Americas Energy Policy
Americas current energy policy.
Corn based ethanol scheme facing increasing public and Senate scrutny
edited: for grammar & clarification 5/29/08 2;09pm
Back in 2005 Senators thought they had come up on a grand scheme to not only help the nations corn crop farmers but more so themselves. By mandating corn based ethanol they believed they had come up with a way to solve our nations thirst for foreign oil and make the voters think they had really accomplished something. For all intents and purposes a win-win solution.
Now barely two years later we are seeing the fallout from that legislation that was apparently not very well thought out. A plan that was only looked at from by all accounts only one side, the side that would enrichen the Senators rich business campaign partners and themselves in their quest for campaign contributions to fatten their campaign war chests. It now certainly appears that not much, if any consideration was given to what effect removing so much raw corn from the nations, arguably the most precious basic food commodity from the national food supply chain leading to recent skyrocketing food prices.
Now with the roar becoming an ever increasing and ear bruising crescendo from the voters as they struggle harder and harder to put food on their tables for their families and are now clamoring for some political hide that the Senators are now looking at possible scrapping or at scaling back drastically the poorly planned and misguided corn based ethanol policy that has brought much of their new contemptuous scorn upon themselves and their once misguided business farm campaign donor partners.
Now barely two years later the corn based ethanol subsidy proponents in the Senate are being forced to face the growing fallout from their shortsighted scheme that now wreaks and smells like a monstrous farm pork-laden subsidy program that appears to benefit only the multi-millionaire farmer campaign contributing constituents and puts the nations food supply at great peril. This also is bringing out the ethanol subsidy benefactors clamoring to malign and marginalize just about anyone who dares to speak out against their multi-million and probably soon to be billion dollar subsidized milk cow.
These Senators apparently chose to either ignore or even to consider what many opponents of the one sided corn based ethanol program they rammed through were trying so hard to tell them about the shortcomings and related problems with their plan and opposition is now quickly gaining momentum all across the nation and across the world, at last as food prices steadily out paces inflation and consumers shrinking pocketbooks. The deserved backlash is growing daily and those Senators are growing very nervous as well as they should. To help put this into perspective please read on.
Senators begin to ponder an ethanol exit plan
As food-versus-fuel debate gets louder, politicians start to squirm
May 28, 2008.NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Think back to 2005 and the energy policy debates in Congress. Democrats and Republicans both claimed the slogan of energy independence as the mantra for a national energy policy..Energy independence quickly became synonymous with homegrown biofuels, specifically corn-based ethanol. The vote was easy: Iowa farmers versus Saudi oil ministers. Congress mandated that 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol to be blended into the nation's fuel stocks by 2012. Last year, Congress increased the mandate to 15 billion gallons by 2015..Fast forward less than one year later. Proponents and opponents of ethanol are waging a rough and rowdy war in Washington over whether biofuel has a future..Ethanol has always had opponents: anti-subsidy, fiscal conservatives; oil industry executives fearful of competition at the pump; wary environmentalists uncertain about the air and water implications of turning food into fuel..Today, however, ethanol opponents are getting louder. And Washington policymakers who overwhelmingly voted to boost the biofuel to national savior two years ago are listening more carefully to the case against biofuels.."The volume on the food-versus-fuel debate is getting louder by the day," said Bill Wicker, spokesman for the majority staff of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee..Recently, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, representing more than 300 food and beverage companies, joined the ethanol backlash. GMA's members include Nestle, Sara Lee - all companies facing higher fuel bills to run their manufacturing plants and higher costs for the raw materials used to make their products. The group thinks ethanol is the culprit in rising prices for meat, milk, and eggs and sees a rollback of the ethanol mandate as salve for family food budgets..The group wants to "amplify" the links between the ethanol mandate and rising food prices as often as possible and use the media's heightened focus on these issues to pressure Washington to turn back the clock on ethanol, according to a memo written by the association..The industry see stories of global food shortages and price spikes creating a perfect window of opportunity to "change perceptions about the benefits of bio-fuels and the mandate and, ultimately, to build a groundswell in support of freezing or reversing some provisions" funding ethanol production from grain..Iowa Senator Charles Grassley, a firm supporter of ethanol subsidies, got a hold of the group's memo and published it online last week. Grassley called the group's campaign a "misinformation campaign" and railed against the "scapegoating of ethanol."."The Grocery Manufacturers Association has an obvious self-interest in launching this campaign. They need to blame someone for high grocery bills, and they've aimed their fire, I think, at a false target," Grassley said at a Thursday press conference..A political price to pay?.To unseat support for ethanol the food and beverage industry believes it has to convert progressive Democrats, pro-business Democrats, and Republicans and Democrats from non-farm states who supported the ethanol mandate. "Environmental, hunger, food aid, poverty, development, senior, children, business, nutrition, farm, consumer and labor groups" are all natural allies in the fight, according to the memo drafted by the group..The Glover Park Group, a Washington lobbying agency, drafted a strategy proposal for the Grocery Manufacturers Association for taking on ethanol. In the memo, the lobbying group said "we must demonstrate to policy makers at the state and federal level that there is a political price to allowing ethanol policy to drive up the cost of food.".That price is constituent ire stemming from pocketbook and kitchen table issues like food and gasoline prices. The lobbying group suggested that the food companies take their campaign to "average voters."."Average voters understand perfectly well what increased food prices mean and with the right messaging are fully capable of drawing the connection to corn-based ethanol," the lobbying group said..A broad Democratic offensive against ethanol would certainly be threatening to the federal mandate for ethanol production and some pressure is already landing on lawmakers. Yet Congress -- and Democrats who have made curbing foreign imports of oil a top national priority -- hardly seem prepared to turn their back on domestically grown biofuels just yet.."The issue is complicated, and Chairman [Jeff] Bingaman thinks that it's wise for folks to catch their breath and get better educated on the complexities before charging ahead with changes," Wicker said, referring to the the chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Bingaman sent a letter to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman and Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer this month asking them for more information on the connection between crops and food prices..All of this has pro-ethanol groups waging a vigorouos defense of their industry. But ethanol is certainly not on the ropes.."For reasons both political and strategic we think Congress is unlikely to dismantle anytime soon the renewable fuels standard," according to a new report from the Stanford Group Company..The ethanol industry warns that if lawmakers undo the ethanol mandate they'll have a lot of explaining to do to consumers when grocery bills don't drop significantly. It contends there are only small amounts of corn in grocery store products, saying the impact is measured in cents not dollars. With crude oil prices now above $130 a barrel, the food and beverage companies are still going to face dramatically higher energy prices that will continue to be passed along to consumers, they argue..States stake out biofuels positions.That's what makes the states the real battleground in the ethanol fight, something anti-ethanol groups realize.."[A]s long as state and federal decision makers and their staffs can comfort themselves with the thought that current ethanol policy makes sense on the merits, it will be difficult to get them to take up the fight," the Glover Park strategy memo said..In the absence of a Washington about-face, Texas is prepared to be a test case in the ethanol war. Texas Governor Rick Perry, a Republican, asked EPA last month to curtail the amount of ethanol from grain that must be blended into gasoline supplies by half. This month EPA announced that it is accepting comments on the request..Texas has to prove that the renewable fuel standard would "severely harm the economy or environment of a state, region, or the entire country, or if EPA determines that there is inadequate domestic supply of renewable fuel." EPA has 90 days to decide if it will grant a state waiver..Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison recently introduced a bill, S. 3031, that would freeze federal ethanol production mandates at 2008 levels. Ten other Republican senators, including Republican presidential nominee John McCain, R-Ariz., signed on as co-sponsors of the legislation.Needless-to-say the biofuels debate isn't going away anytime soon
I would only add that wayward Congress members have been adequately warned and that November could be a real problem for those who put corporate interests ahead of their voting constituents’ interests. Greedy corporations cannot cast a single ballot at the ballot box but they can only try to buy elected politicians who must stand for election every 2 or 6 years and their constituents are paying closer attention like they haven't in many years now. So be warned Senator "Half-measure" Hutchinson and Senator "Gotta watch closely" Cornyn!
Big Brother Oil Co.
Congresswoman threatens to nationalize oil industry
It would seem that the Dims end game plan was purposely accidentally revealed by Socialist Democrat Maxine Waters (D-CA) last Thursday, May 22, 2008 in a grilling of oil executives by a House panel. She brazenly and openly threatened to nationalize the oil industry if it didn't do something about the rising prices at the pump.
A report by Fox News, captured in a clip posted on YouTube.com, showed Waters challenging the president of Shell Oil, John Hofmeister, to guarantee the prices consumers pay will go down if the oil companies are allowed to drill wherever they want off of U.S. shores.
Hofmeister replied: "I can guarantee to the American people, because of the inaction of the United States Congress, ever-increasing prices unless the demand comes down."
The Shell exec said paying $5 at the pump "will look like a very low price in the years to come if we are prohibited from finding new reserves, new opportunities to increase supplies."
And with that the Socialist Democrat Comrade Waters snapped back with
And guess what this liberal would be all about. This liberal will be about socializing … uh, um. …"
Waters paused to collect her thoughts as if seeming to realize she had screwed up big time but decided to plunder ahead anyway since she had already crossed the line.
Would be about, basically, taking over, and the government running all of your companies. …"
The oil executives responded, according to Fox News, by saying they've seen this before, in Hugo Chavez's Venezuela.
Hardly any difference these day's
With the passage of the recent Farm Ag bill, aka the massive Farm subsidy giveaway pork laden and bloated Ag bill no wonder folks are having a harder time telling the difference between the two top parties.
Buffett sees "long, deep" U.S. recession
Warren Buffet, a U.S. investor and purportedly the worlds richest man is predicting that the current recession he believes that America is in will last much longer and run much deeper than many people currently believe.
Buffet asserts that America is
"already in recession" and added: "Perhaps not in the sense that economists would define it" with two consecutive quarters of negative growth.
Buffet went on to say;
"But the people are already feeling the effects," said Buffett, the world's richest man. "It will be deeper and last longer than many think."
While I do not necessarily think his ability to read the crystal ball as an analytical economic forecaster is infallible I do value his opinion on the subject as do millions of others around the globe. He has managed to amass a rather sizeable fortune and he must know something about economic indicators and markets to keep from losing his amassed fortune. I’d suggest that you go and read for yourself the article. It is based upon an interview published in German magazine Der Spiegel on Saturday.
House passes bill to sue OPEC over oil prices
It would seem that just when you thought arrogance and downright utter stupidity in Washington couldn’t get any worse our elected leaders in the Congress come along and do something to surprise and even stun us all. So when I read the headline I thought to myself, WOW! I mean here we are as a nation suffering from skyrocketing sticker price shock at the pump and even dreading the next time we need to fill up knowing well that the price will be even higher we now learn that these night crawlers in Washington have no idea that they are about to drop the rest of us directly into the fire.
It would seem that they have now come up with the brilliant and genius idea of suing OPEC for their very own failures and shortcomings in our nations miserably failed energy policy. The very Congress that refuses to allow exploitation of our own vast oil reserves, the failure to authorize any new oil refining capacity increase in over 30 years, no new nuclear plant construction in over 25 years and no meaningful increases in funding for alternative fossil fuel alternatives. Utterly mind boggling.
It never ceases to amaze me how dumb and stupid these miserable out of touch cretins in Washington seem to think we peasants are and just how much they hold us in contempt. Now they want to make sure that they show the rest of the world just how stupid they can get and make us the laughing stock of the world while absolutely pissing off those who sell us their oil. Just how stupid can they get?! Never mind, I know that question is merely a rhetorical one.
House passes bill to sue OPEC over oil prices
By Tom Doggett
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved legislation on Tuesday allowing the Justice Department to sue OPEC members for limiting oil supplies and working together to set crude prices, but the White House threatened to veto the measure.
The bill would subject OPEC oil producers, including Saudi Arabia, Iran and Venezuela, to the same antitrust laws that U.S. companies must follow.
The measure passed in a 324-84 vote, a big enough margin to override a presidential veto.
The legislation also creates a Justice Department task force to aggressively investigate gasoline price gouging and energy market manipulation.
"This bill guarantees that oil prices will reflect supply and demand economic rules, instead of wildly speculative and perhaps illegal activities," said Democratic Rep. Steve Kagen of Wisconsin, who sponsored the legislation.
The lawmaker said Americans "are at the mercy" of OPEC for how much they pay for gasoline, which this week hit a record average of $3.79 a gallon.
The White House opposes the bill, saying that targeting OPEC investment in the United States as a source for damage awards "would likely spur retaliatory action against American interests in those countries and lead to a reduction in oil available to U.S. refiners."
The administration said less oil going to refineries would limit available gasoline supplies and raise fuel prices.
Foreign investment in U.S. oil infrastructure has declined in the last decade. But the state-owned oil companies of several OPEC nations are owners of U.S. refineries, and those investments could be affected if the legislation becomes law, said Arlington, Virginia-based FBR Capital Markets Corp.
The bill also requires the Government Accountability Office to carryout a study on the effects of prior oil company mergers on energy prices.
The Senate would still have to approve the House measure.
The Senate previously approved similar legislation as part of a broad energy bill. However, the OPEC-suing provision was removed after White House opposition in order to get the underlying energy legislation signed into law.
They're at it once again or It just won't die!
Seems Dr. Frankenstein's monster just won't quite die and is trying to rise once again to wreak havoc on Americans and their families. Democrats and many Republican RINO's in Congress are trying to bring back amnesty once again but do it in a most hideous way as to get their monster slave wage labor for their big business donor-partners but also do it in such a way as to make sure meddling American citizens are forever locked out of any decision making process. Read on to see for yourself.
Will Congress Outlaw Local Laws?
Posted 05/14/2008 ET
Updated 05/14/2008 ET.One has to admire the Sisyphean tenacity of the Congress as it starts to roll another boulder up the mountain of public opposition to the federal encouragement of illegal immigration. The latest attempt, HR 5515, masquerading under the euphemistic label “New Employee Verification Act” (NEVA) is another unworthy successor to the recently demised “Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act” and “Dream Act” in its insolent attempt to procure cheap labor and voting constituencies for the political ruling classes, Democrat and Republican alike.
Pushed as replacement for the current E-Verify system (formerly Basic Pilot) by which employers can use the Internet to verify the legal work status of workers, this bill would create yet another massive computer database requiring seven million US employers to query for all newly-hired employees. E-Verify has been successful for its relatively few users, but it does suffer from faults due to poor and incomplete data. The new NEVA system would presumably, but not convincingly, fix some of these faults, so at first glance it sounds like a good deal. But then one must consider the recent experience with government computer projects like the new, and now abandoned, “virtual fence” on the Arizona border, which sucked up $20 million only to provide high-tech nesting towers for Arizona vultures.
As always when dealing with the political class growing ever more distant from the populace it rules, the NEVA devil is in the details. For all of its noble goals, hidden in the voluminous wording of this legislation is the true agenda of its sponsors, to wit, the section on preemption, Section 101(b)(2)(A), which reduced to simple language* would preempt and ban any and all state or local law for immigration-related issues enacted to impose employer fines or sanctions, or would forbid any laws requiring employers to verify work status or identity for work authorization. It would also prevent any unit of government from verifying status of renters, determining eligibility for receipt of benefits, enrollment in school, obtaining a business or other license, or conducting a background check.
This preemption, buried deep in the text of the bill, would kill all the laws recently enacted by long-suffering states and localities in response to the federal government’s unwillingness to enforce its own federal laws on immigration. Gone would be the recent highly effective and highly successful enforcement legislation of Arizona and Oklahoma, the local laws and ordinances of towns like Hazleton, PA, Costa Mesa, CA, Herndon and Prince William, Virginia, and over a hundred other localities, and of hundreds more in process of enactment.
For one example, the control of business licenses is now one of the few areas not preempted. It is one of the few tools still left to states and local governments to fight the presence and hiring of illegal workers, and the award of benefits and welfare. NEVA would take even those tools away. Having abdicated its own responsibilities on immigration enforcement, the Congress is apparently on a search-and-destroy mission for any lower elected body that might actually want to follow the rule of law and provide the protection for its citizens that the federal government seems incapable and unwilling to provide.
The oxen now being gored by these successful local initiatives have been given a considerable role in crafting this debilitating legislation. The whining exploiters and profiteers of illegal labor in Arizona would love to see that state’s tough yet effective laws removed, and the Chamber of Commerce, a leading advocate for open borders and unlimited cheap labor, has contributed via testimony and a revolving door for some of its alumni in Congressional staff positions. They have not been hesitant to push for total preemption of all state actions in their Congressional testimony and policy papers.
While the preemption clause is the most fatal of the flaws in this legislation, there are others embodied within. For example, it only applies to new workers applying for positions after the date of enactment. It ignores the tens of millions of illegal workers already in the country. There is no requirement to “re-verify” workers already employed, even if they are not entitled to work, or even to be, in the United States. Once enacted, no further inquiry would be made of those here illegally unless they apply for a new job.
As long as a currently-positioned illegal does not apply for a new job, he is home free from further inspection. You can bet there will be a massive surge of “hiring” to get workers on the roles before the legislation takes effect, even if they don’t do much work for a while. This intentional omission guarantees a continuing cheap labor pool of millions which should satisfy the exploiters’ needs for quite some time, say until amnesty and a path to undeserved citizenship make them permanent.
Also lurking in the text is a safe harbor position that holds employers accountable only for the hiring decisions related to their own employees, not those of their subcontractors. Many if not most current illegal workers are employed through subcontractors, many of whom are unlicensed and working “off the books”. In the mid-Atlantic area it’s called the “Verizon Exemption”, based on that company’s penchant for hiring numerous subcontractors for its billion dollar cable-laying operations who almost exclusively employ illegal workers. Of course, the practice allows Verizon to say, probably with great accuracy and greater duplicity, that it does not hire illegals. But it sure pays for a lot of them, if indirectly and at a rate that is far below union wage scales and benefits it used to pay its now laid-off American employees.
It should be said that there are some good components to the NEVA Act. Theoretically, it could improve on the E-Verify system, assuming that a government program which spans three massive bureaucracies (Social Security, Homeland Security, Health and Human Services) can create and administer a massive new and secure data system. It could also eliminate some of the paper record-keeping requirements of the current system, like I-9 Forms. Another positive provision would be the use of the data as a tool for denying benefits (Social Security entitlements, welfare and education benefits) to those not legally entitled to them.
But beside the legal issues, there are other deficiencies in the proposed NEVA system of an administrative or technical nature. The proposed database is not a new creation, but an expansion of the system now used to track “deadbeat dads” (a rather sexist statement itself). NEVA is assumed by its proponents to be an improvement over what it claims is the error-prone E-Verify system, a statement not backed up by the statistics. But the “deadbeat dad” system has its own catalogue of errors and wrong identities, so it is debatable that in its expanded design it will be any better. NEVA also relies on source documents which themselves may be as compromised as the current false document plague inflicting other systems. For example, a driver’s license would be adequate for anyone who claims they are a US national (and who won’t). For the uninformed, driver’s licenses are those little cards you get down at the DMV, or from the guy at the day labor site, or some basement print shop which can also get you a matching Social Security card.
Why spend large sums to modify the “deadbeat dad” system with its own deficiencies rather than improve the E-Verify system specifically designed for the work eligibility task? Perhaps we should follow the money and see which government contractor has a vested interest in this new procurement.
The Act also requires that an employer actually hire the worker before he checks the NEVA system on eligibility. Trial lawyers and the ACLU will love this provision, as it will open the door for subsequent legal mischief if the employer finds out things that would have prevented that individual from being hired in the first place. It also provides for private entities to set up a parallel “Secure Employment Eligibility Verification System” (SEEVS) which can be used in lieu of the federal government system. There are no specified constraints on who can set up these external systems. It could be IBM, but it could also be La Raza or the ACLU. They would have access to normally secure and privacy restricted personal information in immigration and Social Security databases – and a lot of opportunity for mischief. But to be fair, La Raza opposes NEVA because it does not also include amnesty and a path to citizenship.
Although labeled “bipartisan”, this bill submitted by Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Tex.) is overwhelmingly Republican in its sponsorship (28 out of 31). It appears to be a counter to Democrat Heath Shuler’s SAVE Act legislation, a much better, if not perfect, alternative now blocked by fellow Democrat Speaker Pelosi’s pro-illegal obstinacy.
Apparently the Republican leadership in Congress, not having been slapped around enough by the voters in the disastrous 2006 elections for its disconnect with those voters, is hell-bent on continuing to fight the overwhelming majority of Americans who want the illegal immigration problem fixed, not facilitated. Rather than listen to the people, they seem to be more attuned to the special interests whose siren call on Comprehensive Immigration Reform in 2006 led Republicans into the minority.
It would also be informative to hear what the Presidential candidates think about this legislation. Has John McCain still gotten the message -- “secure the borders first” -- or would he support this usurpation of local and state governments, including his own Arizona, by a federal authority with a history of apathy and indifference?
Candidates for the coming election are now a monotone chorus chanting “change”. Well, a welcome change for them and the rest of the inside-the-Beltway crowd would be to start enforcing the ample and adequate immigration laws we already have. A welcome change would also be to get off the open-border cheap-labor bandwagon and start paying attention to what the people want. If not, then let’s kick that boulder back down the mountain, and see if they want to try it again..
Battle Hymn of the Republic
Feeling down? Check out this link. If after viewing it you don't feel uplifted, blessed and patriotic then you aren't human and certainly you're not a true traditional American. Open your browser window to FULL view (F11) and make sure your speakers are on. You'll need a broadband connection. Runs about 4 or 5 minutes.
Feel free to pass around the link.
Lessons Learned? Hardly!
I would like to think that Republicans have started to pay attention to the winds of political change across the nation as they see their numbers steadily dwindling in the House and likely losses in the Senate but alas, they either haven’t been paying attention or just don’t care. It seems that they still just don’t get it.
I’ve been hearing conservative sounding voices starting to shout that Republicans need a plan, a total remake and start acting and sounding like they get it at last. I’ve heard Sean Hannity call for this on his radio and television show. I’ve heard Rush say it as well as several other national recognized conservative voices yet the leadership in the House and Senate just keep trudging full steam ahead into the coming train wreck.
I found this article at The UnionLeader.com that does a very good job of articulating just this very message in a piece titled: Dunces: Republicans learn nothing. Read on
Dunces: Republicans learn nothing
TWO DAYS after former Republican Rep. Bob Barr announced his candidacy for President as a Libertarian, and one day after a Republican lost a special election to a Democrat in a strongly GOP Mississippi district, more than half of House Republicans voted for the pork-saturated, $300 billion farm bill.
Idiots.
Three weeks ago, a Rasmussen Reports poll found that 48 percent of Americans trusted Democrats more than Republicans on the economy. Only 40 percent trusted Republicans more. That is the legacy of big-spending Republican policies pushed by leaders like Tom DeLay and President Bush and continued by the current GOP minority in the House.
For anyone with even weak Republican tendencies, voting against the farm bill was a no-brainer. The bill is full of subsidies, big-government economic meddling and wasteful pork projects. And yet, only 91 of 199 House Republicans voted against it.
New Hampshire Reps. Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter, continuing their lock-step support for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's big-government agenda, voted for the bill. And 91 House Republicans voted right along with them.
Sen. Judd Gregg, before voting against the bill Thursday morning, had a good summary of its ridiculous economics.
"Some may ask, and I may have wondered, what happened to all the economists who worked for the Soviet Union when it failed, who were sitting at their desks and they didn't have a job anymore? Folks who believed in a commissar economy, who believed in top-down management of the economy, who believed in five-year plans, who believed that supply and demand had no relationship to markets -- where did those people go?
"We know, they went into the development of present farm policy."
And their harmful ideas were approved, again, by Republicans, alleged defenders of free markets and opponents of redistributionist economic schemes.
As a group, Republicans in Washington have failed to learn from their electoral losses, from their bad poll numbers, and even from the waves of angry letters, e-mails, blog postings and phone calls from their outraged former supporters who berate them daily over spending.
Either the majority of Republicans left in Washington aren't listening, or they are constitutionally incapable of learning. We're starting to think it's the latter.
To compound the very real problems facing the Republican party they select a candidate that most real conservatives and traditional Republican voters cannot stomach nor vote for or at least not support with their time or money. The few that will vote for him are finding that no one makes a big enough clothes pin or make strong enough Vick's. At least they won't be able to say that they weren't adequately warned far ahead in advance.
I rather suspect that Juan McCain may just win after all but it will be a defaulted and hollow victory for the RINO Republican party as Hussein Obama will likely take on so much political baggage that it ends up sinking him in November. It won't be because Americans really want him as their President. The real losers will be the American citizens.
The McCain Mutiny
Republicans across the nation are starting to worry whether John McCain is really a stealth socialist Democrat. He has already started the traditional turn to the middle early in the campaign, errr, strike that, make that the hard left of the political spectrum. They already knew that he was a liberal leaning Republican but didn't know just how far left he was going to lean.
Why I Will Not Support McCain
I came across a blog posting yesterday written by blogger David Zublick at AmericaTalks blog. I found that he was expressing just how I too feel about the Republican standard bearer for president, John McCain and how I can not bring myself to vote for him either. So I'll just repost here what he said.
If I had any doubts about whether to vote for John McCain in this year's presidential election, those doubts were laid to rest this past week when McCain sat down for an interview with Fox News host Bill O'Reilly. McCain solidified for me the fact that he is not a true conservative and not worthy of my support.
McCain proved that on some of the most crucial issues, he will let down a base of constituents that are looking for answers.
O'Reilly addressed the question of rising gasoline prices. Anyone with a brain in their head knows that only two things will help this nation break free of its dependence on foreign oil; drilling domestically while developing alternative fuel sources. But McCain is an environmentalist wacko who is opposed to tapping the supply of oil in this country because he wants to keep the land pristine. Utter nonsense.
On the use of waterboarding suspected terrorists for the purpose of gaining vital knowledge which would help prevent an attack on our soil, McCain is also opposed. Waterboarding has been successful in the past. It should not be discarded as a valuable tool in the war on radical Islam. As a matter of fact, other forms of torture should also be used. After all, these maggots are not part of an army. They are enemy combatants and are not covered by the Geneva convention.
The issue of illegal immigration was also covered in the interview, and once again McCain proved he's a one-worlder like George W. Bush who feels we should give amnesty to those who have broken the law to get into this country.
These things I just cannot abide.
We need a president who will work to round up the approximately 30 million illegals living here and ship their asses out. We need a president who will use whatever methods it takes to protect this nation from another terrorist attack, and we need a president who will break us free from the stronghold of OPEC by drilling in ANWR, North Dakota, and wherever else there is oil domestically.
John McCain is not that candidate, and I will not vote for him in November.
To quit or not to quit..........
It sure seems the political talking heads in the liberal media (and I do include the WSJ talking head pundits at the FauxNews Channel in that group) and Osama’s overzealous supporters are really beating the drum hard lately for Hillary to just quit, to give up and pull out, just let the Marxist candidate B. Hussein Obama have the nomination before the primary process runs its course and just screw what the voters want. After all who do they think they are?! Damned miscreants!
First let me say that I am certainly not a Hillary supporter or fan and I’m most definitely not a Obama supporter or fan or friend but I think Hillary should stay in right up until either Obama (the Marxist) garners the necessary number of delegates to lock in the nomination or until the last primary is conducted and then take the nomination race to their convention floor and settle it once and for all there and only there. And count ALL of the votes.
After all look what happened to the Republicans and who they got ham strung with, a self-described self-absorbed social liberal (dictator wannabe) masquerading as a RINO Republican when all the other GOP candidates chose to quit long before the primary process was finished, before half the voters had any say at all. The Republicans allowed the political hacks of both party’s including the talking heads (including the vastly overpaid AND over rated fiscal yet socially devoid quasi-conservative WSJ associated FauxNews Channel) of the liberal media and many Democrats masquerading as Independents to select and coronate the Republican Party lackluster (loser inspired) liberal candidate for president.
Not unlike Obama, McCain is having much much difficulty in attempting to ‘close the deal’ with voters from his own party where he no longer has any competition and has as much FREE liberal-media coverage for their annointed darling and favorite liberal RINO as he wants. Social conservatives are fleeing him in droves which apparently suits him just fine.
So for those reasons and others not mentioned here I believe that Hillary (the self-avowed socialist) should hang in there and fight right up until the ‘fat lady sings’, so to speak.
McCain driving that wedge ever deeper…..
Is John McCain poised to take yet another foolish jaunt to the left in his campaign to win the Presidency of the United States? He has of late been heading by some accounts to the center and by other accounts to the left of center in order to capture some of the Democrats more socially liberal supporters and liberal Independents by sticking his finger in conservatives other eye. ABCNews.com is reporting that he may be contemplating moving the party in that direction by disregarding the party platform on abortion and softening the party years long stance to allow for abortions to account for exceptions such as rape, incest or risk to the mother's life, a position thought to be more acceptable to moderates and liberals but opposed by Christians and social conservatives alike.
Just the other day McCain was reported planning on attending the annual conference of the racist LaRaza (LaRaza translates into 'The Race') on July 14, 2008 and that he is intending to resurrect the failed “comprehensive immigration reform” (aka shamnesty) bill in some form when he is elected. He says he believes that America won’t survive without giving 20-40 million illegal aliens amnesty and opening up all of Americas social welfare programs and its residual benefits to these people. I can only roll my eyes and wonder just who is going to pay for all of that give away pork and what of the 60+ million baby boomers retirements.
I must ask, can we afford McCain and his socially liberal grandiose dreams of amnesty for 20-40 million welfare recipients and certain ruination for America and its legitimate citizenry?! And he is supposed to be a conservative according to the Republican Party apparatus. Seems to show just how out of touch with American reality they have become.
McCain Poised to Flip on GOP Abortion Platform
In '00 and '07, McCain Called for Exceptions in GOP's Platform on Abortion for Rape, Incest, Mother's Life
By TEDDY DAVIS
May 9, 2008Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., faces enormous pressure from social conservatives to ignore his repeated commitment to change the GOP's platform on abortion.
"If he were to change the party platform," to account for exceptions such as rape, incest or risk to the mother's life, "I think that would be political suicide," said Tony Perkins, the president of the conservative Family Research Council, to ABC News. "I think he would be aborting his own campaign because that is such a critical issue to so many Republican voters and the Republican brand is already in trouble."
A senior Republican close to McCain told ABC News that building a more inclusive GOP is a top priority for the Arizona senator.
But this adviser does not see changing the party platform to include exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother as necessary for achieving that vision.
Will the real....
Will the real Hussein Obama please stand up! Which one of you is the real you?
Beware of the ever evolving chameleon!
I'll be backkkkkkkk........
RINO Presidential candidate John McCain appears to be feeling his oats lately about his poll ratings and has returned to his usual comfort zone this past Monday when after delivering a speech at a town hall meeting in Charlotte, North Carolina. Afterwards during a Q&A with reporters McCain apparently felt comfortable enough bringing up and touting a couple of his past accomplishments and how he felt proud to be a part of his past participation in the infamous ‘Gang of 14’ saga back in 2005 and his nearly single handily ramming through his version of ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ aka as the shamnesty boondoggle back in 2006.
He went on to say that comprehensive immigration reform is the only way he could see solving America’s immigration problems. If elected he would make shamnesty once again a top agenda item of his administration. And that's just what he plans on telling the Mexican reconquista's at the annual conference of the racist LaRaza (LaRaza translates into 'The Race') on July 14, 2008 where he is an honored speaker. Hey, I thought Americans overwhelmingly defeated that budget busting piece of legislation and every reworked version of it over the past few years. I guess McCain will be taking his que's from lame duck President Bush and tell Americans he knows better than we do what is good for us no matter what we think.
McCain touts 'Gang of 14,' immigration reform
May 5, 2008 - CHARLOTTE, North Carolina (CNN) — John McCain the presidential candidate suddenly sounded like the John McCain of 2005 on Monday, touting two pet issues that have generated considerable heartache among grassroots conservatives: the “Gang of 14” compromise and comprehensive immigration reform.
McCain brought up the “Gang of 14” saga unprompted at a town hall here, in advance of a major speech on judicial appointments he is set to deliver tomorrow in Winston-Salem.
“I know what bipartisanship is,” McCain said. “I am going to talk tomorrow again about our Gang of 14: seven Republicans, seven Democrats that got together rather than blow up the Senate, and we confirmed so many federal judges.”
In the spring of 2005, McCain and 13 other senators from both parties agreed on a compromise to avoid the so-called “nuclear option,” which would have curtailed the right of the minority to filibuster. Democrats had been filibustering to prevent the confirmation of three conservative judicial nominees named by President Bush.
McCain said he took pride in his votes to confirm Supreme Court Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito, a line that drew applause from assembled members of the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce.
The Arizona senator also seemed to move past his usual “secure the borders first” mantra in favor of calling for, as he put it, “comprehensive immigration reform."
Last summer, McCain and Sen. Edward Kennedy led the charge on an immigration reform package that aroused the ire of conservatives and ultimately threatened to undermine McCain's then-frontrunning presidential bid. (McCain also supported immigration reform bills in 2005 and 2006.)
“Unless we enact comprehensive immigration reform I don’t think you can take it piecemeal,” he explained Monday, answering a question about providing visas for skilled workers.
“In other words,” he said, “because as soon you and I start to talk about the highly skilled workers, our agricultural interest people are going to say, ‘Look we need ag workers, too.’ And then somebody’s going say, 'We need the DREAM Act,' and then somebody’s going to say, 'We’ve got to enforce our border.'”
Throughout the Republican primary battle last fall, McCain faced relentless questions about his support for the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, the 2007 bill that would have allowed illegal immigrants to remain in the United States if they faced certain penalties. Opponents labeled it “amnesty.”
Since clinching the nomination, McCain has largely avoided speaking about wide-ranging immigration reform, arguing primarily that the government needs to focus on securing the border with Mexico before taking on other measures.
On Monday, he lobbied for a broader approach that includes a temporary guest worker program and tamper-proof ID cards.
“We get in this kind of a circular firing squad on immigration reform in the Congress of the United States," McCain said, "and the lesson I learned from it is we’ve got to have comprehensive immigration reform.”
Let them eat ethanol
The answer from greedy speculators to the mounting worries of not having enough food to go around for the worlds hungry.
Perry having second thoughts on ethanol
Seems that Texas Governor Rick ‘Goodhair’ Perry is starting to sense the growing public and worldwide angry backlash against using Americas corn, a very basic food commodity, for making ethanol fuel for cars and SUV’s instead of using the corn for what God put it on earth for, for feeding hungry people here and also reducing the amount of corn for export to other nations who are starting to realize increasing shortages in their food and feed supply.
By some estimates the amount of corn being used to make ethanol has diverted about 22% or more from the annual corn crop yield and that has led to increased costs for just about every food product derived from corn as well as greatly driven up the cost of feed for our nations livestock thus driving many cattle, hog, poultry and other animal producers who rely on corn in their feed supply either out of business or into near bankruptcy in many corners of the nation. Ranchers are finding it extremely difficult if not impossible to keep their doors open due to the extreme high cost of animal feed. Predictions are now that pork and chicken will be the next items in very short supply as a result.
This has naturally caused many Americans much financial pain at the grocery store checkout as well as this corn diversion has lead to skyrocketing wholesale food costs which are quickly passed on to you and me almost daily now if not weekly. There naturally are other things going on in the economy that are helping to raise those costs such as oil and gas, labor and greedy speculators but the diversion of corn is one of the leading contributors.
Perry's ethanol resistance catches on in U.S. Senate
AP - WASHINGTON — Following the lead of Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Senate Republicans today asked environmental regulators to use their power to halt the country's ethanol output expansion plans amid rising food prices.
Twenty-two Republican senators, including presidential candidate Sen. John McCain of Arizona, sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency suggesting it waive, or restructure, rules that require a five-fold increase in ethanol production over the next 15 years.
Congress passed a law last year mandating a ramp-up to 15 billion gallon of corn ethanol by 2015 and 36 billion by 2022. But McCain and other Republicans said those rules should be waived to put more corn back into the food supply for livestock, and to encourage farmers to plant other crops.
"This subsidized (ethanol) program — paid for by taxpayer dollars — has contributed to pain at the cash register, at the dining room table, and a devastating food crisis throughout the world," said McCain, in a statement.
Despite tough rhetoric from lawmakers, analysts say Congress is unlikely to roll back such a popular program during an election year.
It is only "popular" to those corporate interests like ADM and others who benefit by millions and billions of dollars in Federal subsidies in this major scam. If this ethanol program was so hot and so good for America why isn't private corporations doing this with their own dollars? That should be the yard stick with which to measure this boondoggle.
Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co. analyst Kevin Book argued in a recent note to clients that Congress will not "turn on the corn belt" because of the significant number of votes held by ethanol-producing states. Ethanol subsidies could face greater risks, however, in 2009 and going forward, according to Book.
Last month, Perry made waves when he asked federal regulators to relax rules requiring use of corn-based ethanol in the nation's fuel supply, arguing the mandate is driving up world food prices and harming the Texas economy.
In an April 25 letter to the EPA, Perry asked the Bush administration to waive 50 percent of the federal mandate for production of ethanol derived from grain.
Federal law requires that the nation use 9 billion gallons of renewable fuels this year and 11 billion gallons in 2009.
Ethanol is blended into more than half the gasoline sold in the United States, including in Houston and other cities struggling with the worst air-quality problems.
Farmers have responded to government ethanol incentives by planting the largest crop of corn in 60 years, leaving fewer acres for soybeans, oats and other agricultural staples.
Tighter crop supplies means higher production costs for food processors of all types. In one recent example Pilgrim's Pride Corp., the nation's largest chicken producer, said costs rose $200 million in the quarter on higher corn and soybean feed.
And Americans are paying those higher costs at the grocery store, where egg prices have jumped 40 percent in the last year and flour prices have risen 50 percent since January, raising the price of bread and other baked goods.
The EPA has the power to waive or restructure the requirements if they cause unintended harm to consumers or the environment.
"We don't think it's the right move to make," said Liz Friedlander, a spokeswoman for the National Farmers Union.
The group said ethanol production has helped lower fuel prices by reducing demand for gasoline.
It has? You got to be kidding me if you think Americans are so gullible as to swallow that load of pig swill.
Farmers and ethanol producers have defended corn-based production of the alternative fuel, saying its impact on the rising food prices has been relatively small. Instead, they blame food price inflation on higher fuel prices, poor weather conditions and dwindling stockpiles of wheat and other crops.
If you really believe that Mr and Mrs corporate corn farmer then tell me, if Congress took away all your Federal subsidies would you still be parroting your corporate party line? Heh heh, I didn't think so and neither does the American public.
While nearly all experts agree increased biofuel production by companies such as Archer Daniels Midland Co. and Pacific Ethanol Inc. has contributed to the run-up in food prices, there is little consensus on the scope of its role.
The ethanol industry says ethanol and other biofuels account for just 4 percent of the price surge, while the Department of Agriculture says the figure is closer to 20 percent.
Last week a group of international scientists recommended halting use of crops for biofuel, saying it would cut corn prices 20 percent.
OBTW. Most of the Senators that signed this petition are most of the same ones who originally enthusiastically passed this legislation but being an election year they have to appear as if they're really concerned for you and me.
Bush say's it isn't his fault
So it it's not his fault or the fault of his administrations policies or of past administrations that America is facing in the looming and growing food price crisis according to Mr. Bush himself. Seems it is the fault of the growing middle class of India according to the President and his Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice this past week.
She goes on to say that China is also at fault as well. She said that improving incomes and prosperity in India and China were responsible for the rising food prices. It would appear that Bush and his people will go to any length to keep from owning up to his administration policy shortcomings on how much corn, wheat, rice and other basic crops, how much to grow and not grow and a failure of a coherent and viable energy policy to make us more self-sufficiengt and less dependent on foreign oil imports. Like Clinton, don't get caught between Mr. Bush and his legacy rebuilding. It would appear that Mr. Bush learned at least one valuable lesson from the Clinton's and that is to, "deny, deny, deny" when things aren't going your way.
Probably one of the biggest boondoggle's of President Bush's administration is the ongoing bio-fuel scam being perpetrated against not only the people of the United States but on the world as well is the diversion of, so far around 3 billion bushels of corn to make 9 billion gallons of ethanol which equates to around 25%-30% of the current American corn crop. AND THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT WANTS AT LEAST 35 BILLION GALLONS PRODUCED IN TEN YEARS, WHICH WOULD TAKE NEARLY THE ENTIRE AMERICAN CORN CROP ACREAGE TO PRODUCE. Americans had better wake up and demand of Washington to stop and reverse this bio-fuel scam before America is reduced to a third world nation having to beg for food for its very day to day exisience.
Bush blames India's middle class for food price hike
WASHINGTON, May 3: US President George W. Bush on Saturday blamed the ‘wealthy’ lifestyle of India’s huge middle class for the spiralling global food prices.
“There are 350 million people in India who are classified as middle class. That’s bigger than America. Their middle class is larger than our entire population,” observed Mr Bush. ‘‘And when you start getting wealth, you start demanding better nutrition and better food. And so demand is high, and that causes the price to go up.”
The remarks, made in a speech on economy and trade, earned him an immediate rebuke from India where a spokesman for the ruling Congress party said Mr Bush’s analysis was “completely erroneous” as India is not a food importer but a food exporter.
Mr Bush, however, is not the first US leader to blame India. Earlier this week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also expressed similar views. She said that improving incomes and prosperity in India and China were responsible for the rising food prices.
Other American officials also have indicated that people in these two countries were eating too much and a better quality food, which has forced world food prices to go up.
In India, a Congress party spokesman Manish Tewari told reporters that Mr Bush’s assessment was wrong.
“The facts speak otherwise. India is not a net food importer. It is a food exporter,” he said. “The assumption that local prices are increasing because of a changed India is completely erroneous.”
Mr Tewari instead blamed the developed world for the crisis. “Diversion of arable land in the developed world for ethanol production and changes in the climate pattern led to the crisis,” he said.
In the meanwhile the smart and prudent thing to be doing in the meanwhile is to be slowly stockpiling of the non-perishable foodstuffs derived from corn and wheat. For those that can they should consider putting in a victory garden and canning what they can. I rather suspect that it will likely get worse before it gets better. It won't be long before we will look back longingly to this period as the good ol' days.
Food or Famine
Ethanol - Take your pick - profits or food.
Worldwide Famine Contributor
A mounting worldwide famine and food shortage contributor.
Federal prosecutor: Being an 'illegal' not a crime
Seems that a federal prosecutor in the District of New Jersey, U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie has determined that being on U.S. soil without an invite or without permission of the federal government is not a crime but more of a nuisance. Geez, where do we get these morins from?! Yeah I know, that's a rather rhetorical question. I suppose we should thank our compassionate conservative (barf) President for that. Read on --
Christie: Immigrants are not criminals Immigrants and their advocates today found an unlikely ally: the top law enforcement officer in New Jersey. U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie surprised many at a Dover church public forum when he said sneaking into the United States is not a criminal act. "Being in this country without proper documentation is not a crime," Christie told more than 60 residents and town officials. "The whole phrase of 'illegal immigrant' connotes that the person, by just being here, is committing a crime." Being undocumented may be a civil wrong, but it's not a criminal act, Christie said. "Don't let people make you believe that that's a crime that the U.S. Attorney's Office should be doing something about," he added of entering the country illegally. "It is not." …….. The U.S. attorney had been invited by the local chapter of the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey, a statewide group formed to empower Latinos to obtain political, economic and social equity, and hosted by the First United Methodist Church of Dover. While Christie told the audience it doesn't take a "genius" to see there's a "serious immigration problem" in this country, he stressed an undocumented immigrant is not a criminal unless that person re-enters the country after being deported. Rather, the state's top federal prosecutor called the problem of undocumented immigration "an administrative matter" that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is supposed to address. "If there are people out there committing crimes, they should be dealt with," Christie said. "If there are undocumented people running around, then Immigration and Customs Enforcement should do their jobs." |
As long as we have brain dead pro-open border advocate morons like Christopher Christie and Johnny Sutton of the Southern district of Texas serving as U.S. Attornies we won't even begin to solve the illegal immigration problem facing down and undermining America at every turn with our Presidents' blessing. Christie should not only be fired immediately and with extreme prejudice he should be filed on for refusing to do his sworn duties and for any crimes comitted by illegal aliens within his district since he became a U.S. Attorney. The madness has to stop!
Those Stimulus Checks
And how are you planning on spending your stimulus check?
Americans hoard food
This piece at TheWashingtonTimes certainly caught my attention. It caused me to think, ‘since when did Americans start hoarding food?’ And then it occurred to me, ‘why would Americans be hoarding food? In this day and age?!’ I know that food and gas has been on the increase over the past few years and it certainly has been making even larger increases at the pump and the checkout stand in recent months yet I wasn’t all that aware that we as Americans had been hoarding food, anyway not since the ‘Great Depression’ of my parents era.
But after reading on down in the article one soon becomes aware that what some rather wise and astute Americans, myself included have actually been doing is starting to read the tea-leaves and starting to buy and store extra foodstuffs and other related items we need in our daily lives otherwise known as ‘laying in extra vittles’. Okay okay, some might call it ‘stockpiling’ and maybe some might try to even stretch that to ’hoarding’. I wouldn’t quite go that far, personally.
Americans hoard food as industry seeks regs …. some Americans are stocking up on staples such as rice, flour and oil in anticipation of high prices and shortages spreading from overseas.
In all seriousness our basic food commodities supply have lately been showing signs of worsening with no real relief in sight for at least a couple of years or more according to some economists familiar with the world food supply numbers. Many world economists have been predicting that