Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Palin Advises America Must Cut The Shackles of Foreign Oil Dependence-Analysts Discuss Options

Once again the American economy is under threat because of rising oil prices which stem from instability in the middle-east. Even if political matter settle down there is no guarantee that they won't flare up again-possibly even more dangerously if radical Islamic regimes take over one oil producing country after another.


Only one public figure-Sarah Palin-has consistently made this point and called for America to take matters into its own hands,as much as possible, by opening up the Alaska oil fields, and off shore drilling wherever there are opportunities-in both cases with full respect to the environment.


Two analysts look at this hugely important problem in depth.They lay the blame for the current situation where it belongs and off in depth analysis and positive suggestions for the future. Senior Correspondent Lisa Gilmer leads off followed by an equally in depth review of Sarah Palin's prescriptions from the 'Sarah Palin Information Blog" (SPIB).

******************************************************
LISA GILMER; Senior Correspondent



There were a few interesting articles I happened upon today which make me think it is very important that countries who solely or primarily rely on oil from the middle east need to seriously find new sources including drilling LOCALLY wherever that may be.

In Alaska, for example, some 80% of land is "Federal" land and cannot be touched. Why? More exploration and expanded responsible drilling NOW for oil and shale - and coal too - needs to happen in America and across the world.

TheUrkel's communist islamic-friendly regime has other plans though... plans that do NOT benefit America... plans that only enrich elitist banker types.

What are these plans? TheWon (and previous presidents) cozy up to the Saudis and middle east dicatators who have the oil. Judge for yourself...

Go back to a few stories from last year. March 2010, Washington Times, EDITORIAL Obama surrenders gulf oil to Moscow:
"The Obama administration is poised to ban offshore oil drilling on the outer continental shelf until 2012 or beyond. Meanwhile, Russia is making a bold strategic leap to begin drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico. While the United States attempts to shift gears to alternative fuels to battle the purported evils of carbon emissions, Russia will erect oil derricks off the Cuban coast.
Offshore oil production makes economic sense. It creates jobs and helps fulfill America’s vast energy needs. It contributes to the gross domestic product and does not increase the trade deficit. Higher oil supply helps keep a lid on rising prices, and greater American production gives the United States more influence over the global market."

"Cuba has rights to the area in which drilling will be conducted under an agreement the Carter administration recognized. From Russia’s perspective, this is another way to gain leverage inside what traditionally has been America’s sphere of influence. It may not be as dramatic as the Soviet Union attempting to use Cuba as a missile platform, but in the energy wars, the message is the same. Russia is projecting power into the Western Hemisphere while the United States retreats. The world will not tolerate a superpower that acts like a sidekick much longer."
Now to July 2010 Obama's latest assault on liberty from WND:
"President Obama's Executive Order 13547, issued July 19, further extends federal power, embraces global governance, diminishes the rights and privileges of individuals and brings the United States into compliance with Agenda 21, Chapter 17.6, which says:

Each coastal State should consider establishing, or where necessary strengthening, appropriate coordinating mechanisms (such as a high-level policy planning body) for integrated management and sustainable development of coastal and marine areas. The National Ocean Council created by the executive order creates this mechanism – and much more.

The genius of the American system of governance created by the U.S. Constitution is the delicate balance of power between the federal government, state and local governments, and the people. The founders recognized the people as the source of power; the people came first. It was the people who organized states. The states created a federal government and through the Constitution limited the power of the new government to those specific powers set forth in Article I, Section 8. All unspecified powers were explicitly retained by the states or the people.

In the first 200 years, the United States of America produced greater wealth and prosperity than the rest of the world had produced in 2000 years. Why? Because individuals were free to pursue their own individual happiness."

