gimini210's Blog

3/13/08 Vote 61: On the Motion: Motion to Waive C.B.A. Cornyn Amdt. No. 4242; To protect the family budget by providing for a budget point of order against legislation that increases income taxes on taxpayers, including hard-working middle-income families, entrepreneurs, and college students. No

 

3/13/08 Vote 65: S CON RES 70: DeMint Amdt. No. 4328; To provide for a deficit-neutral reserve fund for Social Security reform. No

 

3/13/08 Vote 60: S CON RES 70: Sessions Amdt. No. 4231; To establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund for border security, immigration enforcement, and criminal alien removal programs. No

3/13/08

Vote 56: S CON RES 70: Alexander Amdt. No. 4207 as Modified; To establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to improve energy efficiency and production. No

3/13/08 Vote 52: S CON RES 70: Bunning Amdt. No. 4192 as Modified; To repeal the tax increase on Social Security benefits imposed by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. No

 

Vote 66: S CON RES 70: Allard Amdt. No. 4232; To pay down the Federal debt and eliminate government waste by reducing spending 5 percent on programs rated (as mandated under the Government Performance and Results Act (Public Law 103-62)) ineffective by the Office of Management and Budget Program Assessment Rating Tool.No

3/13/08 Vote 71: S CON RES 70: Ensign Amdt. No. 4335; To increase funding for the Department of Justice for the vigorous enforcement of a prohibition against taking minors across State lines in circumvention of laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions consistent with the Child Custody Protection Act, which passed the Senate by a bipartisan vote of 65-34, with an offset. No No

 

Get the point? To get his full voting history go to:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members
/o000167/votes/page2/

It seems Nancy Palosi has a great plan in action, it entails keeping the vote for drilling off the floor until after the election when she believes there will be enough democrats elected to prevent drilling for our own oil. She does not care what the people of the United States Of American want. It boils down to what she and her party wants. We do not matter in the grand scheme of the democratic party. It is a great plan and it is working so far.

Even if President Bush called an emergancy congress back she could just close it right back down without a vote ever going before the congress. Palosi not only is against the Iraq war but she wants us out of Afganistan and she wants us all to sit down and put on a happy face on as we get disarmed and destroyed. She has behaved in a mannor unbecoming to a lady much less the speaker of the house with her temper tantrums and her refusal to allow votes on anything she does not approve of.

Bush may not be the best president in our history but Palosi is the worse person to run congress in the history of mankind or womankind. She has made sure our nation will come to a stand still when she dictates it as it has done now. She has broken the rules laid out for the speaker of the house and she flat does not care, she is a democrat so she is entitled to act and do anything she so chooses and to heck with what is best for our nation.

Palosi's idea is to save the world but destroy us while doing it. Al Gore dismantled our nuclear plants programs which would of freed up our natural gas for other uses and the dems plan on keeping it that way. They want us to invest trillions on so called "clean"  energy programs but do not tell you that ethinal is just as polutant as oil products, that the hybreds will cost thousands to keep on the road by the owners, and to install solar panels will cost over $6,000 a panel and you need several per home to actually save on electric. And Al gore will make more millions off us.

In the mean time they keep tooting the thousands of acres the oil companies have to drill on but omited that the oil companies spent $1.25 trillion trying to find oil there and gave it up. So we have the facts and they democrats do too yet they do not care. As Obama and Nancy think that $10.00 a gallon for gas is a great idea and will bring our country to it's knees. That also explains why they want to create a civil army to control the citizens of our country. They fear we might just go after them.

I do not want to hear it was republicans that got us here as the democrats are now in power and have done nothing, not a thing to correct the mess we are in. In fact they have contributed to the mess and plan on creating a bigger one.

So just impeach Palosi and DO NOT vote another insane democrat into congress.

Some of the things Obama voted on. Now remember his policies for lower incomes and health care etc. You might find his voting history and his speeches on his policies are a tad diffrent.

11/7/05 Rejected Session 1, roll call 304: On the Amendment
Allard Amdt. No. 2423; To authorize a program to provide health, medical, and life insurance benefits to workers at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, Colorado, who would otherwise fail to qualify for such benefits because of an early physical completion date.

11/3/05 Rejected Session 1, roll call 297: On the Motion
Motion To Waive CBA Re: Lautenberg Amdt. No. 2381; To require certification prior to beneficiary enrollment in a prescription drug plan or an MA-PD plan that has a gap in the coverage of prescription drugs under part D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act.

10/26/05 Rejected Session 1, roll call 274: On the Amendment
Coburn Amdt. No. 2232; To increase funding for the AIDS drug assistance program

Rejected Session 1, roll call 295: On the Amendment
Byrd Amdt. No. 2367; To replace title VIII of the bill with an amendment to section 214(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to impose a fee on employers who hire certain non-immigrants.

