1Declaration: Free Markets, Free People, Free Minds

Today's quote of the day is actually two of my favorite quote's about this countries governmental system, a constitutional republic not a democracy.

Our country's founders cherished liberty, not democracy.
--Ron Paul

Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.
--H.L. Mencken

This is a curious set of quote's since we hear democracy used a lot today. Whether if it was spreading democracy to the Middle East by force of arms or politicians plea for greater democracy in the American form of government, the term democracy is thrown around dangerously by politicians and the media.

To understand this quote by Republican House member Ron Paul is true it would be pertinent to know what democracy is. Democracy is in the simplest sense mob rule. It is sometimes known as "mobocracy." Democracy is a form of government where the majority rules and the minority is neglected and is hence very dangerous for those who disagree with the majority. Democracy allows those in the majority to push their will upon those who have different opinions on governmental power, religious preferences, or moral compass. This is the most dangerous aspect of a democracy. A democracy is no better or less tyranical than dictatorships. Wikipedia has a pretty good run through of the history of "mobocracies."

A constional republic according to Wikipedia is:

A constitutional republic is a state where the head of state and other officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutiona law that limits the government's power over citizens. In a constitutional republic, executive, legislative, and judicial powers are seperated into distinct branches and the will of the majority of the population is tempered by protections for individual so that no individual or group has absolute power. The fact that a constitution exists that limits the government's power makes the state constitutional. That the head(s) of state and other officials are chosen by election, rather than inheriting their positions, and that their decisions are subject to judicial review makes a state republican.

I believe it is quite clear now why the founding fathers cherished Liberty, not democracy. H.L. Mencken could not have said it more clearly that "Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." Democracy assumes that the right will be achieved by the will of the majority no matter how stupid or ignorant the individuals who make up the majority are. The US made this assumption when they pushed for Palestinian free and fair elections that resulted in the election of Hamas officials.

Perhaps I can make this clearer. Choose any issue in your mind and for my sake I will take something trivial to prove my point. I want to create a law that says all people between the ages of 18-25 are not permitted to wear baseball hats from dawn until dusk. I go an campaign to the people and society starts to take my view for whatever reason. Now it is election time and my movement passes with a clear majority (60%-40%). Now people between the ages of 18-25 are not permitted to wear hats duruing the daylight hours, something no doubt that most of you would consider unreasonable. However because the majority has spoken it has become law. This is a clear example of the downfall of democracy.

While the previous example may seem trivial the position can be taken in many different directions including outlawing different religions, personal choices, or a different moral compass. This was the idea our founding fathers were most concerned with. They realized that the will of the majority was just as tyrannical as the monarch they had split with or the dictators of the world today. Remember that some of the worlds greatest tyrants have come forth due to democratic practices including Hitler, Chavez, and the Presidents of Iran.

Liberty and Democracy are not one in the same. Democracy seeks the will of the majority while liberty seeks the protection of the majority. The founding fathers understood this quite clearly. I am unsure if today's leaders remember this lesson.

Today we are coming to a point where the majority are pushing their will upon the minority. Every member of society must be protected from these whims no matter how rich or poor, weak or strong, or any other measure of difference.

Today's politicians, generally those from the left but also from the right, are pushing policies that seek to abrogate the rights of minorities because of the will of the majority. Liberals push for higher taxes on the minority who have had great success to benefit those who have made poor decisions. Conservatives push for the continual denial of personal rights they deem morally wrong. These are just few of many examples of the danger of those seekinig more democracy. The abrogation of minorities rights due to the will of the majority who seek greater benefits or in their view a society of greater morality. I will conclude with one final quote that brings much light to this disucssion by Alexander Tytler author of Decline and Fall of the Athenian Republic.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until voters discover...they can vote themselves [benefits] from the public treasury. From that moment, the majority always votes for candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.

Ron Paul, Alexander Tytler, and H.L. Mecnken understand the danger that greater democracy brings. Too bad politicians today do not realize the same or perhaps they do. You make the call.

Our country's founders cherished liberty, not democracy.
--Ron Paul

Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.
--H.L. Mencken

Check out what Libertarian Presidential nominee Bob Barr has to say about our energy policy and the energy policy of other candidates.

The United Nations is an overpayed and overhyped international organization that has failed to take action on many of the world's problems.

On this day in 1945 the U.S. and other countries signed the United Nations Charter. Unfortunately, “the UN has been an enormous disappointment,” says Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr. “The U.S. should push to roll back the UN’s functions and slash America’s financial contribution.”

The United Nations since its inception has not sought to fulfill a role in resolving international problems. Instead it has tried to invade the sovereignty of individual countries and is continually trying to usurp governmental authority.

The UN does not uphold the principles of the United States. For example, the United Nations has placed tyrants on the boards of Human Right's Abuse, which has made the effectiveness of the organization a complete joke.

Expectations for the UN initially were high: before the signing, President Harry S. Truman said “At no time in history has there been a more important Conference than this one.” Obviously, “President Truman had no sense of history,” notes Barr. “America’s constitutional convention always had a much better claim to that honor.”

Read the whole article here: Bob Barr Says U.S. Must Cut United Nations Role and Budget — Bob Barr 2008

Posted using ShareThis

This quote is hard for liberals, socialists, and statists to understand for some reason. "Every living human being is an end in himself..." What does that mean?

This is another way of saying that every individual is liable for their own successes and failures in life. It is their decisions that will influence the direction of their life in either a positive or negative direction. Personal decisions will dictate the course of every individuals life.

Liberals, socialists, and statists will tell you that your course in life is dictated almost entirely by the outside influences of the greedy, the corrupt, and the tie that holds both of those together, the rich. They argue that it is the rich in society that holds people down. But the question is how did these people become rich. Many were not born into privelged homes, or had money given to them by a friend or family member. The rich in society have worked hard and made proper decisions that have landed themselves in the position they are in.

Is it societies fault that a teenager becomes pregnant or is it a result of poor personal decision? Is it societies fault that people succomb to drug and alcohol abuse or is it poor decision? Is it societies doing that makes some individuals rich and others poor? The answer to all of this is a resounding no!

Relying on the others for your success will always lead to disappointment and a maintenance of your current level in life. Government programs in the same sense cannot bring wealth or success. Wealth and success are an achievement of personal sacrifice, sound choices, and realization that achievement of individuals is the result of personal responsibility.

In other words, your destiny is fully in your control!

