Axis of Oil - OPEC, Russia, Mexico, Norway

OPEC is attempting to push cartel nations into cutting production by 2.5 million barrels of oil a day, led by anti-American countries of Iran and Venezuela.

The reason? Oil prices have fallen to about $70 per barrel, taking money out of the hands of the producers. Money that they are using to build an offensive capability unprecedented in their regions.

OPEC is also urging Russia, Mexico, and Norway to join forces in an attempt to crush the gluttonous American nation who has become completely dependent on them for survival...

Almost like Rome and her dependence on Egypt for grain during the fall of the Republic...

OPEC and the other axis of oil countries are not alone... they have help from within the United States. The "Socialist" Party (i.e. the Democrats) leadership of Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Obama, etc. have delayed oil exploration expansion, a key bridge to developing energy independence in the United States. Their lust for power is matched only by their ignorance on domestic issues, such as energy, as a key to basic survivability of not just the nation, but the states which make it up. Free energy exploration has been denied, and the Untied States has become more and more dependent on her enemies for fuel. A nation that cannot fuel itself, and cannot feed itself, cannot defend itself... and as such, cannot be free.

If OPEC and the Axis of Oil puts the squeeze on the US, there will be a cry for war, similar to the battle cry of the Japanese toward the US when we cut their oil imports at the beginning of WWII. In this case, we are the land of the rising sun (though I would argue that it is very much setting). The leaders of the nation will bring us into a true war for oil...

The Federal government, and the Democratic Party have become so out of touch with reality that it puts the very existence of a free people in the Americas at risk. The Republican party is not doing much better - having become a mostly war mongering party, blindly "supporting troops" without thought to constitutionality of their cause - and in doing so, and by not leaving well enough alone with Russia, we have turned a valued ally into an enemy.

But why bring up the constitution - it is merely an historical document which laid the groundwork for the "Constitutional Socialist Democracy" which was birthed in 2008.

America is under siege. The enemies created by the authoritarian colonistic policies of the last 20 years have learned the lessons of political influence - and they are bearing them down upon the US. These are enemies, both foreign and domestic - and they are well versed in hatred of liberty! In response, the consumers of the Untied States are confused - running blindly to support regime change - which is really societal change to socialism. Meanwhile, the Russians are getting their just dessert - payback for the 1989 collapse of their Socialist Union; the Iranians are laughing all the way to the bank, as payback for the Shah. The One World capitalist government is collapsing, and the stage is being set for a One World Socialist take-over. You know it is coming when the GOP president is to the left of Hugo Chavez on economic issues... and the Democratic Candidate for presidency is already making appointments to discuss terms of surrender with the same. With a Socialist America, liberty throughout the world fails, giving birth to the age of worldwide authoritarian control - or continued conflicts for control.

All the while, the Federal Government is contemplating ANOTHER stimulus give-a-way. Another check, bought on credit. Another Trillion dollars towards a national debt... a nation that knows no more bounds... a nation whose treasury is being raped and pillaged by leaders, corrupt maggots all, blood lusting for continued and permanent power. Another solid marker along the highway of socialist reform in the United States.

Arm yourselves.

And understand the meaning of these words:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of
patriots and tyrants" - Thomas Jefferson.

Palin/Clinton on SNL - Parody Politics & "Experience"

I can picture it now - it is similar to the Oscar's...

The award for Woman in a Leading Role... The nominees are:

Hillary Clinton - in "No Country for Old Man" - The tale of the 2008 campaign that wasn't

Sarah Palin - in "Into the Wild" - The tale of one woman's political enlightenment in the Alaskan Wild

And the Oval Office goes to: (drum roll) SARAH PALIN, for her wonderful role as a small town woman who found herself in the Alaskan Frontier, and brought those values and life lessons to the lower 48 states!

This image popped into my head as I watched the SNL skit featuring Tina Fey as the stereotyped Sarah Palin - a know-nothing Conservative gun-toter from nowhere Alaska, and Amy Poehler as stereotyped Hillary Clinton - a nut-cracking, power hungry pants-suit.

Though I think they did a hack job on Palin, over playing her stereotype - I am pretty confident that they nailed Hillary's reaction spot on... I am sure there was more pulling out her hair than ripping apart the podium, however.

Regardless, as the world continues to get to know Sarah Palin, including Obama's army of lawyers and investigators rummaging through Alaska's landfills looking for ANY dirt on Palin, they are beginning to see a very capable conservative. And it is Palin's conservative views, shared by most Americans, that the Liberal Media, like SNL, don't seem to understand - perhaps because they actually think that New York thinking and living (such as Sex and the City) is the rule, rather than the exception in America. Let me tell you Lib-Media types something... you are wrong - a thousand times over.

