What - Me Worry?

OK – OK – OK! I was wrong! Generally, Republicans want us to start drilling for new sources of domestic oil because we believe there are not enough good new alternatives to stem the demand for foreign oil. We believe this is causing us to be needlessly subservient to tyrant governments in the Middle East and in South America.

But Democrats are resolute in their desire not to drill. They believe that we can come up with alternatives so drilling would be counterproductive in every way. Well, they did it. They put their best minds to it and have come up with not one, but several alternatives to solve our need for crude oil. It must be thrilling for them to command it – and then see it come forth right before their eyes. I just have to marvel at the brain power.

Who needs to start drilling again when you have these solutions to our biggest problem:

Wisdom from Larry the Cable Guy

Regarding whether or not we should tap resources in our own country for oil and/or build new refineries, don’t ever give me the excuse that we should not do it because it will not help for another 10 years. That is the lamest reason I have ever heard. To the person who offers up that logic, there should be an immediate challenge. You see, the hidden logic behind that statement is that we will have gone on to newer technology that will have replaced the need for oil. So why waste our time?

I hate that the logic behind such a stupid statement goes unchallenged. No one who uses it should get a free pass. Make them verbalize that hidden logic. Then as they stammer a bit about how we need to be weaned from oil, get ready for some fun. The problem with the “we need to . . .” philosophy is that it simply denies reality. After the person gives you the standard blah blah blah about that then ask them to describe in detail what society will look like without oil being a part of it. Encourage them to really think about it.

What you want to get them to realize is that this world will not reach that reality in 10 years. Are you reading this on your computer? Reach out and touch the frame of the screen. Touch your keyboard. Touch your computer. How about your chair. In the room you are in, take the time to touch everything that has petroleum products in them. That will take some time. Now go to the next room and do the same. Do that in the kitchen – that will really take some time. Now go out to your car and visualize that it is futuristic and does not burn any gas or oil. But go through and touch the dash board, the seat covers, the instrument panel, the belts and hoses, the lights and bumpers and now even the fenders. Now that you get the picture, really imagine a world where we have completely weaned ourselves from petroleum products. Is a refusal to access the supply of oil really the answer? Will the need for it disappear in 10 years?

Now, go to your computer and look up economic data on how fast India, China, and all third world countries are growing. We get precious little respect from them now because they are jealous of our lifestyle. Imagine going to them and telling them that we don’t mind if they want to strive towards modernism – to get disease and poverty under control – they just have to do it without petroleum products.

Before the exercise gets too bogged down, please go back to the original premise. Democrats are saying that we should not tap our own resources or build new refineries because they won’t be productive for at least 10 years. But I believe that in 10 years we will have produced more products, not less that will be made from petroleum! And I do not believe that we will have done away with petroleum driven cars by then – not by a long shot. Even if we radically change – we will still rely on petroleum as one of our most valuable resources.

Should we at long last start to drill, mine, and refine? Queue the Cable Guy.

Polar Bears or Children: Let's Hear Your Choice

Since I like writing about it, I guess I must be impassioned about showing people the right side of the Global Warming issue. The best way I know is to point out more very credible and knowledgeable people who have come from the position of support to become formidable critics of the movement.

This article, written by James Delingpole is about a Danish economist named Bjorn Lomborg. He understands some things that I have been saying all along. This isn’t a battle between those who love the environment and those who hate it. It is a battle between ethical people and a movement that has hijacked the cause for their own political purposes. What Lomborg does is put sensitive issues through a cost / benefit analysis that shows the frauds for what they are. For instance he passionately argues that one of the highest priorities should be saving starving children in Africa rather than polar bears in the Arctic.

What non-economists tend to have difficulty understanding, says Lomborg, is the concept of marginal benefit. ‘We tend to think in terms of absolute magnitude, so people will say, “Global warming is overall a bigger problem than micronutrition so we should deal with that first.” But what economists say is, “No. If you can spend a billion dollars and save 600,000 kids from dying and save about two billion people from being malnourished, that’s a lot better than spending the same amount to postpone global warming by about two minutes at the end of the century.”

Once a darling of the green movement, he now finds himself without a voice among those who still push their agenda forward. I like the following quote because it clearly states the ethical problem for the global warmers.

‘You cannot have a conversation about the biggest policy argument of the day, and then say that one side isn’t allowed to debate,’ says Lomborg. He thinks the greens have also done their cause a great disservice by talking up the climate change threat. ‘You can overplay your cards and screech so loudly that you end up losing the argument.”

As he points out, the real tragedy is that so much time, money and resources are being wasted by pursuing the wrong things.

I believe the global warmers should be held accountable for the damage they are causing by preventing solvable problems from being achieved. Read this article and you will see that there is a much more credible approach that can be taken by people who really care about people rather than achieving political power.

Some of my readers believe in the Global Warming cause. Shame on you! There are too many experts out there who can easily show you that the global warming hoax is a lie. Mr. Lomborg also demonstrates that blindly accepting it costs many human lives.

How Obama can Lose the Race

As I said earlier, this is Obama’s race to lose. His path to victory is to engage the middle of the spectrum without alienating the extreme left that got him the nomination. That sounds simple, but many on the far left have shown that they have very little tolerance for any position on issues like Iraq other than their own.

A year ago, no one could have understood what the big issues were going to be in November 2008, We all thought the big issue would be Iraq. Democrats knew they would be able to crush the Republicans on the issue. Well, that is not the way it is working out. The success in Iraq is undeniable and for Obama to continue the “mistake that we should abandon” rant is now a loser for him.

