Thursday, April 28, 2011
For instance, Rep. Steve Israel, DCCC Chairman sent one dated Wed, April 27, 2011 10:57:36 AM that says, “At town hall meetings across the country, House Republicans are facing a citizen backlash like never before for voting to end Medicare but give more reckless tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires.”
James Carville, well known strategist and GOP hater sent one Wed, April 27, 2011 9:23:11 AM saying, “You know Republicans. Give ’em an inch and they’ll take billions in tax cuts for the wealthy.”
“So far, they’ve tried to kill Medicare, scrap health care reform and gut clean energy investments. Why? To give big, fat tax cuts to billionaires and corporations.”
Robby Mook of the DCCC on Tue, April 26, 2011 2:38:58 PM said, “On the campaign trail, Republicans promised to stand up for America’s seniors. But now that they’re in Congress, they’ve passed a budget that turns Medicare into a voucher program, giving huge payouts to big insurance companies and leaving seniors to pay thousands of dollars in increased health care costs – all while protecting tax breaks for Big Oil and the ultra rich.”
Sen. Barbara Mikulski, Tue, April 26, 2011 7:52:49 AM wrote, “Is nothing sacred to these people?”
“First, Republicans spent months attacking women and families. Now they’re going after seniors. There’s no end to what they’re willing to destroy to achieve their extremist vision.”
Rep. Steve Israel, DCCC Chairman, Mon, April 25, 2011 12:18:18 PM claimed, “We can’t let up. The same right-wing special interests that attacked House Democrats for supporting Health Care Reform are back in full force thanking House Republicans for their vote to end Medicare. And get this, their misleading ads claim that by voting to end Medicare, Republicans were actually trying to protect it. Huh?”
“We have to stop this outrageous lie in its tracks. Here are the facts: if Speaker Boehner and House Republicans simply chose to get rid of the huge tax breaks for the wealthy, Big Oil, and companies that offshore to avoid paying their fair share, they wouldn’t have to slash health care benefits for seniors at all.”
Our own Sen. Patty Murray Mon, April 25, 2011 6:33:59 AM stated, “The GOP budget is a dagger in the heart of American families.”
“Under it, everyone would sacrifice – except billionaires and corporations. The social safety net working families rely upon would disappear. People remember life before Medicare. Many seniors’ lives ended in abject, heartbreaking poverty.”
As is usual, there is no lie, no hateful claim, no rhetoric the Democrats won’t use to spin the truth to regain power and control of the nation. Class envy and pandering to seniors have become commonplace.
Just one little problem for the Democrats, seniors aren’t buying it. In spite of all the divisiveness, the class envy, the hateful rhetoric, a recent Gallup poll finds 48 percent of seniors (those 65 and over) support Ryan’s plan over Obama’s plan, while only 42 percent back Obama’s. “That is highest total among the age groups tested - a 47 percent plurality between the ages of 50 and 64 backed Ryan, and a 45 percent plurality of those between 30-49 backed Ryan,” says National Journal.
The only group falling for the lies and misrepresentations seems to still be the young who overwhelmingly side with Obama.
But, the target group remains to be seniors who have matured enough to know rhetoric when they see it.
It seems every time efforts are made to rein in out of control spending, streamline programs to improve efficiency and get the country on track, the Democrats pull this nonsense and all too often, target seniors, telling them how bad Republicans are for them.
Little wonder the country remains on the brink of disaster.
Posted by Lew Waters at 1:22 AM
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Now that the Obama Administration has released a long form birth certificate, even though it too is already being questioned, comedienne Whoopi Goldberg slams Donald Trump as a racist for pursuing the long sought after issue. Inadvertently though, she makes an unbelievable comment that convinces me more just how delusional and out of touch with reality many on the left are.
H/T Mediaite with a special thanks to ABC's The View for exposing their own hypocrisy.
Posted by Lew Waters at 11:19 PM
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Ever since Vancouver, Washington Council Member Jeanne Stewart stood up for the citizens of Vancouver and cast the vote to grant citizens a vote on funding light rail from Portland, Oregon into the community, she has come under fire from Mayor Tim Leavitt. The latest being a comment made and quoted by the Columbian newspaper, accusing her of "pandering."
"With exception of one pandering Council Member (who previously voted in support of a replacement bridge and light rail transit), I have no reason to believe that the Vancouver City Council has an inclination to reverse direction from its decision of 2.5 years ago."Four citizens stood up at the April 25, 2011 City Council Meeting in her defense. Not one other council member defended her, much to their shame.
September 9, 2009 on his blogsite Tim Leavitt put up campaigning, he wrote a post "Continuing to stand up for the Residents of Vancouver and Clark County"
"Portland Mayor Sam Adams insisted that from his perspective, no tolls means no project."On August 7, 2009 Tim Leavitt wrote in his blog post "OREGONIAN Editorial Board Out of Touch--Tolls are Unnecessary and Unjust!"
"I made it perfectly clear that I have no intention of rolling over on tolls." "Tolling is an extremely regressive tax. Whether one has an income of $10,000 or $100,000, everyone will pay the same toll. To suggest a tolling 'credit' or 'mitigation' for the low-income is simply to admit that tolling is unfair to the working class and those of lesser financial status."
"Who is representing the hard-working families and businesses of the Portland-Metro region, and particularly SW Washington? It's certainly not the Oregonian Editorial Board. It's certainly not local elected officials, like Vancouver's current Mayor, Royce Pollard. Nor are a number of other higher-up elected officials. Nor are transplants from the east coast, who proudly proclaim that tolls are a way of life. Tolls may be a given on the other side of the country, but one of the reasons many of us are here in the west coast is because it's NOT like the east coast!"July 27, 2009 he wrote in his post, "How to Pay for a New Bridge without Breaking the Backs of Vancouver's Working Class."
"You see, it's quite easy to force an issue onto the public when you don't have to worry about facing that public every day to listen to the hardship and explain why your position just cost jobs, homes and closure of businesses. It's easy to force a matter onto the public when you have only a few months or years left in public office, and then can go into retirement and out of the public eye."
"Our current leadership has failed to create good, new jobs locally--forcing our citizens to cross the river to earn a decent wage, for the dubious privilege of paying Oregon income tax. And now, after this failure, that same incumbent leadership is saying that we need to just "accept it," and "get over it." and prepare to pay tolls."On September 14, 2009 he wrote in "Tolling is NOT the Only Answer!"
"I submit that tolls are not a foregone conclusion, and this project can be done without detrimental financial impact to our hard-working families, employers or seniors on fixed incomes."
"In the Editorial section of the September 9 Columbian, Tom Koenninger writes that tolls on the new I-5 crossing are a foregone conclusion, and insinuates that anyone who claims otherwise is a fool or a liar."Who has been "pandering," Mayor Leavitt? You have!
"Indeed, since Mr. Koenninger and the current Mayor of Vancouver, among others, have been stubbornly trying to force tolls onto our community for years now, one can hardly expect that they'd suddenly come to their senses."
"It's because of this hard-headed refusal to do what is right for our community, and to defend the very people who need it most, that I am running for Mayor. Our community really does deserve better ideas, better leadership, and a stronger commitment to our citizens."
Posted by Lew Waters at 7:49 PM
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
UPDATE: One news report showing in Jacksonville. Doesn't look like much a "revolution" so far
Racial supremacists groups are known to make noise and have never accomplished anything but bringing harm to others. Black, White, Hispanic, doesn’t matter what they are, they advocate racial purity pitting race against race.
During times of economic strife is when they seem to make the most noise, always blaming others for problems within their community that not only did they cause, but ignore all the answers to solving those problems. The Ku Klux Klan blamed Blacks for strife in the South for decades instead of pulling together with Blacks, Jews and others to improve conditions there.
Now we see another supremacist group, the New Black Panthers calling for a Revolution worldwide to be kicked off this Saturday, April 23, 2011 in 60 cities.
From the webpage set up, it is said they are
“supported by Students and Youth, members of many of Black Church, the New Black Panther Party, Nation of Islam, National Black United Front, National Action Network, Moorish Science Temple of America, Rainbow Push Coalition.”
No Pacific Northwest cities are amongst the list of 60 yet. The webpage also claims,
“To the Authorities, don’t worry about who is organizing it. This is organized by the people and for the people. This is organized by a new younger leadership un-approved by our former slave or colonial master. We are grassroots activists, youths, residents, union members, community residents, spiritual people, revolutionaries and freedom fighters who have decided to take a stand together April 23rd. The call of Dr. Malik Zulu Shabazz has resonated with the disillusioned all over the earth.”
“April 23rd, 2011 we are taking vigilantly to the streets, police stations, projects, courthouses, State Capitols, houses of racists, morgues, jails and anywhere our people can be found and the fight can be found for justice! We will rattle the enemy and those who are asleep to show and prove the world we are wide-awake!”
“Our demands are immediate and non-negotiable.”
Stirring hatred of others because of their skin color or cultural ancestry backfired on the Klan in time. Their hate filled rhetoric brought much harm not only on to Black People, but Whites as well. They were marginalized decades ago, but the effects of their hatred are still fresh in the minds of people of all races who realize the answer is pulling together, just as Blacks and Whites did in the aftermath of 1900 Galveston Hurricane.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. called for unity, mutual acceptance and the “day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.”
Bill Cosby, comedian, entertainer and a highly educated man laid it out well showing that the problem isn’t skin color, it’s the ill behavior of people, all races, all colors creating the problems.
You cannot continue to blame others for problems you created yourself.
Islam is said to be one fifth of the world’s population and has amassed great wealth as can be seen in so many Mosques all over the globe. Yet, they have some of the poorest underfed people in the world.
That is not the fault of Christianity, it is the greed and mismanagement of those controlling Islam.
They call for the redistribution of wealth, yet they cling to their own.
The New Black Panthers state, “we are wide-awake!”
Are they really?
Or are they just trying to use you to further their supremacist claims and take more of what you have for themselves?
Posted by Lew Waters at 12:07 PM
Saturday, April 16, 2011
In a way I was lucky during the 1973 oil crisis, I was still in the U.S. Army and stationed overseas in the country of Germany that saw a much greater embargo of oil from the Middle East than did America. I say I was lucky because we did not have gas lines over there and during the height of it all the German Government banned driving on Sunday, save taxi cabs and emergency vehicles. We in the Military who stood weekend duty had to seek a driving pass to be prominently displayed inside of the car to be out driving and even then, we could only drive to and from our duty. I never had to sit in a gas line until I returned to America in March 1974 and then only a few times as the crisis eased shortly after my return.
I am struck that ever since that time, nearly 40 years ago, we continue to hear much of the same rhetoric coming from politicians of both parties and still, very little, if anything has actually changed. We still hear the calls of conserve, we are running out of oil, make cars more efficient, drill our own, don’t drill our own, we need to get off of foreign oil, whatever, much of the same rhetoric from 1973 is still heard in 2011.
Republican President Richard Nixon, in office at the outset of the oil crisis went before the nation early on November 25, 1973 outlining a series of steps called for to minimize the impact, both to the economy and to our personal lives to weather the crisis. He also announced the appointment of an “Energy Emergency Action Group to analyze the situation on a continuing basis and to advise him of all actions required to deal with it.”
In his January 30, 1974 State of the Union address, Nixon claimed,
“We will break the back of the energy crisis; we will lay the foundation for our future capacity to meet America's energy needs from America's own resources.”
He went on to address playing a role in the disengagement between the forces of Egypt and Israel, the root cause of Middle Eastern nations curtailing much of the oil they sold to Western nations and that leaders in the Middle East were meeting to “discuss the lifting of the oil embargo,” thereby returning to shipping the much needed oil for our energy needs.
As we know, Nixon resigned in August 1974 and the reigns were turned over to Gerald Ford who was appointed to replace him. President Ford, also a Republican, said in his January 15, 1975 State of the Union address,
“We depend on others for essential energy. Some people question their Government's ability to make hard decisions and stick with them; they expect Washington politics as usual.”