10/26/05 Rejected Session 1, roll call 273: On the Motion
Motion to Waive CBA Re: Clinton Amdt. No. 2292; To provide additional funding for part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

10/26/05 Rejected Session 1, roll call 272: On the Motion
Motion to Waive CBA Re: Dodd Amdt. No. 2254; To increase appropriations for Head Start programs.

10/26/05 Rejected Session 1, roll call 271: On the Amendment
Gregg Amdt. No. 2253, As Modified; To increase appropriations for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program by $1,276,000,000, with an across-the-board reduction.

10/26/05 Rejected Session 1, roll call 270: On the Motion
Motion to Waive CBA Reed Amdt. No. 2194, As Further Modified; To provide for appropriations for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program.

10/26/05 Rejected Session 1, roll call 269: On the Motion
Motion to Waive CBA Re: Byrd Amdt. No. 2275; To provide additional funding for title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

10/25/05 Rejected Session 1, roll call 268: On the Motion
Motion to Waive CBA Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 2213; To increase the maximum Federal Pell Grant award from $200 to $4250.

Sen. Obama voted in favor of the Akaka Amendment (SA 1186) to S. 1387 The Akaka Amendment would exempt children of Filipino World War II veterans naturalized pursuant to the Immigration Act of 1990 from numerical limits on worldwide immigration. This additional exemption from caps on visa issuance would serve only to increase the flow of immigration into the United States.The Akaka Amendment passed by a vote of 97 to 9.

Sen. Obama voted in favor of a motion to invoke cloture and bring S. 1639, the “corrected and updated” version of S. 1348, the guestworker-amnesty bill that would grant an amnesty, would authorize the importation of millions of new foreign workers, and would do little to curb our illegal immigration crisis, to the Senate floor. Two weeks prior to this vote, the Senate rejected cloture on the “grand bargain” substitute amendment to S. 1348 by a 45-50 margin, thus halting – for the time being – the bill’s progress toward final passage. President Bush then stepped in to plead with Senate Republicans to give the “compromise” another look and Senate Majority Leader Reid then brought the proposal back to the Senate as a new bill, S. 1369. The motion to invoke cloture passed by a vote of 64 to 35.

3/14/08 Vote 82: S CON RES 70: DeMint Amdt. No. 4339; To provide for a deficit-neutral reserve fund for providing an above the line Federal income tax deduction for individuals purchasing health insurance outside the workplace. No

3/13/08 Vote 72: On the Motion: Motion to Waive C.B.A. DeMint Amdt. No. 4340; To create a point of order against bills that would raise gasoline prices. No

3/13/08 Vote 67: S CON RES 70: Brownback Amdt. No. 4284; To provide funds for a Commission on Budgetary Accountability and Review of Federal Agencies. No

3/13/08

Vote 66: S CON RES 70: Allard Amdt. No. 4232; To pay down the Federal debt and eliminate government waste by reducing spending 5 percent on programs rated (as mandated under the Government Performance and Results Act (Public Law 103-62)) ineffective by the Office of Management and Budget Program Assessment Rating Tool. No

No 3/13/08 Vote 61: On the Motion: Motion to Waive C.B.A. Cornyn Amdt. No. 4242; To protect the family budget by providing for a budget point of order against legislation that increases income taxes on taxpayers, including hard-working middle-income families, entrepreneurs, and college students. No

Now I have thought about this for a while, Obama keeps saying how he is going to cut taxes for the lower incomes, how many of us lower incomes get all our fed taxes back and a little more depending on how many children? So what is his tax cut? He says he is going to raise taxes on the richer workers, so who has been paying the taxes if we get all ours and some back if not the rich? And he is going to do this because it is not fair that the rich who worked to get what they have have it and the lower incomes don't.

 Now my question is, if the higher incomes are the ones who do not get their federal taxes all back and in some cases owe more just where the heck does he think all that pork he wasted came from?

He also wants to add a tax on profits, give this some thought, if taxes go up on companies who make a profit who do you think will pay for it? If two companies came back to the U.S. because of tax breaks offered by states then if more taxes are added to them where will they go?

Then we have the double social security tax, now if congress is spending the social security taxes they get now and not on social security what will they do with more?In fiscal year 2008, Congress stuffed 11,610 projects (the second highest total ever) into the 12 appropriations bills worth $17.2 billion. Pork is where it will go.

$7,556,660 for grape and wine research.  Wine is a popular beverage.  In fact, in 2006, per capita U.S. wine consumption was 2.39 gallons while the U.S. exported 404.5 million liters of wine.  Total wine sales in 2006 were $27.8 billion.  There is no pressing need for taxpayers to pay for this research.

