Energy Policy Timeline: a Helpful Guide

1995 -- Oil at $18 a barrel: Democratic President Bill Clinton vetoes oil exploration in ANWR.

1998 -- Oil at $20 a barrel: Democratic President Clinton issues executive order banning offshore oil and gas drilling.

2001 -- Oil at $28 a barrel: Democrats Bonior, Stupak and Kaptur lead efforts to block Great Lakes oil exploration and drilling in Gulf.

2005 -- Oil at $45 a barrel: Democrat Rahm Emmanuel blocks BP's refinery expansion plans.



2006 -- Oil at $70 a barrel: Democrats block oil exploration in ANWR.

2006 -- Oil at $75 a barrel: Democrats block US companies from drilling off the coasts of the U.S.

2006 -- Oil at $75 a barrel: Democrat Pelosi helps block access to Gulf of Mexico 'natural gas' trove.

2008 -- Oil at $145 a barrel: Judge appointed by Democrat Bill Clinton blocks oil drilling in Michigan.

Last week House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed that "Drilling is a hoax! It's an absolute hoax!" And Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid helpfully added:

The one thing we fail to talk about is those costs that you don’t see on the bottom line. That is coal makes us sick, oil makes us sick; it’s global warming. It’s ruining our country, it’s ruining our world.

Back in the real world, our entire economy runs on fossil fuels.

It will take decades to make the transition to clean technologies, for which the free-market incentives are immense.

The United States is the only country on the planet that intentionally withholds access to its own treasure trove of oil and natural gas.

Historically, the energy policy differences between the two parties are clear:

• For ANWR Exploration -- GOP: 91%; Democrats: 14%.

• For Coal-to-Liquid -- GOP: 97%; Democrats: 22%.

• For Oil Shale Exploration -- GOP: 90%; Democrats: 14%.

• For Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration -- GOP: 81%; Democrats: 17%.

• For Refinery Increased Capacity -- GOP: 97%; Democrats: 4%.

Writing at Gateway Pundit, commenter Nahanni offers an excellent suggestion.

...I would like to recommended an investment opportunity for all of you. It might prove very lucrative in the coming months. Invest in companies that make torches, pitchforks, baseball bats and rope. I am beginning to think there might be a great demand for them.

Vote accordingly in 2008.


Cartoons: Ramirez. Chart: Bespoke Investment Group.

Thank your local Democrat for $4 gas!

Ticked off at $4-a-gallon gas?

Despite the catastrophic damage that high oil prices can wreak on our economy, Democrats oppose virtually every measure that would relieve the pain on average Americans.

The accompanying map depicts "The No Zone." This is the region surrounding the United States in which Democrats have blocked oil exploration.

Democrats oppose drilling in deepwater, even though Hurricanes Katrina and Rita proved that modern offshore drilling platforms pose little or no pollution risk. Democrats oppose exploration in a tiny, postage-stamp sized region of Alaska. As for new refineries or nuclear energy, well, the Democrats oppose those, too. The net impact of Democratic behavior is that America will become increasingly dependent on foreign oil.

While alternative energy sources remain an admirable goal, they are decades away from becoming serious alternatives to oil. For good or bad, America's economy and national security hinge on access to oil. Ben Stein comments:

...If we lost all oil and gas products tomorrow, ...the world would simply collapse. There would be an immense depression beyond anything we saw in the 1930s -- the economy would go back to a primitive state. There would simply not be a functioning society. It would be as if there had been nuclear war, minus the casualties from blast and radiation... In a word, we cannot as a modern society or even a modestly industrial society live without oil and gas. That is, [it is not] a luxury or a narcotic. [It is] a basic necessity of life, as basic as almost any commodity there is.

The Democrats like to pretend that oil is a needless luxury by preventing exploration in sensible locations. But, in the mean time, Cuba is permitting foreign countries to drain the Gulf of Mexico of its oil. Cuba granted China drilling rights in the Gulf. And, in fact, China will be drilling within 50 miles of Florida.

Thus, while countries such as China suck oil out of the Gulf, Democrats continue to stonewall against sensible energy policies.

Vote accordingly in 2008.

Obama to big oil: fill 'er up!

ABC blogger Jake Tapper reveals an oily misdirection on the part of Barack (name redacted) Hussein. Oops. Got the redaction part wrong... again. Hate when that happens.

