McCain-Palin

John McCain, listening to a small but vocal minority in his Party (I’ve been hearing about this pairing for months from a few vocal supporters), has picked the conservative governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, as the Vice Presidential pick of the Republican party. Palin, who two years ago was a virtual unknown in the political mainstream, jumped to prominence after defeating incumbent former governor Frank Murkowski for the nod as the Republican pick for Governor and then former Governor Tony Knowles for the spot. Before that she was on the city council of the city of Wasilia, Alaska, where she served two terms and then won the mayoralty of that city in 1996.

The extremely popular 44 year old Republican governor is Pro-life and also pro Capital Punishment, and is, according to Wikipedia, who gets a big thank you for the facts given here, is “noted for her independence from big oil companies”.

The pick, it seems to me is a smart move and good strategically as well for the McCain campaign. It, in one stroke, tries to pull women voters who may still feel alienated by the victory of Barack Obama to McCain’s side with the pick of only the second woman ever on a major party ticket, tries to put to rest the connections between McCain and corporate interests, Puts a pro-life conservative on the ticket with him, and creates a great deal of buzz by putting a relative unknown in the spotlight mere days away from the Republican National Convention.

a video for you, a good look at Sarah Palin, from an interview a few months ago on CNBC with Larry Kudlow:

I Like this pick here by John McCain. I don’t know that it is the best pick he could have made, but it is definitely a better pick than either Tim Pawlenty or Mitt Romney. I don’t have a real issue with her age or lack of experience, if I did i would have the same issue with Barack Obama. I think she is a good pick in large part because the other picks out there all had real issues. Romney? flip-flop on pro-life/pro-choice. Tom Ridge? Pro-life when McCain is not. Pawlenty doesn’t have the aforementioned strengths that Palin has, strong a candidate for the V.P. as he was.

What do you think about this V.P. Pick? Is Sarah Palin the best pick? Does it counter well the Biden V.P. Pick the Democrats made? Does it help the Republican ticket in a dramatic way? In any way? Will this help the Republicans take the disenfranchised Hillary Clinton voters who feel left out by the Obama/Biden Campaign? Drop me a line and let me know!

Uncle Mikey

Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed

During this Campaign season, it has been the typical ad campaign’s for both parties so far. The Dems tell you how great their plan is, and the Republicans ATTACK. But we have a new wrinkle today. Yeppers, ladies and Gents, We have us a bonafide Democratic/Barack Obama attack ad here!! Well, as close to an attack ad as the Obama campaign has gotten anyway. It isn’t one of the slick little Hollywood productions that the McCain Campaign has put out recently, but I tell you,there is some strength in this ad. Let’s watch together, shall we? Excellent!

The commercial begins with a question “Can we really afford more of the same?”, and a dour looking gentlemen with a few years on him, looking at us. Then comes a slow motion shot of John McCain, looking kinda tired, which is quickly followed by a shot of a Corporate Board room, and the announcer says “For big corporations, two hundred billion in new tax breaks.” Later on in the Commercial we have the visual of what is clearly an abandoned warehouse, which fades to a youngish looking man looking into the camera and then to a shot of John McCain, and then to and the announcer saying “Companies shipping jobs overseas keep their tax giveaways. While one-hundred-million Americans get no tax relief at all.” ….

I could do this for the Entire commercial, but I want to make a larger point here.

This is a very effective ad, even if it doesn’t really fit the term attack ad. What it does is effectively paints a picture of John McCain as being very much for big business elite, and for helping the wealthy at the expense of the working and middle class, while making the point that Barack Obama’s plan will help the working and middle class. While most of John McCain’s ads early on went for stunning movie type visuals with no real meat to them, Barack uses the backdrop of the average working family very well here to make a point about his plans and the plans of his opponent.

The ad ends on a very positive note, as is Sen. Obama’s standard method, but the sharpness here is a new wrinkle for the Obama campaign. Up until now, the ads have been kinda soft and sweet…well maybe not soft and sweet exactly but nothing on the level of the typical Republican attack ad of the last quarter century. It’s good to see that there is more than one campaign that knows how to bear its fangs and join the battle.

Welcome to the big leagues, Senator. Now that you’ve learned that you have fists, It’s time to learn how to use them. Next time, I expect you to draw blood, little brother.

News from the Conventions, and the campaign as it happens. See something and want it covered in depth? Drop me a line and I’ll hit it.

Addendum: He Did it again! We have a Second attack ad out, and he drew blood this time! I think so at least, you might think differently. Watch it here and judge for yourself:

See ya Later!

Uncle Mikey

Today I am going to look at 3 men, one a Lobbyist, one that lobbyist’s business partner, and the other a former lobbyist working in the McCain Campaign, and their baggage.

First Up: Harry Sargent/Mustafa Abu Naba’a. The McCain campaign last week had to return $50,000 in contributions from donors due to the fact that the donations were in fact collected by a foreign national, Mr. Mustafa Abu Naba’a, a man who is a citizen of both Jordan and the Dominican Republic. This is seen as potentially conflicting with election laws, because it is illegal for foreign nationals to give to American political campaigns. Not to mention that the money came from donors who do not even back Senator McCain.

Mister Abu Naba’a owns a 1/3 share of Mister Sargent’s company, which supplies oil to the U.S. military in Iraq, and has contracts that could be worth up $1,400,000,000 with the U.S. military.

That’s a nice piece of change.

Also of some interest here was the amount given and the people who wrote the checks that Mister Naba’a allegedly picked up for Mister Sargent for the McCain campaign. The amount given? The most allowable to give, by law. $2,300 per person. It is HIGHLY unlikely that an Auto Mechanic, a Taco Bell Manager, and a couple that at one time ran a liquor store would have that kind of money to give to a political campaign. This, ladies and gentlemen, is not exactly the people you would normally imagine giving this much, and I severely doubt that any of these people actually have that kind of money to give to a political campaign. I know auto mechanics. They don’t make enough money to actually be able to give that kind of money to a political campaign. The guy doing your brakes doesn’t make enough to give like that. Trust me on this one.

And if Taco bell pays that much, I’m leaving the copy center of the Law Firm I work at and going to taco bell to chase my dream of wealth and success. Oh wait. They don’t…pay.. that much…. Hmmmm… Neither does working a Liquor store. That job is more likely to get you on TV as a shooting victim than any real prosperity.

But Wait there’s More!

Mister Sargent is also being looked at by Rep. Henry Waxman, the chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, for overcharging the military for the fuel he sold them. And the contract that he signed with the Military is interesting, insofar as it was not the lowest bid for the supplying of oil used by the American military in Iraq.

Another Bundler of joy is a man named Randy Scheunemann. He is former President of the committee for the liberation of iraq, of which John McCain was a member, which was widely seen as a PR organization for the Iraq war push back in 2002. He was also closely linked to the Project for the New American Century, A Neo-conservative think tank, which is stated as an important shaper of American Foreign policy. Other Members of this Think tank Included Scooter Libby, Richard Perle, Dick Cheney, and Paul Wolfowitz.

He was also an Advisor to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Iraq. He is now foreign policy aide to John McCain.

This man, Scheunemann, has been linked to Ahmed Chalabi, The First Iraqi Oil Minister, who has given state secrets to Iran and has been accused of fraud involving Iraqi currency as well as grand theft of both national and private assets in Iraq.

Scheunemann has also been linked to, and in fact worked for, Stephen Payne, the disgraced former lobbyist who offered access to Senior administration officials in exchange for large amounts of cash for the George W. Bush Public Library.

And Until March of this year, Mister Scheunemann had been a lobbyist for the nation of Georgia, who were recently attacked and mauled by the Russian bear. Could this be the reason for John McCain’s rush to take the Georgian’s side in the recent Georgia-Russian conflict?

This is very fertile ground for analysis. There are TONS more Lobbyists, and not just McCain’s men who I can skewer. Are there any shady dealings going on anywhere that you would like to be brought to light? Anyone out there you think needs to get the third degree? Drop me a Line and Let me know!

Uncle Mikey

First, the Basics. We have 3 sides here. Georgia, South Ossetia, and Russia. South Ossetia is a province in the nation of Georgia that has been trying to break away from Georgia for the better part of 18 years. It has declared independence, along with an area called Abkhazia. This independence has not been diplomatically recognized by any nation. For a history of the Georgia-South Ossetia conflict, click here.

The Beginning of this Conflict is Kind of Murky. Both sides claim the other started shooting first. At this point it doesn’t really matter, because what started out as dueling sniper fire now has thousands of combatants, and is drawing the increasing ire of a great many nations, calling for an immediate cease fire. A few selected statements:

President Bush said on Monday:

“Russia has invaded a sovereign neighboring state and threatens a democratic government elected by its people. Such an action is unacceptable in the 21st century,”

From this Report from Reuters there was also a statement from a “Senior U.S. official” that this looked like it had been planned out by the Russians for some time.

