Alarmists Use Weather To Promote Global Warming Hoax

Yes, global warming is still in the news. Especially since President Bush was at the G-8 Summit extoling the (non-existent) virtues of working to prevent greenhouse gas output. Unfortunately, he got the most press. Other, more scientific, more reasoned and more rational people didn't get any press coverage at all. So, I am here to give you the scoop.

We have Dr. Tim Ball of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg who gives us this:

Claims that recent severe weather and flooding in the US are proof of human CO2 impacts on global climate are scientific nonsense. They are part of a pattern of keeping weather and climate issues in the public mind. My grandmother admonished me with, “Your sins will find you out.” It is a maxim that should now befall proponents of the false theory that human CO2 is causing global warming or climate change. Exposure rarely emerges from the original event, but as Watergate showed the coverup bares the truth. Governments and large segments of society accepted the theory. Most bullied by use of fear but also their lack of knowledge and understanding was also exploited. Now a combination of events are driving them to raise the threat level and make increasingly false claims. forcing a coverup. The world is cooling while CO2 levels continue to rise. In every record for any period in history temperature increases before CO2 not as assumed. Plans to implement carbon taxes to offset warming exacerbate soaring fuel prices. Effects of policies implemented to replace fossil fuels with biofuels are driving food and total living costs rapidly higher. People increasingly question the threats as a recent UK poll showed; “The majority of the British public is still not convinced that climate change is caused by humans - and many others believe scientists are exaggerating the problem, according to an exclusive poll for The Observer.” Proponents of the theory that humans are causing global warming or climate change have used fear to push their false belief. Now they’re experiencing fear as evidence shows they’re wrong and the public perceive a deception.

Having earned a degree in Physical Sciences from the University of Maryland, I was aware of the deception long before Al Gore came out with his notoriously error-filled propaganda movie.

But why would scientists "exaggerate the problem?" Funding. They want funding and in order to get it, they must justify their expenses. Unfortunately for us, that funding usually comes from the taxpayer or the consumer and we end up paying to further an agenda of Socialist leftists.

More:

Events are driving them to extreme, unsubstantiated and even ridiculous claims and threats. One of these was that sea level would rise, but it foundered when the two Nobel Peace Prize winners, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Al Gore were in serious disagreement. Another was Arctic sea ice except it returned to long term normal levels last winter and NASA announced the one year anomaly was due to changes in wind patterns. So they return to their central theme of convincing you that normal weather events are abnormal. An increase in severe weather is a persistent theme, especially in North America.

But is that severe weather really an indicator of anything other than natural responses by our environment to factors that are out of our control?

Report co-chair Tom Karl, Ph.D., director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C said, “This report addresses one of the most frequently asked questions about global warming: what will happen to weather and climate extremes? This synthesis and assessment product examines this question across North America and concludes that we are now witnessing and will increasingly experience more extreme weather and climate events.” Karl has a vested interest in this being true. It is the position of the IPCC and he cites the IPCC as the authoritative body. Internationally, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), under the auspices of the United Nations (UN), World Meteorological Organization (WMO), and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), is the most senior and authoritative body providing scientific advice to global policy makers. Well he was a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Reports for 1990, 1992, 1995, a Coordinating Lead author and panel member of the 2001 Report and a Review Editor for Chapter 3 of the 2007 Report. Source: ncdc.noaa.gov There are three major problems with what is being said. 1. The severe weather of this spring across the Northern Hemisphere was caused by cooler weather not warmer. 2. The IPCC and the NOAA positions that severe weather will increase with global warming is scientifically wrong. 3. The records show current weather extremes are well within long term natural variability.

Basically, what is happening is that cool polar air pushes towards the tropics and warmer tropical air gets displaced upward as a result. The fronts where cool air and warm air meet are where the severe weather occurs. This explains why most of the severe weather we see happens between 30 and 65 degrees of latitutde.

So, why is this important? Because the Global Warming Alarmists are claiming that Global Warming is causing severe weather when the exact opposite is true. It is when the earth cools down and cool polar air remains longer at the lower latitudes that we get more severe weather.

