the people of the United States.

The problems we have in America today were caused largely by the socialists policies of FDR and LBJ and others who have had the foolish notion that the government can manage our money and our lives better than we can. Government has its essential uses, but interfering in the free market and in people's lives are not among those uses. The more we get government out of our lives, the better and stronger America will be. A free people is far more generous than a forced people, who cannot afford to be charitable because all their money is going to a bloated government who uses much of that money just to pay for administering programs, never mind actually helping people.

As much as possible, government should be small and should be local, where the people can keep a closer eye on what is being done and can put a quick stop to waste and fraud. There have certainly been Republicans who have bought into the tax and spend and big government foolishness. They can be voted out of office, too, if they show no signs of mending their ways.

There is a lot at stake for America these days. Think about freedom and liberty. Reread the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America. Think seriously about the lessons of history. And whatever happens on Tuesday, think seriously about keeping a close eye on government and contacting your representatives at both state and national levels and letting them know how you expect them to govern on your behalf.

And may God continue to bless America.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, August 16, 2008

Issues in Politics and on the World Stage

Sometimes the problems of today seem overwhelming. It is difficult to keep them all in mind. We need to do our best to be aware of what's going on and what it all means. New Media Journal has a good editorial titled "Ignore 'The Perfect Storm' at Our Own Peril" by Frank Salvato. In this editorial, Mr. Salvato discusses the way that many, though not all, politicians put their own quest for political power above the good of the country. One way the politicians have done this recently is by distracting Americans from some serious threats, from without and within, that we should be paying attention to.

An article from the Wall Street Journal provides some information about Russia and its use of finance to increase its power. It is "Kremlin 'Capitalism' Is a Threat to the West" by Peter Charles Choharis. Mr. Choharis provides a look at the ways Russia is flexing its economic muscles as well as its military muscles in order to gain power and control. It also shows a glimpse of some ways Russia might be circumvented, but it won't be easy, with Russia so willing to use its military. This, too, is a situation Americans would do well to stay informed about.

An article about our Presidential politics at Townhall.com is called "Not All African Americans Starry-Eyed for Obama" by Floyd and Mary Beth Brown. In this article, the Browns point out that many of Obama's ideas are far from what Dr. Martin Luther King's were and from what many African Americans believe. There are quotes from one of Dr. King's nieces, Dr. Alveda King, on the topic, as well. This article brings to the fore some serious thoughts for contemplation by all Americans.

A hat tip (if I had a hat!) to JR for the last 2 articles.

Labels: , , , ,

Saturday, August 02, 2008

All is not Lost in Washington, DC

I read an interesting article about the adjourning of the US House of Representatives for their August vacation. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wanted to shut down the House without allowing a vote on an energy policy. She succeeded, but what happened next assures me that not all of Congress is indifferent to the needs of the American people.

The article comes from Human Events and was written by John Gizzi, who is Political Editor at Human Events. The title is "Republicans Rebel Against Adjournment; Pelosi Turns Out Lights". You should read the entire article to get the flavor of what happened. It's great!

By now everyone has noticed (or should have noticed) how arrogant and elitist Barack Obama is. At American Thinker Kyle-Anne Shiver has written an article about it called "Why I'm Thanking God for Obama". It'll give you some insights to ponder.

Labels: , ,

Saturday, July 05, 2008

First Yellow Journalism, Now Yellow Science

From The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition: Commonsense About Climate Change comes an article by James Kerian called "Yellow Science". The first two paragraphs explain the term:
In the late 19th century, William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer developed what would come to be known as yellow journalism. By disregarding what had been standard journalistic methods, particularly in regards to the verifying of sources, these two publishers were able both to push their country toward war with Spain and dramatically increase the circulation of their respective newspapers.

Man has always had a healthy desire for knowledge, and it is the feeding of this hunger that ennobles journalism. Hearst and Pulitzer were acutely aware that man has a less healthy but no less voracious desire to believe that he has knowledge, particularly knowledge of something sensational. It is the feeding of this hunger that irreparably disgraced journalism, and a century later now threatens to do the same to science.
The article itself has a lot to say about the unscientific methods used to promote global warming and create a climate of fear among people so that those pushing global warming can push through their agendas, which will damage economies and production of all kinds around the world. The final paragraph is blunt, but true:
The long-term results of yellow journalism have probably been more devastating than the war it started. Journalists have lost the respectability of their profession, and the public has lost real journalism. We are in very real danger, as scientists and as a nation, of losing the respectability of a professional community that has done so much to make this country great in the past hundred years. If yellow science overcomes real science it will not only be on account of the greed, ambition, and cowardice of our scientists but also the sloth and cowardice of a public that is unwilling to stand up and demand professionalism. This is why, as the editors of the New York Press said in 1897, I "called them yellow because they are yellow."
I recommend reading the entire article. It will give you something to consider carefully. For an excellent additional source of information, try "Editorial: The Great Global Warming Hoax?" by James A. Peden. It's informative as well as fun to read, although the science may make your head spin a bit!

