Moonage Political Webdream

That’s the headline on CNN.  The headline NOT on CNN is:

Unable to pay bills, London, Ky. YMCA closes

And, the reason they decided to give up?

Director Don Burgin said the London-Laurel County “Y” struggled with $6,000 monthly utility bills and its budget was further stretched by an increase in the minimum wage.

And of course, who do some people blame for the failure of a non-profit due to an unfunded mandate?

George W. Bush, of course.

Nancy Pelosi just LOVES ignorant voters.

Technorati Tags: budget, bush, closing, cnn, kentucky, london, minimum, nancy pelosi, non-profit, pelosi, unfunded mandate, wage, wages, ymca

Tags: budget, bush, closing, cnn, kentucky, london, minimum, nancy pelosi, non-profit, pelosi, unfunded mandate, wage, wages, ymca

No Comments »

Congressman Peter King is kinda upset.

A month-long advertising campaign, to be run in New York on the subway cars, aimed at promoting Islam has generated controversy with an angry lawmaker sending a letter to the authorities asking them to stop the drive….

“I have no problem with the ad itself, but I have a very, very real problem with those behind it,” Republican lawmaker Peter King said on Tuesday.

“They are especially shameful because the ads will be running during the seventh anniversary of September 11, and because the subways are considered a primary target of terrorists,” he said.

Now, CNN’s running a poll on their homepage.  So far, about 63% of the people agree with Congressman King.  At first I didn’t.  However, when reading further, the “those behind it” include Siraj Wahhaj, who was a character witness for the 1993 bombing.  Now, I just see how anyone can be a character witness for someone who bombs innocent people.  Sorry.  Just can’t do it.  However, I still have a problem with stepping all over The First Amendment.  So, I propose this for the Transit Authority.  They can allow Siraj Wahhaj and his cronies to run all the ads on those trains that they want.  However, right next to each ad, an ad is also allowed to run showing the results of Islam in America and elsewhere.

Fair enough?

Technorati Tags: ads, advertisement, advertising, campaign, first-amendment, Islam, jihad trains, new york city, peter-king, poll, Siraj Wahhaj, subway, terrorist

Tags: ads, advertisement, advertising, campaign, first-amendment, Islam, jihad trains, new york city, peter-king, poll, Siraj Wahhaj, subway, terrorist

3 Comments »

Apparently smarting from polls that put his Senate leadership in the single digits, Harry Reid decided to fight back starting with this letter to The Hill Blog:

When our country is in crisis, Congress must be ready to take immediate action. Democrats in Congress have tried to take action again and again. We have proposed both short- and long-term solutions: short-term solutions to bring down gas prices now, and long-term solutions to attack the root of the problem: our growing addiction to oil:

First – we end the billions of dollars in tax breaks for big oil companies whose executives have been hauling record profits while we pay record prices.

Second – we force the oil companies to do their part by investing some of their profits in clean and affordable alternative energy.

Third – we protect the American people from price gougers and greedy oil traders who manipulate the market.

And fourth – we stand up to OPEC and countries who are colluding together to keep oil prices sky-high.

He then goes on to assure everyone that increasing production to meet the increased demand is not a solution.

Just a few thoughts on this. 

• How does he figure that increasing the expense and decreasing the profit margin for oil companies will make gas cheaper for the consumer?
• I’m all for eliminating an unnecessary middle man.  I’m not sure how he’s going to do it though since a good number of those traders live outside of the US.
• I’m all for shaking down OPEC.  However, unless he has an idea of how we can, none of his blue flames will amount to anything, ever.  If we had a stick, like, say, the ability to NOT buy their oil, THEN OPEC has something to fear.  However, Harry’s against that.

Bottom line, it’s up to Harry to see that the US Senate presents ideas to fix the problem.  Republicans are the MINORITY party.  Get it?  To claim he, as the Senate MAJORITY Leader, can not get anything done because a hand full of MINORITY members don’t want to is absurd.  And, I think it’s this absurd unreality that Harry keeps expecting people to swallow that is the reason the US Senate is nearing single digits in popularity.  I’m not the first to question Harry’s excuse, hopefully I’m far from the last.

Quite frankly, I have said it before, and I’ll keep saying it.  As long as Harry and Nancy keep whining about Republicans and accomplishing nothing, they will cost Obama the election.