Just as life is an end in itself, so every living human being is an end in himself, not the means to the ends or the welfare of others - and, therefore, man must live for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself.--Ayn Rand

Libertarian Presidential Nominee Bob Barr appeared on the Glenn Beck Show on June 25, 2008. Here is a excerpt from the interview.

“What I am doing, and what I intend to do though the remaining months of this campaign, is raise the issues that neither of the two major party candidates are raising. Questions and issues that go to the fundamental nature of why government has gotten so big, why its spending so much money, why its invading our privacy, why we are seeing court decisions like [Kennedy v. Louisana]. These are issues that are important to the American people, not the issues being discussed by Senator McCain and Senator Obama.” - Bob Barr

Barr now becoming a regular guest

The Fairness Doctrine was an act of Congress that made sure that when one view point was expressed on the radio that the radio station gave opposite and equal air time to the issue as well in an effort to be "fair." The Fairness Doctrine was repealed by Ronald Regan and since then talk radio has flourished but much to liberals dismay it has been overwhelmingly conservative, about 91% right leaning.

From the Media Research Center:

The Issue:
Once again, liberal leaders are pushing the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” to silence conservative leaders like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Mark Levin. Their goal is clear -- silence conservative speech over the radio airwaves. Read MRC’s Special Report: Unmasking The Fairness Doctrine (.pdf)

Help Declare Radio Independence Day!

The Media Research Center is leading the effort to expose and defeat these efforts. The Broadcaster Freedom Act (H.R. 2905) -- a bill in Congress that would ban permanently the so-called “Fairness Doctrine.” -- is stalled in Congress. We want to rally 100,000 signers by July 4th so we can press every member of Congress to go on record on this vital First Amendment issue.

NOTE: The “Broadcaster Freedom Act” is currently stuck in committee. Sign this petition urging Congress to bring this bill to a vote by July 4th! -- "Radio Independence Day"

The Petition States

I am signing this petition to urge members of Congress to bring the Broadcaster Freedom Act (HR. 2905) to a floor vote.

In addition, I am joining with other Americans who are standing against any and all efforts to censor, limit, or restrain the right of conservatives to participate freely in the marketplace of ideas through the “Fairness Doctrine” or similar legislative and bureaucratic efforts. I also call on the media to provide fair and balanced reporting on this issue. Our nation was built upon free and open discourse.

Global warming has become highly politicized in recent years with the likes of global warming alarmist Al Gore and environmentalists. This politicization has hampered American efforts to use readily available and economically viable energy solutions to reduce the price of energy now. The politicization has likewise hampered American ability to decrease our dependence on foreign energy sources and force us to continue paying countries who despise us and support terrorism.

If one man gets his way energy prices will go higher when he attempts to sue fossil fuel companies for "high crimes against humanity and nature." This man is James Hansen who spoke 20 years ago to Congress about the dangers of global warming (see the PDF transcript of the testimony here). He is speaking before Congress again testifying that large fossil fuel entities like Exxon and Peabody Energy have spread knowingly misleading information about anthropogenic global warming.

Despite significant evidence to the contrary Dr. Hansen, head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, is calling for members of Congress who have doubts about the truth of global warming or a shaky history on the support for global warming legislation to be unseated.

Like most environmentalists, Dr Hansen is hoping to stop our use of America's most abundant energy source, coal. He also advocates supporting the "creation of a huge grid of low-loss electric power lines buried under ground and spread across America, in order to give wind and solar power a chance of competing."

His energy plan would most likely be funded by the public and cost us billions dollars not to mention the economic devastation that would occur if he gets his way and gets America's next president to support the Kyoto Protocol.

Dr. Hansen like other environmentalists notably Al Gore say that global warming is without a doubt true and nonbelievers of this phenomenon should be ostracized for their beliefs despite continuing studies against anthropogenic induced global warming.

Click here to read the full article on Guardian News.

NASA scientists have linked increased solar activity to the heating of earth's atmosphere. This is not really new news, only a confirmation that the global warming phenomenon Al Gore, global warming alarmist, speaks about is much more questionable and debatable than he would like you to know.

"It has become clear in recent years that coronal heating is a highly dynamic process, but inconsistencies between observations and theoretical models have been a major source of heartburn. We have now discovered two possible solutions to this dilemma: energy is released impulsively with the right mix of particle acceleration and direct heating, or energy is released gradually very close to the solar surface," says James Klimchuk, an astrophysicist at the Goddard Space Flight Center's Solar Physics Laboratory in Greenbelt, Md. Klimchuk will present his team's findings on May 29 at the American Geophysical Union conference in Ft. Lauderdale, Fl.

X-rays and ultraviolet radiation from the solar corona affect Earth and its atmosphere. For satellites, this can be a real drag--literally. As Earth's atmosphere gets hotter, it expands and becomes denser at high altitudes. When this happens, satellites experience more drag, which changes their orbits. Accurately predicting this "space weather" gives satellite operators more time to respond to or avert problems that could potentially cause interruptions and outages.

To read the whole article click here.

This story was brought to my attention by Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Have you ever heard the saying, "Well they got off on a technicality?" Then the person might add on something to the extent of "well put them in jail anyway," because the evidence exists that they are guilty. Other similar instances include the crime being so heinous that people say forget the trial and just lock them away. Thomas Jefferson and the founders realized this problem from their own experiences in imperial England where people were arrested and convicted without due process.

The founders found this problem to be of such importance that half of the Bill of Rights (5 of the first 10 Amendments) dealt with this problem. Here is a list of the 1st 10 Amendments and links to their reading.

• Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression
• Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms
• Amendment 3 - Quartering of Soldiers
• Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure
• Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings
• Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses
• Amendment 7 - Trial by Jury in Civil Cases
• Amendment 8 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment
• Amendment 9 - Construction of Constitution
• Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People

The administration of justice is one of the primary roles of government along with the insurance of rights to the individual to life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. While some people may get away with crimes they did commit, these "technicalities" presented in the Constitution ensure the protection of individuals from the corruption and whims of government. It is more dangerous that an innocent person could go to jail, lose their freedoms, and right to life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness than a guilty man going free.

This concept is not hard to understand. A government that is not limited in the pursuit of justice is a government that can take life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness away without question and without mode for recourse.

If we cannot ensure the the rights of the innocent than let the guilty go free for the opposite is most vile!

