At the risk of being labeled a "Slanted Republican Extremist", I have to say that I have seldom seen the enthusiasm amongst conservatives that I am seeing today following the speech by Sarah Palin last evening.  To set the record straight, by the way, I belong to no political party and believe my self to be a fiscal and social conservative.

That having been said, I was very impressed with Ms. Palin last night.  She strikes me as the person next door.  I think she strikes many Americans as the person next door.  She isn't the super-sophisticate that we see in the Speaker of the House.  She isn't the elitist we see in the Senate Majority Leader.  Sarah Palin is the person next door...and I hope she never changes.

I have been taken to task by liberals because Sarah Palin isn't perfect and her family isn't perfect.  No one is perfect, and I don't expect that of anyone since I am far from perfect.  I really don't understand some of the people who have made comments on the earlier Blog concerning Sarah Palin.  I must simply not be 'with it'.

There seems to be a palpable fear emerging from the liberals today that must stem from her performance last evening when the press set her up to 'have to hit it out of the park'.  She has befuddled them all because she did just that.  She hit it out of the park and made it look easy.  I have heard her labeled as a 'natural' speaker.  I believe that may be true.  She handled herself extremely well.  She took shots with a smile on her face that made her seem much less shrill than Hillary when she took shots.

Sarah Palin will see some rough spots before this is all done, but I suspect that she'll see far fewer rough spots than I might've guessed a couple of days ago.  She has a real gift of being able to connect with people.  And her connection seems to be at a deeper level than simply surface.  She seems able to touch people where they're unaccustomed to being touched.

There is a toughness that reminds me of Margaret Thatcher.  I see a communicator that reminds me of Ronald Reagan.  I see the person next door.  She isn't unapproachable; she is very open and tells us what she is thinking without the typical feigned eloquence we've all come to expect and despise from the usual politico.  As I said earlier, she is like you and me...at least I think of her as being like you and me.  And that makes all the difference in the world.

I believe we are witnesses to something really special, and I suspect that liberals are simply beside themselves trying to determine how best to beat her up enough to keep that something special from happening. 

The other thing we are likely going to be witness to are the downright dirty tactics that have already begun to be unrolled by the liberals.  The mainstream press has finally dropped all pretense of impartiality.  The 'talking heads' have almost begun to foam at the mouth.  When the press finally steps back after this is all done, and it begins to understand the damage it has done to itself, I can only hope that it goes on a long soul-searching retreat so that it can look deep inside and maybe, just maybe, find the proper road to follow in the future.  If it doesn't, the press as we've known it to this time will be gone.

Us 'working stiffs' aren't as stupid as they've given us credit for being.  We can actually think for ourselves.  We are able to reason and we are able to determine what we each think is right.  We know what needs to be done for the country.  We can actually make determinations for ourselves.

When a Sarah Palin touches us, we know we've been touched.  And we know we've been genuinely touched; not manipulated as is the case with some others seeking office.

What an experience.

I will vote for John McCain for President with a clear conscience where, I must confess, I had been feeling a little remorse because I would, for the first time in a long time, be voting for the 'lesser of evils'.  I am no longer voting for the lesser of evils.  I am a solid supporter and I love his VP selection.

Sarah Palin is like you and me.  She is a real person; she went to high school with other real people; she played ball like other real people.  She owns a gun and loves to hunt and fish.  She is educated as a journalist...but, I'll still cast my ballot proudly.

The liberals have been instantly relegated to name-calling.  That tells me just how good this selection was on John McCain's part.  Sarah's husband, Todd, has an arrest for DUI.  How many of us were a flashing light away from such an experience at one time in our lives?  Her daughter is pregnant at the age of 17.  How many real families go through similar experiences each year in our country?

Sarah Palin runs a state; she is commander-in-chief of the Alaska National Guard.  She has more executive experience than the two candidates on the opposing ticket.  She has had run ins with her state's good ole boys and they lost.  They were also, in several instances, members of her own political party.

Sarah Palin scares the bejeebers out of the liberals.  She is their very worst nightmare come true.  While they try to paint Joe Biden as 'Joe Lunchbucket", she has lived the 'lunchbucket' life, just like many of us have or still do.

Among the things that concern the liberals is this simple fact: she not only talks the talk, she walks the walk!  She is true to her philosophy; she does not have to remember who she is for this audience or that audience.  Sarah Palin is who she is, and we can like it or lump it!

Sarah Palin has some hurts coming from the press and the liberal blogosphere.  But, do you want to know something?  She's been there and done that, too!  She has scrubbed her knees and walked away the stronger for it.  She isn't hiding anything about herself or about her family.  And, they'll come through this just fine, maybe a bit wiser, but just fine.  Because they are all real people. 

Like you and me, they have their flaws and their scars and their regrets...and their faith.  I'd love to see "Sarah Barracuda" running up and down the hallways of Congress.  Those people need a dose of "real"!

