Boehner: They're 'Gonna Hang' Pelosi

Pitchforks and tar and feathers, anyone? Could be. The American people are pretty fed up at this point with high energy prices and the fact that the Dems went on vacation without even a cursory attempt at fixing the problem.

And now, Pelosi shows her ultra-Socialist side by hinting that there could be a special session of Congress in which every issue on her Socialist agenda will be discussed but not the one issue causing Americans the most grief today. John Boehner made a pretty profound comment about that:

From the Chicago Tribune blogs:

"She's gonna bring us back and not deal with it?" asked the Ohio Republican, as quoted by Politico. "The American people are gonna hang her."

Count me in as one of those who will be wielding a pitchfork in front of the Capital soon.

But, the Dems are never the type of party to pass up an opportunity to say something stupid, as evidenced by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD):

[T]he Maryland Democrat said. "I hope the Minority Leader will apologize for his remarks, and work with Democrats in a bipartisan, constructive manner to increase our domestic oil supply, invest in renewable energy and end our dependence on foreign oil."

Memo to Steny: bipartisan efforts can only be made when both parties are present in Congress and both parties are discussing the same issue.

You can access the complete entry on-line here:

Boehner: They're 'Gonna Hang' Pelosi
Matthew Hay Brown
The Swamp at the Chicago Tribune
August 11, 2008

Barack Obama's Economic Ignorance: More Taxes Means Less Oil (And Higher Prices)

Barack Obama has of late sent insults in the direction of John McCain saying McCain has little economic knowledge.

I don't know what level of understanding John McCain has, but I do know that Barack Obama has an even lower level of understanding. Take Obama's proposal to tax the oil companies and then redistribute the wealth to Americans in the form of $500 and $1000 checks. (Nothing like buying a few votes, eh?)

Investor's Business Daily has some commentary on this tax-scam:

Illinois' senior senator, Dick Durbin, recently declared that, "The oil companies need to know that there is a limit on how much profit they can take in this economy." Why is there no limit to the increased taxes Obama and the Democrats want to take in this economy?

Why is it that Socialists always think that government has more right to private money than does the private entity that earned that money? Why do Socialists like Durbin and Obama think that the working American is some sort of bottomless well of funding?

More:

Obama once called the McCain-supported plan for a gas-tax suspension a "stunt." Now he wants to take a "reasonable amount" of oil company profits and rebate, a la George McGovern, $1,000 to families and $500 to individuals as a part of a second stimulus package to offset high gas prices, a big part of which is federal, state, and local taxes on both oil producers and consumers. Obama does not define what a "reasonable amount" is. Nor does he define at what point profit, which is an indicator of success and not greed, becomes a windfall. Exxon made a dime on a dollar in 2007. The oil and gas industry as a whole made 8.3% compared with 8.9% of all U.S. manufacturing. Meanwhile, the federal government operated at a huge loss. Electronics company LG saw its profits grow by 505% in 2007. Abbott Laboratories saw its profits soar 110% Google had a profit margin of 25.3%, more than double Exxon's. GE's profit was 10.7%, about the same as Exxon's, but do its subsidiary media outlets such as NBC and MSNBC report that?

So, if a profit margin of 8.3% is "price gouging" than why are all the companies and corporations who pull in profits over 8.3% not being dragged before Congress?

Because the oil companies are not price gouging in any way, but the Socialist Dems are hoping that you and I will not be smart enough to see it. Their hope is a futile one because I do see it.

And how much does the government make on gasoline in the form of taxes? Check out the graphic below:



Government taxing makes up 13% of the price of a gallon of gasoline. That's four points higher than the 7.4% the oil companies are making (on gasoline alone). So, why isn't Congress investigating itself for "tax gouging" the price of oil? Getting rid of the Federal gas tax would take the price of a gallon of gas back down below $3.50/gallon. That would be a very good start.

Barack Obama is the ignorant one here and his blind followers, Pelosi, Reid and Durbin, are equally ignorant.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

More Taxes Will Mean Less Oil
Investor's Business Daily
August 5, 2008

Drill, Drill, Drill! And An Open Letter To Nancy Pelosi By House Republicans

This story has got big enough legs and more than enough endurance to go all the way up to the election. That's good for Conservatives like me, but bad for libs. Why? Because the high cost of gasoline is not an issue that the libs and Dems can just spin away. It's here and it's right out in the open for everyone to see. There is, quite simply, no way to hide it, not even behind those idiotic words: "I'm trying to save the planet."

