|
Thursday September 25, 2008 16:46 |
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, September 24, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Energy: In a stunning defeat, congressional Democrats were forced to allow the quarter-century-old offshore drilling ban to expire. But the fight has only begun, with the struggle now shifting to state legislatures.
Funny how the Democrat-controlled Congress can't get the things it wants enacted, can't even get a single appropriations bill passed, yet minority Republicans this week succeeded in ending a supposedly sacrosanct ban on oil and gas offshore drilling that dates back to the early 1980s.
It was an unexpectedly powerful knockdown of Democrats and their enviro-extremist allies, but they are not yet counted out.
GOP Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina noted in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., the possibility that Democrats would "use environmental lawsuits to block exploration until they can reinstate these energy bans after the November elections." DeMint warned Reid that it "would be a major mistake."
So with the ban ending, what are the next moves toward reducing America's dependence on oil from hostile regimes in places such as the Middle East, Russia and leftist Venezuela?
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Friday August 29, 2008 20:46 |
|
It's hard to imagine George Bush saying something as insulting as "can I drill your brain?" to a protester and getting away with it. But that's what the apparently thin-skinned Nancy Pelosi did two days ago.
The protesters were chanting "Drill Here, Drill Now" when Pelosi asked if she could drill their brains. She went on to say that the protesters were the "handmaidens of Big Oil".
I'd like to ask Ms. Pelosi a few questions. Why does she think one would only support "drilling here and drilling now" if they had ties to "big oil"? Why doesn't she believe that having ties to America is enough motivation for most people to support drilling here and drilling now? Why does she think Americans don't want to do what's best for America unless they have ties to the oil industry?
We get 60% of our oil - mostly from countries that would like to wipe us off the face of the earth. Even Democrats agree that this isn't a good idea. Even Democrats say we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Yet they stubbornly reject any and every viable alternative. Sure, they support solar power and wind power and hydrogen power and agra power, but none of these alternatives are ready for prime time. No one opposes those alternatives (not yet anyway). But they won't be viable for decades. (Democrats will no doubt oppose them as soon as they become viable). The only two power alternatives that are ready for the here and now - oil and nuclear - are both rejected by Democrats.
(If you have any idea why they reject every viable form of energy, why don't you share it with us here)
They have a zillion excuses why each of these viable alternatives is unacceptable, but the bottom line is always the same. They reject any energy alternative that would actually work - here and now. It's almost as if they want to see America slip further into decline. Of course they say they don't, but if one were to judge them by their actions, instead of their words, it would be hard to come to any other conclusion. |
|
Read more...
|
|
Thursday July 17, 2008 22:01 |
|
On Monday July 14th (three days ago), President Bush lifted the Executive ban on offshore oil drilling in the U.S. (see article). And by today, three days later the price of oil has plummeted from $145 a barrel to $130 a barrel. That's a 10% drop in three days. Democrats have spent most of the summer saying "we can't drill our way out of this mess." They've said if we start drilling here now for oil that it won't affect energy prices for 10 years or more. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Wednesday July 09, 2008 23:55 |
|
I left a gathering of friends tonight on the Upper West Side of Manhattan and headed for my car which was parked in the garage underneath. When I pulled out onto the street there must have been a hundred people buzzing around with cell phone cameras blocking my exit from the garage. As I got closer they moved aside and let me through. It was then that I saw they were watching a movie scene being filmed across the street. I called a friend who loves movies thinking she would enjoy seeing this. She said she would so I headed down to pick her up. We got back about 15 minutes later only to find the scene had already been shot and the fawning crowds had dispersed. No problem... it was still fun to watch the crew tearing everything down that made up the scene that took less than 15 minutes to shoot. (Yes, this all has a political point). |
|
Read more...
|
|
Saturday July 05, 2008 18:17 |
|

Katie Clark drives 100 miles a day to care for Evelyn and Bill Harman in Union, Mich. Democrats have told us in recent years that no party has a monopoly on religion - and they prove it by showing that they support government programs that give money to the poor. They claim Republicans' religious inclinations are misplaced with their emphasis on moral concerns like same-sex marriage and abortion. They say that their support for these government programs proves that they are more concerned for the poor and therefore at least as religious as Republicans. Well, apparently their policies are hurting the poor more than helping. A New York Times article published today, reveals how the Democratic prohibition against domestic oil drilling is hurting the poor and elderly the most. SOUTH HAVEN, Mich. — Early last month, Jeanne Fair, 62, got her first hot meals delivered to her home in this lake town in the sparsely populated southwestern part of the state. Then after two deliveries the meals stopped because gas prices had made the delivery too expensive. “They called and said I was outside of the delivery area,” said Mrs. Fair, who is home bound and has not been able to use her left arm since a stroke in 1997. Faced with soaring gasoline prices, agencies around the country that provide services to the elderly say they are having to cut back on programs like Meals on Wheels, transportation assistance and home care, especially in rural areas that depend on volunteers who provide their own gas. In a recent survey by the National Association of Area Agencies on Aging, more than half said they had already cut back on programs because of gas costs, and 90 percent said they expected to make cuts in the 2009 fiscal year. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |