The Failed Obama Energy Policy

There has been a great many failures under Obama ranging from economic policy to his abysmal record on instituting policies that encourage job growth. I could go on but the failures have been chronicled here for the last four years.

But no failure has been greater or had a greater impact than Obama policies on energy.

Back four years ago, the environmental lobby had power. People still rated environmental issues rather highly among their concerns and a lot of the reason was global warming hysteria stoked to a high level by what started as far left thinking but eventually became neo-leftist dogma. The planet was suffering from rising temps and it was all going to kill us all unless we all paid a tax to supports those poorer among us who would be effected. The biggest redistribution scheme ever perpetrated was close to passing and Obama was the one who was going to push it through.

Then a funny thing happened, Obamanomics kicked in and we all got poorer. Instead of fretting over the poor polar bears, we were worried about our daily survival and keeping our jobs.

Obama had run on a policy of green jobs and green tech. These, said The One, were the steady and long-lasting jobs of the future. The interesting thing was that none of us who were in the business at the time had any idea what he was talking about.

So Obama rammed through the stimulus and instead of targeting money for industries that were solid and sustainable--like coal, petroleum extraction and production and natural gas, Obama sent our tax dollars to companies like Solyndra that could never hope to compete and had no established business model.

In the case of natural gas, a resource that American companies learned to exploit in ways never thought imaginable, was targeted by environmentalists and by the Obama EPA. Any president with experience in business would have seen the great opportunities for the nation and worked to allow for the maximum return to our economy. Instead, the EPA started releasing bogus reports about the dangers of hydraulic fracturing or "fracking" in western Pennsylvania and the dangers of extracting previously unrecoverable crude in other areas. The fact that many of the studies and anti-fracking stories came from those with a seriously vested interest in the matter remain uncommented upon by the MSM.

EPA head Lisa Jackson is one of the most ideological agency heads in our history (when you are featured in a good light by the Guardian, you are far left). At every turn she restricted the exploitation of our natural resources and refused to hear any other discussion than that she espoused. Barack Obama threatened to shut down coal mining operations and he set Jackson on that course from day one. She's a zealot of the worst sort. She believes that she's right and anyone who questions her is wrong. Jackson exemplifies the sheer elitism of the Obama years and she trusts people who share her ideology.

But never in the last five years has either Obama or Jackson explained how we were going to feed our ever-increasing need for energy--whether it be for propelling planes and cars to firing power plants. They haven't budged on nuclear, sue coal-fired plants and issued brutal regulations of manufacturing through emissions standards that are expensive and restrictive.

Juxtapose the situation in Canada and our own. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has vision, he saw that Canada has a future as an energy giant. They sit upon oil that has previously been difficult to extract but now--thanks to technology developed by energy companies-can be removed and sold. He offered the US reduced rates if we built a pipeline to transfer the oil to refineries and assured us that we could slash our reliance on Mid East oil by a huge margin. Of course, Obama voted present, made no firm decision (a hallmark of his presidency) and eventually said no. Canada said okay and sold the oil to Chinese interests for a higher rate.

This is long-winded but the issue of energy is a big one. There exist more jobs in energy as a sector than most others. States that have been derided because they provide coal and other natural resources are finally back in a position to have their say. States like Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia can now speak up and say that Obama's energy policies hurt real people. Ridiculous regulatory burdens instituted by a northeast liberal sitting behind a desk in DC and answering to no one have had a profoundly horrible effect on these states and driven them back instead of moving them forward. Funny that the EPA would change their policies on key issues once they saw that it would hurt Obama politically but I digress.

On January 20, 2013, when Obama moves out of the White House, the vision of him and EPA Secretary Lisa Jackson being booted is one that I will savor. President Romney can do us all a favor by putting every single regulatory burden she instituted on hold and evaluating all of them on their merits. I'm guessing that most will not survive.

How Fracking is Helping the Environment

Via the Prof, Walter Russell Mead notes that tracking is reducing CO2 emissions more than Cap and Tax or any other ridiculous scheme:

Right now, fracking is doing more to control carbon emissions than all the efforts of all the greens in the world. And by promoting American (and Chinese!) domestic energy production, it is doing more to lay the foundations of world peace than all the peace activists and disarmament campaigners in the world. And by creating more well paid blue collar jobs both in gas and oil extraction and in the manufacturing industries that will grow to exploit the new cheap energy sources, fracking strengthens the American economy and the tax base, providing revenues for both federal and state governments.

