Welcome To The United Socialist States Of America

The Democratic party is looking more and more socialist with each passing day.  These people truly frighten me due to their sheer arrogance and outright stupidity.

Moving on ....

WASHINGTON  —  With gasoline prices topping $4 a gallon, Senate Democrats want the government to grab some of the billions of dollars in profits being taken in by the major oil companies.

The Democrats are looking at this as nothing more than free money.  And by the way, what exactly do the Democrats intend on doing with the revenue generated by their windfall tax? Karl Marx, call your office.

Senators were to vote Tuesday on whether to consider a windfall profits tax against the five largest U.S. oil companies and rescind $17 billion in tax breaks the companies expect to enjoy over the next decade.

By the way, who decides what constitutes "windfall profits?"  Oh, the Democrats decide?  Who gave the Democrats the power to determine what "windfall profits" are?  Karl Marx, call your office.

"The oil companies need to know that there is a limit on how much profit they can take in this economy," said Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, the Senate's No. 3 Democrat, warning that if energy prices are not reined in "we're going to find ourselves in a deep recession."

Karl Marx, call your office.

But the Democrats are going to have to overcome staunch Republican opposition to any new taxes on the oil industry. The five largest U.S. oil companies earned $36 billion during the first three months of the year.

Keyword:  Companies.  Companies with shareholders.  Need I say more?
Karl Marx, call your office.

Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., will need 60 votes Tuesday to proceed with the oil tax legislation in the face of a threatened GOP filibuster. If he doesn't get 60, he likely will pull the bill from the floor.

And was delighted to learn the bill flopped faster than a stack of dropped flapjacks.

Only last week, Reid was forced to withdraw a measure aimed at addressing global warming, falling short of the 60 votes needed to advance that legislation.

The Democrats' energy package also would:

— Make oil and gas price gouging a federal crime, with stiff penalties of up to $5 million during a presidentially declared energy emergency.

— Authorize the Justice Department to bring charges of price fixing against countries that belong to the OPEC oil cartel.

— Require traders to put up more collateral in the energy futures markets to curb speculation.

Karl Marx, call your office.

Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has acknowledged that Americans are hurting from the high energy costs but strongly opposes the Democrats' response and has ridiculed those who "think we can tax our way out of this problem."

The practice of taxing ourselves into prosperity is standard operating procedure when it comes to Democrats.  Don't believe me?  Take a long look at Detroit, Michigan. I'm telling you, Democrats know absolutely nothing about economics.

Oil executives, testifying before Congress last month, called the proposed taxes "punitive" and warned that they would discourage domestic oil and gas exploration and production, possibly causing prices to rise instead of fall.

In other words, liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent.

The American Petroleum Institute, which represents the major oil companies, has been reminding lawmakers that in the early 1980s, when the government imposed windfall profits taxes on oil companies domestic oil production dropped and imports increased.

In other words, the Democrats define the word "stupidity" at the absolute highest level.  What is it going to take for us to start drilling? 

But Democrats reject the comparison.

Of course they do.  Why?  Ask their environmentalist friends.  The environmentalists are the real reason why we're all paying high prices at the pump.  By the way, so much for Nancy Pelosi's 2006 pledge to bring down the costs at the pump. 

The Senate proposal would impose a 25 percent tax on profits over what would be determined "reasonable" and would allow oil companies to avoid paying the tax if they invest the money in alternative energy projects or refinery expansion.

Karl Marx, call your office.

Yay!  Let's tax the oil companies!  Then, we will all sit back and wonder why the price at the pump continues to skyrocket as the oil companies pass on the costs of the Democrats "windfall profits tax" onto the consumers.

The tax breaks that would be rescinded, given by Congress over the past five years, are expected to save the five largest oil companies about $17 billion over the next 10 years. The Democratic proposal would funnel the money into tax incentives for renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, and to promote energy efficiency and conservation.

Yay! Let's give the oil companies even less incentives to explore for oil. On the other hand, the Democrats don't allow the oil companies to do their job anyway, so what's the difference? 

Most Senate Republicans have a different approach to dealing with the growing energy crisis — pump more oil and gas.

The Republicans are exactly right.  We need to drill.  Now.

The GOP energy plan, rejected by the Senate last month, calls for opening a coastal strip of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil development and to allow states to opt out of the national moratorium that has been in effect for a quarter century against oil and gas drilling in more than 80 percent of the country's coastal waters.

In other words, when it comes to drilling for oil, the Democrats said this.

"Republicans by and large believe that the solution to this problem, in part, is to increase domestic production," said McConnell.

Common sense clearly dictates that in order to bring the price of a gallon of gasoline down oil, production must be increased.  However, common sense is severely lacking in the Democratic party.  So what do we do in the meantime?  We're all supposed to suck it up as we "wait patiently" for the new renewable energy sources to come to pass, move closer to work, drive smaller cars and/or ride bicycles to work, and change everything else regarding our modern day lifestyle all because the liberal Democrats say we should.

Like I said .... Karl Marx, call your office.

Update:  Hallelujah!  Luckily, their attempt failed.

Print | posted @ Tuesday, June 10, 2008 6:52 PM

Comments on this entry:

Gravatar # re: Welcome To The United Socialist States Of America
by TheBad at 6/10/2008 7:11 PM

As far as I can tell, democrats have limited our ability to drill offshore to three states on the Gulf of Mexico: Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. The rest of our waterfront states are off limits (to us, at least). That’s just offshore drilling, to say nothing of onshore drilling in such desolate locales as ANWR.