Great Britain’s Prime Minister, Gordon Brown on Sunday said:

We will continue to press for international action to help bring this conflict to an end, and we urge both parties to agree an immediate ceasefire.”

Almost All the nations of the G-8, Which include not just the Two above-mentioned nations, but Japan, Germany, Canada, Italy and France, are also calling for International mediation over the growing crisis. Notice I said Almost. Russia was noticeably absent here.

I do not know how much you know about this place, I am only really learning about it myself, But there are a few things that strike me here. Vladimir Putin is quoted as saying that this war will be taken to it’s “logical conclusion”, and that there are two very profitable oil Pipelines, The Baku-Supsa and the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, that run through Georgia.

Can you say war for oil? It is being talked about. One or two more fast facts.

Russia moved 5 battalions of the 58th Army to the Russia/Georgia Border several days before The Georgians began their all out assault on South Ossetia, when this was still just a few snipers on both sides going at it.

The United States has airlifted the Georgian troops that were serving with us in Iraq directly to Georgia after the Russians Invaded.

Word that I am getting is that the Georgians have pulled back, but that the Russians have not.

For their Part, both Barack Obama and John McCain have also joined the chorus of voices around the world calling for a cease fire. Both men have spoken to Mikheil Saakashvili, President of Georgia and issued terse statements condemning the war. Read them for yourself. First from McCain:

“Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin must understand the severe, long-term negative consequences that their government’s actions will have for Russia’s relationship with the U.S. and Europe,”

Barack Obama makes an even stronger statement:

Russia has escalated its military campaign through strategic bombing and the movement of its ground forces into the heart of Georgia. There is no possible justification for these attacks.
I reiterate my call for Russia to stop its bombing campaign, to stop flights of Russian aircraft in Georgian airspace, and to withdraw its ground forces from Georgia. The Georgian government has proposed a cease-fire and the Russian government should accept it.

A Video for you, from the scene.

The Questions I think need to be asked are as follows. Do the Candidates statements have any real meaning outside the campaign trail? Do you think the world is really listening to them? They are still only senators after all.

Do you think this conflict could possibly draw the United States into it on the side of Georgia?

There are reports that have the Georgians opening fire on civilians, and even aid workers in the area, and killing Hundreds and possibly over 1,000 people, and of Russians doing the same, firing rockets, mortars and small arms at Georgian civilians, and of doing this for the Oil and not for the South Ossetians. Is there really any such thing as a good guy here, or in any war for that matter? Can there be?

Could the old Cold War, once dead, come back to life, and become Hot? I want to hear from you!

Uncle Mikey

Story Edit ETA 9:00A.M. 8/12 : Russia orders halt to fighting: Georgia Skeptical

This is something of a follow up on yesterday’s report on quotes and statements on Energy policies By Barack Obama and John McCain. But today we are going to look at actual votes each of the two major party candidates as far as energy policies are concerned.

To begin with, know that the vast majority of the energy votes for the last two years have been in fact MISSED by both of these candidates. John McCain has missed all 15 of the energy related measures to reach the senate floor since august 2006, and Barack Obama has missed 9 of the last 15 energy related measures to reach the senate floor in the same time span.

Despite there chronic campaign influenced absences, they have been on the floor a total of 11 times in the last few years to vote on energy related bills at the same time. I am going to go over a few of them, to show how they voted, and how much they vary when it comes to actual legislative actions.

3/16/2005; Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act: S 3711: A bill to enhance the energy independence and security of the United States by providing for exploration, development, and production activities for mineral resources in the Gulf of Mexico, and for other purposes.

This bill was touted as a remedy to the high cost of energy, via drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, hence the Bill’s title. A complete summary of the bill can be found here. If you have the time and patience, here is a complete list of every speech given on or about this bill.

Given their stances now, it is not suprising that Obama voted no and McCain voted yes. This Amendment was rejected 51-49.

3/16/2006; LIHEAP Funding Amendment: S Amdt 3074 to S Con Res 83: To increase funding for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program by $3,318,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, increasing the funds available to carry out that program to the fully authorized level of $5,100,000,000, to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.

This was a non binding resolution that set funding levels for discretionary spending. It passed 51-49 with the help of four Republican senators voting with the Democrats.