But the IPCC report claims that Global Warming will make polar air temperatures rise faster than tropical air temperatures. Because the two air masses would be closer in temperature, that would mean less severe weather, not more.



From the above graph produced by National Oceanographic and Atpmospheric Administration (NOAA) data, you can see that tornadoes were more frequent between 1950 and 1975, when the earth was in a cooling trend. As the world warmed going towards the year 2000, the frequency decreased, and since the earth has cooled since 2000, the frequency has increased.

Dr. Ball's parting shot:

This trend of severe weather is most likely to increase as the Earth continues to cool. Proponents of human caused climate change will claim it proves them right. They will continue their practice of claiming natural events as unnatural. Unless people understand the basic science they will continue the fraud and pressure politicians into even more damaging energy and environmental policies.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Alarmists Use Weather To Promote Global Warming Hoax
Dr. Tim Ball
Canada Free Press
July 7, 2008

Obama Shows His True Intent On The Immigration Issue And He Won't Even Try For A Balanced Budget

Sometimes, what a candidate says indirectly reveals more about his/her true intentions on an issue than what he/she says directly reveals about it. Take what Obama said about all kids having to learn Spanish:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama lamented legislative pushes to make English the official language of the United States and said Americans should instead focus on making sure their children learn Spanish at a recent campaign stop. "I don’t understand when people are going around worrying about, we need to have English only. They want to pass a law, we just, we want English only," Obama told supporters in Powder Springs, Georgia on Tuesday. "Now, I agree that immigrants should learn English, I agree with this. But understand this, instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English, they’ll learn English, you need to make sure your child can speak Spanish."

Clearly, Obama is set on turning the United States into a fractured society of differing factions based on race and nationality. This would be a disaster for us.

Immigrants coming to the U.S. should learn English to assimiliate with us. We should not have to learn their language to accomodate them.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Obama: Kids Should Learn Spanish
Amanda Carpenter
TownHall.com
July 9, 2008

---

And back in 2006, the Democrats complained that spending in the Republican-controlled Congress was out of control. Their solution? Back Barack Obama. Will that address the issue of over-spending? Not likely.

Read this:

Not only does Obama say he won't eliminate the deficit in his first term, as McCain aims to do, he frankly says he's not sure he'd bring it down at all in four years, considering his own spending plans. "I do not make a promise that we can reduce it by 2013 because I think it is important for us to make some critical investments right now in America's families," Obama told reporters this week when asked if he'd match McCain's pledge.

Hey! Socialism costs money! It's going to take a few billion dollars to implement the leftist programs (euphemistically called "critical investments") that will ultimately destroy our economy, right? It happened in Europe. It happened in Latin America. Why are the Dems so gullible as to believe that it won't happen here?

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Analysis: Obama Won't Try For McCain's Budget Goal
Nedra Pickler
TownHall.com
July 8, 2008

Iraqis Lead Final Purge Of Al-Qaeda Out Of Iraq

You've probably noticed that Iraq is no longer prevalent in the news. No more daily stories about bombings, IEDs, ambushes or American service personnel being killed on a daily basis. Perhaps we should take note of the reason why Old Media isn't jamming the stuff down our throats anymore.

It's because we are winning. Even Jack Murtha, the back-stabber from Pennsylvania, went on TV in Pittsburgh and admitted that the surge is working. But the Times of London spells it out more precisely:

American and Iraqi forces are driving Al-Qaeda in Iraq out of its last redoubt in the north of the country in the culmination of one of the most spectacular victories of the war on terror. After being forced from its strongholds in the west and centre of Iraq in the past two years, Al-Qaeda’s dwindling band of fighters has made a defiant “last stand” in the northern city of Mosul. A huge operation to crush the 1,200 fighters who remained from a terrorist force once estimated at more than 12,000 began on May 10. Operation Lion’s Roar, in which the Iraqi army combined forces with the Americans’ 3rd Armoured Cavalry Regiment, has already resulted in the death of Abu Khalaf, the Al-Qaeda leader, and the capture of more than 1,000 suspects.