To give you a good example of how out of touch the Dems are with the American people, check out this exceprt for Lawrence Kudlow's latest column:

While Republicans on the House floor shouted "vote, vote, vote" and "lower gas prices," the Democratic majority turned off the lights, cameras, and microphones. Determined Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell offered unanimous-consent requests to vote on lifting the ban on deep-water exploration, and the Democrats objected. When McConnell asked Democrats if they'd overturn the ban at $4.50 a gallon, they replied "no." When he raised the price to $5, $7, and $10, they cried "no," "no," and "no."

Even if the American people had to struggle with paying $10/gallon for gasoline, the Democrats made it clear they still would not take a common sense approach to lowering prices, i.e. increasing supply. Their excuse? "It would take seven years to see the effect." Apart from the fact that President Bush's announcement that he was removing the executive ban on domestic drilling resulted in an immediate psychological effect that brought down prices, we should also keep in mind that had we done this seven years ago, we would be seeing the effects today. The longest journey begins with the first small step.

Lawrence goes on:

Polls suggest that two-thirds to three-quarters of the nation wants to drill. To wit, while a just-released Obama campaign ad attacks McCain as a tool of big oil, McCain has taken his first-ever lead in a Rasmussen tracking poll. There is a voter revolt going on, and it reminds me of the anti-tax rebellion that lifted Ronald Reagan into office twenty-eight years ago. Is the conventional wisdom about to be swept away? As Republicans press home the drill, drill, drill message, might they pick up seats in Congress this year? And might the national clamor for a more realistic and balanced energy policy -- one that includes more oil, natural gas, clean coal, nuclear, and the alternatives of wind, solar, and cellulosic -- carry John McCain to a convincing victory over Obama? Without even realizing it, the GOP drilling offensive has become a new contract with America. And it appears to be working. The public is putting aside global warming and choosing instead new-energy production, a stronger economy, and more job creation. Voters want growth, not austerity. They want Ronald Reagan, not Thomas Malthus. And by resisting this grassroots call, the Democratic party is digging itself into one of the biggest political dry holes in history.

Sound like empty cheerleading rhetoric? Think again:

New economic statistics highlight the damage done by the unprecedented oil-price shock. Only a year ago real gross domestic product was growing at 4 to 5 percent. Then came the dramatic rise of energy prices and down came the economy. GDP contracted slightly late last year and rose a miniscule 0.9 percent in this year's first quarter. And although real growth picked up to nearly 2 percent in the second quarter, that number is suspect since the government does not count surging import prices from food and energy. Wall Street blames everything on the housing slump and the sub-prime credit crisis. Of course, these are significant. But the drop in housing starts, sales, and prices has been going on for nearly two years, without crunching down the economy. It's the oil shock that has brought us perilously close to recession. In fact, despite a slight rise in GDP, nonfarm corporate payrolls have declined for seven consecutive months while private payrolls have fallen for eight straight months. A year ago the unemployment rate was 4.5 percent. Today it's 5.7 percent. Topping it off, the inflation rate has climbed from 2 to 4 percent over the past year. Right now the recession call is still an open question. But the economic damage caused by skyrocketing energy prices is a no-brainer.

But the Dems in Congress appear to have no brains in this issue at all. High energy costs effect everything. Food, clothing, consumer goods, tourism, travel. As gasoline prices go up, so do these other prices.

We need to get the Dems out of Congress and make sure that Barack Obama doesn't gain the White House in November. If the latter happens and he gets a rubber-stamp Congress, we will be in for the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Drill, Drill, Drill Is Working
Lawrence Kudlow
RealClearPolitics.com
August 5, 2008

---

And here we have an open letter to Nancy Pelosi from Republicans John Boehner, Roy Blunt, Adam Putnam, Eric Cantor, and other members of the House Republican Conference:

On Friday August 1, 2008, at 11:23 a.m., your Democrat majority in the House of Representatives adjourned the House for five full weeks.House Republicans believe that Congress should not go on vacation until we take action to lower gas and energy prices for struggling American families. For the last two months we and our House Republican colleagues have used every tool at our disposal to try and get you and your Democrat majority to vote on legislation to lower gas and energy prices by expanding environmentally sound domestic production of oil and natural gas, improving energy efficiency, and encouraging the development of alternative energy technologies. Many of the proposals we have asked you and your Democrat majority to allow us to vote on are bipartisan proposals that we believe would enjoy the support of a majority of the Members of the Congress. Yet because you and your Democrat Leadership personally oppose these proposals, you are not allowing them to come up for a vote. This past Sunday, you even told George Stephanopoulos that you will never allow this vote to occur (see transcript on the reverse). In protest of you and your Democrat majority not allowing an up or down vote on producing more American energy, we and our House Republican colleagues were prepared to take to the floor on Friday, August 1, 2008, and speak to the nation. Rather than allowing that to happen you and your Democrat majority adjourned the House, turned off the television cameras, shut off the microphones and turned out the lights. Nearly 50 House Republicans remained on the floor of the House in defiance speaking to those citizens gathered in the galleries and to the media. Today we have again returned to the Capitol to continue speaking to the thousands of Americans from all across our country who are visiting the Capitol. We would have preferred if instead we were joined by our colleagues to have a true debate on this issue that ended in an up or down vote. We think it is unconscionable that Congress has gone on vacation before we have addressed the high gas prices that are crippling our economy and hurting millions of families. We are asking that you reconvene the House from your five-week vacation and schedule a vote on legislation to increase American energy production. Let us be clear, we are not asking for a guaranteed outcome, just the chance to vote.

Anyone think that Nancy Pelosi is going to respond to this well-reasoned letter? Or is she going to continue screwing the American people at the behest of the Socialist left?

Stephanopoulos To Pelosi: Why No Up Or Down Vote On Drilling? The Pelosi Premium Goes Higher

Nice graphic, eh? Gasoline prices have increased 74% since Pelosi and kin took power in Congress, and now they want to push the price even higher. What happened to the party that claimed to have so much compassion for the working class and the poor? Do the Dems just not realize how badly high energy costs are hurting the lower classes? Where is the compassion and the desire to provide relief for these people? The Dems have done nothing but lie about how much they want to help.

And Nancy Pelosi really went off the deep end on the energy issue. She has created a huge problem for herself and for Senator Harry Reid as well. They both know that over 70% of the American people want the United States to begin producing oil domestically and are becoming very angry over the high gas prices as shown in the above graphic. But at the same time, both Pelosi and Reid are beholden to a minority in the far-left environmental movement. That is why they both decided to take five-week vacations rather than allow a debate and a vote on domestic drilling. Both Pelosi and Reid know that they will lose.

They're right. They will lose. But instead of being courageous leaders and facing reality, they have both chosen to tuck their tails between their legs and run like scared children.

