Publicado: 04-25-2011 10:16 PM
George Stephanopoulos And Michele Bachmann 'Settle' The Obama Birth Certificate Issue
Hey everybody, did you hear the news?
The whole Obama Birther conspiracy has been resolved!
But the issue reached a new level of resolution on Good Morning America today, when George Stephanopoulos brandished Obama's Certificate Of Live Birth (which, it should be noted, isn't enough to satisfy crazy people) at Michele Bachmann, to which the congresswoman replied, "Well, then that should settle it."
The whole interview sounds just like Frost/Nixon -- if the only thing at stake were getting a politician to barely demonstrate the minimum amount of rational thought possible.
TRANSCRIPT, via ABC News:
Stephanopoulos: Last night you were on Fox News suggesting the president should come forward with his birth certificate as well --
Bachmann: Well, what I have said about that is, I was asked a question about that and Republicans are constantly asked to vouch for the authenticity of the birth certificate. The only one who can is the clerk of court in the county where someone is born and that's where people should go. Don't ask Republicans, go ask the clerk of court.
Stephanopoulos: Well, actually one of your supporters in the state of Iowa has put forth a bill that would require presidential candidates to file their birth certificate with their candidacy, do you support that?
Bachmann: Well, Governor Jan Brewer just vetoed that bill in Arizona because she felt that that was a bridge too far, that it wouldn't be up to the authenticators in each state to do that, that that would be a federal issue. There is a federal piece of legislation that hasn't gone anywhere that would also require that candidates put forward their birth certificate. I have no problem giving my birth certificate, it wouldn't bother me at all. I've got one, its authenticated, take it.
[Bachmann was referring to H.R. 1503 which would have required presidential campaign committees to file "a copy of the candidate's birth certificate." Iowa Senate bill 368, which was introduced by Bachmann supporter Kent Sorenson, contained similar language, saying a candidate should file "a copy of the candidate's birth certificate certified by the appropriate official in the candidate's state of birth."]
Stephanopoulos: Well, but so does the president. According to the bill 'a candidate for president or vice president shall attach to and file with the affidavit a copy of the candidate's birth certificate certified by the appropriate official in the candidate's state of birth.'
Bachmann: That's right.
Stephanopoulos: Well I have the president's certificate right here. It's certified, it's got a certification number. It's got the registrar of the state signed. It's got a seal on it. And it says 'this copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding.'
Bachmann: Well, then that should settle it.
Stephanopoulos: So it's over?
Bachmann: That's what should settle it. I take the president at his word and I think- again I would have no problem and apparently the president wouldn't either. Introduce that, we're done. Move on.
Stephanopoulos: Well this has been introduced. So this story is over?
Bachmann: Well as long as someone introduces it I guess it's over.
Stephanopoulos: It's right there.
Bachmann: Yeah, there you go. Because that is not the main issue facing the United States right now.
The end result of this exchange will be
the restoration of a level of reason to the political discourse that birthers will probably become angry at Michele Bachmann now. Of course, just a few days ago Donald Trump, confronted by Stephanopoulos on the same subject, told the ABC host that he had been "co-opted" by the Obama White House's "minions." So by the transitive theory of minion-based co-opting, Michele Bachmann has now been co-opted by the White House through Stephanopoulos.
Naturally, those who insist the "certificate of live birth" is not sufficient evidence of the simple fact that Obama was born in Hawaii will besiege everyone involved in today's interview with emails.
Last week we learned that similar restrictions in place prevent third parties from obtaining Mitt Romney's certificate of live..., and the former governor's campaign team won't accommodate requests for its release, either. The key difference, of course? Nobody wants to make a disingenuous claim against Romney's citizenship status.
Publicado: 04-25-2011 10:17 PM
Bloomberg: Stop the birther talk
Washington (CNN) - Republicans will suffer electorally if they continue to fan the flames of the so-called "birther" debate instead of focusing on the economy, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Sunday.
"I think the Republicans are making a terrible mistake in making this a big issue," Bloomberg, an independent, said on "Fox News Sunday." "We have the deficit. We have the economy. Those are the things that the public cares about."