Wouldn't it have been nice if this was on the front page of the New York Times? But don't expect a leftist-liberal rag to print anything that shows terrorists in a bad light.

More:

Even in the district of Zanjali, previously a hotbed of the insurgency, it was possible to accompany an Iraqi colonel on foot through streets of breeze-block houses studded with bullet holes. Hundreds of houses were searched without resistance but no bomb was found, only 60kg of explosives. American and Iraqi leaders believe that while it would be premature to write off Al-Qaeda in Iraq, the Sunni group has lost control of its last urban base in Mosul and its remnants have been largely driven into the countryside to the south. Nouri al-Maliki, Iraq’s prime minister, who has also led a crackdown on the Shi’ite Mahdi Army in Basra and Baghdad in recent months, claimed yesterday that his government had “defeated” terrorism. “They were intending to besiege Baghdad and control it,” Maliki said. “But thanks to the will of the tribes, security forces, army and all Iraqis, we defeated them.”

Even if Old Media refuses to report on the truth, we bloggers in New Media can still access it.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Iraqis Lead Final Purge Of Al-Qaeda
Marie Colvin
TimesOnLine.com
July 6, 2008

Gasoline Price War Hits The Senate And Nancy Pelosi's Promise Of Lower Energy Prices Keeps Getting Emptier

Harry Reid is a prime example of how out-of-touch the Democrats are with reality. Here is what he said in front of a Fox News camera:

“The one thing we fail to talk about is those costs that you don't see on the bottom line. Coal makes us sick. Oil makes us sick. It's global warming. It's ruining our country. It's ruining our world. We've got to stop using fossil fuels."

Well, as I noted in a recent posting, that is like asking humans to stop eating. It just won't happen, at least not without seriously fatal side-effects.

Jed Babbin notes something similar in his most recent column:

America’s, like it or not, is an oil-based economy. People who drive, fly and ship by truck are the basis for our commerce. Without the ability to drive, fly and ship we cannot buy and sell goods and services.

Apparently, the Democrats are still addicted to the fantasy that we can make cars, planes, trains and ships go on pixie dust and unicorn whiskers. They have this fantasy that some super-scientific technology is going to come and rescue us. Not so.

Read on:

Airlines are -- once again -- facing bankruptcy and the cost of fuel is driving up the price of every kind of goods and services. Neither the President nor the Democratic Congressional leadership is doing anything to bring the price of gasoline down now, before the election. Politicians seem to be immune to reason. They’re talking about things that may -- not will -- happen decades from now. If we began today, and bent all our attention, spent every dime we have on it to the exclusion of all else, we’d not be able to “stop using fossil fuels” for fifty years or more. The Democrats seem impervious to the facts. There is no cost-effective way to “stop using fossil fuels” in an economy that is completely dependent upon that use. Even if there were, the burden of gasoline costs on our economy demands that effective action be taken now to drive that price down. Reid and others chant the mantra that “you can’t drill your way out of this problem.” We -- and the OPEC cartel -- have drilled our way into it. Why can’t we drill our way out, at least to buy enough time to figure out a long-term solution?

So why do the Dems act the way they do, to the complete detriment of the American people? For the same reason they refuse to acknowledge reality and vote to do the right thing:

Because the environmentalists would be unhappy. Their contentment is more important to Reid and the other Dems than the economic survival of the American voter.

Yes, keeping the radical left happy is more important to the Democrats than keeping their promise to the American people. Remember that promise, made back in 2006? Here is a reminder of what Nancy Pelosi said on April 24, 2006:

"Democrats have a common-sense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices by cracking down on price gouging, rolling back the billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies, tax breaks and royalty relief given to big oil and gas companies, and increasing production of alternative fuels."