Even George Staphanopoulos was taking Pelosi to task over this. He asked her no less than seven time whether she will allow a debate on the floor of the House. She ducked and dodged each time. Here is the exchange from ABC's This Week which broadcast August 2, 2008, as reported by NewsBusters:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, HOST: You've been getting a lot of heat for not allowing a straight up or down vote expanding drilling off the coasts of the United States. Why won't you permit a straight up or down vote? NANCY PELOSI, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: What we have presented are options that will really make a difference at the pump. Free our oil, Mr. President. We're sitting on 700 million barrels of oil. That would have an immediate effect in ten days. What our colleagues are talking about is something that won't have an effect for ten years and it will be 2 cents at the time. If they want to present something that's part of an energy package, we're talking about something. But to single shoot on something that won't work and mislead the American people as to thinking it's going to reduce the price at the pump, I'm just not going to be a part of it. STEPHANOPOULOS: Except it’s not just Republicans that are calling for this. Members of your own caucus say we must have a vote. Congressman Jason Altmire, let me show our viewers right now, says, “There is going to be a vote. September 30 will not come and go without a vote on the opening the Outer Continental Shelf. The message has been delivered. The issue can't be ignored any longer.” He says he speaks for a lot of Democrats. He's talked to the leadership and a vote must happen. PELOSI: Maybe it will, as part of a larger energy package. Let's step back, call a halt and put this in perspective. What we have now is a failed energy policy by the Bush/Cheney, two oilmen in the White House. $4 a gallon gasoline at the pump. And what they're saying is let's have more of the same. Let's have more of big oil making, record profits, historic profits. You see the quarterly reports that just came out, who want to be subsidized who don't really want to compete. Let them use the subsidies to drill oil in protected areas. Instead we're saying, free the oil. Use it, don't lose it. There's 68 million acres in lower 48 and 20 million more acres in Alaska where they're permitted where they could drill anytime. This is a diversionary tactic from failed energy policies. STEPHANOPOULOS: But if you feel you have the better arguments, why not give a straight up or down vote for drilling? PELOSI: Because the misrepresentation is being made that this is going to reduce the price at the pump. This is again a decoy, it’s not a solution. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, if you’re right, why not let it be debated out and have the vote? PELOSI: We have a debate every single day on this subject. What you saw in the Congress this week was the war dance of the hand maidens of the oil companies. That's what you saw on the Republican side of the aisle. Democrats and Republicans are not right there on party lines on this issue. There are regional concerns, as well as some people concerned about what this means back home for them. But we have a planet to save. We have an economy to grow. And we can do that if we keep our balance in all of this and not just say but for drilling in unprotected and these protected areas offshore, we would have lower gas prices. STEPHANOPOULOS: So what exactly are you trying to say? You say you might allow a vote as part of a comprehensive package, but you won’t allow a vote on -- PELOSI: We have put on the floor. Free our oil. Strong bipartisan support for that. Use it, don't lose it. Strong bipartisan support for that. End undue speculation, strong bipartisan support for that. We've talked about these things. Invest in renewable energy resources so that we can increase the supply of energy for our country. Strong bipartisan support for that. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yet you brought those measures to the floor in a way under the suspension of the rules so that it couldn't be amended with a drilling proposal. PELOSI: Well, we built consensus and have a strong bipartisan. This is what’s going to make a difference to reduce the dependence on foreign oil, to stop our dependence on fossil fuels in our own country. To increase the supply of energy immediately to reduce the price at the pump to protect the consumer. So this is a policy matter. This is very serious policy matter. It's not to use a tactic of one -- one tactic in order to undermine a comprehensive energy package to reduce our dependence on foreign oil which is a national security issue. To reduce our dependence on fossil fuels in our own country. Now, will we be talking about natural gas that's cheaper, better for the environment -- STEPHANOPOULOS: But why not allow votes on all that? When you came in as Speaker you promised in your commitment book "A New Direction for America," let me show our viewers, you said that “Bills should generally come to the floor under a procedure that allows open, full, fair debate consisting of full amendment process that grants the Minority the right to offer its alternatives.” If they want to offer a drilling proposal, why can't they have a vote? PELOSI: They'll have to use their imagination as to how they can get a vote and then they may get a vote. What I am trying to, we have serious policy issues in our country. The President of the United States has presented this but for this our economy would be booming. But for this, gas would be cheaper at the pump. It's simply not true. Even the President himself in his statement yesterday and before then has said, there is no quick fix for this by drilling. STEPHANOPOULOS: And Senator Obama has agreed with you. He says, listen. This is not the answer. Drilling is not the answer. But he said over the weekend that he might be willing to sign onto drilling as part of a comprehensive proposal. PELOSI: What Senator Obama said is what we want a President to say. Let's look at all of the options. Let's compare them. And let's see what really does increase our supply. Protect our environment, save our economy, protect the consumer, instead of a single shot thing that does none of the above. Why we give subsidies to big oil to drill instead of letting them -- STEPHANOPOULOS: I want to move on to other issues. Just to be clear, you are saying you will not allow a single up or down vote on drilling. But you will allow a vote on a package that includes drilling? PELOSI: No, what I'm saying to you is, as far as I'm concerned, unless there is something that -- you never say never to anything. You know, people have their parliamentary options available to them. But from my standpoint, my flagship issue as Speaker of the House and 110th Congress has been to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reverse global warming. I'm not giving the gavel -- I'm not giving a gavel away to a tactic that will do neither of those things. That supports big oil at the cost and expense of the consumer. STEPHANOPOULOS: So you’re not going to permit a vote, you may get beat, but you're not going to permit a vote on your own? PELOSI: Again, we take this one step at a time. But while we're spending all of this time on a parliamentary tactic when nothing less is at stake than the planet, the air we breathe, our children breathe. STEPHANOPOULOS: But that’s what I don’t understand. If you could get votes on everything else that you care about which you say there is strong bipartisan support, why not allow a vote on the drilling as well? PELOSI: Because the President will not allow any of these other things to go forth. Why are we not saying to the President, why don't you release oil from the SPR in ten days to have the price at the pump go down? Why are you opposed to any undue speculation in the oil markets? Why do you not insist that people who have leases on our land with permits ready to go use those? The oil companies don't want competition. And what we would do by saying, go ahead, give them the subsidies. Allow them to drill in areas that are protected now, instead of where they're allowed to drill, is to diminish all of the opportunity that we have for an electricity standard for our country. Where we set out standards that makes the competition for renewable energy resources better. Which says to the private sector, invest here because there is a standard that they have to honor. If you just say it's drill, drill, drill, drill and we're going to subsidize it, what is the motivation for the private sector to come in and say we're going to support these renewable energies, wind, solar, biofuels. Plug-in cars. Natural gas and other alternatives.

