MEMO TO SELF

WHERE THE HELL ARE YOU
AND HOW THE HELL DID YOU GET THERE?

You’ve lived through a depression, several recessions, 12 presidents (6 of whom you voted for), a world war, a ‘cold war’, several other declared and undeclared ‘hot’ wars and a ‘police action’ in which you participated. You’ve witnessed the space race, men walking on the moon, little man-made vehicles traversing the Martian landscape as well as little Japanese-made vehicles traversing the American landscape. You’ve seen the malevolent influence of the drugs and sex driven zombies of the 1960’s anti-war, America-hating left, the crowd which dragged this country through the disgraceful retreat/defeat in Vietnam, and whose influence and progeny will continue to pollute our politics for generations to come. You’ve watched the rise and fall of communism and its related collectivist ideologies all over this planet and you now sense the very real possibility of their rebirth, in the United States, of all places. You’ve no way of knowing what else may be in store, but nothing really surprises you anymore.

Now, two days after your 76th birthday, and one day after casting your vote for John McCain and watching him lose to Barack Obama, you sit there pondering the future of America under President Obama. You sit there wondering what the hell has happened over the last two years and, more importantly, what might happen in the next four. Has your country become a place where emotion has completely replaced reason, where respectful disagreement has been replaced by harangue, where all the failed collectivist ideologies of this planet’s history will find a new home?

You’ve given up analyzing this presidential campaign, trying to understand why a thoroughbred with the track record and credentials of a John McCain was unable to win the race against an untried and unproven individual with no track record and a long list of questionable relationships. You feel you know the four reasons for McCain’s loss. First, the liberal-oriented mainstream press has been telling the country for almost eight years how George W. Bush is a disaster, a stupid man, the worst president ever. The fact that he was re-elected 3+ years ago means nothing to them. Is it any surprise then, with the constant battering of the media, that Bush is held in low regard? All Obama had to do is wrap Bush around McCain’s neck, even though McCain often disagreed with Bush. Secondly, the Republicans behaved like Democrats for the past six years, helping to spend us into the deficit mess we now enjoy. Thirdly, and very importantly, about seven weeks before the election, the economy tanks as a result of the Democratic Party’s meddling in the mortgage market, using Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac to pollute the market with sub-prime mortgages. The Democrats, in effect, converted home-renters into home-owners into homeless as the mortgage market tanked and took the rest of the economy with it. The fact that it happened on George Bush’s watch, along with the fact that the Democratic controlled congress had neither the desire nor the will to address the problem at its source and endanger their presidential candidate, was a killer for McCain. Finally, and most importantly, the Democratic candidate proved to be one of the most capable and adroit politicians ever to seek the Oval Office, was able to raise and spend unheard of amounts of money and ran a masterful campaign.
However, you now hear esteemed members of the mainstream media admitting that they are hard-pressed to predict what our new President will do because they just don’t know the man, have no sense of who he really is.

Perhaps, you think, if they hadn’t spent all their time and effort pulling Obama’s bandwagon and avoiding any examination of the man, his associations, his voting record or his campaign promises, they might have attained some knowledge of the man behind the charisma. If they had replaced some of their adulation with the slightest bit of journalistic integrity and curiosity they might have achieved some sense of what they were enabling.

Perhaps, on reflection, you really can’t blame the young for voting the way they did. It is no surprise that the young are idealistic. It is also no surprise that many have been influenced by their teachers and professors and, to a large extent, by peer pressure. But, they voted honestly and in great numbers. And if, as they mature, they are able to maintain some of their idealism and factor in some degree of wisdom gained from experience, it could auger very well for our future.

Perhaps the overwhelming number of blacks voted along racial lines. That shouldn’t surprise you or distress you. If you were black, you very well may have done likewise. Human nature is an integral ingredient of the political process.

Barack Obama was not your choice but he will be your President. So, pray for him and his family, pray that the Lord give him wisdom and strength to lead us through the current financial and economic mess. Pray that he fully recognizes the need for us to be strong in the face of our enemies. Pray that he sees the wisdom (if not the necessity) of governing from the center. Pray that he adheres to his campaign promises to do just that and does not allow the far left faction of his party to drag him (and us) closer to socialism or into the self-destructive sewer of capitulation, recrimination, retaliation and vengeance.

So there, self. I hope that closes the book for you on this election. Go on with your life, fight the good fight and do whatever you can to help your party reclaim its principles, if not its very soul.

Regards,

Me

JOURNALISM, THEY USED TO CALL IT

"Better in my grandfather's day," he told me, shaking his head sadly.
"We grow progressively more Philistine," I suggested.
"It is our cheap press. The ephemeral overwhelms the permanent, the classical."
"This journalism," I agreed, "or call it rather rather this piddling quotidianism*, is the curse of our age."
"Fit only for......." He gesticulated clutchingly with his hands as though seeking the word.
"For the fire."
The old man was triumphantly emphatic with his, "No: for the sewer."

THE BOOK SHOP - ALDOUS HUXLEY
* 'daily recurrence' (I had to look it up. I thought I'd save you the trouble.)

FAREWELL ADDRESS TO THE GRADUATING JOURNALISM MAJORS - CLASS OF 2008

"CIVICS 101 - GO YE FORTH AND CHANGE THE WORLD"

Welcome to all of you, the top dozen Journalism majors of this year’s graduating class, the cream of the crop. This will be the first and only session of CIVICS 101 and will last, at most, 10 minutes. Successful completion of this session will satisfy the final requirement for your Journalism degree. Any questions?

No questions, that’s a good journalistic sign. As journalists, you must be prepared to trust your own pre-conceived notions and not stoop to being influenced by what less intelligent people might call facts. However, if there remain any areas of curiosity at the conclusion of the session, I will be glad to entertain your questions then.

Now, because you are who you are, I’ll skip over the lecture and proceed to the final examination. Don’t worry, it shouldn’t be too difficult for, as we’ve kept reminding you, you’re all superior individuals.

Open the envelope on your desk and remove the one-page test sheet inside. As you see, it consists of four questions, all of which are multiple choice. Take a minute to scan it while I read it to you, as I know you all dislike reading anything someone else has written. After which, we’ll proceed to the actual examination.

1. WHEN IS ELECTION DAY?

A. The 1st Tuesday in November.
B. The 3rd Friday in February.
C. Barack Obama’s birthday.
D. Any day you feel like voting.

2. WHO MAY VOTE?

A. Any citizen of the United States, eighteen years or older.
B. Anyone, citizen or not, regardless of age, living or dead.
C. Any resident of the United States, legal or otherwise.
D. Anyone registered by ACORN (including 'B' and 'C', above).

3. HOW SHOULD A VOTER DECIDE FOR WHOM TO VOTE?

A. Examine the issues along with the candidates’ experiences and characters.
B. Follow the advice of movie stars, rock stars and other intellectual giants.
C. Rate how the candidates speak, look and dress, not how they think and act.
D. See how much each promises to take away from someone else to give to you.

4. WHAT WOULD CAUSE RIOTS AND DISTURBANCES IN THE INNER CITIES?

A. Obama Loses.
B. Obama Wins.
C. Either of the above.
D. None of the above.

Now that we’ve reviewed the test, it’s time to grade your answers. I will assume that each of you made an emotional connection with one answer to each of the four questions. As I give you the correct answers, I want you to grade yourselves. As Journalism majors, you’ve been taught never to accept the criticism of others, so we expect you to grade your own responses.

THE ANSWER ‘A’ in each case is archaic, not at all emblematic of change. It reeks of yesterday, the old world, not the new world, not the world you want to create.

THE ANSWERS ‘B’ and ‘C’ in each case may be desirable or beneficial, but are only parts of the whole, steps in the right direction, falling short of fulfilling your progressive dreams.

THE ANSWER ‘D’ in each case is the correct answer, the progressive answer, the doorway to the new world, as I’m sure you all realized immediately.

May we have a show of hands of those who had the correct answer? All of you. I’m not surprised. As head of the Department of Journalism I’ve tried to be your guide through the intricacies of our Electoral process and I’m proud of your accomplishments.

Ooops! I see we have two people with questions. We’ll start with the young man in the second row. What’s on your mind? …….Thank you, I’ll repeat your question for the class. You want to know what the word ‘intricacies’ means. Well, that’s my fault. Perhaps I should have used a simpler expression. Think of it more as the trivial details of the process which, frankly, you needn’t worry about.

And you, young lady by the window. You also had your hand up……..I see, you want to know why Journalists have to know anything about the Electoral process. A very good question.

The answer has two aspects. In the first instance, you must exhibit at least a passing acquaintance with the process in order to feign objectivity and attract a following. However, as you progress through your career and your personal convictions become more important than the facts, this ‘objectivity’ may become at least a distraction or, more seriously, a detriment to the overall mission for which we’ve prepared you, that is, to change the world.

I see there’s another question from the same young man in the second row………”No. I’m sorry, but we don’t have enough time to explain all the words you don’t understand. Be comforted by the fact that, wherever you’re going to be working, words will not be as important as mood, your point of view, the emotion involved beneath the surface. Remember the motto of what used to be the nation’s premier newspaper, “All the news that fits us, we print.”

And, need I remind you that the old ‘report the news and keep your opinions to yourself’ school of journalism that may have been appreciated by your grandfathers is outdated. As I said before, your studies here have prepared you to change the world, not merely parrot useless facts. Truth must be dealt with. When the truth doesn’t further your personal agenda, distort it. When it threatens your agenda, destroy it.

Now go forth, you seekers of Utopia, you instruments of change, and help bring about your courageous new world. And should the God in whom you do not believe actually exist, may He have mercy on your souls!

THE 'PETER THE PLUMBER' PINCIPLE

“I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
Barack Huessin Obama

"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."
George Bernard Shaw

Assume that Shaw’s Peter is a plumber and Paul is a philosopher and reflect on this from the late John Gardner, LBJ’s head of HEW from 1965 to 1968.

"The society that scorns excellence in plumbing because plumbing is a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy. Neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water."

Now, try substituting the word “taxes” for “scorns” and “politics” for “philosophy” and you might have something more appropriate to our current situation, to wit:

"The society that taxes excellence in plumbing because plumbing is a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in politics because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good politics. Neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water."

The dirty little secret of the prevailing Liberal Democrat theory of spreading the wealth is that it can work only where there is unlimited wealth. For there will be, most certainly, no shortage of outstretched hands and upturned mouths on the receiving line. And as each of the SOWS (Spreaders Of Wealth) gets sucked dry of his or her available supply of spreadable wealth, when all the wealth has been spread, when the supposedly infinite store of largess has been dispensed, what then? Do we then tell all the recipients that SUCKISM has run its course and they must now become the spreaders and reverse the flow? Does the SUCKER become the SUCKEE? Who is John Galt?

As long as we’re asking questions, does the statement, “From each according to his means and to each according to his needs” mean anything to you? Does the phrase “Spreading the wealth” send a quiver up your leg or a shiver down your spine? We have seen ample proof in the last century of the efficacy of Socialism. It would seem improbable that we would need to be reminded of the Cuba of Fidel Castro, the Russia of Josef Stalin, (see also Poland, Hungary, Latvia, East Germany, etc.), the Venezuela of Hugo Chavez, and the other failed experiments in human misery.

Given these historical tragedies, when is the last time you really thought about what this country is all about, what philosophy has enabled its success, what innate sense of morality has guided its development, what inspired ideology has informed its goodness and what strength of spirit has protected it?

My advice to my fellow-citizens is simple. Be informed. Know from whence we came and how we got here. Remember that what’s best for the country is also best for you. However, also realize that what’s best for you is not always best for the country. And to my younger fellow-citizens, at least those who think, beware falling victim to the pack mentality. The pack has been known to turn on itself when other prey becomes scarce. And finally, as a wise man once said, “If you’re not a socialist by the age of 20, you have no heart. If you’re still a Socialist at age 30, you have no brain.”

THE SEVEN-YEAR ITCH

THE SEVEN-YEAR ITCH

The number seven seems to permeate the current political silly season. Seven years seems to be a recurring time frame and groups of seven seem to define the mess in which we find ourselves.

THE NEW 9/11 – THE SEVEN YEARS wherein the Liberal Democrats succeeded where the 9/11 terrorists failed.

In September 2001, fanatical Muslim terrorists attempted to topple the U.S. financial system and the Twin Towers that embodied it. They succeeded in bringing down the Twin Towers but failed to topple the U.S. Economy

In September 2008 (seven years later), Congressional Democrats completed their socialistic agenda’s decades-long misuse of their own twin towers (and cash cows), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Their attempts to deny their complicity, to protect their party and to shield their Presidential nominee from blame for the resulting financial fiasco blocked any realistic chance of containing the damage to our financial system.