Unfortunately that doesn't fit into the "green" agenda. You see, if we have clean domestic energy, we'll use more and their grand plan to redistribute our money to poorer nations will be harder to bring to fruition. They were never about cutting emissions or finding cleaner energy, that's just an easy vehicle to use to achieve their ends.

It's too late for Australia whose citizens are being forced to choke down the most onerous emissions regulations on the planet.

As an aside, Mead is an excellent writer and his posts are never boring. He chooses relevant topics and explains his views in a straight-forward, non-preachy manner.

How American Ingenuity Will Change the World Again

There's a simplistic formula for making money in America.

First you have smart people come up with an idea and develop that idea. They then find wealthy people to financially assist them in bringing their idea to fruition (private equity). A company is born and the the idea becomes a viable product or service. The product or service is marketed and is provided to consumers at the best price possible while the company provides it in the most efficient manner possible.

In the end, everyone make money including the people who developed the idea, the financial backers who took a risk and those who subsequently work for the company. Consumers get what they want at a good price as the industry develops, expands and becomes even more efficient.

Notice that I did not mention government assistance or regulation at all in the above formula.

We're seeing that play out in an industry that we were not even key players in a decade ago.

Natural gas is second only to oil in making the world run. Ten years ago, the US was a player but not a large one. Russia ruled the natural gas markets in Europe and Asia and used that power to hold continental Europe by the balls.

Enter some smart people who developed hydraulic fracturing that allowed natural gas once thought untouchable to be removed and sold. This has been so successful that the price of natural gas--used in everything from power plants to boilers--has dropped dramatically keeping prices reasonable in Obamanation.

To be honest, this is the only truly successful sector in America since Obama took office and he's doing everything he can to kill it through regulations, but I digress.

Today, natural gas can be bought for $2 per million cubic feet in the US but in Asia is ten times that amount. We are sitting on something that, properly exploited will ensure a strong America for decades.

Some issues still remain--such as restrictions on exports instituted by politicians who don't know the first thing about energy and environmentalist's screaming just to scream--but the industry is one of the few bright lights in an otherwise gloomy economic world.

Here's a must read.

PA Booming While NY Loses Out on Billions

In yet another example of liberal policies hurting economic activity, the state of New York is sitting on a veritable pool of natural gas and won't let anyone touch it. Pennsylvania and West Virginia, to their credit, have put procedures and policies in place to safely remove the gas while reaping huge benefits and reducing natural gas retail costs for homeowners and businesses:

PITTSBURGH - Marcellus shale gas wells in Pennsylvania generated about $3.5 billion in gross revenues for drillers in 2011, along with about $1.2 billion in West Virginia, according to an analysis by The Associated Press.

That's a huge amount of revenue for businesses and employees and a nice windfall for the state in tax revenue. How many jobs have been created by exploiting these wells? Think about not only the drilling companies but the people who supply them: drill equipment suppliers, fuel suppliers, local restaurants, motels, convenience stores, etc. The ripple effect is enormous. It's only going to get better:

Patrick Creighton, a spokesman for the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an industry group, estimated that it costs the industry about $5 million to bring a well into production. With about 2,200 active wells in the state, that comes to $11 billion in additional investments, mostly over the last four years. The industry is also building or planning billions of dollars of new pipeline construction.

But not just businesses are booming, individuals are making a nice chunk of change as well:

Creighton said the minimum royalty in Pennsylvania is 12.5 percent of well revenues, meaning property owners here were paid more than $400 million last year.

So why is New York missing out on what is essentially the fastest growing business in the region? Because the legislature--led by mainly urban liberals based in NYC--are blocking any opportunity for shale gas to be extracted. The ban is in place until June of this year but I expect that the moratorium will be extended, thus allowing Pennsylvania to continue being the premiere state for gas extraction and sale. If Gov. Cuomo does see the light and allow hydraulic fracturing, I would bet that the regulations will be so oppressive that the state will fail to see the benefits other have. Environmentalists will not give up without a fight, though.

We Can't Survive Four More Years

Two things to see or watch. The first, a graphic that has to get wide attention:

The second is a video that has gone viral today on conservative sites and should be a commercial broken up into four parts and run during Modern Family and other popular shows: What have we gotten ourselves into with this guy?

The Obama Business Failures Keep Piling Up

There's never been an administration that has been as anti-business as the current one. From collusion with unions in the GM/Chrysler debacle to Solyndra and the myriad other "green" entities that have squandered billions and crashed and burned leaving us holding the bag, it seems that everything the Obama folks touch turns to shit.

