By Lee Ellis
April 21, 2008
On the day, April 18, when Ben Stein's movie opened here in theaters about religious freedom and the lack of public knowledge about the threat of Darwinism, Jimmy Carter was in Syria meeting with a Hamas leader, Khaled Mashaal, in Damascus. Since the former President is anti-Israel, one ponders what they were plotting?
Meanwhile, I pondered why Al Gore is spending millions of dollars on TV ads promoting an unscientific theory of global climate change when many well-known climatologists and scientists say otherwise? Do liberals allow political pontificating to excuse them from truth?
With the cost of oil escalating due to competition from all other nations, especially from China and India, why are legislatures trying to keep us from using the Canadian tar sands oil which will be used by every other country, leaving us high and dry with $4.00 or $5.00 per gallon gasoline? Do the environmental extremists control our government's decisions now as well as how much we must pay for a gallon of gasoline?
Mark J. Perry, a professor of finance and economics at the University of Michigan writes about the vast, secure and reliable supply of fuel from Canada's oil sands.
In his article, he states, "These sands hold an estimated 174 billion barrels of crude oil, making these deposits second only to Saudi Arabia in global reserves. ...Although President Bush has publicly welcomed production of Canadian sands oil, Congress last year passed legislation that prohibits the government from using alternative fuels that have a larger carbon footprint than conventional oil. As a result, the Defense Department is unable to use jet fuel made from this oil even though greenhouse gas emissions per barrel of tar sands oil have fallen 32% since 1990. Now California is moving to disallow the use of tar sands oil under a recently approved low carbon fuels standard sought by environmental groups. Illinois is among a dozen states also considering such a standard. ... The irony is that countries with fast-growing economies such as those in China, Brazil and India are accelerating energy resource development, while resource-rich North America is becoming captive to environmental extremism."
What better reasons than these do we have to cast out the extremists and elect rational thinking individuals to all offices this November.
As to our home security, will those we elect protect us in 2009 and beyond from another attack on our soil? We not only worry about al Qaeda but also about the new Napoleon, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He has vowed to eradicate both Israel and America from the face of the earth. In case you forgot, he has just added 6,000 centrifuges to his arsenal for construction of nuclear bombs. Oh, he does say they are just to produce domestic energy. Hmmm, I wonder why he doesn't just use all that oil under his land for his needed energy.
Speaking of terrorism, I still can't understand how the Democrats are interested in protecting us from another 9/11 attack, when they have virtually stopped surveillance of phone calls between the Middle East and sleeper cells here in America. We were lucky that England caught eight terrorists in 2006 who almost succeeded in blowing up more planes headed to the USA. Guess we will have to depend completely now on our European friends to save us since the Democrats in control are willing to cut off our intelligence. Are the ghosts of the Senator Frank Church committee still roaming the Capitol halls?
And I'm still pondering those income tax rebates for people who didn't pay any income tax. Yes, almost half this country (40%) paid no income taxes while 10% paid 70% of our taxes. Sure sounds like our government forgot about "fair and balanced." You might ponder that once the first group reaches 50%, what else will they vote for themselves?
Just where is the money coming from to pay for the universal health plans and other goodies that the candidates are promising? When a candidate, in order to get votes, offers false promises, I often wonder what is the difference between that and attempted bribery? Can anyone explain that to me? I guess I missed Law 101 in school.
Oh, and how come state legislatures never comprehend the results of their "soak the rich" bills passed in order to redistribute money to more voters? The rich, who generally got that way because they built successful businesses, then have to cut expenses. And, just how do they accomplish this? They are forced to either lay off employees or simply move to another state. I wonder why Michigan suddenly comes to mind. As I recall, their jobs were not outsourced to foreign shores as suggested in the primaries; they moved to other states like Texas.
I am pondering why the Pelosi gang has suddenly reversed its screaming rhetoric? Remember when they were bashing President Bush because he did not cater to the whims and desires of all other countries in order to make us universally loved ? Now they want President Bush to cause our allies to hate us by reneging on the many free trade deals we had negotiated which had resulted in thousands of exporting and agricultural jobs here in the USA. Colombia is cheek and jowl next to Communist Venezuela. Breaking that contract with it undermines trust from all other countries for future deals with the USA. And it allows Chavez more military operations and more control of our South American neighbors. You have to ponder if sedition trumps doing what is best for our country in the minds of a few power-hungry congressional members.
And do you recall when the presidential candidates were angry with Bush because he would not write or visit with Iran's leaders? Now they are mad because he wants to salute our athletes at the Olympic Games and while there, talk to China's President Hu Jintao about human rights. Hillary must have learned how to flip-flop from John Kerry.
Finally, I still ponder why if Obama wanted to learn the Black experience, why he chose twenty years of training for himself, his wife and his malleable children by the anti-American, Socialist and Communist-leaning Black Liberation teachings of Jeremiah Wright instead of positive famous Blacks such as Thomas Sowell, J.C Watts, or Chris Gardner who truly found the path to pursue happiness.
I suspect that we won't be just voting for candidates this year; rather, we shall be voting for the type of governments we shall have both nationally and locally. So, in November, stop looking at faces and names when you vote. We must judge only by what type of governmental philosophy will each candidate create for us or against us?