Labor Day has arrived and signals the 'end of summer' as nights get chillier and children and grandchildren go back to their respective schools.  Ideally, we will enjoy a luxurious fall season with leaves ablaze and many beautiful days before snowflakes once again arrive.

Labor Day was formally decreed across the United States in 1894 by then President Grover Cleveland.  The new federal holiday was swiftly approved by Congress and has been with us since.

Labor Day has, like so many special holidays, lost a lot of its meaning for many people.  For some, it is simply another three-day week-end.  For others, it is the time when the Muscular Dystrophy fund drive is hosted by Jerry Lewis, and so on. 

I have never been a member of organized labor, unless by accident during my six-week 'career' at the Estwing hammer plant in Rockford, IL in the early 1960s.  I have friends who were and still are members of unions.  I have many acquaintances who were and/or are members of unions.  My feelings about the labor movement tend toward the position that they were very important during the later years of the Industrial Revolution and during the early third of the 20th century.  Since that time, I am convinced that unions, in general, have lost the essence of what made them so dominant during those times.  Child labor laws have curtailed that practice.  Employers have come out of the dark ages in most cases and recognize they must treat their employees as humans who are part of the reason for the success or failure of their business.

Among the strongest unions today is the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) run by Mr. Andy Stern.  He has proved to be a consummate organizer and is one of the brightest people in organized labor today of which I'm aware.  I see entities such as 9 to 5 with the soon to be held referendum that would bind employers in Milwaukee to offering sick leave for all employees.  These organizations tend to signal the changes that have been occurring in our country.  The strongest union is one that organized workers in the 'service' sector.  The old United Auto Workers (UAW) struggles with the malaise felt throughout that industry.  Coal miners no longer have the clout that once was theirs.

I see the Democrats in Congress still carrying the water for labor with such things as the open vote effort that would certainly favor organizers and quiet the opposition.  Political power changes hands periodically and that has a great deal to do with the ebb and flow of organized labor.  Labor organizations still have the ability to mobilize tens of thousands of 'volunteers' to get out the vote.  Republicans can only stand in the shadows and lament that they do not have similar clout.

I wonder where organized labor will be in a decade or two or three.  I don't know but I do recognize that change will continue at the same or a faster pace.  Will organized labor find ways to make inroads in India or China?  Will those governments permit such organizing?  If the government of China permits organizing, I wonder at what cost to the workers?  Will unions in the U.S. come together to maintain a level of strength that many have already lost individually?  If so, where will the new leaders come from?  I doubt that heavy industry will be the source of leadership; it more likely comes from the service sector of our economy given the massive shifts in employment in our country.

At any rate, I trust you will have or have had a very pleasant Labor Day 2008.

Former president Jimmy Carter has progressively become a looser and looser cannon.  He has obviously 'represented' the United States in many foreign countries, since losing his race for re-election...all on his on dime since he was "without portfolio" as the phrase goes.  He went on his own, conducted his foreign policy meetings on his own and did his best to muddy the waters of the sitting president.

As if mixed signals were not enough, he was taped discussing John McCain in the past day or two.  His partisanship took an amazingly nasty jump during this press conference.  He remarked that John McCain had "milked" his tour in the North Vietnamese POW camp, known as the 'Hanoi Hilton', "every chance he got".  His remarks centered on the Saddleback debate.  Carter remarked that he (McCain) seemed to get that into every answer he gave no matter the question.

To the contrary, my feeling has been that McCain didn't raise that point often enough since the contrast it draws between him and his opponent is stark.  That Carter, an Annapolis graduate and former nuclear submarine officer, can have come to this saddens me as much as it angers me.

Jimmy Carter is an embarrassment to me as a former president of my country.  He ought to be an embarrassment to his political party since he was a failed one-term president, and has become a pariah.  He ought to have enough self-control to be able to avoid such remarks.  But...he doesn't.

Carter needs a muzzle...pure and simple.

You and me are really great people.  Why is that?  Well, we seem to help bail out just about everything that bangs on Washington's door.

A short time ago, the sub-prime mortgage companies received their bail out; likely the first of their bail outs since Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are still in the throes of that mess.

Now the automobile industry is in the queue for what yesterday was about $25 billion and today has already climbed to $40 billion according to the press.

Is this a proper use for the tax dollars that are extracted from each of us?  Should we be funding these bail outs for industries that essentially have gone bad because of their own doing?  If you or me were responsible for these 'disasters', we'd probably step up to the plate and take what was coming to us.  But we didn't force people to be too gullible and let people sell them homes they couldn't afford.  We didn't cause the oil price jump because we didn't approve new refineries for thirty years or drill for new fields of oil?

If any of us should be paying 'the price', it seems that the finger of blame needs to be pointed at Washington and the people we send there to represent us.  That group has caused these issues to surface through favors to those putting money into their campaign accounts.  That group has caved in to the environmental groups that are fanatical to the extreme in their pursuit of the ultimate goal they espouse.

