“Oh MY, God!   That is code for $4.00/gallon gasoline and super skyrocketing higher heating, lighting and grocery costs…   And, just in time, when we are all losing our jobs and our economy is collapsing due to the Socialistic despotic Union loving Commie spendthrift likes of Dingy Harry and his ilk…    Isn’t that special?”   - -  Capt. Karl

AP

Thursday, February 19, 2009

WASHINGTON – Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he wants to take up a bill to tackle global warming by the end of the summer.

The Nevada Democrat told The Associated Press in an interview late Thursday that the Senate in the next few weeks will move to pass an energy bill focusing on several of President Barack Obama’s priorities, but then ” hopefully late this summer do the global warming part of it.”

Senator Harry Reid (A.K.A.: Dingy Harry), Senate Majority Usurper.

There is widespread agreement that the climate change issue must be addressed. But there remains sharp disagreement on just how to do it.

Many Republicans argue that the Democrats’ plan to cap the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming may be too expensive and produce higher energy costs. Democratic congressional leaders maintain that costs can be contained and that failure to act soon could have even more severe economic consequences.

Reid says he is convinced that many senators want to move on the issue this year.

“We have to take a whack at it,” he said.

Reid, who is up for re-election next year, has assumed a high profile on the need to promote “clean energy” sources such as wind, solar and biomass that do not produce carbon dioxide, the predominant greenhouse gas. These are also energy projects popular in Reid’s home state, where several major solar projects are under way or planned.

Next week, Reid will participate in a “clean energy” forum being convened by the Center for American

AlGore stands in front of the world he destroyed economically via the total scam of "Global Warming" causing massive increased costs of living on innocent human beings across the world.

Progress. Others participating will include former President Bill Clinton, possibly former Vice President Al Gore,and senior Obama administration officials.

Reid earlier this week said that he expected Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, to produce an energy package within two weeks that will be ready for floor action. Among other things, Bingaman’s bill would require utilities to produce 4 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources by 2011, increasing to 20 percent over the following decade, according to a draft of the legislation.  OH  MY  GOD ! ! ! !  Do you guys remember what happened to California?  The land of forcing all manner of Global Warming B.S. down the throats of their citizens in the form of “requirements”?  They are now over $42 BILLION DOLLARS in debt.  They have refused to send out tax refunds to millions of people expecting them.  They are talking of raising all sorts of taxes.  And, people are leaving California by the droves!  Don’t fall for this people, study, read and learn about the sham of Global Warming for yourselves.  The whole thing is B.S.!  I have spent months researching all of this.  You can find all sorts of science articles on The Liberty Tree Lantern so that these damn tyrants don’t screw with your minds, for the sake of controlling and manipulating us.  Much of our financial disaster has been caused by the false “beguilement” of Global Warming.  Our economy can’t take anymore of it before total collapse.

Reid said he favors a 20 percent renewable standard for utilities, but added, “we’ll get by with what we can.”

Many states already have requirements for utilities to use renewable energy, but attempts in Congress to establish a national requirement have fallen short repeatedly because of regional divisions. Lawmakers from the Southeast particularly have argued that utilities in their area would be hard pressed to meet a federal requirement because they lack wind or solar energy resources.

Reid said he also favors some additional tax incentives aimed at spurring energy efficiency, especially for construction of more energy efficient buildings.

“We’ve got to give people incentives to build better buildings and also do something about the buildings that are there right now,” said Reid.

But Reid said he doesn’t expect the Senate to tackle the issue of offshore oil drilling again.

While Congress last fall ended a drilling moratorium that covered 85 percent of the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, Reid said he’s convinced that Obama’s Interior Department will protect those areas where drilling shouldn’t be allowed.

“I don’t think we need to do anything legislatively,” he said.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar recently scrapped a Bush administration blueprint for offshore energy development through 2015 and said he was developing a new plan, keeping in mind that some areas are not suitable for drilling and putting greater emphasis on developing wind and wave energy projects offshore.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Do you folks have any idea how much more you are going to have to pay for energy if Dingy Harry gets his way?  Did you enjoy $4.00/ gallon gasoline, massive increases in the cost of heat and light and huge increased costs in groceries?  This is what is on tap if you don’t stop the Senate Majority Tyrant!