It is more dangerous that even a guilty person should be punished without the forms of law than that he should escape. --Thomas Jefferson

Check out this interview of Libertarian Presidential Nominee speaking out on the erosion of personal liberties in contemporary American society and a lighthearted bit about his eye catching mustache. You can visit the site here.



To find out more on Bob Barr visit BobBarr2008.com.

A major topic of many politicians in contemporary America is the need for welfare and wealth redistribution. I urge you, especially those who believe in these programs, to consider the thoughts of the principle writer of the ideals of the Constitution.

To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical.--Thomas Jefferson

Libertarian Presidential Nominee Bob Barr is the only real nominee for change from the status quo. John McCain and Barack Obama favor politics as usual in contemporary American politics. The two party system has hindered American choice and enlarged the size of the federal government in an attempt to keep others out of the picture. Bob Barr favors elimination of the IRS, replacement of the tax system with the Fair Tax, reduction in federal spending, balancing the budget, and personal choice. Barr's campaign platform is the Constitution of the United States.

Libertarian presidential nominee Bob Barr offers actual change. He has not only renounced the two-party system, the Patriot Act and the Defense of Marriage Act, he’s worked with the libertarian party, the ACLU and the NRA to undo decades of damage to our civil liberties.

There is much to be said for someone so entrenched in the system to not only admit wrong, but to take initiative in correcting it. This is not something we can say for John McCain or [Barack] Obama, both of whom voted to fund the war and extend the Patriot Act.

Unlike Obama or McCain, who Barr rightly calls a vote for business-as-usual, he is committed to addressing our dependence on foreign oil, the falling value of our dollar and the $58 trillion the two-party system would have our grandchildren pay off. Barr is the only major contender willing to do this by addressing the cause of these problems — not the pretend causes. Barr offers real hope and actual change by unifying us as Americans, as citizens with unalienable rights and a servant government.

The sooner we embrace this vision, the sooner it will be achieved.

Read the article here in the Norwich Bulletin.

The man who attempts to live for others is a dependent. He is a parasite in motive and makes parasites of those he serves. The relationship produces nothing but mutual corruption. It is impossible in concept. The nearest approach to it in reality -- the man who lives to serve others -- is the slave. If physical slavery is repulsive, how much more repulsive is the concept of servility of the spirit. The conquered slave has a vestige of honor. He has the merit of having resisted and of considering his condition evil. But the man who enslaves himself voluntarily in the name of love is the basest of creatures. He degrades the dignity of man, and he degrades the conception of love. But that is the essence of altruism. --Ayn Rand

Enslavement to the Crown

American history has a rich heritage of the enslavement of people of all races, cultures, and genders. The first slavery was servitude to the crown of a tyrannical government. Read the Declaration of Independence from start to finish and analyze the document. You may be surprised if you have never read it before in this context. The Declaration of Independence was a Declaration from Enslavement from big and oppressive government to allow all people to chose their own individual path of success free from the tyranny government brings.

Today most Americans do not realize the enslavement capabilities of a big government that was supposed to be a beneficial dictatorship. This was the first story of slavery in American history. Americans like Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, George Washington, and the like fought to overthrow the enslavement of men to the oppressive British crown. Because of their resistance to the enslavement of man to a tyrannical and oppressive government we have had the opportunity to devise our freedom today.

Black Slavery

The second enslavement is where men and women were forced to work without compensation or mercy. This was the forced servitude of blacks. This time is an embarrassment in the history of the United States and violated the founding principles of our country in which "all me are created equal" and of individual liberty. The end of formal forced servitude was not the end of slavery.

Blacks were forced to like separate from society at the hands of a government that said forced separation and discrimination was fine. The leading from of this enslavement was from liberals and progressives. Blacks were still enslaved but this time it was a slave to law that prevented equality. Blacks and other groups have fought for and achieved a climate where equality is the norm today. Denying that forms of racism and prejudice still exist is idiocy, but by in large, minority groups in the United States have the freedom to choose their own path and live in freedom.

Dependency

Today's enslavement is perhaps the worst in American history. Today we have politicians such as Barak Obama, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, John McCain, and many others who have enslaved themselves to the idea of dependency on government to increase their power. These people enslave the masses with fantastic oratory and rhetoric about change, a 'Third Way,' or hope.

Breaking this idea down. "The man who attempts to live for others is a dependent. He is a parasite in motive and makes parasites of those he serves. The relationship produces nothing but mutual corruption." Barak Obama clearly lives for others preaching for equality. Barak Obama's equality is not equality in treatment or under the law but instead equality of wealth and possessions. He has become a parasite feeding off of the masses to acquire power and votes whom he enslaves to lives of dependency and fear.

In turn the people become parasites on societies enslaved to government handouts at the hands of those who work hard and make coherent choices in their lives. These people voluntarily enslave themselves to lives of dependency: mentally, financially, and spiritually. Take an objective look at any Barak "The Messiah" Obama rally with people fainting in his presence and believing every word of his hope and change by creating a United States of Dependency and Oppression. Barak Obama (or any other dependency loving politician) and his faithful masses have become corrupt. The live on the idea that government and society owe them their living. Living for others "is impossible in concept. The nearest approach to it in reality -- the man who lives to serve others -- is the slave."

Ayn Rand concluded, "if physical slavery is repulsive, how much more repulsive is the concept of servility of the spirit. The conquered slave has a vestige of honor. He has the merit of having resisted and of considering his condition evil. But the man who enslaves himself voluntarily in the name of love is the basest of creatures. He degrades the dignity of man, and he degrades the conception of love. But that is the essence of altruism." Barak Obama (or any other politician preaching dependency) has enslaved himself and consequentially enslaved the masses that follow him. The masses have not resisted but have succumbed to ideas of servility Obama preaches. They have not resisted and have not considered that they are willingly relinquishing their freedoms. These people are degrade their dignity and degrade American principles of indivuduality, small government, and freedom of choice.

Billions of people around the world live in governments where they have not freedoms and are willing to fight for their freedom. Iraqi's are fighting for their freedoms after decades of tyranny and in some cases acts of benevolence to buy their acquiescence. Afghani's are doing the same. Citizens of Venezuela are becoming increasingly disgusted with the control-all dictator Hugo Chavez. Millions of people in the countries in the Middle East North Africa region have offered their citizens many of the same benefits that the Democrats and some Republicans, I should just say liberals, are preaching today to solidify their power.