Technorati Tags: alternative energy, congress, democrats, energy, harry reid, minority, nancy pelosi, oil, oil traders, opec, price gougers, republicans, Senate, tax

Tags: alternative energy, congress, democrats, energy, harry reid, minority, nancy pelosi, oil, oil traders, opec, price gougers, republicans, Senate, tax

No Comments »

Fresh on the heals of Keith Ellison defying all logic and facts and coming to the conclusion if people had more money they wouldn’t be broke, Eleanor Holmes Norton has dropped this bit of wisdom on us as well:

The District has passed new gun legislation consistent with the recent Supreme Court decision overturning the city’s gun ban, but mindful of the obligation to keep order and prevent gun violence. However, added to gun killings typical of big cities today, there is likely to be an increase in homicides that would have been prevented if there were no guns in homes.  Therefore, I have challenged my own constituents, the great majority of whom strongly favored the D.C. gun ban, not to buy a gun.  The data reported for decades could not be more definitive: guns are seldom used to deter criminals (most thugs prefer empty premises).  Overwhelmingly, guns in homes are used during violence among relatives and friends, for suicides, and in accidents. In big cities, guns in homes do not stay in homes. They make their way to the streets.  The court has spoken and the city has acted.  It’s the turn of residents to act now.  If they meant what they said, that it was our gun ban and we needed it, then residents won’t buy into the gun culture by buying a gun.

Kinda curious, if the thugs prefer empty premises, why does DC have one of the highest murder rates in the country?

OK, see if this logic makes sense: If they were responsible gun owners in the first place, the ban would never have been necessary now would it?  We didn’t concern ourselves too much with the people who had guns and never used them and kept them properly stored.  We read about the people who broke the law and used them.  Kinda like cars.  We don’t concern ourselves too much with someone driving right.  When someone kills someone with a car, THEN we deal with it.  But, no one has banned the car.  And, trust me, cars can be a lot more lethal than a pistol.

Anyways, what Ms. Holmes Norton is NOW suggesting is rather than allowing only the criminals to have guns against a defenseless law-abiding society, she just wants to allow only criminals to OWN guns against a defenseless law-abiding society.

Big whuppin difference dontcha think?

Know what I think?  I think it would be a good idea for every criminal to think there was someone at home ready to defend their property and more than capable of doing it.  So, I’d be encouraging everyone in DC to rush out and buy a gun and learn how to use it safely.  If they chose not to buy one, then no one’s the wiser.  Including the thugs responsible for one of the highest murder rates in the country in a city with “no guns” and robbing empty premises. 

And, if Ms. Holmes Norton needs to look to a community that is safe for ideas, she could look at the very bottom of the list.  Plano, TX.  I’m sure she knows what Texans think about their guns.  Try passing a ban there sometime and see what happens.

Technorati Tags: ban, dc, eleanor, gun, holmes, law, norton, plano, texas, washington

Tags: ban, dc, eleanor, gun, holmes, law, norton, plano, texas, washington

1 Comment »

Representative Keith Ellison submitted this letter to The Hill blogs:

We have to consider the 30 years of stagnant wages that your average Americans have had to face. That fact is that the reason we have people refinancing their homes, getting home equity loans, getting high rate interest credit cards and petty loans is because wages have been flat. We need to pursue a higher wage strategy. Humphrey-Hawkins required that the Fed not only try to maintain loan inflation, but also increase full employment. Full employment, with the increased productivity rates that we would experience, would have meant that people would have been making more money. If people would have been making more money, people would not be in the difficult, dire straits that they are in today. I think that we have to look beyond just the current crisis in to the larger framework.

What dimension does this guy live in?  I’m not sure I’ve ever read a more completely clueless statement in my lifetime.

To wit.  “Wages” can otherwise be called “Per Capita Income”.  Now, those figures are very easily obtained.  If Keith had looked, he would have seen this:

In other words, “wages” have grown 400% over 30 years.  What is “stagnant” about that?

Then, we have to look at “full employment”:

We are closer to “full employment” than we were in 1976.

So, the actual evidence is more people are working and making more than they were 30 years ago.  Completely contradicting Keith Ellison’s assertion.  This guy couldn’t be more wrong if he tried.  So, his solution that more people have jobs that pay more money is flawed as well. 