Sarah Palin is every woman. She is my mother, my grandmother, my sister, and my friend. Not only does she appeal to the every-woman, but she appeals to me... the conservative guy. She is a reformer, an executive, and the future of the GOP - youth and women are now given a new face within the Republican Party with which they can relate.

The attacks on her experience? Even if she had been Governor for 20 years in Alaska, the answer would be that Alaska is a state of only 600,000 people, less than the population of the city of San Francisco and just over the population of Oklahoma City. Governor of such a small amount of people must not be in touch with the complexities of the real world.

Palin has 8 years of Executive Experience - 6 years as Mayor of Wasilla, the 4th largest town of Alaska, behind Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau; and two years as the Governor and Commander In Chief of the State of Alaska.

Palin has 4 years Legislative Experience - serving on the Wasilla City Council.

Palin has 2 years Judicial Experience - serving as Chairman of the Alaskan Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. This role also gives her almost expert insight into energy independence issues.

That is 14 years of tested leadership of notable measures.

If the Democrats are going to go to war against small town USA, supposing that work in small or sparsely populated states or regions doesn't count as "real experience" - hinting that small town citizens are somehow inferior to their North Eastern metropolis cousins... That is a battle I firmly welcome. Small town USA will win every time!

It is going to be a Long Cold (war) Winter

During the cold war, Soviet and US planes routinely escorted one another along the outskirts of one another's airspace, with the pilot's fingers surely on the trigger. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the Cold War was considered over, and the Russian planes ceased their flights around US territory.

That was 1992 - This is now.

Russian bombers began flying off the coast of Alaska last year - a direct threat to US oil supply. This was the first real show of force from Russia towards the United States in nearly two decades. It adds to the increased tensions between the two nations, and may be pushing a direct threat in the face of the Georgian conflict.

Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, warned Moscow that they are playing a dangerous game by pushing the US into Cold War relations with the country.

Russia's resurgence has been made possible by the income gained from energy resources and their respective high prices. Europe's dependence on Russia for energy has given Moscow influence over the continent that the Soviets could have only dreamed of. And now that the once broken Russian government is being strengthened with Cold Hard Cash, and they sense an air of anti-Americanism throughout the world, Russia is looking beyond the Soviet era and into the beginnings of a new Russian Empire.

As this BBC report states, Russia is clearly back after the chaos from the Soviet collapse:


With the war coming to a general close in Iraq, tensions are rising as the US and Russia assert their influence - Cold War style. China is not yet a major player, militarily, though they have been a nuisance to US naval operations - shadowing US fleets and interrupting training exercises in deep waters. The US is faced with Georgia's situation, Iran's Russian backed Nuke plan, tensions due to Polish missile defense systems, Ukrainian pleas for help after Russia's claim to their territory (similar to Georgia), Russia's announcement that it plans to use a 1960's style tactic of placing nuclear missiles in Cuba, China's relationship with Taiwan and Japan, and the list goes on.

From where I stand, the 21st century is shaping up to look a lot like the 20th century. It would appear that we may have been witness to a false spring... and the Bitterly Cold Winter of War between Russia and the US is still simmering.

Oil - Who's to Blame? Who's to Fix?

The topic being discussed (or is it disgust?) all around the world is the price of oil. $40 a barrel just a few short years ago, the price of oil was fastly approaching $150 a barrel - until an unexpected drop this week (Nearly 10% fall-off in 3 days).

I hear daily reports of democrats calling for alternative energy as the only means to end this crisis. I hear daily reports of republicans calling for increased drilling as the only means to end this crisis. This has turned into the ultimate political battle, each side blaming the other, but neither side fully stating to the American people what the cause is and the true implications it has on our society.

Let's begin by answering the question: Who's to blame?

Anyone in the know understands that crude oil is sold as futures on the Merchant Exchange, NYMEX. NYMEX is similar to the stock market, only instead of stocks, you are able to buy items at a price you expect to see at some future time. For instance, you can buy/sell a barrel of oil in August 2008, or August 2013. Depending on world events, the price of your future will fluctuate based on a market response to how that item will sell in the future. So who is to blame? The merchants, naturally. In a free market we have only ourselves to blame. It is we, the people who choose to buy and sell oil and gas (even at the pumps), who drive the market prices. Are we alone? Of course not. There is analysis of oil supply versus oil demand that drives the input into the sell of the futures...