Have you seen the price of a barrel of crude go up about $4.00 today.  I was wondering how the price of oil could go up that much.  I figured it had something to do with B.O. and or his Interior Secretary of despotism and creator of massively higher cost of living expenses comrade Ken Salazar.  How could this bastard stop our oil companies from producing our own cheap domestic oil supplies?  That S.O.B.! ! ! !

If we don’t start doing something to force these oppressors to let our oil companies produce our energy supplies we are really headed for trouble when we already have so many people out of work and our economy failing.  Don’t you see what these people are doing to us?  When are we going to rise up and tell these bastards where to stick it?  When are we going to tell our public “SERVANTS’ to get the hell out of our way?  When are we going to tell them to DRILL  BABY,,,  DRILL!

How long are we going to let these bastards destroy our financial lives, especially when there are so many scientists that state that we are going into another ice age?  And NASA satilites indicate a downward temperature trend over almost ten years?  I sure haven’t seen any global warming lately?  Have you?  We’ve had a lot of below zero days here in Wisconsin and plenty of snow.

Excuse me, I need to go out to my garage and hold onto my pitchfork, again, for awhile.  I’m getting those forward twitching compulsions in my arms again.  Perhaps another rope and a box of ammo, too!

Look what the hell our U.S. Government is doing to us, our economy and our pocket books again.  We have to do something about this!  Write and call your representative before they kill us off financially!  We need this oil to keep prices low!  Lower is better to save us, our jobs, our money and our American Dream!

- Capt. Karl

Nick Snow
Washington Editor

WASHINGTON, DC, Feb. 5 — US Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar directed the Bureau of Land Management on Feb. 4 not to accept $6 million in successful bids on 77 tracts offered in BLM’s Dec. 18 oil and gas lease sale in Utah.

“The 77 parcels that the Bush administration offered on the doorsteps of some of our national icons raised several troubling questions. I have directed the BLM not to accept the bids. We will take time to review the processes behind their inclusion in the lease sale,” he told reporters in a teleconference.

Salazar indicated that he does not expect his decision to be legally challenged. “The government contract is not formally completed until the BLM accepts the bids, which has not happened in this case,” he said. Payments for the winning bids on the 77 parcels will be returned and leasing will proceed on the 39 remaining tracts from the sale, he added.

The decision was the secretary’s second action involving a BLM oil and gas lease sale in less than a week. He ordered the DOI agency on Feb. 2 to remove eight tracts from a Feb. 3 lease sale after Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal expressed concerns about them (OGJ Online, Feb. 4, 2009). The offering of 137 remaining parcels went ahead as scheduled, raising nearly $2.4 million from the sale of leasing rights and from rental fees on 112 parcels.

Salazar did not rule out some of the 77 Utah tracts ultimately being leased. “I don’t necessarily believe that all of them won’t go into oil and gas development sometime in the future. I do believe that the proximity of Arches National Park, Dinosaur National Monument, and Nine-Mile Canyon raised serious questions about the planning process that was used,” he said.

But he stopped short of saying that the resource management plans which Utah’s BLM office completed prior to the December lease sale could be overturned. “We’ll look at them as we get our feet better planted on the ground,” he said.

Additional actions likely
Salazar also suggested that further actions could be forthcoming. “At this point, we are looking at many of the Bush administration decisions. Some of them are probably going to be good decisions. Others we will disagree with. There were a number of decisions that were made without going through the proper environmental reviews and using sound sciences to develop them. We are reviewing all of those and expect to have additional announcements in the days and weeks ahead,” he said.

Environmental organizations applauded Salazar’s move. “Today’s announcement signals a new era in the way our natural resources are managed,” said Sierra Club Deputy Director Bruce Hamilton. “The Obama administration clearly understands that instead of allowing the oil industry to destroy places like Arches National Park, we should be investing in the kind of clean energy solutions that curb global warming and leave our natural treasures intact.”

Stephen Bloch, conservation director for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance in Salt Lake City, called the secretary’s action “a critical first step in bringing balance back to public lands management in Utah’s remarkable red-rock country. This decision rescues the stunning landscapes of Desolation Canyon and the White River from the ravages of oil and gas development.”

Oil and gas trade association officials had the opposite reaction. “The decision runs counter to President Barack Obama’s stated goal of reducing US reliance on foreign energy sources and is at odds with the judgment of most Americans that the nation should develop more of its own oil and natural gas,” said American Petroleum Institute Pres. Jack N. Gerard. “With US domestic oil production declining, we need to develop more and keep more jobs and economic activity in this country,” he added.