September 2010 Laura Rambeau Lee discusses above story about Executive Order 13547 at the Examiner.com Two if by sea:
"In an article by Henry Lamb posted on World News Daily on July 31, 2010 entitled Obama’s Latest Assault on Liberty he states “President Obama's Executive Order 13547, issued July 19, further extends federal power, embraces global governance, diminishes the rights and privileges of individuals and brings the United States into compliance with Agenda 21, Chapter 17.6, which says:

Each coastal State should consider establishing, or where necessary strengthening, appropriate coordinating mechanisms (such as a high-level policy planning body) for integrated management and sustainable development of coastal and marine areas. …”

This executive order also intends to pursue the United States’ accession to the Law of the Sea Convention, or Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) Dr. Lamb goes on to say “This treaty would give the U.N. power to regulate activity within our territorial seas (Article 2, (3)); it would give the U.N. the power to levy taxes in the form of application fees ($250,000) and royalties; it provides no benefits that the United States does not already enjoy. Yet, the Obama administration has set up this new National Ocean Council to convince the Senate to ratify the treaty.”
In 1978 Ronald Reagan declared, “No national interest of the United States can justify handing sovereign control of two-thirds of the Earth’s surface over to the Third World.” In 1982 Ronald Reagan refused to sign the Law of the Sea Treaty or send it to the Senate.In 2004 President George W. Bush signed the treaty, which essentially would give the International Seabed Authority all of the rights over the Atlantic, Pacific, Indian and Arctic oceans and all of the oil and mineral resources they contain. The International Seabed Authority, created by The Law of the Sea Convention, consists of 155 nations, wherein the United States would have only one vote and no veto. But of course, the United States would pay the principal share of the operating costs, as we do today with the United Nations, paying close to 17% of the operating costs. Fortunately the Senate did not pursue it’s ratification at that time."
March 2011 NewZeal points out in Must Read: Arab Communists Meet - Plan Major Changes for Middle East - from "Arab left forum" February 2011:

"The mass movement and militancy that we are witnessing has opened up a new horizon for the Arab world. A horizon created through the struggle of the youth and the workers of Tunisia and Egypt, and with significant and effective participation by Arab women. This raises the opportunity and the challenge for the forces of the Arab Left to unify themselves under a program for democratic and social change with two main and related tasks.
Firstly, such a program is necessary to confront reactionary internal forces attempting to exploit the mass popular awakening in Egypt and Tunisia in order to serve their own agendas which does not entail any radical change from the current status in the Arab world. On the contrary, these reactionary agendas would reproduce the same regimes albeit in a novel shape and form.
Secondly, such a program for the unification of the Arab left forces is also necessary to effectively confront the Imperialist American plots and Zionist occupation and assaults under a banner for real and effective change.
In the current revolutionary moment we are witnessing, the Arab leftist forces and parties gathered in Beirut decided to entitle their exceptional meeting The Martyrs of the Tunisian and Egyptian Revolution and the Other Arab Intifadas."

Trevor asks: "Does this all sound like "democracy" is coming to the Middle East? ... If this allowed to play out, $10 or $20 a gallon gas won't be the big issue. National survival will be."
So you got all that?

First the Dem-commies give "ownership" (?!?!) of oceans to the UN through "executive order" (total B.S. I say - he is not a dictator but he acts like one) while Feds continue to lock down & confiscate land across the USA and ban further drilling (while promoting Soros-owned Petrobas drilling in Brazil). Next, they cozy up to Iran and other middle east & arab dictators who now have their own leftist arab groups pushing for a combined arab power state in a goal to "confront" the USA and Israel...?

Like I said, time for USA and ALL western countries dependent on middle eastern oil to start drilling for their own... quick. TheWon regime needs to be stopped.

Trevor is right: national survival at stake.

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

Palin: Obama’s ‘terrifying anti-oil agenda will bring our country to its knees’


Amid today’s reports that “The national average for self serve unleaded gas is $3.50 a gallon,” Sarah Palin warns that President Obama’s “naive and destructive and terrifying anti-oil agenda is going to bring our country to its knees.”
In a passionate challenge that Obama must “tap into our domestic energy sources,” Palin went on to denounce Obama saying, “His agenda must be stopped!”
Instead of tapping America’s natural energy resources, opening drilling, or speeding up approval of shallow and deep water drilling applications, Fox News reports that  ”the Obama administration is considering releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to help Americans facing a spike in oil prices as a result of unrest in the Middle East, Obama Chief of Staff William Daley said Sunday.”
Not even a court order to expedite permits for drilling can deter the Obama administration’s determination to thwart drilling in America. Since the BP oil spill in the Gulf, only one permit has been approved by the Obama administration. As for the court order? The Obama administration is appealing.
Resolution 140, from the House of Representatives is a bi-partisan effort to leverage  pressure  from both Democrats and Republicans on the Department of Interior for speedy action on approval of both shallow and deep water drilling applications. That pressure has yet to budge Obama’s “naive and destructive and terrifying anti-oil agenda.”  There is no sign Obama intends to allow permits to go forward.
Recently several of  Palin’s Reagan speech ‘Don’t tread on me’ top applause linesregarded her energy position. From the applause, many Americans agree with her. Following is a transcript of the relevant lines from that article:

