Editors Picks

Conservative Commerce Mandate

Since we do not know yet how the Supreme Court will rule on the Healthcare Mandate, I think we need to prepare ourselves that this might stand.   If it does, it is time for Conservatives to figure out how they will deal with this, when they eventually return to power.

I say we begin to push a mandate on firearm purchase and proper self-defense and military training.   The continuing and increased government expense to offer police services, to those that are not protecting themselves, is a tax burden carried by the rest of us.   Military spending needed to get citizens to a basic fitness and skill with firearms, slows our ability to respond in an emergency and distracts resources from necessary higher value services.

Like healthcare, many people will require police protection at some point in their lives.   Some more than others and some may not need it at all.   But because you cannot predict when the proper use of a firearm may be required,  every citizen must be protected and insured against that eventuality.    The improper use of a firearm can be very destructive and therefore proper training to insure proper use is a necessary element of this right.

Unlike healthcare, the right to bear arms is an actual right in the Constitution.   The need for “a well regulated militia” is directly recognized.   Therefore, those that are not properly executing this right, need to.    Based on the current healthcare argument this conservative mandate should pass unanimously.

Another scientific consensus being challenged?

Not what you think.  This is the scientific study into the source of Oil.    Simply put; Oil is not a fossil fuel, it is a naturally occurring and renewable resource.   The blog below is interesting including the comments.

The basics are this.  Oil as a fossil fuel was “hypothesis born in 1757, the dark ages of science” and disproven by the Russians and others ever since.  The earth produces methane and oil naturally and it seeps up from cracks in the mantle and settles in sedimentary rock.  It is not created in sedimentary rock by decaying fossils.   A basic scientific cause-effect flaw that occurred in these early “scientists”.
Most interesting to me is the idea of studying pre-emergent diamond particles in Oil.   Diamonds are only produced in deep mantle when the heat and pressure are extreme and they fracture off and work their way up through cracks.   The deeper the oil is discovered the more diamond particles it seems to have.   This seems basic logic as they are co-located, but how did oil get into the mantle?  Some say it drips down through cracks.    Others say the pressures in the earth do not work that way.  The inner earth pressure forces things up from the mantle not down.
Chevron is extracting these tiny particles from their deep water rigs and reselling them for nano-technology research.
The Livermore research effort took an unexpected turn when
Chevron scientists, who had been studying clogged oil pipelines
in the Gulf of Mexico, published a paper in the January 3, 2003,
issue of Science. The paper described the discovery of higher
diamondoids ranging from less than 1 to about 2 nanometers (that
is, with 2 to 11 adamantane units).”
What is the true science?  I am not sure, but I know we continue to find Oil deeper and in higher quantities then we were ever thought we available.  Is it the Green movement and their friends in government and public schools that hide this research?   Interesting read from the other side of the isle.   Believes that the Oil industry and war mongering right wing is pushing the idea of oil as a limited resource to drive up the profit and need to conquer other countries.
I find the study and research very interesting.   But the impacts on the politics of today and drive for government action towards Green energy cannot be underestimated.

US impact on Oil price limited by market share and simple math

ABC News proving that their “fact check” needs a new headline:
FACT CHECK: More US Drilling Didn’t Drop Gas Price

This “FACT” stated by the headline is torn apart by the article itself.

The US produces 2% of worlds oil today.   So if we increase our production by 10%, the impact on world Oil reserves is 1/5 of 1%.   This supply can be easily offset by shifts by OPEC or the Saudi’s.    They do touch on this basic truth, “That’s because oil is a global commodity and U.S. production has only a tiny influence on supply. ”

“Unlike natural gas or electricity, the United States alone does not have the power to change the supply-and-demand equation in the world oil market”   Now oddly in this article it states that we supply “11% of the world’s output”.    This would seem an odd contradiction to the President’s “2% of the world’s oil.”   But it is not.     The 2% number is based on the amount of oil under drill heads available for removal.   The 11% is based on the actual removal of oil and places onto the open market.   Neither of these numbers represent the actual amount of oil available to be tapped and used.    Numbers very based on type of oil and industry versus government estimates.  But the numbers are probably somewhere near 1Trillion barrels of oil (or 200 more years at current levels).

“ if the U.S. were to increase its oil production by 50 percent it would at most cut gas prices by 10 percent.”   OK, the math is close (11% increased to 16.5% would impact the world market by about 10%).     But this is flawed in two ways.   First,  if we were to double or triple our production so that we were a player in the market, then our impact would be felt much greater on the world market.    But if you understand that markets are more dynamic than basic linear math, this even fails.   If the US were to show it was serious in increasing it’s share of world markets the competitive countries would drop prices to try and keep us from attaining market share.    Keeping us at 10% on the world markets allows them to control prices.   The US being a player limits their independent control over the market and forces the prices to a lower level.     Think about any other free market and the impact of a growing competitor.