Forced enslavement of man is no doubt evil but those who are forced into servitude have at least resisted. Those who enslave themselves to the whims of politicians have given their mind, spirit, and soul to those who seek only more power. Those who have enslaved themselves to the rhetoric of politicians along with those who enslave them are the clearest definition of a parasite. Each entity leeches off the other. Both become increasingly corrupt as they feed off of the benefits of the other and of society at large.

You make the call, "If physical slavery is repulsive, how much more repulsive is the concept of servility of the spirit?"

As of 11:20 AM CDT over 1,000,000 American citizens have signed the petition to Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less.

We have trillions of barrels of oil in the United States, more than any other country in the world. We have over 3 times the oil than Saudi Arabia. Make your declaration to Congress to lift regulations of drilling and refining.

The petition is picking up steam. Americans are fed up with high oil and gas prices. We need to do everything possible to lower energy prices and this is the first step. Make your declaration!

Newt Gingrich founder of AmericanSolutions.com has started a bi-partisan grassroots movement to show Congress that Americans support a sound energy policy that lifts regulations on drilling in the United States, which could become the premier supplier of oil in the world. So far almost 950,000 Americans have signed the Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less petition. What are you waiting for?

America has the largest oil resources in the world with over 10 billion barrels of oil in ANWR, billions more off of America's coastline, and nearly 1 trillion barrels of oil in oil shale in Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado that is currently under Congressional regulations that prohibit drilling.



Sign Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less and make your declaration!

Have you ever heard the old saying that actions speak louder than words. Clearly Al Gore has not. Former Vice President, Presidential Nominee, and global warming alarmist Al Gore clearly has not, either that or he is really just a hypocrite or nonbeliever of global warming.

“A man’s commitment to his beliefs is best measured by what he does behind the closed doors of his own home,” said Drew Johnson, President of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. “Al Gore is a hypocrite and a fraud when it comes to his commitment to the environment, judging by his home energy consumption.”

In the past year, Gore’s home burned through 213,210 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity, enough to power 232 average American households for a month.

Al Gore as is well known made an award winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, and went on to win a Nobel Peace Price on what many climatologists and meteorologists will tell you is soft science. A New Zealand court stated multiple major falsehoods that were portrayed in the movie and urged Al Gore to give back his Emmy for Best Documentary. Had Al Gore created a drama it would have been fine but a documentary indicates that the information presented is factual.

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research uncovered that Gore’s Nashville home guzzled 20 times more electricity than the average American household.

After the Tennessee Center for Policy Research exposed Gore’s massive home energy use, the former Vice President scurried to make his home more energy-efficient. Despite adding solar panels, installing a geothermal system, replacing existing light bulbs with more efficient models, and overhauling the home’s windows and ductwork, Gore now consumes more electricity than before the “green” overhaul.

Since taking steps to make his home more environmentally-friendly last June, Gore devours an average of 17,768 kWh per month –1,638 kWh more energy per month than before the renovations – at a cost of $16,533. By comparison, the average American household consumes 11,040 kWh in an entire year, according to the Energy Information Administration.

So what is Al Gore's motives? Are they really an attempt to change the world and stop a phenomenon that is highly debated among academics? I would contend that Al Gore is motivated by profit and power. Al Gore has become a god among environmentalists and liberals. Liberals throughout history have created situations of overhyped danger in an attempt to garner power from Hitler to JFK. Now I am not comparing Gore to Hitler. That would be pure ignorance. I am comparing tactics used by both men to garner more power by creating fear among the masses in an attempt to garner power and stature.

Gore's other motive: Money! "Gore saw his personal wealth increase by an estimated $100 million thanks largely to speaking fees and investments related to global warming hysteria." That's right Al Gore is getting rich off of soft science and fear mongering.

Now I am a free market guy and clearly some people want to waste their money to give him a nice house and a private jet so I am fine with that, but stop calling this guy a saint or savior of the world. He is not. Al Gore is a hypocrite and elitist at best if he does believe what he is saying. At worst though Al Gore is a nonbeliever garnering political power and wealth. Either way, Al Gore is hindering the United States from expanding and utilizing our own energy resources in the name of global warming, a soft science.

To finish reading the article by the Tennessee Center for Policy Reasearch click here.

I have heard numerous times in the past several days that if the US were to start drilling now that the gas would come down only 1.8 cents per gallon. These politicians usually Democrats are then quick to bring up that we have only 2% of the worlds known reserves. Well they are only partially right. We have only 2% of the worlds reserves that are currently tapped or can be tapped.

The rest of the truth is that in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming we have oil shale that is fully extractable and economically viable to do so. In this oil shale we have contained by conservative estimates 3 times the oil that Saudi Arabia has 21% of the world's known oil reserves and will last for another 80 years at the current rate. Somehow this math does not add up. So what's the deal? Simple, Democrats are not about bringing down prices now with practical means that can be developed. Democrats are trying to change our lives.

Development of the oil shale has come profitable at $95 a barrel but new techniques that Shell has successfully developed and tested allows for oil shale extraction around $25 a barrel. Simply stated: We have no excuse not to open up drilling around the United States as part of a complete energy plan to bring down oil prices right now and work toward energy independence.

We can't drill now though because it remains illegal to do so.

Yet, buried in a Department of Interior appropriations bill passed in December 2007 was an amendment that prevented establishing regulations for leasing land to drill for oil shale. The House passed that amendment, proposed by Rep. Mark Udall of Colorado, on June 27, 2007, by a vote of 219-215.

On May 15, 2008 in a 15-14 vote, the Senate Appropriations Committee rejected an amendment by Sen. Wayne Allard (R-CO) to allow oil shale drilling and overturn the Udall moratorium.

To finish reading the article.

Sign the Petition: Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less.

Sources

(1) RAND. Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment. 2005.
(2) AmericanSolutions.com

A recent Rasmussen Reports poll indicates that only 47% of Americans favor not nationalizing oil. 29% favor nationalization and about a quarter of Americans are not sure. Nationalization of industry is a dangerous practice of totalitarian governments, governments like Soviet Russia, Communist China, and Socialist Venezuela. This to say the least is a scary thought. By a similar margin more Americans trust private industry as opposed to government intervention to lower oil prices.

Hugo Chavez in Venezuela has nationalized oil production. What have been the effect? Simply, declining production and wells falling into disrepair. This is in short the effect of nationalizing an industry. Another example comes from a teacher I had for US History in 8th grade. She visited Russia many times in the 1990's after the fall of the USSR. She was visiting a family and looking at some family portraits. She noticed as the children grew older the nails holding the frames grew larger as well. She asked the family why this was. The family replied that in Soviet Russia businesses were told they had to produce a certain weight of nails and then they could call it a day. In effort to speed up the day they produced fewer larger nails while decreasing the quality and usefulness of the product.