The latest example comes to us from Consumer Reports' testing facility:

DETROIT (Reuters) -- A $100,000-plus Fisker Automotive luxury car died during Consumer Reports speed testing for reasons that are still unknown, leaving the struggling electric car startup with another blow to its image.

"It is a little disconcerting that you pay that amount of money for a car and it lasts basically 180 miles before going wrong," David Champion, senior director for the magazine's automotive test center, told Reuters.

Fisker has benefited from the publicity generated when actor Leonardo DiCaprio was handed the first Karma last summer and pop idol Justin Bieber received one as a gift this month.

The breakdown of the Consumer Reports car is more bad news for a company that already recalled some Karmas. Fisker also has changed its CEO and halted production over the past month as it seeks to renegotiate the terms of a $529 million loan from the U.S. Department of Energy.

I'm guessing that the word "renegotiate' will mean what it did with the aforementioned Solyndra and Jon Corzine: It means give bonuses to execs and claim bankruptcy. There's no way they can survive this and not enough bleeding heart actors like Leonardo DiCaprio to keep them in business. And note that Fisker is a foreign company seeded with American tax dollars. Not that Obama's results have been any better at home.

But no, the Obama failures don't end there, we also have example #204,986,835 showing that government has no business intruding in business:

The U.S. government has awarded appliance-maker Philips $10 million for devising an “affordable” alternative to today’s standard 60-watt incandescent bulb. That standard bulb sells for around $1. The Philips alternative sells for $50.

Of course, the award-winner is no ordinary bulb. It uses only one-sixth the energy of an incandescent. And it lasts 30,000 hours–about 30 times as long. In fact, if you don’t drop it, it may last 10 years or more.

But only the U.S. Government (in this case, the Department of Energy) could view a $50 bulb as cheap.

See how that works? Your hard-earned tax dollars were paid to a company to design a lightbulb that will cost you 20-times what you paid for your last one while helping solve an environmental crisis that may or may not actually exist. That's called Obamanomics and it's the reason we're in the fiscal shape we are in today.

Obamanation: Gasoline Prices at Record Highs

The Obama administration has no energy policy but then they have no real policy on anything else so no surprise. Yes, they talk of green power and electric cars they subsidize but have no coherent strategy for keeping fuel prices stable. Recent reports predict increases throughout the summer and Saudi Arabia is about to choke back on the taps guaranteeing an even quicker and greater increase.

Obama is complicit in this as he has destroyed American power in the region, has botched the Iran situation from day one and has neutered America's oil exploration and extraction capabilities. Not to mention the XL Pipeline debacle in which he kowtowed to the environmental lobby.

America is sitting on pools of oil that we cannot go after and massive amounts of natural gas that will allow us to flood markets thus reducing the price of oil but we can't export due to regulatory and other restrictions. Imagine if we export natural gas in large quantities and it is used to fuel power plants, thus reducing emissions while limiting the use of petroleum as a fuel. It's win-win and we get to give the Russians the finger at the same time.

It's time we get a rational, pragmatic energy policy but when we have a present who develops a budget that is beyond laughable, I'm really not expecting it.

Obama Gets Outsmarted Again

When the Smartest President in History (TM) was inaugurated, many of us looked at his policies on energy. We knew it would be green jobs based even though green jobs have never really been defined. We knew he would possibly attack coal-fired power plants and natural gas, which he has done through the back door using the EPA. We suspected that he would give huge incentives for electric vehicles as well. But none of us ever saw the utter failure that his energy policies would become in just three years.

This week alone he has managed to alienate one of our dearest allies and neighbors by slamming the door on the XL Pipeline project that would have given us ethical, dependable oil for decades and now he was given the finger by the world's newest emerging economy; Brazil:

BUENOS AIRES — Off the coast of Rio de Janeiro — below a mile of water and two miles of shifting rock, sand and salt — is an ultradeep sea of oil that could turn Brazil into the world’s fourth-largest oil producer, behind Russia, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

The country’s state-controlled oil company, Petrobras, expects to pump 4.9 million barrels a day from the country’s oil fields by 2020, with 40 percent of that coming from the seabed. One and a half million barrels will be bound for export markets.

The United States wants it, but China is getting it.

Less than a month after President Obama visited Brazil in March to make a pitch for oil, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff was off to Beijing to sign oil contracts with two huge state-owned Chinese companies.

The deals are part of a growing oil relationship between the two countries that, thanks to a series of billion-dollar agreements, is giving China greater influence over Brazil’s oil frontier.

