July 24, 2008

Jul 24 04:50 Giving Credit Where Credit's Due
Jul 24 06:44 The Cat's Out of the Bag?
Jul 24 08:27 That's What I Want to Hear!!!
Jul 24 09:29 Kline Blogger Conference Call
Jul 24 14:18 The GOP Oil Ultimatum
Jul 24 15:28 A Strange Speech, Some Odd Parallels
Jul 24 17:39 A Picture of Obama's Elitism

Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Prior Years: 2006 2007

---

---

Giving Credit Where Credit's Due

---

Tuesday, I participated in a conference call with Rep. Michele Bachmann, who talked about her recent trip to NREL and ANWR. The MOB was well-represented with Mssrs. Aplikowski and Pusateri also participating in the call. The Strib's Kevin Diaz has written an article about the call, too. He's even written about the bizarre moment in the call:

Asked by a reporter whether the "children" in her analogy might be overweight or overfed, she replied that she doesn't think that constituents suffering under skyrocketing gas prices see themselves that way.

That was utterly bizarre. It isn't a stretch to think that Mr. Ragsdale knows best what the individuals' needs are.

Because I wanted to give credit where credit is due, I contacted Mr. Diaz to thank him for including that episode in his article. Following that, we agreed that both sides have dug in their heals on this issue. I told Mr. Diaz that the part that bothered me most about the gamesmanship was when the DRILL Act was brought up with a closed rule, meaning that the Democrats' leadership wouldn't allow amendments to the bill.

It's one thing when a legislator or a political party digs its heals in. In this instance, I'm comfortable with Republicans digging in their heals. That's because I believe they're right. People have said that Republicans are only taking this position for political purposes but that's easily refuted. As a party, Republicans have consistently been for drilling in ANWR and other known reserves.

This certainly plays to the Republicans' advantage. That said, this shouldn't be a partisan issue. As I've said before, common sense shouldn't a partisan thing. It is because Democrats are utterly beholden to the environmentalist lobby. They refuse to tell the environmentalists when they're wrong.

I'd further suggest that contrasting the differences between R's and D's is precisely what elections should be about.

Kudos to Kevin Diaz for his reporting of the conference call story. I'll praise the Strib when I see the Strib doing good things.

---

Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 4:50 AM

No comments.

---

---

The Cat's Out of the Bag?

---

Maria Cantwell committed a gaffe. Actually, she committed a major gaffe. In Washington, a gaff is when a politician accidently tells the truth. According to this WND article , Democrats won't allow a vote on increasing drilling. Here's what she said:

In an interview with Bloomberg TV's "Money and Politics" last night, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., explained Democrats don't want to increase supplies of oil and gasoline because they want to wean Americans off of petroleum products.

Asked point-blank if Democrats in the Senate would consider how increasing the supply of oil would lower the prices that are pinching U.S. consumers, Cantwell replied: "Oh, we definitely want to move beyond petroleum. And so there will be a supply side offered by the Democrats and it will include everything from battery technology to making sure that we have good home domestic supply, and looking, as I said about moving faster on those kind of things like wind and solar that can help us with our high cost of natural gas."

This fits with the Democrats' energy policies for the past quarter century. Locally, it fits with El Tinklenberg's first energy policy :

The evidence is in and speaks overwhelmingly; global climate change is real. It's the biggest long-term challenge our nation and world face. Those who continue to deny its reality gamble with our children's and grandchildren's futures. We need to reduce America's dependence on the coal and petroleum products that are the primary causes of global warming. Alternatives can be made available in bio-derived, nuclear, solar, and wind energy.

Ms. Cantwell's stated position sounds remarkably similar to Mr. Tinklenberg's first position. Once drilling caught fire, though, Mr. Tinklenberg's position changed :

El Tinklenberg has promoted a comprehensive plan for domestic exploration to increase supply and investment in technology and greater efficiency to lower demand, which will result in lower prices for Minnesotans.

I've said before that I don't know how you can be for reducing "America's dependence on the coal and petroleum products that are the primary causes of global warming" while simultaneously advocating increasing drilling of coal and petroleum products.