$4,800,000 by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) for the Jamaica Bay Unit of the Gateway National Recreation Area.  The Gateway National Recreation Area’s website describes the Jamaica Bay Unit as “a wealth of history, nature and recreation, from New York City's first major airport and coastal fortifications to a wildlife refuge and pristine beaches.”  A nice place to swim away with defense dollars.

Just a few examples of where those added taxes will go and are going. Now why not get a grip on the waste in congress and stop robbing the rich to give to the congress because it is not going to the general Americans who pay the taxes.

Then we come to universal health care, if medicare cost $300. billion a year and we add the rest of the U.S. on it will end up in the trillions, where will the money come from? Are we asking the right questions? To be honest the oil companies do not make a trillion in profit so where will the money come from? Think people. And now that line item veto is gone all the pork will stay on so watch what will happen with your taxes.

Can any one say give to congress and rip off the Americans? That is what will happen.

CAGW Names Senators Who Voted to Kill DeMint-McCain Earmark Moratorium Porkers of the Month Washington, D.C. - Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today named all 71 senators who voted against an amendment to impose a one-year earmark moratorium in the fiscal year 2009 Budget Resolution March Porkers of the Month.

The amendment was offered by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and had fourteen bipartisan co-sponsors including all three presidential candidates.

 As Sen. DeMint has said, “The earmark process allows politicians to fund pet projects based on political power instead of merit. Earmarks are rarely subject to public hearings or oversight, and they invite the kind of corruption that has sent lawmakers to jail.”

In addition to inviting fraudulent behavior, earmarking diverts lawmakers’ attention from important national business, like saving Medicare and Social Security for future generations. Many congressional offices have one or more staffers dedicated to procuring earmarks.

 A year-long moratorium is a critical step forward to stopping Congress’s addiction to earmarking. It would give members time to reform the process, devote more effort to critical issues, and help keep money in taxpayers’ wallets instead of being diverted to Washington where it can be converted into pork. In fiscal 2008, pork-barrel spending ballooned to 11,612 projects costing $17.2 billion.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) opposed the ban as “unrealistic” and even went so far as to erroneously claim that earmarking “has been going in this country for 230-some-odd years,” and that “The Founding Fathers would be cringing to hear people talking about eliminating earmarks.”

To the contrary, the Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves right now to hear their legacy so completely distorted. In 1796, Thomas Jefferson predicted the slippery slope of the federal government funding local road projects when he said, “it will be a scene of eternal scramble among the members, who can get the most money wasted in their State; and they will always get most who are meanest.” In 1822, President James Monroe argued that federal money should be limited “to great national works only, since if it were unlimited it would be liable to abuse and might be productive of evil.”

Today, Appropriations Committee members arbitrarily pick winners and losers by earmarking funds for specific recipients. Rank and file members, backed by an army of lobbyists, bypass authorizing committees and lobby appropriators directly for pet projects. This unrivaled power over pork explains why Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), an appropriator, self-interestedly said about the amendment: “It's just such a crock. This is such political hype.”

 For protecting their personal pork projects at the expense of the national interest, CAGW names the 71 senators who voted against a year-long earmark moratorium its March 2008 Porkers of the Month.

Citizens Against Government Waste is the nation’s largest nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in government. Porker of the Month is a dubious honor given to lawmakers, government officials, and political candidates who have shown a blatant disregard for the interests of taxpayers.

 Akaka (D-HI)                  Baucus(D-MT)            Bennett  (R-UT)          Biden (D-DE)  Bingaman (D-NM)        Bond (R-MO)               Boxer (D-CA)               Brown (D-OH) Brownback (R-KS)        Bunning (R-KY)           Byrd (D-WV)                Cantwell (D-WA)  Cardin (D-MD)               Carper (D-DE)             Casey (D-PA)              Cochran (R-MS)  Coleman (R-MN)          Collins (R-ME)             Conrad (D-ND)           Craig (R-ID)                   Crapo (R-ID)                  Dodd (D-CT)                Domenici (R-NM)       Dorgan (D-ND)    Durbin (D-IL)                 Feinstein (D-CA)         Gregg (R-NH)              Hagel (R-NE)        Harkin (D-IA)                 Hatch (R-UT)                Hutchison (R-TX)        Inouye (D-HI)     Johnson (D-SD)           Kennedy (D-MA)           Kerry (D-MA)                Klobuchar (D-MN)   Kohl (D-WI)                    Landrieu (D-LA)           Lautenberg (D-NJ)    Leahy (D-VT)           Levin (D-MI)                   Lincoln (D-AR)              Lugar (R-IN)               Menendez (D-NJ) Mikulski (D-MD)            Murkowski (R-AK)        Murray (D-WA)            Nelson (D-FL)    Nelson (D-NE)              Pryor (D-AR)                 Reed (D-RI)                Reid (D-NV)      Roberts (R-KS)             Rockefeller (D-WV)     Salazar (D-CO)          Sanders (I-VT) Schumer (D-NY)           Shelby (R-AL)               Smith (R-OR)             Snowe (R-ME)     Specter (R-PA)              Stabenow (D-MI)          Stevens (R-AK)          Tester (D-MT)          Vitter (R-LA)                   Voinovich (R-OH)         Warner (R-VA)            Webb (D-VA) Whitehouse (D-RI)      Wicker (R-MS)               Wyden (D-OR)                                                 

These are the people who do not mind spending the billions each year instead of putting it back into social security and other failing areas of our nation. These people use it for personal gains and do not think of those of us who are paying these taxes. Note there are Democrats and Republicans. Also note who leads the crowd in wanting to keep their wasteful spending. 