Oh, that's right.  We are to blame because we continue to return the same people to Washington in spite of what they do and don't do.  We don't require any 'reparations' for their actions.

Maybe we all need to get a little more involved and a little more vocal starting with our upcoming local elections.  Too may of us simply shake our heads and fume; we really need to be more active in our precincts and districts and villages or cities, and in our counties and states.

I saw a quote in the past few days that went along these lines:  "Too many people have died for our freedoms for us to not vote."

Cigarette Taxes...

The state raised cigarette taxes to $1.77 per pack and promptly budgeted/spent all the new money that would bring in.  The only problem is that this 230% increase in the tax rate only generated a 48% increase in the tax money received!  Now, we're stuck with a lot of people circumventing the tax entirely by buying cigarettes out-of-state or over the Internet.  And, we have added to an already staggering budget shortfall.

Makes a lot sense, huh?

~~~~~

Clean Air Act Gone Wild...

One of my favorite agencies, the EPA, has decided that it now has free rein over so-called greenhouse gases.  This came to pass as the result of a 'namby-pamby' U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that didn't go quite far enough to ward off this rampant agency.  EPA has now released its Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule-making, an ANPR in the jargon, and this is astonishing.  EPA would regulate airplanes, trains, ships, boats, tractors, farm and mining equipment, lawn mowers, garden equipment, portable power generators, fork lift trucks, construction equipment and logging equipment.

EPA estimates that more than 500,000 new permits will be required.  Among the supposed new requirements are these:

• Lawn mower standards:  "...each application could require a different unit of measure tied to the machine's mission or output-such as grams per kilogram of cuttings from a 'standard' lawn for lawn mowers."
• Truck speed standards:  "Speed limiters are generally available on new trucks or as a low cost retro-fit..."
• Single family homes become polluters:  "...we believe that small commercial establishments...and indeed, a large single-family residence could exceed this [CO2 pollution] threshold."

All of this means that our taxes go up exponentially since the EPA will be forced to grow staff and facilities to handle this new found mission.  And, it means that we'll all pay more for products and services.

And, none of this was ever the intent of Congress nor has it had the opportunity to inject itself to this point.

~~~~~

Compact Fluorescent Bulbs...

Regular, nice old incandescent light bulbs (starting with 100 watt bulbs) become illegal to manufacture in 2012.  The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) points out that this means we can forget about spending 20 cents or so for the old bulb while buying the new CFLs for something on the order of $3.00+ (remember that these are usually subsidized today).

While CFLs save energy, they have costs associated with them that make all this really questionable:

• The average lifetime is not 10,000 hours, but "up to 10,000 hours"
• The energy savings and lifetime of CFLs has been exaggerated in some applications
• The CFL only achieves the claimed efficiency if burned continuously for long periods
• If left on for only 5 minute periods, the CFL will burn out just as fast as an incandescent bulb
• CFLs dim over their lifetime and do not deliver what is promised

And, we're adding mercury to the environment which supposedly will be handled by proper disposal.  Yeah, sure!  How many of us has disposed of a burned out CFL improperly already?  How is that ever going to be policed?

~~~~~

Clean Water Restoration Act...

The EPA is back again.  The original Clean Water Act of 1972 had gotten to be very broadly interpreted under various EPA rulings.  "Navigable waters" had morphed into isolated wetlands, dry lake beds and drainage ditches, for example.  Now, two Democrat members of Congress have introduced the bill named in the title.  It would replace the phrase "navigable waters" with the phrase "waters of the United States"  This means "all waters subject to ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds and all impoundments of the foregoing".  Reason magazine, August/September 2008

If this bill were to pass in its current state, it would very likely result in massive new regulations for boaters, fishermen, hunters, and even conservationists.  This act would leave it to the courts to decide what constitutes "waters of the United States".

Thanks to Ronald Bailey for writing the article "Feds in a Fishbowl" in Reason.

~~~~~

Anti-Meat Campaign...

Finally, from the Heartland Institute, this on global warming activists' latest efforts.  They are launching new efforts to restrict meat production and consumption, building on prior efforts to restrict various agriculture activities that supposedly would reduce 'greenhouse gases'.

More on this can be found on the worldchanging.org website.

If we continue to have a ban on drilling more oil, we won't be able to buy meat anyway, so maybe this isn't as bad as I first thought.

Maybe we really do have too many crackpots in Congress...or too many people are being paid through campaign contributions and don't have the commonsense necessary to sort out the good from the crazy.

The 'virtual fence' that was approved by Congress to extend across hundreds of miles of the border between the United States and Mexico has been been put on hold indefinitely.

Why?  Well, it seems that the Interior Department has not signed off on the use of its lands.  These officials have refused to accept an environmental assessment that the towers, cameras, etc. would have no appreciable effect on the lands.

Even though the Department of Homeland Security has the authority to waive environmental laws for border security projects, it apparently does not extend to the virtual fence projects.  Sounds like the typical governmental bull!