He also said,
“I am proposing a program which will begin to restore our country's surplus capacity in total energy. In this way, we will be able to assure ourselves reliable and adequate energy and help foster a new world energy stability for other major consuming nations,”laying out 3 steps of,
“First, we must reduce oil imports by 1 million barrels per day by the end of this year and by 2 million barrels per day by the end of 1977. Second, we must end vulnerability to economic disruption by foreign suppliers by 1985. Third, we must develop our energy technology and resources so that the United States has the ability to supply a significant share of the energy needs of the free world by the end of this century.”
Addressing his policy on energy, on May 27, 1975 President Ford said,
“Last January 15, I went before your Senators and Representatives in Congress with a comprehensive plan to make our country independent of foreign sources of energy by 1985.”
Addressing his efforts and missteps of both parties in congress, President Ford said,
“We are today worse off than we were in January. Domestic oil production is going down, down, down. Natural gas production is starting to dwindle. And many areas face severe shortages next winter. Coal production is still at the levels of the 1940's. Foreign oil suppliers are considering another price increase. I could go on and on, but you know the facts. This country needs to regain its independence from foreign sources of energy, and the sooner the better.”
Stating a point many in the country and government have yet to realize, he also said,
“When I talk about energy, I am talking about jobs. Our American economy runs on energy—no energy, no jobs. In the long run, it is just that simple.”
In the January 19, 1976 State of the Union address, President Ford said,
“My proposals, as all of you know, would reduce domestic natural gas shortages; allow production from Federal petroleum reserves; stimulate effective conservation, including revitalization of our railroads and the expansion of our urban transportation systems; develop more and cleaner energy from our vast coal resources; expedite clean and safe nuclear power production; create a new national energy independence authority to stimulate vital energy investment; and accelerate development of technology to capture energy from the Sun and the Earth for this and future generations.”
The 1976 campaign against Democrat challenger Jimmy Carter saw barbs thrown back and forth on energy independence. In the debate held September 23, 1976, challenger Carter charged,
“Our country now has no comprehensive energy program or policy. We have 20 different agencies in the Federal Government responsible for the production, the regulation, the information about energy, the conservation energy spread all over Government. This is a gross waste of money.”
He also charged,
“we need to have a realization that we've got about 35 years worth of oil left in the whole world. We are going to run out of oil. When Mr. Nixon made his famous speech on operation independence, we were importing about 35 percent of our oil. Now we've increased that amount 25 percent. We now import about 44 percent of our oil.” He added, “We need a shift from oil to coal. We need to concentrate our research and development effort on coal burning and extraction that's safe for miners, that also is clean burning. We need to shift very strongly toward solar energy and have strict conservation measures and then, as a last resort only, continue to use atomic power,”and calling for “mandatory conservation measures.”
President Ford responded,
“Governor Carter skims over a very serious and a very broad subject. In January of 1975, I submitted to the Congress and to the American people the first comprehensive energy program recommended by any President. It called for an increase in the production of energy in the United States. It called for conservation measures so that we would save the energy that we have. If you are going to increase domestic oil and gas production--and we have to--you have to give to those producers an opportunity to develop their land or their wells.”
He also replied,
“we have to expand our research and development. In my program for energy independence, we have increased, for example, solar energy research from about $84 million a year to about $120 million a year. We are going as fast as the experts say we should. In nuclear power we have increased the research and development under the Energy Research and Development Agency [Administration] very substantially to ensure that our nuclear power plants are safer, that they are more efficient, and that we have adequate safeguards. I think you have to have greater oil and gas production, more coal production, more nuclear production, and in addition, you have to have energy conservation.”
The October 6, 1976 debate and the October 22, 1976 debates saw pretty much the same back and forth.
In November, Jimmy Carter won the election.
Part Two, Part Three, Part Four
Posted by Lew Waters at 6:19 PM
In his January 19, 1978 State of the Union address, President Carter proclaimed,
“We here in Washington must move away from crisis management, and we must establish clear goals for the future, immediate and the distant future, which will let us work together and not in conflict. Never again should we neglect a growing crisis like the shortage of energy, where further delay will only lead to more harsh and painful solutions.
Every day we spend more than $120 million for foreign oil. This slows our economic growth, it lowers the value of the dollar overseas, and it aggravates unemployment and inflation here at home.
Now we know what we must do, increase production. We must cut down on waste. And we must use more of those fuels which are plentiful and more permanent. We must be fair to people, and we must not disrupt our Nation's economy and our budget.
Now, that sounds simple. But I recognize the difficulties involved. I know that it is not easy for the Congress to act. But the fact remains that on the energy legislation, we have failed the American people. Almost 5 years after the oil embargo dramatized the problem for us all; we still do not have a national energy program.”
As inflation began to spiral higher, in his January 25, 1979 State of the Union address, President Carter called upon Congress
“to take other anti-inflation action--to expand our exports to protect American jobs threatened by unfair trade, to conserve energy, to increase production and to speed development of solar power, and to reassess our Nation's technological superiority. American workers who enlist in the fight against inflation deserve not just our gratitude, but they deserve the protection of the real wage insurance proposal that I have already made to the Congress.
To be successful, we must change our attitudes as well as our policies. We cannot afford to live beyond our means. We cannot afford to create programs that we can neither manage nor finance, or to waste our natural resources, and we cannot tolerate mismanagement and fraud. Above all, we must meet the challenges of inflation as a united people.”
We were also early on in what would become known as the 1979 energy crisis, where the world saw a significant decrease in oil production from the Middle East as Iran and Iraq became embroiled in a protracted war.
In his January 23, 1980 State of the Union address, President Carter said,
“The crises in Iran and Afghanistan have dramatized a very important lesson: Our excessive dependence on foreign oil is a clear and present danger to our Nation's security. The need has never been more urgent. At long last, we must have a clear, comprehensive energy policy for the United States.
As you well know, I have been working with the Congress in a concentrated and persistent way over the past 3 years to meet this need. We have made progress together. But Congress must act promptly now to complete final action on this vital energy legislation. Our Nation will then have a major conservation effort, important initiatives to develop solar power, realistic pricing based on the true value of oil, strong incentives for the production of coal and other fossil fuels in the United States, and our Nation's most massive peacetime investment in the development of synthetic fuels.