CNSNews: $7.5 Million in Taxes Earmarked for Golfing

Now that is why we pay our taxes. Golf lessons for children but mind you it is putt putt golf.

Now I know congress, at least the democrats, keep telling us about the billions the oil companies make on oil, what they did not tell you is what they spent finding it.  According to Ernst & Young, from 1992 to 2006 the U.S. oil industry spent $1.25 trillion on long-term investment vs. profits of $900 billion. Is it any wonder they want to stop drilling in dry holes and start drilling where they can at least find something?

Democrats say use our reserves, then if we go to war without those very reserves and suddenly need them do we wait the 7 to 12 years the same democrats want us to beleive it will take to drill for more to replinish our supplies? It isn't called strategic oil supplies for nothing. What are they thinking?

We have a congress that is letting us down on all fronts. They want us to beleive the oil industry is getting rich off our backs but in reality they are losing money and will not drill any longer where there is little or no oil and they have made it clear they do not want the leases they have and here is congress saying drill where you have the leases or we will take them back. Hey congress, don't you get it? The oil industry doesn't care if you take them. I got it and I am not a college grad.

Then you have Obama saying a gas tax is a gimic to get elected, Hmmmmmm, well guess what, here is Obama's original thought on that:

Obama took a different view on the issue when he was an Illinois legislator, voting at least three times in favor of temporarily lifting the state's 5% sales tax on gasoline. The tax holiday was finally approved during a special session in June 2000, when Illinois motorists were furious that gas prices had just topped $2 a gallon in Chicago. Seems he was for a gas-tax moratorium before he was against it.

Not only was he for it then he wanted his name on the pumps saying he was responsible for it.

So we all sit back and suffer while he and the idiots in congress get tax free gas and we keep paying and our oil sources dry up. Yes we need to use alternatives and we need to explore  and create new means of energy but we also need to save the billions we spend importing oil, and the oil spills from the tankers, and get busy here drilling for our own. Why is it that it is alright for Cuba to explore for oil 45 miles off the FL coast but we can not drill off our own coasts?

We had better wake up and smell the coffee before we are in real trouble.

Take note of the powers of congress. Congress controls federal spending.  They also control interstate and foreign commerce, definition or commerce is as follows:

trade in goods and services: the large-scale buying and selling of goods and services
Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Then we go to the statement it is the spending on the war in Iraq. Note that the congress was given the same infor as the president and they are the ONLY ones who can declare war so they are responsible but like children and criminals, blame some one else.

Then we have Pork  barrel spending and Senator Stevens. The definition of pork is more or less that a person attches it to a bill for personal gains. Kind of like two Senators who work on a commity to regulate morgages and are given special low % rates on their home morgages. Pork Barrel should be illegal as well as special intrest groups and lobiest. Where any of them are we can count on taxes going to them.

Still, when everything is taken into account look who is responciable for the spending. How do you blame another person for what you are suppose to be doing?

http://bensguide.gpo.gov/9-12/government/nation
al/congress2.html

The Constitution grants Congress "all legislative powers" in the national government. Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution lists a wide range of congressional powers, including:

• Coining money.
• Maintaining a military.
• Declaring war on other countries.
• Regulating interstate and foreign commerce

Congress also controls federal taxing and spending policies—one of the most important sources of power in the government. The Constitution also gives Congress the authority to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper," an implied source of power sometimes called the Elastic Clause.

In addition to the power described above, Congress shares powers with the president in matters such as, framing U.S. foreign policy and control over the military. For example, while the president negotiates treaties, they are only put into effect once the Senate approves them. Also, while Congress can declare war and approve funds for the military, the president is the commander-in-chief of the military.

Note there is nothing the president can do without the congress approving it. So if these are the responsibilities of congress then why do they keep shifting the blame? I have been curious about this for years as I learned how our government was run as a child in school.

