Republicans Face an Uphill Battle

It looks like I was wrong, when I said that Congress was responsible for the latest increases in Gas and Oil, it's the Democrats in Congress that have given Congress a bad name. Republicans are facing an uphill battle to save the U.S. Economy and the U.S. Consumer's wallets and Bank accounts, but the Democrats are fighting them tooth and nail.
Let the Democrats in Congress know how you feel by participating in Operation Drill Bit. Let then know we're watching.

• On January 4, 2005, Rep. Don Young (R-AK) introduced a bill (H.R. 39) to repeal the prohibition against the production of oil and gas from ANWR and any leasing or development leading to such production.

• On April 21, 2005, the House passed a bill (H.R. 6) by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) to allow oil and gas leasing in ANWR. 90% of Republicans voted for the bill, while 80% of the Democrats voted against it. The provision was removed before the bill was signed into law.

• On October 6, 2005, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced a bill (H.R. 4004) to repeal the prohibition against the production, leasing, and development of oil and gas from ANWR. Rep. Paul has reintroduced the legislation in the 110th Congress (H.R. 2415).

• On May 23, 2006, Rep, Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) introduced a bill (H.R. 5462) to direct the Bureau of Land Management to establish an oil and gas leasing program in ANWR and conduct two lease sales there before October 1, 2010.

• On May 25, 2006, the House passed a bill (H.R. 5429) by Rep. Richard Pombo (R-CA) to repeal the proscription against the production or leasing of oil and gas resources from the ANWR and to provide extensive environmental safeguards for such production. 87% of Republicans voted for the bill, while 86% of the Democrats voted against it.

• On July 26, 2006, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) introduced a bill (H.R. 5890) to repeal the prohibition against production of oil and gas from ANWR and any leasing or development leading to such production.

• On July 18, 2007, Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) introduced a bill (H.R. 3089) to repeal the prohibition against producing oil and gas from ANWR.

  OCS. Republicans have also consistently proposed expanding energy exploration and extraction on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), the lands under the waters surrounding the United States, most of which are statutorily off limits to energy development. Reports indicate that such expansion could yield 86 billion barrels of oil.

• On February 17, 2005, Rep. Barbara Cubin (R-WY) introduced a bill (H.R. 907) to allow easements or rights-of-way for energy and related purposes on the OCS for otherwise prohibited activities when such activities support exploration, development, production, transportation, or storage of oil, natural gas, or other minerals.

• On April 13, 2005, Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-LA) introduced a bill (H.R. 1596) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to grant a lease, easement, right-of-way, license, or permit on the OCS for activities not otherwise authorized under existing law, if those activities support or promote exploration, development, production, transportation, or storage of oil, natural gas, or other minerals.

• On April 21, 2005, the House passed a bill (H.R. 6) by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to grant, on either a competitive or noncompetitive basis, a lease, easement, or right-of-way on the OCS for activities not otherwise authorized under current laws, if those activities support exploration, development, production, transportation, or storage of oil, natural gas, or other minerals. 90% of Republicans voted for the bill, while 80% of the Democrats voted against it. These provisions were retained in the final version of the bill signed into law, and a provision was added to direct the Secretary of the Interior to inventory, analyze, and report to Congress on oil and natural gas resources beneath all of the waters of the OCS.

• On September 15, 2005, Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) introduced a bill (H.R. 3811) to terminate any prohibition on the expenditure of federal funds to conduct oil and natural gas leasing and preleasing activities anywhere on the OCS and to terminate all withdrawals of federal OCS land from leasing activities.

• On September 27, 2005, Rep. John Peterson (R-PA) introduced a bill (H.R. 3918) to terminate any prohibition on the expenditure of federal funds to conduct natural gas leasing and preleasing activities anywhere on the OCS and to terminate all withdrawals of federal OCS land from leasing for exploration for, and development and production of, natural gas. Rep. Peterson introduced a similar bill (H.R. 4318) on November 15, 2005.

• On October 6, 2005, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced a bill (H.R. 4004) to terminate any prohibition on the expenditure of federal funds to conduct oil and natural gas leasing and preleasing activities anywhere on the OCS and to terminate all withdrawals of federal OCS land from leasing activities. Rep. Paul reintroduced the bill (H.R. 2415) in the 110th Congress.