Nationalizing has an effect of reducing efficiency and quality of the product because the government is not motivated by profit. The evidence for this is on display in Venezuela where nationalizing the industry has seen declining oil production. In a free market economy where oil can be bought and sold, nationalizing oil would increase the price because of the reduction in quantity that would result. Nationalization of the oil industry is not the answer.

Nationalization may cut out the profits companies seek but in return the government will become a monopoly. Without competition in the market, the demand for higher efficiency in the drilling and refining process will decline and prices will rise. The government will not be forced to compete for survivability, which in all cases has resulted in higher prices.

Finish reading the story here.

When discussing politics the usual sides are conservative and liberal, or Democrat and Republican. Most people consider politics to be linear ranging from totalitarian government (fascism, communism, or more generally statism) on the far left, to liberalism, then moderates, conservatives, and anarchists. Most tend to forget the latter because a traditional form of government and politics does not exist.

When will the world learn that a million men are of no importance compared with one man?
--Henry David Thoreau

Political Diamond

I contend that the political sides are not linear but rather a diamond. The bottom corner represents statism, the two side corners liberalism and conservatism, and the top corner libertarian with the center area being a centrist or moderate with slight tendencies towards one of the extremes or corners.

Statism as previously discussed represents big government at its most extreme. A government where economic and personal liberties are eroded for the benefit of the community (fascism, communism, and totalitarianism fit into this category). Liberalism and conservatism are a bit hypocritical and confused. Both political leanings have big government and small government leanings. Liberals generally seek a maximization of personal liberties (not legislating morality such as marriage, drug use, abortion, and etc.) while neglecting economic liberties favoring higher taxes and welfare programs to act as a safety net on society. Conservatives are the opposite favoring economic liberties while imposing morality legislation on personal liberties. Conservatives favor lower taxes, a strong military, a free market, and oppose social welfare programs.

Libertarians on the other hand favor minimal government intrusion into people's lives economically or personally. We view it as unethical to forcefully take money from one social groups pockets and put it in another in the name of social justice. To make it simple, libertarians are generally pro-choice everything, strongly favor the free market, favor a laissez faire form of government, and view government as a necessary evil with a few specific functions. These functions are in the most general terms policies that protect individual liberties and choice, a common defense, and the administration of justice.

Why am I a Libertarian?

Simple, life is a precious gift! Life is too short and every individual should be free to live their life in whatever manner they choose as long as they do not engage in activities that would take another persons right to live their life in the way they choose. In essence, the forced imposition of your beliefs is immoral and unethical.

But what about the "less fortunate" (a phrase I despise)? "Less fortunate" is a phrase invented by socialists and liberals for the imposition of social welfare programs. "Less fortunate" is a term that implies that those who are well off have gotten lucky and those who are not well off have not been fortunate to have luck on their side. Off of my soapbox now.

As an individual you are free to engage in any activity you choose, whether positive or negative, so long as you do not impede another persons ability to live their life in their own manner. With that liberty you are also responsible for your own position in life, your failures, and your successes. This means that your position in life are brought upon by your own decisions in life. As with the force imposition of morality, the forced collection of money for the purposes of social welfare programs is unethical and immoral because the actions of one group impedes another groups right to live their life including the donation of goods and money to those who they chose to support.

The power to tax is the power to destroy.
--John Marshall

Surely government must institute laws to protect traditional values, right? Wrong. Each person should have the chance to develop their own personality and their own moral compass. Not everyone has the same religious, moral, or other beliefs. To be fair government must remain neutral on policies towards the legislation of morality.

So why am I a Libertarian? Life is too short and precious to remove individual choice and freedom whether through social welfare schemes that forcefully take from one and give to another, the legislation of morality that do not affect another's "life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness," or economic limitations.

Conclusions

Government is a necessary evil and is the worst failure of civilized man to quote both Thomas Jefferson and H.L. Mencken.

Government's throughout history have largely proven to be failures where power becomes absolute and individual freedoms have been crushed. From the monarchies of Europe, to the liberal fascism that Hitler and Mussolini espoused, on to the Communists who preached for the collective, and governments who legislate religion onto the masses.

Government has proven through history to be a tool to enslave man mentally, economically, morally, and religiously. The founding fathers of the United States recognized these facts and created a country where individual and economic liberty should be cherished. Today though liberals espouse views that forcefully take money and livelihood from one groups labor to give it to another who have done little to nothing and conservatives who seek to legislate "traditional values" while neglecting other people's beliefs and morals; government has failed and been oppressive.

As P.J. O'Rourke has clearly stated, "A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them." This is why I am a Libertarian.

Liberals want the government to be your Mommy. Conservatives want government to be your Daddy. Libertarians want it to treat you like an adult.
--Andre Marrou

The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it.
--John Hay (1872)

Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty.
--Thomas Jefferson

We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
--Winston Churchill

If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.
--Ludwig von Mises

I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have.
--Thomas Jefferson

Politicians never accuse you of 'greed' for wanting other people's money --- only for wanting to keep your own money.
--Joseph Sobran

Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom.
--Albert Einstein

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.
--Thomas Jefferson

Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom.
--Friedrich Hayek

If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
--Samuel Adams

A little government involvement is just as dangerous as a lot, because the first leads inevitably to the second.
--Harry Browne

It is sobering to reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence.
--Charles A. Beard

The small minority of adults who are unable rather than unwilling to work, have to rely on voluntary charity; misfortune is not a claim to slave labor; there is no such thing as the right to consume, control, and destroy those without whom one would be unable to survive.
--Ayn Rand

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive.
--Thomas Jefferson

There can be no such thing, in law or in morality, as actions forbidden to an individual, but permitted to a mob.
--Ayn Rand

Having federal officials, whether judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose a new definition of marriage on the people is an act of social engineering profoundly hostile to liberty.
--Ron Paul

The threat posed by humans to the natural environment is nothing compared to the threat to humans posed by global environmental policy.
--Fred L. Smith (1992)

In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place.
--Mohandas Gandhi

I can say - not as a patriotic bromide, but with full knowledge of the necessary metaphysical, epistemological, ethical, political, and aesthetic roots - that the United States of America is the greatest, the noblest and, in its original founding principles, the only moral country in the history of the world.
--Ayn Rand