Let's go back to March, shall we? Obama essentially scuttled US drilling and instead pushed hard for Brazil's right to do so. He befuddled energy policy experts and put all of our eggs in one basket by cozying up to Brazil who then decided that Obama was not the man for them and ran off to make a deal with the Chinese. I guess having our next enemy edging into our hemisphere to loot natural resources is just A-okay with the Obama administration.

So let's summarize this. shall we? Obama sucks up to Brazil while simultaneously squashing our own oil exploration business. Brazil says no thanks and makes massive deals with the Chinese who will definitely consider this an embarrassment for the US. China edges in and essentially has cornered the market in a part of the world that we once threatened to go to war over if anyone tried to exert influence. Canada came calling and offered us a clean, safe supply of oil that would travel by pipeline to our refineries, thus reducing the amount of energy used to ship it by truck or boat. Obama grovels to his green constituency and quashes the pipeline deal. Canada is now talking to China about buying the oil that was almost given to us.

In other words, Obama has gone from making us the powerhouse in the world of oil refining and oil exploration into a second-tier player. I guess with Obama, losing out to the Chinese in every arena we challenge them is good for America.

More here.

Some "Oops" are Bad and Some are Ignored

In what is the latest example of a liberal picking and ignoring his facts to support his conclusion, I bring you "progressive" blogger Michael Wood.

Mr. Wood hates drilling in the Marcellus Shale natural gas sites in Pennsylvania; an industry that has created numerous jobs and helped the US become more energy independent. The former governor of that great state just across the Delaware River from me decided--smartly--that he would allow it and would tax it. He saw the potential for creating jobs and increasing revenue. As with all tax estimates, the numbers were off somewhat:

Back in May, the Department estimated that taxable Marcellus Shale royalties generated $102.7 million in PIT collections in 2010. Now the Department says that figure is a tad lower — $46.2 million, a decrease of $56.5 million or over 55% from what was reported six months ago. To quote Britney Spears, “Oops!”

Yes, that's million, with an "m". And yes, this imbecile included a decade old quote from a bad album to punctuate his point...dude, really?

Mr. Wood goes on to excoriate the entire industry and rail about the amount of taxes received from that sector, which is supposed to indict Governor Corbett and the industry as a whole. The essay was so good that it made to the front page of hard left circle jerk FDL from it's original post on some obscure lefty blog dedicated to PA state issues.

So I entered the search terms "General Motors" in the original site where Mr. Wood usually drivels to see if he or any of his brethren over there ever wrote anything about the abortion known as the auto bailout. To my complete surprise, there was one obscure mention about GM and it was about a plant closing in Edison.

So I got to thinking; how could Mr. Wood be upset about a report that showed a 55% shortfall in estimated taxes for a thriving PA industry but not get equally as irked about a union bailout using billions of dollars in taxpayer money--money already collected, not estimated--that will result in the American people being short-changed $23.6 billion. Yes, with a "b". How can this be? I mean, we have the gas drillers bringing tens of millions of dollars and thousands of jobs into a part of the state that desperately needs it, which provided millions in new revenue versus a bailout that was basically a campaign plan using our money and shoring up dying, crony unions.

And that describes the liberal mindset in a nutshell. Poorly estimated tax revenue that equals roughly ten minutes of federal government spending versus losses of billions on a bailout that helped no one but the United Auto Workers leadership, which one is worse?

As we see in Mr. Wood's post, there's no comparison. And the irony that the state's estimates were--as he suggested--a mistake while Obama's plan functioned by design is lost on him completely.

PA Actively Killing Jobs and Budget Relief

In a perfect world, the Obama administration would have looked to the massive deposits of energy-producing raw materials we have under our feet to stimulate the economy. Instead he bowed to the altar of environmentalism more deeply than he bowed to the king of Saudi Arabia. He could have offered a plan that included tax credits to businesses who could extract oil, coal, natural gas that were new, clean and sustainable. Energy companies would have jumped at it and believe me; as someone in the business, the means to do so are what Obama would have called "shovel ready". We have environmentally friendly means that have been developed and can be implemented at will.

The jobs that would have been created would have been in the hardest hit states who are desperately seeking jobs like West Virginia, New York and rural Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania and parts of New York are in the midst of a modern day gold rush but the substance isn't a solid, it's natural gas and the amounts in the Marcellus Shale deposits would give us a serious leg up on the world when it comes to self-sufficiency in that particular raw material.

Instead The One poured our money into pork projects, handouts and funds for "community organizing" that do anything but.

Today, the state of Pennsylvania drove another stake through the heart of budget balancing and reducing the unemployment rolls by withdrawing a permit for water treatment for one of the largest gas-extracting operations in the country:

Months ago, with little public awareness, the Delaware County wastewater treatment plant got a state permit to accept wastewater from natural gas-drilling operations hundreds of miles away.