More so, within this country, where the employment of high wage jobs, huge profits and taxes from oil sales would flood the country in money.   How much of a lift would our economy get and how much good could we do with that money being here instead of in the Middle East deserts?    How much less environmental impact would their be and free trade in not shipping the oil across the Oceans and through the Suez Canal?   Why shouldn’t we be an oil provider in world markets?

The reason we impact the markets on Steel, food, technology, and wood is that we are still the world’s leader in those industries.  It is simple market share.   How much impact would a single farmer have on the price of corn world wide if he doubled his output?  What is he had a complete loss?   Now think what would happen if the Florida Orange crop was complete loss…oh wait that has nearly happened before.
“Also, a cold snap threatened the orange crop in Florida, which produces about 80 percent of the domestic orange juice supply. Futures prices soared to all-time high of $2.1995 per pound on Jan. 23″.
All in all the article is not wrong, but the fact check headline seems to push that there is not much that can be done.   But reality is that a massive increase in US supply and new policies to continue to produce more and more, would drastically drive down oil prices world-wide.

Occupy Wall Street Protests in Zuccotti Park, bought for 168.9 Million?

Sad but true, anti-corporate protesters are corporate tools of the left…
- Protests start Sept 17th in private Zuccotti Park, near wall street.
- Sept 23rd U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced the Department of Energy finalized a partial guarantee for $168.9 million loan to Granite Reliable Power, LLC.
- Granite Reliable Power, LLC by Brookfield Renewable Power, which is a subsidiary of Brookfield Asset Management of New York.
- Brookfield Asset Management owns One Liberty Plaza and Zuccotti Park and Major Bloomberg’s girlfriend, Diana L. Taylor, is on the Board of Directors of Brookfield Properties.
- Brookfield’s lobbying firm in DC was Oldaker, Biden & Belair.. any name in there look familar? Yes, Hunter Biden son of the VP but has changed to Heather Podesta & Partners … hmm another common name and coincidently wife of John Podesta’s brother.

Shhh don’t tell the protesters that they are the useful tools of the very corporate cronyism they claim to despise; their heads might explode. Of course, they do support the Administration run by those that voted for the bail-outs in the first place, so their ability to understand irony seems limited.

h/t freerepublic

Beware low bridge ahead…Constitutional views from the left

Today Mark Levin scared us all with a reading from Time magazine’s Managing Editor. I felt required to make sure this article was posted with the necessary and obvious rebutles. I was happy to see that a equally angered Conservative (@AaronWorthing) was faster at the keyboard than I and had already done the bulk of my work in his piece.

Please give him the courtesy of reading his post. He obviously spent a great deal of time finding the proper references to trounce the editor. This is precisely the kind of article and factual rebuttal that I wanted this site to bring to the fore. I still have not reached those lofty goals but still plan to build that platform. People like Aaron prove the will and articles like this one from Tinme continue to prove the need.

News Busters also covered this as well here.

Atlas Shrugged Part I (A review)

In summary, rushed.

It is kind of amazing that after having the rights for twenty years or so for a book that is 1000+ pages the movie really seems rushed.

The overall movie seemed to jump from scene to scene trying to get through the story but not really settling in on the main plot.   I [...]

Turning Budget Battle Lemons into Lemonade

The budget battle has shown weakness in the GOP leadership.  It has shown they cannot negotiate under the barrage from the left and the mainstream media.  They won elections stating they would get control of the budget.  That they would start by cutting 100 billion from the 2001 budget.   Then it turned into a [...]

Immigration ought not be about proximity

I want to go a different direction. Why has illegal immigration not been fixed?

The answer is two-fold and in both parties: Corporate crony-ism and votes. Corporations want cheap labor and political parties want votes.  People would not vote for higher prices and percieved “racism”.  Therefore, politicians have no reason to fix the problem… or should I say “had” [...]

Health care is a right?

So many Democrats refer to Healthcare as a right and justify the need to cover 100% of the American populous (including illegal residents) and to vilify those that appose their agenda.  I oppose this bill in many ways but not the least of which is that healthcare IS NOT a right and in fact is [...]

Do the two parties really differ on health insurance/coverage?

The short answer as with many large policy issues is “Absolutely and to the core of their policy direction.”

I am not talking about GOP arguments against Obamacare, their promises to repeal it or any new plans.   I am talking about passed (past) legislation that can be reviewed in practice.    I am talking about [...]