Obama voted yes. McCain voted No.

6/28/2005; Energy Policy Act of 2005: HR 6: To ensure jobs for our future with secure, affordable, and reliable energy.

This bill had a Large amount of provisions to it. A few for your perusal:

- Coordinates an Outer Continental Shelf mapping initiative, as well as a federal inventory of natural gas and oil reserves located in that area

- Requires a gradual increase in the amount of renewable fuels used in gasoline, such as ethanol, from four billion gallons in 2006 to at least eight billion gallons in 2012

- Directs the President, within one year of enactment, to develop and implement plans to reduce the United States’ demand for petroleum by one million barrels per day from the amount projected for 2015

- $18 million over three years for nuclear energy research programs, including one that examines designs for high-temperature reactors capable of producing pure hydrogen

Barack Obama Voted Yes on this. John McCain Voted no. It passed the Senate 85-12. The no votes were pretty evenly split, 7 Republicans, 5 Democrats.

Draw your own conclusions as to which man voted in a more ethical manner. What i am trying to do here is draw attention to what these men have actually done. Talk is cheap, and this article is about walking the walk and how each man showed his true colors when push came to shove on the senate floor when your energy dollars were on the line.

In four of the six votes, the first two bills mentioned, these two men each followed the party line. The final vote had bipartisan support. The final bill was by far the most comprehensive and most sweeping in scope. Senator McCain believed this bill did not serve the present or future needs of the nation and would only saddle us with debt while making us more dependent on foreign oil…despite the planned reduction of petroleum use by 1,000,000 barrels of oil a day put in the bill, and the doubling of renewable fuels used in gasoline in a 6 year time span.

You make the call as to whether he was right or not. Do you see the facts as set out in their voting record affecting their perception by the voting public? Do you think the lack of recent voting on both of their parts, but in particular John McCain lack of votes over two years, will have a palpable effect on voters perceptions of their energy proposals? Drop me a Line and let me Know!

Uncle Mikey

That’s right Ladies and gentlemen, It’s time for a closer look at the energy Policies of our top two Presidential Contenders. But this time, we are going to play a little game. I’m going to throw a series of quotes out there, and you try to guess who said what. OK? Let’s begin.

1 ) speaking of off shore drilling this candidate said it “would be very helpful in the short term in resolving our energy crisis”

2 ) speaking of off shore drilling, this candidate said in a june 24 town hall meeting that offshore drilling would have an “psychological impact that I think is beneficial.” but didn’t claim it would have any effect on prices in the short term.

3 ) speaking on energy dependence this candidate said ” [We should] free America from its dependence on foreign oil. We must take concrete steps to move us toward energy independence including requiring that 20 percent of the nation’s power supply portfolio come from renewable sources like wind, solar, biomass and geothermal energy by 2020, and that a percentage of our nation’s fuel supply is provided by renewable fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel.”

4 ) speaking on ethanol, this candidate said it “does nothing to reduce fuel consumption, nothing to increase our energy independence, nothing to improve air quality.”

5 ) speaking on fuel efficiency, this candidate said “We could save as much, in terms of our fuel, if we increased our fuel efficiency standards, as much as we would from getting Alaska drilling going immediately.”

6 ) speaking on nuclear power, this candidate said “I don’t think that we can take nuclear power off the table. What we have to make sure of is that we have the capacity to store waste properly and safely, and that we reduce whatever threats might come from terrorism.”

7 ) speaking on ethanol, this candidate said it is a “vital alternative energy source, not only because of our dependency on foreign oil but its greenhouse reduction effects.”

8 ) speaking on nuclear and alternative energy sources, this candidate said “I actually think that we should explore nuclear power as part of the energy mix. There are no silver bullets to this issue. We have to develop solar. I have proposed drastically increasing fuel efficiency standards on cars, an aggressive cap on the amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted. But we’re going to have to try a series of different approaches.”

9 ) speaking on Nuclear Power, this candidate said “”Nuclear power is safe, nuclear power is green–does not emit greenhouse gases.”

10 ) speaking on energy policy, this candidate said “I think at the end of the decade we could have a auto industry that has significantly reduced our consumption of oil by as much as 35% or 40%. The technologies exist right now for plug-in hybrids. We should continue to investigate the possibilities of electric cars.”

Do you have your guesses in? Good! Let’s see how you did!

