Friday, May 23, 2008

Supply and Demand -- Democrats Offer To Repeat Carter Mistakes

The price of oil is not a mystery borne of conspiracies, it's simple supply and demand. In the late 70's we were in the same situation we are in now. What was the Democrat's solution then? The same as it is now: alternative energy and tax the oil companies.

Before we start down that path again why don't we take a look back and see how it all worked out.

When Jimmy Carter came into office the price of oil was around $14.00 per barrel. A lot happened during the Carter years, most of it bad. Investor's Business Daily has a good summary
here. By the end of the Carter Administration we had: the Synthetic Fuels Corp., the Energy Department, price controls on domestic oil, oil import quotas, and the Windfall Profits Tax. And when he left office the price of a barrel of oil was $35.00; that was a 154% increase.

The Democrats are now proposing more regulation, more taxes on oil companies and less drilling. What do you think will be the result of those policies? Just ask Jimmy Carter.

American Thinker Blog -- It's Supply and Demand, Stupid

Bootz Points Out -- Durbin Makes A Fool Of Himself

It was nothing less than a show trial. The Senate brought the leaders of the largest oil companies to Washington DC for a little grandstanding yesterday. Right there in the middle of all of this was Illinois Senator Dick Durbin.

I'm sorry, but this has to be said. Dick Durbin is either a shameless demagogue or a complete dumbass. I'm going with dumbass. This fool couldn't tell you the difference between a profit and a profit margin if his reelection depended on it. He sat up there on his fat ass and said to these oil company executives "Does it trouble any of you when you see what you're doing to us?" So ... there you go. These high gas prices? This is all being done to us by the evil oil companies. They're doing it to us with their huge profits.

We have increasing demands worldwide ... and a diminishing supply of oil ... and Durbin wants the uneducated people of this country to believe that these high gas prices are something that the oil company executives are "doing to us."

Why can't these guys defend themselves? Why can't just one of them say: "Tell us, Senator, do you honestly believe that this government; the government that gave us Social Security and pork spending, could run these oil companies any better than we do? The American people instinctively know that if this was a government operation they would be waiting for days just to be able to put ten gallons of gas in their tank. Frankly, Senator, you don't know the difference between an profit and a profit margin, and you would be hard pressed to make a successful attempt at running a corner gas station."

Yeah .. I know. In my dreams.


Neal Boortz

Jobless Claims Decline -- Rockford Unemployment Rises To 7.2%

Fewer Americans than forecast applied for unemployment benefits last week, indicating companies are reluctant to fire more workers even as the economy slows.

First-time jobless claims fell 9,000 to 365,000, from a revised 374,000 the prior week, the Labor Department said today in Washington. The total number of people collecting benefits was unchanged at a four-year high of 3.073 million for the week ended May 10.

Rockford declined by 1400 mostly manufacturing jobs.


Bloomberg News

Can You Check My Schedule?

An Iranian university is holding an international conference on the liquidation of the Jewish state, according to Iran's state run news service.

I wonder how that liquidation is going to fit into Obama's schedule?
Gateway Pundit --Iran Plans International Conference on Liquidation of Israel

McCain Campaign Vows Not To Be Neutered

He began pounding McCain for seeking the third term of George W. Bush. At the same time, Obama implores McCain in the interest of "one nation" and "one people" not to attack him. The shorthand, widely repeated by the news media, is that the Republican candidate must not "Swift boat" Obama. That amounts to unilateral political disarmament by McCain.

McCain is not about to disarm. His campaign has no intention of fighting this battle on Democratic turf. During the more than five months ahead, Republicans will explore the mindset of this young man who is a stranger to most Americans. That includes his association with the Chicago leftist William Ayers, who has remained unrepentant about his violent role as a 1960s radical. This will not be popular with McCain's erstwhile admirers in the mainstream news media, but America has not heard the last of Bill Ayers in this campaign.