An employee of a Florida hospital testified recently about the costs of treating illegal immigrants in one hospital.  You can watch the testimony by clicking here.

The citizens of this country finally prevailed on border controls, and yet the government continues to thwart this solution.  It seems like someone is a bit confused on just how this country works.  The people in these various departments are employed because we pay taxes to support their employment.  I am tiring of those within the system who pervert it to their own will.

Oregon has had government involved in health care for quite a few years.  The state electorate also approved the concept of state sanctioned suicide several years ago.

Recently, the board that reviews the medications that are approved for state residents made a determination that was controversial...in my mind if no where else.  The board, in essence, said that, given the cost of a certain medication, it would approve suicide for this patient but would not approve use of the medicine given its relative newness and the lack of convincing data as to the outcome.  It had essentially set a price on the human life involved.

Today I read the story concerning Denver Children's Hospital and heart transplants in infants that use the heart from another infant that died a 'cardiac-related death'.  This differs from a heart harvested from a brain-dead infant in which that heart is beating until removed from the donor body.  A decision has been made that the donor that has been pronounced dead and has been in that state for only 75 seconds, is a valid heart donor for purposes of this new program.  The earlier line that had existed required death be determined only after some five minutes during which time the heart did not re-start itself.  In this instance, the length of time a person had been deemed 'dead' had been reduced to assure that the harvested heart had a decent chance of functioning in the new body.  The three cases in which this approach has been employed resulted in three infants alive today.  The decisions to withdraw life support were made by the parents in all three instances.

We know so much more today than we did a decade ago.  We can do things from a medical perspective that were impossible then, and these procedures have become commonplace now.  We are, in this area, pushing the envelope as it has never before been pushed.

I know there are at least two sides to these issues.  I have good friends whose daughter lives today because of transplanted organs that were available on a timely basis.  I can't even begin to comprehend being placed in the middle of such decisions, and I earnestly hope that never befalls me.

And this leads to my general question:  Is there a line we dare not cross?  If so, where is or was that line?  Am I comfortable with an appointed board making life and death decisions about me?  Who among us can claim the right to make such a decision?  How do medical ethicists deal with these kinds of issues?

I don't profess to have the answers to these questions.  If you do, and you're willing to share, I'd appreciate your comments.

As we watch the Summer Olympics, we see the pageantry and the heroics of the athletes from around the world. 

We don't see the oppression that has persisted for centuries in China and that continues to persist under the very noses of those who are walking the streets of Beijing.

TV cameras and microphones have been installed in all the taxi cabs and are remote controlled by the authorities to be sure that no one says or does something threatening to the regime.  130,000 police and soldiers are present ostensibly to protect the attendees.  They also help assure that the opposition will be suppressed during the games.

300,000 Chinese citizens augment the 130,000 people mentioned above as additional eyes and ears.  Reporters are subject to censorship.  Passports are summarily pulled from some reporters who have sought to broadcast by telephone back to their home countries.  That is a subtle form of reminder that the regime is in complete control and that one shouldn't forget it.

Against this backdrop, the President stood aligned with Chinese protestants this morning to deliver a few words of support.  We don't know what kind of persecution will follow when the reporters and TV crews leave, but we can remember the Tienanmen Square episode of a few years ago and draw upon those scenes of brutality to get some idea.

China is China.  Nothing more and nothing less.  It owns a big chunk of America.  It spies on us every day.  It works to find weaponry that can be used against us.  It still wishes to defeat us; if not on an actual battlefield, then in commerce.  We seem to forget these things, but they are critical.

Is 'perversion' too strong a term?  I don't think so.

The EPA has turned down attempts by the State of Wisconsin to relax the ill-conceived S.E. Wisconsin requirement for 'reformulated' gasoline even as we are virtually in full attainment.  That was probably dwarfed by comparison to the decision it announced that it was denying the State of Texas' request for a cutback on the amount of ethanol required to be blended with gasoline.

There is a radio commercial playing in our market that is sponsored by the ethanol lobby that makes the case, in essence, that we, who question the use of corn to make ethanol, are over-reacting and need to check our facts.  I am angered every time I hear that commercial, including this morning as it played while I was shaving...with a blade.  That could've hurt!

The simple facts are being ignored by the EPA, Congress and the President.  And, these aren't stupid people.  This is intentional ignorance.  Our food prices are going up, and it is caused in part by the insistence that ethanol be blended with gasoline even as us taxpayers pay the price for the ethanol support being paid on every gallon.  The other part of the increase is obviously that caused by the fact that Democrats have so far refused to relax their stance against oil drilling here and now.

Back to ethanol.  It is causing many cattle ranchers to reduce their herd size because they can't afford the feed to grow them for market.  The prices for chicken and beef are rising at a rapid pace.  I looked at flank steak a few days ago since it always used to be a relatively lower priced cut of meat.  That is a thing of the past.  I bought chicken breasts a few days ago and was astounded at the prices I saw on the packages.