The American people are making progress in energy conservation. Last year we reduced overall petroleum consumption by 8 percent and gasoline consumption by 5 percent below what it was the year before. Now we must do more.”
He also announced his “import ceiling for 1980 of 8.2 million barrels a day” of crude oil, with no significant increase in domestic oil production, but adding,
“The single biggest factor in the inflation rate last year, the increase in the inflation rate last year, was from one cause: the skyrocketing prices of OPEC oil. We must take whatever actions are necessary to reduce our dependence on foreign oil--and at the same time reduce inflation.
As individuals and as families, few of us can produce energy by ourselves. But all of us can conserve energy--every one of us, every day of our lives. Tonight I call on you--in fact, all the people of America--to help our Nation. Conserve energy. Eliminate waste. Make 1980 indeed a year of energy conservation.
Of course, we must take other actions to strengthen our Nation's economy.
First, we will continue to reduce the deficit and then to balance the Federal budget.
Second, as we continue to work with business to hold down prices, we'll build also on the historic national accord with organized labor to restrain pay increases in a fair fight against inflation.
Third, we will continue our successful efforts to cut paperwork and to dismantle unnecessary Government regulation.
Fourth, we will continue our progress in providing jobs for America, concentrating on a major new program to provide training and work for our young people, especially minority youth. It has been said that "a mind is a terrible thing to waste." We will give our young people new hope for jobs and a better life in the 1980's.
And fifth, we must use the decade of the 1980's to attack the basic structural weaknesses and problems in our economy through measures to increase productivity, savings, and investment.”
Losing the 1980 election to Republican Ronald Reagan, President Carter delivered the January 16, 1981 State of the Union address trying to triumphantly boast,
“Our economy is recovering from a recession. A national energy plan is in place and our dependence on foreign oil is decreasing. We have been at peace for four uninterrupted years.”
Those of us who were alive and paying attention then know better.
He also claimed of his Administration,
“the 1977 National Energy Plan marked an historic departure from the policies of previous Administrations. The plan stressed the importance of both energy production and conservation to achieving our ultimate national goal of relying primarily on secure sources of energy. The National Energy Plan made energy conservation a cornerstone of our national energy policy.
In 1978, I initiated the Administration's Solar Domestic Policy Review. This represented the first step towards widespread introduction of renewable energy sources into the Nation's economy. As a result of the Review, I issued the 1979 Solar Message to Congress, the first such message in the Nation's history. The Message outlined the Administration's solar program and established an ambitious national goal for the year 2000 of obtaining 20 percent of this Nation's energy from solar and renewable sources. The thrust of the federal solar program is to help industry develop solar energy sources by emphasizing basic research and development of solar technologies which are not currently economic, such as photovoltaic’s, which generate energy directly from the sun. At the same time, through tax incentives, education, and the Solar Energy and Energy Conservation Bank, the solar program seeks to encourage state and local governments, industry, and our citizens to expand their use of solar and renewable resource technologies currently available.
As a result of these policies and programs, the energy efficiency of the American economy has improved markedly and investments in renewable energy sources have grown significantly.”
President Carter also announced his “Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act,” blocking off billions of barrels of domestic crude oil that still sits in the ground, untapped today.
Part One, Part Three, Part Four
Posted by Lew Waters at 6:05 PM
On July 17, 1981, newly sworn in Republican President Ronald Reagan submitted his National Energy Policy Plan to Congress. In it he stated,
“Our national energy plan should not be a rigid set of production and conservation goals dictated by Government. Our primary objective is simply for our citizens to have enough energy, and it is up to them to decide how much energy that is, and in what form and manner it will reach them. When the free market is permitted to work the way it should, millions of individual choices and judgments will produce the proper balance of supply and demand our economy needs.”
He laid out his policy saying,
“This Administration's actions to end oil price controls and to dismantle the cumbersome regulatory apparatus associated with those controls demonstrate the intent stated in my February 18 economic message to minimize Federal intervention in the marketplace. Reforms in leasing policies and the removal of unnecessary environmental restrictions upon the production, delivery, and use of energy are part of this same effort to reduce bureaucratic burdens on all Americans.
This does not mean that the Federal government is withdrawing from all involvement in energy. It cannot and should not. The Government itself is directly responsible for lands which contain a major share of our resource wealth.”
In his January 26, 1982 State of the Union address, President Reagan said, “By deregulating oil we've come closer to achieving energy independence and helped bring down the cost of gasoline and heating fuel,” setting us on a path of relatively economical and plentiful energy throughout the 1980’s, but still increasingly dependent upon foreign oil as much of our land locked oil sources remained blocked to recovery.
In the February 6, 1985 State of the Union address, President Reagan said,
“Reducing unneeded red tape and regulations, and deregulating the energy, transportation, and financial industries have unleashed new competition, giving consumers more choices, better services, and lower prices. In just one set of grant programs we have reduced 905 pages of regulations to 31. We seek to fully deregulate natural gas to bring on new supplies and bring us closer to energy independence.”
After having been in office 2 years, Republican President George H.W. Bush called for in his January 29, 1991 State of the Union address,
“A comprehensive national energy strategy that calls for energy conservation and efficiency, increased development and greater use of alternative fuels.”
Defeating President Bush in the 1992 election, Democrat President Bill Clinton said of his plan on energy in the February 17, 1993 State of the Union address,
“Our plan includes a tax on energy as the best way to provide us with new revenue to lower the deficit and invest in our people. Moreover, unlike other taxes, this one reduces pollution, increases energy efficiency, and eases our dependence on oil from unstable regions of the world.”
We were paying roughly $1.10 at the pump for a gallon of regular gasoline. By the time he left office in January 2001, we paid $1.45 per gallon on average.
President Clinton briefly called for “new sources of energy” in his February 4, 1997 State of the Union address.
In his January 27, 1998 State of the Union address, President Clinton said,
“I propose $6 billion in tax cuts, in research and development, to encourage innovation, renewable energy, fuel-efficient cars, energy-efficient homes. Every time we have acted to heal our environment, pessimists have told us it would hurt the economy. Well, today our economy is the strongest in a generation, and our environment is the cleanest in a generation. We have always found a way to clean the environment and grow the economy at the same time.”
In the January 19, 1999 State of the Union address, Clinton proposed,
“a new clean air fund to help communities reduce greenhouse and other pollutions, and tax incentives and investment to spur clean energy technologies. And I want to work with members of Congress in both parties to reward companies that take early, voluntary action to reduce greenhouse gases.”
In spite of decades of improvements in pollutants emitted from cars and industry, further efforts were called for by Clinton.
The January 27, 2000 State of the Union address saw a continuation of environmental concern as Clinton said,
“New technologies make it possible to cut harmful emissions and provide even more growth. For example, just last week, automakers unveiled cars that get 70 to 80 miles a gallon--the fruits of a unique research partnership between government and industry. Before you know it, efficient production of biofuels will give us the equivalent of hundreds of miles from a gallon of gas.
To speed innovations in environmental technologies, I propose giving major tax incentives to businesses for the production of clean energy--and to families for buying energy-saving homes and appliances and the next generation of super-efficient cars when they hit the showroom floor. I also call on the auto industry to use available technologies to make all new cars more fuel efficient right away. And on Congress to make more of our clean-energy technologies available to the developing world--creating cleaner growth abroad and new jobs at home.”
Long gone now is the call of previous administrations on increased domestic production of our own oil.
In the February 27, 2001 State of the Union address, newly elected Republican President George W. Bush said,
“many citizens are struggling with the high cost of energy. We have a serious energy problem that demands a national energy policy. The West is confronting a major energy shortage that has resulted in high prices and uncertainty. I've asked federal agencies to work with California officials to help speed construction of new energy sources, and I have direct Vice President Cheney, Commerce Secretary Evans, Energy Secretary Abraham and other senior members in my administration to develop a national energy policy.
Our energy demand outstrips our supply. We can produce more energy at home while protecting our environment, and we must. We can produce more electricity to meet demand, and we must. We can promote alternative energy sources and conservation, and we must. America must become more energy-independent, and we will.”
In the January 29, 2002 State of the Union address, early in the days of the War on Terror, Bush said,
“Good jobs also depend on reliable and affordable energy. This Congress must act to encourage conservation, promote technology, build infrastructure, and it must act to increase energy production at home so America is less dependent on foreign oil.”
As we sat poised to open a second front in the War on Terror in Iraq, in the January 28th, 2003 State of the Union address Bush said,
“Our third goal is to promote energy independence for our country, while dramatically improving the environment. I have sent you a comprehensive energy plan to promote energy efficiency and conservation, to develop cleaner technology, and to produce more energy at home. I have sent you Clear Skies legislation that mandates a 70-percent cut in air pollution from power plants over the next 15 years,”and called upon a Republican led Congress,
“Join me in this important innovation to make our air significantly cleaner, and our country much less dependent on foreign sources of energy.”
Again, in his January 20th, 2004 State of the Union address, President Bush reiterated to Congress,
“Consumers and businesses need reliable supplies of energy to make our economy run - so I urge you to pass legislation to modernize our electricity system, promote conservation, and make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy.”
The average price for a gallon of regular gasoline was now at $1.58.
We see a similar call from President Bush in the February 2nd, 2005 State of the Union address when he said,
“To keep our economy growing, we also need reliable supplies of affordable, environmentally responsible energy. Nearly four years ago, I submitted a comprehensive energy strategy that encourages conservation, alternative sources, a modernized electricity grid, and more production here at home, including safe, clean nuclear energy. My Clear Skies legislation will cut power plant pollution and improve the health of our citizens. And my budget provides strong funding for leading-edge technology — from hydrogen-fueled cars, to clean coal, to renewable sources such as ethanol. Four years of debate is enough — I urge Congress to pass legislation that makes America more secure and less dependent on foreign energy.”
By the time of the January 31st, 2006 State of the Union address, with the average price of a gallon of gasoline up to $2.31, President Bush said,
“Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. And here we have a serious problem. America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world.
The best way to break this addiction is through technology. Since 2001, we have spent nearly $10 billion to develop cleaner, cheaper and more reliable alternative energy sources. And we are on the threshold of incredible advances. So tonight, I announce the Advanced Energy Initiative, a 22 percent increase in clean-energy research at the Department of Energy to push for breakthroughs in two vital areas. To change how we power our homes and offices, we will invest more in zero-emission coal-fired plants, revolutionary solar and wind technologies and clean, safe nuclear energy.”
Part One, Part Two, Part Four
Posted by Lew Waters at 5:59 PM
With Democrats now in control of both Houses of Congress, in the January 23rd, 2007 State of the Union address saw President Bush still calling,
“Extending hope and opportunity depends on a stable supply of energy that keeps America's economy running and America's environment clean. For too long our Nation has been dependent on foreign oil. And this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists - who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments ... raise the price of oil ... and do great harm to our economy.
It is in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply - and the way forward is through technology. We must continue changing the way America generates electric power - by even greater use of clean coal technology ... solar and wind energy ... and clean, safe nuclear power. We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybrid vehicles, and expand the use of clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel. We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol - using everything from wood chips, to grasses, to agricultural wastes.
We have made a lot of progress, thanks to good policies in Washington and the strong response of the market. Now even more dramatic advances are within reach. Tonight, I ask Congress to join me in pursuing a great goal. Let us build on the work we have done and reduce gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent in the next ten years - thereby cutting our total imports by the equivalent of three-quarters of all the oil we now import from the Middle East.
To reach this goal, we must increase the supply of alternative fuels, by setting a mandatory Fuels Standard to require 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels in 2017 - this is nearly five times the current target. At the same time, we need to reform and modernize fuel economy standards for cars the way we did for light trucks - and conserve up to eight and a half billion more gallons of gasoline by 2017.
Achieving these ambitious goals will dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but will not eliminate it. So as we continue to diversify our fuel supply, we must also step up domestic oil production in environmentally sensitive ways. And to further protect America against severe disruptions to our oil supply, I ask Congress to double the current capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
America is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that will enable us to live our lives less dependent on oil. These technologies will help us become better stewards of the environment - and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change.”