Monday, March 7, 2011

Ryan Easily Wins Wisconsin '12 Poll.If Palin's VP He Brings Electoral College Win

The Hill has an analysis of a PPP poll showing that Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan is way ahead of his putative rivals in that state if he was a candidate for president in 2012.


The poll gives Ryan 30% of the vote in a big field but way ahead of Mike Huckabee who comes in in second place at 17%. Since Ryan has strongly advised he will not be a candidate there are a number of interesting scenario's that arise from the poll.


Firstly, as has been the case for many months the combined Palin/Huckabee support (with Ryan removed from the poll is 38% to Romney's 12% which proves, once again, that the grass roots-even in this traditionally liberal state, want a conservative candidate (which of course Ryan is also).


Secondly if Ryan was selected by Palin, should she get the nomination, as her VP choice, bearing in mind Palin has often singled out Ryan for praise, especially his economic "road map" which she quotes often (and Ryan has not denied he would take the VP slot, rather he has in fact left that door open) then a very interesting electoral college map appears.


If Wisconsin is added to the base red states and Palin won back the red states that Bush had one but McCain lost the following electoral path to victory is very real.
Palin could afford to lose Nevada/New Mexico/New Hampshire/Virginia and even Iowa and the one Nebraskan Electoral College vote that Obama won- and still win.


Palin and Ryan appear very compatible in economic matters and he would lend a degree of gravitas to that area.The base accepts him and he has youthful exuberance allied with respected experience.According to the electoral map it is a winning combination.

Do These 18 Pictures Of Cheerleaders to Celebrate The New Australian League Season Exploit Women?

Do these 18 pictures of Australian Rugby League (NRL) cheerleaders exploit women in this feminist age or is it harmless fun to celebrate the start of the NRL season. Examine  all 18 pictures carefully and you be the judge of this important issue at:


http://nz.sports.yahoo.com/galleries/g/8970408/the-nrl-is-back/8970421/




Here is one example:


Astonishing Poll Results So Far " If Romney The Nominee Would You Write In Palin?"

The polling so far at:

http://recovering-liberal.blogspot.com/2011/03/pollif-romney-is-nominee-will-you.html



is running an astonishing 75% for "Write in Palin". This rate of bleeding, if it held true across America on electionday, must send a strong message to the GOP establishment as not only would Romney, or any RINO, lose but the downtickets would be decimated.


The vehemence from the Palin supporters in their comments as to their actions strongly supports this scenario.


Polling ends next Sunday and may reach 1000 genuine voters as only one vote per person is allowed.

Sunday, March 6, 2011

POLL:"If Romney Is Nominee Will You Vote/Not Vote/Write In Palin/Write Someone Else?"


The liberal media and the beltway gang have let the mask slip (not that it was much of a mask) and have  come out in the open as to the "safe pair of hands" who is  O.K. with the Washington elite  as their choice for GOP 2012 presidential candidate.
A massive media blitz for Mitt Romney has commenced,  as the insiders see their opening with  Daniels/Huckabee/Gingrich self destructing, and they are preparing the GOP voters for their version  of McCain for 2012.  The grass roots have other ideas and the true test will come in the ballot box irrespective of how much  effort the insiders/lib's put into their chosen sacrificial lamb for Obama.
However, should the East/West Coast/Lib's/Beltway denizens campaign succeed, and Romney is the  nominee, the question for the grass roots is "what to do on election day 2012?" It's clear who the grass  roots activists want-it's Palin by a mile but what effect will that have in November 2012?
To gauge this to some degree here is a simple poll which asks "Would you vote for Mitt Romney in  November 2012 for president?" If not, would you write in Sarah Palin?"  "Would you write in  someone else?" "Would you not vote at all?"
Only one vote per person is allowed with this poll so it will be an accurate reflection of the responders choices