[You may have seen a] Barack Obama TV ad where he's standing in a gas station saying the following:

"Since the gas lines of the ’70s, Democrats and Republicans have talked about energy independence, but nothing’s changed — except now Exxon’s making $40 billion a year, and we’re paying $3.50 for gas... I’m Barack Obama. I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore. They’ll pay a penalty on windfall profits. We’ll invest in alternative energy, create jobs and free ourselves from foreign oil. I approve this message because it’s time that Washington worked for you. Not them."

Factcheck.org today takes a look at Obama's claim to not take money from oil companies and concludes that the statement  "misleading" since according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics Obama has taken more than $213,000 from individuals (and their spouses) who work for companies in the oil and gas industry -- not to mention that two of Obama's top fundraisers are top executives at oil companies."

Apparently Obama learned his lessons well as an apprentice to Hillary Rodham Clinton, Harry "Land Deal" Reid, John "Unindicted Co-Conspirator" Murtha, William ("Freezer-burn") Jefferson and Ted ("Bubbles") Kennedy.

Read more: Why would some politicians support higher oil prices? Because they can.

AMERICA MUST DRILL FOR MORE OIL HERE AT HOME - NOW!

THE OIL EXTRACTING NATIONS ARE GETTING RICHER AND RICHER AND RICHER:


BREITBART:

Moscow has overtaken New York City as home to the most billionaires, according to Forbes magazine, with 74 of the super-rich elite now counting the Russian capital as their home.

DUBAI'S SKYINE IS GROWING LIKE CRAZY!


SAUDI ARABIA'S TOO!



WHY ISN'T THE USA GETTING RICH ON OIL - WE HAVE THE 11TH LARGEST RESERVES IN THE WORLD?!?



Well, one reason is that we haven't drilled for ANY oil in ANWR, or off the coast of California or off the coast of Florida for DECADES.

This means we are not reaping as much of the income off our PROVEN RESERVES as we might be. So our GDP is lowered, AND AS IF THAT WASN'T ENOUGH... as a result we must buy more from overseas -- a lot from folks like Chavez.

We are making our selves, OUR NATION, POORER - and other nations RICHER.

And many of those nations are friendlier to our enemies than to us, in a lot of ways...

We should put an end to their oil monopoly. And we can. YES, WE CAN! And it's safe and clean:

• Canada is drilling for oil right over the border from ANWR; their caribou don't mind; why should ours!?

• None of of the off-chore oil rigs leaked as a result of Katrina, so drilling off the coast of Florida is absolutely safe and clean.

• And the UK and Norway have been drilling in the North Sea for decades - which is much rougher than the pacific off the coast of California, so there's NO EXCUSE for NOT drilling there, too.

ALSO: If we drill in these places then we will lower the coast of energy WORLDWIDE and that will help the world's economy.

IT'S A WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN:

We make more money; we send less overseas to unsavory nations; we lower our costs and the energy costs of the whole world - and it doen;t harm the environment one iddy-biddy bit.

SO WHY DON'T WE DO THIS!?

• THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS HAVE BLOCKED IT YEAR AFTER YEAR.

• THEY'RE THE MAIN REASON WE ARE SENDING SO MANY DOLLARS OVERSEAS FOR OIL, AND WHY IT'S SO EXPENSIVE.

But I don't just blame them. I BLAME BUSH!

Where's the leadership from Bush!?

WHY HASN'T MCCAIN SPOKEN OUT ABOUT THIS!?

Where's the freakin' Congressional GOP!?

Useless.

WHY OIL IS VERY EXPENSIVE: "IT'S THE SUPPLY, STUPID!"

NYTIMES TODAY - AND ME YESTERDAY, (WITH A SOLUTION!).

OIL CLOSES ABOVE $100/BARREL FOR FIRST TIME - and what we can do about it!

*******UPDATE - 2/20/08: AS I WROTE BELOW (YESTERDAY!) IT'S ALL ABOUT SUPPLY AND DEMAND - NYTIMES:

Supply Fears Push Oil to Triple Digits
By CLIFFORD KRAUSS

HOUSTON — Crude oil closed above $100 a barrel for the first time Tuesday, vaulting through a longstanding psychological barrier amid persistent concern about whether production can keep up with rising global demand.