The plan was to take the polluted water from the burgeoning - and contentious - industry in the Marcellus Shale region, transport it by truck or train to the Chester facility, treat it there, and then discharge it into the Delaware River.

Until yesterday, that is, when the permit was abruptly rescinded.

Note the negative use of "polluted". Most water is polluted before it's treated, hell, toilet water is "polluted" as is water from your clothes and dish washer when it's discharged.

More:

Yet getting the gas out of the ground requires millions of gallons of water to fracture - or "frack" - the shale. Companies add various chemicals to increase the water's effectiveness, and the fracking process deep underground can contaminate the wastewater with toxics and natural radioactivity.

Again, note the use of the word "toxics"; it's misleading. Everything is toxic according to what we used to call science (before Climategate). Paracelsus; a Swiss chemist came up with this hypothesis on toxicity and it's not been disproven to this day:

“Alle Ding sind Gift und nichts ohn Gift; alein die Dosis macht das ein Ding kein Gift ist” [all things are poison and notwithout poison; only the dose makes a thing not a poison”]. With the exception of E = mc2, perhaps no other single statement has wielded such force in establishing the popular notoriety and the professional stature of an individual in the history of science as the words just quoted.

What he meant was simply that everything is toxic. If you're thirsty and drink a glass of water, you're no longer thirsty. If you drink fifteen, you will have an adverse or toxic reaction. Example here.

I digress but my point is the MSM always uses loaded words when discussing environmental issues.

Let's continue with the PA story:

Companies need ways to deal with the wastewater. Options include treating it on-site, reusing it, injecting it into deep wells and transporting it to wastewater treatment plants.

But treatment has been problematic because the water has impurities known as "total dissolved solids" and other contaminants, such as chlorides (salt) and sulfates.

Dissolved solids, chlorides and sulfates are all easily treatable and can be accomplished by any municipal treatment plant in Iraq. Again, misleading.

Most plants cannot remove the solids (a lie--ed). On April 16, the DEP announced discharge standards limiting the solids in the wastewater effluent.

But just five weeks earlier, on March 9, the state approved a permit for the Delaware County Regional Water Quality Control Authority, which was already discharging levels of solids that were higher than the new standards, to accept this solids-laden water in Chester.

The approval meant that the plant would be "grandfathered," not having to comply with the new standards until its permit was changed for other reasons, DEP officials acknowledged.

So the plant currently can discharge the solids but now because it's coming from a shale site, they suddenly can't?

This is a plan by Pennsylvania to limit the extraction of a valuable commodity that would lift the standards of living in a depressed area but in Obamanation we must not piss off Gaia. Ed Rendell is falling right in line like a good little puppy dog while his state is withering and dying.

Meanwhile, China, Russia and other nations are getting fat, dumb and happy while devastating their environment.

Obama Still Pushing Global Warming With Budget

I guess his administration just doesn't get it; Americans care about paying their mortgage and putting food on the table, they've not given global warming a second thought in months. But that won't stop The One from ramming through legislation that will cripple us financially while costing us trillions more we don't have:

President Barack Obama's aides say the administration will work with Congress on his budget proposal, but energy independence is not subject to wheeling and dealing.

Obama planned to make the case Monday for a budget proposal that invests billions in research designed to reduce climate change and guarantees loans for companies that develop clean energy technologies. Obama has tied his first budget proposal as president to a renewable energy program to help the United States move toward energy independence.

Renewable energy? This would give the GOP a great platform to scream "drill baby, drill" at the top of their lungs. Drilling in ANWR and off the continental shelf would add thousands of jobs, help with energy independence and could be ramped up in months rather than years. It would be an energy stimulus the likes of which we've never seen.

The GOP better not cave on this and if they stand strong will potentially regain the House and Senate. People are upset and if the GOP just pounds the issue daily and makes it understandable for the public, it's a win-win. We saw during the short gas price spike that the environment goes out the window when the choice is between money and Mother Nature. In fact, the public has recently ranked global warming as the least of their concerns and seems to have woken up to the fact that this is a scam on a great scale.

Will someone please explain this to Sens. Specter, Snowe and Collins.

