President Bush said on Saturday:

Our problem in America gets solved when we aggressively go for domestic exploration. Our problem in America gets solved if we expand our refining capacity, promote nuclear energy and continue our strategy for the advancing of alternative energies as well as conservation,” he said.

“One interesting thing about American politics these days is those who are screaming the loudest for increased production from Saudi Arabia are the very same people who are fighting the fiercest against domestic exploration, against the development of nuclear power and against expanding refining capacity.”

All very true. But where was this language seven years ago, President Bush?

Some may accuse me of parsing, but I believe our President Bush hit a very live, very open national nerve on Thursday when he said, in Israel, addressing members of the Israeli Knesset (excerpts):

We gather to mark a momentous occasion. Sixty years ago in Tel Aviv, David Ben-Gurion proclaimed Israel’s independence, founded on the “natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate.” What followed was more than the establishment of a new country. It was the redemption of an ancient promise given to Abraham and Moses and David — a homeland for the chosen people Eretz Yisrael.

Eleven minutes later, on the orders of President Harry Truman, the United States was proud to be the first nation to recognize Israel’s independence. And on this landmark anniversary, America is proud to be Israel’s closest ally and best friend in the world.

The alliance between our governments is unbreakable, yet the source of our friendship runs deeper than any treaty. It is grounded in the shared spirit of our people, the bonds of the Book, the ties of the soul. When William Bradford stepped off the Mayflower in 1620, he quoted the words of Jeremiah: “Come let us declare in Zion the word of God.” The founders of my country saw a new promised land and bestowed upon their towns names like Bethlehem and New Canaan. And in time, many Americans became passionate advocates for a Jewish state.

These are quotes that the the Mainstream Media, the Defeatist Elitist Media (DEM, as I call them) refuse to let you read:

My country’s admiration for Israel does not end there. When Americans look at Israel, we see a pioneer spirit that worked an agricultural miracle and now leads a high-tech revolution. We see world-class universities and a global leader in business and innovation and the arts. We see a resource more valuable than oil or gold: the talent and determination of a free people who refuse to let any obstacle stand in the way of their destiny.

Why is it, I posit, that Islam cannot build, cannot proffer positivism, cannot seem to do nought but destroy? To tear down? To whine? To cry? I submit a response in two parts:

To continue with Pres. Bush’s speech:

We believe in the matchless value of every man, woman, and child. So we insist that the people of Israel have the right to a decent, normal, and peaceful life, just like the citizens of every other nation.

We believe that democracy is the only way to ensure human rights. So we
consider it a source of shame that the United Nations routinely passes more human rights resolutions against the freest democracy in the Middle East than any other nation in the world.

Did you read this in the DEM? Continuing:

The fight against terror and extremism is the defining challenge of our time. It is more than a clash of arms. It is a clash of visions, a great ideological struggle. On the one side are those who defend the ideals of justice and dignity with the power of reason and truth. On the other side are those who pursue a narrow vision of cruelty and control by committing murder, inciting fear, and spreading lies.

This struggle is waged with the technology of the 21st century, but at its core it is an ancient battle between good and evil. The killers claim the mantle of Islam, but they are not religious men. No one who prays to the God of Abraham could strap a suicide vest to an innocent child, or blow up guiltless guests at a Passover Seder, or fly planes into office buildings filled with unsuspecting workers. In truth, the men who carry out these savage acts serve no higher goal than their own desire for power. They accept no God before themselves. And they reserve a special hatred for the most ardent defenders of liberty, including Americans and Israelis.

And that is why the founding charter of Hamas calls for the “elimination” of Israel. And that is why the followers of Hezbollah chant “Death to Israel, Death to America!” That is why Osama bin Laden teaches that “the killing of Jews and Americans is one of the biggest duties.” And that is why the President of Iran dreams of returning the Middle East to the Middle Ages and calls for Israel to be wiped off the map.

Continue reading what you won’t read anywhere else:

There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It’s natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.

But the words most oft-quoted from the speech:

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.

Some people suggest if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it. Israel’s population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you.