These Liberal Congressional Democrats succeeded not only in bringing down their own twin towers (Fannie & Freddie), but also succeeded where the terrorists had failed by dealing a crippling blow to the U.S. Economy.

Score The Democrats – 1 The Country – 0

THE SEVEN DEADLY SINS – An Association Test wherein you are invited to match one from Column A with one from Column B.
---A ----------------------- B
Gluttony ..............Franklin Raines (CEO Fannie Mae, Carter & Clinton OMB, advisor to Obama)
Lust ......................Barney Frank (D. Mass.)
Greed ...................Chris Dodd (D. CT)
Sloth .....................Chuck Schumer (D. NY)
Wrath ...................Maxine Waters (D. Cal)
Envy ......................Nancy Pelosi (D. Cal)
Pride .....................Barack Obama (D. ILL.)

(Hint to solvers: THERE ARE NO WRONG ANSWERS.)

Score The Democrats – 2 The Country – 0

THE INNOCENCE OF THE SEVEN YEAR OLD – Wherein the Child is Father to the Man

When Adolph Hitler marched into Poland, I was only 7 years old. Years later, had I the opportunity to socialize and work closely with him, I might have politely refused (possibly even impolitely) and if he’d offered to host my political coming-out party and do some fund-raising for me, there’s a good chance I might have refused his help.

When 60’s radical Bill Ayers began his public career as a terrorist by bombing New York City Police Headquarters, Barack Obama was only 8 years old.
When 60’s radical Bill Ayers bombed the United States Capitol building, Barack Obama was only 9 years old.
When 60’s radical Bill Ayers bombed the Pentagon, Barack Obama was only 10 years old.

Therefore, Obama claims his close association with Bill Ayers years later is not to be regarded as a reflection on his own patriotism, his judgment, his political philosophy or his fitness to govern. Of course, this rationalization doesn’t take into account the following:

When 60’s radical Bill Ayers publicly expressed his regret for not having done more damage to the United States, Barack Obama was only 39 years old.

Obama never knew about Ayers’ terrorist activities. Never knew, even while living in an area where Ayers was celebrated and idolized for his past. He never heard about it, never read about it, never realized that his benefactor, mentor and co-director was a detestable hangover from the ranks of the 60’s anarchists, bomb-throwers, cop-killers and America-haters.

Just as the smartest woman in the world didn’t have the faintest idea of what her husband was doing (or rather, having done to him) while they both lived in the White House, we now have this smart fellow who would use his wisdom and insights to govern 300 million citizens. The same smart fellow whose wisdom and insight never provided him with the faintest glimmer into the heinous crimes of only one citizen, the acts of terrorism his friend, benefactor and fellow-traveler had committed, admitted to and bragged about.

Score The Democrats – 3 The Country - 0

THE SEVEN VIRTUES – Another Association Test wherein you are invited to match one from Column A with one from Column B.

---A-------------------- B
Faith ...............Chuck Schumer (D. NY)
Hope ...............Bernie Sanders (I. VT)
Charity ............Ted Kennedy (D. Mass)
Fortitude ........Hillary Clinton (D. NY ?)
Justice .............Henry Waxman (D. Cal)
Prudence .........John Conyers (D. Mich)
Temperance ....Harry Reid (D. Nev)

(Hint to solvers: THERE ARE NO RIGHT ANSWERS.)

Score The Democrats – 4 The Country – 0

THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN – Wherein the Seven ‘Masters of the Universe’ were duped by The Seven Deadly Sins into betraying The Seven Virtues (see above)

Lehman Brothers
Goldman Sachs
Wachovia
Washington Mutual
Fannie Mae
Freddie Mac
Indy Mac

Score The Democrats – 5 The country – 0

THE SEVEN WONDERS OF THE WORLD – Wherein I Wonder:

1. I wonder when the Liberal/Progressive, Socialist-Leaning Media will wake up and realize that their reward for blindly backing the Obama Manifesto could result in they, themselves, being destroyed by it?

2. I wonder when the Liberal/Progressive throwbacks will realize that their visceral hate for George Bush, the Military and business in general is at best childish, at worst treasonous, and that George Bush saved their asses in spite of themselves.

3. I wonder when the right will stop trying to make nice with the left? When will they learn that you don’t defeat duplicity by encouraging it?