Obama Admin Say No To Huge Oil & Jobs Source

Not surprising yet disappointing just the same:

Institute for Energy Research (IER) president Thomas J. Pyle issued the following statement today after the Interior Department announced its plans to withdraw from consideration acreage in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming where research and development of a small portion of our nation’s homegrown oil shale reserves had previously been scheduled to take place:

“Earlier this week, Secretary Salazar suggested America’s massive and homegrown reserves of oil shale held ‘great potential.’ Unfortunately, the Interior Department’s decision today may help ensure that potential never becomes reality – in the process, locking-away an American energy resource larger than the total reserves of the entire Middle East.

“At a time of great economic uncertainty, with millions of Americans out of work and state budgets stretched beyond their breaking point, responsible development of America’s abundant shale resources could be a way out of our current condition, and a way back to a better one. The Interior Department’s announcement today effectively forecloses that opportunity.”

I see why Salazar would do this; I mean the potential for thousands of jobs, massive amounts of equipment that will need to be procured helping manufacturing, energy independence and low fuel prices must always be trumped by environmental concerns, right?

Here we are in what Obama claims is the worst economy since the Great Depression and his administration is intentional stopping industry from creating a viable and lucrative new energy sector.

I'm felling all hopey and changey, y'all.

Via: Instapundit.

Thursday News

Some interesting stories from around the web:

This would qualify as unfortunate.

Navy 1, environmentalist whackos 0. SCOTUS overturns the Ninth Circuit again.

Great moments in cable news: MSNBC eats crow in Palin story.

Russia has Europe deeply concerned.

When $750 billion is really $5-trillion. Yeah, I sure didn't see that coming.

Obama to Coal Mining States: Screw You!

He's made it clear. Note that it was in Frisco again where he also slammed people who cling to guns and religion and intimated they hate on minorities:



A vision of one, possible future.

The Case Against Obama

With the election looming, it's time to ensure that the facts are known about just what an Obama victory would mean. Instead of the feel-good, if it makes you happy, warm fuzzy of what an Obama win would mean to liberals who think with their hearts and not their heads, it's time to explain what an Obama administration would seek to accomplish after the buzz is over and the man with little experience actually has to lead this nation.

Taxes:
Redistribution is the thread that runs through all of Obama's tax proposals. From letting the Bush tax cuts lapse in which we will all receive a tax increase to his Marxist policy of taking from the rich to feed the middle class, it's all very Euro-leftist. The fact that it is unsustainable is beside the point as is the fact that it is also un-American.

The very idea of taxing the hell out of "the Man" and starting yet another series of entitlement programs is mothers milk to libs. Too bad that American businesses will sink further led by the backbone of our economic system; small business. Why start a business, bust your ass for 16-18 hours a day and then give more to Uncle Obama? Liberals will look at this and be happy until they realize that they will suffer as businesses leave the nation in droves.

Health Care:
Do we have problems in our health care system? Yes. Is socialized medicine the answer? Hell no. How about we try other things less dramatic like tort reform to stop the ridiculous trial lawyers from suing over every little perceived mistake made by doctors and better agreements between hospitals and insurance providers.

The fact that socialized medicine has tanked in every country that has attempted it should give any intelligent person pause, but then, that would imply, once again, that people are thinking with their heads and that's not been the case with the giddy liberal establishment.

The Obama proposal to force businesses to buy and provide health insurance will only have the disastrous effect of driving those same people out of business.

National Security:
Obama is very unserious about foreign policy as made abundantly clear with his comments about Israel, Pakistan, Iraq and Iran as well as other allies and enemies. Joe Biden was exactly right in his assessment that Obama will indeed be tested in the first six months. President Bush has established quite clearly that we will respond with force regardless of what Europe or the UN thinks because our security is our problem.

Obama will adhere to the multilateral approach favored by John Kerry and most other liberals, an approach that will be disastrous for our men and women in uniform as well as civilians at home and abroad. Bill Clinton was one who cared what the world thought of us before doing what was in the best interest of our security and it resulted in us being attacked at the World Trade Center in 1993, Mogadishu, Dar-es-Salaam, Nairobi, Riyadh and finally at the World Trade Center once again in which thousands were incinerated.

Th UN and EU don't care about us as a nation and never have. They want us knocked down a peg because we are uncultured, brash and cocky. The sad thing is that Obama and his supporters feel the same way. American power is something to be reined in and if the consequences are such that it affects our interests, so be it. We will decide at the UN where the two nations who most want us down--China and Russia--hold sway.

Environment:
Environmentalist's will see an Obama victory as a victory for them and we will see the systematic dismantling of the petroleum industry--one of the only sectors of our economy that remains strong. We will suffer as OPEC makes us their puppet and gas prices swing wildly based on their collective whim. The US auto industry will cease to exist for the most part as they could never compete with South Korea or Japan in emerging technologies and the aforementioned tax burdens placed on American businesses will ensure they continue to face heavy declines.