I ask first if I could use this but the credit goes to the ones listed below. jax276's Blog

by jax276

by jax276 Last Post 1 hour Ago

Obama Jul 27, 2008 | 8:27 PM Category: News Report This Post This comment from a US Marine, does not go along with what we saw on national liberal TV Received this from someone who was in Afghanistan when Obama blew in. Hi all FYI--for what freedom is worth. Tiffany and Jeff Porter are our friends who live in Virginia. (Below is from Tiffany) I don't know each of your personal political convictions, and apologize if anyone finds this offensive. I thought it was important enough to share. This is Jeff's first hand view of Senator Obama. Tiffany ---------- Forwarded Message ----------

 Hello everyone, As you know I am not a very political person. I just wanted to pass along that Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an hour on his visit to 'The War Zone'. I wanted to share with you what happened. He got off the plane and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the area to meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander here at Bagram.

 As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and didn't say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the General. As he finished, the vehicles took him to the ClamShell (pretty much a big top tent that military personnel can play basketball or work out in with weights) so he could take his publicity pictures playing basketball.

He again shunned the opportunity to talk to Soldiers to thank them for their service So really he was just here to make a showing for the American's back home that he is their candidate for President. I think that if you are going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would thank those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for you.

 I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheer leaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the United States. I just don't understand how anyone would want him to be our Commander-and-Chief.

It was almost that he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and our great country. If this is blunt and to the point I am sorry but I wanted you all to know what kind of caliber of person he really is. What you see in the news is all fake.

In service

 CPT Jeffrey S. Porter

Battle Captain

TF Wasatch

 American Soldier

 Don Herpen herpen@comast.net

American by birth

MARINE by the grace of God

Semper Fi

Everyone remembers the smoking ban and the need to tell us when, where and if we can smoke. Do you remember the people saying it is a bad thing to give the government the power to ban anything legal? Do you remember being told if one right is remove it will lead to others?

Well get this, LA is banning MC Donalds, Buger King, Taco Bell, and various other fast food restruants. They have decided if the people can not eat right then they will make them by getting rid of fast foods. They have made the choice for the people. The people of LA eat too much fast food so we stop letting them in the citiy.

Now we do have a problem with people being over wieght but you do not see MSG being banned from food. It is not needed to preserve food and is used to make people eat more. You know the old saying, "Bet you can't eat just one", and not many can because of MSG. Also it is proven MSG can cause certain people to gain wieght. So why is it still used?

The problem I have with the government, be it state or federal, telling us what we can do or can not do is they start out small and excelerate as they are doing. NY is trying to ban donut shops. So what next? All cakes, breads that are not whole grain, cookies, ice creams, sugar, pasta? All these things can make us fat. So do we ban them?

Do we get rid of oils, candy, and other foods as well? Do we force all of us to eat salads, fresh fruit and veggies? Do we get rid of hamburger, pork, and other fatty meats? Just where do we stop once the goverment takes over how we eat? No more pies, be they apple or pot pies. Where is the line? We opened the door to allow the government to tell us what we can do and can not do even if it is not illegal and now little by little they are growing in telling us what we can do.

Remember the ban on smoking started in one state and advanced to all. Will another of our rights soon be gone? Or should I ask will many of our rights be gone? Should we worry? Yes, we have a government that thinks we need to be told what, when and how to do. We need to stop eating fast food, we need to lower our air and heating, we need to drive less, we need a hybred car, we need solar panels, we need to stop smoking, we need to wear seat belts, we need...... the list goes on and on. So where does it end?

Once the government starts telling us what to do we become socialistic, and our country is a republic, where we have the right to do things even if they are not good for us. It is not good for many to box but they do, so will the government ban that? We need to stop and think and put a halt to governmental controls over legal choices. We have the right to eat what we want to even if it is a Big Mac and not a salad.

 

Just a touch of humor. I think we need some now.

 

First do you know what ANWR is?

ANWR= national wildlife refuge.

   Map of northern Alaska and nearby parts of Canada showing locations of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), the 1002 area, and the National Petroleum Reserve—Alaska (NPRA). Locations of known petroleum accumulations and the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) are shown, as well as summaries of known petroleum volumes in northern Alaska and the Mackenzie River delta of Canada. BBO, billion barrels of oil (includes cumulative production plus recoverable resources); TCFG, trillion cubic feet of gas recoverable resources Map of the ANWR 1002 area. Dashed line labeled Marsh Creek anticline marks approximate boundary between undeformed area (where rocks are generally horizontal) and deformed area (where rocks are folded and faulted). Boundary is defined by Marsh Creek anticline along western half of dashed line and by other geologic elements along eastern half of dashed line. Exploration wells are coded to show whether information from them was available for the 1987 USGS assessment of in-place petroleum resources. Dashed red line shows the offshore extent of the entire assessment area

The total quantity of technically recoverable oil within the entire assessment area is estimated to be between 5.7 and 16.0 billion barrels (95-percent and 5-percent probability range), with a mean value of 10.4 billion barrels. Technically recoverable oil within the ANWR 1002 area (excluding State and Native areas) is estimated to be between 4.3 and 11.8 billion barrels (95- and 5-percent probability range), with a mean value of 7.7 billion barrels

Typical view of the ANWR 1002 area coastal plain. .