Labels: , , , ,

Saturday, June 14, 2008

Politics and Government

There are many articles I could link to today--articles about how we need to develop our own energy resources in the US, articles about the problems with global warming and the economic crisis that would follow if we start passing a bunch of restrictive laws, the problems that government generates, the problems an Obama presidency would create, and so forth. There are so many subjects that we as citizens need to be aware of so that we are acting and voting responsibly. I think that what I will do for today's post is simply list links to articles that can give us all something to think about in various areas.

The Climate Alarmist Manifesto by Marc Sheppard

Thank You, Big Oil by Todd Keister

Revisiting Obama's Speech to AIPAC by Rick Richman

Increase American-Made Energy to Reduce Gas Prices by Rep. John Boehner

Global Warming and the Price of a Gallon of Gas by John Coleman

Bag-Man for Ecoextremists by Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson

Congressional Problem Creation by Walter Williams

The Consumer-First Energy Act of 2008 Will Only Increase Gas Prices and Energy Costs by Ben Lieberman

Liberty's Best Hope: Why American Leadership is Needed for the 21st Century by Kim R. Holmes, Ph.D.; Henry R Nau, Ph.D.; and Dov Zakheim, Ph.D.

Who is Obama? Where is the Press? by Tony Blankley

I realize that is a long list of articles, but they give a good overview of some of the serious problems facing America today.

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, June 02, 2008

Energy Concerns

With gas prices, and other prices, rising, we are all getting concerned. In spite of the Senate's dog-and-pony show grilling oil execs, the oil companies are not the problem. In fact, they would be the major solution, if we would let them. The problem is our government, which is supposed to be working for us, but often is not. The government has so seriously restricted the USA from developing its own energy resources that we find ourselves hog-tied. It is time, as they say, to stop the madness.

I realize that environmental concerns are real. However, no company is going to risk the problems that would come to them if they carelessly polluted the environment while developing natural resources. In addition, with today's technology and know-how, we can develop our resources in a much cleaner way than in the past. We need to be good stewards of the earth and its resources, but that does not mean, "Don't touch anything!"

A number of countries are drilling off shore in various places around the world--Russia and Cuba (with China), some of the European countries, and so forth. I am not saying we should "follow the crowd" just to be following the crowd. I am saying that other countries are busily developing resources, and since we need to as well, why aren't we?

The resources I am talking about are oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy. All of these need to be developed, starting now. In addition, we can continue working on alternative resources, such as wind, solar, liquid coal methods, and biofuels. Regarding that last, I believe the powers that be jumped the gun on ethanol. It needs work to be more efficient and less polluting. There is also much research needed in all areas, and we need to increase our refining capacity. This all takes time and huge amounts of money. Oil companies need the profits they are getting in order to do research and development. They actually get very little of the $4.00 from each gallon of gas--the government takes a far larger share.

I have a number of links to share with you about this issue. Please feel free to mention others in the comments. There are many more informative links around the internet with facts and figures on energy and the environment.


Federal Government sites:


US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (see especially the Minority Page)


US Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources


The House Committee on Energy and Commerce


The House Committee on Natural Resources


The House Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming


These provide a starting point for learning about what the government is doing and not doing. You can email the committees as well as individual legislators to tell them what you feel is needed or not needed. Don't forget to find out what your state legislature is doing and give them feedback, as well. In addition to the energy issue, you can look at the committee pages for other issues of concern and email about those, also.


A petition:


American Solutions Petition (this is to be presented to the federal government and is about energy. Details on the site.)


Some informative articles:


"Drill Here, Drill Now" by Jed Babbin (This is the article that told me about the above petition and it discusses the petition.)


"Congress, Gasoline and Hearings--Look! There's a Diversion" by George Landrith


"Top 10 Energy Questions for the US Senate" by Human Events


"Carbon Chastity: The First Commandment of the Church of the Environment" by Charles Krauthammer


"Environmentalists' Wild Predictions" by Walter Williams


"Congressional Problem Creation" by Walter Williams


"Too 'Complex'?", "Too 'Complex'? Part II", and "Too 'Complex'? Part III" by Thomas Sowell (This is about economics and supply and demand, but mentions energy as one issue involved.)


"When 'Market-Based' is a Façade" by George Will


"How Al Gore is Getting Fat off of a Starving World" by Jerry Bowyer (about food prices as affected by ethanol)


"Oil Crisis Solved by Resources, Not Gimmicks" by Kathryn Jean Lopez


"Coal-Cap Disaster" by Lawrence Kudlow


"Windfall-Profit Nonsense" by John Stossel


"Gas Prices and the Blame Game" by Ed Feulner

"The 'Big Oil' Witch Hunt" by Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson


The Heritage Foundation's Energy and Environment page (Here you will find dozens of well-researched articles about various aspects of energy and environment issues.)