Robert Novak -- Real Clear Politics -- McCain Won't Play By Obama's Rules

McCain's Response To Cheap Obama Politics

Thursday Senator Obama took to the floor and took a cheap shot at Senator McCain. This is after Obama supporter Senator Harkin of Iowa earlier claimed the McCain's family service in the military gave him an outlook that, "can be pretty dangerous." (Democrats continue to demonstrate that they have no respect for service -- Oh, Harkin, a veteran, had previously lied about having served in Vietnam when he was stationed here at home.)

McCain responded to Obama, here it is in full because the media snips do not do it justice. It is a great read, but the soundbites miss much

"It is typical, but no less offensive that Sen. Obama uses the Senate floor to take cheap shots at an opponent and easy advantage of an issue he has less than zero understanding of," McCain said in the statement. "Let me say first in response to Sen. Obama, running for president is different than serving as president. The office comes with responsibilities so serious that the occupant can't always take the politically easy route without hurting the country he is sworn to defend. Unlike Sen. Obama, my admiration, respect and deep gratitude for America's veterans is something more than a convenient campaign pledge. I think I have earned the right to make that claim."

"It is typical, but no less offensive that Senator Obama uses the Senate floor to take cheap shots at an opponent and easy advantage of an issue he has less than zero understanding of. Let me say first in response to Senator Obama, running for President is different than serving as President. The office comes with responsibilities so serious that the occupant can't always take the politically easy route without hurting the country he is sworn to defend. Unlike Senator Obama, my admiration, respect and deep gratitude for America's veterans is something more than a convenient campaign pledge. I think I have earned the right to make that claim.

"When I was five years old, a car pulled up in front of our house in New London, Connecticut, and a Navy officer rolled down the window, and shouted at my father that the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor. My father immediately left for the submarine base where he was stationed. I rarely saw him again for four years. My grandfather, who commanded the fast carrier task force under Admiral Halsey, came home from the war exhausted from the burdens he had borne, and died the next day. I grew up in the Navy; served for twenty-two years as a naval officer; and, like Senator Webb, personally experienced the terrible costs war imposes on the veteran. The friendships I formed in war remain among the closest relationships in my life. The Navy is still the world I know best and love most. In Vietnam, where I formed the closest friendships of my life, some of those friends never came home to the country they loved so well.

"But I am running for the office of Commander-in-Chief. That is the highest privilege in this country, and it imposes the greatest responsibilities. It would be easier politically for me to have joined Senator Webb in offering his legislation. More importantly, I feel just as he does, that we owe veterans the respect and generosity of a great nation because no matter how generously we show our gratitude it will never compensate them fully for all the sacrifices they have borne on our behalf.

"Senators Graham, Burr and I have offered legislation that would provide veterans with a substantial increase in educational benefits. The bill we have sponsored would increase monthly education benefits to $1500; eliminate the $1200 enrollment fee; and offer a $1000 annually for books and supplies. Importantly, we would allow veterans to transfer those benefits to their spouses or dependent children or use a part of them to pay down existing student loans. We also increase benefits to the Guard and Reserve, and even more generously to those who serve in the Selected Reserve.

"I know that my friend and fellow veteran, Senator Jim Webb, an honorable man who takes his responsibility to veterans very seriously, has offered legislation with very generous benefits. I respect and admire his position, and I would never suggest that he has anything other than the best of intentions to honor the service of deserving veterans. Both Senator Webb and I are united in our deep appreciation for the men and women who risk their lives so that the rest of us may be secure in our freedom. And I take a backseat to no one in my affection, respect and devotion to veterans. And I will not accept from Senator Obama, who did not feel it was his responsibility to serve our country in uniform, any lectures on my regard for those who did.

"The most important difference between our two approaches is that Senator Webb offers veterans who served one enlistment the same benefits as those offered veterans who have re-enlisted several times. Our bill has a sliding scale that offers generous benefits to all veterans, but increases those benefits according to the veteran's length of service. I think it is important to do that because, otherwise, we will encourage more people to leave the military after they have completed one enlistment. At a time when the United States military is fighting in two wars, and as we finally are beginning the long overdue and very urgent necessity of increasing the size of the Army and Marine Corps, one study estimates that Senator Webb's bill will reduce retention rates by 16%.

"Most worrying to me, is that by hurting retention we will reduce the numbers of men and women who we train to become the backbone of all the services, the noncommissioned officer. In my life, I have learned more from noncommissioned officers I have known and served with than anyone else outside my family. And in combat, no one is more important to their soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen, and to the officers who command them, than the sergeant and petty officer. They are very hard to replace. Encouraging people not to choose to become noncommissioned officers would hurt the military and our country very badly. As I said, the office of President, which I am seeking, is a great honor, indeed, but it imposes serious responsibilities. How faithfully the President discharges those responsibilities will determine whether he or she deserves the honor. I can only tell you I intend to deserve the honor if I am fo rtunate to receive it, even if it means I must take politically unpopular positions at times and disagree with people for whom I have the highest respect and affection.

"Perhaps, if Senator Obama would take the time and trouble to understand this issue he would learn to debate an honest disagreement respectfully. But, as he always does, he prefers impugning the motives of his opponent, and exploiting a thoughtful difference of opinion to advance his own ambitions. If that is how he would behave as President, the country would regret his election."


Maxine "Chavez" Waters Unveils The Democrats Agenda

Video: Maxine Waters threatens to nationalize America’s oil industry

This, "solution," that the Democrats find as their default position (rather then say -- letting us use our own oil!) is frightening and has been tried before. The end result is typically shortages and prices that would make $4 gas look like a gift!

Hot Air

Wow -- A Billionaire Who Doesn't Feel Guilty About It.

Billionaire investor Carl Icahn said Barack Obama would be a ``terrible'' U.S. president whose election would bring higher interest rates and a loss of international confidence in the dollar.

``I don't normally get involved in politics, but this time I am,'' Icahn told an investors conference in New York last night. ``I don't think Obama really understands economics.''



In An Obama Nation -- Vacation Travel

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 where I would love to go for vacation:

This is the vacation I will have to settle for -- Next year this windmill will have to produce enough electricity to run the lights at night. 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.

See all the Obama Nations

Is, 'Oil's perfect storm,' nearly over?

The perfect storm that has swept oil prices to $132 a barrel may subside over the coming months as rising crude supply from unexpected corners of the world finally comes on stream, just as the global economic downturn begins to bite.

The forces behind the meteoric price rise this spring are slowly receding. Nigeria has boosted output by 200,000 barrels a day (BPD) this month, making up most of the shortfall caused by rebel attacks on pipelines in April.

The Geneva consultancy PetroLogistics says Iraq has added 300,000 bpd to a total of 2.57m as security is beefed up in the northern Kirkuk region.

"There is a strong rebound in supply," said the group's president Conrad Gerber.

This is a must read about the causes and recent changes in oil production. Including charts of non-OPEC oil producing nations.


Telegraph UK -- Oil's perfect storm may blow over

Post-American Read For A Post-American President

What does a Post-American Presidential candidate read? Why, The Post-American World of course!DKK
Via - Instapundit

What Was The Democrat Strategy in 2006? Lie To Fools!

"I'll tell you my impression. We really in this last election, when I say we...the Democrats, I think pushed it as far as we can to the end of the fleet, didn't say it, but we implied it. That if we won the Congressional elections, we could stop the war. Now anybody was a good student of Government would know that wasn't true. But you know, the temptation to want to win back the Congress, we sort of stretched the facts...and people ate it up."

Oil, Dollar, Trade, and The Bush Impact

Below is a reply to a comment on a post on the Why We Vote RRStar blog -- I had to post it here because, well it was fun to write and took some work:

Don, thanks for the reply. Let me address each one of your points, and you have some good ones and some ... well let's see:

You should be concerned about the national debt. That is part of the reason that fuel prices are so high. A weak dollar doesn’t buy much overseas. That includes oil which impacts on food, travel and almost everything we do.

Partially right -- the trade deficit has far more to do with the falling dollar then does the does the national debt. The falling dollar in return actually boosts our material exports and makes home made and home grown products cheaper.

As a matter of fact, GM and Toyota (for the first time) are now exporting vehicles made here, Buicks to China!