The U.S. imports over 65% of the nation's needed petroleum. These oil imports cost more than $55.1 billion a year. This figure does not include the military costs of imported oil. These figures are rising and could exceed 80% imports by the year 2010.

Prudhoe Bay, located 60 miles to the west of ANWR, has been operating for nearly 20 years and has produced in excess of 10 billion barrels of oil during that time. It is among the most environmentally sensitive oil operations in the world. Present output at Prudhoe Bay has declined to 1.4 million barrels per day, and is continuing to decline

Conclusion.
The debate over drilling in Section 1002 of ANWR is not about destroying one of America's national treasures. The magnificent mountains, beautiful lakes, and precious wildlife will not be disturbed. Nor is it about enriching oil companies. Irresponsible federal policies and indifference by policymakers to the growing domestic shortages of oil, not the actions of oil companies, have made the United States more than 50 percent dependent on foreign oil sources and subject to price volatility. At issue is whether to use merely 2,000 acres out of a total of 19 million acres in ANWR to ensure the nation's energy security. When it takes up H.R. 4, the full House should follow the lead of its Resources Committee, which approved oil and gas exploration      and development in Section 1002 of ANWR's coastal plan, and resist               efforts to delete that provision from the bill. America has much at stake-most importantly, its national energy security.

                                                   
                                                       
                                                       
                                                       
                                                       
                                                       
                                                       
        Charli E. Coon, J.D., is Senior Policy Analyst for Energy and the Environment in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

They look happy to me despite the pipelines we are told will destroy them.                 

I think the bear thinks he found a new place to play, I guess he doesn't know it is a pipeline that eill destroy his life style and maybe bring his kind to an end.    

So why are we made to beleive that drilling will destroy the wildlife and keep them off the lands they have lived on for 100's of years? I think someone is not telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Mkaes you wonder why. Why  would congress want us to think it will destroy the wildlife when they seem to    take full advantage of the pipelines.                                             
                      

 

Beneath a 1.5 million acre tract on the North Slope of Alaska is estimated to be between 3 and 9 billion barrels of recoverable oil. This area is a specially designated area within the 19 million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Known as the "Coastal Plain", this area was designated by Congress in 1981 as requiring special study to determine its oil and gas potential and the effects of development on the environment. In 1987, the Department of Interior recommended development. Congressional authorization is required for the Coastal Plain

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/06/mccain-su
pporter-dnc-delegate-may-get.html

OBAMA OR DIE! ...DNC McCain Supporter Gets the Boot Obama or Die... Or, at least get sent home. This big tent just got a little smaller. Diane Behrens and delegate Debra Bartosevich (on right) follow speeches in the Hillary Clinton delegate selection room at an earlier Democratic caucus. (Photo by Scott Anderson Journal Times) Sadly, Wisconsin's most famous delegate to the DNC Convention in Denver is about to get the boot. JS.Online reported: The state party is asking the Democratic National Committee to unseat Debra Bartoshevich, an emergency room nurse from Racine County who was locally elected in May to be a delegate for Hillary Rodham Clinton at the party’s national convention in Denver in August. In its challenge, the state party argued that Bartoshevich: • Violated party rules in expressing support for the other party’s presumptive nominee. • Violated party rules requiring that delegates be “bona fide Democrats who are faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States.” • Failed to honor a pledge that delegates sign stating their intent to vote for the party’s presidential ticket in the fall. The same challenge also stated that the “Democratic Party of Wisconsin and its members have been embarrassed in the local and national media by the decision of Ms. Bartoshevich to endorse Senator McCain.” Bartoshevich received a copy of the challenge in the mail Wednesday. “I still very much want to be a delegate for Hillary,” Bartoshevich said Wednesday night. “I still support Hillary Clinton as the nominee. I hope to still go (to Denver). All I can do is sit and wait.” Bartoshevich made public her support for McCain over Democrat Barack Obama in an interview with the Journal Sentinel this month. Bartoshevich said that she felt the nominating process had been unfair to Clinton and that Obama was inexperienced and risky. That's alright, Debra. There's room under the GOP tent for you-- Just ask Joe Lieberman.

posted by Gateway Pundit at 6/27/2008 05:52:00 AM

Now one of these sites I used for a prior post but made the mistake of taking it from my e-mail. This time I will simply give you the sites along with the original posted site. The truth still comes down to it is a small area and it is not the area that the Democrats want us to beleive it is. So the question is, Why lie? Why not show us that it is in about the same are that they are drilling around now? The secound site is the one I used for my first post. I have about twenty that I have looked at and every one has a diffrent oppion but they all show a very small area in the same place. Some anti-drilling do not show pictures so you have to wonder why.