Answer’s 3, 5, 6, 8, and 10 are Barack Obama’s

Answer’s 1, 2, 4, 7 and 9 are John McCain’s

The rhetoric the last few days has been poisonous, so i thought I’d clear the air with a little bit of reality. You know, to show where they stand, not where each one says the other stands.

So the next time you hear a candidate say something about the other candidate on this issue, you at least now have some realistic idea on where they actually stand.

A hearty thank you to ontheissues.org for the help on this one.

Are there any other issues you would like to get a clearer focus on? Something out there you want answers to but don’t quite get from mainstream media? Drop me a Line and let me know and i’ll do what i can to get you the answers you need!

Uncle Mikey

A.N.W.R.: Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. 19,049,236 acres of Pristine land in Northern Alaska. With Billions of Barrels of oil Underneath. To the big oil business interests, there is Gold in them thar hills! The Area that they drill in now in Northern Alaska near there, Prudhoe Bay, produces 17% or so of U.S. domestic oil production, and conservative estimates have the total amount of recoverable oil in the ANWR region is 4,300,000,000 Barrels of oil, with some estimates as high as 11,800,000,000 barrels of oil. There’s a Minor Problem for those who want to tap this “Black Gold Mine”.

The Locals, The indigenous populations say no.

The Ecologists say no.

The Democrats say no.

Now you would have to be $illy to not understand why the big oil companie$ want to drill there. Profit$. They $tand to make billion$ and billion$ on any oil exploration, even if it would take them year$ to work with it and get production ramped up to help them.

ENOUGH with the dollar signs.

The Oil companies also argue that the addition of the ANWR oil to America’s oil arsenal would give leverage against Oil market speculators, and it would drive the price of oil down significantly, potentially saving Americans Billions of dollars overall. One more positive, according to President Bush. A quote from President Bush:

With a drilling footprint of less than 2,000 acres – about 0.01 percent of this distant Alaskan terrain – America could produce an estimated 10.4 billion barrels of oil. This is the equivalent of roughly two decades of imported crude oil from Saudi Arabia.

Time for a rebuttal I think….

Last point First.

BULLSHIT. the 1002 region, which is the area Oil companies want to drill in is Not less than 1% of the Total size of the ANWR. It is maybe .01% The Size of Alaska. To throw out the information out there the way Georgie Porgie threw it out there is entirely disingenuous and just plain wrong.

And that area, 1002, has a Native American Indian tribe living there, where they would drill. Ya Know, I’m all for helping out the Average American in just about any way I can. But taking away hunting area and living space for people who live there is NOT one of them. The Inupiat Eskimos who live there don’t want this done. It would take away from them their way of life, disturb the way they live. Destroy their calving grounds. Which they need so the Animals they depend on for survival, The elk, can raise their young so they can thrive and the Inupiat can hunt.

Let’s look at this another way. Even if we start moving men and material up there TODAY, it will take YEARS to get any kind of return on our investment. And it would be a fight every step of the way. It would be easier and more helpful to the economy to find another source of energy that we can use. We the people are ADDICTED to oil. The Answer to our Oil problems is not MORE OIL. The Answer is in finding a way to make us more self sufficient and less dependent on oil of ANY Kind. There are answers out there.

Solar.

Nuclear.

Wind.

Geothermal.

There are a great many ways for us to get what energy we need, if we just learn to harness it and learn to adapt it. It will probably take as much time to get the power we need from those other sources as it would for us to get useful product from ANWR.

Both John McCain and Barack Obama are against drilling in ANWR, Barack Obama had this to say:

“I strongly reject drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge because it would irreversibly damage a protected national wildlife refuge without creating sufficient oil supplies to meaningfully affect the global market price or have a discernable impact on U.S. energy security.”

John McCain had this to say:

“If people have new information or want me to review policies…no matter what those policies are, I’d be glad to review them,” he said. “People have said to me, ‘I’m going to bring you new information about ANWR, how environmentally we can make it safe.’ I’ll be glad to accept new information but my position has not changed.”

Think I have it wrong? Think either Candidate has it right? Think you know a better way? Drop me a Line!

Uncle Mikey

Economics: This president has overseen the single most disastrous economic downturn since Herbert Hoover was in office at the beginning of the great depression. Since the signing on of Henry Paulson as Dubya’s Treasury Secretary in July of 2006, The Dollar has seen an amazingly dramatic Downturn. Now, anyone who looks at this data with anything approaching a trained eye can see that as the dollar deflated, Investors and people looking to protect their Investments sought to put their equity onto more solid footing by buying commodities.