"If the Republican Party doesn't start addressing that, they will lose and they deserve to," he added.
Even though he called Donald Trump, who has become a champion of the birther movement, a "friend" and "New York icon," Bloomberg wouldn't say whether or not he takes Trump's presidential flirtations seriously.
"Look, anybody can run for president if you're 35 and an American citizen and born here," Bloomberg said, before adding that President Barack Obama was born in the United States too.
Publicado: 04-25-2011 10:18 PM
San Francisco (CNN) – We all know that San Francisco's an overwhelmingly Democratic leaning city. And if you are a Democratic president running for re-election, the city's also a pretty good place to fund raise, and that's just what President Barack Obama's doing Wednesday night and Thursday morning.
The president headlines two fundraisers Wednesday night. The first is a dinner for approximately 200 people at a private residence and the second is being held at the Nob Hill Masonic Center. National Football League hall of famer Jerry Rice, a former wide receiver with the San Francisco 49ers, is scheduled to speak at the second event, which is expected to have approximately 2,500 people in attendance.
Thursday morning Obama headlines a breakfast at the St. Regis hotel, with around 200 people invited. A source with knowledge of the events says the gatherings will "include a broad range of the President's supporters with tickets starting at $25 and ranging to the legal maximum limit of $35,800."
All money raised is expected to go to the Obama Victory Fund, which is split between the president's re-election campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
In the 2008 election cycle San Francisco was the source of $46.4 million in federal contributions, with 82 percent going to Democratic candidates, party committees and Democratic leaning organizations, according to FEC data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
The president heads to San Francisco after holding a town hall earlier in the day at Facebook headquarters in Palo Alto, California. The president is highlighting his proposals to reduce the nation's deficit at a trio of town halls this week. The first was held Tuesday in northern Virginia, with the final town hall scheduled for Reno, Nevada Thursday.
The president also headlines two fundraisers in Los Angeles on Thursday. The first is a 60-person dinner at the Sony Pictures lot, with the second at a restaurant in Brentwood. In the 2008 cycle, Los Angeles County was the source of $150.4 million in political contributions.
The president announced on April 4 that he was setting up his re-election campaign. Last week he personally kicked off his fundraising drive by headlining three events in his hometown of Chicago. Next week Obama's first round of fundraising ends with a gathering in New York City. Obama shattered all records by raising nearly $750 million in his bid for the White House in 2008.
Besides being a smart place for Democratic candidates to raise money, the Golden state's also generally a safe spot for Democrats in presidential contests. Obama topped fellow Sen. John McCain by a 61 to 37 percent margin to win California's 55 electoral votes in the 2008 election. George H.W. Bush's 1988 victory in the state was the last time a Republican presidential candidate carried California.
Publicado: 04-25-2011 10:18 PM
Prominente legislador de EEUU, acusado de poseer drogas
East Haven, Connecticut, EE.UU. -- Un prominente legislador de Rhode Island que a principios de año criticó al congreso de su estado evocando imágenes de indocumentados fumando marihuana afronta cargos de narcotráfico en Connecticut.
El líder de la minoría republicana en la Cámara de Representantes de Rhode Island, Robert Watson, fue detenido el viernes en un retén policial y acusado de posesión de marihuana y otros artículos relacionados al consumo de narcóticos, dijo la Policía de East Haven, Connecticut.
Las autoridades también acusaron a Watson de conducir bajo la influencia de una sustancia controlada.
Según el informe policial, las autoridades encontraron una bolsa con marihuana y una pipa en la bolsa del pantalón de Watson, quien fue puesto en libertad tras el pago de una fianza de 500 dólares.
En una declaración emitida el lunes, Watson admitió que la Policía descubrió "rastros" de marihuana pero rechazó que el legislador estuviera drogado mientras conducía.
Watson recibió una andanada de críticas en febrero después de que dijera que las prioridades de los legisladores de estado estaba bien "para quien sea un guatemalteco gay al que guste apostar y fumar marihuana".