The average price of a gallon of regular gasoline was now setting around $2.10, down from $3.10 weeks earlier.
We now have Barack Obama occupying the seat of the Presidency and outlining in his Energy & Environment Policy,
“For decades it has been clear that the way Americans produce and consume energy is not sustainable. Our addiction to foreign oil and fossil fuels puts our economy, our national security and our environment at risk. To take this country in a new direction, the President is working with Congress to pass comprehensive energy and climate legislation to protect our nation from the serious economic and strategic risks associated with our reliance on foreign oil, to create jobs, and to cut down on the carbon pollution that contributes to the destabilizing effects of climate change.
The President has already made great strides toward changing our energy future. The Recovery Act constituted an unprecedented and historic investment in the clean energy economy. Investments in the development of renewable energy and clean technologies will lead to the energy sources of the future. Investments in high speed rail and advanced car batteries will lead to the transportation systems of the future. Investments in a smart electric grid and energy efficient homes, offices, and appliances will reduce our overall energy consumption as a nation. And all of these investments will lead to the industries of the future, help put America back in the lead of the global clean energy economy, and create millions of jobs over time. As the President said, ‘Now is the moment for this generation to embark on a national mission to unleash American innovation and seize control of our own destiny’.”
Glib words, but as the national average for a gallon of regular gasoline approaches $4, we see the current administration financing off-shore exploration of drilling for oil off the shores of Brazil and expressing that we wish to become their best customer of their oil.
At the same time, we see that the current Secretary of Energy, Steve Chu on Fox News Sunday March 20, 2011 and noted for his 2008 statement, “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe,” saying, “The recent spike in gasoline prices following that huge spike in 2007, 2008 is a reminder to Americans that the price of gasoline over the long haul should be expected to go up just because of supply and demand issues.”
It’s been nearly 4 decades since the 1973 Oil Embargo and much of the same rhetoric comes from politicians who seek to lay the blame for this ongoing energy mess on oil companies instead of themselves.
We still have billions and billions of gallons of recoverable crude oil within our own borders that just sits there. We have nearly 4 decades now of calling for more and more money thrown towards “alternative fuels” which apparently remain unperfected, but forced on us just the same.
In spite of several calls by past Presidents, the one thing still not allowed in order to decrease our dependency on foreign oil remains drilling and recovering our own.
From where I sit, it is high time the government either got serious on our energy needs, or got the hell out of the way and allows those who are serious to truly end our dependence on foreign oil by using more of our own, while we spend more decades perfecting these “alternative fuel sources.”
Part One, Part Two, Part Three
Posted by Lew Waters at 5:50 PM
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Background and earlier video at PrisonPlanet
Why call on Obama? Too many abdicated their parental responsibility to the state and since the initial stand-off with Police was over mandated medical treatment, anyone doubt the Mother supports Obamacare?
Won't do any good to call on Obama. He's not a messiah.
Posted by Lew Waters at 8:09 PM
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Remember back in 2006 when Pelosi and her Democratic cabal wrested control of both houses of congress away from the Republicans and later in 2008 when they seized the White House as well? Nancy Pelosi seemed to think elections mattered a lot then.
Winning the House in 2006, Nancy Pelosi said, “Tonight is a great victory for the American people. Today the American people voted for change, and they voted for Democrats to take our country in a new direction. The American people voted to restore integrity and honesty in Washington, D.C., and the Democrats intend to lead the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history.”
We know how well the “honesty and integrity” worked out.
From her snubbing of General Petraeus to closed door sessions on Obamacare, coming out to tell us that in order to find out what was in the bill, we first must pass it, Pelosi and her Democratic Cabal, who declared themselves “Bi-partisan” and “open” wielded their majority with no consideration for the minority party.
In the run-up to passage of the failed stimulus bill and rejecting any call for bi-partisan input, Pelosi said in February 2009, “Washington seems consumed in the process argument of bipartisanship, when the rest of the country says they need this bill.”
Of course, any effort to seek any compromise on Pelosi’s agenda was immediately labeled “obstructionism.” Compromise during her era as Speaker of the House amounted to “do it our way.” Be it rule changes, Obamacare, the stimulus or labeling voters concerned as the Tea Party rose as “Astroturf, Pelosi ruled with an iron fist.
That was then as Democrats seized complete control of the nation and we were being misled “America has come together.” I have yet to understand why America can only “come together” if Democrats control all majorities.
Who can forget Obama’s now famous reply to Republican concerns over the massive stimulus package of “I won?”
Pelosi, thrown out on her rear as House Speaker as Republicans made historic gains in the 2010 elections in the House sings a different tune now that she and her Democratic cabal are back to the minority.
In a recent speech at Tufts University Nancy Pelosi now says,
“To my Republican friends: take back your party. So that it doesn’t matter so much who wins the election, because we have shared values about the education of our children, the growth of our economy, how we defend our country, our security and civil liberties, how we respect our seniors. Because there are so many things at risk right now -- perhaps in another question I'll go into them, if you want. But the fact is that elections shouldn't matter as much as they do...But when it comes to a place where there doesn't seem to be shared values then that can be problematic for the country, as I think you can see right now.”
Just who should the Republicans “take the party back from?” Why do Democrats like Pelosi feel everybody must be “liberal/progressives?” Did she not see the historic losses for her liberal/progressive” views in November 2010?
The audacity of this woman is just astounding.
Posted by Lew Waters at 1:58 AM
Monday, April 11, 2011
Of note in this video, archived by OPD, even during this time, I believe to be prior to World War Two, the streetcars shown, even though accessing more of a diverse area then today's "Loot Rail," had few riders shown in the film.
See more archival video at OPB Streetcar City
Posted by Lew Waters at 6:44 PM
Sunday, April 10, 2011
He bemoans how "security restrictions mean he can't go out for long walks or go to the carwash or the grocery store."
He says, "I just miss - I miss being anonymous."
I couldn't agree more. I miss him being anonymous too. I hope he returns to being anonymous real soon.
It doesn't take much to resign, just take Biden with you.
