Another Thought on Pelosi’s Energy Bill

I’ll probably think up a number of other reasons to feel like I’ve just visited a proctologist when considering Nancy Pelosi’s Energy Bill, but this one is almost one hemorrhoid too many.

By setting the drilling limits at 50 to 100 miles, the House Democrats under the unflinching wisdom of Nancy Pelosi have virtually guaranteed the Republic of China exclusive drilling rights in the Florida Straits, that is of course, unless Exxon Mobil, Chevron and Conoco want to go begging to Hugo Chavez’ mentor, Fidel Castro,  or his brother Raul, for permission.

Oops, then that would make it a foreign source again, wouldn’t it?

And don’t forget about that postage stamp sized footprint that would only be required in ANWR to tap the oil and gas in millions of acres of Alaska. Using this analogy, China can put in a well within the Cuban side of the Straits and, with a little horizontal drilling get oil from … where?

Off Miami or Naples … or how about from right under Disney World?

Thanks Nancy. Why is it every time I think of you I feel like my house has been robbed?


New York Times Slaps Down McCain Op Ed


Somehow, I thought this was the United States … and New York City was part of it … and the New York Times supported democracy … and free speech. Apparently like a two-bit, tin-horn dictator, the New York Times only supports freedom of speech when it adheres to their political agenda. I would be the first to vote for the New York Times to receive the Hugo Chavez/Fidel Castro Award for Journalistic Freedom.

Since John McCain won’t declare a timetable for withdrawal of troops from Iraq, the Times won’t publish his op ed. Since John McCain has steadfastly been opposed to a declared timetable, doesn’t this, in essence, amount to journalistic blackmail and political censorship?

Since the staff of the New York Times is an ardent supporter of Barack Obama, is this an indication of the direction that Obama’s policies on freedom of speech and political dissidence will take? I suppose the disturbing thing about this is that I’ve been listening to Democratic pundits defending the New York Times editorial position all day. I doubt that Obama himself will have anything to say about it since his usual tactic is to allow his cronies to deal with his dirty work while maintaining “plausible deniability”. Yet, that’s probably the smart thing to do, since it usually takes his campaign advisors at least four days to figure out an appropriate response and Obama rarely shows the capacity to think on his feet. Smart, intellectually adroit lawyers can actually practice their profession in the courtroom. The rest teach, work for the broadcast media where their opinions are scripted, or practice in other areas, like politics, where the demands on their mental capacity isn’t acutely challenged. Is that why Obama returned to South Chicago after graduating from Harvard Law School … to hide in the womb of like minded people who wouldn’t challenge him?

What to Do with the WindFall Profits From American Oil Companies

This week, as the first quarter financial reports have come in from America’s top oil companies such as Exxon Mobil and Chevron, presidential candidates, most notably Hillary Clinton, and other politicians, primarily Democratic, have shouted “Outrage” and clamored for as yet unspecified windfall profit taxes to be placed upon American oil companies.

In response to these cries of political posturing, the oil companies have meekly, and weakly, responded by pointing out that their profit margin is no greater than that of other U.S. industry segments. It’s frankly ironic when American industries have to apologize for making normal profits.

Windfall profit taxes on American oil companies would temporarily put billions of dollars into the coffers of the U.S. treasury but it would do nothing to recoup the billions of dollars that we are sending to Canada, Mexico, Nigeria, Venezuela or other oil producing countries. Hillary Clinton proposes spanking the hands of these countries and admonishing them for their greed.

Senator Clinton proposes using these windfall profit taxes to pay for “green industries” to reduce our dependence on oil. I think that’s great, but what is she going to do with Senator Ted Kennedy who won’t allow currently available renewable energy sources like the wind farm proposed to be constructed in Nantucket Sound to be built?

While Americans are being worked into a frenzy of outrage over the profits of oil companies, the true culprits contributing to the nearly $4 a gallon cost of gasoline like Senator Kennedy and other special interest groups are quietly sipping their mint juleps on their verandas enjoying their unspoiled scenic views.

I wholeheartedly agree with Senator Clinton for the need to increase our research and development of alternative sources of energy as well as the use of currently available technologies.

In typical lawyer fashion, Senator Clinton wants the United States to develope laws to allow the United States and it’s citizens to file suits against the offending entities such as other countries in the World Court as if, in some way, this might force OPEC to change it’s ways. How about allowing U.S. citizens to file suit against Senator Kennedy to force him to get his dead butt out of the way of the construction of the wind farm?

If anyone would take the time to look at the financials of American oil companies, they would see that the increase in net profits really aren’t that great when compared to the overall size and cost of operations of each of these companies.

American oil companies annually spend billions of dollars in foreign countries drilling for oil, refining oil products to be imported to the United States as well as for the transportation of crude oil and refined products to the U.S. while billions of gallons of crude oil and billions of metric yards of natural gas lie untouched off American shores and access to these resources are restricted from use … that is … use by us.

While we sit idly by China and Venezuela are renovating and expanding Cuba’s capacity to drill for oil and oil companies from Canada, Spain, Norway, Brazil, India and Malaysia are actively drilling for oil in Cuba both onshore and offshore in the Florida Straits. With horizontal drilling, oil rigs placed near the accepted boundaries between the United States and Cuba could actually allow the tapping of oil within U.S. territorial waters by foreign countries. Additionally, what is to stop foreign countries from drilling off the U.S. in nonterritorial waters?

So, what should be done with the windfall profits of American oil companies?