Publicado: 04-25-2011 10:48 PM
Jan Brewer: Birther Issue Leading Country 'Down A Path Of Destruction'
Phoenix -- Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer says the so-called "birther" issue is a potentially destructive issue for the country.
Brewer was interviewed on CNN on Monday about her decision a week ago to veto an Arizona bill that would have required President Barack Obama and other presidential candidates to prove their natural-born citizenship.
Brewer reiterated her veto explanation that the bill was poorly drafted. She also said she believes there's no question that it was directed at Obama though it's clear he was born in Hawaii.
She told CNN interviewer John King that the birther issue is leading the nation "down a path of destruction."
Brewer spokesman Matt Benson did not immediate respond to requests by The Associated Press for elaboration on that remark.
Publicado: 04-27-2011 12:43 PM
KEN SALAZAR, ENEMY #1 OF AMERICAN WORKERS
By Michelle Malkin On March 23, 2011 In Daily Mailer,FrontPage
After two years of practicing unrepentant contempt for science, jobs, law and truth, why should Interior Secretary Ken Salazar’s words mean anything anymore? While President Obama promotes offshore drilling overseas thousands of miles away in Brazil, Salazar now promises to revitalize America’s oil and gas industry. It’s like Jack “Dr. Death” Kevorkian promoting himself as a lifesaving CPR specialist.
This week, Salazar announced that the administration has just approved the first deepwater oil and gas exploration plan since last spring’s BP/Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Mind you: This is not a granting of permits, but a green light for Shell Offshore to seek drilling permits for three new exploratory wells off the Louisiana coast. Shell first submitted and received approval for its original exploration plan in 1985 — 26 red tape-wrapped years ago.
Salazar’s make-believe resurrection of American offshore and onshore drilling began a few weeks ago, when the Interior Department Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement issued a deepwater drilling permit to Noble Energy for a well at the Santiago project about 70 miles off the Louisiana coast. But as Louisiana political analyst and blogger Scott McKay pointed out, “This isn’t a permit for a new project. The permit issued to Noble was for a bypass of an obstruction in a well they’d already drilled before the Deepwater Horizon accident. It took 314 days to get that well back online with this administration.”
Nevertheless, Obama oil czar Michael Bromwich claimed credit for the decision and insisted the project be treated as a new well. So this is how Democrats win the future: crushing industries with one hand while patting themselves on the back for saving them.
The measly Noble Energy permit approval came months after the Obama administration purportedly “lifted” its junk science-based drilling moratorium — and only after federal courts repeatedly spanked Salazar and the White House for their “determined disregard” of judicial orders and “increasingly inexcusable” action on stalled deepwater drilling projects.
More than a month ago, U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman ordered the Obama administration to decide within a month whether to grant a set of five permits for deepwater drilling projects in the Gulf of Mexico. Feldman wrote that the foot-dragging administration’s “time delays at issue here are unreasonable” and told the feds to act in an “expeditious” manner to “restore normalcy to the Gulf region and repair the public’s faith in the administrative process.”
The Obama administration’s response? Last week, just under the wire on the judicial time limit, the White House won a stay from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Delay, baby, delay.
Unsurprisingly, the man who misled the public about scientists’ support for his overreaching moratorium now faces more charges of data doctoring. Louisiana GOP Sen. David Vitter called out Salazar and Bromwich for publicly low-balling drilling application figures. While the pair informed Congress that the administration has received fewer than 50 shallow water permits and that only six to seven deepwater permits are pending, the Obama Justice Department asserted in legal filings that “there are 270 shallow water permit applications pending, and 52 deepwater permit applications pending.” Which is it?
Jim Adams, president and CEO of the Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA), further skewered Salazar’s book-cooking on the permit-orium: “There were 32 deepwater drilling operations already permitted when the president imposed his moratorium last year. Interior Secretary Salazar is merely allowing existing permit holders to resume their operations.”
OMSA reports that there are more than 100 deepwater development plans that have yet to be cleared to even become eligible for a permit. Salazar is “treating Gulf workers like peasants, tossing us work crumb by crumb and expecting us to be grateful,” Adams said. “We’re tired of fighting for scraps. We want to get back to work — all of us, not just a handful of crews.”