These are the words objected-to by Demorats. Mind me, my readers, mark these in your files, mental and physical. Remind yourselves of the greater, overarching issues we face. But then, from the speech:

Sixty years ago, on the eve of Israel’s independence, the last British soldiers departing Jerusalem stopped at a building in the Jewish quarter of the Old City. An officer knocked on the door and met a senior rabbi. The officer presented him with a short iron bar — the key to the Zion Gate — and said it was the first time in 18 centuries that a key to the gates of Jerusalem had belonged to a Jew. His hands trembling, the rabbi offered a prayer of thanksgiving to God, “Who had granted us life and permitted us to reach this day.” Then he turned to the officer, and uttered the words Jews had awaited for so long: “I accept this key in the name of my people.”

The Demorat party couldn’t contain themselves in response. My first immediate thought, from Shakespeare: “methinks thou doth protest too much.”

And I would ask: what is it, quite, to which you so objectively protest? Do those words — say, perchance — truly define you? And to Obama: you’d best learn the true number of American states though, at 57, you somehow forgot Hawaii and Alaska — which, I guess, aren’t states?

When President Bush is wrong, he is wrong. When President Bush is correct, I proffer credit.

P.S.

Can’t believe I only got 3 comments on my last post. Folks: coming SOON to a theatre near YOU.

Once again, the California Supreme Court shows residents that it couldn’t care less what 36-million Californians think (as Fornicalia approved Proposition 22 in the year 2000, on a 4,579,386 / 61.2% Yes votes …… 2,897,689 / 38.8% No votes), by granting same sex marriage.

From AP News:

California’s supreme court ruled that a ban on gay marriage was unlawful Thursday, effectively leaving same-sex couples in America’s most populous state free to tie the knot in a landmark ruling.

In an opinion that analysts say could have nationwide implications for the issue, the seven-member panel voted 4-3 in favor of plaintiffs who argued that restricting marriage to men and women was discriminatory.

With its 121-page majority opinion, the California Supreme Court opens a box best left closed: what are, then, the limits to marriage? One man, two women? Three women? Twenty women? One woman and a power tool? One man and one boy aged 13? One man and one goat? Five women and a Labrador Retriever? What about a California law aimed at churches, making it illegal to refuse to marry a same-sex or an “out of definition” series of persons or objects in what California now considers to be a lawful marriage?

As I have said and written, time after time, real power exists in the judgeships, SCOTUS appointments and education. We hand education and appointments to the Left, and we lose power entirely in this nation because the Left will continuously work OUTSIDE the electorate in order to promote and fulfill their Leftist/Socialist agendas — those agendas that will not, generally, be approved by the electorate at large. But something tells me this will, in fact, be going to SCOTUS.

However, from the Pacific Justice Institute:

Today the California Supreme Court handed down a ruling which legalized same sex marriage in California. The California Defense of Marriage Act, also known as Proposition 22, was found to be unconstitutional by the high court. Passed by the voters in March of 2000 by a wide margin (61.2%) the law was codified as Section 308.5 of the Family Code and stated: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

Chief Justice George wrote the opinion for the court and was joined by Justices Kennard, Werdegar and Moreno. Justice Baxter wrote a concurring and dissenting opinion joined by Justice Chin. Justice Corrigan also wrote a concurring and dissenting opinion. Six of the seven justices on the court were appointed by Republican governors.

This is not the last word on this issue. In November the California voters will be presented with an opportunity to amend the California Constitution via the Marriage Protection Act. Should the Act pass, it will not be subject to review by the California Supreme Court.

Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute, stated, “This is a classic case of judicial activism at its worst. This decision will now make the passage of the Marriage Protection Act critical for the survival of the will of the people of California.”

P.S: California residents, go to: http://www.protectmarriage.com/

From a recent Yahoo News/Politico interview, (amongst other Iraqi issues) President Bush also said:

— The president said global warming has “been more clearly defined as a problem” during his eight years in office, and when asked if it is real, Bush said: “Yes, it is real; sure is.”

“I could have supported a lousy [Kyoto] treaty and everybody would have went, ‘Oh, man, what a wonderful-sounding fellow he is,’” Bush said. “But it just wouldn’t have worked.

“I don’t think you want your president trying to be the cool guy and not end up with policies that actually make a difference. So the policies I’ve outlined are policies that will actually make a difference: nuclear power for generating electricity, battery driven cars, ethanol.”

— Asked a question that was submitted online about skyrocketing gas prices, Bush said the problem doesn’t have “a quick answer.”