I know that my mileage with reformulated gas is less than it was before that edict; about 10% worse.  I know that ethanol is much less efficient in terms of the energy it generates than is gasoline.  So, I am burning more and getting less.  A double-whammy in our part of Wisconsin.

The EPA stated that there was "no compelling evidence" that the mandate for ethanol is causing "severe economic harm".  That had to have been spoken by a federal employee who is reimbursed for his or her mileage...from our tax dollars  These people simply have no contact with reality, or manage to suppress the lessons they really learn in order to be a "dutiful servant of the people".

As if all this isn't enough to put me into a deep funk, I am confronted with the idiocy that is called political campaigning where people talk about wind power, sun power, and bio-fuels while not mentioning oil or coal or nuclear power.  How in the world are we supposed to leap forward a decade or more when technology is not yet even available to soften our landing?

We are in real danger of becoming a third world nation if the current policies are not changed and changed quickly!  Our economy simply cannot withstand the political assault it is under.  And this is not a political assault from another country...it comes from within.

So, I don't think calling the EPA the Environmental Perversion Agency is much of a reach. 

And I, for one, am very, very tired of the elected people we all put into office forgetting who it is they represent, and what it is we want.

If you were prescient and stocked up on the Forever Stamp while it was still available at $0.41, you may be able to say "Gotcha!"

A small news item caught my eye this morning.  The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) posted a loss of $1,100,000,000 for the quarter ended June 30th.  Yes, that is $1.1 Billion that was lost by the USPS, now a private organization.

The reasons cited were reduced mail volume (blamed on the slowing economy) and rapidly rising transport costs.

We can all understand that the cost of fuels that go into delivery have gone through the roof.  Everything delivered costs more, or soon will.  And, the economy has slowed.  Given the apparent political stalemate on drilling for oil here and now, fuel costs will likely do nothing but continue to increase.  Your Forever Stamps may prove to have been a really good investment since postage costs will almost certainly have to rise for us consumers.

I wonder, however, if there may be something more at work here.  Is it possible that we are watching the initial death throes of snail mail as we have known it for our lifetimes?  We know that more of us are computer literate today than ten years ago.  I think we would agree that use of computers and other communications devices will continue to accelerate.

Between telephones and other electronic communication media, and with delivery services available that have already taken most of the parcel post market, are we in the process of ending the use of delivered items that we walk to a mailbox to retrieve?  Simply look at the state of newspapers in our country today to get some idea of the potential impact.

Will there continue to be a USPS ten years from now?   Twenty?

If so, what will it look like and what will it do?  What will happen to all the brick and mortar that carries the USPS logo?  What happens to the tens of thousands of employees?

Could this really happen?   Did anyone ever ask that about horses and buggies?  Did anyone ever foresee air travel in the 1850s?  Did anyone ever foresee space travel in the 1930s?

A new approach to how auto insurance would be priced is beginning to catch hold and could spread quickly if it proves to be something people like.

The concept is called "pay as you drive" and it factors miles driven and driving behavior into premium rate development.  So far, Progressive, an auto insurer whose ads you've probably seen on television, has begun to sell this product in Alabama (in July) and will launch the product in New Jersey next week.

California officials are apparently considering legislation that would allow the concept to be marketed there.  The California Assembly passed the bill (A.B. 2800) by a vote of 72-2, so it was popular on that side of their legislature.

Here's how it works:

Policyholders receive a small wireless device that ties into the vehicle's computer diagnostic system.  The device gathers data from various functions on-board the vehicle.  This data reports how much the vehicle is being driven, when the vehicle is being driven, the number of miles driven and mileage by time of day, the speed per second and all sudden acceleration, deceleration and braking.

The data is transmitted automatically to Progressive, and policyholders can check their data on-line.

The whole point apparently is to cause those who drive more to pay more while those who drove less would pay less.  A recent study from the Brookings Institution found that today, drivers similar in age, gender, location and driving record pay nearly the same rates.  If all drivers were to pay per mile, driving would decline by 8% nationwide thus saving $50 to $60 billion per year from reduced congestion and fewer accidents.  It would also supposedly reduce carbon emissions by 2% and oil consumption by 4%.  (By the way, in the first five months of 2008, miles driven by drivers in the U.S. have dropped 2.4% or nearly 30 billion miles given the cost of gasoline and diesel fuel.)

Progressive is also introducing this program in Minnesota and Oregon.  If the program appears popular in Minnesota, I'll wager that it won't be long before it is is being touted in Wisconsin.

Not stated in the study, but inherent in the supposition, is anything concerning the premium rate impact.  It stands to reason that the safer driver would be charged less for his or her premium.  This will strike some as a way to single out a group for higher rates.  If that group is incurring the bigger costs, would that be all bad?

Beyond all this is the privacy invasion issue that will certainly be part of the debate and acceptance patterns.