At least 13,000 jobs have been lost, according to Louisiana State University professor Joseph Mason’s latest estimates. Isn’t it high past time to send Salazar and his misery-inducing eco-radicals packing? How about exporting them to Brazil?
VERY SOON WE WILL BE PAYING OVER $8 A GALLON OF GAS THANKS TO OBAMA'S JIHAD AGAINST THE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY.
Obama’s policy is working . . . to raise energy costs.
A Man-Made Energy Crisis
By Victor Davis Hanson
Gas is well over $4 a gallon in most places in California — and soaring elsewhere as well. But are such high energy prices good or bad?
That should be a stu...pid question. Yet it is not, when the Obama administration has stopped new domestic offshore oil exploration in many American waters, curbed oil leases in the West, and keeps oil-rich areas of Alaska exempt from drilling. Last week, President Obama went to Brazil and declared of that country’s new offshore finds: “With the new oil finds off Brazil, President [Dilma] Rousseff has said that Brazil wants to be a major supplier of new stable sources of energy, and I’ve told her that the United States wants to be a major customer, which would be a win-win for both our countries.”
Consider the logic of the president’s Orwellian declaration: The United States in the last two years has restricted oil exploration of the sort Brazil is now rushing to embrace. We have run up more than $4 trillion in consecutive budget deficits during the Obama administration and are near federal insolvency. Therefore, the United States should be happy to borrow more money to purchase the sort of “new stable sources of energy” from Brazil’s offshore wells that we most certainly will not develop off our own coasts.
It seems as if paying lots more for electricity and gas, in European fashion, was originally part of the president’s new green agenda. He helped push cap-and-trade legislation through the House of Representatives in 2009. Had such Byzantine regulations become law, a recessionary economy would have sunk into depression. Obama appointed the incompetent Van Jones as “green-jobs czar” — until Jones’s wild rantings confirmed that he knew nothing about his job description “to advance the administration’s climate and energy initiatives.”
At a time of trillion-dollar deficits, the administration is borrowing billions to promote high-speed rail, and is heavily invested in the federally subsidized $42,000 Government Motors Chevy Volt. Apparently the common denominator here is a deductive view that high energy prices will force Americans to emulate European centrally planned and state-run transportation.
That conclusion is not wild conspiracy theory, but simply the logical manifestation of many of the Obama administration’s earlier campaign promises. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu — now responsible for the formulation of American energy policy — summed up his visions to the Wall Street Journal in 2008: “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” I think Chu is finally figuring out the “somehow.”
A year earlier, Chu was more explicit in his general contempt for the sort of fuels that now keep Americans warm and on the road: “Coal is my worst nightmare. . . . We have lots of fossil fuel. That’s really both good and bad news. We won’t run out of energy but there’s enough carbon in the ground to really cook us.”
In fairness to Chu, he was only amplifying what Obama himself outlined during the 2008 campaign. Today’s soaring energy prices are exactly what candidate Obama once dreamed about: “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” Obama, like Chu, made that dream even more explicit in the case of coal: “So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.”
There are lots of ironies to these Alice-in-Wonderland energy fantasies. As the public becomes outraged over gas prices, a panicked Obama pivots to brag that we are pumping more oil than ever before — but only for a time, and only because his predecessors approved the type of drilling he has stopped.
The entire climate-change movement, fairly or not, is now in shambles, thanks to serial scandals about faked research, consecutive record cold and wet winters in much of Europe and the United States, and the conflict-of-interest, get-rich schemes of prominent global-warming preachers such as Al Gore.
The administration’s energy visions are formulated by academics and government bureaucrats who live mostly in cities with short commutes and have worked largely for public agencies. These utopians have no idea that without reasonably priced fuel and power, the self-employed farmer cannot produce food. The private plant operator cannot create plastics. And the trucker cannot bring goods to the consumer — all the basics like lettuce, iPads, and Levis that a highly educated, urbanized elite both enjoys and yet has no idea of how a distant someone else made their unbridled consumption possible.
— Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the author, most recently, of The Father of Us All: War and History, Ancient and Modern.
Publicado: 04-27-2011 12:44 PM
OBAMA PROVOCA UNA ESTRUENDOSA CAIDA DEL DOLAR...
OBAMA SIGUE LOS PASOS DE CASTRO... CUANDO FIDEL LLEGO AL PODER EL PESO CUBANO SE COTIZABA Y ERA ACEPTADO INTERNACIONALMENTE A LA PAR DEL DOLAR, AHORA EL PESO CUBANO NO TIENE NINGÚN VALOR Y GRACIAS A OBAMA EL DOLAR PIERDE VALOR Y PRESTIGIO ACELERADAMENTE DEBIDO A LA POLITICA FISCAL ESTUPIDA DE SU REGIMEN MARXISTA.
Dollar plunges to 2½-year low
By Peter Garnham
April 21 2011
The dollar dropped to its lowest level in more than two-and-a-half years on Thursday as buoyant risk appetite prompted investors to sell the currency to fund carry trades.
Analysts said robust corporate earnings figures had boosted hopes over global growth, while the prospect that US interest rates would remain at ultra-low levels was fuelling demand for carry trades, in which low-yielding currencies such as the dollar are sold to finance the purchase of riskier, higher-yielding assets elsewhere.
Market rumour that the People’s Bank of China was poised to implement of substantial, one-off revaluation of the renminbi also weighed on the US currency.
The dollar index, which tracks its progress against a basket of six leading currencies, fell 0.8 per cent to 73.785, its weakest level since August 2008. Traders said the stage could now be set for the index to target the record low of 70.698 it hit in March 2008.
The dollar also dropped 0.9 per cent to a 16-month low of $1.4641 against the euro, fell 1 per cent to a 16-month trough of $1.6560 against the pound, lost 0.8 per cent to a record low of SFr0.8817 against the Swiss franc and plunged 0.7 per cent lower to Y81.93 against the yen.
The Australian dollar, which with its relatively high yield and commodity-linked status has been a favourite target for carry trade investors, surged to a fresh 29-year high against the dollar, rising 0.6 per cent to $1.0758.
Lee Hardman at Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ said dollar weakness continued to be mainly driven by widening expectations of monetary policy divergence between the Federal Reserve and other major central banks.
He said the downgrade of the outlook of US sovereign debt by rating agency Standard & Poor’s on Monday had reinforced this dynamic by increasing expectations that the Fed would have to keep interest rates at ultra-low levels for longer to offset the negative impact from the expected fiscal tightening.
Mr Hardman added, however, that while near-term concerns over monetary policy divergence and heightened US fiscal concerns were genuine, he believed there was a strong case that current dollar weakness was overextending.
“With market liquidity thinning heading into the Easter holidays, it provides the ideal conditions for a dollar undershoot relative to fundamentals,” he said.
“Indeed, while there is a notable risk that the near-term dollar sell-off extends further, it appears only a matter before a correction takes place.”
Commentary: Beijing won't push the renminbi too fast
China and four other leading high-growth economies have taken landmark steps toward lowering the importance of the dollar in international financial transactions — part of a seminal shift in the move towards a multicurrency reserve and trading system.
Mind you, you wouldn't get an idea of anything dramatic from reading the official Chinese press on the conclusion of a summit meeting of the so-called BRICS economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) in the southern resort twin of Sanya in southern China last week.
"Leaders call for peace and prosperity" was the front-page headline in the China Daily. Stirring stiff. Even more striking was the prominent story the previous day that China's President Hu Jintao and visiting Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff had agreed to quicken trade procedures for "gelatin, corn, tobacco leaf, bovine embryos and semen." At least we know there's no holding back the Chinese rhetorical flourishes on these issues.
Leave aside the whimsical acronyms. Addition of South Africa to the former BRICS format seems to have galvanized the grouping. The five countries agreed to expand use of their own currencies in trade with each other — an important step toward putting the dollar into a new downsized place. One key influence is the annual expansion of China's trade volume with other core countries by 40% in 2010 — and the buoyancy looks set to continue.