“It took us a while to get to where we are — very dependent on oil,” he said. “So my answer … is that the best thing we can do is to increase supply and to drill for oil and gas in environmentally friendly ways at home and build more refineries.”

Let’s examine this a little further.

As of Tuesday, 05-13, oil rose to $127 a barrel, and refined gas to $3.73.

But is it pipeline attacks in Nigeria? Mischief in Iran? Nasty hedge funds? The plunging overall value of the dollar?

Perhaps more importantly, what’s the actual, realistic impact? I’ve re-thought this over the past few weeks and, frankly, I don’t see much of one. Yes, of course, Prius sales are up. I happened to rent one not long ago when my 2007 Toyota RAV-4 was in the shop and — gulp — I actually liked it.

But in truth global demand hasn’t significantly wavered, staying pretty much at 86 million barrels per day.

In the United States, politicians are still blocking development of our oil reserves off coastal waters, ANWR in Alaska, and the absolutely massive oil shale deposits available in Colorado.

I’ll readily admit that, personally, I won’t necessarily be much affected fiscally until gas gets to, say, $10 a gallon. I’m finally, at the late stage of my career, where my overhead is minimal, I pay less for my house than many pay for a studio apartment, I have one credit card, carry no credit over from one month to the next and don’t purchase anything unless I can pay it off within one month. My credit card company hates me. But my credit score is 830. So I am very much the American exception and not the rule.

Despite this, the DOE hypothesized that fuel demand dropped by 200,000 barrels per day — calculated to be less than 1% of the 20.7 million barrels per day total. The median age for US cars on the road is 9.2 years, up from 6.5 years in 1990. The national mpg of 22.4 is only 1 mpg better than 10 years ago. Why? Congressional demands for greater safety. Consumer demands for quieter cars with more options = heavier cars.

And our miles-per-year don’t seem to be diminishing yet. In fact, with hybrid and purposely-purchased high mpg cars, it is theorized that these folks are spending just as much money on gas because the perceived efficiency allows them to rationalize driving, in truth, more miles.

Let’s say gas is $3.50 a gallon. The US DOT estimates that, against taxes, registration, license, insurance, finance and depreciation (about $5,600 a year total), the yearly cost to drive 15,000 miles makes up just 29% of driving costs.

This also begs another question: why aren’t oil companies going out-of -their-minds to drill?

Because oil executives have long memories and protect their profits. Oilfield capital costs have doubled since 2005. Shortages of people, machinery and steel have doubled the costs of some oil sands projects in Canada — just ask AB Freedom about Alberta tar sands.

No big oil company is willing to bet that oil stays where it is. For example, British Petroleum (BP) still uses $60 per barrel oil as a reference for evaluating new projects.

And what about oil in the United States?

We’re going to import more than $400 billion in crude and refined gas in 2008, up from $300 billion in 2007. And yet, some of the easiest and cheapest untapped fields are right under our US feet. A small oil company recently found a good amount in Colorado but couldn’t get a pipeline. Because rates pipeline companies in the US can charge to move crude are capped by the FERC. So if a cap exists, why build pipelines? What’s the point? Where’s the incentive?

Royal Dutch Shell thinks that our waters of the outer continental shelf have 100 billion+ barrels of recoverable oil. Except: 85% of the US coastline is “off limits” by Congressional decree.

Shell thinks that 1.5 trillion barrels exist in oil shale within Utah, Colorado and Wyoming. Yet, last December, Congress passed a measure prohibiting spending to establish programs to lease oil shale on fed lands.

And those are just a few of the issues involved within the US.

What about diesels? Europe has created an entire generation of diesel automobiles, where fuel is $8 a gallon, and where 50% of passenger cars possess a diesel engine (as opposed to 3% in America). But wait; there’s more. Yes, your mileage is better with a diesel engine. But what are American truckers paying now? Up to $4.50 a gallon for various localized “boutique” diesel blends — up to a third more than regular unleaded? You see much savings? The average US consumer does not. And consider: diesel cars and trucks will cost $2,000 to $5,000 more per unit than gasoline versions — and there may be additional costs to maintain the pollution equipment due to particulate matter.

Another clue about US diesels? The trucking trade Western Truck Paper is featuring 2006 Volvo tractors, for example, for roughly half the price of new units. Meaning: trucks ain’t selling.