Kathleen Sgamma, government affairs director for the Independent Petroleum Association of Mountain States in Denver, said, “At a time when the Utah legislature has contemplated cutting a day from the school year to address the budget shortfall, the state is losing income from its share of the lease sale, not to mention royalty and other tax revenue from forfeited production. With this decision, our government is denying access to American energy that belongs to all Americans and making it even more difficult to increase energy security and tackle climate change.”

The administrations effectiveness to raise the living costs on the average American just trying to keep his or her home and their jobs is very impressive.  

The Liberty Tree Lantern is amazed with regards to Obama’s ability and detirmination to harm the remaining wealth of individual American people who are trying to just survive in the economic climate that the U.S. Congress has caused by mulititudes of scofflaw activities and unconstitutional legislation over the last 9 decades.

Americans for Prosperity Urges the Obama Administration Not to Block Domestic Energy Production

By Isaac MacMillen

America needs more and better sources of energy. That’s not up for discussion. But what a firestorm has erupted over what those sources should be!

Despite public opinion (e.g. with prices down, support for offshore drilling remains high—at 68%), America’s energy solutions continue to be dictated and repressed by Hard Left environmentalist groups—and they are increasingly turning to the courts to enforce their liberal, anti-energy agenda.

A quick look at available energy sources tells a sad tale:

• Coal? In Utah, the permit for a coal-burning plant was blocked by the EPA for CO emission reasons. This halts the construction of new coal power plants. Using similar environmentalist reasoning, a judge in Georgia blocked another coal plant earlier this year. Even clean-coal plants are feeling the pressure, with 8 plants forced to cancel construction in 2007 because of regulation-driven costs or uncertainties.

• Natural gas? A natural gas pipeline in Long Island was blocked for environmental reasons. And the fate of a gas pipeline in Colorado remains uncertain.

• Drilling? We have the oil. But as Shell found out last year, courts can step in and prevent exploration. Of course, given the strength of envirolobby supporters in Congress, Shell—and other oil companies—will have to consider the courts the least of their worries. The lifting of the offshore drilling moratorium may be short-lived. New, advanced methods of extracting oil may be doomed by environmental regulation. And the oceans of oil and gas in the continental United States will continue to be neglected.

• Nuclear? Regulations have made this—the safest of all power options—economically impractical. Too bad, as it has already helped France achieve virtually complete energy independence. But apparently France’s near-pristine safety record doesn’t move their hard-core dogmatists. A quick glance at the safety precautions in place show that most fears of nuclear disaster (accidental or deliberate) are misplaced, as the threat is extremely remote.

• Wind and solar power? The same liberals who have opposed offshore drilling because of its supposed aesthetic impact—will they be silent as huge wind and solar farms are built across beautiful plains and rugged desert? (Wait—looks like they’ve already spoken up—as when Robert Kennedy, Jr., put his own aesthetic wants above his neighbors’ energy needs.)

Environmental radicals have even used the courts for measures as extreme as forcing the U.S. Navy to cease a vital sonar drill because of potential environmental impact, despite a paucity of proof or a scintilla of evidence. (Fortunately, the Supreme Court overturned the ruling.)

How well is the Left’s judicial activism working? The environmental legal group Beverage and Diamond stated:

“By way of these lawsuits, the courts are to some extent shaping climate change policy while state regulatory agencies act more slowly.”

Donnell Van Noppen III, the president of Earthjustice, a group affiliated with the liberal Sierra Club, stated:

“People who support us are the ones who really believe that the use of the courts is crucial. It’s been really proven true in the last few years that the courts are essential because we’ve had a Congress and a White House really wanting to go in quite an anti-environmental direction, and the courts have been the backstop.”

The damage the courts are doing to American energy policy is staggering. As a tool of the liberal envirolobby, they have wreaked havoc on America’s energy policies, turning solutions into problems, including the Supreme Court classifying carbon dioxide a pollutant regulable under the Clean Air Act. But that should come as no surprise to those who have followed their antics throughout the years.

The zeal that radical environmentalists have shown to saving the planet—even at the cost of human life—will ultimately prove fruitless. While they may preserve the planet, what is the point if no one is left to enjoy it? It’s no wonder that they are forced to rely on an oligarchy of black robed judges to proceed with their plans.