The day’s price rise of more than 4 percent capped a week-long run-up that began when President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela threatened to cut off oil exports to the United States over a legal struggle with Exxon Mobil. Crude oil fell from a record $100.10 a barrel in New York on speculation that a U.S. Energy Department report will show stockpiles rose for a sixth week, according to Reuters. Crude oil for March delivery dropped as much as 90 cents, or 0.9 percent, to $99.11 a barrel in after-hours electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

... World supplies have been trimmed by substantial cutbacks in production in Iraq and Nigeria in recent weeks. Nigeria alone has lost about 10 percent of its daily production since guerrillas stepped up their sabotage and kidnapping of oil workers in the Niger Delta at the end of last year. Some analysts fear that OPEC could cut production further when it meets next month to counter the prospect that a softening world economy may eventually weaken demand and push prices down.

Oil is expensive.

Expensive oil drives up costs, increases inflation, and decreases the discretionary income people have to spend - and so increases the threat of recession, too.

And a recession in the USA causes the entire world to go into a recession - because the entire world depends on US consumption.

ON ALL COUNTS IT IS BAD.

There is an easy solution: INCREASE SUPPLIES.

This can be dome easily: just let the oil companies drill for more oil in places they think there is a great chance of finding a lot; (their belief is what will incentivize them to invest billions - and it won't cost the taxpayer a single penny!).

All that is necessary to have this happen is for Congress to OPEN UP ANWR, and demand that FLA and CA open up the waters off their coasts for drilling.

THERE IS NO RISK TO THE ENVIRONMENT:

• Canada safely and cleanly drills for oil right next door the ANWR.
• Louisiana allows drilling in the Gulf - off its coast. NOT ONE OF THESE OFF-SHORE RIGS LEAKED DURING KATRINA - THE WORST HURRICANE IN THE GULF'S HISTORY.
• And the waters off of California are easier to drill in than the North Sea - where Norway and the UK have safely drilled FOR DECADES!

People who claim that burning oil creates too much CO2 and that CO2 is causing global warming are WRONG:

• there is no "man-made" global warming;
• the world is actually cooling; this winter (2007-8) is one of the coldest and snowiest in DECADES - for both hemispheres.
• And the prior warming trend was NOT outside historical norms/cycles.
• AND CO2 IS A LAGGING INDICATOR OR PRIOR WARMING PERIODS AND NOT A CAUSE.

Therefore, there is simply no excuse for NOT ALLOWING the energy companies risk their own capital and drill as much as they want.

The moratorium on drilling in ANWR and off the coasts of FLA and CA are a MUCH GRAVER RISK than global warming or leaks or any other risk of "damage" to the local environment.

Continuing the moratorium is IRRATIONAL, and SELF-DESTRUCTIVE.

It puts at risk the entire world's economy.

OVERLY EXPENSIVE OIL is one of the two or three MOST important issues facing the entire world.

The USA must lead on this issue and IMMEDIATELY take the necessary steps in Congress to increase supplies.

I PREDICT, THE DAY THE CONGRESS ACTS THE PRICE OF OIL WILL DROP 25%.

That would help the entire world's economy IMMEDIATELY.

And it would also mean the USA would NOT be sending as much money to the Middle East, not per barrel, and not as many barrels, either.

IT'S A WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN!

WHO IS CLOBBERING THE DICTATORIAL LEFTIST CHAVEZ?

Not the US State Department.

Not the UN.

Not The Dems

BIG OIL! EXCERPT (REUTERS):

Exxon Mobil Corp (XOM.N) has won court orders freezing up to $12 billion in Venezuelan assets around the world as it fights for compensation for operations lost to President Hugo Chavez's nationalization drive.

The largest U.S. company sought the asset freeze to guarantee repayment should it win arbitration over the Cerro Negro heavy oil project.

The move is the boldest challenge yet by an international oil major against any of the governments around the world that have moved to increase their holds on natural resources as energy and commodity prices have soared.

... The news comes as a tough blow to Chavez, who suffered a stinging defeat in a December referendum that would have let him run indefinitely for reelection and enshrine socialism as the OPEC nation's economic system.

Right on!

Those who deny you your private property deny your basic human rights and your humanity.

When the state can steal your property and the fruits of your labor, then you are a slave.

THOUGH THE LEFT WOULD TELL YOU THE OPPOSITE: Chavez is a tyrant and our enemy; Big Oil is the friend of enterprise, prosperity and liberty. Big Oil is o0ur friend.

FED MAKES MONEY CHEAPER - NOW WE MUST MAKE ENERGY CHEAPER

The economy needs cheaper energy as much or more than it needs money.

And we don't have to wait for OPEC to take pity on us for oil to become cheaper.

We can reduce the price of oil with the stroke of a pen: just by opening up ANWR and the coasts of CA and FL for oil exploration - and by granting licenses for 20 nuclear power plants and 20 clean coal-burning power plants.

Oil will hit $60/barrel in a week.

If we really want to keep America and the world's economy growing, then we will do these things.

I think expanding energy supplies and getting control of immigration are the two biggest issues for the next election.

The GOP should re-package itself as the party of expanding energy supplies and of ending illegal immigration.

McCain is pro-amnesty and a greenie - so he would be incapable of leading.

ALL WE NEED TO DO TO MAKE ENERGY CHEAPER IS EXPAND SUPPLIES

The Shame Of Groveling For $100 Oil

Energy Policy: Instead of begging oil sheiks to open the spigots, as the president shamefully did Tuesday in Riyadh, he should be pressuring Congress to open up Alaskan and Gulf Coast refuges to drilling.

• THE DAY WE ANNOUNCE WE ARE GOING TO DRILL FOR OPIL IN THESE REGION PIL DROPS 10%.
• THE ONLY THING STOPPING THIS IS THE LEFT.

To defeat OPEC we must defeat the Democrats.

SAUDIS ARREST 208 JIHADISTS AND SMASH 6 CELLS PLANNING AN ATTACK ON OIL FACILITIES

THE AUSTRALIAN/AFP:

Saudi Arabia has arrested 208 suspected al-Qa'ida militants plotting assassinations and an attack on an oil facility, in one of the biggest swoops in the kingdom.

The suspects formed six cells, one of which plotted to attack a logistical oil facility in the Eastern Province, Interior Ministry spokesman General Mansur al-Turki.

“One of the cells was plotting to attack an auxiliary oil facility in the Eastern Province - a logistical facility, not an oil refinery,” he said.

General Turki did not give details about the installation, but said the suspects had been arrested over the past few months in various parts of the country.

He said another cell was plotting to smuggle rockets into the kingdom, which has been battling suspected al-Qa'ida militants since they launched a spate of bombings and shootings in May 2003.

An Interior Ministry statement carried by official media said security forces thwarted an imminent attack on the auxiliary facility by rounding up the eight members of the cell, which was led by a foreign resident who trained suicide bombers.

Saudi Arabia, the world's top oil producer and exporter, announced in February last year that it had foiled an attempt to blow up the world's largest oil processing plant, in Abqaiq in the Eastern Province.

The Interior Ministry said the suspects were rounded up in a series of preemptive operations against members of the “deviant” group - official terminology for al-Qa'ida suspects.

Some of those detained had formed “an assassination squad to target (Islamic) scholars and security men”.

Another cell headed by an “infiltrator” who is an “expert in launching rockets” was plotting to smuggle eight rockets across the border to use them in “terrorist operations” inside the country.

More than half of those arrested - 112 - were linked to “external” parties that recruit militants and send them to troubled regions in order to take part in fighting in these countries and then return to “spread sedition and chaos” in Saudi Arabia, the ministry said.

It was apparently referring to Iraq, where Saudis are among militants fighting US-led forces.

Those detained also included “32 Saudis and (foreign) residents active in providing financial aid to adherents of the devious thinking,” the ministry said.

Another 16 rounded up in the Muslim holy city of Medina constituted a “media cell” active in promoting the Islamist extremists' views, inciting “criminal acts” and coordinating the travel of militants to “areas of military conflict.”

• HALF THE SAUDIS ARE ON OUR SIDE, WHICH MAKES THEM ABOUT AS TRUSTWORTHY AS PAKISTAN.
• HALF IS BETTER THAN NONE.

• IF THE DEMOCRATS WOULD ALLOW US TO USE MORE COAL, BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER-PANTS, AND EXPLOIT THE OIL RESERVES IN ANWR AND OFF THE COASTS OF CALIFORNIA AND FLORIDA, THEN WE'D BE IN A BETTER POSITION TO DEAL WITH THE SAUDIS.

THE DEMOCRATIC ENERGY PLAN: $5 GAS

Our beloved Democratic Congress, led by professional politicians Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, has hit another milestone. Unfortunately, their latest achievement is completely bungling U.S. energy policy, resulting in the highest oil prices ever seen on the face of the Earth.


Crude Oil and Gasoline Prices under the current Democratic Congress(source: Gateway Pundit, click to zoom)
You may ask: why would I blame the Democrats? The answer is a simple, brutal fact (hat tip: Gateway Pundit).


