Historically, Socialist regimes decry the fact that not everyone has the same standard of living. They win power by convincing people that they will bring economic equality and prosperity to the populace. Of course, that is impossible. Instead, they make everyone equal by bringing the standard of living down for everyone. Everyone, except the power elite. This WSJ editorial demonstrates just one example of that. The liberals bashed Bush and the Republicans for an oil based energy bias and opposing alternative energy. While the former is just practical, and the later false, see what happens when these liberal elites find that their policies affect them personally. It is clear they believe their own rules do not apply to them, just the unwashed masses.

The U.S. Senate today laid the second brick in the foundation to assure the country cannot achieve energy independence. It passed out a bill that turns potential oil and gas development land into untouchable wilderness. The first brick was B.H. Obama's selection of the most liberal and anti-business coalition of natural resource and environment agency heads in the history of the nation. Now, the AP reports Senator "coal is dangerous" Reid did not even allow debate or amendment to the bill as he stuffed it down the throats of the Senate Republicans. So much for bipartisanship.

Wilderness designations lock the land away from not only developing it for multiple uses, but even driving a wheeled vehicle or fighting fires on it. For example, ranchers or landowners who have in-holdings adjacent to these wilderness areas often need to drive hours to reach their property because they cannot make a 15 minute trip across wilderness designated land. Existing access and fire roads are abandoned under a draconian roadless policy.

So, B.H. Obama is still days away from being inaugurated, but the plan is already taking shape: Appoint anti-business, environmental extremists to head up agencies, have the 111th Congress toughen up restrictions, laws, and regulations even more than the bureaucracy already has, ramp up merciless enforcement, take land out of production for mineral and oil development, eliminate hydro uses, ban energy development on all other federal lands, stonewall permits for nuclear power plants, transmission lines, refineries, solar energy, hydro energy, wind energy, etc., etc.. We're just getting started.

What is the end game here? Why do our leaders want to incapacitate us by eliminating domestic energy development and pay tribute to the world's despots who have no problem destroying the environment with unrestrained energy development? Russia even uses it as a weapon of blackmail against the Balkans and Europe. It cannot all be incompetence. This seems to be going very well for the liberals. So, what is the goal?



Besides my theory of liberals grabbing permanent power by devolving our society into a serfdom, I am perplexed. Very perplexed.

That is a quote in the Wall Street Journal by Steven Chu, B.H. Obama's new Energy Secretary-select. While Mr. B.H. says he dismisses raising the federal gasoline tax (for now), practically all of his "Energy Team" says it is the most effective way to address climate change. So. why does the new president in waiting hire people who are on record of being to the left of Karl Marx on economic issues, but then dismiss them? Stay tuned. Or, should I say, be patient?

Liberals are always touting that Europe's way of doing things is superior to American culture and policies. That argument as been raging since before the Revolution. For the most part, such pontifications have fallen on deaf ears here in the colonies. We separated from Europe precisely to do things differently. But, there is one thing that we are behind the curve on, and Europeans are catching on well before us; the global warming hoax. It has been reported in numerous European media outlets over the past year that Europeans, especially those in the U.K., are fed up with all the hype over the issue. They have endured significant and multiple increases in taxes and fees, curtailment of goods and services, and nonstop scare tactics about how the world will end if global warming is not stopped now. After spending billions of euros over the past decade in the name of addressing global warming, the doomsday hysteria has not lessened one bit. People are finally getting suspicious that this global warming bit is simply a government ploy to generate more taxes and fees, and better regulate personal activities. Ya think?!

On December 18 an article was published in the U.K. Telegraph explaining that NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies Director and chief scientific advisor to Algore, Dr James Hansen, has been caught red handed fudging temperature data to make the case that the 1990s was the warmest decade of the past century, and this past October was the hottest on record. Turns out, he misused the data. Turns out the 1930s was the warmest decade of the 20th century. Turns out October 2008 was no record warm period at all. It was only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years. So much for the credibility of An Inconvenient Truth, as if we needed more facts to debunk that travesty.

So, why hasn't the United States SRM (State-Run Media) widely reported this and a raft of other similar news reports? For example, on December 14th, the AP published an article that breathlessly worried about B.H. Obama's ability to quickly deal with the accelerated advance of global warming. I saw only one news outlet, Fox, that reported that there were scientists who disagreed with the AP's hysteria. These types of nonstop "news stories" report global warming opinions as facts, not theory. What type of government are these "watchdogs of liberty" trying to encourage? As was evident in the past presidential election, the SRM seems not to be ashamed that they are simply the public relations arm of the liberal faction of our government. No watchdogs the NYT, LAT, NBC, CBS, and ABC. I am profoundly perplexed with what is going on here. The public is being fed a line, and, judging by the last election results around the country, they have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.