If courts continue dictating court-ordered environmental policy, American businesses may eventually find themselves in the same situation as a UK power plant, which was vandalized by environmental activists to the tune of nearly $75,000. But when it brought the crooks to court, the vandalism was ruled “justified” in light of the “greater threat” of global warming.

Businesses need to know, for the long-term, what the rules are going to be. At present, these rules change so often that it is impossible for the businesses to be confident that the investment they make today will not be pillaged tomorrow.

So, it’s true: America needs more and better sources of energy. But right now, even more, it needs to stop the courts from doing the bidding of the radical envirolobby before its wholly contrived firestorm leaves energy independence in ashes.

Isaac MacMillen is a contributing editor of ALG News Bureau.

So the Congressional incumbent Steve Kagen from Green Bay, Wisconsin, from the 8^th district has voted to raise our price of Gasoline, heat, light, electricity and food even higher.  And, what’s worse he did it by passing legislation designed to make a fool out of us, in a way that he can at the same time say that he opened up millions of square miles of offshore areas for oil exploration and drilling.  How stupid does Mr. Kagen think we are?  Mr. Kagen is not only an enemy to our pocketbooks and our way of life, he is a pure insult to our intelligence!

 I don’t know about you but this ol’Capt is mad as hell at this insult and the financial harm that Mr. Kagen is trying to deal us.  I am not going to take it anymore and I hope you will not either.

Here are all the Aye votes who are against you financially and the Nay votes that are trying to help you financially by lowering the price of energy and everything you need to live, by allowing us the freedom (from Government) to supply our energy from our own domestic resources:

Also see: http://captkarl.blogivists.com/2008/09/17/offshore-drilling-up-to-senate-after-house-passage/

And:  http://captkarl.blogivists.com/2008/09/17/204/

Republican Energy Fumble
August 8, 2008; Page A13

Politics has its puzzling moments. John McCain and most of the GOP experienced one late last week. That was when five of their own set about dismantling the best issue Republicans have in the upcoming election.

It’s taken time, but Sen. McCain and his party have finally found — in energy — an issue that’s working for them. Riding voter discontent over high gas prices, the GOP has made antidrilling Democrats this summer’s headlines.

AP

Members of the “Gang of 10″ discuss their energy plan, Aug. 1.

Their enthusiasm has given conservative candidates a boost in tough races. And Mr. McCain has pressured Barack Obama into an energy debate, where the Democrat has struggled to explain shifting and confused policy proposals.

Still, it was probably too much to assume every Republican would work out that their side was winning this issue. And so, last Friday, in stumbled Sens. Lindsey Graham, John Thune, Saxby Chambliss, Bob Corker and Johnny Isakson — alongside five Senate Democrats. This “Gang of 10″ announced a “sweeping” and “bipartisan” energy plan to break Washington’s energy “stalemate.” What they did was throw every vulnerable Democrat, and Mr. Obama, a life preserver.

That’s because the plan is a Democratic giveaway. New production on offshore federal lands is left to state legislatures, and then in only four coastal states. The regulatory hurdles are huge. And the bill bars drilling within 50 miles of the coast — putting off limits some of the most productive areas. Alaska’s oil-rich Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is still a no-go.

The highlight is instead $84 billion in tax credits, subsidies and federal handouts for alternative fuels and renewables. The Gang of 10 intends to pay for all this in part by raising taxes on . . . oil companies! The Sierra Club couldn’t have penned it better. And so the Republican Five has potentially given antidrilling Democrats the political cover they need to neutralize energy through November.

Sen. Obama was thrilled. He quickly praised the Gang’s bipartisan spirit, and warmed up to a possible compromise. Of course, he means removing even the token drilling provisions now in the bill. But he’s only too happy for the focus to remain on the Gang’s efforts, and in particular on the five Republicans providing his party its fig leaf.

Equally gleeful was Louisiana’s Mary Landrieu, the Senate’s most vulnerable Democrat. She had been sweating the energy debate, especially after her vote against more oil-shale production — a position her Republican opponent, John Kennedy, had used against her to great effect. Yet there she was, chummily standing with the Gang of 10 and boasting that she is working with “five Republicans” to “lower prices at the pump by increasing offshore drilling here at home.”

