When Democrats took the House and Senate in 2006, they pledged to lower gas prices/fix the economy (somehow) and bring the troops home.
Uh, failure on both counts.
The reason for the latter failure is that cooler heads in the party prevailed and they realized the folly of allying themselves with America's enemies. Thank you, Joe Lieberman. Of course, General Petraeus' resounding success in executing President Bush's The Surge kind of took the wind out of the sails of extreme left of The Democrat Party.
On the former, Democrats, allied by a few compliant Ag-state Republicans, created a ridiculous federal program designed to reduce our reliance on foreign oil. The net result, however, has been to burn food (corn) in our gas tanks which has, along with a few other contributing factors, driven up food prices. This is fine for rich, San Francisco Democrats, but kind of sucks for those living in lesser developed countries.
Let's not forget another hoped-for benefit of Congress' command and control tendencies--specifically, that burning ethanol would be better for the environment than gas. True to the law of unintended consequences, the carbon cost of putting additional ethanol in America's gas tanks exceeds the original carbon cost of burning pure, clean gasoline.
For all the climate change fetishists, this colossal disaster (maybe not for the SF dems, but certainly for the growing ranks of the world's starving) should serve as a cautionary tale: "solve" climate change at your own risk.
But that's the problem, isn't it? Those who bring this craptastic legislation into being and those who advocate for it never have to bear the burden of its failure.
If you have tips, questions, comments, suggestions, or requests for subscription only articles, email us at lybberty@gmail.com.
4 comments:
Well put Jake. Well put.
Jake, I'm disappointed. You're overlooking a major accomplishment of the Democrat-led Congress.
Shortly after the elections, the new Democrat-majority House of Reps voted itself a pay raise of over $4000 to their already $170,000+ salaries (not counting kickbacks and lobbyist payoffs). This was, in my view, a fantastic demonstration of Democrat efficiency and focus.
It's funny what people will forget isn't it?
It's really easy for people to tell others to drive less when they live in cities with public transport. Try and tell them that out in the rest of the country that's not viable they tell you to move to a city.
Following is AN OPEN LETTER TO SENATOR OBAMA. You are welcome to
distribute it for the good it may bring. This is an issue that is moving forward in
a stealth mode and unless the American public becomes aware of the seriousness
accompanying it, they will be blind sided in the years following the 2010 "lock in" target date.
= = = = = =
Conway Chester
1682 Langley Ave.
Irvine, CA 92614 - USA
Friday, June 6, 2008
Senator Barack Obama
John C. Kluczynski Federal Office Building
230 South Dearborn St., Suite 3900 (39th floor)
Chicago, Illinois 60604
RE: A campaign issue that could win the presidency
Dear Senator Obama,
In your bid to be President, YOU HAVE SAID NOTHING about the North American Union (SPP.GOV) . Perhaps you are aware that this is a “deal” put into place by President Bush in concert with his close friend and confidant, former president of Mexico , Vicente Fox. It was agreed to with much less enthusiasm by former Canadian prime minister Paul Martin, Jr.
Finalization of this clandestinely undertaken business deal was orally solidified at the Bush ranch in 2005. It was never debated before the legislature or made known to the American citizens. Subsequently, we learned of plans to construct a Super Highway project, in which thousands of privately owned acres of tax payer property will be confiscated (under the cleverly initiated Kelo vs New London Supreme Court ruling - also in 2005) through eminent domain proceedings. Private property is central to the freedom we enjoy as Americans and the North American Union - Trans Texas Corridor “NAFTA Super Highway” deal negates this fundamental and traditional American right to own, retain, safeguard and preserve property that has been in families for, in many cases, generations.
The NAU springs from a process, (quietly - indeed surreptitiously) set in motion by President Bush in 2005, with NO debate or vetting considerations by the legislature thereby completely disenfranchising the American citizens from having any knowledge of or say in the matter. It is tantamount to a virtual coup in surrendering of U.S. sovereignty to a trilateral entity that, in the form of a North American Union, could emulate the European Union that now dictates to the citizens of 27 European states.
Senator Obama, you need to bring a bright light on this matter and alert the American people of your position on preserving U.S. Sovereignty. The N.A.U. is an issue that, if actively denounced in forthcoming campaign messages, could win you the presidency. Your opponents have never brought up this vital issue - - meanwhile the Bush administration is proceeding as thought this privately crafted scheme is a “done deal”.
The American people and I will be watching, listening and waiting to see how you stand on this critical matter.
Sincerely,
Conway Chester
P.S. Congressman Ron Paul is a co-sponsor of House Concurrent Resolution 40 expressing Congressional disapproval of the NAFTA Superhighway and any moves toward a North American Union. So far, Senator Obama, you are NOT listed among the 48 who are COSPONSORS of this bill. Why not? Advocating could win the election for you! Congressman Paul has also introduced H.R. 5191, which would prohibit the use of federal funds to carry out these highway projects. This is added legislation you could back, Senator, to show your unabated support for the sovereignty, independence and freedom of America.
cc: The Honorable Ron Paul, Congressman
cc: The Honorable Virgil Goode, Jr., U.S. Representative
Post a Comment