We need to get the Dems out of Congress and replace them with people who really know what the needs of the United States are.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Gasoline Price War Hits The Senate
Jed Babbin
Human Events Online
July 7, 2008

---

And here is a little something from the Journal Sentinel of Milwaukee:

Natural gas futures have jumped 82% since the start of the year. Heating oil and propane prices are also soaring. The increased natural gas prices already have resulted in electricity bills jumping twice since March for customers of Milwaukee-based We Energies and Green Bay-based Wisconsin Public Service Corp. Including increases authorized for three other state utilities, customers of the state’s five investor-owned utilities have seen rates rise by $210 million since the start of the year. Spokesmen for the state’s large natural gas utilities said it’s too early to predict what customers may pay this winter. The futures price of natural gas, which finished last week at its highest point in more than 2 1/2 years, could still fall below its current, abnormal high, they said. “Prices right now are in the scary range,” said Kerry Spees, spokesman for Wisconsin Public Service, an electric and natural gas utility. “It makes you look toward the winter with a little trepidation.”

Anyone still gullible enough to believe that Nancy Pelosi and the Dems have us on the right track?

You can access the complete column on-line here:

High Natural Gas Costs Expected To Boost Heating Bills This Winter
Thomas Content
Journal Sentinel of Milwaukee
July 6, 2008

What Is A Billion? What Taxes Are You Paying? Do Politicians Have Any Idea What They Are Spending Money On?

What is a billion? Let's put it in perspective here. From an email I recieved:

The next time you hear a politician use the word 'billion' in a casual manner, think about whether you want the 'politicians' spending YOUR tax money. A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of it's releases. A. A billion seconds ago it was 1959. B. A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive. C. A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age. D. A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet. E. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate our government is spending it. While this thought is still fresh in our brain ... let's take a look at New Orleans ... It's amazing what you can learn with some simple division. Louisiana Senator, Mary Landrieu (D) is presently asking Congress for 250 BILLION DOLLARS to rebuild New Orleans. Interesting number ... what does it mean? A. Well ... if you are one of the 484,674 residents of New Orleans (every man, woman, and child) you each get $516,528. B. Or ... if you have one of the 188,251 homes in New Orleans , your home gets $1,329,787. C. Or ... if you are a family of four ... your family gets $2,066,012. Washington, DC: "HELLO!" Are all your calculators broken?? Accounts Receivable Tax Building Permit Tax CDL License Tax Cigarette Tax Corporate Income Tax Dog License Tax Federal Income Tax < BR>Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA) Fishing License Tax Food License Tax Fuel Permit Tax Gasoline Tax Hunting Licen se Tax Inheritance Tax Inventory Tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax) IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax) Liquor Tax Luxury Tax Marriage License Tax Medicare Tax Property Tax Real Estate Tax Service charge taxes Social Security Tax Road Usage Tax (Truckers) Sales Taxes Recreational Vehicle Tax School Tax State Income Tax State Unemployment Tax (SUTA) Telephone Federal Excise Tax Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Tax Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax Telephone State and Local Tax Telephone Usage Charge Tax Utility Tax Vehicle License Registration Tax Vehicle Sales Tax Watercraft Registration Tax Well Permit Tax Workers Compensation Tax STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago ... and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt ... We had the largest middle class in the world ... and Mom stayed home to raise the kids. What happened? Can you spell 'politicians?' And I still have to press "1" for English.

Sad but true.

We should have three top priorities:

1) Pass the FairTax.
2) Control Government Spending.
3) Produce oil and energy right here at home.

Companies Begin Quest For Oil Offshore: Oil And Gas Prices Emerging As #1 Issue

So, how much have you been paying to fill your gas tank? Quite a bit more than you were when the Democrats took control of Congress back in 2007. Gas prices have gone up over 38% since then. The American people want change. Not the change Barack Obama is proposing (i.e. more disastrous Socialism), but a change in domestic energy production policy.

That change would be to lift the stifling rules and regulations that prevent us from producing our own energy right here at home. Conceivably, our domestic oil companies could produce oil at $60/bbl instead of having to pay $145/bbl or even $200/bbl when the price gets that high.

According to the Associated Press:

Oil companies once viewed drilling in the deep waters off Florida as cost prohibitive. Politicians feared even the slightest sign of support would be career suicide. No more. Record crude oil prices are fueling support for oil and natural gas exploration off the nation's shores. In Florida, movement was under way even before President Bush called on Congress last month to lift a federal moratorium that's barred new offshore drilling since 1981. The early activity here stems from a 2006 Congressional compromise that allows drilling on 8.3 million acres more than 125 miles off the Panhandle — an area that had been covered by the moratorium, which was enacted out of environmental concerns. In exchange, the state got a no-drilling buffer along the rest of its beaches.

2006. That's when the Republicans controlled Congress. They had more than enough votes to force the issue, but certain Republicans decided to become obstructionists, including the GOP Presidential candidate John McCain.

McCain better be singing a different tune today, because Barack Obama is the one constantly saying "no" to viable solutions to our energy crisis. Here's what the American voter is thinking:

With gas topping $4 a gallon, recent polls show Americans, Floridians included, more supportive of drilling in protected areas. Some politicians — including Gov. Charlie Crist — have switched sides. "We think the public is way out ahead of the politicians on these issues. People are more open to (offshore drilling) now," said Tom Moskitis, spokesman for the American Gas Association, a trade group. At the same time, oil companies, driven by the record energy price, are more willing to risk $100 million or more to begin exploring new regions. The Interior Department estimates there could be 18 billion barrels of oil and 77 trillion cubic feet of natural gas beneath the 574 million acres of federal coastal waters that are now off-limits.

And when people realize that the energy crisis is going to threaten the family vacation to Disney World, they will end up voting for the candidate who will work the hardest to remove the threat. That is why John McCain had better be listening to the people on this one.

More:

But politicians who once supported the ban are changing their minds. Sen. John McCain supports lifting the ban and allowing states to decide whether to approve drilling of their shores. Crist, Florida's Republican governor and a possible vice presidential candidate, reversed his long-standing opposition to lifting the ban last month. The ban won't be lifted without a fight. Sen. Bill Nelson, who has led opposition to offshore drilling among the state's congressional delegation, criticized the governor for reversing his position, accusing Crist and McCain of putting oil company profits before protecting the state's $65 billion annual tourism industry.

But Nelson seems to be completely ignorant of the fact that if people can't put gas in their cars, or airlines can't put fuel into airplanes, then the tourist industry in Florida is going to take a huge hit. People aren't going to walk hundreds of miles to get to Florida, especially if they have children.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Companies Begin Quest For Oil, Gas Off Florida
Associated Press via MSNBC.com
July 4, 2008

How Barack Obama Intends To Repay His Surrogate Lap-Dog General Wesley Clark For The McCain Military Service Smear

Political Ad Verifies Democrats Have No Integrity And Bush Urges Americans To Contact Congress About Drilling At Home

A Philadelphia radio station, KYW-AM 1060 has rejected a political ad submitted by the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) that uses an impersonator for President Bush's voice, but fails to disclose the impersonation up front.

According to The Hill:

Philadelphia KYW-AM Vice President and General Manager David Yadgaroff said his station decided not to run the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) ad because it was worried its listeners would be misled. “As an all-news station, we were concerned that our listeners would have been misled by usage of an impersonator in the creative delivery,” Yadgaroff said in an e-mail sent to The Hill. The ad was part of a $100,000 DCCC ad campaign in 13 different congressional districts held by Republicans. In the ad, a Bush impersonator calls the local GOP congressman, thanking him for “continuing to support the Big Oil agenda” as a member of the “Grand Oil Party.”

There are several things to note here. First, is the blatent political distortionism the Dems are deliberately engaging in. Second is that they are pointing the finger of blame in the wrong direction ... again. High oil prices are attributable to a do-nothing Democrat controlled Congress. Third, it shows that the Dems have abandoned any pretense of integrity.

We need to vote them out of office before they inflict a Socialist disaster on us that is worse than what is happening over in Europe.