4. I wonder when the 60’s crowd will grow up, stop looking for their lost youth, their lost causes, their lost hates and realize how their generation and its spawn have done lasting damage to this country that shelters them?

5. I wonder if the party that supports partial birth abortion and wants governmental control of a socialistic healthcare delivery system realizes that neither position promotes human well being?

6. I wonder why the feminists of the left (a redundancy) have so much hate for their country that they spew their venom on a successful woman simply because she doesn’t support abortion on demand, the indiscriminate murder of millions of their fellow citizens?

7. I wonder if, at age 75, I will live long enough to see the rebirth of a Democratic Party that rejects the Clintonian principles of character assassination, dissembling and outright falsification, that stands for something other than the failed collective ideologies of the last several centuries and that reemerges as a vital and vibrant contributor to honest and intelligent political discourse? I Wonder.

YESTERDAY PEOPLE - THE CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS

A FOUR POINT PLAN FROM A FIVE STAR FOOL

"Bailout Plan Rejected, Markets Plunge, Forcing New Scramble to Solve Crisis" (Wall Street Journal – September 30, 2008)

The current financial crisis was brought about by the Liberal Democrats, starting in 1977, when Congress enacted the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) under Jimmy Carter. Their ‘redistribution of wealth’ philosophy, straight out of the Karl Marx playbook, was further strengthened under Bill Clinton. The revised CRA regulations can be found in the May 4, 1995, Federal Register (60 FR 22156).

All of this culminated in Congressional action, forcing lending institutions to lower, if not eliminate, their credit standards. The penalties for non-compliance ranged from threats of being labeled as racist to punitive fines ranging up to $10,000 for each loan application in which ‘discrimination’ was found.

It’s a damnable lunacy to look for these same Liberal Democrats to provide solutions to the very problems they created. They have made known their intentions to socialize our country, starting with schemes that would destroy the best Health Care delivery system on the planet. Their scheme for the Financial Markets in no less Socialistic and much more dangerous.

We do not need a trillion dollar + bail out. We don’t need any more politics injected into the mix. Let the free market function freely. Where there is fraud, we have laws and courts where wrongdoing can be punished. Unfortunately, we have no such protection against stupidity.

If, indeed, The current problems are a poisonous cocktail of a liquidity crisis, a shortage of available capital and a shrinkage of available credit for Main Street and Wall Street, I propose a four-point plan, each piece of which is simple to implement, and carries no cost to the taxpayer.

1. INSURANCE - As Larry Kudlow was the first to suggest, raise the limit on FDIC insured deposits from $100.000 to $250,000. Benefit – Small Business Security

2. ACCOUNTING - Eliminate “mark-to-market’ requirements and allow holders of mortgage debt to value such debt at a price they can realistically anticipate in the future, not being forced to carry them at today’s depressed prices. Benefit – Lenders and Borrowers

3. TAXES - Declare a temporary moratorium and allow U.S. Companies to bring back deposits from tax havens abroad on a tax-free basis. Benefit – Capital Infusion

4. CAPITAL GAINS - Eliminate Capital Gains tax on any sale of the mortgage-backed securities at the heart of the current problems. Benefit – Increase value of severely depressed paper.

As I am neither economist, financial guru, nor political genius, I am not implying that these are the only options. I’d just like to see our employees in Congress, the Regulatory Agencies and The White House address this problem by examining the full-range of remedies available.

THE UNITED STATES MARCHED TOWARD ITS DESTINY AS THE STRONGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD BY REMAINING FAITHFUL TO ITS CAPITALISTIC, FREE-MARKET ROOTS AND PHILOSOPHY.

FOR GOD’S SAKE, DON’T ALLOW THE ULTRA-LIBERAL LOONS IN THE FAR LEFT FRINGE OF OUR COUNTRY TO DESTROY THAT WITH WHICH GOD HAS BLESSED US.

Jack Deeney
Danbury,CT
30 September 2008

YESTERDAY PEOPLE: THE U.S. CONGRESS - STONE AGE SOLUTIONS IN THE HYDROCARBON AGE

OIL SURGES OVER $134 ON SUPPLY WOES, WEAK DOLLAR. (Reuters – May 21, 2008) “Weakness in the U.S. dollar encouraged Wednesday's buying spree by bolstering the purchasing power of buyers holding other currencies, dealers said.”