And yet 700 billion dollars a year goes to purchasing foreign oil. While Pelosi and company continue to parrot the line about an "oilman" being in the White House, the Dems are content to let themselves be the party of OPEC in that they would rather we continue sending money to Venezuela and Saudi Arabia instead of starting the process of gaining energy independence.

The Republicans are still in Congress trying to put together a bill that will allow us to produce energy domestically while the Dems are off on vacation after having succeeded in doing nothing. We need to get the libs out of Congress so that we can get America moving forward again.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Stephanopoulos To Pelosi: Why No Up Or Down Vote On Drilling?
Noel Sheppard
NewsBusters.org
August 3, 2008

Top Ten Things To Expect From An Obama Supreme Court And The Dems Energy Charade

One of the biggest issues facing Americans today is where the Supreme Court will be headed in the next 4 to 8 years. It took over 30 years to undo the Court that back in the 60's and 70's rode roughshod over the American public and forced upon us many ill-advised liberal policies that resulted in the coddling of criminals and walking all over the victims of crimes.

Committee for Justice Executive Director Curt Levey wrote supporters an email which Amanda Carpenter over at TownHall has partially reprinted. Included is a Top Ten list of what we can expect from an Obama Supreme Court. Here they are:

10. Expanding and perpetuating the use of racial preferences 9. Creating new constitutional rights to physician-assisted suicide and human cloning 8. Expanding judicial oversight of military detentions and CIA interrogations 7. Prohibiting tuition vouchers for religious schools 6. Banning the death penalty 5. Requiring taxpayers to fund essentially unlimited abortion rights 4. Creating new constitutional rights to massive government welfare and medical care programs 3. Stripping "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance 2. Eroding property rights 1. Ordering all 50 states to bless gay marriage

Pretty interesting list, especially for those of us who remember how chaotic the 70's were with respect to criminal justice.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Top 10 Things To Expect From Obama Court
Amanda Carpenter
TownHall.com
July 28, 2008

---

And the Democrats still don't get it when it comes to energy. What are they thinking? That we won't see through their smoke and mirror tricks?

Writing for the Wall Street Journal, Michele Bachmann, a Republican congresswoman from Minnesota, deconstructs the Dems energy non-policy very nicely and in accurate detail.

From the WSJ:

Consider the details of Drill. It would not have opened new lands to energy exploration. Instead, it would have increased the number of lease sales in the National Petroleum Reserve -- the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge's (ANWR's) sister territory on Alaska's North Slope -- from one lease sale every two years to one every year. The problem here came in the fine print. The bill would have mandated that leasing be done in an undefined, "environmentally responsible" way. ... The Democrats' focus on the National Petroleum Reserve is also striking. While it contains comparable known reserves to ANWR -- 10.6 billion barrels compared to an estimated 10.4 billion barrels in the wildlife refuge -- its fields are spread over 23 million acres. The portion of ANWR territory that should be opened to exploration covers a mere 2,000 acres. The National Petroleum Reserve's fields are a little over 250 miles from the current pipeline infrastructure, while ANWR is only 75 miles away. To top it off, currently there is no production in the National Petroleum Reserve because of ongoing litigation. By focusing on a patch of Arctic tundra more spread out than ANWR, a greater distance from current pipelines, and subject to lawsuits not addressed by the legislation, the Democrats chose to respond to American cries for expedited drilling in such a way that would have made it harder to produce energy. There's more. The Drill Act included "use it or lose it" restrictions that prohibit the federal government from issuing new exploration or production leases anywhere, unless the applicant can certify that every lease currently held is being "diligently developed" (again, to be defined later by lawyers) to produce oil or natural gas. Any lease not meeting the yet-to-be-determined standards would have to be relinquished.