So, what is the root of this mess?  Paul Krugman I think did the absolutely best job illustrating it.

Paul Krugman illustrates where the problem is

The foreclosure rate for fixed rate loans has dropped substantially since 2000.  The Primes have stayed pretty much level.  The only area to increase, and to say the least, spike, is the Subprime Adjustable Rate.  Now, what does Paul also point to that means something in this discussion?

Paul Krugman illustrates the average price of a house

Starting around 1998 or so, the average price of a house exploded, doubling in about five years.  Problem is, there was nothing to support this.  People were borrowing twice as much money to build the same house as they did in 1995.  Wages were increasing, but not that fast.  A lot of this “bubble” was financed, obviously, with risky loans.  Now, those risky loans are biting the careless and greedy loaners that issued them.  The additional effect is that those risky institutions making those loans also held a lot of traditional loans.  As they got in trouble with the risky loans, it affected the more traditional loans.  Additionally, since the average price of a house was twice as much, it required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to access more credit.  Now, in addition to risky loans hammering the private sector, it is believed that some of those same institutions that were issuing those risky loans, like Indymac, were also sending Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae bogus loan applications that should never have been in the traditional mortgages in the first place, thereby increasing the exposure to risky loans for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

So, what needs to be done?  In my opinion, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae need to re-examine their portfolio of mortgages received from Countrywide and Indymac.  Possibly foreclosing on those that should never have been there in the first place.  In the meantime, the feds need to make the traditional market more accessible to safer loans by raising the mortgage limits for applicants.

That’s really about it.

And you know what, that’s already being done.

In the meantime, the companies that ignored the rules will be absorbed in the market place.  Countrywide’s already being absorbed, Indymac will be absorbed by someone else I imagine.  So, rather than imposing his Utopian dream of a purely communist society, I think Keith Ellison just needs to stay out of issues he clearly is completely clueless about.

And quite frankly Minnesota, you guys have elected a blitehring idiot.  Please, for the sake of the rest of the country, do the right thing.

Technorati Tags: communism, countrywide, ellison, employment, fannie-mae, freddie-mac, housing, indymac, inflation, keith, Minnesota, mortgages, socialism, unemployment, wages

Tags: communism, countrywide, ellison, employment, fannie-mae, freddie-mac, housing, indymac, inflation, keith, Minnesota, mortgages, socialism, unemployment, wages

No Comments »

In my opinion, 9/11 was largely the responsibility of Jamie Gorelick.  Jamie Gorelick is pure evil. Period. Her name figures prominently in several domestic disasters. Sure, she didn’t break the levees in New Orleans, but it was the climate of non-communication between agencies that contributed to the problems in a substantial way. So yeah, some of the blame for the consequences of Katrina can be attributed to her.

I mean, her name is mentioned in association with:

• Waco
• Ruby Ridge
• Although she handled the Oklahoma City bombing fairly competently, it was HOW the Waco and Ruby Ridge incidents were handled, in a large part by Gorelick, that led to the bombing.
• Sandy Berger’s thefts
• Able Danger
• 9/11, repeatedly
• The legal wrong side of the Duke Lacrosse rape case ( which involved, par for course, ignoring obvious evidence. )
• The bad situation of Fannie Mae due to lack of oversight and cooperation with auditors by the board she was a member of.
• And, believe it or not, she’s now part of the exploding gasoline prices crisis as she’s a board member for Schlumberger Ltd.  An oil field developer.  She was hired there in 2002.  Pretty much when the War in Iraq started.  You know, the war everyone tried to blame on Dick Cheney and Haliburton.  BTW, Schlumberger is a direct competitor to Haliburton.   Schlumberger was directed by John Deutch from 1998 until 2007.  You remember John Deutch, he was the CIA director who downsized the CIA following the collapse of the Soviet Union and thereby pretty much eliminated our foreign intelligence operations.  It was this lack of foreign intelligence that was directly blamed for 9/11.  jamie Gorelick’s wall was the other primary reason.  John hired Jamie.  Schlumberger lost out to Halliburton.  Repeating the past, John’s gone now, Jamie’s not.  In the meantime, who’s the primary benefactor in the US for NOT driving down the price of oil by developing more wells?  You guessed it, Schlumberger vis a vis Jamie Gorelick:
  
• Of course, they wouldn’t be successful at it if it weren’t for the complete support of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, who REFUSE to do the right thing and allow OTHER companies to do the drilling that Schlumberger apparently refuses to do.