You can access the complete story on-line here:

Philly Radio Station Refuses To Run Democratic Ad
David Matthews
The Hill
July 3, 2008

---

And President Bush has been urging Americans to contact their Congressional Reps and ask them to vote to allow drilling here at home for lower-priced oil. According to The Hill:

Americans should contact Congress and tell their elected representatives to open up a part of the Alaskan wilderness and the area off the country’s coast to oil exploration, President Bush said Wednesday. “I fully understand why Americans are concerned about gasoline prices,” Bush told reporters. “But I want them to understand fully that we have got the opportunity to find more crude oil here at home in environmentally friendly ways and they ought to write their Congress people about it.” The president said Americans should tell Congress to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and the Outer Continental Shelf, as well as push for an increase in oil shale exploration. Bush argued that the Democratic Congress has “refused to budge” on these issues.

Note that legislative body mentioned in that last sentence. Therein lies our biggest obstacle to energy independence.

You can access the complete story on-line here:

Bush Urges Americans To Get Congress To Allow Drilling
Klaus Marre
The Hill
July 2, 2008

CNN's Glenn Beck: Your Gas Money For A Flat Screen?

I was watching Glenn last night when he had Rudy Giuliani on talking about the current oil crisis. Yes, I said "crisis" because that is what we are in. When the price of a barrel of oil has gone up so dramatically in the space of a year and a half, I'd say we are in a crisis.

Mayor Giuliani has the right ideas about what to do. Drill, drill, drill. There is no other solution. Right now, the Democrat controlled Congress seems to want to do nothing but wait and watch gas prices go higher, our economy sink lower and then sit back, enjoy their perks and privilidges while pointing the finger of blame in the wrong direction.

Glenn Beck has a few words to say about that. In fact, it is clear that drilling at home and producing domestically is the only rational solution. The alternative is to wreck our economy and turn the U.S. to chaos. But what about the standard stock arguments from the greens? What do those arguments really mean and are they even valid? From CNN:

"It's not going to help for another 10 years!" Here's the thing. America is a long-term plan for me. I don't know where these people plan to be in 10 years, but I plan to be here. This is, of course, the same argument heard around President Clinton's veto of ANWR drilling in 1995. Among other things, if we had started drilling ANWR then, oil would be already flowing. At its peak, ANWR could supply 1.45 million barrels per day, enough to tell Hugo Chavez and all his Venezuelan oil to shove it (with a little change left over). Of course, Clinton didn't have Chavez to deal with back then. If only he were thinking 10 years into the future.

And this:

"We can't drill ourselves out of this problem!" Maybe not solely, or forever, but it sure can help. With new technology, who knows what we can do over time? The government estimates that the outer continental shelf alone has 76 billion barrels of oil that are recoverable, and that's just with today's technology. To put that number into perspective, it's equal to every barrel of oil that we'd import from everywhere outside of North America for 31 years at our current pace. But instead of developing these resources, we throw up endless roadblocks. If you don't think that pumping more of our own oil would affect prices, ask yourself what would happen if we did the opposite. What if we announced today that we were turning all of our existing pumps off?

More:

"What about the environment?" This may surprise those who think I'm the pre-eminent murderer of the Earth, but the only real argument against owning our own oil destiny is an environmental one. Under this theory: High gas prices equal less gas usage, which equals a saved planet. Thomas Friedman, in a recent column, laid it out in an honest fashion: "Now that [gas] is $4 a gallon, the government should at least keep it there, since it is really having the right effect." He went on to describe Chrysler's promotion that guarantees cheaper gas as "the moral equivalent of tobacco companies offering discounted cigarettes to teenagers." Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, apparently agrees, saying that coal and oil are making us sick along with "ruining our country" and "ruining our world." If you believe such nonsense, then it's perfectly rational to ignore our ample energy resources. (It's not rational to combine that with complaints about high gas prices, sorry Harry Reid.) For the rest of us, while visions of the Exxon Valdez may dance through your head, the National Academy of Sciences found that the offshore industry is among the safest industrial activities in the United States. And please, next time you hear someone complaining about environmental risks of drilling at home, remember this from a 2003 speech from the director of the US Minerals Management Services: "Imports present an environmental risk of spills about 13 times greater than domestic production" and "natural seeps account for 150-175 times more oil in the ocean than outer continental shelf oil and gas operations." NATURAL SEEPS? Now we know who the real polluter is -- that evil wench -- Mother Nature.

