Thursday, August 28, 2008

Thirty Years of a Failed Democrat Energy Policy

By Alan Caruba

Millions will tune in to hear Sen. Barack Obama’s acceptance speech as the Democrat Party’s choice to be the next President of the United States. For Americans, the need to pay particular attention to his speech is essential if we are to escape thirty years of a failed Democrat energy policy.

From the days President Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the roof of the White House and secured a windfall profit taxes on American oil companies, this nation has been made vulnerable to our enemies by emphasizing alternative energy and biofuels as the answer to our growing need for oil and electrical power.

The windfall profits tax led to the decline of the oil industry’s investments in oil exploration and extraction in the United States, and to their understandable reluctance to invest billions in the building of much needed refineries.

Congress, since 2006, has been controlled by Democrats as the majority party. In the Senate, Harry Reid, the Majority Leader, has said that “Oil makes us sick. Coal makes us sick. Global warming makes us sick.” This is such blatant nonsense that, were it spoken by anyone else, it would be easily dismissed. However, Sen. Reid controls the legislative agenda of the U.S. Senate! His counterpart in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, has said that her job is to “save the planet.”

We should consider the total lack of any substantive legislation the Democrat Congress has produced in the two years they have been in control. We should consider the prospects if they are permitted to continue and their candidate should become President.

For this reason alone we should listen closely to Sen. Obama.

Global warming was and is a hoax. Thousands of scientists worldwide have dismissed the false computer models on which it is based, but more importantly at this time is the fact that the Earth has been demonstrably cooling for at least a decade.

Even the venerable Farmer’s Almanac predicts “below average temperatures for most of the U.S.” The 192-year-old publication which claims an accurate rate of 80 to 85 percent for its forecasts, prepared two years in advance, says in its 2009 edition that at least two-thirds of the country can expect “colder-than-average temperatures this winter, with only the Far West and Southeast in line for near-normal readings.”

“This is going to be catastrophic for millions of people,” said editor Peter Geiger.

I will tell you what also will be catastrophic: the election of Sen. Barack Obama and a Democrat Congress if their thirty years of attacks on the American oil industry continue, along with their thirty years of support for biofuels, ethanol, and so-called “alternative energy” or “clean energy.”

As my friend, Seldon Graham, Jr., with fifty years’ experience as a petroleum engineer and attorney, says, “The U.S. needs to eliminate both ethanol and foreign oil. If it is worth fighting for in the Middle East, it is worth drilling for in the United States.”

You will not hear such straight talk from Sen. Obama and you have not heard it from the leadership of the Democrat Party. Instead you have heard the steady drumbeat of attacks on the American oil industry and the advocacy of failed energy policies that cost Americans millions at the gas pump and leave millions vulnerable to high costs when they heat their homes this winter.

Even Sen. McCain, who still believes the global warming hoax, has called for off-shore drilling. That is a small step in the right direction. A pragmatist, he will no doubt come to see the folly of further legislative programs to address a non-existent global warming threat, but it will be Sen. Obama’s energy policies that hold the greatest threat to the nation’s economy and future.

1 comment:

Rich Kozlovich said...

Did I miss something? The reason for not drilling for oil, according the greenies and their supporters in leadership positions in government, is that it would only reduce the price of gasoline 2 cents a gallon in 10 years. Okay….let’s look at that. I do believe that inflation is currently higher than 4% a year, but let’s use that as a base figure and use $4.00 a gallon for gasoline as the other base figure. After ten years what would the price of gasoline be? If my math is correct it comes to $5.91 a gallon. So assuming that inflation is the only driving force for price increases; by drilling we would be paying $3.98 a gallon for gasoline in 10 years and by not drilling we pay $5.91 a gallon. I have some questions.

• If I thought of this; can we really believe that these “leaders” didn’t think of it?
• If they know this, then they know that drilling will in reality reduce what people are paying at the pump because everything else (including income) will go up and the price of gasoline will remain stable or go down. Right?
• If they know this then can we believe that they are being disingenuous?
• If they are being disingenuous can we assume that they have another agenda in mind?
• If they have another agenda in mind; what is it?

Rich Kozlovich