OIL PRICES PASS $134 AFTER REPORT OF SUPPLY DROP. (AP – May 21, 2008)
“With demand for oil growing in the developing world, and little end in sight to supply problems in producing countries such as Nigeria, few analysts are willing to call an end to crude's rally.”

So, is it the weak dollar or the time-honored story of supply & demand? Whatever the underlying cause, the fact remains: we have an energy crisis, so what do we have to do to solve it? Not to worry. Our politicians are stepping up to face this newly emerging crisis.

1. The Senate calls in the oil company executives (May 21, 2008) and Senator Durbin (Illinois Democrat) berates them for having no “corporate conscience”. "Is there anybody here that has any concerns about what you're doing to this country with the prices that you're charging and the profits that you're taking?" Durbin asked.

According to the unbiased reporter from Associated Press, “The titans of America's oil industry sat quietly for a moment.” And further, from that fair and balanced reporter, “The executives, sitting shoulder to shoulder in the hearing room, said they understood people were hurting, but they tried to blunt the emotion with economic analysis.”

How dare the Oil Company executives blunt emotion – and with economic analysis, of all things?

2. The House votes to pursue legal action against OPEC “CONGRESS' LATEST ANSWER TO RISING GASOLINE PRICES: SUE OPEC” (The Los Angeles Times, May 21, 2008)
“Defying a White House veto threat, the House on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved legislation that would allow the Justice Department to pursue legal action against the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries for conspiring to restrict supplies or drive up prices.”

So, the Democratic House goes in a direction different from the Democratic Senate and wants to lay the blame for our oil-related problems squarely on OPEC, of all people.

3. Barack Obama “wants windfall profits tax on oil companies.” (The Guardian April 25, 2008). “Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama today called for a windfall profits tax on oil companies, which he said would be used to ease the burden of rising energy costs on poor and middle-class Americans.”

So, Barack Obama throws his lot in with the ‘tax windfall profits’ gang founded by Jimmy Carter (and we know how well that worked for him) and recently joined by Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. Chavez announced his ‘windfall profits tax’ in April 2008, claiming that it is necessary to fund key social programs as part of his effort to implement an economic and social system he calls "21st-century socialism."

With all this political posturing, confusion, finger pointing and hand wringing, where do we look for answers? Certainly not to our elected officials who have never some to grips with the fact that, other than through enacting tax related measures and caving in to the manic demands of the environmental lobby, they have negligible power over global markets. In fact, the sum total of their proposals will not produce one additional drop of oil. We are in the Hydrocarbon Age, reaping the rich harvest of rewards of this gift from God. Just as the Stone Age did not come to an end because we ran out of stones, the Hydrocarbon Age is not coming to an end because we're running out of oil.

According to the website http://www.partnershipforenergy.com (a project of The American Petroleum Institute), "As global demand for oil increases, many people are asking how our nation’s oil needs will be met in the coming decades. The good news is that America isn’t running out of oil—and neither is the rest of the world."

"New extraction and refining techniques have opened up opportunities to explore for oil cost-effectively in oil sands, oil shale, and coastal lands and waters. New oil discoveries worldwide would provide billions of barrels of oil for years to come. In the U.S. and Canada alone, these discoveries include:

• Up to 4.3 billion barrels of oil in oil shale in North Dakota’s Bakken Formation
• Up to 19 billion barrels of oil in oil sands in Utah
• More than 30 billion barrels of oil in Alaska’s coastal plains and the Chukchi Sea
• An estimated 173 billion barrels of oil from oil sands in western Canada
• More than 1.2 trillion barrels of oil in oil shale in the Green River Formation in Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah.

What does it mean? 1 billion barrels of oil could provide enough fuel to keep more than 1 million cars running for the next 30 years."

Now I know that Big, Bad Oil is supposed to be the enemy, Congress is our friend (assuming you pay no attention to Nancy Pelosi & Company's approval ratings) and the environmentalists all have our best interests at heart.

How about a novel approach? Might it not make sense to listen to the people who best know about oil, the oil industry itself?

YESTERDAY PEOPLE - JIMMY, HUGO & BARACK

or- DON QUIXOTE OBAMA - TILTING AT WINDFALLS

Windfall Profits Tax 101: How to Make the Producers Pay and Damn the Consequences.