Government is actually the worst failure of civilized man. There has never been a really good one, and even those that are most tolerable are arbitrary, cruel, grasping, and unintelligent. --H.L. Mencken


[Political] offices are as acceptable here as elsewhere, and whenever a man cast a longing eye on them, a rottenness begins in his conduct.
--Thomas Jefferson

The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.
--Patrick Henry

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.
--Thomas Jefferson

If you have been voting for politicians who promise to give you goodies at someone else's expense, then you have no right to complain when they take your money and give it to someone else, including themselves.
--Thomas Sowell (1992)

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
--Thomas Jefferson

The true danger is when Liberty is nibbled away, for expedients.
--Edmund Burke (1899)

When they kept you out it was because you were black, when they let you in, it is because you are black. That's progress?
--Marilyn French

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
--Thomas Jefferson

If it is now the belief of my fellow men, who call themselves the public, that their good requires victims, then I say: The public good be damned, I will have no part of it!
--Ayn Rand

Honest people are never touchy about the matter of being trusted.
--Ayn Rand

Force Always Attracts Men of Low Morality.
--Albert Einstein

None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.
--Goethe

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.
--Noam Chomsky

The power to tax is the power to destroy.
--John Marshall

I wanted to change the world. But I have found that the only thing one can be sure of changing is oneself.
--Aldous Huxley

You wanna get rid of drug crime in this country? Fine, let's just get rid of all the drug laws.
--Ron Paul

When the same man, or set of men, holds the sword and the purse, there is an end of liberty.
--George Mason

There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.
--Mark Twain

If it is one thing I despise it is government intervention in my life. Government tells me I must give a portion of my income for social programs. They tell me I cannot take the money I earn to save for retirement on my own free will, instead I have to support a bankrupted system that Chile eliminated within 5 years of its inception. Now they are trying to tell me I have to get health care or pay for someone else to get health care. Where in the Constitution does it state that the federal government has the ability to control these decisions in my life?

Republican House Member Ted Poe from Texas has brought out his Constitution and asks Speaker Pelosi where in the Constitution it says that the federal government has the authority to make us use a certain type of light bulb, the compact fluorescent (CFL). They don't!



Where will it stop? If you have not read the Constitution in a long time, try reading it. Take special note of the 10th Amendment, which delegates any authority not specifically granted the federal government to the states. Tell me where it says the federal government can tell me what type of light bulb I can use.

Bring back the Constitution!

Energy has become one of the most divisive issues on Capital Hill today as Americans are pleading for a solutions to the high gas prices that are dragging down the US and global economy. Democrats and Republicans cannot seem to agree on an appropriate course of action. Democrats have been duped by environmentalists claiming global warming will kill us all or the caribou in Alaska or some other species will be devastated by drilling. Republicans seem to totally neglect the need for research into other alternative sources of energy claiming drilling will solve all our problems.

Could it be that both sides are right? Without a doubt.

The Democrats

Democrats are correct about continuing the development of other sources of energy such as wind, solar, geothermal, bio-fuels, and the like. This has nothing to do with the threat for global warming. Instead the argument should be made and is being made in most cases that alternative energy development will help decline our dependency on foreign oil and more generally oil and natural gas. Our dependency on oil as a primary fuel source is a national security threat and has helped fund some of the same extremists our country is fighting against, a completely inefficient concept. We must increase our diversification of energy sources. As any investor knows, putting all your investments into one area can lead to complete devastation.

In similar measure Democrats are correct in their assertion that we need to remove the $18 billion in tax subsidies that has been given to energy companies like Exxon Mobil. The fate of these companies is not at stake as can be seen by the large profits taken in by the companies.

Overall these points made by the Democrats are beneficial towards lowering energy cost in the long term. Their plan however lacks any immediate impact as many of the alternative energy sources mentioned are not yet economically viable nor can they yet produce large sums of energy. Nothing in the Democrats plan will help cut out the speculation on oil prices.

The Republicans

Republicans hold the view that drilling will solve all of our problems. This is a bit watered down but for the most part gets the point across. Drilling and refining are necessary functions now that need to be expanded until another economically efficient solution comes forward for mass energy production. Announcing the lifting of regulations on drilling will help secure more supply in the future and drive down speculation in the marketplace.

Republicans are also right that the windfall profits tax touted by the Democrats will have no effect on gas prices. This test has already been tested before and its results were devastating. Domestic production of oil and gas decreased by an average of 6% and increased our dependence on foreign sources of oil by around 15%.

Overall the Republican solution acts to increase supplies today but does little to nothing for the long term to diversify our energy portfolio. With a lack of diversification we will to continue to fund the dictators and terrorists in the countries we are currently fighting justly on unjustly.

The Solution

The Democrats and Republicans cannot seem to get things done but the solution is right before them. If they would end the partisanship and begin to work towards an economically and politically viable agreement that coupled both long and short term strategies our energy problem would have a solution and both side would be satisfied with the results.

First thing to tackle will be the near term solution. Lift regulations on drilling and the building of refineries. This will help tackle speculation and help solidify the future supply of oil. Lift the current $18 billion worth of tax subsidies on oil companies unless they agree to invest in the creation of alternative energy sources such as wind, solar, geothermal, and etc. To help further solidify oil supplies, the US should invest the the building of coal to oil plants. Both of these are both short and mid-term solutions.

Second we need to address the mid-term to long-term solutions to increase our diversification in energy resources. First we need to start a mass conversion to nuclear and clean coal energies. Nuclear is a readily available, economically viable, and environmentally friendly option that both Italy and France are investing quickly in. If we really want to reduce our dependency on oil in an environmentally friendly way nuclear is the best option.

The other mid to long term solution is increasing our use of coal. Coal has been in the past and can be a very dirty energy source. New technologies are available that can reduce carbon emissions to near 0% and utilize nearly 70% of coals energy source through a process involving carbon sequestration and the conversion of hydrogen laden emissions into hydrogen fuel cells. The US is the Saudi Arabia of coal. We should use this natural resource to our advantage and with todays technologies it can be used in an environmentally friendly and efficient manner.

Other energy sources are available such as wind and solar and can be constructed but they are more expensive and less reliable that both the nuclear and coal options. None the less, if areas such as in West Texas and Oklahoma can be used for wind generated energy this is a good way to increase our energy diversification. This method also helps soothe environmentalists qualms. bio-fuels are yet another option. These are all sources of energy that both Democrats and Republicans can embrace.