What else drives the futures of sweet crude up? Congressional recognition of fables, such as human caused Global Warming - alarmists... This adds uncertainty into the future of the supply, and regulation of the use of the product. When carbon taxes are proposed, carbon based products (and carbon emitting products) are expected to increase in price, showing an offset. This forecast of gloom and doom drives the price up.

What drives the price down? The promise to ease restriction on the oil companies to explore oil reserves freely in the waters off the US. The oil may take some time to hit the market, but it is the prospect of increased supply that will add speculators to drive oil futures down, thus driving fuel costs down.

But will drilling for oil ease the cost in America? Possibly, but not by much. This is because of the higher oil demand around the world. American oil will be sold freely on a world market, so as demand increases in other regions, the increased supply will not add to a surplus, and futures will remain high. Who profits from this? The oil companies, of course. Is this a bad thing? No... it is the free market at work.

Inasmuch, there are two additional options in addition to increasing supply to meet the immediate demands. The first is nationalizing the oil fields in US territory. Pass a bill in congress and ram it down the throat of the president stating that all oil drilled in the US must be released to US markets only, and sold only as fuel for the United States. Am I advocating for this? Absolutely NOT. But this is the mentality of the American People who believe that Congress can fix the problem, or that the Presidential Candidates have some solution that will control the oil markets. The oil market is a private enterprise. Love it or not, you are not entitled to cheap gas... it is the will of the people that drives the market. Which brings me to my second option - lifestyle changes. The oil industry is not responsible for funding alternative energy, nor are they obligated. They are in the market for oil... not in the market for creating a technology that will put them out of business - where is the sense in that? Lifestyle changes will drive a need for alternative means of energy. An increase in consumer demand for Fuel Cells, Solar Panels on the Rooftops, heck- even rocket packs, will drive the market to innovation and creation in these areas of research. We need to be pro-active about what we want to see on the market. If we don't see something that will drastically change our lives, we should invent it. Turn off American Idol, and turn on the tool box... put together a prototype Electric Hummer, or solar powered scooter... then market it as a means of alternative transportation or energy... Be the change that you want to see!

We are to blame for the mess we are in. Not Congress. Not the oil industry.

We are the solution. Not regulation of the industry by the government - Socialism is never the correct answer. Free markets drive innovation... and this is a problem that we can only innovate our way out of. We need to... I hear we are running out of oil anyway... (let's see how the futures like hearing THAT!)

Iran - US: Battle in Hormuz

As the war of words heats up surrounding Iran's defiant nuclear program, both countries are beginning to unveil what a war between the two countries would look like.

Israel will clearly make the first blow, striking the nuclear sites of Iran in hopes that they can curb their nuclear weapons development. This is going to happen sooner rather than later, and is going to be a massive country wide attack, necessary to destroy all of the nuclear development. As well, Iran's nuclear sites have been built in reinforced bunkers to avoid an Iraq-style destruction (the Israeli's destroyed Iraq's above ground nuclear sites in the early 80's), so these bombs would have to be of some substance.

Iran has declared that if they are attacked by Israel, they will retaliate by destruction of Israel. One would assume that they would push the button and activate their army of suicide bombers to cause civil unrest in the Hebrew nation. Israel's response would be nothing short of total destruction of the Palestinian territories as a reminder that they exist at the pleasure of Israel.

Meanwhile, Iran has declared that any attack on their facilities would cause a closure of the Strait of Hormuz - a 21 mile waterway connecting the Persian Gulf and all her oil resources to the Indian Ocean. The Strait lies pinched between Iran and Oman. Iran closing the shipping lanes in the Strait would prohibit the shipment of 40% of the world's oil supply - a move that is not going to be taken lightly by the world community.

As well, Iran (who is counting on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as their main
defense against attack), has been studying US military ship operations in the waterways in an attempt to face the foe off their own shores. Iran has developed a "stealthy" sea plane (see picture) that is intended to deliver torpedoes and other anti-ship weapons. (The plane is not stealthy, as the top-mounted rotor would light up any radar detector)

The Untied States reminds Iran that the Naval 5th Fleet is based in Bahrain, just on the Persian Gulf side of the Strait, and that any attempt to engage the Navy militarily would be met with "Captains who are ready to defend their ships".

