Department of the Interior Public Comment Period on Off-Shore Leasing

My understanding is that the Interior Department is soliciting public comment, for a sixty day period, starting January 21, on a five-year plan to lease offshore properties for oil and gas exploration. As is the case with most things in big government, I have searched for a web site that would allow me to provide my input, but to no avail. So instead, I wrote ALL of my elected representatives to provide them with my input so that they make sure my comments were placed in the hands of the proper bureaucrat. I suggest that you provide your comments to your elected representatives www.congress.org. My input to the Department of the Interior follows.

Dear Sir or Madam:

To place my comments in context, energy independence is not only a matter of economic prosperity; it is a matter of national defense. It represents a path forward for putting people back to work, while displacing $700B of payments to countries that are not friendly to us. Gross domestic product and per capita energy consumption are directly correlated: as we consume more energy, GDP goes up. The converse is also true.

This said, regardless of the current price of a barrel of oil, the United States should aggressively pursue development of all of its natural energy resources, starting with those that are proven, abundant, and under its direct control or the control of friendly nations. The following technologies should be deployed / developed in the order shown.

· Energy conservation education should be funded.
· We should be drilling for oil and natural gas wherever it is the least expensive to do so and where a high probability of success exists.
· We should be building more nuclear plants, an energy source that reduces greenhouse gases; is a “high density” energy source (viz., produces more power per acre of land than any other); is abundant in America, Canada, and Australia; is renewable if the country were to reprocess fuel; and could be the basis for conversion of coal to oil or supply of electric energy to automobiles.
· Clean coal should be pursued, because the United States has greater reserves of energy in the form of coal than Saudi Arabia has in oil. As noted above, coal and oil shale can be converted to oil through the use of electricity produced by nuclear power plants.
· The natural gas pipeline from Canada should be completed and the use of natural gas as an alternative to gasoline should be developed. Natural gas is also important to the development and deployment of fuel cell technology, which could over time become a significant source of residential energy supply as well as power transportation solutions.
· Monies should be invested in battery storage technology and fuel cells. These technologies are the key to unlocking the commercial potential of alternative energy sources, because they allow energy to be stored and deployed in mobile form.
· Wind power should be developed and deployed in those situations where it economical to do so. At present, this is a “feel good” technology. The energy density of a “wind farm” is .01 Megawatts per acre of land used compared to 2.8 Megawatts per acre of land used by a commercial electric coal plant (this calculation not only takes into consideration the capacity of the energy source but also its availability). Translation: a 2,259 Mw super-critical fossil plant uses 800 acres of land; an equivalent wind farm uses 200,000 acres of land. Even so, it is a proven technology that has more market share than any other alternative energy source, except conventional hydroelectric power. Wind power is followed closely by biomass.
· Other alternative energy sources should be explored based upon an “investment in success” principle rather than some “religious” fanaticism that we need to save the earth. Photovoltaic technologies should continue to be developed, but one should come to grips with the fact we have been investing in this technology for almost 40 years and to date solar represents 498 Mw of summer capacity in the United States out of 998,837 Mw of total deployed capacity. It is also very expensive in terms of dollars per kilowatts installed. A more promising source, in my view, is algae based oil production, which has demonstrated the ability to produce 18,000 to 22,000 gallons of fuel oil per year per acre of non-arable land, compared to the government’s “ethanol” mandate that produces 12 gallons of gasoline per arable acre of land.

Last, I do believe that global warming is occurring; however, I do not believe that man’s presence is contributing in any significant sense to that warming. I believe – based on scientific evidence – that the principal driver behind the warming is solar activity and that this is a naturally occurring, cyclical phenomenon. Spending billions and billions of taxpayer dollars to counter it will be throwing money down a rat hole. In fact, the wrongheaded belief that man’s carbon based activities are the culprit will exacerbate the problem by moving us toward investing in “green technologies” that are high cost, low energy density. The developmental costs will be borne disproportionately among the “successful” (otherwise known by “the rich” in progressive / socialist circles) so that the “poor” can have access to these energy sources. The end result of this will be another failed government program that has negative economic consequences, especially for the poor, which in turn affects our ability to address more pressing matters.

Geithner Confirmation

The following is an open letter to my elected senators, from Virginia, Messrs. Webb and Warner:

“I respectfully request that you vote NOT to confirm Geithner as Secretary of the Treasury. Character counts.

“I am sure that at least one qualified democrat, out of a population of 300 million citizens, can be found to fill this position other than Geithner. If Obama can make the argument that the means does not justify the ends when it comes to interrogating terrorists using water boarding, then confirming a person who has an absolute disregard for the tax code to head the agency that makes those laws does not "hold water" either.

“I also reject the argument that "time is of the essence." Since when has time been of the essence to congress? If congress had addressed the housing issue, social security, Medicare, and energy issues over the last thirty years, we would not be facing this crisis.”