Democrats have prohibited drilling in all areas marked in red
The "not-in-my-backyard" Democrats have prohibited drilling in literally every oil-rich area that surrounds the country.

This US DOE Report posits that there are more than 9000 billion barrels of oil in this country alone. New technologies coming online could double U.S. oil reserves. Even the known stripper oil wells could be converted to crude oil production.

Were the Democrats' objections to local exploration based upon ecological grounds? Of course not. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita proved -- beyond a shadow of a doubt -- that offshore rigs are ecologically sound. During the twin storms, the rigs were swept away like leaves in the tailwind of a Rosie O'Donnell fart. Did you hear about any oil spills in the aftermath of the storms? Nope. The Democrats' bogus objections to offshore drilling are based upon two factors unique to the liberal progressive wing of the party: stupidity compounded with arrogance.

Meanwhile, there's important offshore drilling news that the mainstream media hasn't chosen to share with its customers: China is drilling for oil 50 miles from Key West, Florida. Yes, you heard that right. Michael Moore's socialist utopia -- Cuba -- is leasing drilling rights to the Chinese. In turn, they are draining the gulf of oil with the tacit approval of your Democratic Congressional leadership.


Cuba has leased drilling rights to China 50 miles from Key West, FL
Now, you'll forgive me as I have to write my representatives a thank you note for their wonderful stewardship of U.S. energy policy.

Read more: The No Zone. Cross-posted at Doug Ross @ Journal

OIL IS $91/BARREL - SO WHY WON'T THE LEFT LET US INCREASE SUPPLIES!?

• YOU CAN'T REPEAL THE LAW OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND. DEMAND FOR OIL IS UP, AND SUPPLIES HAVE SIMPLY NOT KEPT PACE.

• THAT'S WHY OIL IS NOW $91/BARREL.

• BUT WE CAN INCREASE SUPPLIES QUICKLY - WITHOUT SENDING A SINGLE SOLITARY DIME OVERSEAS.

• ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS ALLOW OIL-DRILLING OFF THE COAST OF FLORIDA AND CALIFORNIA, OPEN ANWR AND BUILD NEW/CLEAN COAL-BURNING POWER PLANTS.

• THE ONLY THING STOPPING THIS FROM HAPPENING IS THE LEFT.

• AFTER ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, I THINK THIS IS THE BIGGEST DOMESTIC ISSUE. THE GOP WOULD BE SMART TO USE THEM BOTH.

MORE HERE AND HERE - WITH MAP AND LINKS OF ALL THE OIL WE COULD HARVEST RIGHT HERE!

YAWN: ALAN GREENSPAN AGREES WITH JIMMY CARTER: GULF OIL CRUCIAL TO NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE PROSPERITY OF THE FREE WORLD

LGF LINKS TO A STORY DRUDGE IS BLARING IN RED AS IF IT'S NEWS:

"Alan Greenspan claims Iraq war was really for oil."

Here's part of the blurb LGF cited:

AMERICA’s elder statesman of finance, Alan Greenspan, has shaken the White House by declaring that the prime motive for the war in Iraq was oil ... it is his view on the motive for the 2003 Iraq invasion that is likely to provoke the most controversy. “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says.

THIS IS NOT NEWS.

REPEAT: THIS IS NOT NEWS.

WHAT GREENSPAN HAS SAID IS NOT EVEN CONTROVERSIAL. PERSIAN GULF OIL IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO THE FREE WORLD, AND MUST BE DEFENDED.


Jimmy Carter first enunciated the FACT that Gulf oil was crucial to the USA and the West in his final SOTU in 1980. Here's a snippet (link and snippet courtesy of THE CARTER LIBRARY!):

"Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force."

YES, THAT WAS SAID BY THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER AND DARLING OF THE BDS-AFFLICTED, "ANTI-WAR" LEFT. REPEAT:

• "Let our position be absolutely clear:

• An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region

• will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America,

• and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary,

• including military force."

The RELEVANCY of the Carter Doctrine to the 2003 Iraq War is not new and not some hastily thought up way to rationalize Greenspan's comment. I FIRST BLOGGED ON THE CARTER DOCTRINE HERE - IN 2004!

Is there any doubt that al Qaeda and the Iranian tyrants would LOVE LOVE LOVE to gain control of Iraq's oil, and THAT IT WOULD BE A DISASTER FOR THE FREE WORLD!?

I hope not.