Finally long-term solutions towards energy independence are needed. This is a more research oriented phase that Democrats are offering such as clean energy. Some of these sources are viable now like solar and wind but are still expensive and with further research and development can become an economically viable and viable energy source. Research into other energies such as hydrogen fuel cells should increase. These long-term solutions in research will help solidify our future because oil and gas are quickly running out.

Conclusion

The solution offered unilaterally by Democrats or Republicans are incomplete. Democrats lack the short range solutions and would increase the prices and decrease the output of oil and gas through windfall profit taxes or other taxes like the Climate Security Act. Republicans lack the longterm solutions that the Democrats are recommending and are offering subsidies to oil companies that are not needed.

If Democrats and Republicans would work together they would see that their goals are the same in increasing our energy independence, bringing down energy prices, and increasing our energy diversification in the short, mid and long terms.

By working with both sides, our energy independence can be secured and sources of clean energy can be developed to reduce pollutants into the air that can cause health problems. End the partisanship and start working towards a viable energy solution that embraces that positive aspects of both sides and negates the negative aspects.

Sources

(1) "Dumb or Ill-Informed," by Walter Williams, Townhall, 4 June 2008.

Tonight Libertarian leaning Republican Ron Paul of Texas will officially end his campaign for the Republican nomination in what is really just a formality this evening. Reports indicate that Ron Paul will not endorse Republican nominee John McCain and will work towards getting Libertarian leaning candidates elected instead. Ron Paul will not seek election as an independent or third party candidate.

Ron Paul appeared on CNN this morning. He had this to say about Libertarian nominee Bob Barr.

John Roberts: Congressman, what do you think of Bob Barr? Does he faithfully represent the values of the Libertarian Party?

Ron Paul: I think so. It doesn’t mean that you can look at his voting record like you look at mine and say there was never any infraction. That doesn’t mean that he can’t represent these values. He’s saying the things he should be saying. He’s joined the Libertarian Party and he presents these views and he talks our language. So I do really believe that he can have a very positive effect in this campaign and let the people know that limited government is a very, very important message and that people will have a chance. That gives everybody a choice in the matter.

Exxon Mobil has just announced that they will be getting out of the retail gas service. Oil prices have become too high to continue this operation as profit margins continue to decline. So much for the argument of liberals that profits are too high. Exxon has stated they will begin to sell of company owned gas stations to other retailers around the country. This is surprising since Exxon is the world's largest gas distributor.

This is clear evidence, since these companies as all privately owned companies seek to make a profit, that pressure and interrogations the oil and gas companies that have come under on Capital Hill is nothing but political pandering to the masses. Their hand in the oil crisis is minimal at best but better stated negligible.

As stated by large oil and gas companies numerous times in Congressional hearings, their average profit on a gallon of gas is only 5-6 cents per gallon. As prices of oil continue to increase the profit margin declines and consequentially the economic viability of this area of business.

Stop the rhetoric about "big oil" Congress and vote to Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less. Write your representatives and let them know.

I would like to take a moment to offer my prayers and thoughts to the victims of the devastating flooding in Iowa. Towns have been destroyed and lives ruined. You are in my thoughts and prayers.

As an Eagle Scout I would also like to give my thoughts and prayers to the 4 scouts who have died while at a summer camp in Iowa. This is a tremendous loss to the scouting community and I can only imagine the grief that their troops and families must be going through. A place of fun and challenge has turned into a place of tragedy. The camp will be forever changed and this moment will forever be marked in the minds of fellow Scouters.

My prayers are with you all. God Bless!

American Solutions started a petition about 3 weeks ago to let the Congress know that we want action now to start bringing down oil prices. The original goal was to collect 100,000 names to submit. That number was quickly achieved so the goal was set higher. Every goal has been met and passed.

The petition I speak of is to Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less. This petition recognizes the fact that alternative energies still have a ways to go in development before they can fuel our way of life. Right now we need to open up drilling immediately to bring down speculation and bring up supply in the years to come. The impact will have both short term and long term implications.



Take a moment, it takes only 30 seconds to let your voice be heard. Sign to Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less today. This is only the first step to letting your representatives know. If you really believe what this petition stands for send your elected representative an email today and let them know of the problems you are facing. Let them know you want them to vote to life regulations on drilling. The Chinese can drill closer to our coast than we can. Let them know to life regulations on refining. We have not increased our refining capacity in over 2 decades. Let them know if they do not vote in favor of the American people you will vote in favor of a representative who does.

Take action and make your declaration!

Popular Ohio Governor Ted Strickland, who some were considering one of Obama's top choices for Democratic Vice Presidential Candidate has publicly taken himself out of the running for the position. This did not seem to be the compulsary "I am not interested in the job" that you hear from every politician mentioned. The tone of his remarks seemed finalized.

If true this is bad news for Democrats who seek to take the important swing state of Ohio in November's Presidential election. With McCain showing strong in Florida, Ohio will be that much more important for Obama to win to have a chance in the upcoming election.

With the conservative base still not satisfied with moderate John McCain, who continues to part from conservative positions on energy policy, immigration, 1st Amendment rights, and the like, this is great news for the McCain campaign who recognize the importance of this state. If John McCain loses Ohio chances are slim McCain will take office in January.

With controversial pick Eric Holder in his VP vetting team, Obama may be in trouble this fall. Eric Holder was the Attorney General under Bill Clinton who pushed for the pardon of Marc Rich. Dick Morris has written an article about this problem.

If ever there was a person who did not deserve a presidential pardon, it’s Marc Rich, the fugitive billionaire who renounced his US citizenship and moved to Switzerland to avoid prosecution for racketeering, wire fraud, 51 counts of tax fraud, evading $48 million in taxes, and engaging in illegal trades with Iran in violation of the US embargo following the 1979-80 hostage crisis.

The War on Drugs has cost Americans billions of dollars since its inception in the 1970's, yet drug use remains high, perhaps higher, drugs keep getting into the country, and no signs of success have come to fruition.

Former supporter of the War on Drugs Bob Barr, Libertarian Presidential Nominee and former Georgia Congressman, has written an article in the Huffington Post. Here are a few excerpts from the story.

For more than three decades, the Libertarian Party and small “l” libertarians have done their part to prove to America that liberty is the answer to most of the problems that we face today. Over the past several years, I was one of the many people influenced by this small party.