Posted by Lew Waters at 9:25 PM
Contrary to how conservatives are often portrayed, we do believe in and practice conservation. We just believe it should not be mandated by the government.
Michael Souder, who's 3rd Grade Class sang the tribute to Soldiers a year or so ago has written and recorded a song with his 2nd graders from Tussing Elementary School helping to teach the children to "use it, replace it when you're done" with natural resources and in recognition of the upcoming Earth Day.
Before any take exception, allow me to remind you that we conservatives support and recommend the Boy and Girl Scouts for young people. No youth group teaches conservation and respect of the earth more than they do.
When I was in the Boy Scouts, it was common practice to always leave a campsite cleaner than we found it. We didn't freak out if someone cut down a tree, we used it and planted one or two more to replace it.
Posted by Lew Waters at 8:22 PM
Friday, April 08, 2011
Both sides are announcing no government shutdown as they have reached a budget deal,,,,, finally. All of that fearmongering, hyperbole and hate rhetoric from the Democrats to score political points wasted.
Earlier, New York Democrat and tax cheat Charlie Rangel appeared on Fox News' Bill O'Reilly Show and admitted his party did not pass a budget in the 2010 congressional session, when they had total and complete power in government, because it "was a political hot potato."
Posted by Lew Waters at 8:26 PM
In keeping with the call for more "civility" in discourse, fringe Democrats or union goons, have set up a facebook page calling for people to dump their trash on the lawn at Speaker of the House John Boehner's Washington D.C. house.
In addition to the obvious, aren't these also the same people always crying about others polluting and not keeping communities clean?
Posted by Lew Waters at 9:33 AM
Thursday, April 07, 2011
The union goons, upset over being expected to “pay their fair share” in the current budget crisis.
The protest, led by the greedy SEIU is said to have brought about 500 people to oppose budget reductions called for across the board to offset the current $5 Billion budget gap.
Washington State Patrol officers did not arrest those who refused to leave the capitol last night after being told to, but arrested the 17 today when they tried to force their way past the officers into Governor Gregoire’s office, shouting “let us in” and “we want the governor.”
One of the union goons, Sharon Kitchel-Perdue who was arrested said, “They need to listen to us,” referring to the Democrat led legislature.
The thugs are demanding an “end corporate tax exemptions before cutting state services,” mimicking the “raising taxes is an incentive for the rich to work harder” meme recently heard at a Moveon.org rally held in Vancouver.
With the state capitol in Olympia now on lock-down, The Washington State Labor Council and Washington Federation of State Employees are announcing that Wisconsin state Sen. Spenser Coggs, one of the 14 Wisconsin Fleebagging Democrats that fled the state in a bid to prevent a Democratic vote to take place last month will be a “high-profile guest” to Friday’s planned rally, expected to bring about 5,000 union goons and thugs in to protest “paying their fair share.”
In an email to the Olympian, spokeswoman for the Labor Council Kathy Cummings said, “This is a huge opportunity for our Labor Community and our own state Democrats to hear from one of the legendary figures who stood up to Governor Scott Walker’s initial attempts to ram his union busting bill through the state legislature. You won’t want to miss the reception he will get from all of Labor in Washington state.”
That their juvenile tantrum failed to stop Wisconsin from going ahead with the cost cutting measures and they had to shop for a sympathetic judge to block the legislation passed, is forgotten.
That efforts to stack the Wisconsin Supreme Court have backfired with the discovery of a computer error, negating union sympathizing challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg’s premature declaration of victory with a 40 vote lead, that now gives incumbent conservative state Supreme Court Justice David Prosser a 7,500 vote lead, just shows me that the Wisconsin fleebagger has much to pay heed to in his own state, instead of acting like some sort of false hero to union goons in Washington State.
Union thugs camping out in the Wisconsin capitol caused millions of dollars in damage to the building. No reported damage as of yet in Olympia.
His time would be better spent help to wipe the jubilant smiles off the faces of Moveon.org and People for the American Way who declared in email just today, “we just had a HUGE win” as news was breaking of the computer error that failed to report thousands of votes last evening.
Sorry thugs and goons, but that’s the way the union crumbles.
Posted by Lew Waters at 7:36 PM
Sunday, April 03, 2011
That greedy agency, the Environmental Protection Agency has overstepped their limits of enforcing federal environmental laws to advancing “policies absent congressional action that could cost millions of jobs, hurt American consumers and put U.S. businesses at a competitive disadvantage globally,” as explained by Jack Gerard, president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute last November.
The congressional action undertaken to reign in the out of control EPA is H.R. 910: Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011 introduced by Rep. Frederick Upton (R-MI) and co-sponsored by 95 fellow representatives. The design of the bill is “To amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change, and for other purposes.”
In a more plain laymen’s term, it is to prevent a government agency from sidestepping congress and taking it upon themselves to write the regulations they will enforce against us and businesses still struggling to come out of this ‘Great Recession.’
A related bill in the senate, S. 482 introduced by Sen. James Inhofe (Ok) carries 43 co-sponsors and carries the same intent as does HR 910.
HR 910 has made it through committee, S 482 has not. Needless to say, the Senate remains under the control of the Democrat Party who favor the policies that continue the country mired in deep recession.
The EPA, going along with those that continue to cry industry and man are causing global climate change has been writing regulations to enforce limiting “Green House Gases,” which include such nefarious gases as water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxides, all of which are mostly natural occurring in nature. Carbon dioxide is what you and I exhale every time we breathe.
Addressing CO2 in a recent conference call I was fortunate enough to listen in on, Jane Van Ryan from API said,
“The greenhouse gases in question include carbon dioxide. It has been estimated that as many as 6.1 million stationary forces could come under – and I have to emphasize the word “could” – could come under these regulations, depending on what happens.
That could include big-box stores, that could include farms, it could include, you know, small establishments as well as large establishments. And there are several states who say that they don’t even know how they would be able to handle the permits that would be required, because various companies, various of these stationary sources, would have to have permits to emit greenhouse gases to either continue operating or to expand their businesses. And it’s believed that the impact on the economy could be quite severe.”
The end result will not be much different than what we read in the Wall Street Journal article, We’ve Become a Nation of Takers, Not Makers, addressing the growing problem of greedy public unions and were we read,
“More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined. We have moved decisively from a nation of makers to a nation of takers.”
The difference is, instead of greedy union bosses, its greedy government agencies taking steps that will stifle job growth, raise the cost of business, taxes, fees and yes, even raise the price of the gasoline you and I depend on to freely move around or go to a job for those lucky enough to have a job still.
Also ignored is even the EPA's admission that CO2 emissions have been falling over the last 2 years.
As can be expected, opposition from the leftists who desire subjugation of the American worker to government is fierce and filled with the usual misinformed fear mongering. The ‘Green Chamber of Commerce’ claims, “H.R. 910, the ‘Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011,’ has been dubbed the ‘Asthma Aggravation Act of 2011’ by Pete Altman, a Climate Campaign Director at Natural Resource Defense Council.”
The Wilderness Society claims HR 910 “is premised on bad science and the pleadings of polluters who would rather continue dumping their harmful greenhouse gases into the atmosphere for free, as they have for generations.”
The ‘Natural Resource Defense Counsel’ claims, “Besides blocking clean car standards, H.R. 910 will also worsen oil dependency by preventing EPA from setting similar standards for planes, trains, ships, off-road equipment and industrial uses.” Those “standards” are explained as, “The next round of EPA standards will have similar levels of benefits over the DOT fuel economy program alone. The standards for 2017-2025 have the potential to raise fuel economy to as high as 62 mpg, and save drivers as much as an additional $7,400 over the life of vehicle,” showing a complete disconnect with reality of what the average American enjoys in being able to travel freely and economically as they see fit.
As one who has spent in his entire adult life in the Automotive Industry and being a Washington State Certified Auto Emissions’ Specialist for several years, I have witnessed first-hand the results on such regulations forced upon the Auto Manufacturers and the public as cars were downsized, lightened by the use of more plastic components, components made from petroleum and that give off hydrocarbons as well. Also not considered is how the price of a car as skyrocketed over the years just on the average car, not even taking into consideration the “gas guzzler” tax on more high performance vehicles.
What is claimed that you might potentially save over several years, if you keep one long enough to realize any such savings, is more than offset by the price of the vehicle being driven up due to mandated technology and increased insurance costs due to the cost of repairs or replacement also skyrocketing.
Add to that, EPA will enforce more stringent regulations on facilities that service your vehicle, those airplanes, trains, buses and other modes of transportation that will undoubtedly be passed along to you in form of increased fares and repair bills.
Of course, the big problem there is how many businesses will be driven out of business due to citizens being unable to afford travel or a government mandated vehicle that is dependable which will increase unemployment astronomically and create even more people wholly dependent upon government which itself is so deep in debt it will take generations to climb out of, if we even can.
What you see unfolding before you is a near perfect description of socialism and why it is a failure wherever tried. As was expressed by Sir Winston Churchill, “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
As Kyle Isakower shows us on API’s Energy Tomorrow Blogsite,
“implementation of EPA GHG regulation under the CAA could: Result in employment losses between 475,000 to 1.4 million relative to a baseline without the new regulations, Impact all sectors of the economy including up to an estimated 200,000 manufacturing jobs and Reduce total U.S. GDP by $47 to $141 billion annually.”
We ‘makers’ must begin pushing back against these ‘takers,’ be they greedy public union bosses or over reaching agencies empowered by government.
With that in mind, I fully support and ask you to fully support the American Petroleum Institute, Americans for Prosperity in supporting not only HR 910 and S 482, but the McConnell Amendment “that prevents the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, something it was never designed or intended to do.”
I also urge you to listen to or read the transcript of the recent conference call I was involved in for some very timely and pertinent information on the EPA’s overreach.
Posted by Lew Waters at 1:40 AM
Saturday, April 02, 2011
Friday, April 01, 2011
Transcript provided by the Right Scoop
Thank you for being here because this shows your commitment to your country. This shows your commitment to the principles and values upon which this country was established. And you know some of the things that people continue to ask me, they continue to ask me “well, why won’t you compromise, why won’t you negotiate?”. We’ll let me tell you something. Abraham Lincoln said very succinctly, he said “plant your feet in the right place and then stand firm”, and so I’m gonna be standing firm.
When I was a young Lieutenant and I was going through airborne school, the sergeant black hat said very simply: “If you set the bar low you jump low.” You did not send us up here to set the bar low. You sent us up here with some expectations. You sent us with a mandate. You sent us up here believing that we were here to do the things, to turn around this great ship of state called the United States of America. Because right now, this leaderless, rudderless ship is out in the maelstrom about to get tossed on the rocks.
And I’m sick and tired of hearing everyone talk about this great constitutional, conservative grass roots movement called the Tea Party. I am sick and tired of them trying to blame you, I am sick and tired of them trying to castigate you in a negative manner. No one says anything about Moveon.org; no one says anything about Organizing for America. You are what this country was founded upon and I am glad to be standing her with you.
We are not here to talk about shutting down the government. But if you want to know about shutting down the government, go right over there and talk to Chuck Schumer, go talk to Harry Reid, go down to 1600 Pennsylvania and talk to the President. We’re here to talk about the incredible fiscal irresponsibility.
And I gotta tell you something. Why would I want to sit down and compromise with people who enhanced this problem we have in America with the three years of deficit spending – 1.42 trillion, 1.29 trillion, 1.65 trillion. The debt in the past four years has gone up 5 trillion dollars. Why do I want to listen to people like that. Because I don’t think that they are going to give me any good solutions.
The bottom line is this: we have got to turn this ship around. I am not going to lower my standards, I am not going to do anything but stand upon the values you sent me up her for!
For twenty two years you asked me to do one simple thing. You asked me to always protect your life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. You asked me to guard the great symbols of this country. In November of 2010 you gave me the privilege and honor of to take off a uniform, put on a suit and tie and continue to serve you.
I will continue to protect you. I will continue to protect your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. I will not let you down!
God bless you all, God bless America, and thank you to the tea party.
Posted by Lew Waters at 11:30 PM