The BRICS' state development banks, including the China Development Bank, agreed to use their own currencies instead of the dollar in issuing credit or grants to each other — and they will also phase out the dollar in overall settlements and lending among each other.
Chinese officials at the annual Boao Forum at the end of last week voiced cautious optimism about the possibilities for far-reaching international monetary reform proposals taking a step forward when the G-20 meet in Cannes in November at the behest of French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Chief among these is for enhancing the special drawing right of the International Monetary Fund through the inclusion of emerging market currencies.
Speaking in Boao, Zhou Xiaochuan, governor of the People's Bank of China, refused to get carried away by any of this. He gave a cautious welcome to bringing the renminbi in to the SDR but admitted it had to be part of a planned move to full convertibility of the Chinese currency as well a shift to a flexible exchange rate.
Fresh signs of a disturbing lack of equilibrium in the Chinese economy, above all the latest annual rise in the consumer price index in March to 5.4% — have heightened speculation that China will speed up a rise in the renminbi to lower import prices. Governor Zhou, while not yet wishing to confirm any details, delivered a strong hint that he was prepared for such a course.
If the renminbi were to become a fully fledged reserve currency, of course, it would have to go down as well as up — marking enormous risks along the journey for the renminbi to assume a greater international role. For all of these reasons, Beijing will proceed with utmost caution in relaxing its restrictions for the currency to circulate freely overseas.
The last few days, make no mistake about it, mark an important step along this path — but there is a long way to go still.
David Marsh is co-chairman of the Official Monetary and Financial Institutions
EN LOS AEROPUERTOS DE BRASIL LAS AUTORIDADES NO ACEPTAN DÓLARES PARA PAGAR LOS IMPUESTOS DE SALIDA DEL PAÍS, TIENEN QUE PAGAR EN LA MONEDA BRASILEÑA, REALES, O CON TARJETA DE CRÉDITO... ¿QUIEREN MAYOR AFRONTA? ESTAMOS COSECHANDO LO QUE OBAMA HA SEMBRADO, EL DESPRESTIGIO INTERNACIONAL DEL DÓLAR... YA NADIE RESPETA LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS, NI SIQUIERA NUESTROS MAS FIELES ALIADOS.
Real Wages Fall For 5th Straight Month, Bad News For Obama
By Ed Carson
Fri., April 15, 2011
Tags: Economy - Income - Inflation - Obama - Elections
Real earnings fell for a fifth straight month as wages fail to keep up with soaring gasoline prices and other costs. Inflation-adjusted earnings for all private workers dropped 0.5% in March, the worst monthly drop since July 2008, according to Labor Department data. Nominal wages were flat while consumer prices climbed more than 0.5% for a second straight month.
Year over year, inflation-adjusted weekly pay sank 0.4%. That’s the first drop in a year and down from a 2.2% gain in October.
Since October, real weekly wages have dropped at a 3.8% annual rate — matching the decline set in July 2008, when oil prices peaked above $147 a barrel.
(Meanwhile, real hourly wages fell 0.6% vs. Feb. and 1% vs. a year earlier.)
The 2 percentage point temporary cut in payroll taxes has offset much of the recent decline in wages. But prices at the pump are taking their toll on consumers’ pocketbooks and psyche. Retail sales ex gasoline rose just 0.1% last month. The IBD/TIPP Economic Optimism Index dived to a 33-month low in April, losing more than 20% in the last three months.
Overall consumer inflation was 2.7% in March, the highest since the end of 2009. Core inflation was 1.2%, the highest since the start of 2010 but still moderate. However, overall and core inflation should continue to trend higher for the next few months, if only because of easy year-earlier comparisons.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is betting that commodity prices will have only a temporary impact on U.S. inflation. We’ll see.
It’s not just inflation. Nominal weekly wages were flat in March. The yearly gain slowed from 3.4% in October to 2.3% in March.
Wage woes are bad news for President Obama’s re-election hopes. As James Pethokoukis has pointed out, income is the biggest variable on national elections.