Also these sites do not all agree with drilling for our own oil. The problem I have is we are spending billions and we are asking for more oil spills by importing. We not only have oil there, offshore but right here in the middle of our country that our congress blocks us drilling for. In this day and age we have a safer less invasive forms of drilling so we must ask ourselfs why they do not want us drilling for our own oil. I know why Al Gore doesn't, he made over $100 millions in profit on his green house investments yet he drives a big SUV and uses a huge gas guzzling boat to play on then flies in his private jet at the expence of who? All of us who fall for his go green theory.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironme
nt/wm692.cfm

http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/anwr.asp>

http://www.anwr.org/Headlines/GOP-Reps-call-for-dri
lling-in-ANWR.php

http://www.anwr.org/Resources/Land-Statistics.phpa>

http://www.anwr.org/backgrnd/potent.html

This is what Charli E. Coon,J.D. concluded:

Conclusion.
The debate over drilling in Section 1002 of ANWR is not about destroying one of America's national treasures. The magnificent mountains, beautiful lakes, and precious wildlife will not be disturbed. Nor is it about enriching oil companies. Irresponsible federal policies and indifference by policymakers to the growing domestic shortages of oil, not the actions of oil companies, have made the United States more than 50 percent dependent on foreign oil sources and subject to price volatility. At issue is whether to use merely 2,000 acres out of a total of 19 million acres in ANWR to ensure the nation's energy security. When it takes up H.R. 4, the full House should follow the lead of its Resources Committee, which approved oil and gas exploration and development in Section 1002 of ANWR's coastal plan, and resist efforts to delete that provision from the bill. America has much at stake-most importantly, its national energy security.

Charli E. Coon, J.D., is Senior Policy Analyst for Energy and the Environment in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

 

Size of ANWR relative to U.S. states:

1. ANWR 19.0 million acres Portion of ANWR permanently closed to development (Wilderness & Refuge) 17.5 million 2. West Virginia 15.5 3. Maryland 6.6 4. Vermont 6.1 5. New Hampshire 5.9 6. Massachusetts 5.3 7. New Jersey 4.9 8. Hawaii 4.1 9. Connecticut 3.2 Area proposed for exploration 1.5 million 10. Delaware 1.3 11. Rhode Island .7

From The TimesJuly 25, 2008

He ventured forth to bring light to the world The anointed one's pilgrimage to the Holy Land is a miracle in action - and a blessing to all his faithful followers

Gerard Baker

And it came to pass, in the eighth year of the reign of the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant), when the whole land from the Arabian desert to the shores of the Great Lakes had been laid barren, that a Child appeared in the wilderness.

The Child was blessed in looks and intellect. Scion of a simple family, offspring of a miraculous union, grandson of a typical white person and an African peasant. And yea, as he grew, the Child walked in the path of righteousness, with only the occasional detour into the odd weed and a little blow.

When he was twelve years old, they found him in the temple in the City of Chicago, arguing the finer points of community organisation with the Prophet Jeremiah and the Elders. And the Elders were astonished at what they heard and said among themselves: “Verily, who is this Child that he opens our hearts and minds to the audacity of hope?”

 In the great Battles of Caucus and Primary he smote the conniving Hillary, wife of the deposed King Bill the Priapic and their barbarian hordes of Working Class Whites.

 Background Obama fears the Blair effect as tour continues The Europhiles are not the future, Mr Obama The Bugle - Barack Obama is coming to Europe! Our leaders go after some Obama magic And so it was, in the fullness of time, before the harvest month of the appointed year, the Child ventured forth - for the first time - to bring the light unto all the world.

He travelled fleet of foot and light of camel, with a small retinue that consisted only of his loyal disciples from the tribe of the Media. He ventured first to the land of the Hindu Kush, where the Taleban had harboured the viper of al-Qaeda in their bosom, raining terror on all the world.

 And the Child spake and the tribes of Nato immediately loosed the Caveats that had previously bound them. And in the great battle that ensued the forces of the light were triumphant. For as long as the Child stood with his arms raised aloft, the enemy suffered great blows and the threat of terror was no more.

 From there he went forth to Mesopotamia where he was received by the great ruler al-Maliki, and al-Maliki spake unto him and blessed his Sixteen Month Troop Withdrawal Plan even as the imperial warrior Petraeus tried to destroy it.

 And lo, in Mesopotamia, a miracle occurred. Even though the Great Surge of Armour that the evil Bush had ordered had been a terrible mistake, a waste of vital military resources and doomed to end in disaster, the Child's very presence suddenly brought forth a great victory for the forces of the light.

And the Persians, who saw all this and were greatly fearful, longed to speak with the Child and saw that the Child was the bringer of peace. At the mention of his name they quickly laid aside their intrigues and beat their uranium swords into civil nuclear energy ploughshares.