We'll sign on to the Kyoto Protocols, which have been shown to have a disastrous affect on any first world nation that signed on to them. China will exploit the fine print and progressively grow stronger while we flail about trying to meet limits on carbon emissions and impossible Kyoto goals.

Overall:
An America under Obama will make America circa 1979 under Jimmy Carter look like paradise. With the ultra liberal Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid leading a veto-proof Congress, we'll see every Obama proposal passed without a second thought as to consequences. Their will be no forethought because these policies are feel good and feel good is all that matters. As we did in LBJ's Great Society, we allowed legislation to pass that resulted in Welfare--a policy that ensured a permanent minority underclass in our society. Hell, even Bill Clinton saw that it needed reform.

Obama will sign the most far-reaching entitlement programs we've ever sen in America. free speech will be severely curtailed when he re-institutes the "Fairness Doctrine" and America will be a nation whereby those who question the authority of leadership or who say anything deemed "hate speech" will be subjected to trials and punishment. The media who were complicit in ushering in Obama will be neutered--and this time not by their own choice but by the man they acted as lapdog to.

This is the decision we must make, one in which the fate of our nation as we know it and as intended by our Founding Fathers is at stake. We will cease to be the guiding light that attracts citizens of every nation to our shores and instead become a nation of drones who rely on the government for everything they need. In other words; a nation that won't deserve to be called America.

Update: I neglected to even mention the courts. This will make you very worried.

Calling the Dems Bluff: GOP Should Propose "Green" Jobs

The Democrats have been calling for so called "green" jobs for awhile now yet haven't been too precise in defining exactly what those jobs are. I think it's time we define those jobs for them.

We can knock 1% off the unemployment rate immediately by fast-tracking these projects and it will have an affect in all areas of the country.

First, anyone with a half a brain knows that we are going to need oil for the foreseeable future--I'd say at least thirty more years for diesel, jet fuel, home heating oil, solvents and other fuels used by power plants such as #6 fuel oil. Gasoline use will be severely curtailed in fewer years based on the newest production vehicles coming on line. We should propose a 10-year plan to extract all the oil we can in the most environmentally safe manner science and cost effectiveness allow. Second, we set out an ambitious plan to build new, high tech refineries in every region of the country, for instance: North Jersey/New York, South Jersey/Philly/Delaware, Baltimore/Washington, Boston, Chicago, etc. Say thirty new refineries using the best available technology and designed to meet the strictest environmental standards (see this proposed refinery in S.Dak). The refineries will be able to handle light, sweet crude, high sulfur oil such as that from Venezuela as well as oil sands or shale oil (as much as I hate the bailout bill, there is some good in it). The trickle-down effect would be dramatic as suppliers would immediately revamp and ramp up to supply all the parts needed. The government or whatever banks remain after the financial meltdown offer the oil companies loans at a fair rate and since we know they are much more solvent than the financial sector, those loans will be paid back.

The construction would take three to five years for each facility and would shore up a flagging construction industry at a time it's sorely needed. The Dems would face fierce blow back from the labor unions were they to fight this as they are starting to see huge percentages of their membership "sitting on the bench". Non-working members means no money flowing into the unions, which means that union leaders will have to explain why they are still raising their salary while the rank and file are sitting home out of unemployment benefits while still having to pay inflated dues.

Next, we push hard for new nuclear power plants throughout the country but allowing the individual states the right to say yes or no to construction. Again we streamline the process to ensure the newest technology will be utilized while also cutting the red tape for approvals. Today's plants are smaller, more efficient and safer. We also set strict security guidelines that would make them safer than any existing facilities in the world. With the anticipated opening of the Yucca Mountain site, we have a disposal option for spent fuel available soon.

Next we push for the creation of a natural gas pipeline that can distribute natural gas around the nation. It's clean and plentiful.

Finally, we should propose to shore up the existing electrical grids we have and build or repair those that are in poor condition. A joint effort between the various regional utilities and the federal government would go far to attaining this goal. Again, the loans will be at a fair-market rate and the government could guarantee a portion if need be (but only a portion).

Add to this idea the construction of more wind energy facilities, solar collection centers and research the idea of hydro power through tides or other water sources, we could put a good amount of Americans to work quickly on long-term projects.

FDR did this in the 30's and 40's but paid with government funds, I would propose it be accomplished all with private funds with cooperation between banks, energy companies and the various agencies of the government that stand in the way of progress as a mater of course.