Barack Obama has now decided that he needs to promise another round of stimulus checks that are discussed as being in the range of $1,000 for every family and $500 for individuals.  Now, of course, even in the federal government, money does not grow on trees.  This 'reward' for electing Obama and the Democrats has to be paid for.  After all, they apparently hold to the approach that all things done within the government must be "revenue neutral".  So, if money is going to be given to one person, it must be taken from somewhere else.

The 'somewhere else' in this instance is destined today to be a take-away from "big oil" through what is artfully called a "windfall profit tax".  A Wall Street Journal editorial today takes an intriguing look at the concept of such taxes including some individuals that seem to have benefited from windfall profits.. 

There is a certain arbitrariness to all this posturing. 

First, from whom or what will such money be taken?  Well, why not target those nasty "big oil" companies.  They are, after all, socking money away at record levels.

Second, what is it that constitutes a "windfall" profit?  Well, this one seems to differ with the magnitude of "big oil's" profit, so it really becomes whatever the Congress thinks it is...and it can be different when applied to different entities and/or at different times.

Third, doesn't this become very much a form of nationalizing parts of companies?  How does this differ from Hugo Chavez' approach in Venezuela other than in degrees?  Chavez decrees that the company will be 'nationalized' and seizes whatever assets exist for which he doesn't feel obligated to pay stockholders.  So if, for example, "big oil" earns a combined $10 billion, and if government decrees that it should've only earned $5 billion, the windfall profit tax levied is essentially consuming half the industry.  

Fourth, from whom is this "windfall profit" being taken?  Why, from the stockholders of the companies...and those stockholders are individuals, mutual funds, pension funds and so on.  Too many people are seemingly unable to work through this.  This money comes from them, goes to Congress and is re-distributed to other 'thems' after, of course, a few dollars are siphoned off to go to this or that pet project that gets tacked on to the legislation as it wends it way through the voting process.

Fifth, the oil companies simply pass the lost profit on to their customers in the form of increased prices to cover this unanticipated 'cost' that was levied against them.  You and me pay this at the pumps, and when we turn on our lights and heat our homes and buy food and other necessities since virtually everything is dependent upon oil at one or another stage in the process.

Could it be that there really is nothing to which we can refer as a federal give-away?  The federal government doesn't earn dollar one; it only takes from you and me.  If it doesn't have any money of its own, then it really is only re-distributing our money like an inefficient Robin Hood.  Robin didn't have the need for large sums from his takings such as Congress seems to have.

This sure sounds very much like socialism doesn't it?

Back on July 21st, I Blogged about the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" that would compel radio stations to mount the same number of hours daily for 'liberal' talkers as they do for 'conservative' talkers.  This would, in the minds of the liberals in Congress, equalize the message of the two differing points of view. 

On the heels of that, we saw the 'celebration' of Rush Limbaugh's twentieth anniversary as a conservative 'talker' this past Friday.  There is not, to my knowledge, a liberal radio personality anywhere with anything near the run that Limbaugh has had and will continue to have according to the new $38 million contract signed that takes his nationally-syndicated program into 2016.

This drives the liberals nuts but it has nothing to do with 'unfairness', and everything to do with the difference in messages.  We Americans, thankfully, are able to listen to anything we prefer.  If we preferred the Air America message, it wouldn't be struggling and on its third owner in nearly the same number of years.  We prefer the conservative message.  Liberals fight battles using class warfare actually pitting one group against another group to create animosity that the left believes will result in votes for its candidates.

If you follow any of the national debates, you'll see this clearly.  Conservatives understand the free market forces and seek more oil being drilled recognizing that this will drive prices down.  Liberals still cannot tolerate the concept of the free market since they find it threatening, and, therefore see everything through the prism of taxation forcing certain behaviors.  They believe that taxes on the 'egregious' profits of oil companies will result in lowered prices in the marketplace.  They simply do not want to understand that oil companies don't pay taxes; the customers of oil companies pay taxes...and that is us.

That starkly displays the difference in message, and it explains why there is a Rush Limbaugh and why his popularity is probably the equal or better of all the liberal 'talkers' in combination.  And it explains the extreme dislike, even hatred, with which the likes of Limbaugh are perceived by their enemies.  It also explains why liberals think that legislation will cure this problem as well as all other problems.

This 'freedom of thought-freedom of speech' thing is a real problem...for those whose thoughts are not swallowed by the listening masses.

A week ago, I Blogged about Chrysler ending its leasing operations, and suggested that GM and Ford were close to the same decision.  All this due in major part to the declining residual value of the trucks on lease.

GM announced a major hit in the last quarter with the loss of over $15 billion.  It is very near the precipice, in my opinion, where it will need to actively consider bankruptcy.  It has a market value today that is a mere shadow of what it was just a year or two ago.

And now, foreign auto makers are facing similar pressures although certainly not yet to the degree that U.S. auto manufacturers are confronting.  BMW announced that it will raise prices and reduce production to stave off the problems faced by others.  Nissan has begun to show signs of problems.

