Imagine Nancy Pelosi compromising with the Nazis in WWII: “OK, you can kill… mmmm… THREE million Jews and gypsies instead of six. Deal?”

It is quite obvious we need to do everything to promote alternative energy sources. This is going to take years. We must become energy independent asap as anyone who has a brain can see how the Russian’s have frozen any tough response to their invasion of Georgia for fear of losing half of their natural gas supplies.

This is a situation which concerns national security yet we have Rep. Pelosi and other members of our congress playing politics as usual.

When we wake up one day in a situation comparable to 911 or worse, much of it will fall on the shoulders of many inept politicians. I always thought we elected our Congress to do things in the best interest of our country.

Also, to the gang of ten, get with the house Republican program. What you have signed on to will be nothing better than the status quo.

I am all for drill here and drill now. Never before has it been more apparent that our NATIONAL SECURITY is at stake. This is NOT about $4/gallon gasoline. This is about protecting our country from enemies abroad. This is all about not shifting $700 BILLION from our treasury (GDP) into the treasury of our enemies.

Kudos to the GOP in the House. Now if the GOP weasels in the Senate find their backbone, we can nail this election this fall. I do not believe Obama will win the electoral votes and I am beginning to believe that the Dems will lose their majority. Reed and Pelosi are just stuck on stupid and the American electorate is coming out of their complacent coma. I even believe the Michigan will turn Red for this Presidential election, first time since Regan’s 2nd term, I think.

Wanderlust on August 17, 2008 at 8:14 PM

Don’t let Alphie read that, it’s head would explode, too much reason, intelligence, and fact……………

Wanderlust on August 17, 2008 at 8:14 PM

“desperate people do desperate things” IE: accept socialism

‘Our allies the Saudis’ could really use some belt-tightening as a result of reduced global demand. Chavez is another good example. Maybe that’s why the Democrats oppose reducing the price of oil, it would hurt the dictator they love the most.

Beagle on August 17, 2008 at 11:26 AM

I’d like nothing more than for us to turn the environmentalist spin on lil’ Hugo: Venezuela’s oil is really, really crappy, by world standards, from what I gather – very heavy with sulfur and other stuff that requires special, more expensive processes to refine. For all of Chavez’s bluster, the main place where Venezuelan oil is refined is in the USA.

So if we want to truly break Hugo’s dreams of being Castro’s successor as strongman to Latin America, as more American crude oil sources come on line (that is, lighter, less sulfurous crude), we begin imposing heavier costs to deal with removing the sulfur from Hugo’s crude. After all, Nancy wants to “save the planet”, and that sulfur has to go somewhere. Better it be somewhere else, other than America. Stick that up yer pipe, Hugo baby, while you bash America yet again!

As for our resident troll alphie, you guys are just feeding him. There will be no argument anyone here can possibly make that would change his mind, so it’s not worth your effort, IMHO.

And as for this question:

I still can’t quite grasp why the dems seem so opposed to domestic energy production. Could one of you guys help me out?

funky chicken on August 17, 2008 at 12:01 PM

Answer: follow the money and leverage. There are three forces at play, all which combine to form SanFranNan’s anti-American oil policy:

1. Special interests: from “Big Ag” (mainly ADM and ConAgra) down to small producers, farmers have realized that being paid corporate welfare tax incentives to grow non-food corn and other fuel crops earn them much more money than food crops, given Congress’ desire to pander to powerful constituent bases at the expense of American security (which, come to think of it, is similar to the reason why so many politicians refuse to enforce existing laws on illegal immigration, but that’s another story). This issue is why price supports for crops never seem to go away in spite of ever more efficient production methods. It’s also an issue governments around the planet face, not just the US – e.g., try to import rice without duties into Japan; it just won’t happen.

2. Special interests: the so-called environmental movement. Having learned that “alternative” fuels are so bloody expensive, the environmental lobby supports ever-increasing fossil fuel prices so that at some point, their alternatives begin to make sense. The problem with this point is that because there is still so much supply of fossil fuels to be had (the “Peak Oil! Peak Oil! The world is ending!” group notwithstanding), natural market forces won’t justify pricing anywhere close to a break-even point for alternatives for many years yet. The simple fact is, outside of nuclear power, crude oil, coal, and natural gas are the most efficient energy sources for most needs, in terms of extractable calorific content. Of course, there are many other reasons why the environmental lobby are in lust with alternative power schemes, but again, like agriculture, it comes down to their addiction to corporate welfare tax incentives provided by the biggest Sugar Daddy of all, the US Government.

But by themselves, these two special interests would not stand for long, except for the third item, which acts as a catalyst for the first two:

3. The Left’s continued need for, and dependence upon, a state of fear and misery as the justification for its support of increasing Government intervention in the markets and personal freedoms. Without the power that comes from control of the government purse, the Left’s policies and philosophies would simply vanish like a fart in the wind. With the exception of providing for a standing army in wartime and managing the maintenance of and enforcement of laws, there is normally not much for a government to do, to justify its existence. As people began to realize this fact over history, they rejected, and even overthrew, their oppressively heavy-handed governments, wanting instead to be able to live their lives in peace and earn a living without paying taxes for services in which they saw no immediate benefit. Perhaps the most poignant example of this realization was Bastille Day in France; the Boston Tea Party follows right behind that.

So the Left must “sell” Government as the source of all solutions, big and small, in order to justify its existence. To this end, it will latch onto any state of fear it can find, or else create, to motivate the populace into freeing up the purse strings of money and power. It will make Devil’s bargains with dictators and throttle progress in its homelands in order to justify its need to derive power by controlling tax policy.

SanFranNan and the Obamessiah tacitly admit that the only thing wrong with $4.00/gallon gas prices is that the price rise happened too fast, causing people to take notice of it. They could literally care less that the bulk of increased costs for crude oil go to countries and stateless groups that use those funds to harm US interests and threaten the safety and security of US citizens. Indeed, the Left will eventually use these security threats to justify ever increasing efforts to “help” its citizens on the basis that there are nasty threats abroad, and that if they only could increase Government’s ability to “do something about it”, things would be better.

The prospect of American energy independence scares the crap out of Democrats because if it ever happens, employment will rise, poverty will fall, and people will become too busy earning their own wealth to care what Government will claim it can do for them.

/rant OFF

Republicans lambasted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) energy plan Saturday advising her to “get out of the way” if she was not going to accept GOP solutions to the energy crisis.

Don’t stand in the doorway, don’t block up the hall….for the times they are a’changin’ – Bobby Zimmerman.

Nancy and Harry will be “daschled” this coming election. See ya.

bayam on August 17, 2008 at 5:32 PM

Point taken, but many of us are opposed to throwing money away on unworkable solutions. Example T. Boone and Polosie and the wind farm idea (they hope to make tens of millions from our taxes, not the wind itsself). We give them billions for very little or no gain in electrical power or carbon print. Remember wind is not dependable and so we MUST run power plants even when the wind is blowing!

Lets spend our money where we can get a payback like hydrogen or methane for only 2 examples. Methane (made from nearly anyhing from garbage to coal) is avalible now and we can build enough plants in 2-3 years to replace ethonal,saving our food chain.

alphie on August 17, 2008 at 5:49 PM

Guess what alphie??? They do!

duff65 on August 17, 2008 at 5:31 PM

Rush reported last week that the oil companies pay $4,000/second in taxes.

alphie on August 17, 2008 at 3:12 PM

Wow What state hospital are you in anyway?? did you see the martian steal the moon last night too?

I still can’t quite grasp why the dems seem so opposed to domestic energy production. Could one of you guys help me out?

It depends on how you count domestic production. Do solar, wind, and natural gas count, or does it have to involve oil?

There are some very big utility-scale solar projects, including one formally announced by PG&E last week, that depend on alternative energy tax credits to go forward.

If you didn’t believe James Woolsey before- that alternative energy is a national security issue in a world where oil in controlled by Arabs and Russians- perhaps you’ll believe it after events in Georgia. The nation needs an energy policy beyond drilling offshore and Alaska reserves- drilling which I think needs to happen- but won’t dramatically reduce the transfer of wealth to our adversaries abroad or the likelihood that a major conflict over the next 20 years will cause a catastrophic cut off of energy supplies to the West.

There is always a “nut case” on these threads, you qualify. What Nancy has proposed is worse than nothing. Strategic stocks are for emergencies (get it). A windfall profit tax on companies making about 8-10% is absolutely stupid (the feds already get much more in taxes). Why don’t you go back to school and take Econ 1?

Focusing on solar and wind is the wrong approach. Those so-called green energies don’t help anyone.

Go RNC GO!!

allrsn on August 17, 2008 at 4:35 PM

I’m not disagreeing but why do we get so damned excited when Republicans act like Republicans instead of getting upset when Republicans act like McCain Democrats?

alphie on August 17, 2008 at 2:26 PM

Mindlessly regurgitating leftist lies again, alphie?

Tell us again about how Exxon isn’t interested in oil shale. Because it’s a big joke.

Lets not waste monies on projects that contribute little or nothing to our energy needs, keep it real.

Lets consider replacing ethonal (a primary link in our food chain)with methonal. Methanol is ‘wood alcohol’ made from anything from wood waste to human garbage, human waste to coal (imagine that clean burning coal). At the peak of gasoline cost methanols cost was $1.80/gallon.

What is the cost of ethonal including the cost of production, subsidies, raise in food costs and all other costs?

Would one of the house Repubs walk across the street and slap the smile off Miss Lindsey Grahams stupid face?