At least, Sen. Cantwell's stayed true to her position, though I wouldn't be surprised if Democrats retreated from her statements either today or Friday at the latest. To their credit, Republicans aren't going gently into that good night:

The point was underlined by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, who said Democrats are not even permitting debate on legislation and amendments designed to increase the supply of oil and gasoline to U.S. consumers.

"Today, the appropriations markup that was going to include amendments that would open up the outer continental shelf and maybe even shale in Colorado and Utah was canceled," she told the same Bloomberg interviewer. "It wasn't postponed, it was canceled. So that indicates to me that the majority is not going to try to have an open debate, but I hope I'm wrong. If they have an open debate, and we're allowed to have amendments, and we have a balanced plan that includes production in all the sectors, then I believe we can meet this problem in a bipartisan way, and that's what we should be doing for America."

The Senate Democrats' position is identical to the House Democrats' position. It's actually a clever ploy on the Democrats' behalf. Their candidates are free to say that they're for increasing drilling (like Mr. Tinklenberg is doing) because they know that they'll never vote on increasing drilling.

The bad news is that Ms. Pelosi's and Ms. Cantwell's views will be posted and bounced around the internet. The other consideration is that the American people want to see Congress getting things done. The Democrats, led by Ms. Pelosi, Ms. Cantwell and others, are being obstructionists.

We'll highlight the fact that the DRILL Act was brought up under a closed rule because enough House Democrats would've voted to increase drilling on the OCS. That bill with that rule said that Democrats weren't interested in having a serious debate on energy policy. It said that they were employing a my-way-or-the-highway tactic.

The good news is that this issue isn't going away:

WND's Joseph Farah is spearheading a grassroots battle to flood Congress, and particularly the Democratic leadership, with e-mails, phone calls, letters and text messages demanding action that can lead the country in the direction of energy independence.

"Right now, that means lifting the moratorium," he says. "That's the first step. If we can't agree on that as Americans today, then we are in for a long period of national economic decline. If we can't push Congress to do the right thing with even a strong majority of Democrats behind us, then this country is simply no longer a place where the will of the people means anything."

It's gonna be a long, hot summer and fall for Democrats if they don't take substantive action to lower gas prices.

Now that we have their quotes to use against them, they'd be wise to just cave. If they hold fast to their positions, they're gonna get beat up on this issue. I was gonna say that they'd get beaten silly on this issue but it looks like that's already happened.

---

Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 6:46 AM

No comments.

---

---

That's What I Want to Hear!!!

---

Hannity: Senator, I know because everywhere I go, people talk to me about the high price of gasoline and the impact that it's having on their lives, the economy. Most Americans are angry when they find out that we have more resources here in the United States that we're not tapping into. I've even argued that we have a clear and present danger facing the United States, the possibility of an energy war. Am I overstating the case?

McCain: No. We're sending $700 billion a year overseas to countries that don't like us very much. Some of that money ends up in the hands of terrorist organizations. It's one of the greatest transfers in wealth in history and I think you are exactly right on the mark when you say that Americans are starting to figure things out. Of course we have to drill offshore. Of course we have to exploit every means we have of bridging this gap while we make the transition to energy independence. I viewed a new automobile the other day, the Volt. I pray it succeeds. It could revolutionize the auto industry and I also want to mention that we all love wind, tide, solar, all of that, nuclear power...nuclear power. The French can build a nuclear power plant in five years. We should build 45 nuclear power plants by 2030 and that will create 700,000 new jobs and it's clean.

Sen. Obama opposes offshore drilling. He opposes nuclear. He opposes a gas tax holiday. He opposes giving an award for a real battery-driven car. So he, uh...

Hannity: And coal.

McCain: And coal. And we've got to invest $2 billion a year in peer research and development, in clean coal technology. We are sitting on the world's largest supply of energy in the form of coal reserves. We've got to have clean coal technology.