It appears that the earth is cooling, not warming. As far as I know, this cannot be attributed to human activity; it's a natural cycle that can be demonstrated simply by looking at the past climate cycles over several centuries, and their association with sun spot activity. If the earth is cooling, it could have an even more profound effect on civilization than warming. What is the implication on public policy? More energy. We will need all we can get to keep warm.

Investor's Business Daily opines about B.H. Obama's new Energy Secretary, physicist Steven Chu. Despite the mounting evidence that global warming is, at a minimum, suspect, it appears the Democrats are preparing for a full frontal assault on free market principles in the name of saving the planet. The assault is not confined to the ongoing litany of anti-free market bailouts, but on multiple levels. Coal is the next prime boogeyman, knocking the evil SUV into second place.

I won't be the first to say "I told you so", but I wish I were.

No, Good News: If Santa's workshop was around 60 years ago, it will be just fine now.



As mentioned before on this blog, the global warming chicken littles have pointed to melting polar ice as proof of their doomsday predictions. While I provided other contrary viewpoints from credible scientists, here is another, more recent article explaining why melting polar ice is a completely natural and cyclical process that goes on about every 60 years or so.



So, when do we de-list of the polar bears?

Being a long-time contrarian regarding global warming, I have a habit of joking about the coming ice age just to pull the chain of my Algore-struck colleagues. But, it appears to be no joke! Check out the long list of inconvenient facts indicating that the earth is, indeed, in a major cooling cycle.



All the more reason to START DRILLING NOW so we can keep warm in the years to come.

It snowed today in Houston, Texas and New Orleans, Louisiana. The snow flurries in Houston tied a 64-year record for the earliest snowfall, and today’s snow in New Orleans was also among the earliest in recorded history.

Sure could use a little global warming right about now.

The list of scientists who reject the Algore global warming "fact" is growing longer and longer. Among their numbers are leading climate scientists who formally were advocates of the doomsday predictions, but now have come to question and even reject it as more information is laid bare. But when I mention this to friends and colleagues who are believers in this new religion, they say I am nuts, or worse, a denier. Kinda like a holocaust denier, I guess. Serious charge. Well, get a load of this, skeptics. Lots of links to first degree evidence can be found on the U.S, Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works blog tracking the goings on this week at the global warming conference in Poznan, Poland. It seems there are far more skeptics among the scientists than there are believers. Read the quotes from the scientists themselves. A real eye opener. I wonder if we will see that reported in the State-run Medial (SRM)?

Who said this?: “A new revolution is possible only in consequence of a new crisis,”

and,

“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.  What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.  This is an opportunity.”

The first sentence was written by Karl Marx over one hundred years ago. The second statement was spoken this week by Rahm Emmanuel, the White House Chief of Staff in waiting for President-select Obama.

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but this Socialism thing is really getting tiresome. Can't the federal government just leave us alone?? We can rebuild the economy and achieve energy independence ourselves, if they will just get out of the way.

Does anybody remember the reason given for creating the Department of Energy during the Carter Administration?  No?

The Department of Energy was instituted on August 4, 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. And now, 31 years later, the budget for this department is $24.2 billion a year; they have 16,000 federal employees, and approximately 100,000 contract employees.
 
Okay, that worked out pretty good. Now, let’s turn the banking system and auto companies over to the government. And health care. And . . .

Reported in the WSJ (subscription required) on page A8 today, November 19: As predicted, Obama and the Dems are preparing for a full scale shutdown of new domestic energy development. One only need to look at the list of far left eviros being appointed to key positions in the new administration. They vow to get tough on regulations in the federal agencies. Like, it's not already tough?? That means fewer applications for oil, nuclear, wind, solar, hydro, etc, development, because energy companies cannot afford the long delays and expensive consultants, attorneys and lobbyists required to get a facility permitted over a 15 year period. Meanwhile, the terrorist harboring countries will continue to get richer, build up their militaries (including a proliferation of submarines worldwide), and fund terrorist groups to wreak havoc on Western democracies. All on our dime. Fasten your seatbelt. Energy prices, low now only because of the liberal created worldwide recession, or worse, will eventually soar back to pre election levels or higher. The libs are already high-fiving reports that Sarah Palin's gas pipeline project is in jeopardy.

Why, you ask, would Obama and the Dems support such draconian tactics? Just read the posts below. It is in the liberals' best interest to have the economy in chaos and fundamental needs in short supply. That is the only environment where they can win power. Just look at this past election for proof. They will not be happy until we return to feudal times, this time with an Orwellian twist.

Even Reuters had to publish an article stating that 2008 will be the coolest year in the past 5 years. But, but, didn't Algore and B.H. Obama tell us we are already seeing the damage from global warming? So, how many years do we have left?


I think we might need some oil to keep warm.

Think plowing agricultural fields with horse and oxen, and taking food to market by wagon. There might be a complication in getting food on the table for you city folk.

But you might need a little oil to make a tire. And some oil to make the plastic tire gage. And some more oil to make most of the non metal parts on the car. And ...