Like Oil. And Gold.

As the Value of the dollar has dropped like a stone, we have seen the largest increase in Oil and gold prices in recent memory. Gold Prices have Jumped 400% during this Administration’s tenure. Oil Prices were at a more or less stable $30 a barrel at the beginning of this administration. Oil, as of last Friday, was selling at $144, a more than 400% increase. I have heard and seen forecasts that put the price of Oil by year end at $170 and I have heard talk of $200 a barrel oil!

Due, In part, to reactionary economic policies of Henry Paulson and the Bush Administration.

These men think that all we have to do is be America and everything will be fine. That backwards, and again I will use the word, REACTIONARY, policy, has undermined our economy from the beginning of this administration, but especially of late.

Though I greatly dislike government intervention in personal matters, it bothers me not at all when it comes to business or itself. It is time, I think, for the dollar to receive government protection of the sort that the Stock Market receives from executive order #12,631 “The President‘s working group on Financial Markets“, AKA the “Plunge Protection Team“.

Protecting the dollar in a similar manner would Insure that Commodities Price spikes like the one we have seen since Henry Paulson came to be Treasury Secretary would be a thing of the past… Or would at the very least curb and control fluctuation in the value and strength of the dollar enough to keep commodities prices from killing the dollar.

But lord, please let that come from the next president. President Bush doesn’t know his A$$ from his elbow as far as economics is concerned, he’d screw the whole damn thing up.

Dislike what you read here? Have an Issue with anything said here? Drop a Comment on me and let me Know.

Uncle Mikey

With The Economy and gas prices such a large concern, I thought today would be as good a time as any to look at the issue.

I read a comment by a Libyan Oil Bigwig on bloomberg.com, named Shokri Ghanem, who is Chairman of the National Oil Corporation, who seems to be threatening a cut in oil production. Quoting the Bloomberg.com story:

National Oil Corp. Chairman Shokri Ghanem declined to say when a decision would be made on whether to lower production or give any indication of the size of the cut under consideration.

He said the cuts could also be made because of threats of sanctions against Iran and U.S. legislation allowing lawsuits against the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.

Add to this that the President of Opec, Chakib Khelil, has made the statement that oil prices could rise to somewhere between $150 and $170 per barrel during the summer. I have also heard, and this was a while back talk of the possibility of $200 per barrel oil, but Mr. Khelil seems to be ruling that out.

Add to this Nigerian oil workers working for Chevron going on strike, threatening to shut down production there to the oil giant.

All this adds up to One hellacious problem for the Average American. How can the Average American fight a problem this big?

You can’t. But The Government can….or should. The Bush Administration seems powerless to do anything here at all, but there is power in the Presidency that this man does not realize. There are hearings underway about oil speculation, but it doesn’t seem to get much press, I cover it a bit in a few paragraphs. right now tho, Let’s take a quick look at what our 2 major party candidates want to do about our Oil situation.

John McCain wants to expand our off shore drilling, thereby reducing our dependence on foreign oil. He will give a $5,000 tax credit to anyone who buys a zero emissions car, and will give incentives to auto makers to make them. His plan will, he says, make us Oil Independent by 2025

Barack Obama wants to give incentive to manufacturers as well, providing tax credits and loan guarantees for domestic auto plants and parts manufacturers, so that better, more fuel efficient cars can be built here. This plan, according to Mister Obama will cut oil consumption by 10 million barrels a day by 2030.

Both Candidates believe in reform of Oil speculation, and have called for regulation. Obama calls for trade of “energy futures” on regulated exchanges, and McCain calls for “oil futures” market regulation.

Now there are hearings underway that are talking a lot about this particular thing, Oil market speculation, saying that it is THE driving force behind oil price increases. I have heard speculation that Closing the Enron Loophole could conceivably drop the price of oil 25%, maybe more.

Even if the current President has not the brains to do these things, it is good to see such aggressive reform mindedness on the part of these two candidates. I don’t know which has the better plan, I’ll do a more In-depth article on that later.

I have a video here, Testimony from The Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, speaking is Professor Michael Greenberger, Director of the Center for Health and Homeland Security at University of Maryland:

How aggresively do we need to attack this problem? Can the Government really have a major impact on oil prices? Can closing the Enron Loophole have that big of an effect on oil prices? Drop me a line and Give me your thoughts On this.