1. April 1980: Windfall Profits Tax - JIMMY CARTER - SOCIALISM FOR THE UNITED STATES IN THE OLD CENTURY

In the United States, President Jimmy Carter signed the Crude Oil Windfall Profits Tax Act into law in April 1980.

The windfall profits tax was forecasted to raise more than $320 billion between 1980 and 1989. However, the government collected only $80 billion in gross tax revenue and, to the extent that the tax was deductible against corporate income, the actual net realized was closer to $40 billion.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the 1980 windfall profits tax depressed the domestic production and extraction industry and furthered our dependence on foreign sources of oil.

2. April 2008: Windfall Profits Tax - HUGO CHAVEZ - SOCIALISM FOR VENEZUELA IN THE NEW CENTURY

Venezuela starts collecting new windfall profits tax on oil companies, as part of President Hugo Chavez' plan to gain a larger share of oil company profits.

President Chavez, a Socialist, has said the tax is necessary to fund key social programs as part of his effort to implement an economic and social system he calls "21st-century socialism."

Critics say the tax will slow investment and development in the oil sector, and also discourage other foreign direct investment in Venezuela.

3. April 2008: Windfall Profits Tax - BARACK OBAMA - SOCIALISM FOR THE UNITED STATES IN THE NEW CENTURY

“Obama wants windfall profits tax on oil companies” (The Guardian April 25, 2008). “Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama today called for a windfall profits tax on oil companies, which he said would be used to ease the burden of rising energy costs on poor and middle-class Americans.”

Campaigning in Indiana, Obama selected a gas station as the forum in which to announce his attack on “…the energy lobby, (who) have blocked ‘meaningful relief’ to consumers hard hit by high gasoline prices.” He went on to say that, "It isn't right that oil companies are making record profits at a time when ordinary Americans are going into debt trying to pay rising energy costs. That's why we'll put a windfall profits tax on oil companies and use it to help Indiana families pay their heating and cooling bills and reduce energy costs".

Obama's campaign did not indicate how much money a windfall profits tax would raise.

I shouldn’t be surprised at Mr.Obama’s evocation of the present policy of Hugo Chavez or the past policy of Jimmy Carter. I was surprised, however, that he decided to make his policy announcement at that gas station. He very well could have caused a crowd to gather, evoking images of the lines of those waiting for gas in Jimmy Carter’s time.

Oh well. Just another example of Mr. Obama’s commitment to change.

Now, we know that the Socialists, Liberals and Progressives all love the idea of taxing, their DNA demands it. Most especially, they insist on taxing the producers for, as Willie Sutton explained that he robbed banks ‘cause that’s where the money is’, Liberals tax where they can find the most capital. The possibility that such capital might better be utilized by the producers to expand exploration and production has no appeal.

And specifically, we should ask why the whole question of windfall profit taxation exerts such a strong attraction for the Democrats. Why is it their philosopher’s stone? Is it because there is such an imbalance between the ‘obscene’ profits of the oil companies and the taxes they pay in the normal course of events? Is it because of the extremely beneficial impact that these windfall profit taxes will have on the underlying problem of energy use and availability? Well, at the risk of being accused of using facts rather than emotion, let’s see what history shows us.

It may be an oversimplification, but the truth of the matter is that the price paid by the consumer for oil products is only partially dependent on the price of crude and the costs of transporting and refining it. Historically, "..taxes of various kinds add substantially to the price of the finished product, and greatly exceed the cost of the original petroleum."
(THE AGE OF OIL - Leonardo Maugeri, 2006)

As to the comparison between oil profits made and taxes paid, in the final quarter of the last Century the oil companies paid about 2 trillion in taxes to the federal and state governments – about triple what their profits were for the same period. So, it seems that the real recipients of windfall profits were the governmental taxing agencies who made three times what the rapacious oil companies made. Do you suppose it might be possible for these agencies to impose windfall profit taxes on themselves?

As to the beneficial impact of such Liberal policies on the underlying problems of energy availability and cost, do you remember asking yourself about that as you waited in Jimmy Carter’s gas station lines then - or do you ponder over all the promises made by Nancy Pelosi and company a year and a half ago and the complete lack of accomplishment since then?

The Democrats are trying to characterize John McCain’s campaign as an attempt to establish the 3rd term of the George Bush presidency. Would that they were right. I would much prefer that to what Obama is promising, the 2nd term of Jimmy Carter.