Our worldwide vehicle companies are in the throes of a major set of problems that could very likely result in fire sales or outright closures of some old-line companies.

A significant part of these problems can be traced back to fuel prices that have impacted our economy and those of other countries around the world.  The costs of fuel have driven down auto and truck sales.  This drain on spendable dollars has also taken a huge toll on the rest of our economy.

And, against that backdrop, what has Congress done about these problems?  Through the stalling tactics employed by the Democrat-controlled House and Senate, NOTHING has been accomplished.  They continue to say NO to oil, NO to nuclear, NO to coal.  They feel that we need to suffer to the point that we'll roll over and let them take us where they have intended to take us for years.

We are facing some of the most serious economic issues of several generations and our government thinks this is the 'medicine' we need to get our heads more properly attuned to their 'vision' of what the U.S. and the world needs to look like in the coming half-century.

If there is any 'good news' coming from Washington, it is the fact that the law-makers have gone on their August 'vacation'.  The bad news is that our government will remain paralyzed until after the new government is sworn in in 2009.

We cannot afford to simply sit back and watch this mess play out.  We need to drill here and drill now!  That signal will further depress the price of crude oil on the world market and begin the process of our economic recovery in a big, big way!  As a pundit said in the last day or two, it is really hard to install a wind generator on your personal vehicle.  It is really hard to wean our country from its primary source of vehicle fuel overnight...and it is absolutely a crime to force us into the coming series of bankruptcies to try to prove some point that is unsupported by science.

I cannot fathom what goes on in the minds of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.  I cannot believe that normal human beings have the kind of disregard for their brothers and sisters that these two seem to evidence.  I know that politics is referred to as a "blood sport", and I don't necessarily mind them spilling their own...

But I really have to draw the line when they metaphorically spill yours and mine and never even blink in the process.

The July 25th edition of the Small Business Times includes a great article featuring an interview with Michael Grebe, President & CEO of the Lynde & Harry Bradley Foundation based in Milwaukee.  The Foundation has spent something in the range of $250,000 to develop the project referred to in the title.

If you are a conservative, you know all about the Foundation and probably think it does great work.  If you aren't a conservative, you may not wish to read the rest of this Blog.

The Foundation commissioned a survey of 2,421 American citizens and concluded that there is an American "identity crisis".  84% of those surveyed believe there is a unique American identity and yet 63% of those surveyed felt that America's shared national identity is becoming weaker.

The Foundation has set forth on an ambitious project that centers on the teaching of American history by teachers who have a major in history.  They seek classes that expose students at all levels of school to the period of America's founding and that would explore the leaders of the time including their warts.

I would encourage you to check this full report if you're interested.  This comes at a time when we hear about "citizens of the world" while we seem embarrassed to have instructors concentrate on our founding, our heritage and our achievements.  Those of us under the age of 25 likely have limited knowledge of American history, may never have seen the great documents upon which the country is based, and have little idea of what it really means to be an American unless they've majored in the subject.

There has been what I see as a concerted effort to downplay our founding, to talk about the things of which we're all embarrassed while paying no attention at all to the things of which we should be proud.  We have been a nation seeking political correctness to a fault...and the Lynde & Harry Bradley Foundation has set about curing that problem.

Have I lost my mind?  I hope not.

My concern is this:  With gas prices dropping and now at the mid $3.80s per gallon, will we lose our impetus to keep the pressure on our elected officials to get more drilling going and to relax the myriad rules on new refineries?

We are a strange group, we humans.  We got used to paying $4.20 per gallon for regular for a week or two and now we're "saving" nearly $.40 a gallon.  We forget very quickly that only a year or so ago we were paying a dollar or more less for our gas.

We seem to forget that we were upset over ethanol and its impact on our mileage and on our food prices.

We seem to forget that reformulated gas is costing us more and causing lower miles per gallon.

Are we going to meekly go about our daily business now until prices go back up?  Are we going to give our politicians a 'free pass'? 

Are we going to let the presidential candidates avoid dealing with this issue...even though they'll make promises that'll probably be forgotten in a week or two?

Are we going to demand that our state representatives push hard to get the ethanol lobby off our backs?

Chrysler announced that it is getting out of the leasing business.  It cannot, apparently, find lenders that will continue to supply money to this part of its business.  Similarly, Ford and GM continue to burn through capital and will or are facing similar realities.

Leases of automobiles and trucks account for something on the order of 20% of the U.S. market.  The lease holders permit the monthly rental (lease) of the vehicle and expect to be able to recover the vehicle and resell it for more than they have invested in it.  This carries risk, and it is that risk that seems now to be threatening at least this portion of sales activities.  The risk is that the vehicles owned by the leasing company will lose value faster than the leasing company expected and that the leasing companies will be "upside down" when the time comes to sell off the vehicles that come off lease.