 From there the Child went up to the city of Jerusalem, and entered through the gate seated on an ass. The crowds of network anchors who had followed him from afar cheered “Hosanna” and waved great palm fronds and strewed them at his feet.

 In Jerusalem and in surrounding Palestine, the Child spake to the Hebrews and the Arabs, as the Scripture had foretold. And in an instant, the lion lay down with the lamb, and the Israelites and Ishmaelites ended their long enmity and lived for ever after in peace.

As word spread throughout the land about the Child's wondrous works, peoples from all over flocked to hear him; Hittites and Abbasids; Obamacons and McCainiacs; Cameroonians and Blairites.

And they told of strange and wondrous things that greeted the news of the Child's journey. Around the world, global temperatures began to decline, and the ocean levels fell and the great warming was over.

The Great Prophet Algore of Nobel and Oscar, who many had believed was the anointed one, smiled and told his followers that the Child was the one generations had been waiting for.

And there were other wonderful signs. In the city of the Street at the Wall, spreads on interbank interest rates dropped like manna from Heaven and rates on credit default swaps fell to the ground as dead birds from the almond tree, and the people who had lived in foreclosure were able to borrow again.

 Black gold gushed from the ground at prices well below $140 per barrel. In hospitals across the land the sick were cured even though they were uninsured. And all because the Child had pronounced it.

And this is the testimony of one who speaks the truth and bears witness to the truth so that you might believe. And he knows it is the truth for he saw it all on CNN and the BBC and in the pages of The New York Times.

Then the Child ventured forth from Israel and Palestine and stepped onto the shores of the Old Continent. In the land of Queen Angela of Merkel, vast multitudes gathered to hear his voice, and he preached to them at length.

 But when he had finished speaking his disciples told him the crowd was hungry, for they had had nothing to eat all the hours they had waited for him.

 And so the Child told his disciples to fetch some food but all they had was five loaves and a couple of frankfurters. So he took the bread and the frankfurters and blessed them and told his disciples to feed the multitudes. And when all had eaten their fill, the scraps filled twelve baskets.

Thence he travelled west to Mount Sarkozy. Even the beauteous Princess Carla of the tribe of the Bruni was struck by awe and she was great in love with the Child, but he was tempted not.

 On the Seventh Day he walked across the Channel of the Angles to the ancient land of the hooligans. There he was welcomed with open arms by the once great prophet Blair and his successor, Gordon the Leper, and his successor, David the Golden One.

 And suddenly, with the men appeared the archangel Gabriel and the whole host of the heavenly choir, ranks of cherubim and seraphim, all praising God and singing: “Yes, We Can.”

In Afganistan and Iraq Obama stayed inside and spoke to a few troops, played basketball and ate. He spoke to the leaders of the countries and an American general but he went with his mind already made up on his policies. He was ask 3 times if the surge was working and managed to avoid answering every time and in fact said we should never of had it but should of with drawn our troops out and left Iraq to sink on its' own. Yet he says the surge was not the reason but the fact that Iraq took up the slack on its' own that they are doing so well. Then he says we need a surge in Afganistan but if he does not beleive a surge works then why do it. Then he goes to Europe. Now he is making campaign speeches.

Just where is Obama running? Europe or here? What is he up to when he goes over there and tells them they need to send more military into Afganistan? Has he become president and I missed it? Why should the President of France have to tell the people that France is not electing him? Why did Obama have to have a free concert in Berlin, Germany to attract a crowd? Why was he bashing the US there? Just who is Obama and where is he coming from? Just what is Obama up to? He is promising world peace and an end to genocide. How is he going to do this? He cancelled his visit to our military in Germany to make a campaign speech to Germans. Now that is so nice, pay for a concert and then run for president in Germany, then go to France and run in France.

Does he feel he is going to be president of the world? What is he up to? His people already call him president, he has refered to himself as Commander In Chief, is he giving the world the impression he is already our president or that the election is in the bag? He is discussing foriegn policies as if he was our president and he has implied we are violent and prejudice. He has slamed us as a people and as a nation. Just when did we elect him? It is one thing to privately discuss issues it is another to do so publicly as if you are the president and have the right to. What is going on? What facts is he finding when he is making political speeches and not touring Afganistan nor did he tour Iraq. He brings up Jerusalem and how it should be done which is touchy with both Israel and the Muslims.

So what is he up to and why does he think he can hold summit meetings in Europe? Basicly that is what he is doing. One country at a time. Do you not find out facts by asking question and listening rather than telling the world what you want done and by who? I thought it was how you found out about things. You ask and some one explains. Is that not how you go about fact finding? Maybe I am wrong. But my husband, who avoids politics, ask me why Obama was having summit meetings so now I am asking.