This seems like a long list of links, but the energy situation needs to be resolved now because it will take time to get the various energy production projects going, and to build nuclear plants and expand refineries. If Bill Clinton hadn't vetoed a bill that would have allowed all this in 1995, we would now be enjoying the benefits of producing much of our own energy and who knows how much farther along we would be in the research and development of alternative energy resources? I ask you to read these articles and look into what our government is doing. Then contact your government representatives and let them know that the time for foolishness is over and it is time America produced its own energy freely.

Labels: , , , , ,

Saturday, May 17, 2008

Do You Know What Your Government is Doing?

We are overwhelmed with information these days, so it is not surprising that we don't always know what is going on, especially if we think government and politics is boring and don't pay attention to those areas of our lives.

Actually, the more you learn about government and politics, the more interesting it gets. The thing to remember, though, is that what our government does and doesn't do affects our lives and our futures and it should be a priority to know what is going on and to educate ourselves about the Constitution and how government is supposed to work, as compared to how it does work.

One good place to study our nation's documents is at The Patriot Post. They have a section called "Historic Documents" which has links to documents throughout history that have influenced our nation, and current documents as well. While you're there, look through the archives and read essays and their newsletters (Monday Brief, Wednesday Chronicle, and Friday Digest). You'll learn a lot and be entertained at the same time.

Now, back to our current government. Make use of The U.S. Government's Official Web Portal. You can do all sorts of things there. There is a lot of material on the whole government site, so take some time to explore it occasionally and learn what's there. You can visit sites of the various congressional committees and find out what they are doing and have done. You can email committees or you can find out who your senators and representatives are and email them. Look on the right side of the screen at the home page and you'll see a box labeled "Government Agencies". For our purposes today, click on "Federal Government". You will find a link for A-Z agencies and also the three branches of government. Click on "Legislative Branch". Here you will find links to the Senate and the House of Represenatives, as well as agencies that support Congress (like the GAO). This is where you can find out what committees there are and who's on them and what they are working on.

What this is all leading up to--although I want everyone to educate themselves about the government generally--is a couple of things that either have been voted on or will be voted on that I think shows our congress neglecting the best interests of the American people.

First up, on 13 May 2008, the Senate rejected the McConnell Amendment to the Flood Insurance Bill, which contains the American Energy Production Act (Is that convoluted enough for you?). Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, had this to say:

“Today, the Senate missed an important opportunity to end the cycle of dependence on foreign oil. The McConnell/Domenici amendment the Senate rejected today would have produced up to 24 billion barrels of American oil, enough to supply our nation with no foreign imports for five years.

“Some around here may wonder why Congress has such low approval ratings. This is why. Americans are being forced to pay higher and higher prices at the pump, with no relief in sight. Adopting this amendment would have given us a path forward, and send a strong signal to the world’s oil markets that America was willing to fully develop its own energy resources. I strongly support all of our efforts to reduce consumption and develop renewable energy, but we cannot rely on those alone to solve our problems.

“I am pleased, however, that the Senate did adopt an amendment to suspend filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). Although this amendment won’t have a dramatic effect on gas prices, it does reflect the fact that when oil now costs over $120 dollars a barrel, we need to begin doing things differently. I wish more of my colleagues had recognized that fact with regard to increasing domestic production.”
Over at the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works page, Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK), on his minority page, gave more detail about this Senate vote:

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, today voiced disappointment with Senate Democrats for their failure to vote in favor of common-sense legislation that would bring down the price of energy and increase American jobs. Senate Democrats defeated the McConnell amendment 4720 to S. 2284, the Flood Insurance bill, down party lines by a vote of 42-56.
Senator Inhofe specifically said:

“Today’s vote on energy legislation represents a stark contrast between Republicans and Democrats,” Senator Inhofe said. “Rather than raise taxes, block production, increase regulations, and call for investigations, the Republicans offered common-sense legislation that works to bring down the price of gas at the pump and the cost of energy in our homes. The Republican approach brings down prices by increasing access to domestic supplies, expanding the nation’s refinery capacity, and promoting market-based alternatives for our energy future. Importantly, the bill includes key provisions from my Gas Petroleum Refiner Improvement & Community Empowerment Act of 2007 (Gas PRICE Act), legislation that is designed to improve the permitting process for the expansion of existing and construction of new refineries. Unfortunately, no matter how high energy costs soar, too many Democrats and liberal special interest allies continue to block any meaningful measures to help alleviate the pain of high energy costs on American families.