I encourage you to write your elected representatives and let them know what you think.

Where is Obama’s Aunt?

In late November, 2008, I contacted by elected representatives concerning the illegal immigration status of President Obama’s Aunt Zeituni Onyango. The content of my communication was:

“In a local newspaper article (The Virginian Pilot), it was reported that president-elect Barack Obama's aunt (Aunt Zeituni Onyango) has been in this country for 4 years illegally. She violated a deportation order and has taken up residence in subsidized housing in Boston. Because this is a country that is based on the rule of law, I respectfully request that you notify the appropriate authorities of her status, and have her deported immediately. I look forward to your positive response to my request. I will expect a follow-up from you within 30 days. If I do not hear from you, I will report this to my local newspaper as well as the 200 people I reach through my blog. I will have them direct their concerns to your office.

“I realize that, as democrats, this places you in a tough spot, since Aunt Zeituni is a close relative of the president-elect. However, a price exists for doing the right thing.”

Well … surprise, surprise … my elected senators, Jim Webb and Mark Warner, did not respond, so I am moving to plan “B.” If you are a Virginian and wish to contact your senators, you may reach them electronically through www.firstgov.org. You may have to fax Mr. Warner. He is our former governor and was elected, in part, because of his experience as a high-tech, IT executive. Unfortunately, he does not have an e-mail address, as of this writing. You will have to contact him by fax or snail mail. Perhaps that is why he has not responded. Apparently he is too busy to communicate with his constituents, and instead is voting for a stimulus package to build infrastructure for everyone else but those who are in charge of spending the peoples’ money.

If you are not from Virginia, I urge you to contact your representatives directly and ask them to simply enforce the law. Unfortunately in America today, we do not recognize laws anymore unless they seem to be ones that fit our political agenda.

Obama on Redistribution of Wealth

Somehow I missed this one, but you should not: a You Tube 2001 radio interview with Barack Obama in his own words on government's responsibility to redistribute wealth. No wonder the markets are in a turmoil: with three branches of government controlled by the socialist democrats, the economy in turmoil (aided and abetted by the republicans), Obama's social engineering programs will drive the final nail in the coffin of capitalism.

The Road Not Taken

As we wind down the 2008 presidential election, I think we will look back on it and ask ourselves many questions about how we ended up with a Marxist-socialist in the White House. This election will have profound negative consequences on us as a people and on the world. As I have stated in previous postings, this trip did not start yesterday, it started over 70 years ago. It will take us at least 70 years to reverse this course, if we can do it all. I doubt that we can, but that does not mean that we cannot -- or I will not -- try.

So, for those of you who are committed to an Obama presidency, I would ask you to consider three decision criteria in selecting our next president: character, experience, and accomplishment. In the business world, these three criteria are generally evaluated through a review of a written resume, validated through a personal interview, and a final hiring decision confirmed through personal references. With respect to a personal resume, you have Obama's own books (Dreams from My Father and Audacity of Hope) and books written about him (The Obama Nation by Jerome Corsi and The Case Against Barack Obama by David Freddoso). With respect to interviews, you have Rick Warren's Saddleback debate, the Presidential Debates, and interviews with numerous cable pundits. However, one is hard pressed to confirm the hiring decision through personal references, as this is not an area the media wants to fully explore. So, I decided to find the most comprehensive list I could so that you could make an informed decision. They are summarized and illustrated through video documentary in the Cloward Piven Strategy - Part 2 - Political Allies and Advisors. As my father told me "You will be judged by the company you keep." I guess this does not apply to Barack Obama.

As for me, I think I will stay on The Road Not Taken (Robert Frost, 1920).

"I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference."

Second Open Letter to the United States Congress

The following letter was sent to my elected representatives on October 17, 2008. I suggest you write one to your elected rerpesentatives requesting your "stock" certificates be sent directly to you for safe keeping.

"The purpose of this letter is to request information about the contractual nature that the US Treasury has with the various financial institutions, which Congress has authorized the Treasury to nationalize. Specifically, is the Treasury receiving voting shares for its investment? If so, how and by whom will these shares be voted? If shares are being issued, I would like to receive mine in the mail. Otherwise, I am concerned that when these shares appreciate, as they must according to Mr. Paulson (as he knows that the mark to market rule allowed him to buy these shares at a depressed value), then I want to make sure that my pro rata share of the proceeds are returned to me. Otherwise, I fear they will be absorbed by the US Government and returned to organizations such as ACORN, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and other entities who do not have my best interest in mind.

While I await word from you, I will spend my time in retirement working to recover one-third of my life savings. Plan B is to figure out how to die 33% sooner than my actuarial age, which will be bad for me, but even worse for those who were depending on my continued contribution to their prosperity and ultimate realization of the 'American Dream.' ”

Money Ain’t For Nothing … and the Checks are for Free!