Whether through the free market or by simply allowing families to make their own decisions regarding the education of their children, libertarians have taught us that liberty does truly work.

In stark contrast, when government attempts to solve our societal problems, it tends to create even more of them, often increasing the size and depth of the original problem. A perfect example of this is the federal War on Drugs.

Today, I can reflect on my efforts [as a federal prosecutor and HOR member] and see no progress in stopping the widespread use of drugs. I’ll even argue that America’s drug problem is larger today than it was when Richard Nixon first coined the phrase, “War on Drugs,” in 1972.

Bob Barr offers other solutions to the problem based upon free-market principles.

While it is clear the War on Drugs has been a failure, it is not enough to simply acknowledge that reality. We need to look for solutions that deal with the drug problem without costly and intrusive government agencies, and instead allow for private industry and organizations to put forward solutions that address the real problems.

One such solution was presented to me recently by a libertarian friend and supporter, Glenn Jacobs.

Glenn is a very unique guy with a very unique job. To say Glenn is a “big guy” or “intimidating” is an understatement. He gives people nightmares… literally.

Each week Glenn, who stands nearly seven feet tall, walks into a wrestling ring under the stage name “Kane” to beat other large men for sheer entertainment purposes.

[…]

It was speculated that Chris had murdered his family and committed suicide in a steroid or “roid” rage. While it is unclear how much of a role drugs played in Benoit’s actions, and whether mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) may also have been a contributing factor, it was clear the WWE had some serious problems within its organization.

In the wake of the tragedy, the head of the WWE, Vince McMahon, and its other leaders looked internally to recognize these problems and address them. Although in the two years before Benoit’s death, dozens of wrestlers had been suspended, gone to rehab, or been dismissed under the WWE’s recently adopted “Wellness Program,” the WWE strengthened its drug policy further, re-emphasizing that its policy wasn’t merely a document, but the internal laws of the company that would be enforced.

[…]

While there may be some employees of the organization who may not like random drug tests or being thrown on a treadmill for an EKG, they have the choice of finding a new employer.

That’s the beauty of this libertarian solution. It does not take government intervention or our tax dollars. It also does not force anyone to do anything, as it only requires voluntary action and decisions.

To read the whole article click here.

The governments War on Drugs has failed like all government programs. A change is needed and government is not the solution. Let your representatives know! Make your declaration!

12 term Democratic Congressman Paul Kanjorski has admitted to the Democratic Party purposefully make false promises to get elected and retake the Congress in the 2006 midterm elections. He stated that Democrats purposely told Americans that if elected they would end the War in Iraq to capture votes.

Kanjorski went on to say that any "good student of government would know better. But you know, the temptation to want to win back the Congress, made us stretch the facts." This is not news to most conservatives and libertarians.

This confession clearly demonstrates the Democrats desire to capture power at any length. Where will it stop? If members of the liberal Democratic Party are willing to lie about ending the war to garner power what makes you think they will uphold their promises to the American people? What makes you think that the liberals who promise generous benefits are doing so for the benefit of the American people as opposed to solidifying their hold on power?



Leaders throughout history have promised great benefits like today's Democratic Party to solidify their power and silence opposition forces. Where will they stop?

Usually political cartoons appear as still images in news papers to relay some sort of political problem through humor. Not so with modern technology and the wonder that is YouTube. This is a unique lead up to my article coming up in the next week about the problems of socialized/nationalized health care. Check out this Glenn Beck video.

Partisanship in Washington D.C. is removing any chance we have of lower gas price. Alternative energy solutions are far off, tax increases will have the opposite effect of intentions, and regulations prohibiting drilling and making the building of refineries nearly impossible. Environmental groups have more representation than the average American today. For more reading please visit A Government of Special Interests, by Special Interests and for Special Interests. Special interests are dividing Washington and prohibiting real solutions from getting done.

For a complete energy solution that would utilize the positive aspects of Republican and Democratic plans, institute long, mid-range, and short term plans, and would decrease our dependence on oil visit Energy Partisanship: How to Resolve the Problem.

How can you make a difference? Let your voice be heard. First thing to do is sign the Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less Petition. This petition is a real solution to the energy problem designed to push Congress to vote for less regulation on drilling and refining to increase supplies and drive down speculation to decrease the prices at the pump. Numbers make a difference, so join the over 476,000 Americans from all political affiliations and all demographics and sign the petition today.

Step 2: Let your representatives know that the partisanship must end and regulations that drive up the price of energy need to be removed. Let them know that they will not have your vote in the next election without their support of decreasing federal regulation prohibiting drilling off the coast of Florida, in ANWR, and other places around the country. Let them know to lift regulation prohibiting the building of refineries. Let them know you have had enough with the pointing of fingers towards big oil and CEO's!

Let them know you support a nuclear power infrastructure and clean coal energy to decrease our dependence on foreign oil!

Make your declaration!

Republican Senators have finally taken a stand where the interest of the American public lies. Former Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and presumptive nominee Barack Obama have been pressing for a tax on oil company profits they consider obscene.

Republicans have blocked a measure in the Senate that would have increased taxes on oil company profits as determined by a Profit Reasonableness Board.

The Democrats' energy package also would have:

— Maee oil and gas price gouging a federal crime, with stiff penalties of up to $5 million during a presidentially declared energy emergency.

— Authorized the Justice Department to bring charges of price fixing against countries that belong to the OPEC oil cartel.

— Required traders to put up more collateral in the energy futures markets to curb speculation.

Windfall profit taxes would have decreased funds available for exploration and drilling for oil companies and led to a further reduction of energy production thereby driving up prices. Former President Jimmy Carter instituted a similar measure in 1980 which decreased our domestic oil production by up to 6% and increased our dependence on foreign oil by around 15%.

Democrats need to get with the program and realize that federal regulation on drilling and refining that has prohibited increases in supply is responsible for the increase in prices. A tax on energy profits will have detrimental impacts on oil companies that will be forced to bring down costs in the form of decreased oil exploration, job cuts, and increases in product price. The bill that was stopped today by a vote of 51-43.

Take some time today to email your representative to let them know that this proposal is against the best interests of the American people and will have detrimental impacts to our economy.

If the government can decide how many profits a company can make, what is next? Will they decide what is a 'reasonable' temperature in your home is? Will they decide how much money is just too much money for you to make? What is next? Where will it stop?

To read the entire article by Fox News click here.