How many more disasters does this woman have to be involved in before CNN and MSNBC out her?

I will admit Jamie Gorelick’s life reads like a movie.  Only problem is it would be a bizarro Forrest Gump where horrible things happen to millions of people every time she steps into the picture.  It’d probably be a huge hit though.

Technorati Tags: 9/11, able danger, Cheney, duke, fannie-mae, forrest gump, haliburton, harry reid, jamie-gorelick, Katrina, lacrosse, nancy pelosi, new-orleans, Oil Supply, rape, ruby ridge, sandy berger, schlumberger, texas, waco

Tags: 9/11, able danger, Cheney, duke, fannie-mae, forrest gump, haliburton, harry reid, jamie-gorelick, Katrina, lacrosse, nancy pelosi, new-orleans, Oil Supply, rape, ruby ridge, sandy berger, schlumberger, texas, waco

No Comments »

This has got to be the stupidest/funniest thing I’ve seen in a while:

Once again, the innocent peeps of the US, primarily South Carolinians, were made aware of this very, very, bad idea by a blog, The Palmetto Scoop.  The political reaction in South Carolina was fast and furious.

Republican state Sen. David Thomas of Greenville protested the campaign and called for an audit of the advertising budget overseen by the state Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism.

“South Carolinians will be irate when they learn their hard earned tax dollars are being spent to advertise our state as ‘so gay,’” Thomas said in a statement.

South Carolina governor Mark Sanford said the governor felt it was inappropriate as well.  In the article, they mention Sanford is a potential running mate for John McCain.  I had never heard this, but it makes the story a little more “national”.  Fact is, I don’t think he is.

My second thought on this is who at the state level would have thought this was an idea that didn’t merit public input?  I mean, it’s public tax dollars at work here, I think the public should have been made aware that a PR campaign to attract alternative lifestyles to their neighborhood was being pondered. 

The tourism department quickly said it was canceling payment of its $5,000 fee for the posters, which it said were approved by a low-level state worker who did not run the idea by senior officials. The employee, who was not identified, resigned last week, the agency said.

Now, I don’t just quite buy that a major PR campaign targeting another country to attract alternative lifestyles would be made by a “low-level state worker” without anyone else knowing about it.  Now, I think that “low-level state worker” should be fired for being so inconsiderate of who’s money they were spending.  But, I think their supervisor probably needs to go as well for being so clueless as to what their subordinates are doing.

In the big picture of things, if South Carolina doesn’t want to appeal to gays, it’s no big deal to me.  There’s not really a whole lot to do in South Carolina that couldn’t be done somewhere else.  For example, my friends recently took their two very young, impressionable, girls to Dollywood for a family getaway.  Once they got there, turned out it was “Out at the Park“.  If you go to Disney World the first week of June, you can be assured to see lots of gays there that week as well.  And, of course, there’s always New Orleans, Miami, and Key West.  Being straight there just kinda seems out of place.  So, the fact that South Carolina wants to have a particular PR angle of appealing to people with kids that don’t really want to explain what “gay” is to five year olds is a pretty good angle to me.  In fact, at this point in my life, it’s a lot more appealing than Dollywood, Disneyworld, New Orleans, Miami, or Key West.

Now, the hook against South Carolina’s values was given as:

Gay tourism is a $64.5 billion market in the United States, the International Gay and Lesbian Travel Association estimates, and more than 75 cities around the world have gay-themed campaigns that create no controversy.

The issue here is how many “normal” tourism dollars are lost by people who don’t want to subject their small children to alternative lifestyles?  Used to I’d go to any theme park without hesitation.  Now, I think twice about places like Dollywood and Disney World because there is no telling what will be there.  Now, granted, the peeps at Dollywood were a lot more discreet than the peeps at Disney World, it’s still just not something I want to explain to my very inquisitive five year old boy.  I don’t want to tell him what they’re doing is wrong, and I sure as hell don’t want him thinking what they are doing is something he should be doing as well.  So, rather than risk it, I’ll double-check which alternative lifestyle is frequenting the park and see if it falls within an acceptible range of what I want my child exposed to at a family theme park.