The Green Revolution Wilts

I always wondered what the tipping point for the American public was when it came to opting oil exploration over environmental concerns. That point was $4 per gallon.

Now we're seeing a sea change in the concept of green thinking by Americans. They are mush more open to drilling off our coasts and in ANWR, burning whatever coal is necessary to keep electricity affordable, increasing production of shale deposits and ratcheting up natural gas production. They haven't exactly warmed to resuming construction of nuclear plants but that's changing as well.

Perhaps the high cost of fuels and the hypocrisy of eco-celebrities like Al Gore and others have finally made people realize just how ridiculous the carbon offsets garbage is as well as realizing that America is at the forefront of environmental regulation with regards to clean water, air and land.

Here's another view along these same lines.

Al Gore Encourages "Civil Disobedience" Over Power Plants

Former VP and environmental hypocrite Al Gore is urging on the the agitators:

Nobel Peace Prize winner and environmental crusader Al Gore urged young people on Wednesday to engage in civil disobedience to stop the construction of coal plants without the ability to store carbon.

The former U.S. vice president, whose climate change documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" won an Academy Award, told a philanthropic meeting in New York City that "the world has lost ground to the climate crisis."

Translated from Gorese into English he's actually saying "that Obama character has stolen my thunder and the rise in gas prices has turned the American people into anti-environmentalist's who encourage drilling everywhere so let's riot".

By the way Al, this is the type of civil disobedience the libs are good at.

The fact that without coal-fired power plants, Gores own house--a building that has a carbon footprint larger than most African nations--would go dark seems to have escaped the Goracle. Obama's success has put a dent in Gore's lucrative business as a hypocritical environmental shill so it's time to take off the (hemp) gloves and get serious about putting coal-fired plants in a "lockbox". I guess Biden is getting his talking points from the Goracle instead of his running mate.

Sarah Palin on the Environment

She seems pragmatic about environmental issues as her state depends on oil and environmental tourism. She has the job of balancing both issues and seems to be handling it well. Two quotes give and idea of just what her poitions are:

I'm keenly aware of sharply declining production from North Slope fields. The amount of oil currently flowing through the Pipeline is less than half of what it was at its peak. We must look to responsible development throughout the state--from the Slope all the way down to Southeast--every region participating! From further oil and gas development, to fishing, mining, timber, and tourism, these developments remain the core of our state. We provide stability in regulations for our developers.

Source: State of the State Address Jan 17, 2007

The standard should be no different for industry. Ironically, we're trying to convince the rest of the nation to open ANWR, but we can't even get our own Pt. Thomson, which is right on the edge of ANWR, developed! We are ready for that gas to be tapped so we can fill a natural gas pipeline. I promise to vigorously defend Alaska's rights, as resource owners, to develop and receive appropriate value for our resources.

Source: State of the State Address Jan 17, 2007

In other words, she knows that a balance must be struck, a position that will rankle many environmentalists but she wouldn't have attracted them anyway. She sees that Alaska must maintain it's natural resources but also use those that they have available to prosper. In other words, the exact approach that we should be taking in all 50-states.

Example #458,098,565 Free Markets Work

Democrats have been telling us that drilling off the coasts or in ANWR would do nothing and not produce any price reductions for a decade. Here's proof that more supply equals lower prices on another needed commodity, natural gas, which we've been tapping into domestically with fervor of late. Here's the supply news:

Natural-gas prices, which were 50 percent higher in May than they were a year earlier, have dropped so much that early fears of a winter of high prices and short supply are melting away.

A milder summer, strong production of the fuel, a slow economy, and forecasts for a mild early winter have pushed down prices and spurred talk by some analysts of a natural-gas glut.

"You have a combination of two things: some milder-than-normal summer weather and also we're anticipating an 8 percent increase in natural-gas production over last year," said Neil Durbin, a spokesman for Dominion East Gas Co. in Cleveland. "It has had the effect of moderating prices."

Emphasis mine. Now how fast does that take to translate to lower prices? Try less than a day:

Peco Energy Co. said Thursday it will lower its natural gas rate on Sept. 1 because of a projected decrease in gas supply costs in the wholesale market.

The Philadelphia-based electric and gas utility said its gas rate will decrease by 9 cents per hundred cubic feet to $1.59 per hundred cubic feet from $1.68 per hundred cubic feet, which will lower the bills of a typical residential customer by 5.1 percent or $7 per month.

But drilling for oil domestically would have no effect given what we've heard from Speaker Pelosi and other Democrats. It shows they still don't understand free markets.