Hannity: You have come under some scrutiny and criticism because you changed your position on offshore drilling and my question for you is "Would you consider your position on ANWR. There's nothing there. Of the 19,000,000 acres, they'd only use 2,000 acres. Do you think you'd reconsider in light of the high price of gas?

McCain: Listen, I will look at everything. I still don't believe...it's called the National Wildlife Refuge. But on the offshore drilling, it's always left up to the states and it is left up to the states. But it's also important to recognize the price of a barrel of oil. You know, when President Bush made the announcement that we were going to lift the federal moratorium, which wasn't that big a deal, the price of a barrel of oil dropped $10 a gallon...

Hannity: a barrel...

McCain: And the people that said that we couldn't affect the price of a barrel of oil were wrong because we tell the world that we're going to have our own reserves and we're not going to be dependent as we make this transition to independence, that it will matter in the price of a barrel of oil is concerned, my friend. And I'm confident that...as oil executives say, and I hope you have them on your program sometime, or an expert; they're telling me that we could get some of this oil within a year or 2. It's not this 10 year...

Hannity: Two years Outer Continental Shelf, 86,000,000,000 barrels of oil are available there. You know, this has got to be a defining issue. You're for nuclear power, Barack Obama's against it. You're for the suspension of the gas tax, he's against it. You're for offshore, he's against that. You're for expanding coal mining, he's against that. These are major differences in the campaign.

McCain: These are major differences and I think...I would love for you to sometime come to a townhall meeting with me as I just had. When you say to an audience "I think we have to drill offshore and exploit our resources, they stand and applaud. They get it.

The American people, sometimes we don't give them enough credit that they deserve for knowing what's going on. They know we have to be independent of foreign oil. They know that we need to go to nuclear power. They know these things and they care and it matters.

That transcript is a little over half of the energy portion of the interview. I watched it last night. I loved the vast majority of the answers Sen. McCain gave. I'll readily admit tht he breezed past the ANWR question, which he could've addressed more directly. I'm still not a fan of the gas tax holiday and never will be.

I hope that Hannity has some experts on his radio and TV programs that will talk about the technology that they're using and how that speeds up how fast they can go from exploration to production. If these experts speak out, it's certain that Democrats would tell the world that they're shills, that they can't be trusted because they work for evil 'Big Oil', etc. That video, though, would get bounced all over the internet. The American people would decide for themselves whether the experts are credible.

That's the Democrats' worst nightmare. It'd destroy their biggest argument against drilling. Once that argument is obliterated, it's 'Katie-bar-the-door' time because the Democrats' credibility on the biggest domestic issue this election will be nonexistent.

It's time that we all emailed Sen. McCain and told him that he needs to speak this strongly and this clearly on this issue every day the rest of this campaign. If he does, I'll bet big money that he'll fire up the GOP base in a big way. That's because we have a clear advantage over the Democrats on this issue. It's the issue that the American people agree with us in overwhelming numbers.

Let's not forget how this contrast plays out with blue collar workers in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, and elsewhere. Let's also view this in the context of whose judgment the American people will trust more in on this issue and on national security. If Sen. McCain spotlights his policies and his judgment on those two issues, Sen. Obama will have a difficult time winning.

When we look back from Election Night, I wouldn't be surprised if we view this as one of the highlights in Sen. McCain's campaign.

---

Originally posted Thursday, July 24, 2008, revised 04-Aug 1:18 AM

No comments.

---

---

Kline Blogger Conference Call

---

9:05- Stopthepork.com goes online. Earmarks have nothing to with merit. Had more to do with how long they'd been there. Petition put together to build grassroots support.

9:08: Jerry Ewing-Is there a difference between earmarks and pork? Kline: States get $520 million annually, which allows MnDOT to set priorities

9:11: Derek: Is McCain on board? Kline: McCain walks the walk.

9:14: Rob Neppell: Longterm & shortterm goals? Kline: We won't totally abolish earmark.

9:15: Janet: Will we need more seats to get real movement? Kline: Majority says they might not get to spending bills.

9:18: Cindy: Is there a way to get challengers involved? Kline: We'll look into it. He can sign the petition. Rep. Kline mentions that Brian Davis pledged not to take earmarks until the system is fixed.

UPDATE: Make sure you check out the posts at Ladies Logic , SCSU Scholars , Psycmeistr's Ice Palace and Freedom Dogs .

UPDATE II: I didn't realize that Kevin was also participating on Rep. Kline's conference call. Make sure you check Kevin's post , too.

---

Originally posted Thursday, July 24, 2008, revised 25-Jul 3:23 AM

Comment 1 by TwoPuttTommy at 24-Jul-08 09:57 PM

So, John Kline thinks pork oughta stop? Tell him to quit sending campaign propagada via the frank. If there's anyone out there that abuses the Franking Privilege more than Kline, I'd be surprised.

---

---

The GOP Oil Ultimatum

---

(H/T: Captain Ed )

According to this article in the Hill, Senate Republicans have issued an ultimatum to Harry Reid. Here's what the Hill is reporting:

Senate Republicans have threatened to block nearly all other bills pending before the August recess if Democrats refuse to vote with them on expanding offshore drilling.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said bills that do not pertain to energy can wait until after the August recess, with gas prices now surpassing $4 per gallon. McConnell and top Republicans indicated Wednesday they would oppose any procedural votes to take up other legislation, which require 60 votes to succeed.

"We think there is nothing more important that we can do right now than to deal with the Number One issue of the country," McConnell said. "This is the biggest issue since terrorism right after 9/11. People are pounding on their desks, saying, Why don't these people get together and do something about this problem?"

Bravo!!! Sen. McConnell and the GOP are putting unwanted pressure on Harry Reid. Reid didn't anticipate McConnell attempting this strategy. This puts Reid's plans on hold. Here's what was on Reid's list:

Following swift Senate action on the narrow energy bill, Reid wanted the Senate to approve a massive defense authorization bill, an overhaul of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, legislation to protect reporters' sources, an extension of expiring energy tax incentives, and a major package of 33 bills held up by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.).

Let's see Harry defend his list of bills vs. McConnell's agenda of bringing down the price of gas. How many people put a higher priority on overhauling "the Consumer Product Safety Commission" and pass a reporters shield law than on passing legislation that will open up drilling on the OCS. McConnell might let the defense authorization bill through but the other bills are wastes of time compared with the GOP's drilling bill.

This paragraph is a great telltale sign:

The hardball tactics reflect Republican confidence that they can pull off a major election-year victory with gas prices at record highs, after they have been battered at the polls and have lost on several recent high-profile legislative battles.

I'd be surprised if Republicans don't have polls showing them clobbering Democrats on this issue. I suspect that the Democrats have similar polling. The main concern I had was that Republicans would push this issue for awhile, then leave it just when they were making headway.

If this push continues, rest assured that Democrats will wake up on the first Wednesday in November stunned and broken-hearted. I don't deny that this had the makings of a bad year for the GOP. That was before gas started jumping in price. The dynamics have totally changed because Democrats' stumbles on the energy issue are as bad as Hillary stumbled with the drivers license question at the Drexel debate.

The pundits that predicted that Democrats would have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and a supermajority in the House will be dining at the crow buffet this November.

Here's the official Reid reaction:

Rodell Mollineau, a Reid spokesman, shot back at the Republican threat.

"Why would Sen. McConnell's statement be any different than his posture on most every other bill to come through the Senate?" Mollineau said. "Bush-McCain Republicans have conducted 83 filibusters so far this year and have blocked six attempts this summer to address the energy crisis. Their feigned outrage would be laughable if it wasn't at the expense of millions Americans suffering at the pump."

Mr. Mollineau, the energy crisis was caused by the Democrats' filibustering of drilling in ANWR. Let's not pretend that the Democrats' writing into law each year the OCS drilling ban didn't have a big impact on this crisis, too. Like Sen. McCain said last night, the American people get it . When he brings up drilling on the OCS at his townhall meetings, people stand and cheer. People know where to affix the blame, Mr. Mollineau, and it isn't with Republicans. Mr. Mollineau can spin all he wants but this issue is a loser for Democrats.

---

Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 2:20 PM

Comment 1 by Rick at 25-Jul-08 11:25 AM

I'll bet if the Dem's win in Nov. we will be drilling OCS and they will tell us they were for it the time. It was the Rep's. that held it up

Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 25-Jul-08 05:16 PM

They don't dare allow drilling. their environutter allies would dry up their campaign contributions faster than a Texas oilman yells GUSHER!!!

Comment 3 by stefano at 25-Jul-08 06:09 PM

It has been ten days since President Bush provided the leadership on this issue and the two branches of Congress led by the Democrats, Senator Reid and Congressperson Pelosi have done absolutely nothing in a practical sense to lift the ban on drilling and give the people of this nation relief from skyrocketing energy prices. President Bush's action caused futures market speculators to reassess their risk and reduce their long positions in energy, resulting in a drop in energy prices. If and when the congressional Democrats bend to the desires of the majority of Americans and lift the drilling ban we will see another drop in prices because investors will again reassess risk and reduce their long positions. Longer term when more oil and gas enters the energy supply lines, prices will be further reduced. What is it that is more important for Congress to do than lift the drilling ban? How can it be more important for Congress to go on their August recess than to lift the drilling ban? The Democrat leaders love to tell us how they feel our pain. I see no evidence of that from the Democrats when they plan to go on vacation before lifting the drilling ban. Tomorrow will be eleven days that Congress has not acted. How many more days will it take. Every day that the Democrats fail to act is another day of money hemorrhaging from our wallets and from our national treasury. It is a day closer to when another American will lose his job, a day closer to a winter when an American will be unable to pay his heating bill. Don't give us this garbage about throwing out everyone in Congress if no action is taken. The ball is in the Democrat court and their power is on the line. Act or be acted upon.

http://eternaledge.blogtownhall.com/

http://obackarama.blogtownhall.com/

Comment 4 by Walter hanson at 26-Jul-08 07:57 AM

the problem Stefano is that the liberals don't see the cause and effect that you listed.

Take the historic case of New Orleans. The Army Corps of Engineers wanted to build dikes for the New Orleans area that could withstand a category five hurricane. They are stopped by lawsuits by enviornmental groups.

Yet all you hear from the left is how the Bush adminstration didn't care and you got people seriously blogging about how it was delibarlate sabotage by Bush (just like 9-11) that caused those dikes to expose. They never bother to check the damage that these enviornmental groups caused.

Walter Hanson

Minneapolis, MN

---

---

A Strange Speech, Some Odd Parallels

---

Several portions of Barack Obama's speech in Berlin caught my attention. Here's the first thing he said that caught my attention:

The odds were stacked against success. In the winter, a heavy fog filled the sky above, and many planes were forced to turn back without dropping off the needed supplies. The streets where we stand were filled with hungry families who had no comfort from the cold.

But in the darkest hours, the people of Berlin kept the flame of hope burning. The people of Berlin refused to give up. And on one fall day, hundreds of thousands of Berliners came here, to the Tiergarten, and heard the city's mayor implore the world not to give up on freedom. "There is only one possibility," he said. "For us to stand together united until this battle is won,The people of Berlin have spoken. We have done our duty, and we will keep on doing our duty. People of the world: now do your duty,People of the world, look at Berlin!"

Isn't it odd to hear Sen. Obama talk about "in the darkest hours", Berliners "kept the flame of hope burning" just after visiting Iraq, which Sen. Obama voted to abandon in their darkest hour?

The man who talks about hope and change voted to cut off funding for the troops, which would've handed Iraq to AQI's terrorists and Iranian-funded militias. Ironic doesn't begin to describe it.

Why does Sen. Obama think it appropriate to identify with the Berlin airlift but not with the heroic Iraqi people who were trying to bring hope to their country after being liberated from another madman's clutches? Does Sen. Obama think that Berlin's liberty is more worthwhile than the Iraqis' liberty?