Or, I’ll just take the family to Myrtle Beach again and take the kid to Disney World when he’s eighteen.

Technorati Tags: advertisement, advertising, campaign, gay, idiot, key west, miami, myrtle beach, new-orleans, south-carolina, tourism

Tags: advertisement, advertising, campaign, gay, idiot, key west, miami, myrtle beach, new-orleans, south-carolina, tourism

No Comments »

Here’s the story:

Overweight viewers are protesting the film’s depiction of a world ruined by “doughy and lazy folk who drink liquid cupcakes and can’t even really walk.”

In the film, which was fourth at the box office this weekend, Earth has been turned into a trash dump due to the Buy N Large corporation. Humans evacuated the unlivable planet and now live on a giant cruise ship in space, where they watch TV, eat food from a straw and are too overweight to walk….

Some say Pixar is pushing the message that overweight people are draining the resources of the planet and perpetuating the myth that obese are lazy and gluttonous.

There’s only one problem I have here, it’s all based on wrong information.  Whoever these people are protesting, they obviously haven’t seen the movie.  If they had, they’d know that this is what destroyed Earth:

And due to the thin man detroying the Earth, over many generations, man no longer had a need to walk, and therefore devolved into muscleless blobs.

This is soooo typical to me of so much outrage in the world.  Complete ignorance.  I also dealt with a post from somewhere else that claimed bailing private corporate monsters Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was yet another example of US government fascism.  Fascism?  Let’s look closer:

..a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

OK, someone want to explain to me how raising the credit line of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac constitutes an example of fascism?  It’s not even a lender in the purest sense.  It just purchases mortgages from local banks so they can allow other people to get mortgages.  It doesn’t “regiment” commerce, it expands it for the private sector.  The word “fascism” has absolutely no bearing at all in debating whether the government expanding their line of credit has merit or not.  None.  And, obese people being offended with Wall-E is eqaully ignorant as well.

I just wish people would do an iota of research before being outraged.

Technorati Tags: fannie-mae, fascism, fnma, mortgages, protest, shelby-forthright, wall-e

Tags: fannie-mae, fascism, fnma, mortgages, protest, shelby-forthright, wall-e

2 Comments »

Barack Obama’s having a rough week.

First, he did the very odd thing of stating very publicly he liked President Bush’s Faith Based Initiative so much he wanted to expand it.  That drew the ire of the Reverend Jesse Jackson:

“See, Barack’s been talking down to black people on this faith-based—,” Jackson says during a break in taping. “I want to cut his nuts out.”

Now, I don’t think the reverend was terribly upset that Obama wanted to expand the opportunities for religious social programs to do good, I think it was because he did the unthinkable and supported a wildly conservative President’s idea.  Luckily for Obama, people have focused more on his nuts and not on the fact that it was spoken by a wildly liberal, race baiting African American.  This is the core of Obama’s support ( wildly liberal, not necessarily African American ).

Then to further antagonize the wildliy liberal Russ Feingold offered this piece of advice for Obama:

I think it is a terrible piece of legislation. No Senator should vote for it, no Democrat should vote for it. It is one of the worst intrusions of personal rights of Americans in the history of this country, and I am hoping Senator Obama will be able to fix this monstrosity. No Democrat should vote for it.

To which Obama’s immediate reaction to Feingold was:

Now, even the ACLU condemned this piece of legislation.  So, we’ve got Rev. Jesse Jackson, ACLU, And Russ Feingold condemning Obama in about a week.  That’s pretty tough for any candidate.  Now, all of them have said they’re still hot for Obama.  But, it seems a little more shallow now than it did last week to me.  Even the wildly liberal DailyKos couldn’t find it in their soul to look for an upside to this.  He did however, remarkably find a way to blame it on Republicans and media.  ( Clue here Kos guys, Obama did the deed because he’s scared to death about an issue.  How often will he capitulate on other conservative issues like, oh, let’s say, Faith Based Initiatives? )

Bottom line, this has been a rather disastrous week for Obama.  Is he dead in the water?  No way.  He’s fresh, he’s enthusiastic, and he’s got Hollywood and main stream media completely in his pocket.  However, the more he panders to the issues he’s staked his career by opposing to this point, the less enthusiastic his core will become.  And, if he thinks by pandering to the conservatives will make them forget his previous history, he’ll learn a very powerful message in politics:  Convservative voters never forget.  Liberal voters generally tend to be a lot more flexible.  However, it was Bush’s pandering to the “center” early in his presidency that cost him his unfettered support of his core.  And, for the next eight years, he’s had only tepid support since.  It was only the incredibly inept candidacy of John Kerry that kept him in office.  The problem for Obama in my opinion, is John McCain is no John Kerry.

