Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Look behind the man behind the teleprompter and learn what Obama stands for

The possible and by some accounts likely, next president of the United States, Barack Obama, in the words of his excellent speech writers, will solve all the county’s problems with "CHANGE". Yes indeed, whatever problem you are concerned about Obama has a solution and that solution is change.

For example, are you worried about global warming; well here is the Obama response:

"Well, I don't believe that climate change is just an issue that's convenient to bring up during a campaign. I believe it's one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation. That's why I've fought successfully in the Senate [during his 123 days of actually being present at senate deliberations] to increase our investment in renewable fuels. That's why I reached across the aisle to come up with a plan to raise our fuel standards… And I didn't just give a speech about it in front of some environmental audience in California. I went to Detroit, I stood in front of a group of automakers, and I told them that when I am president, there will be no more excuses — we will help them retool their factories, but they will have to make cars that use less oil."
Barack Obama, Speech in Des Moines, IA, October 14, 2007

Do you understand? Obama will address "the greatest moral challenges of our generation" by helping automakers retool their factories to make cars that use less oil. Therefore, immediately after getting congress to give automakers a lot of money, we will have the climate change problem solved. I wonder how many in his Detroit audience and others reading his remarks cried out "halleluiah we is saved from global warming".

Having solved climate change, Obama stands ready with a plan to take on the energy crisis; from his web site we learn this will be done this way, and I quote:

Reduce Carbon Emissions 80 Percent by 2050

Invest in a Clean Energy Future

Support Next Generation Biofuels

Set America on Path to Oil Independence

Improve Energy Efficiency 50 Percent by 2030

Restore U.S. Leadership on Climate Change

Obama critics say he has not explained how he would actually implement his plans; viewing the Obama solutions from his web site show the reason for this criticism, nothing but platitudes. The only sure thing is that more taxes will be required to fulfill this wish list.

Although Obama is sometimes criticized for not being specific regarding his programs, he actually has informed the country what he proposes to do. Unfortunately few get past the messianic tone of his speeches and the generalities to actually try to understand what Obama is all about. If voters actually understood what Obama wants to do, he would lose the November election in a landslide, even to John McCain.

The United States receives about 1.6 million barrels of Canadian oil per day but Obama wants to enact "low-carbon fuel legislation". Such a law would place steep penalties on refiners who use tar sand crude oil which of course applies to almost everything we get from Canada. If Obama has his way, we would be denied 1.6 million barrels a day from a politically reliable source. Canada would have no problem selling this oil to other countries and we would be the loser.

Canada, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela are our major suppliers of oil. There is currently an effort to obtain approval for a refinery in South Dakota to process Canadian oil. But Obama and his green allies consider Canadian oil to be "dirty"; meaning that it requires more processing in refineries than the light, sweet crude of the Middle East. Obama’s policies would heavily penalize the use of Canadian oil and increase our dependency on Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.

Global demand is rising exponentially, so if we would need to replace 1.6 million barrels of "dirty" oil we would have to rely on our existing suppliers. However, none of our suppliers have the extra supplies or the willingness to replace the oil deficit. What this means in practical terms is that by excluding Canadian oil to the US we will have a shortage of oil and there will be higher prices at the pump and consumer goods will cost more.

In addition to depriving the US of a safe reliable source of oil, Obama is also opposed to offshore drilling and he wants to have a "windfall profits tax . . . to ease the burden of higher energy costs on working families."

"Instead of giving oil executives another way to boost their record profits, I believe we should put in place a windfall-profits tax that will . . . ease the burden of higher energy costs on working families," he said. Of course, omitted from Obama’s equation is that any additional costs tacked on oil companies for delivering gas to the pumps will simply be reflected in the price and we would be paying still higher prices for gasoline.

Those advising Obama want him to portray himself as "reformer"’ but is this true? As someone who says he wants to change the way government works by reducing the influence of special interests; he nonetheless has some powerful political allies from special interest groups. For example, when it comes to domestic ethanol, almost all of which is made from corn, he has advisers and prominent supporters with close ties to the agricultural industry. Recently when campaigning in the Corn Belt, Obama embraced ethanol as a substitute for gasoline because it "ultimately helps our national security, because right now we're sending billions of dollars to some of the most hostile nations on earth."

America's oil dependence, he added, "makes it more difficult for us to shape a foreign policy that is intelligent and is creating security for the long term." When Obama travels in farm country, he is sometimes accompanied by his friend and surrogate, former Democrat Senate majority leader Tom Daschle. Daschle serves on the boards of three ethanol companies and works at a Washington law firm where, according to his online job description, "he spends a substantial amount of time providing strategic and policy advice to clients in renewable energy."

Another one of Obama's advisers on energy and environmental issues is Jason Grumet who came to the campaign from the National Commission on Energy Policy, a big ethanol backer. Grumet has personal close ties to the agri-business giant Archer Daniels Midland (ADM). Obama himself twice flew at subsidized rates on corporate planes of ADM. Archer Daniels Midland is the nation's largest ethanol producer and is based in his home state.

Obama is against "windfall profits" by oil companies. However, Obama favors ethanol subsidies (54 cents per gallon) that the US imposes on imported ethanol. At least some of the subsidy ends up in the hands of the corn growers and ethanol-producing companies like ADM. While Obama says he supports helping the United States become "energy independent," he also supports the ethanol tariffs that benefit his political supporters.

The candidate of "change" wants change for others but not for himself as he reaps the benefits from special interest groups he decries in others.

"We made a series of mistakes by not adopting a sustainable energy policy, one of which is the subsidies for corn ethanol, which I warned in Iowa were going to destroy the market" and contribute to inflation, McCain said in an interview with a Brazilian newspaper, O Estado de São Paulo (Brazil is a major source of ethanol produced from sugar cane). "Besides, it is wrong," he added, to tax Brazilian-made sugarcane ethanol, "which is much more efficient than corn ethanol."

Obama, in contrast, favors the subsidies, some of which end up in the hands of the same oil companies he says should be subjected to a windfall profits tax and also benefit his agri-business supporters. In the name of helping the United States build "energy independence," he also supports the tariff.

Obama says we need change, but change for others, not for himself, he continues to do political business as usual.

Jimmy Carter’s energy policies devastated our country forty years ago. Obama will do the same thing. Under Carter we had decreased domestic production and greater reliance upon foreign oil. The Obama energy policy is Carter all over again and will repeat Carter’s 1970’s failures. We are in an oil crisis and have a weakening dollar. Considering Canada alone, oil producers there have plans in place to double their exportation of crude oil to our country by 2020; but these plans will be reversed if Obama is elected president.

The proverbial "last straw" may very well be enacting laws to deal with the bogus global warming scare, refusing to drill off shore and in ANWR and failure to utilize our natural resources to make the United States truly energy independent. We can’t be sure we will recognize our country after Obama and a Democrat congress accomplish all they intend to do.


kirovs said...

So you are against ethanol from US and pro ethanol from Brazil. And supporter of US being not dependent on foreign energy suppliers. Hmmm, now it all makes sense...

Vincent G. Gioia said...


That's not true; I am not in favor of ethanol regardless of the source. I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy.

We can be energy independent using our own resources.