The overwhelming issue is now the price of gas. And unfortunately Obama has to defend the idea that using our own technology, our own ingenuity, our own labor, and our own natural resources and our own land to increase the supply of oil is really a bad idea. This issue hurts his base. Who doesn’t care about the price of gas? Only rich people. And what is his party’s answer? Raise taxes on the oil companies. They have the unfortunate task of trying to convince people that the oil companies will pay these taxes without it affecting the price at the pump. If they win the election with that argument then we deserve what’s coming to us.

Some of the polls that are now being done are showing the Democrats that their “it is good for us to suffer with high gas prices because it protects the environment” doesn’t play with Americans. And the “let’s tax the oil companies” argument is not a winner either.

If American voters can get the message that Democrats do not want to do anything about increasing the supply of gas, but only want to increase the tax adding to our cost at the pump, then this one issue can blow Obama’s chance for the White House. Six months ago this issue did not exist. By itself, it can change the direction of the election. Conversely, Iraq was their big issue. Now the undeniable success there has taken it away as an issue for them. In the next few months, if Obama doesn’t radically adapt on these two issues he will go the way of Kerry and Gore

President Obama - Get Used To It

Watching both political parties go through the process of getting down to their best candidate for President, I have come to the conclusion that our next President will be Barack Obama. Let me put it another way. The race is clearly Barack Obama’s to lose. Here are my reasons:

• Passion. If passion is an indicator then Obama is the winner. The passion shown by his supporters is off the chart. It is an amazing phenomenon. People are showing an amazing level of zeal and enthusiasm for Obama. Conversley the McCain passion is very low. Now the poll numbers are close, but the passion index (if there is one) is strongly tilted to Obama.
• Charisma. That is important. The last two Democratic Presidential candidates were woefully lacking in charisma. Kerry was a stiff. Gore wasn’t as warm as Kerry. Obama rates off the chart in this area, too. McCain has personality. On Saturday Night Live he was really good, but no one has as much charisma as Obama.
• Press. If you believe that the press is neutral about both candidates then it just seems natural that the above two traits would in the end, natrually cause them to be warmer to Obama. If you know the truth, then you know that the press has already signed on and is contributing mightily to being co-authors of this fairytale.
• Money. Democrats are doubling down. After Gore’s loss, the Democrat money knew it had to finance the next election. They almost got it done with Kerry. To their credit they are back with their wallets. It is ironic that this last several years of relatively low taxes and strong economic numbers has contributed more to their wealth than anything else. Conversely, Republicans to this point have been less willing to bankroll McCain.

In future posts, I will discuss how Obama can lose the race and how I think McCain could win it. So what do you think? Do you see it this way?

It is Time to Take Names and Kick You-Know-Whats

I believe the Political Party that can give good solutions to the most important problems we face would be a big winner in the upcoming elections. Republicans have lost the majority of seats in the House because it seems to be on the wrong side of the issues with the majority of Americans. But are they? Regarding the energy crisis, here is how the House sees the oil production issues. Republican Congressman Roy Blunt compiled the statistics. Powerline brings it to our attention.

ANWR Exploration
House Republicans: 91% Supported
House Democrats: 86% Opposed

Coal-to-Liquid
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 78% Opposed

Oil Shale Exploration
House Republicans: 90% Supported
House Democrats: 86% Opposed

Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration
House Republicans: 81% Supported
House Democrats: 83% Opposed

Refinery Increased Capacity
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 96% Opposed

SUMMARY

91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas.

86% of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas.

Now I may not be a smart guy, but if Republicans running for election in their district wanted to campaign to win, they wouldn’t need yard signs, TV spots, or anything else. Just get a diligent crew to stand at gas stations and hand out fliers making people aware of the above statistics. The flier wouldn’t have to say too much. The whirring numbers at the pump would fill in all the blanks.

Of Mice and Men

We had been in our new house for about a week. Our garage was wall-to-wall boxes. It was nice and cool in the garage so we had left a sack of apples out there. I noticed one day that one of the apples was about half eaten. Little mouse droppings were around it. I was impressed that some serious eating had taken place so I threw the bag of apples away and set two mouse traps side by side. I used cheese as the bait. The next morning I went out and both traps had mice. Now I started to think about it. The first mouse had gotten fooled. The second mouse was just stupid. It had been a witness to the other mouse’s catastrophic end just three inches away. But it went right ahead and found its own hunk of cheese.

Now – change of scene. A church in Chicago. It’s big so every service is taped. After many years, the nation is exposed to the contents of the sermons of Reverend Wright. As it turns out, his pulpit was being used as a platform for highly strident political discourse. Once the content of some of the “sermons” was revealed, the general public is rightly outraged. Reverend Wright is “retired” and rightly disavowed by his most famous member, Barack Obama.

Now, a Mr. Pfleger, guest preacher, shows up at the church to deliver a sermon from the same pulpit. This is a Catholic Priest who has a flair for the cadence and style that the people who attend this church are fond of. He then launches into a highly strident political discourse. A good time was had by all. But, like Wright’s sermons this one is immediately sent over the airways and the reaction to it is just the same. By Thursday of the next week, it was over. Just today I learned he has been suspended. But the thing that puzzled me the most were some words after it was apparent he was in trouble. He prefaced his apology with a comment to the affect that “these last three days were some of the most painful of my life”.

He had no premonition that this was coming? He had no foreknowledge that he would be held accountable for his strident political "sermon"? He completely missed the Reverend Wright experience? I feel like the AFLAC Duck after trying to understand Yogi Berra. And I thought of that second mouse.