Technorati Tags: aclu, barack, bush, conservative, conservatives, dailykos, democrat, democrats, faith based initiative, feingold, FISA, jesse-jackson, john-kerry, legislation, liberal, liberals, mccain, nuts, obama, president, race, republican, republicans, Senate, vote

Tags: aclu, barack, bush, conservative, conservatives, dailykos, democrat, democrats, faith based initiative, feingold, FISA, jesse-jackson, john-kerry, legislation, liberal, liberals, mccain, nuts, obama, president, race, republican, republicans, Senate, vote

No Comments »

Via See-Dubya at Michelle Malkin’s blog, with an assist from Gasbuddy:

Apparently Nancy is finally starting to feel the heat.  So, she came up with the ultimate solution her feable mind could produce:

July 8, 2008

The Honorable George W. Bush

The President of the United States

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

The severe energy price crisis facing millions of Americans compels strong presidential action to assist consumers and strengthen the economy. Two months ago, after initially opposing our proposal to suspend government purchases of high-priced oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), you signed our bipartisan legislation into law.

But further action is needed to protect our economy. I call on you to use your authority as President to draw down a small portion of the oil held in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in order to expand available supplies and help reduce the record prices that are helping push the economy toward recession.

Since your Administration took office, the price of oil has increased from less than $30 per barrel to a recent record high of nearly $150, and the price of gasoline has risen from $1.47 per gallon to a record high of $4.11 per gallon. The destabilizing impact of these price increases, driven both by market forces and by excessive speculation, have been devastating to tens of millions of Americans and businesses - and to our larger economy as a whole. These are the kinds of circumstances, in addition to national security conditions, in which utilization of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is more than justified.

As you are aware, there is nothing new or untested about releasing oil from the Reserve or deferring purchases during times of economic instability. You have done it yourself - as have President Clinton and President George H.W. Bush:

• 1990-1991 Desert Shield/Storm Drawdown. President George H.W. Bush withdrew oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve ahead of the first Gulf War on January 17, 1991. The Administration conducted a 4 million barrel test sale in August 1990 and a Presidentially-ordered drawdown of 17 million barrels in January 1991. According to the Energy Department, “The rapid decision to release crude oil from government-controlled stocks in the United States and other OECD countries helped calm the global oil market, and prices began to moderate. When the 1991 SPR drawdown was announced in conjunction with Operation Desert Storm, the price of oil immediately dropped $8 per barrel.” [Emphasis added, White House 2003 assessment of SPR]
• 2000 Swap in the Face of Rising Prices. In late 2000, President Bill Clinton authorized a swap of oil in which 30 million barrels were released from the SPR to address rising oil prices and alleviate the threat of a home heating oil crisis due to low inventories. The MIT expert testified: “The results were immediate, in spite of the fact that oil prices had not yet moved into the market - demonstrating the psychological impacts on the market when the U.S. signals its intention to act. . . By the end of the year, actual oil prices had dropped from $30.94 to $20.38 per barrel, a 34% decrease.” [Emphasis added, Testimony of Melanie Kenderdine, Select Committee on Energy and Global Warming, 4/24/08]
• 2005 Hurricane Katrina, Drawdown. Your Administration also offered 30 million gallons of SPR oil (only 11 million gallons were actually withdrawn), helping reduce crude prices by about $5 a barrel. [Investor's Business Daily editorial, 3/8/08]

Releasing oil from the Reserve is a tool to manage our national and economic security, and when judiciously used will in no way jeopardize national security. The Reserve is currently 97 percent full - the highest level ever - with enough oil to meet our national security needs. We have more oil in the SPR than we did in 2006 (702 million barrels vs. 688 million in 2006) when you deferred deliveries stating: “Our Strategic Reserve is sufficiently large enough to guard against any major supply disruption over the next few months.” The current inventory exceeds our International Energy Program commitment to maintain at least 90 days of oil stocks in reserve (when you include private and public stocks, as other countries do).