The skunk has replaced the Eagle as the new symbol
of the American Presidency.
Publicado: 04-28-2011 08:57 PM
Obama, Gas Prices & the Faculty Lounge
Are high gas prices a good thing?
That is not as dumb a question as it sounds. Examine a few revealing past remarks from President Obama and the cabinet officials who are now in charge of the nation's energy use and oil leases on federal lands. Then decide whether the current soaring gas prices are supposed to be good or bad.
IN 2008, Sen. Ken Salazar
(D.,Colo.) - now secretary of the interior, in charge of the leasing of federal oil lands - refused to vote for any new offshore drilling. In a Senate exchange with minority leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.), Salazar objected to allowing any drilling on America's outer continental shelf - even if gas prices reached $10 a gallon. We can now see why the president appointed Salazar, inasmuch as Obama recently promised the Brazilians that he would be eager to buy their newfound offshore oil - while prohibiting similar exploration here at home.
From 2007 to 2008, Steven Chu, now secretary of energy, weighed in frequently on global warming and the desirable price of traditional energy. At one point Chu asserted, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe." Chu also lamented, "We have lots of fossil fuel; that's really both good and bad news. We won't run out of energy, but there's enough carbon in the ground to really cook us."
In other words, $10 a gallon for gas would be desirable, while an enormous amount of recoverable American oil, gas, coal, tar sands, and oil shale should be left untapped.
During the 2008 campaign, Obama himself had strange ideas about the prospect of expensive prices for fossil-fuel-generated energy: "Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."
Candidate Obama also elaborated on the envisioned role of his administration in ensuring such high prices: "So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them."
As for consumers' plight in paying skyrocketing gas prices, the president, now and in the past, has sounded ambivalent. He recently told a questioner, "If you're complaining about the price of gas and you're only getting eight miles a gallon, you know, you might want to think about a trade-in." Few large passenger vehicles today get only eight miles a gallon, and many squeezed Americans in recessionary times cannot so breezily think of "a trade-in."
In 2008, Obama addressed consumer fears about climbing gas prices: "But we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much."
Note again the fantasy. Few of today's cars have distributor points. New-generation spark plugs and computerized ignition usually ensure 75,000-100,000 miles without a so-called "tune-up." There is no evidence that Americans' tires are chronically underinflated, or if they were, that such negligence would waste more gasoline than all that could be recovered from new offshore oil drilling.
What explains the weird rhetoric from Obama and his administration? First, not long ago they considered high energy prices as not that bad. Government-sponsored mass transit and alternative-energy projects - from wind and solar to the federally subsidized Chevy Volt - pencil out only when gas gets expensive. And if you believe in man-made global warming, then the less coal, gas, or oil that Americans use, the better for the planet.
Second, a president who believes that modern cars get eight miles per gallon or need frequent tune-ups, and that proper tire inflation can substitute for drilling oil, has never run a business that hinged on having moderately priced gas to power a truck, tractor, or car fleet. In fact, most in the Obama administration came to Washington from either academia or prior state- and federal-government employment, where policy is theoretical, without grounding in real experience.
So much of this administration's talk about energy sounds similar to a bull session in the faculty lounge, or what we would expect from lifelong bureaucrats and public functionaries who have never experienced long commutes or struggles in the harsher, profit-driven private workplace.
Now the global economy is recovering and energy use is climbing, as the U.S. dollar sinks. The oil-rich Middle East is in chaos. And more than 2 billion people in India and China are desperate for imported oil. The result is that American gas prices are astronomical, and the public is furious and starting to demand relief from the administration.
Its answer? Simple: Since reelection looms, the administration now insists that high energy prices are no longer good, but suddenly bad. And the evil oil companies are mostly to blame!
Publicado: 06-25-2011 01:14 AM
President Bush's July 2008 decision to lift the presidential moratorium on offshore drilling caused oil prices to drop from "$147 straight down to $33 a barrel in six months."