Sen. Obama, you're a disgusting man. You voted to condemn an entire nation. You voted to let tyrants have their way with people who clearly wanted liberty. I've said numerous times that Bush's failures weren't a reason to abandon Iraq but rather that it was the Iraqis' desire for freedom that should drive us to figure out a way to make their dream a reality.

Sen. Obama, you voted to extinguish hope in Baghdad yet you dare speak about hope in Berlin. Both peoples' liberty is precious. Yet Sen. Obama's vote said that one country's hope wasn't worth it.

Here's another paragraph that highlights

So history reminds us that walls can be torn down. But the task is never easy. True partnership and true progress requires constant work and sustained sacrifice. They require sharing the burdens of development and diplomacy; of progress and peace. They require allies who will listen to each other, learn from each other and, most of all, trust each other.

Sen. Obama speaks of "true progress requires constant work and sustained sacrifice" but he refused to walk the walk when it came to Iraq.

It take true determination, steadfastness and an iron will to forge historic change. Based on what we've seen in his abandoning his primary campaign principles, it's fair to ask if Barack Obama is missing all three of those qualities. It'd be difficult to prove he has any of those qualities at this point.

Based on what I've seen, I don't have any confidence that Sen. Obama has the requisite steadfastness that Thatcher, Reagan and JFK had. Based on this speech, I see more proof that he's a wobbly than that he's steadfast.

---

Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 3:29 PM

No comments.

---

---

A Picture of Obama's Elitism

---

According to WND's Aaron Klein , Sen. Obama's camapaign staff plastered the barricades at Jerusalem's Western Wall with campaign signs:

Sen. Barack Obama's campaign plastered the entrance to the Western Wall, the holiest site in Judaism, with official campaign posters, WND has learned.

Jerusalem Police spokesman Mickey Rosenfeld confirmed to WND posters that adorned police barricades erected at the Western Wall plaza for Obama's visit were distributed by the presidential candidate's campaign.

"These posters were his campaign and not the doing of the police," said Rosenfeld, whose police department coordinated security and provided protection for Obama's visit today to the holy site.

Asked if it was traditional practice for politicians visiting the Western Wall to bring along posters or campaign materials, Rosenfeld replied, "No."

This is disgusting behavior. Treating one of the world's holiest sites as a campaign site isn't acceptable. It's an exercise in elitism of unprecedented proportions. We've known for quite some time that Sen. Obama has a 'the world revolves around me' attitude.

After all, this isn't the first time we've seen Sen. Obama's elitist side. Let's not forget Jeremiah Wright's 'sin' against Sen. Obama. It wasn't the racist, hateful things Wright said from the pulpit. It wasn't his US KKK of A diatribe. Sen. Obama didn't throw Wright under the bus until Wright dissed him personally at the National Press Club. That, Obama said, was too much.

Obama's disgusting behavior at this Jewish holy site is just another episode in his narcissistic behavior. Here's a picture of Obama's garish poster:





Here's Reuters' caption:

Supporters of U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) hold a banner printed with his name in Hebrew as they wait for his arrival at the Western wall in Jerusalem July 23, 2008.

What's odd is that this was a surprise visit. How did Obama's supporters know they should show up with a banner long before sunrise? After all, Sen. Obama visited at about 5:00 am.

Obama arrived at about 5 a.m. Jerusalem time. He wore a Jewish skullcap and placed a prayer in the wall he said had written. He bowed his head while a rabbi read a psalm calling for peace in the holy city.

According to media accounts, one worshipper repeatedly heckled Obama, chanting: "Obama, Jerusalem is not for sale" and "Jerusalem is our land."

This won't help Sen. Obama's image. He's already having difficulty with Jewish voters. This won't help win their confidence. This might just cement their image of him being a show horse, not a workhorse for Jewish issues.I certainly couldn't blame devout Jews for abandoning him after this incident.

---

Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 5:41 PM

Comment 1 by walter hanson at 24-Jul-08 06:31 PM

This is a man who thinks he is God and doesn't have to worry about standards. That's why he doesn't understand if he's elected President all of the disasters that will take place.

Walter Hanson

Minneapolis, MN