Ethanol? Ethanol is a scam and a ripoff, as I wrote some time ago. Already, much of the gas we commonly purchase can be, seasonally, 10% ethanol. I already predicted $100 oil in 2006.

Wonder why the global food shortages? A good deal of that comes from US farmers pushing other crops aside in order to grow corn/grain for ethanol. Except that: making ethanol burns up more carbon than it saves. It depletes groundwater, erodes soil and raises the cost of food for poor countries.

Seen the video where the small-time inventor turns water into propulsion? If I knew how to post videos here, I’d place this video into a post. But even then, don’t you think that, given exposure and time, Al Gore would accuse the US of reducing fresh water and oceanic sources?

In the meantime, how about some helpful internet sources:

1. Gaspricewatch.com

2. Gasbuddy.com

3. Gasprices.mapquest.com

4. AAA.com

We are. The voters. The American electorate. You and me.

And we have abandoned our collective responsibility due to avarice, greed, laziness.

I began formulating the question this past weekend. Who really is responsible for the current plight of America? I don’t mean strictly at this specific point in time; I’m thinking of, say, the past twenty, thirty years or so. Then I began to mentally step back even farther.

And here’s what I concluded:

This country will be in much better shape when my generation completely dies off: the Baby Boomers. Baby Boomers, those born between 1946 and 1964, are responsible for more navel-gazing, more irresponsibility, more self-centeredness, more arrogance, more entitlement-demandation than any generation before or since. William Jefferson Clinton, Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Hussein Obama are all Baby Boomers.

Now, most Americans most definitely want their cake and consumption. Before BBs, kids used to work through college if they could. Now, they demand college, default on loans and boast of it. Free college for illegal invaders, some now demand. And, oddly enough, those who worked their way through college discovered how the world really works much sooner than our coddled and pampered and protected kids of today.

But that’s okay because today’s kids always have a “fallback” — their parents. They know full well that their guilt-ridden parents — those who rushed their kids to soccer, to band practice, to T-ball — will take them back into the fold. It’s a great job if you can get it.

This nation used to believe that parents were responsible for their children. Fathers worked and mothers cared for the kids, as horrifyingly sexist as that sounds. “Bad kids” were ostracized from local groups. It “paid” to be good because most all the neighborhood adults watched over the actions of the juveniles. One phone call from some parent about your negligent actions resulted in serious consequences.

Then the media jumped in. Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan jumped in. Being a mother was ridiculed, demeaned and caricturized. But equal rights didn’t mean just equal rights — it meant superiority over the traditional male and his role as leader. Except, of course, when equal rights didn’t quite mean equal rights. US women didn’t fight wars, didn’t want to, weren’t drafted, never have been. Women morphed into men and men became Metrosexuals and pussies. Lazy, New Age female teachers pushed Ritalin on boys in class because boys couldn’t or wouldn’t sit calmly like little girls. Women now are bemoaning the fact that their life expectancy in the modern world is beginning to decline — directly due to stress, work, responsibility. Time to hold up your end of the log, womyn. GTFOI.

Divorce rates soared. Now, single-motherhood is a woman’s right — and to hell with the child. It isn’t about the child, it’s about the mother. Same for abortion. Except — who’s getting aborted? Why yes, statistically blacks would comprise the largest numbers. But, hey, that’s freedom, eh wot?

Speaking of blacks for a moment, we can all thank Lyndon Johnson and his Great Society. You know — the one that ripped black families asunder and PAID black women to rid themselves of black men and, essentially, create generations of black, fatherless underclasses due to welfare?

This nation decided — made a conscious decision — to abandon love, duty, honor and self-sacrifice in order to glorify the government, the provider, the entitlements. And people became not only enamored of but completely dependent upon the “safety nets” provided by the G.

Why? Because people wanted the safety nets. They were easy. They required little thought and, moreover, even less work.

And all run with the precision and efficiency of your local DMV.

What happened to the Land of the Free, the Home of the Brave?

Why are those who espouse individualism, freedom, liberty and self-sufficiency branded as radicals?

So now, this moment: where is the weak link?

I submit that it is the bulk of America:

Someone once wrote: “We can go on singing patriotically, deluded that we’re somehow still a Superpower because of technology. But weak people and powerful technology don’t make a wholesome couple. We may not know that. But the world’s terrorists do.”