ILEGALSOL, MAESTRO EN EL ARTE DE DESINFORMACION Y LA MENTIRA, ACUSA A BUSH DE NO HABER HECHO NADA CUANDO EL GALON DE GASOLINA SUBIO A $4. OCULTA, CON LA MEDACIDAD QUE LE CARACTERIZA, QUE TAN PRONTO LA GASOLINA SUBIO A $4 EL GALON Y EL BARRIL DE PETROLEO A $147, BUSH, POR DECRETO PRESIDENCIAL ABRIÓ EL BANDERÍN A LA EXPLORACIÓN DE PETROLEO EN MAR Y TIERRA BAJANDO DE INMEDIATO $9 EL BARRIL DE PETROLEO Y EN MENOS DE 6 MESES EL BARRIL DE PETROLEO DESCENDIO A $33 CON EL CONSIGUIENTE DESPLOME EN EL PRECIO DE LA GASOLINA…. EL CCRETINO DE OBAMA HIZO TODO LO CONTRARIO CON EL FIN DE PROVOCAR EL AUMENTO DE LA GASOLINA A LOS NIVELES DE EUROPA DE $7 A $8 EL GALON, ALGO QUE PROMETIO DURANTE SU CAMPAÑA PRESIDENCIAL.
PARA LOGRAR ESE FIN, OBAMA DECRETO UNA MORATORIA QUE DESTRUIA LA EXPLOTACION DE PETROLEO EN EL GOLFO, MORATORIA QUE FUE DECLARADA ILEGAL POR ORDEN JUDICIAL Y QUE EL PICHON DE TIRANO HA DESOBEDECIDO ESTANDO EN "CONTEMPT" DE UNA ORDEN JUDICIAL. DEBIDO A LA MORATORIA LAS TORRES DE PETROLEO INACTIVAS SE ESTAN DESPLAZANDO A LAS COSTAS DE BRASIL Y AFRICA LO CUAL REPRESENTA UNA DAGA EN EL CORAZON DE LA INDUSTRIA PETROLERA DEL GOLFO Y DECENAS DE MILES DE EMPLEOS PERDIDOS QUE ERAN ALTAMENTE REMUNERADOS
A SU VEZ, OBAMA LE DIO A LA PETROLERA BRASILEÑA, PETROBRAS, EN LA CUAL EL FINANCIERO DE OBAMA, GEORGE SOROS, POSEE MILLONES DE ACCIONES, PARA EXTRAER EL ENORME DEPOSITO DE PETROLEO ENCONTRADO EN LAS COSTAS DE BRASIL A MAS DE 5,000 PIES DE PROFUNDIDAD, PETROLEO QUE NO VA A SER VENDIDO A ESTADOS UNIDOS, SINO QUE YA BRASIL LO TENIA CONTRATADO PARA VENDERLO A CHINA.
CON LA PRODIGALIDAD CARACTERISTICA DE OBAMA CON EL DINERO DE LOS TAXPAYERS, MEXICO RECIBO $1 BILLON DE DOLARES PARA EXTRAER DEL GOLFO EL PETROLEO QUE OBAMA NO PERMITIA EXTRAER A LAS EMPRESAS AMERICANAS. EN TANTO UN CONSORCIO DE CUBA CON LOS RUSOS, Y GRACIAS A UN ACUERDO ENTR CARTER Y FIDEL CASTRO, ELLOS VAN A EXTRAER EL PETROLEO QUE YACE A 60 MILLAS DE LAS COSTAS DE FLORIDA!!!
COMO SI FUERA POCO, EN LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS EL EJE DEMOCRATA/ENVIROMENTALISTA NO HA PERMITIDO LA CONSTRUCCION DE UNA SOLA NUEVA REFINERIA DE PETROLEO EN LOS ULTIMOS 20 AÑOS, OBAMA ACABA DE DAR $2 BILLONES PARA LA CONSTRUCCION DE UNA NUEVA REFINERIA…. EN COLOMBIA!!!
EN CUANTO AL PETROLEO EN ANWAR, LOS DEMOCRATAS EN CONTROL DE AMBAS CAMARAS NI LO PERMITIERON BAJO BUSH, NI AHORA BAJO OBAMA.