Let's analyze this situation for a minute. The most dangerous foe is one who has nothing to lose. George W Bush is out of office in less than 6 months, with no concerns of re-election. After the November election, regardless of the outcome, Bush has absolutely nothing to lose. November 5th is a day that Iran should circle on their calendars. With the elections behind him, George Bush has a blank check of power that he could use to unleash hell on Iran, especially if Obama becomes president... a legacy ended with an exclamation point!

Should Israel attack prior to US election day, there would be some politicking, but the Iranian Navy would see instant and utter destruction at the hands of the US forces before one missile was fired from their Naval Missile Boats. The Iranians are outgunned, outclassed, and outnumbered in their own waters. Any threat to the US vessels would be seen as an act of war and would be cause for annihilation. The Iranian Navy would last less than 24 hours as we hit them with everything we have got.

On the ground, a campaign of bombing training camps for military and terrorists, as well as military and nuclear bases, would ensue. The US would not need to put boots on the ground. Our goal would merely be to take away Iran's ability to make war. Their infrastructure would not be able to stop the cruise missiles, and other bombs.

The Iranian Air Force would be eliminated while their planes were still on the ground. Bases would be struck overnight. Any plane that did manage to scramble would have no friendly territory to land... and without an enemy actually in the air to dogfight, they would be forced to land at their own peril.


The POTUS has the ability to take military action without the approval of congress for a period not to exceed 90 days. This would make an attack on Iran legal and legit by American Law.

The Iranians talk as if they have a big stick... but what a whiffle bat has in size, it lacks substance. The Iranians are being permitted to exist at the pleasure of the United States... If we decide that they have crossed the line, and actually pose any sort of a threat, there would be hell to pay.

disclaimer: "Iranians" refers to the government of Iran, the military infrastructure, and the other than friendly citizens of that country... all others are exempt.

Is Offshore Oil the Answer?

Before we delve into this question, we must first understand the history of the mess we are in with regards to the oil price spike.

I was recently attending a discussion by a representative of the gas and oil industry who covered the topic of oil output versus price, and why the oil/gas price spike began.

He began by showing a chart, representing the fixed price of oil based on supply from US wells.

He then made a comment that has to be retold: After Katrina and Rita, we have not been able to open up our Gulf of Mexico wells.

That was the key. The oil industry's inability (or unwillingness) to open those wells due to fear of continued storms (and the low cost of oil at the time to cover any future losses) created the first artificial spike in the oil and gas prices. Since then, subsequent drop in oil production in the middle east and throughout the United States has driven the prices higher yet.

Now Congress is being asked by President Bush if they will allow continued exploration off the coasts of the United States.

I say, let them. They should not have been stopped in the first place... assuming they have adequate protection for marine life and against spills, especially in sensitive areas.

Not to mention that the very oil that the US is unable to drill due to Congress, China is drilling. That is right. China is drilling off the coast of the United States with the help from Cuba. China is tapping into the United State's oil fields while we sit by and do nothing. There is something wrong with that picture.

There is one other problem with the oil crisis that must be spoken. In watching congressional hearings on CSPAN (yeah, I am one of the few who actually watch that channel), I noticed that the oil executives had a common theme (let us develop). They wanted to be able to explore and build new refineries... that comment struck a chord with me. Are the oil monopolies holding Congresses feet to the fire by way of artificially high fuel prices to get access to these additional fields?

If so, this is criminal. You are putting the very life of the country in jeopardy for your own gain, which I amount to holding the US hostage for a ransom. If this is, in fact, the case, I hope to see a drastic hammer falling in favor of the US people.

Until such time that we can sort this mess out, let us open the capped wells in the gulf, and continue drilling in new offshore fields.

You Say You Want a Revolution...

I was recently having a discussion with a fellow Douglas County Republican about the need for change here in America. The discussion followed the concerns with lack of leadership in our "leaders" and their inability and unwillingness to be vessels for change, and further went on to state that short of a Revolution we cannot achieve real change in America.

I made a statement that I want to share with you all. A country will find itself in a revolution when the general population cannot access food/water, cannot house itself, and cannot fuel itself (for the purposes of heating, transportation, cooking, etc).

In the United States, we find ourselves increasingly unable to secure housing... if foreclosures create a lack of housing, the market will crash or we will see people forced to fight for shelter.

In the United States, we find ourselves increasingly unable to access fuel. As the middle class is squeezed out of being able to afford fuel, we will find ourselves unable to travel to and from work, unable to conduct leisure activities, and unable to live life as we know it... all ingredients to social unrest. (Idle hands, and all)

In the United States, do to inflation and fuel costs, we are finding ourselves increasingly unable to afford food. The American people are not starving, by any means... however, as food begins to increase in price to the point where it becomes unattainable, we will fully be in revolution.

This trend is slowly taking place in America... but it is nothing that one slow growing season, or one tragic event cannot hasten. Food, Home, Power.

This theory is being tested in Egypt... They have no access to oil, and now no access to food... and deadly riots are following.

OPEC is failing to increase supply to lower the cost of fuel... the people of Egypt are starving, and resorting to murder in order to obtain a simple batch of bread.

Egypt is turning to the US, who gives $1 billion in aid a year to Egypt, and the UN's World Food Program.

A country that cannot feed itself, and cannot fuel itself, cannot defend itself... and as such, cannot be free.

The US is also at risk of such an end. If the US fails to recognize that out of control inflation, a sense of entitlement, and out of control oil prices are the three main enemies internally to the US, we will then fail to stop our citizens from resorting to breadlines run by the government.

Energy Independence Will Require Radical Changes

Before I begin my discussion on this topic, let me preface by saying that the origin of the Republican Party was in radical ideology... Equality for all men, regardless of skin tone, in a time when slavery was openly practiced over much of the US, and the world. So we were born on radical ideas, and it is on such that we must continue to grow.

Most presidential candidates are talking about an energy independence plan that revolves around a 20-40% reduction in foreign oil consumption by 2020... This is a fancy way of saying that you have a plan, with a fine-print-promise of "It aint gonna happen!"

Energy independence, serious energy independence, does not come from 20 year plans with little or no gain on current situations. Such plans guarantee future energy based wars in regions of the world that would rather not have US occupation.

So to get results, we need Radical Changes... radical changes in the form of Radical Policy and Radical New Laws. I am not one to support bigger government or more laws... but in this case it is a new law that will steer the "norm" in a new direction.

When the congress passed their "sweeping fuel consumption reform" they praised themselves as the car companies grumbled in protest... the reform: mandating 40 mpg average on ALL vehicles by 2020... in hopes to reduce fuel consumption. But with the number of vehicles on the road increasing each year, this does nothing to energy consumption but maintain the status quo!

We need an energy independence bill to go through both houses and the oval office that will guarantee immediate and drastic change... Complete energy independence in less than 8 years from the time of passage... Sounds impossible, but is it? Oh, it will piss off the oil industry... but it is time to "break the addiction". My legislation would look something like this (legal jargon omitted) -

1. 100% of All new vehicles to be sold in the United States shall be Ethanol E-85, Flex Fuel, Ethanol/Hybrid technology, Bio-Diesel, or otherwise burning less than 15% total petrol per tank of fuel by the year 2012.

2. All Oil industry subsidies shall be stopped, and money used instead to prepare the ethanol & bio-diesel infrastructure, including ethanol fuel crops, ethanol / bio-diesel production, and distribution centers. All fueling stations shall be required to provide alternative fueling options (ethanol and/or bio-diesel)

3. US should fund creation of new power plants within the US, to include ONLY clean fuels, excluding Nuclear fission plants. Plants should include Offshore-Wind, Tidal Generators, Geothermal Generators, and Solar Plants.

4. States should be classified as "Sunshine" or "Non-Sunshine" states/regions. For instance, Eastern Colorado gets 300+ days of sunshine a year... this will classify it as a Sunshine State / Region.

5. ALL homes and buildings in "sunshine regions" shall be required to install Solar Panels and energy storage. Cost of installation shall be offset by government subsidies to the solar panel manufacturers. This will drastically reduce the need for power plants, and ensure reduction in natural gas/coal/oil burning emissions. The solar power could provide 75% of all housing energy consumption, eliminating energy draws / black-outs / etc.

Taking the steps above we, as a country, reduce emissions of petroleum based fuels by at least 50-75%. We will also reduce the need for mass power distribution, allowing power share of stored personal solar energy. we will completely eliminate the need to import fuels from the middle east and south America by 2020 (not just reducing by 20-40%). It assures that we become not only energy independent from foreign governments, but greatly adds to our own personal energy independence from big power companies... as well as promising better stewardship of the land in which we live.

This is a radical shift in America, and a challenge that will rival the first moon program to implement on such a short timeline...

But it CAN be done.

In fact, I have freely given my independent ideas on this policy change to Bill Richardson and the You Tube community last week, and I offer it to you (my reader) today. If there is not movement in the congress or by a presidential candidate to adopt these radical policies, I will have to take up the fight myself!

Give the policy some thought, and please feel free to comment...

God Bless.