Clearly, the Dems are scambling to at least present an illusion that they are doing something about soaring energy prices. But they are insulting our collective intelligence by using these idiotic tricks and thinking that we won't see right through them.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

The Democrats' Energy Charade
Michele Bachmann
Wall Street Journal
July 29, 2008

Running On Empty: Democrat Energy Policies Ignore Reality

How much longer will they cling to the fantasy that alternative energy will get us off of foreign oil? What are these new technologies that will lead to some sort of prosperity?

We've already seen what a disastrous failure ethanol has been. The ethanol plan has a) caused us to use more oil than ever before b) caused an increase in gasoline prices and c) has lead to higher food prices. And ethanol was supposedly our best hope for an alternative energy source. What are the others? The truth is, they don't exist. Most of the ideas being vaguely alluded to by Barack Obama aren't even off of the planning boards and are not, in any way shape or form, proven to be a more efficient energy supply than petroleum.

So, why are the Dems so dead set on continuing these failed policies?

Fred Barnes, writing for the Weekly Standard notes a few things:

Advances in oil technology--which Obama either doesn't know about or chooses to ignore--allow drilling to go far deeper beneath the sea and thus farther from the coast. Some oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico are nearly 200 miles from land. Serious spills from drilling offshore have become practically non-existent. More than 100 rigs in the Gulf were damaged by hurricanes Katrina and Rita without a single spill. So Obama, the Democratic presidential candidate, was wrong. Now, like other Democrats, he's in a politically awkward position. He opposes new drilling for oil and natural gas at a time when drilling in areas currently off limits has become popular. Three-fourths of likely voters in a new Zogby poll said they favor it, and Republicans have made it their top issue against Democrats. Democrats appear wary of saying they oppose any boost in domestic oil production, which happens to be the position of a powerful interest group, the environmental lobby. But despite soaring gasoline prices, Democrats are against opening new areas of federal land or offshore for exploitation of oil and natural gas reserves.

Perhaps that is the answer. The Dems are beholden to the radical environmental lobby and are willing to toss Joe and Jane Average American under the bus in order to placate the environmentalists. In other words, they want Joe and Jane Average American to pay for the failed policies of the liberal-leftists.

More:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said last week that the Democratic Congress is "moving America in a new direction for energy independence." But preserving the ban on offshore drilling isn't new. The ban has been in effect since 1981, but Pelosi said it's not responsible for high gasoline prices. Who's really to blame? The Bush administration and the oil companies, she said. Pelosi's most implausible claim is that energy companies are hoarding oil. If so, they're doing this as gasoline prices have reached a record high price. And these companies are the same ones that Democrats accuse of being greedy and reaping "obscene profits." Hoarding oil--keeping it off the market--certainly makes no economic sense, which is why oil companies aren't doing it. As supposed evidence, Democrats cite the absence of drilling in 68 million acres of federal oil reserves leased by oil companies. In truth, these areas are under active exploration that may lead to drilling. Drilling, of course, is the last step in oil production. Whatever Democrats may think, oil companies don't drill first, then explore later to find if drilling is actually worthwhile. Oil companies pay billions to the federal government each year for oil leases, most of which expire after 10 years. They pay an annual fee as well. In 2007, they paid $7 billion for oil leases in the Gulf of Mexico alone. Would they spend so much for leases and fail to follow up and look for oil? Not likely. Pelosi also made this boast: "The New Direction Congress has enacted into law the first new fuel efficiency standards for vehicles in 32 years." The law would boost vehicle fuel standards to 35 miles a gallon--in 2020. But this legislation was entirely unnecessary. The free market is already increasing fuel efficiency. Car buyers are rushing to trade in gas guzzlers for vehicles with better mileage. And auto companies are closing plants that manufacture low mileage cars as fast as they can as they switch to building more efficient cars.

In other words, the Dems are all talk and no action. They will work their rear-ends off to satisfy a leftist lobby group, but will merely turn a cold shoulder to honest, hard-working, tax-paying Americans.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Running On Empty
Fred Barnes
The Weekly Standard
June 23, 2008

Gas Prices Emerging As The #1 Issue, But Is Senator McCain Listening?