• On November 7, 2005, Rep. Jim Nussle (R-IA) introduced a bill (H.R. 4241) that contained a provision terminating the effect of all existing federal laws prohibiting the spending of appropriated funds to conduct oil and natural gas leasing and preleasing activities for OCS areas. The provision was omitted from the version of the bill that passed the House.

• On May 18, 2006, Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) offered an amendment (H.Amdt. 842) to strike sections of the Interior Appropriations bill that prohibit the expenditure of funds for OCS oil leasing activities in certain areas. A majority of Republicans voted for the amendment, while Democrats overwhelmingly voted against it.

• On June 29, 2006, the House passed a bill (H.R. 4761) by Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) to greatly increase energy development on the OCS, including a prohibition on more than 25% of the acreage of any OCS Planning Area being withdrawn from leasing more than 100 miles from any coastline. 86% of Republicans voted for the bill, while 79% of Democrats voted against it.

• On July 18, 2007, Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) introduced a bill (H.R. 3089) to terminate all existing federal laws prohibiting expenditures to conduct oil and natural gas leasing and preleasing activities on the OCS.

• On August 3, 2007, Rep. Chip Pickering (R-MS) introduced a bill (H.R. 3435) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to inventory oil and natural gas resources beneath the waters of the OCS, other than those in the Gulf of Mexico or off the coast of Florida. The Secretary would have to make available for oil and natural gas leasing all such inventoried areas.

Republicans continue to try to get Petroleum that's available in the form of Tar Sands, Oil Shale and Coal to Liquids to increase the U.S. supply of oil from alternative sources, I'll give you two guesses on who's blocking these bills, but you're only going to need one.

• On February 9, 2005, Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UT) introduced a bill (H.R. 681) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to issue separately, for the same area, a lease for tar sands and a lease for oil and gas.

• On July 28, 2005, the House passed a conference report (H.R. 6) led by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) to instruct the Secretary of the Interior to make available for leasing public lands in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming in order to conduct research and development of technologies for the recovery of liquid fuels from oil shale and tar sands. The legislation also contained various other provisions encouraging the increased development of oil shale and tar sands, including evaluating and mapping U.S. oil shale and tar sands deposits and instructing the Defense Department to procure fuel derived from U.S. coal ("coal-to-liquids"), oil shale, and tar sands 90% of Republicans voted for the conference report, while 80% of the Democrats voted against it.

• On November 18, 2005, the House passed a bill (H.R. 4241) by Rep. Jim Nussle (R-IA) that contained a provision facilitating the commencement of oil shale and tar sands leases.

• On June 27, 2007, Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UT) offered an amendment (H.Amdt. 452) to the Interior Appropriations bill to carve out Utah and Wyoming from certain restrictions on oil shale development. 91% of Republicans voted for the amendment, while 89% of Democrats voted against it.

• On March 31, 2008, Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) introduced a bill (H.R. 5656) to repeal Section 526 of the major energy bill of 2007 that prohibited federal agencies from procuring fuels made from unconventional petroleum sources.

Republicans also realize that one of the best ways to lower gas prices is for NEW players to get involved in Oil and Gas Refineries, so they're trying to make it easier for that to happen, but of course, the Democrats keep blocking for the Big Oil companies, I mean they don't want to upset those Record Profits to they?:

• On April 21, 2005, the House passed a bill (H.R. 6) by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), which included, among other things, provisions to prescribe guidelines for the designation of refinery revitalization zones and the coordination and expeditious review of permitting process for such zones. 90% of Republicans voted for the bill, while 80% of the Democrats voted against it. Subsequent iterations of the legislation included tax incentives for refinery investment.

• On September 20, 2005, Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) introduced a bill (H.R. 3836) containing a variety of provisions to expedite federal permitting procedures for construction or expansion of domestic petroleum refining facilities.

• On September 22, 2005, Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA) introduced a bill (H.R. 3887) to direct the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Defense, to jointly designate three closed military installations as suitable for constructing oil refineries and to prohibit the federal government, for two years, from selling or disposing of any such designated site except for purposes of oil refinery construction.

• On September 27, 2005, Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-KS) introduced a bill (H.R. 3924) to revise the tax deduction for certain liquid fuels refinery property to allow expensing of the entire cost of such property if the property allows for a production capacity increase of five percent or more on an average daily basis; and to allow, in lieu of such expensing deduction, a five-year recovery period for the depreciation of such refinery property.

• On October 6, 2005, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced a bill (H.R. 4004) to provide additional tax incentives for investment in oil refineries. Rep. Paul reintroduced the legislation in the 110th Congress (H.R. 2415).

• On October 7, 2005, the House passed a bill (H.R. 3893) by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) that included a variety of provisions aimed at facilitating the siting, construction, expansion, and operation of refineries. 94% of Republicans voted for the bill, while 100% of Democrats voted against the bill.

• On June 20, 2006, Rep. Ron Lewis (R-KY) introduced a bill (H.R. 5653) to extend the election to expense the construction of oil and unconventional fuel (including oil shale and coal-to-liquids) refineries until 2016. Rep. Lewis reintroduced the bill (H.R. 683) in the 110th Congress.

• On July 18, 2007, Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) introduced a bill (H.R. 3089) to provide for increased expensing of refinery property and direct the President to designate at least ten sites for oil or natural gas refineries on federal lands and make such sites available to the private sector for refinery construction.

If you take a look at the first picture on this page, it shows a yellow and orange area in the North East corner of Alaska, this is a closeup of that area. The two spots, marked .08 is the proposed drilling areas. That area is about 100 miles from any trees, it's nothing but a frigid swamp. That Tiny spot in ANWR that we'd like to develop, I mean it's like a little pea in the middle of a football field, but again the Democrats put up EVEN MORE Barriers:

• On February 2, 2005, Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) introduced a bill (H.R. 567) to designate oil-rich lands within ANWR as wilderness and components of the National Wilderness Preservation System, thus erecting another barrier to energy extraction there. Rep. Markey has reintroduced the legislation in the 110th Congress (H.R. 39).

• On April 20, 2005, Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) offered an amendment (H.Amdt. 72) to H.R. 6 to strike the provisions of the underlying bill allowing oil and gas exploration in ANWR. 85% of Democrats voted for the amendment, while 87% of the Republicans voted against it.

China is building Oil Drilling platforms just 50 or 60 Miles off the coast of Florida on the OCS (Outer Continental Shelf), in a partnership with Cuba. Using horizontal Drilling, they'll probably even be able to get to OUR RESERVES!!! Do Democrats care?

• On April 21, 2005, Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) introduced a bill (H.R. 1798) to prohibit leasing for the exploration, development, or production of oil, natural gas, or any other mineral in either the Mid-Atlantic or the North Atlantic planning areas of the OCS. Rep. Pallone reintroduced the bill (H.R. 777) in the 110th Congress.

• On February 16, 2006, Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA) introduced a bill (H.R. 4782) to prohibit oil and gas preleasing, leasing, and related activities in areas of the OCS located off the coast of California and to exclude such areas from the OCS inventory required under current law. Rep. Capps reintroduced the bill (H.R. 2918) in the 110th Congress.

• On May 4, 2006, Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) introduced a bill (H.R. 5300) to repeal the existing law requirement for a comprehensive inventory of OCS oil and natural gas resources. Rep. Hinchey reintroduced the bill (H.R. 586) in the 110th Congress.

• On April 19, 2007, Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) introduced a bill (H.R. 1957) to prohibit the conduct of oil and gas preleasing, leasing, and related activities in OCS areas located in the North Aleutian Basin Planning Area and to exclude such planning area from a mandated inventory of OCS oil and natural gas resources.

• On June 15, 2007, Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) introduced a bill (H.R. 2758) to prohibit oil and gas preleasing, leasing, and related activities in areas of the OCS located off the coast of Mendocino, Humboldt, and Del Norte Counties in the state of California and to exclude such areas from the mandatory inventory of OCS energy reserves.

• On April 24, 2008, Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL) introduced a bill (H.R. 5861) to prohibit oil and gas preleasing, leasing, and related activities in certain areas of the OCS off the coast of Florida.

When Nancy Pelosi rode into power 2 years ago, she promised to do something about Gas prices which had gone up around 50% to just over $2.00 a gallon. Instead, prices have doubled since the Democrats took over congress. Of course, Nancy Pelosi in True political fashion, blamed the whole thing on Bush, but let's take a look at what the Democrats have done when it comes to alternative energy like Oil Shale, Tar Sands, Heavy Oil and Coal Gasification.

• On December 7, 2006, Rep. Marty Meehan (D-MA) introduced a bill (H.R. 6417) to repeal the tax credit for producing fuel from a nonconventional source.

• On June 27, 2007, Rep. Mark Udall (D-CO) offered an amendment (H.Amdt. 448) to the Interior Appropriations bill to prohibit funds in the bill from being used to prepare or publish final regulations regarding a commercial leasing program for oil shale resources on public lands or to conduct an oil shale lease sale. 88% of Democrats voted for the amendment, while 93% of Republicans voted against it.

• On June 27, 2007, the House passed the Interior Appropriations bill (H.R. 2643) introduced by Rep. Norman Dicks (D-WA), which included a provision to prohibit the use of funds to prepare or publish final regulations regarding a commercial leasing program for oil shale and tar sands resources on public lands or to conduct an oil shale lease sale pursuant to the Energy Policy Act of 2005. 98% of Democrats voted for the bill, while 76% of Republicans voted against it.

• On August 4, 2007, the House passed a bill (H.R. 3221) that includes a prohibition on surface occupancy for oil or gas exploration or development purposes in each lease for certain federal lands on the Roan Plateau in Colorado. 96% of Democrats voted for the bill, while 86% of Republicans voted against it.

• On December 18, 2007, the House passed a bill (H.R. 6), now current law, that prohibits federal agencies from procuring fuels made from unconventional petroleum sources, aimed at stopping the Defense Department's plan to procure fuels derived from Canadian oil sands.

And of course, the Democrats just HAD to make smaller Oil refineries EVEN MORE expensive:

• On November 18, 2005, Rep. Bernard Sanders (I-VT, who caucused with the Democrats) introduced a bill (H.R. 4420) to repeal, among other things, the tax incentive from the Energy Policy Act of 2005 allowing a taxpayer to expense 50% of the cost of certain crude oil refinery property placed in service before January 1, 2008.

• On April 27, 2006, Rep. John Larson (D-CT) introduced a bill (H.R. 5234) to repeal tax incentives from the Energy Policy Act of 2005 relating to expensing of crude oil refinery property and exemptions from limitations on oil depletion deductions for certain small crude oil refiners.

All of this leads you to wonder why are the Democrats doing this? Don't they realize how hard this is hitting the poor and middle class, the very people they claim to represent? Don't they realize what all of this has been doing to the World food supply and how many of the world's poor are going hungry over this? Probably because of their belief in Global Warming, but despite their claims, the science isn't quite settled on this yet. Even Europe, while paying lip service to Global Warming is still moving ahead with their plans of building more Coal Fired Plants, Shale to Oil, Coal to Oil, Oil drilling and everything else they need to secure their energy future. Does it seem prudent to destroy the U.S. economy over something that's not quite known. Let's remember that man made Global warming is STILL a theory, and even if the models turn out to be true, if the record breaking cold weather keeps up that we've been having over the past couple of years, we're going to need that energy to keep warm.

The only thing we can do, is let congress know we're watching their every move, and one of the best ways to do this is by participating in Operation Drill Bit. Let's FLOOD Washington with Drill bits so they get the message, if you've already participate, then a heartfelt THANK YOU. If not, please get to the Hardware Store now, or even send in some old ones you have lying around. They will only act if they think we're watching.

Michelle Obama's Not for Profit Hospitals' "Windfall Profits"

I was browsing around the Internet when I came across this Website, ObamaTruth.org. I always felt that Obama was disingenuous, but WOW, I was completely unaware of this:
The big problem I have with this is that Obama is talking about having the Government take over the Oil business because of Price Gouging, while Oil companies are making less than an 8% markup. In the mean time, Obama's Wife's Hospital:

1. Marks up their services to the Uninsured by over 350%
2. Is supposed to be Non Profit, but instead earned over 100 Million Dollars!
   
3. DOESN'T provide the uninsured a discount (despite windfall profits).
4. Spends 10 Million dollars a year on collection agents, despite windfall profits and non-profit status!
   
5. Former CEO walked away with 4.58 million in compensation.
6. Did nothing when the hospital refused to give more Charity Care, in light of Windfall Profits.
7. Michelle Obama received a MASSIVE 200K raise, to over 300K a year!
   
8. Finally, Obama has accepted over 100 Thousand Dollars in Campaign contributions over the past several years.

I decided to start digging for more though, and here's what I found:

1. Michelle Obama's raise actually propelled her salary past other VP's who had been there FAR Longer then she had.
2. Of the 98 Million in Earmarks that Obama has spent of your tax payer dollars, 1 Million went to the Hospital for a proposed pavilion. (This is a Hospital who had over 100 Million in profits, while it's a Non Profit Hospital!)
3. Obama's wife's hospital is also involved in a nasty lawsuit where the uninsured are claiming that they were not only incredibly overcharged for their stays there, but that they relentlessly hounded them for the money, while their supposed to be a Non Profit!

I've expressed my views on Health care, but for someone who claims to be for the Poor and the Middle class, Obama seems to have absolutely no regard for them, at least when it comes to his and his wife's profits!

Global Warming .... Make that Cooling

Call me crazy, call me stupid, but this doesn't make any sense. According to the U.S Government The Climate has been on a cooling trend over the past 10 years.

The Global Warming Alarmist, are all saying that Carbon output is causing Global Warming, and yet in the past 10 years, worldwide Carbon emissions keep rising, as a matter of fact, China alone has added 2 Coal Fired Power plants every single week over the past decade, and that doesn't even include their Oil burning and Gas burning ones that they've added. As a matter of fact, they don't even apply the same stringent environmental controls to their plants that the U.S.A. uses, so their pollution output is significantly higher than the same plants built in the U.S. And yet, we still have had a global cooling trend in the past couple of years. What gives? Maybe this is the reason why the World Bank is trying to siphon off dollars meant to reduce Carbon output, because they know that it really doesn't make and difference and this is all about money.

In the mean time, food prices are still going through the roof, all around the world the poor are the hardest hit. We're doing this supposedly to reduce Carbon output because, we're told it causes Global warming? Clearly, this is not the case. Congress has done nothing but block efforts to increase Oil and Gas production and we're paying through the nose, all for what? To reduce Carbon Output to save the world? Carbon has gone up by MASSIVE amounts, and yet the planet is still cooling!

I've said it before Congress needs to show us they care, but it seems that they're too beholden to the special interest groups, like the Sierra Club and others, to look at straight up FACTS. This information comes from a the government agency that monitors the climate, not some right wing conspiracy group, so what is the problem?
We need to make it clear to congress that we mean business. They need to start Drilling, NOW. We need those Shale to Oil converters running NOW. We need the Coal to Oil Gasification NOW. And if we don't get it, they will be out of a job (right along with the rest of us, since we won't be able to afford to gas it takes to go to work).

One of the best ways to let congress know is by participating in Operation Drill Bit.

Obama's Electoral College Outlook

OK, so the results are in and it's an Obama win on the Democrat's side. However, let's take a look at Bush's win from the last election, you know, the one with the "Vote or Die" campaign from "P-Diddy" that was supposed to be an ASSURED WIN for the Democrats.

Yet the Democrats, despite the Media Machine's full backing barely won 19 states. So what does it look like this time around with Obama on the ticket?

First, the Democrats will lose even more states. Pennsylvania, and the Guns and Religion stuff won't play too well over there, and so they will probably go for McCain. Also Minnesota has had their fill of Democrats and have an all Republican legislature, so they're probably going back to being a Red State.

On the flip side, there's a possibility that Obama will finally pull Georgia away from Republicans and who knows, he might even be able to clinch New Mexico and maybe even Colorado. Even though he had a big win in Iowa, I think the Reverend Wright stuff permanently damaged his image there, so even though CNN and others are saying he can convert them this time around, I SERIOUSLY doubt that will happen. In addition I think he just might have enough support in Virginia to pull them over to his side this time around as well.

Here's what I've come up with:
McCain 284
Obama 253

Sorry, still a loss Barry. Maybe next time.

Discuss