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, oil from SPR deployment can enter the market 13 days after a Presidential decision. Deploying a small portion of the resources in the SPR would provide much needed assistance to American consumers facing record prices and help our economy during a serious period of instability. I strongly urge you to use every available tool, including deployment of the SPR, to provide timely relief for American consumers and businesses.

Thank you for your consideration of this urgent request.

Best regards,

NANCY PELOSI

Speaker of the House

Now, I’m going to make this as simple as possible.  Basically she’s stating that by releasing 30 million gallons, we could drop the price of oil by five dollars a gallon.  Here is why this is screwed:

1. In 1990, the price of crude was about $23.00 a barrel.  Dropping the price $8 meant a about a 33% drop in the price of gas.  The price of gas at the pump dropped from about $1.27 to about $1.01.  That meant something. 
2. In 2000, the price of crude dropped from $30.94 to $20.38.  That meant something.  THe price at the pump peaked at about $1.65, then dropped to $1.38 by the end of the year.  Although a 16% drop, it was quickly erased within six months of 2001.
3. In 2005, the problem was not a market issue, but rather a one-time event that disrupted the US’s ability to refine crude.  By releasing the strategic reserve, it simply kept the supply going until the rigs and refineries could be repaired.

Now, the point is, 30 million gallons in 1991 supplied about 2 days of US average consumption.  In 2000, it supplied about one and a half days.  I don’t count 2005 because that was a very proper reaction to an extinuating event the strategic reserve is actually designed for.  In 2008, it still is about one and one half days.  In 1991, it had an impact on price.  In 2000 it basically did not.  What would be the difference?  See if this makes sense:

That is a chart showing world consumption.  In 2000, the US consumed about 19.701 million barrels a day.  Projected for 2009, the US is about 20.339.  Now, that’s not much of an increase.  In 1991, it was about 16 million.  Bottom line, the US isn’t using much more than we did in 1991.  Taking into consideration the economic growth since 1991, the US is actually profoundly more efficient than it was in 1991.  Now, that first column of figures about doubles in the last ten years.  That folks, is China.  The fourth column is the rest of the world besides the US and China.  Now, where the problem is, is that in 2000, OPEC was a surplus supplier.  They were producing more than they were selling.  Now, the reverse is true due exclusively to the fact that China and the rest of the world are demanding more.  Not the US.  Does it get any clearer than that?

Apparently not to Nancy.

She still refuses to encourage any production that would offset the supply that OPEC can not meet.  The result of OPEC not being able to meet that demand is skyrocketing crude prices.  Even simple math should tell her that $8, being a 33% drop in crude that resulted in a 25% drop in gas price didn’t get the full value of the crude discount.  There’s an 8% discrepency.  So, doing the math, if she gets $8 on $145, which is 5.5%, and loses the same 8% of that, that would be a 5% cut on price.  That folks, would amount to 21 cents on $4.15.  The price of gas rose faster than that last week alone.  And, given the world demand that we are so reliant on, I doubt we’d get even that because OPEC will simply sell that 30 million barrels to someone else, China or India I’m sure would take it in a heartbeat.  And, then, we’d have to re-supply teh SPR at a much higher price anyway or risk complete collapse economically if another Katrina does occur.

Simple fact here Nancy, there are no magic bullets.  We have to re-think and re-tool our supply mechanism before this goes away.  And, until this goes away, we will not be in a position to shake down OPEC like we could twenty years ago.

Do I think Nancy Pelosi is truly that stupid?  Yes I do.  However, I truly believe there are a lot of people in this country that will buy her hrhetoric simply because they love to hate our President.

Technorati Tags: bush, china, clinton, demand, drawdown, economy, energy, Katrina, oil, oline, opec, pelosi, petroleum, president, price, recession, SPR

Tags: bush, china, clinton, demand, drawdown, economy, energy, Katrina, oil, oline, opec, pelosi, petroleum, president, price, recession, SPR

No Comments »