That's why we HAD to intervene in 1991 - when Saddam tried to seize Kuwait and its oil, and in 2003 (when we went back to finish the job - because Saddam hadn't fulfilled the terms of the relevant 1991 UNSCR's which were the de facto armistice).




NOW LISTEN UP FOLKS:

• There's a HUGE difference between saying we have a vital interest in the region because of its oil, and arguing that we that went to war against Saddam so USA's "BIG OIL" could make big profits of the region's oil.

• The former is OFFICIAL US POLICY AND HAS BEEN SINCE 1980.

• The latter is left-wing moonbat territory.

Greenspan is merely articulating what EVERYONE KNOWS: the region is important because of its oil.

It's important to al Qaeda for its oil and to the West.

AND I SAY "WEST" ADVISEDLY: the EU and Japan get a lot more of their oil from the region than we do. They benfit more than we do from protecting it.

AND THE ONES WHO BENEFIT THE MOST ARE THE ARAB/MUSLIM GULF STATES: They are threatened by Iran and al Qaeda, and they need us to protect them.

The ONLY people NOT benefiting from our war there are al Qaeda and Iran and their stooges.

This alone proves we are doing the right thing.

(More on Greenspan here at Memeorandum.)

DEMOCRATS IN HOUSE VOTE TO RAISE TAXES ON PEOPLE THEY THINK ARE BAD GUYS, AND LOWERS THEM FOR PEOPLE THEY THINK ARE GOOD GUYS

NYTIMES:

Declaring a new direction in energy policy, the House on Saturday approved $16 billion in taxes on oil companies, while providing billions of dollars in tax breaks and incentives for renewable energy and conservation efforts.

Republican opponents said the legislation ignored the need to produce more domestic oil, natural gas and coal. One GOP lawmaker bemoaned ''the pure venom ... against the oil and gas industry.''

The House passed the tax provisions by a vote of 221-189. Earlier it had approved, 241-172, a companion energy package aimed at boosting energy efficiency and expanding use of biofuels, wind power and other renewable energy sources.

THE DEMS ARE AT IT AGAIN: RAISING TAXES ON FOLKS THEY THINK ARE THE BAD GUYS.

AND AVOIDING THE BASIC ACTION WHICH WILL HELP EVERYONE: MORE FREEDOM; GIVING COMPANIES IN THE ENERGY BUSINESS MORE FREEDOM TO EXPLORE AND EXPLOIT THE PROVE ENERGY ASSETS WE HAVE RIGHT HERE IN THE USA!

The Left is essentially an elitist bunch of control-freaks who feel they can pick winners and losers better than the marketplace.

This has been proven WRONG time after time after time after time.

Look at Zimbabwe, or Cuba, or North Korea, or Red China or the USSR: their economies under socialism under-performed their economies under freemarkets.

The freemarket doesn't just out-perform socialist markets on the profit-and-loss column; they also produce BETTER QUALITY goods and services.

And they also RESPOND BETTER TO POPULAR NEEDS - REGARDLESS OF WHAT THAT NEED IS.

If free consumers want more solar power, then companies which satisfy that demand will be rewarded by the marketplace.

And this reward far out weighs anything the elitist Socialists can do ON THE POSITIVE SIDE.

All the command-control freaks of the Left do is distort the marketplace; all they are REALLY DOING is rewarding their favorites - their pets. These tax ploys are JUST AS BAD AS PORK PROJECTS.

That's why we need a flat tax or a fair tax.

And we why we need to get rid of as many SOCIALISTIC DEMOCRATS AS POSSIBLE!

WE MUSTN'T LET "BIG BROTHER" (GOVERNMENT) PICKS THE WINNERS AND THE LOSERS, THAT'S WHAT THE FREEMARKET IS FOR.

CUT THE ARAB OIL TRADE: DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES

It's time to cut the money supply to the middle east, let see them buy missiles and guns from China and Russia with sand.

We are in an energy dilemma...or are we? A bit of online research uncovered, in just a few minutes, what appears to be several potential breakthrough technologies that if produced en masse would cut the American consumption of oil at least in half, perhaps more.

I have always suspected the technology was there but not harnessed. Speculation has long abounded that technology was being purchased by Arab oil states in order to perpetuate world dependence on oil.

The Carter Doctrine

I was ignorant of the Carter Doctrine until a poster at the Netscape blog informed me.

Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.

I guess he was a Blood For Oil kind of guy.

Cross Posted at Power and Control