Liberals who care about their fellow man should rethink U.S. energy policy.

[PlatyPius 5]

But, from this data you are drawing an illogical conclusion...

Perhaps being financially secure or "doing better than 5 years ago" leads to one being a Republican, rather than being Republican leads to doing better. The Republican party has typically stood for affluence and has long been the fraternity of those who "have". The Democratic party has long been representative of those who "have not". Ergo, it only makes sense that Democrats would say they are worse off than 5 years ago.

Also, Republicans typically consider "standard of living" to equal "money". Democrats - or more specifically, Liberals - view standard of living as all encompassing. War in Iraq affects my standard of living. Destruction of the environment affects my standard of living. The Patriot Act affects my standard of living.

With George Bush as president - and considering criteria other than money - my standard of living has plummeted in five years. Money-wise, I'm only a little worse off due to the gas prices. Life is more than money, however, so I account for all things that affect my standard of living.

The reality is that since the economy is a political issue for the Obama worshipers they have to make it seem as bad as they can, damn the facts.

I found something interesting just now. A gallup poll on the economy. The top numbers don't look so good on the face of it. 56% say they are better or the same as they were 5 years ago.

But if you scroll down and look at who is saying they are worse off you get to the real truth. Democrats say they are worse off by a margin of 57% to 34% while independents are evenly split and reps say they are better off by a margin of 59% to 23%.

This has only two possible meanings. Dems don't know how to manage their financial lives while reps do or this is a political issue. I would say it's the latter. All dog is doing is trying to bolster his messiah's chances by making the economy out to be worse than it really is.

I also like the way Gallup chose to title the poll. "Four in 10 Americans See Their Standard of Living Declining" rather than "6 in 10 Americans see their standard of living go up or stay the same". Just shows the little ways the bias is working.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107749/Four-Ame...-Declining.aspx

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Most libs are whiners, plain and simple.

Edited June 15, 2008 by ={Rogue}=

[SaadBell 0]

[zqt3344 21]

GaryC you will be ostracized and castrated once again by the radical liberal hypocritical left wing on here for posting this. But you are right and it is true.

I suggest every radical liberal on here go Hug a tree today and then go buy a bike and ride it every where or walk, no more hypocrites driving their cars or flying in their planes anywhere, if you want to talk the talk then walk the walk. Be good for many of you to drop some weight anyway. For it you liberals sitting on computers pecking away eating bon bons and getting overweight and thus driving up the health care costs in this country for the rest of the poor innocent hard working in shape Americans!

A New Deal on Energy

Liberals who care about their fellow man should rethink U.S. energy policy.

By Victor Davis Hanson

The other day in southwestern Fresno County, a poor part of Central California, I talked with a number of folks at a rural gas station. Most drove second- and third-hand pickups, large cast-off sedans or used SUVs. Their general complaint was twofold: They didn’t have the cash to buy a new fuel-efficient Honda or Toyota. And they were now spending a day or two of their wages just to fuel their cars for their long rural commutes.

I also happen to fill up three hours away on the San Francisco peninsula near Stanford University, where I work. High-priced hybrid cars and new more-efficient SUVs are everywhere. Mass transit is available and crammed.

After listening to these quite different motorists, I can confirm an obvious rule about energy use: The wealthier and better-educated seem less concerned about the price of gas.

Indeed, from my informal conversations at two very different gas stations, I would go even further: The wealthy, particularly those who are politically liberal, also like that high-priced gas translates into less burning of fossil fuels by others and helps accelerate research into alternative energies.

What these elites don’t seem to realize is that the energy policies they tend to advocate are for the present paralyzing almost everyone else in the country — and that the truly ethical and environmental solution would require embracing positions long considered anathema to traditional liberalism.

The debate in Congress over more refineries and nuclear power plants; drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and off our coasts; and developing oil shale, tar sands, and liquid coal usually follows a script fit for a soap opera: Grasping Republicans supposedly wish to enrich energy companies, while idealistic Democrats want only to protect the environment. But those black-and-white positions, hatched in the good old days of $1.50-a-gallon gas, should now be revisited on the basis of far different moral considerations.

One is fairness to the poor and middle class. Like it or not, radical environmentalism (and those behind it who provide the lobbying, funding, and influence to block energy legislation) appeals to an elite not all that worried when gas prices rise or electricity rates go up — since fossil energy use goes down.

But a paradox is that most environmentalists think of themselves as egalitarians. So, instead of objecting to the view of a derrick from the California hills above the Santa Barbara coast, shouldn’t a liberal estate owner instead console himself that the offshore pumping will help a nearby farm worker or carpenter get to work without going broke?

Another paradox: American laws and technology ensure a rig off Florida or in Alaska has far less chance of springing a leak than one in the Persian Gulf or the Russian tundra. If there really is a shared Planet Earth, then aren’t we all its collective stewards? By locking out energy exploration in the United States, we are encouraging it almost everywhere else.