Some very profound words of wisdon in their. Domestic production is the way to go until the day comes when we do build cars, freight trains and ships that run on pixie dust and unicorn whiskers. But those technologies are years into the future, if they are even possible at all. Solar power, wind power and ethanol could only supply us a fraction of what we need. Right now, domestic production would supply us all that we need.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Commentary: Your Gas Money For A Flat Screen?
Glenn Beck
CNN.com
July 3, 2008

An America First Energy Plan

One of the things that irritates me the most is when people repeat, like trained parrots, the idiotic line: "We are addicted to oil!" I know, even President Bush has repeated it, but it is still an idiotic thing to say.

How about this: "The human body is addicted to food!" It's the same thing, but on a much, much smaller scale. You see, saying that our economy and culture is addicted to oil is like saying that oil is some form of opiate that we get high off of. But, from my human body/food analogy you can clearly see that this is not the case.

We use the energy we get from oil to provide power for our industries and to power our everyday lives, just as our bodies use energy from the foods we eat to power our bodily functions (like heartbeat, breathing, locomotion, etc.). We are no more addicted to oil than we are to eating food.

Now do you see how idiotic that parroted line is?

So, why bring this up? There was a good column yesterday over at CNBC by Larry Kudlow. Here is an excerpt:

America First should be the rallying cry. We have the natural resources to become the Saudi Arabia of coal and the Saudi Arabia of oil. Lift the moratoriums. Stop attacking our own businesses. Put technology to work. Put venture capital to work, with rock-bottom capital-gains and corporate tax rates. Stop being mau-maued by the extremist greenies who have prevented energy production for over three decades. America First. Unleash our free-enterprise energy sector: 2 trillion barrels worth of shale; 90 billion barrels of offshore oil; at least 10 billion barrels up in ANWR and more throughout Alaska, both onshore and off. Politically, Sen. McCain must also understand how Hillary Clinton clobbered Barack Obama in the big state primaries: Blue-collar workers. They can be the key to victory for McCain. Guess who works in the energy business? Blue collar Reagan Democrats. They work on the rigs. They work in the fields. They drive the trucks. And they’re paid high wages -- substantially above the average hourly wage. Or McCain can sell it this way: American workers are worried about jobs going offshore to India, China, Vietnam, and Bangladesh. Well, a drill, drill, drill, America First energy plan would create millions of new domestic American jobs. Of course, there’s also a national security aspect to this. Worried about funding terrorist rogue states? Drill, drill, drill. A complete portfolio of oil energy sources in America -- that’s the answer.

These paragraphs give a very clear picture as to exactly how issues are all intertwined. Here we have energy prices, taxes, employment and national security. I really wish our Congressionaol Reps had this much sense and foresight.

More:

Sen. Obama is opposed to drilling. Opposed to nuclear. Opposed to coal. He and Harry Reid believe wind, solar, and ethanol are the answers. They’re not. It’s doubtful even at full development and commercialization that these alternative technologies will ever power more than 10 percent of our energy needs. We should go down this road as part of a full energy portfolio. But let’s not kid ourselves: These sources alone will never be sufficient. Sen. McCain has to make this case daily. He must contrast his America First energy plan with Obama’s declinist American vision. He must argue America First for fuel, power, jobs, wages, and national security. He must enlist the Reagan Democrats who may be out of work and are surely angry at $4 gas at the pump and $140 a barrel oil in the world market. Take a page from Ronald Reagan, Mr. McCain. Be optimistic about our future. Be clear, straightforward, and consistent. We can grow this economy and remain number one. This is how to do it.

I know Barack Obama will never listen to such common sense advice. But Senator McCain has the potential. Will he listen? Let's hope so.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

An America First Energy Plan
Larry Kudlow
CNBC.com
July 2, 2008