Sunday, January 28, 2018

TO DRILL OR NOT TO DRILL?



Remember, Shakespeare once put forward the phrase, “To be or not to be, that is the question”? Well today, with the price of gasoline hovering around the price of $2.50 to $3.00 per gallon, the debate has been joined between two political ideologies, “to drill or not to drill”, that is the question today. On one side, are the people who want to tap our plentiful natural resources to get more oil, natural gas, coal, plus investing in clean nuclear power. On the other side, are the ardent environmentalists and the leaders of the Democratic Party, and many of their naive followers. Today, we use approximately 25% of our energy usage on imports from foreign countries. With Pres. Trump in charge of our energy policy, that percentage will decline sharply. We will become energy independent.

To me, as a commentator on the passing scene, I fall on the side of exploring for and using our natural resources to help in alleviating our thirst for energy and for us to not have to rely on foreign sources of energy for our energy needs. With us spending over $700 billion a year to foreign countries, many of whom are not our true friends, such as Canada (our friend), Venezuela (not our friend), Saudi Arabia (a so-so friend), Mexico (another so-so friend) etc., for obtaining much of our badly needed energy, it is a “no-brainer” to utilize what we have on land (including fracking) or off the continental shelf, to help us lessen our need for these unreliable sources of energy and keep most of that $700 billion right here in the good ole U.S.A.

Yes, the critics are correct, that we cannot drill our way out of our energy problems completely, but by being less dependent on others, and by giving us a larger energy supply, of “home grown” energy, it will keep our country safer by not having to rely on some unstable, and unreliable sources of energy in areas that are very volatile and hostile to the U.S. So, besides being a supply problem, it is also a national security problem. Of course, we must look for and develop alternative forms of energy to help wean us off carbon based fuels. But, it is not economically feasible, at this time, to make believe that we can substitute our energy needs with solar, hydro, wind etc. We should develop all forms of energy, including nuclear, not exclude one or the other, but all. We need bold leadership, in this area, to go for the “whole enchilada”, more oil, more coal, more solar, more wind, more hydro etc., etc. We can do it all, just like we did in putting a man on the moon in 1969.

Who is opposing our quests for exploring for new sources of energy? Besides ex-President Obama, our former “Liar in Chief” (and his two flunky's Biden and Kerry), we have some outside forces using their enormous influence and wealth to thwart our energy efforts to become energy independent. Thank God that Pres. Trump has given the O.K. to complete the Keystone and Dakota pipelines. Did you know that Obama benefactor and billionaire, Warren Buffet, has lobbied against approval of the Keystone and Dakota Pipelines, quite obviously because his investment company, Berkshire Hathaway, is the owner of the Burlington Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) which owns most of the rail lines in the U.S. that connect to western Canada, and they haul 80% of the crude from Canada to the Midwest and Texas. Buffet could stand to lose $2 billion plus a year if the pipeline is constituted and implemented. The longer it is delayed, the more money his company makes. In addition, we have another billionaire environmentalist “nut job”, Tom Steyer, who has pledged $100 million to Democratic candidates who will oppose the pipeline and endorse other “green projects” that Steyer endorses. So far, he's had difficulty getting the Democrats from the “red states” to endorse his proposals because they don't want to alienate the voters of their state who rely on fossil fuels for filling their state's coffers with energy taxes, most of whom are against the extreme environmental agenda of that “limousine liberal”, Tom Steyer.

Unfortunately, most Democratic candidates have bought into the scam of “global warming” (a/k/a climate change) as pushed by that non-environmental scientist, Al Gore. They all seem to be afflicted with that medical condition called “Cranial Rectal Inversion”, and the Democratic candidates seem to have a natural tendency to succumb to this malady more so than Republicans.

If you agree with me, you must get rid of the “rascals”, who have this medical condition called CRI, and you must vote into office, people who will represent you and your needs, and not just the needs of the “nay saying” Democrats and their political party, and their partners in the extreme environmental movement. So to answer the question, it is not whether to “Drill or not to Drill” , it is when, where, and how soon we can drill to tap our vast resources of natural energy right here in our own back yard. The sooner the better.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann














Bookmark and Share

2 comments:

George Giftos said...

Makes sense !
But then again, anything that makes sense causes the thumb sucking liberals CRI.

Bill Klein said...

I'll bet that pseudo-scientist, Al Gore, is freezing his ass off up north while preaching his theory of global warming. I guess he's not too worried about the seas rising as he has bought a house on the West coast off the beach. So much for practicing what he preaches. He's as phony as a 3-dollar bill along with the other wacky environmentalists, including Barack Hussein Obama, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Ms. Botox herself, Nancy Pelosi. The only "green" they are interested in is the green that goes into their wallets.