The nonsensical insanity should be stopped and these companies should be allowed to begin drilling off the continental United States and encouraged to build new refining capacity within the United States. Paradoxically, the price of crude oil would decrease, the price of gasoline would decrease and their profits would decrease … most likely in that order. And guess what, that might even create come good paying jobs for Americans … right here at home.

Unfortunately, simple solutions that make too much sense are just beyond the comprehension of American lawmakers who have too much to loose … specifically their demagoguery … by doing something sensible.

Frankly, I wouldn’t be suprised if that little pig of a Venezuelan dictator, Hugo Chavez, wasn’t throwing a few coins in the direction of some select U.S. lawmakers and environmental groups as he laughingly takes his loot to the bank … in Switzerland or the Caymans. Wasn’t there a Kennedy praising Chavez’ donations of fuel oil this past winter?

Jeremiah Wright: “Barack said what he had to say.”

Previews of Jeremiah Wright’s interview with Bill Moyer are now hitting the media.

A quote attributed to Reverend Wright is, “Barack Obama said what he had to say as a politician.”


How many people can remember that TV show, “What’s My Line”? Will the real Barack Obama please stand up?

When are we going to stop getting a politician’s lip service from Barack? The answer might well be “never” or “not before the general election” since he may know that the vast majority of Americans may not like what they hear.

Barack Obama wants campaigning to be about the issues. Well, the American public would like for the campaign to be about the issues also. But, they also want the person presenting the issues to be someone that that can trust regardless of his or her stand on the issues. If the candidate isn’t well known to the public then the character of the candidate becomes an issue … like it or not.

What the American public … or that part of the American public that hasn’t bought Barack Obama hook, line and sinker … wants to know is, “Can they trust Barack Obama to be a man of his word?” It’s the old “in your ear” analogy. It may sound good, but can you believe it?

Well, according to Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama says what he needs to say to get elected President. So. Don’t all candidates? Sure. But, it’s a fact that you can trust some more than others … and … if you can’t completely trust them, or what they say … usually the candidate has enough of a track record that you can predict where they’re coming from. Basically, Hillary Clinton is an known quantity. You may not believe everything she says, but you have a good idea of where she’s coming from. The same applies to John McCain.

Barack Obama is a different matter. Several months ago, I actually preferred him over Hillary Clinton. Then I realized I knew next to nothing about him. I decided to start looking beyond the hype and what he’s written about himself and what he says he wants to do for the country. And, quite frankly, the more I learned , the less I liked and the more questions I had.

One comment he made a while back kept coming back to haunt me. Speaking on religion, he said that he had finally found a form of Christianity that he was comfortable with and that was in Reverend Wright’s church.

That form of Christianity is Black Liberation Theology. One of its fundamental concepts is that God is black and supports the oppressed black people against their oppressor, the white race and, if God isn’t black and doesn’t support the black people in overthrowing their oppressor, then God doesn’t exist.

According to the individuals who developed the concept of Black Liberation Theology like James Hal Cone, by their own admission, it is strongly based in Marxism.

James Hal Cone – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One thing I’ve noticed about people with marxist tendencies, people like Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, is that they have no qualms about distorting the truth or frankly lying to achieve their goals. I forgot. That short list also includes Jeremiah Wright and may, in fact, include Barack Obama. It can explain his fudging on questions, contradictions, mis-statements, phraseology,associations and evasiveness in general.

If you read some of Karl Marx’s writings from the time that he was a journalist in London, his choice of words are no different from those of Black Liberation theologists including Jeremiah Wright himself and James Hal cone who Wright frequently alludes to. By Barack’s own admission, this form of Christianity is his “comfort zone” and occasionally slips out … “typical white people”, oppression, etc.

It’s an interesting thought. Barack Obama might actually become the first Marxist president of the United States.

Bingo!!!! Ideology versus Theology

I knew something was stinking up the woodpile but I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. Then I ran across this post:


This is a must read for anyone trying to figure out what’s going on … and everyone should read it.

Basically, Barack Obama is Jeremiah Wright, just pulled out of the gutters of south Chicago and dressed in an Ivy League suit, cleaned up to be more palatable to moderate Americans.

This Black Liberation “Theology” is about a foreign to Christianity as Islam is. It’s no small wonder that Louis Farakan received an award from Wright’s church.

Wright is somehow justified because he “does good” in south Chicago. Well, Hesbollah and Hamas are praised for “doing good” in Lebanon and Gaza strip. If you buy one, you buy the other.

Barack Obama would love to make this about black versus white, the “oppressed” versus the perceived “priveleged” … turning the race card to his own advantage, inciting a type of social warfare … which he’s done, so far, fairly effectively.

Somehow, I get the feeling that American democracy hasn’t been so threatened internally since demagogues like William Jennings Bryan, Huey Long or Joe McCarthy. Each had their own political era and message, but the intent was just the same. No, I’d go further than that. He smells a little of Fidel Castro wooing the middle class in Cuba or even Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

I’m curious as to how gullible the American public really is and am beginning to appreciate the precarious success of FDR against the likes of Huey Long in the 1930’s, basically a “moderate” populist against a demagogue.

The funny thing is that Bill Clinton has met his master, someone who can sweet talk the public better than he did for eight years. And, now that they’re in competition per his surrogate, Hillary, the same crowd that threw roses at his feet in adulation are now feeding him to the lions.

All hail Barack, the new master!!

And the sycophants are falling at his feet; ergo, Bill Richardson!