We now have an issue we can lock onto and really draw a direct comparison between the Free Market Republicans and the Socialist Democrats. Gasoline price and domestic energy production. And, if the Republicans and Senator McCain play their cards right, it could go a long way towards bringing some sanity back to the halls of Congress this November.

From Dr. Bobby Eberle at GOPUSA:

It was easy for Democrats to blame the "big" oil companies. They would bring oil executives before Congress, lambast them, and feel good about themselves. However, public opinion is changing. The American people are seeing through the left-wing effort to cloud the issue. The price of gasoline is driven by supply and demand. The proper approach is to address both aspects. We should conserve and look for energy alternatives to hit the "demand" side. We should also look at the "supply" side and see how ridiculous it is to leave the fate of America in the hands of unstable Middle-Eastern countries when we have huge supplies of untapped domestic oil. Americans want to drill at home, and Sen. McCain has a golden opportunity to seize upon this issue. Is he listening? In a recent survey by Rasmussen Reports, Scott Rasmussen notes that "most voters favor the resumption of offshore drilling in the United States and expect it to lower prices at the pump."

According to the Rasmussen poll, 67% of voters now believe that drilling should be allowed off the coasts of California and Florida compared to 18% who are opposed.

Heck, even China plans on drilling off the coast of Florida and they plan on drilling directionally to tap mineral reserves that lie within U.S. waters! Why shouldn't we drill there instead?

Dr. Eberle goes on:

In his speech, McCain says: "But the stakes are high for our citizens and for our economy. And with gasoline running at more than four bucks a gallon, many do not have the luxury of waiting on the far-off plans of futurists and politicians. We have proven oil reserves of at least 21 billion barrels in the United States. But a broad federal moratorium stands in the way of energy exploration and production. And I believe it is time for the federal government to lift these restrictions and to put our own reserves to use. "We can do this in ways that are consistent with sensible standards of environmental protection. And in states that choose to permit exploration, there must be an appropriate sharing of benefits between federal and state governments. But as a matter of fairness to the American people, and a matter of duty for our government, we must deal with the here and now, and assure affordable fuel for America by increasing domestic production." Here, the senator is right on target. We must increase domestic production to address the "supply" side of the equation. Congress is standing in the way, and the American people must make their voices heard on this issue. Just as we stopped their attempts at amnesty, if we join together, we can demand more domestic oil production. Make no mistake... through legislation and regulations, Congress is responsible for our vast dependence on the Middle East for oil. This is where the left is so out of touch. People like New York Sen. Chuck Schumer stand up and demand that President Bush pressure countries like Saudi Arabia to increase production, but he won't allow production at home? The president gets criticized by the liberals for being a "bully," but that's exactly what Schumer wants the president to be when it comes to increasing oil production. Rather than increasing our national security and driving prices down by producing more oil at home, the only thing Schumer wants America to do is to actually increase our dependence on foreign oil by demanding OPEC supply more.

Yes, Congress is part of the problem here. Since the Democrats took control, the price of gasoline has almost doubled and rather than actually doing something sensible (like increasing production here at home) they have falsely accused oil companies of price gouging, blocked efforts to bring prices down, and actually driven the price of gasoline up with those idiotic ethanol requirements. Further, those ethanol requirements resulted in us using more oil than ever before so it didn't do anything to reduce our reliance on foreign oil.

The Dems haven't done one thing to ease the consumer's pain at the pump. Despite Democrat claims to the contrary, they do not care one whit about the problems faced by Joe and Jane Average American.

The next time you see someone who voted Democrat, thank them for the high energy prices.

Finally:

Sen. McCain is on the right track in calling for lifting the ban on offshore drilling. He is right that we need more domestic production. He needs to step up and lead on this issue. We can't cower to the left and be afraid of angering some environmentalist. McCain needs to stop the global warming chatter, and show the American people that the best way to ensure America's national security interests are to take our fate out of the hands of the Middle East. I certainly hope he can do it.

Senator McCain needs to come out swinging on this issue. Is he listening to us? I don't know yet. But it is clear the American voter is watching closely now to see who promises what before November.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Gas Prices Emerging As #1 Issue - Are You Listening Sen. McCain?
Dr. Bobby Eberle
GOPUSA.com
June 18, 2008