Mr. McCain, who had been commanding the energy debate, was left to explain why he, of all people, wasn’t more enthusiastic about a “bipartisan” effort on energy, especially one that includes “drilling.” His camp was forced to take refuge in taxes, explaining that their boss couldn’t sign up for a bill that included more. If this is what Mr. McCain’s good friend Lindsey Graham considers “helping,” somebody might want to ask him to stop.

And pity poor Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has been working overtime to stanch GOP losses this fall and head off a filibuster-proof Democratic Senate. His dogged efforts to highlight Democratic opposition to drilling has kept energy in the news and laid the groundwork for GOP candidates to use the issue to their advantage.

In the Colorado Senate race, Democrats had christened former GOP Rep. Bob Schaffer “Big Oil Bob” — hoping to smear his oil industry career. “Big Oil Bob” has instead embraced his pro-drilling positions and is pummeling opponent Mark Udall for his antidrilling stance. In recent weeks, Mr. Schaffer has erased Mr. Udall’s lead. Polls show Republican Sens. Norm Coleman (Minnesota) and John Sununu (New Hampshire) both climbing in the polls on the back of strong energy arguments. As two of the GOP’s most vulnerable senators, both might well have run for cover with the Gang of 10. Instead they’re fighting on the merits.

The “bipartisan” Republican senators have undercut these efforts, and boosted Ms. Landrieu. They’ve even put a smile on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s face. He’d been struggling to tamp down the energy debate through November, where he hopes to increase his majority and permanently shelve drilling. He’s now counting on the Gang to fruitlessly continue “negotiations” straight through the Senate’s short September session and solve his problem for him.

Not one of the five Republicans in the Gang is facing a tough election this year. That’s the sort of security that leads to bad decisions. And theirs is the sort of thinking that could leave Republicans in a permanent minority.

Write to kim@wsj.com

See all of today’s editorials and op-eds, plus video commentary, on Opinion Journal.

And add your comments to the Opinion Journal forum.

POTOMAC WATCH By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL

Republican Energy Fumble
August 8, 2008; Page A13

Politics has its puzzling moments. John McCain and most of the GOP experienced one late last week. That was when five of their own set about dismantling the best issue Republicans have in the upcoming election.

It’s taken time, but Sen. McCain and his party have finally found — in energy — an issue that’s working for them. Riding voter discontent over high gas prices, the GOP has made antidrilling Democrats this summer’s headlines.

AP

Members of the “Gang of 10″ discuss their energy plan, Aug. 1.

Their enthusiasm has given conservative candidates a boost in tough races. And Mr. McCain has pressured Barack Obama into an energy debate, where the Democrat has struggled to explain shifting and confused policy proposals.

Still, it was probably too much to assume every Republican would work out that their side was winning this issue. And so, last Friday, in stumbled Sens. Lindsey Graham, John Thune, Saxby Chambliss, Bob Corker and Johnny Isakson — alongside five Senate Democrats. This “Gang of 10″ announced a “sweeping” and “bipartisan” energy plan to break Washington’s energy “stalemate.” What they did was throw every vulnerable Democrat, and Mr. Obama, a life preserver.

That’s because the plan is a Democratic giveaway. New production on offshore federal lands is left to state legislatures, and then in only four coastal states. The regulatory hurdles are huge. And the bill bars drilling within 50 miles of the coast — putting off limits some of the most productive areas. Alaska’s oil-rich Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is still a no-go.

The highlight is instead $84 billion in tax credits, subsidies and federal handouts for alternative fuels and renewables. The Gang of 10 intends to pay for all this in part by raising taxes on . . . oil companies! The Sierra Club couldn’t have penned it better. And so the Republican Five has potentially given antidrilling Democrats the political cover they need to neutralize energy through November.

Sen. Obama was thrilled. He quickly praised the Gang’s bipartisan spirit, and warmed up to a possible compromise. Of course, he means removing even the token drilling provisions now in the bill. But he’s only too happy for the focus to remain on the Gang’s efforts, and in particular on the five Republicans providing his party its fig leaf.

Equally gleeful was Louisiana’s Mary Landrieu, the Senate’s most vulnerable Democrat. She had been sweating the energy debate, especially after her vote against more oil-shale production — a position her Republican opponent, John Kennedy, had used against her to great effect. Yet there she was, chummily standing with the Gang of 10 and boasting that she is working with “five Republicans” to “lower prices at the pump by increasing offshore drilling here at home.”