"Upside down" is a phrase that has become familiar to many consumers of autos and trucks.  That happens when the vehicle purchased devalues more rapidly than the loan repayments reduce the amount owed.  The term has typically been applied to the individuals who purchased a vehicle and learn, at the time they hope to purchase a new vehicle, that they are the owners of a vehicle for which they owe more than the vehicle is worth.  The SUV marketplace is full of "upside down" deals given the cost of fuel and the effect that has had on resale prices.

Where will this lead?  Well, it will certainly have a lingering effect on individuals who find themselves in an "upside down" situation.  They'll either suck it up, buy a new vehicle and take extended payment terms, or they'll drive what they have for another year or two or three.  The magic for the auto industry has been the short-sightedness of the typical consumer.  If we can afford the monthly payment, we do the deal.  We do not look out to the end of the term with any thoughts about where we'll be financially.  We just want new wheels and we're gonna' get 'em.

If consumers continue to be pinched with rising costs on virtually all fronts, something more will have to give.  If it is the purchase or lease of a new vehicle, that will continue to exacerbate the condition of the auto industry in general.  How much more resiliency is left in the auto industry?  What more will it take to actually cause a GM or a Ford or a Chrysler to go out of business?  

Barack Obama has succeeded in making the November Presidential election an international event.  This world tour that "isn't a campaign trip" certainly seems like a campaign trip.  The mainstream press is falling all over itself providing wall-to-wall coverage, television time, and chatter.  Obama is welcomed with open arms where ever he happens to be.  Apparently countries around the world have been craving "change", and they see Obama as the purveyor of change.  He has been delivering his typically eloquent speeches and he seems to have captivated his audiences.

He seems to have caused the 'victory' in Iraq and has determined exactly what needs to happen to have the same results in Afghanistan.

He has been whatever his particular audience at the time has wanted him to be.  He seemed to be hawkish while in Israel and conciliatory in Germany.  He has apologized, in so many words, for the mean old America and promised a new, open and understanding America that will be easier with which to negotiate, that can be expected to try much harder to be the friend that Europe wishes it to be.

A first-term U.S. Senator, with virtually no foreign policy experience and only limited credentials based upon his actual experience, has met with, and likely made certain commitments or inferences of commitments to, heads of state and high ranking dignitaries across the globe.  While I understand that this kind of thing has no doubt occurred in the past, it is unseemly at best and dangerous at worst. 

There is a reason for the excitement about the Obama candidacy overseas.  The people there believe they will fare much better at the bargaining table with this American and his administration than they may have with the current administration.

Their glee is palpable.  They only wish this was already November because they'd be that much closer to the swearing in ceremony.

We would be wise to step back and take a deep breath before this deal goes down. 

This discourse from a CNN interview of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D - California) by Wolf Blitzer on July 17th, concerning offshore oil drilling legislation, appeared in the Notable & Quotable block on the WSJ Opinion page a couple of days ago:

Blitzer:  John Boehner, who's the Republican leader in the House, he says you have to let this come up for a vote.  He says that you're walking your blue dogs, who are moderate and conservative Democrats, and other vulnerable Democrats off a cliff by not allowing this to come up for a vote, the offshore oil drilling legislation.

Pelosi:  Is that right?  Well, you know, just because John Boehner, who is my friend and whom I respect, says it, doesn't make it so...

Blitzer:  Are you afraid if this comes up for a vote in the House you will lose, given support for offshore oil drilling among these so-called blue dogs, or moderate Democrats, who will join with the Republicans?

Pelosi:  Afraid is not a word that is in my vocabulary...

Blitzer:  So let me get - will you allow this issue, offshore drilling, to come up for a vote on the floor of the House?

Pelosi:  We're going to exhaust our other remedies in terms of increasing supply in America by...

Blitzer:  So the answer is no?

Pelosi:  I have no plans to do so.

Here we see that there is a single reason for no vote on offshore drilling to reduce our dependency on foreign oil and to force oil prices down.  That reason is Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D - California).  Sen. Harry Reid (D - Nevada) who is the Senate Leader need not risk his skin so long as she is willing to carry the water for the Sierra Club and other environmental groups paying the bills for many liberals in Congress.  She is simply not going to permit the vote to occur.  That's democracy from a liberal perspective, I guess.  Play by my rules or I'll take my ball and go home.

We really need to remember these kinds of attitudes and the obstructionist moves when we go to vote in both September and November, but especially in November.

We really need to get in front of the Democrats in both the House and Senate and let them know in no uncertain terms that we want an up or down vote on offshore drilling.  And we don't want some political gamesmanship that makes it seem as though there is such a vote; this must be a single item bill before both chambers that has no waffle language and no add-ons that can be blamed for a "no" vote by one of our elected Representatives or Senators.

They're either with us or they're against us!  It really is that simple.  This isn't a Democrat or a Republican issue; this is impacting everyone of us no matter our political persuasion.  It is costing thousands of jobs.  It is draining millions of bank accounts.  It threatens our economy far more seriously than did the trumped up mortgage 'crisis'.  That it would be blocked by the Democrats places the blame squarely on their shoulders, however!