As stated in Comments on The 2008 Second Presidential Debate, the only difference between the state of our country and its institutions and the Titanic is that the Titanic had a band. So, after a little thoughtful reflection and a strong sense that we are about to inaugurate the first social Marxist to be president of the United States , I propose that we celebrate (with the little money we have left) by hiring the band Dire Straits. With a little twist on the lyrics, their classic hit “Money Ain’t for Nothing” could become American pop culture’s new national anthem! Unfortunately for Obama and his fellow Marxists, the euphoria will be short lived, tempered by economic reality. The “wealthy,” upon which the left’s tax and spend economic policy depends, are fleeing the market. Apparently, they understand that replacing the free market with a large central government controlled entirely by “Democratic” socialists – propped up by a $100B stimulus package, a $700B bailout, and yet another $150B stimulus package currently under discussion – will not work .

America is at a “strategic inflection point” in its history. I believe that if Obama is elected, our children and grandchildren will look back in history and identify this election as the point in time we transitioned from a free, capitalist society – one nation under God with equality of opportunity for everyone – to a Marxist socialist one – a multi-cultural, secular humanistic post-modern society that seeks equality of outcome for everyone but its “intellectual elite,” who view themselves as saviors of the common man and worthy of special dispensation. The Bush Administration’s policies are not the cause of the recent economic implosion, as much as the left would like to us to believe. The cause is the result of a relentless, long-term strategy that was implemented by Marxists starting in the 1920s, brought to the United States in the 1930s, and fully implemented starting in the 1950s (see Taking America to School … and Other Places We No Longer Recognize for background, discussion, and links to Obama’s world view).

The principal thesis of this movement (Critical Theory) was that Marxism could not defeat Capitalism through direct conflict or economic means but had to first undermine its culture by attacking its underlying institutions: the nuclear family, its Christian faith, education, media, entertainment, and popular culture. As the theory goes, success in subversion of these institutions would lead to economic, political, and military collapse. This is exactly what we have seen. Future articles will examine trends in each of these areas; however, suffice it to say that the current economic meltdown is simply a result of this much larger strategy. Our current economic woes are the result of 70 years of social engineering, which has year-by-year – in 2007 inflation adjusted dollars – driven federal spending in 1965 from $628 billion to $2.7 trillion in 2007 (a 334% increase), while the median income of the average American has risen 35% ($28,346 to $38,386 per year). Over this period, mandatory spending on entitlement programs (social security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, etc.) has grown from 26.9% of the budget to 52.9% of the budget. These programs had their genesis in the 1930s through democrat president Franklin D Roosevelt’s “New Deal” and came into full bloom under democrat president Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society.” When interest is considered (8.3%), only 38.8% of the budget is discretionary (within the control of the President).

One of these social engineering programs was the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), signed into law by democrat president Jimmy Carter in 1977 and further expanded by democrat president Bill Clinton in 1999 to offer sub-prime mortgages to low and moderate income persons, who otherwise could not afford them. This fiscally irresponsible, social engineering program targeted at providing “affordable housing” to those who could not “afford” it directly resulted in the economy crumbling under the weight of credit that could not be repaid. In true socialist fashion, the democratically controlled congress – aided and abetted by a minority of clueless Republicans – have now exacerbated the problem by throwing more fuel on the fire, in the form of $700B in cash guarantees. Instead, they should have taken action by unleashing the power of free market capitalism: eliminating insane mark to market rules, reducing capital gains taxes, reducing corporate income taxes, and debating the merits of new tax systems like the fair tax or flat tax system. Note: all solutions proposed by democrats require the government to be in the middle, and that is the problem.

So, what is the bottom line (pun intended)? The progress made by the Bush administration over the past six years has been erased in two weeks by long-term, systemic socialist policies that have been at work for 70 years. A little over a year ago, consumer confidence stood at a two-and-one-half year high, regular gas sold for $2.19 per gallon, the unemployment rate was 4.5%, the Dow reached record highs, and Americans were buying new cars. Over the six year period, the Bush administration has put forward proposals to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, address social security, address energy policy, and address health care. Many of these proposals passed the House, only to die in committee in the Senate because they were blocked by the democrats. Since the democrats have taken control of congress, every one of these economic indicators has reversed and to borrow a phrase from one of their social justice theorists, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, “the chickens have come home to roost.” Consumer confidence has dropped, the Dow is trading in ranges we have not seen since the 1970s, a record number of homes are in foreclosure, unemployment has risen by 10% (to 5.5%) , and the federal deficit has ballooned.

May be the market understands, better than the voters, the true cost of Obama’s Change: you give him a dollar and he gives you back two cents.