Mr. McCain, who had been commanding the energy debate, was left to explain why he, of all people, wasn’t more enthusiastic about a “bipartisan” effort on energy, especially one that includes “drilling.” His camp was forced to take refuge in taxes, explaining that their boss couldn’t sign up for a bill that included more. If this is what Mr. McCain’s good friend Lindsey Graham considers “helping,” somebody might want to ask him to stop.

And pity poor Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has been working overtime to stanch GOP losses this fall and head off a filibuster-proof Democratic Senate. His dogged efforts to highlight Democratic opposition to drilling has kept energy in the news and laid the groundwork for GOP candidates to use the issue to their advantage.

In the Colorado Senate race, Democrats had christened former GOP Rep. Bob Schaffer “Big Oil Bob” — hoping to smear his oil industry career. “Big Oil Bob” has instead embraced his pro-drilling positions and is pummeling opponent Mark Udall for his antidrilling stance. In recent weeks, Mr. Schaffer has erased Mr. Udall’s lead. Polls show Republican Sens. Norm Coleman (Minnesota) and John Sununu (New Hampshire) both climbing in the polls on the back of strong energy arguments. As two of the GOP’s most vulnerable senators, both might well have run for cover with the Gang of 10. Instead they’re fighting on the merits.

The “bipartisan” Republican senators have undercut these efforts, and boosted Ms. Landrieu. They’ve even put a smile on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s face. He’d been struggling to tamp down the energy debate through November, where he hopes to increase his majority and permanently shelve drilling. He’s now counting on the Gang to fruitlessly continue “negotiations” straight through the Senate’s short September session and solve his problem for him.

Not one of the five Republicans in the Gang is facing a tough election this year. That’s the sort of security that leads to bad decisions. And theirs is the sort of thinking that could leave Republicans in a permanent minority.

Write to kim@wsj.com

See all of today’s editorials and op-eds, plus video commentary, on Opinion Journal.

And add your comments to the Opinion Journal forum.

Meanwhile, China is drilling for oil not far from off our Atlantic coast to harvest our domestic oil out from under us while the U.S. Congress keeps it illegal for our companies to harvest our oil off shore.

China’s Cars, Accelerating A Global Demand for Fuel
By Ariana Eunjung Cha
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, July 28, 2008; A01

SONGJIANG, China — Nodding his head to the disco music blaring out of his car’s nine speakers, Zhang Linsen swings the shiny, black Hummer H2 out of his company’s gates and on to the spacious four-lane road.

Running a hand over his closely shaved head, Zhang scans the expanse of high-end suburban offices and villas that a decade ago was just another patch of farmland outside of Shanghai. To his left is a royal blue sedan with a couple and a baby, in front of him a lone young woman being chauffeured in a van.

“In China, size matters,” says Zhang, the 44-year-old founder of a media and graphic design company. “People want to have a car that shows off their status in society. No one wants to buy small.”

Zhang grasps the wheels of his Hummer, called “hanma” or “fierce horse” in Chinese, and hits the accelerator.

Car ownership in China is exploding, and it’s not only cars but also sport-utility vehicles, pickup trucks and other gas-guzzling rides. Elsewhere in the world, the popularity of these vehicles has tumbled as the cost of oil has soared. But in China, the number of SUVs sold rose 43 percent in May compared with the previous year, and full-size sedans were up 15 percent. Indeed, China’s demand for gas is much of the reason for the dramatic run-up in global oil prices.

To read more as to how nice the Chinese have it and how wealthy they are getting because of freedom / capitalism in business there read: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/27/AR2008072701911_pf.html

When will we Americans demand the same “business” environment, rights and resulting prosperity as the Chinese worker has?  When are We The People going to demand that we be able to harvest as much as a TRILLION barrels of crude, according to some reports, from our own domestically available sources?  We all must remember, it is all up to us individually to decide to do something about this.  The U.S. Congress is not going to do us any favors.

The Liberty Tree Lantern believes that as soon as China feels that they have enough wealth, they will use the prosperity to resolve pollution problems, but with in the realm of reality and common sense, not insanity or baloney of “Global Warming” or “Climate Change” by mankind which we have provided evidence in other posts simply does not exist.