However, this is not the only problem created by the democrats and their undying loyalty to the environMental lobby. With no new refineries built since 1976 and the EPA requirement of a seemingly endless list of unique so-called “boutique blends” of gasoline, there is no room for error in production. The smallest of problems causes prices to soar.

Compound the above with the lack of new nuclear plants in the past decade, and we have ourselves a true energy conundrum. And it’s only getting worse. So, what’s the “commonsense plan” promised by the Party of Treasonous Surrender-Monkeys?

Windfall profit taxes.

…or…

Nationalize the energy industry.

Always, always, always be leery of any plan from democrats that they describe as “commonsense”.
  
Gravatar # re: Welcome To The United Socialist States Of America
by Braden at 6/10/2008 8:37 PM

You got that right, TheBad.

Democrats haven't a clue ... and it definitely shows in terms of our current situation regarding prices at the pump.
  
Gravatar # re: Welcome To The United Socialist States Of America
by Andy at 6/10/2008 9:14 PM

I guess I don't see what is wrong with this:

"The Democratic proposal would funnel the money into tax incentives for renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, and to promote energy efficiency and conservation."

But then again, I guess I'm just a Hippie. How retarded would America be to invest in and utilize energy that will never EVER run out? What was I thinking? SHeesh! Forgive my ignorance!
  
Gravatar # re: Welcome To The United Socialist States Of America
by Braden at 6/10/2008 10:03 PM

You're a hippie? Who said? Oh, you did. Never mind.

Yeah Andy, let's adhere to the madness of the Democratic party's near communist agenda

Karl Marx, call your office.

What's more, the scary part in your entire comment is this: You just admitted it yourself that you "guess you don't see what is wrong with this:

"The Democratic proposal would funnel the money into tax incentives for renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, and to promote energy efficiency and conservation."

Nothing like the Democrats granting themselves the power of final arbiter, eh Andy? And they also gave themselves the power to define what "windfall profits" are. So much for companies and their shareholders, right Andy?

Since you appear to be in favor of the above methodologies, I can safely assume you wouldn't have a problem with a windfall profits tax on higher education institutions? And don't tell me higher education institutions don't fall under industry, because they are an industry, believe me. Let's look at Harvard for example, with their huge near $35 BILLION dollar endowment. I think we should place a windfall profits tax on them!

Do you see how stupid that just sounds? Well, that's the same stupidity coming from the Democrats regarding the oil companies.

I could go on, but I am too lazy to type it all out to you right now. Glenn Beck says it better, my friend:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/14/beck.collegeendowment/

You'd better think twice about who the Democratic party really is, Andy; and what they stand for. You should think long and hard about it. And Andy, have you forgotten about Nancy Pelosi's pledge she made in 2006? Do you remember it at all?

Our economy presently is driven by oil (as much as it will disappoint you), much like many other of the world's economies. Yes, I am in favor of other energy technologies, but they are not ready yet - far form it. We need to drill for oil now in the meantime. It's only logical to do so.
  
Gravatar # re: Welcome To The United Socialist States Of America
by TheBad at 6/10/2008 11:00 PM

“But then again, I guess I’m just a Hippie.”

How old are you? If your answer is any less than 58, you need a smack.

“How retarded would America be to invest in and utilize energy that will never EVER run out?”

About as retarded as America investing any more than it already is into energy systems that aren’t showing any scientific promise of replacing the one that is problematic today.

This is the same argument lefties used for suggesting that tax dollars should fund embryonic stem cell research. It’s just as wrong now as it was then. If the science is truly viable you would see more than enough money for research from the private sector. Ultimately, if you want it to be totally screwed, let the government run it. Plenty of examples come to mind. Want a list?
  
Gravatar # re: Welcome To The United Socialist States Of America
by Andy at 6/11/2008 3:43 PM

"but they are not ready yet..."

Perhaps because of lack of funding?
  
Gravatar # re: Welcome To The United Socialist States Of America
by Braden at 6/11/2008 5:05 PM

Lack of funding? Do you seriously expect me to believe that?

How much money have we invested already into technologies that haven't even become mainstream yet? Come on, Andy.

And why do we need government to fund it in the first place? Let the free markets do their job, Andy.

But I guess Socialism is the way to go according to Andy.

So much for freedom and liberty being the solution to the human condition, right Andy?

  
Gravatar # re: Welcome To The United Socialist States Of America
by TheBad at 6/11/2008 9:47 PM

I tire of repeating myself:

“If the science is truly viable you would see more than enough money for research from the private sector.”

However, since you contend it, let us examine:

“Perhaps because of lack of funding?”

Without lifting a finger, I know that this is patently ridiculous. But, for the sake of removing your ability to dub me a “Holocaust Denier” ... the finger lifts:

As we see here, there is a considerable amount of money spent in lobbying. Just imagine if that money was invested into the science instead of trying to bribe Washington into dumping tax dollars into the industry, eh?

What about the aforementioned private investment? Even an overtly liberal organization like SFGate notes “a half-billion-dollar investment in biofuel research” from BP (not tax dollars). Furthermore:

“BP, in addition to the new Energy Biosciences Institute at Berkeley, plans to spend $8 billion over 10 years on its own alternative energy effort, which includes building solar cells and wind farms.”

Lack of funding? My arse.
  

Your comment:

Title:
Name:
Email:
Website:
 
Italic Underline Blockquote Hyperlink
 
 
Please add 8 and 3 and type the answer here: