Thursday, May 22, 2008

Schumer's Magic Oil

In a Senate floor speech he gave on May 13th, the New York Democrat insisted that:

"If Saudi Arabia were to increase its production by 1 million barrels per day that translates to a reduction of 20 percent to 25 percent in the world price of crude oil, and crude oil prices could fall by more than $25 dollar per barrel from its current level of $126 per barrel. In turn, that would lower the price of gasoline between 13 percent and 17 percent, or by more than 62 cents off the expected summer regular-grade price - offering much needed relief to struggling families. "

Schumer repeated these words almost verbatim when grilling oil company executives during yesterday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearings.

Yet Schumer's daily magic number of 1 million barrels is the exact increase experts believe we would today be pumping through the Alyeska pipeline had Bill Clinton not vetoed ANWR drilling back in 1995. And even the most rabid anti-domestic-drilling Democrats don't take issue with that figure.

So then, the increase he demands of "Bush's friends," the Saudis - which he claims would reduce prices by up to 25 percent -- is the exact amount he argued earlier this month would only "reduce the price of oil by a penny" were it coming from ANWR - eco-sacred breeding ground of the Porcupine Caribou.
The Democrats have done everything they can to make energy more expensive for the American consumers. Will this word filter out past the MSM? I wouldn't want to be a Democrat in Congress when it does. Do they still make tar and feathers? I'll let you know if gas hits , what, $7/gallon.
American Thinker Blog -- How much have the Democrats cost you at the pump?

Alaska Challenges Feds Over Polar Bear

The state of Alaska will sue the U.S. government to stop the listing of the polar bear as a threatened species, arguing the designation will slow development in the state, Gov. Sarah Palin said on Wednesday.

Palin said the state will file a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Washington challenging U.S. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne’s decision to grant Endangered Species Act protections to the polar bear.

The Republican governor has argued that the ice-dependent polar bear, the first mammal granted Endangered Species Act listing because of global warming, does not need additional protections.

“We believe that the listing was unwarranted and that it’s unprecedented to list a currently healthy population based on uncertain climate models,” said Alaska Assistant Attorney General Steven Daugherty.

Even though Kempthorne enacted a rule aimed at precluding any new restrictions on oil and gas operations as a result of the listing, the Palin administration believes a wide variety of other development activities in Alaska would be hampered if the listing goes through, Daugherty said.

Any development or activity requiring federal permits or using federal funds would have to engage in a “consultation” process to ensure that polar bears are not harmed, he said.

That consultation, mandated by the Endangered Species Act, “is a long and time-consuming process,” he said. “It’s just, basically, a big time-and-money-waster.”

Michelle Malkin -- You go, girl: Alaska GOP Gov. will sue Bush administration over polar bear listing

Al Qaeda In Iraq Weakest Since Invasion

The Al Qaeda terror group in Iraq appears to be at its weakest state since it gained an initial foothold in the aftermath of the U.S.-led invasion five years ago, the acting commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East said Wednesday in an Associated Press interview

Osama said it was the key just a few months ago -- earlier this week I figured he signaled surrender when he didn't mention it in his last tape. So what do the Dem's do? Why surrender right back, that will show them!
Gateway Pundit -- Al-Qaeda At It's Weakest Since US Invasion of Iraq 5 Years Ago

Senate Proves They Are Clueless -- Bits From Oil Hearings

One theme that emerged from the hearing was the surprisingly small role played by American oil companies in the global petroleum market. John Lowe pointed out:

I cannot overemphasize the access issue. Access to resources is severely restricted in the United States and abroad, and the American oil industry must compete with national oil companies who are often much larger and have the support of their governments.

We can only compete directly for 7 percent of the world's available reserves while about 75 percent is completely controlled by national oil companies and is not accessible.

Stephen Simon amplified:

Exxon Mobil is the largest U.S. oil and gas company, but we account for only 2 percent of global energy production, only 3 percent of global oil production, only 6 percent of global refining capacity, and only 1 percent of global petroleum reserves. With respect to petroleum reserves, we rank 14th. Government-owned national oil companies dominate the top spots. For an American company to succeed in this competitive landscape and go head to head with huge government-backed national oil companies, it needs financial strength and scale to execute massive complex energy projects requiring enormous long-term investments.

To simply maintain our current operations and make needed capital investments, Exxon Mobil spends nearly $1 billion each day.

Because foreign companies and governments control the overwhelming majority of the world's oil, most of the price you pay at the pump is the cost paid by the American oil company to acquire crude oil from someone else:

Last year, the average price in the United States of a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline was around $2.80. On average in 2007, approximately 58 percent of the price reflected the amount paid for crude oil. Consumers pay for that crude oil, and so do we.

Of the 2 million barrels per day Exxon Mobil refined in 2007 here in the United States, 90 percent were purchased from others.

By the way, did anyone know before yesterday that Exxon Mobil spent every dollar it made in profit in American gasoline sales on domestic exploration?
Powerline Blog -- Oil Executives Try to Educate Senate Democrats, But Democrats Appear Hopeless.

Joe Lieberman Takes The Dems Behind The Woodshed

How did the Democratic Party get here? How did the party of Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy drift so far from the foreign policy and national security principles and policies that were at the core of its identity and its purpose?
the parties have completely switched positions. The reversal began, like so much else in our time, on September 11, 2001. The attack on America by Islamist terrorists shook President Bush from the foreign policy course he was on. He saw September 11 for what it was: a direct ideological and military attack on us and our way of life. If the Democratic Party had stayed where it was in 2000, America could have confronted the terrorists with unity and strength in the years after 9/11.

Instead a debate soon began within the Democratic Party about how to respond to Mr. Bush. I felt strongly that Democrats should embrace the basic framework the president had advanced for the war on terror as our own, because it was our own. But that was not the choice most Democratic leaders made. When total victory did not come quickly in Iraq, the old voices of partisanship and peace at any price saw an opportunity to reassert themselves. By considering centrism to be collaboration with the enemy – not bin Laden, but Mr. Bush – activists have successfully pulled the Democratic Party further to the left than it has been at any point in the last 20 years.

Far too many Democratic leaders have kowtowed to these opinions rather than challenging them. That unfortunately includes Barack Obama, who, contrary to his rhetorical invocations of bipartisan change, has not been willing to stand up to his party's left wing on a single significant national security or international economic issue in this campaign.


A great Democratic secretary of state, Dean Acheson, once warned "no people in history have ever survived, who thought they could protect their freedom by making themselves inoffensive to their enemies." This is a lesson that today's Democratic Party leaders need to relearn.


WSJ -- Joseph Lieberman -- Democrats and Our Enemies

She Really Does Have Something To Be Proud Of!

A CBS News report from Obama’s campaign headquarters inadvertently aired an inconvenient (given Obama’s insistence that his critics “lay off” his wife) bit of information hung up in one of the cubicles:

Given that, I’d have to say that criticism of Michelle Obama is completely in-bounds.


Whole post shamefully taken from Say Anything Blog -- Memo In Obama Campaign Office: “Whatever Michelle Says Is the Message”

The World Is Safer Today Then In 2001 -- Huh, But Barack Keeps Sayin'...

It's all Bush's fault.
Terror attacks are down 40% since 2001.

Andrew Bolt and The Canadian Press reported this recent study:

A group of researchers from Simon Fraser University says global terrorism is on the decline, despite previous data and public perceptions that suggest otherwise.

The university's Human Security Report Project says fatalities from terrorist attacks around the world have, in fact, decreased by 40 per cent since 2001.
But... Sadly, there are those who believe that even with Saddam Hussein and the Taliban gone that America is somehow less safe today than before 9-11.

And... Total global terror attacks were down 40% late last year due to the 55% decrease in attacks in Iraq.

Gateway Pundit --I Blame Bush-- Terror Attacks Down 40% Since 2001

In An Obama Nation -- Home Entertainment

An ongoing feature demonstrating the points put forth by Barack Obama that in order to be leaders in the world we will have to be cold and hungry.

In An Obama Nation:

This is what I want to watch when I sit on the couch:

This is what I will have to settle for watching -- right after I crank it up! All for the sake of being a good world leader!

Don't worry, while you and I will feel like Iranian hostages the academics and the media will hail this leadership as being even better then freeing 50 million from tyranny, right up there with winning a world war or cold war.

Previous Obama Nations:

Who Is Really Looking Out For The Young Voters?

John McCain may be the oldest candidate running for the presidency but he appears to be the only one interested in the economic welfare of those younger than seniors. How anybody under the age of fifty can vote for a candidate who refuses to offer a legitimate rescue plan for Social Security is beyond me. Yet McCain is being hammered by groups representing retired boomers who have become easy targets for fear-mongering politicians.

American Thinker -- Youth Voters are backing The Wrong Candidate

80% Think Gas Is Still Cheap -- Compared To Your Life

In a move certain to generate both controversy and publicity, a new and used car dealer in Butler, Missouri, is offering his customers a choice between two sales incentives with their vehicle purchase: $250 in gasoline or a free semi-automatic handgun. "We got high gas prices, theft, carjackings, innocent people getting hurt," Walter Moore, from Max Motors, told KMBC-TV. It seems the resourceful dealer is offering car buyers a solution for it all -- and the gun is proving to be the popular choice with 80 percent of his customers choosing the firearm over free fuel.

Autoblog -- Dealership offers free gas or gun with new car: 80% choose gun

Manzullo Statement On OPEC

Washington, May 20 -

Congressman Don Manzullo (R-Egan) today voted for legislation to reduce gasoline prices in America by allowing the U.S. government to sue OPEC countries that conspire to keep oil prices high by limiting production in their nations.

The Gas Price Relief for Consumers Act (HR 6074) would make it illegal under U.S. law for foreign countries to collectively manipulate energy prices or supplies and permit the federal government to sue foreign countries for any such actions that directly affect the United States. The bill passed the House 324-84 this afternoon.

“For too long, the OPEC criminal conspiracy has wreaked havoc on gasoline prices in the United States,” Manzullo said. “This legislation will make them think twice before turning off the spigot and continuing to manipulate oil supplies to suit their needs. The threat of lawsuits should deter any efforts by the OPEC cartel to continue to raise gasoline prices in America.”

In a separate move, Manzullo, a Republican leader on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, sent a letter today to the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia, Adel Al-Judbeir, urging the country to immediately increase oil production up to 1.9 million barrels a day to increase the supply of oil in the world and reduce gas prices in America. Manzullo, lead Republican on the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment, pointed out in the attached letter that Saudi Arabia has the capability to produce 11.3 million barrels of oil a day but is only extracting 9.4 million barrels daily.

“The constituents I represent in northern Illinois are facing record gas prices exceeding $4 a gallon and need immediate relief before the summer starts or else our economic turmoil could spread more deeply around the world,” Manzullo said. “I believe it is in the interests of both our countries for Saudi Arabia to increase production beyond the 300,000 barrels a day already promised to commercial customers.”

Urging OPEC nations to increase the production of oil is part of the 12-point plan Manzullo unveiled earlier this month to reduce gas prices in America. The comprehensive plan includes short- and long-term strategies to lower American gas prices by combining increased domestic production of oil and gasoline with conservation, tax relief and incentives to encourage development and commercialization of alternative and renewable energies. The comprehensive plan is attached

Manzullo has a 12 point plan (word documentlink to my post on the 12 point plan May 5, 2008 -- who puts a word document online anymore, they couldn't just convert it to a pdf like they did the letter to the Saudi Ambassador pdf?) that if he and the rest of the Republicans, had any chance in hell of getting passed would go a long way toward getting elected this fall.

Unfortunately this OPEC legislation is just about 48 years too late (OPEC formed September 14, 1960) and is the most ineffective part of his plan, which is probably why the Democratically controlled congress passed it.

Oil is going to be a major political tool this fall. I have said before that if the American people knew who was keeping oil at such a high price (hint, OPEC has nothing to do with it) they would vote for a completely new congress.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License