It also makes it far cheaper for tourists to stay here in the States AND for foreigners to visit the States which brings money into our economy. (NPR - Low Dollar Draws European Shoppers to U.S., Even Minnesota feels benefits)

The high cost of oil actually drives down the value of the dollar, as MSNBC explains:
(T)here are new forces weighing on the dollar. High oil prices, for one, aren’t helping. Because oil is typically priced in dollars, the rise in the value of each barrel means every dollar buys less oil.

That has more to do with supply and demand, which is low in part because of the increased demand by China and India. Us demand has dropped because of the increase in price, but China actually subsidizes the price of oil in order to keep it's economy growing -- that would be like removing all gas taxes in the States AND reversing it and paying the oil companies to drop the price. That only increases demand and supersedes the free market.

Now, one reason supply is down is because the Democrats have blocked exploration and have placed a moratorium on coal-to-oil processing. Chuck Schumer blames President Clinton for 62 cents of the increase for vetoing ANWR drilling in 1995, well not in so many word -- he blamed Saudi Arabia for not increasing production by 1 million barrels a day which is what ANWR would be producing today if Clinton hadn't blocked it. (Remember one of the reasons at the time was that it would take ten years for the oil to reach market!)

40% of US oil and natural gas is off limits to exploration -- 40%! Every objective observer admits that US production is at embarrassing levels considering the current oil market.

If our national debt were really the problem with the dollar today we would be forced to raise our interest rates (which would increase the value of the dollar as well as it would increase demand) in order to entice investors in government bonds. Currently our rates are lower then Europe.

As you said, oil impacts everything we do and buy.

Read the whole MSNBC article linked above, it gives a great rundown.

Iraq did have chemical weapons.

Enough said -- Read UN Resolutions 678, 687 and 1441. Read together these resolutions do the following:
  1. Demand that Saddam Hussein leave Kuwait.
  2. Demand that Saddam Hussein immediately dispose of all weapons of mass destruction
  3. Require that Saddam Hussein provide ample proof to the United Nations that these weapons have been destroyed and that no active weapons program for such weapons exists.
  4. Allow any member nation of the United Nations to take military action against Saddam Hussein if the provisions of these resolutions are not completely complied with.
By your own admission Saddam was in violation of the resolutions.

The Institute For Defense Analysis (pdf file) study released earlier this year showed clear ties between Saddam and terror organizations including Al Qaeda's parent organization. There is no tie between Saddam and 9/11 as you point out, but the President didn't say there was. You are believing some spin and lies from your sources and are failing to understand that from day one the war was on ALL terrorists and the countries that support them, it really doesn't and shouldn't matter if they are al Qaeda or Islamic Jihad, they are our enemies -- and there is no question that Saddam supported terrorists.

Is the world safer? Terror attacks are down 40% since 2001. That includes Iraq. Bin Laden virtually surrendered in Iraq last week with his tape -- changing the focus to Palestine. This despite the fact that he had, as late as March, called Iraq the central battle ground in the War on Terror.

  • Iran -- The world has discovered that Bush was right to characterize Iran as evil! They are now isolated from the most of the world after it was disclosed that they had lied about their illegal nuclear program for nearly two decades. The UN agrees with the administration and disagrees with Obama.
  • Libia -- Gave up their illegal nuclear weapons program as a direct response to the invasion of Iraq.
  • Dubai -- Held its first parliamentary election in 2006.
  • Saudi Arabia -- Held their first nationwide elections since 1960 in 2005.
  • Kuwait -- In 2006 Kuwait, which already has an elected parliament, was the first Gulf state to allow women to run and vote.
Look, many of the dictators in the rest of the Mideast are in power as a result of the United States and Soviet policy of ignoring the freedom and human rights of the region and settling for stable allies instead. The President stated that, not only was that not working, but it feeds violence and hatred, and goes against Americans commitment to Democracy in the rest of the world.

Oh and the democracy thing is not a new justification -- it was there right from the beginning as I note above but I don't think you clicked -- "AUMF and actually listened to the President in the months before the war."

I hope this helps and thanks for the kind words.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License