No one is talking of more domestic drilling to give our SUVs and Hummers one last gasp at $2 a gallon gas. Everyone is already cutting back and waiting for more efficient engines and methods of conservation. Instead, producing as much of our own energy as possible means extracting more safely the world’s oil for the world’s biggest consumer.

Consider also how oil triggers a massive transfer of wealth abroad that is as illiberal as it is dangerous. Productive energy-strapped Americans, Europeans, Japanese, Chinese, and Indians are working day and night to give the world critical material goods, ideas, and services. To be blunt, oil-rich Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Russia, and Iran are not.

At best, the massive transfer of national wealth to most oil producers translates into a Chinese worker on an assembly line working longer for less money while artificial island resorts pop up in the Persian Gulf. At worst, that strapped Chinese fabricator is also working harder for another Iranian centrifuge, al-Qaida landmine, or Saudi-funded madrassa.

We should stop talking about suing the OPEC cartel, jawboning the House of Saud to lower prices, blaming the oil companies, or adding yet another massive tax on sky-high gas prices. What we don’t need right now are more pie-in-the-sky sermons about wind and solar saving us all or about millions of new jobs in green technology that can be almost instantly created.

That all may be possible in a generation. But in the here and now, we still need to tap the abundant conventional energy we already have in the United States. And in large part that means building, mining, and drilling.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Y2NjM...WMyOTEyNDg0MzM=

[Ggreen 12]

GaryC you will be ostracized and castrated once again by the radical liberal hypocritical left wing on here for posting this. But you are right and it is true.

Are you talking to your self?!!

the eyyyyyyye is watching us...

[SaadBell 0]

I suggest every radical liberal on here go Hug a tree today and then go buy a bike and ride it every where or walk, no more hypocrites driving their cars or flying in their planes anywhere, if you want to talk the talk then walk the walk. Be good for many of you to drop some weight anyway. For it you liberals sitting on computers pecking away eating bon bons and getting overweight and thus driving up the health care costs in this country for the rest of the poor innocent hard working in shape Americans!

Ya vol mon furah -

[zqt3344 21]

I hope to poke the eye out any chance I get!

GaryC you will be ostracized and castrated once again by the radical liberal hypocritical left wing on here for posting this. But you are right and it is true.

Are you talking to your self?!!

the eyyyyyyye is watching us...

OBEY!

I suggest every radical liberal on here go Hug a tree today and then go buy a bike and ride it every where or walk, no more hypocrites driving their cars or flying in their planes anywhere, if you want to talk the talk then walk the walk. Be good for many of you to drop some weight anyway. For it you liberals sitting on computers pecking away eating bon bons and getting overweight and thus driving up the health care costs in this country for the rest of the poor innocent hard working in shape Americans!

Ya vol mon furah -

[Ggreen 12]

Your food will be ready in couple minutes.

[alienlovechild 75]

Ya vol mon furah

What crappy German! Ganja doesn't improve your language skills.

Reminds me of how Keith Olbermann thinks giving a Nazi salute to his fans is funny. Let's return to the good old days when there was little diversity on TV news. Obama supporters will push for him to dump the First Amendment with a new "Fairness Act".

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Ya vol mon furah

What crappy German! Ganja doesn't improve your language skills.

Reminds me of how Keith Olbermann thinks giving a Nazi salute to his fans is funny. Let's return to the good old days when there was little diversity on TV news. Obama supporters will push for him to dump the First Amendment with a new "Fairness Act".

Obama doesn't like the 1st or 2nd amendment very much. And without those two the rest really don't matter.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

"Liberal elites" eh...?

Oh Good grief... Do we really need this working class hero #######?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

The right has Fox and the left has the rest. Fair to a leftist. And they still b!tch about Fox. Typical.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Ya vol mon furah

What crappy German! Ganja doesn't improve your language skills.

Reminds me of how Keith Olbermann thinks giving a Nazi salute to his fans is funny. Let's return to the good old days when there was little diversity on TV news. Obama supporters will push for him to dump the First Amendment with a new "Fairness Act".

Obama doesn't like the 1st or 2nd amendment very much. And without those two the rest really don't matter.

Fiction, fiction and more fiction. It's what Faux News does to you.

Faux News: We distort, you comply.

[LuzyC 0]

....

Edited June 15, 2008 by LuzyC

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Ya vol mon furah

What crappy German! Ganja doesn't improve your language skills.

Reminds me of how Keith Olbermann thinks giving a Nazi salute to his fans is funny. Let's return to the good old days when there was little diversity on TV news. Obama supporters will push for him to dump the First Amendment with a new "Fairness Act".

Obama doesn't like the 1st or 2nd amendment very much. And without those two the rest really don't matter.

Fiction, fiction and more fiction. It's what Faux News does to you.

Faux News: We distort, you comply.

So he's against the Fairness Act and for the second amendment?