“There should be no surprise that Congress is back again looking for ways to address skyrocketing energy costs. Just four months ago I voted against a Democrat energy bill specifically because I believed it failed Oklahoma and the nation by doing nothing to address rising energy costs. Absent from their ‘energy’ bill were domestic energy resources – such as oil, natural gas, nuclear and clean coal technologies – that are essential to securing an American energy supply that is stable, diverse, and affordable. Today Republicans offered an amendment that would increase domestic energy supplies and once again Democrats voted no.”
There is much more detail on the page.

How many of you even knew such a vote was going on?

Another item on the Senate agenda is described in the 18 April 2008 blog entry on The Inhofe EPW Press Blog. A couple of statements from the blog entry are:
Sen. Inhofe: “Recent hearings in both the Senate and House on the Clean Water Restoration Act made clear the tremendous opposition to the bill by landowners, cattleman, and local governments. Both Committees heard repeatedly in testimony that clean water is critical for our well being; however, this bill does not lead to cleaner water and is nothing more than a federal land grab attempt. If Congress is to amend the Clean Water Act, any changes must provide clarity and reduce lawsuits. This bill does neither. It will not curtail litigation, but rather increase it, as stakeholders seek legal clarity on what exactly are the outer limits of Congressional authority. We should not propose, let alone pass legislative language that increases uncertainty, burdens local governments, and challenges the sanctity of private property rights.”

Rep. Mica: “There is significant nationwide opposition to this unprecedented and historic federal jurisdiction grab, made clear by the lengthy Transportation Committee hearing on Mr. Oberstar’s bill. Multiple witnesses testified to the confusion, costs, delays, and endless litigation that will result should this overreaching bill become law. The responsible regulatory agencies also voiced their concerns with the bill, and testified that they are gaining significant experience with their recent guidance and believe that such a heavy-handed legislative approach is unwarranted. H.R. 2421 and its companion bill in the Senate could lead to the regulation of virtually every wet area in the country, with dramatic impacts on American agri-business, manufacturing, housing, and other businesses, as well as state, local, and individual water and land use rights. With our economy already in troubled waters, this legislation could push American jobs overseas and put another nail in our economic coffin."
Again, how many of you knew of the existence of this bill, which seeks to give control of all US waters and all activities tied to such waters to Congress? Do you realize that all activities, public and private, are tied to US waters in some way? Do you realize what a power grab this is?

I know we can't all be aware of everything all the time, but it should certainly be a priority to keep an eye on what the federal government is doing, and also our state and local governments. You can find links to the state, local, and tribal governments in the same box where we clicked on federal government above. These websites provide names, addresses, and telephone numbers, as well as ways to email your representatives at all levels. If people will just remind our elected officials who they work for (we, the people), it might help prevent some catastrophes.

Do you have ideas on how to keep track of what the government is doing, or on effective ways to let the representatives know of your concerns?

Labels: , , , ,

Saturday, May 03, 2008

Imagine a World Without Environmental Activists

Not that taking care of our environment is a bad thing, but it is the going to extremes that causes everybody grief. I ran across an article a The New Media Journal which, patterned after the movie "It's a Wonderful Life", will give you some things about environmental policy to consider.

The article is "It's a Wonderful Life...Environmentally Speaking" by Greg Lewis. He imagines what the world might be like if environmentalists hadn't forced restrictions or outright bans on drilling for oil in America and building nuclear facilities in America. Interesting scenarios. Perhaps things wouldn't turn out precisely as he imagines, but one can see how much better things might be, and why. I think it's a good read.

On a similar note, also at The New Media Journal, take a look at the article "When Gas Reaches $5 a Gallon, Thank Liberals!" by JB Williams. In this piece, Mr. Williams considers the high cost of gas and why it is so high. He points out the high prices in the European Union, which those on the left seem to consider a model for their policies, and he points out who the highest oil producers are who can "hold America hostage over an oil barrel". He also breaks down the cost of a gallon of gasoline and tells us where the money goes (hint: very little goes to oil companies). This article, too, will give you something to consider.

Labels: , , , ,

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Energy Resources

One thing that frustrates me about our government is the reluctance to develop our own energy resources, whether it is ANWR drilling, offshore drilling, nuclear power, or other sources of power for our use. The Heritage Foundation has an article about alternatives to tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which would only help for a short time and would leave us unprepared for the emergencies the SPR is meant to help with. The article is called "Don't Tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, But Tap Elsewhere" by Ben Lieberman. It explains why we should not use the SPR for temporary price relief and what the SPR is really for.

In a related blog post at The US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works Minority Page, there is a 16 January 2008 entry called "EPW FACT OF THE DAY: Committee Hearing on High Energy Prices Should Focus on Actual Solutions". This post talks about the need for domestic energy supply development and the blocking of this development by liberal Democrats in Congress, which hurts our country.

It is foolish to allow special interest groups to block needed domestic energy supply development and I hope you will contact your congressional representives to encourage this needed development.

Labels: