About Me

Name:Michael Gaijer
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Search

Search

Blog Roll

 

Greedy Liberals in Conservative clothes!

Posted by Michael Gaijer on Friday, July 18, 2008 12:28:43 PM
   Yesterday, Ann Coulter reported in her column 'This is not a Drill' how Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Liberals do not favor drilling off shore, in the Dakota's or ANWR. That they would like to see us go to higher prices per gallon and to heck with the American way of life. She got 585 postings for a remarkable bit of reporting, which was totally lost on her readers, who shouted with glee, "Dril Drill Drill" and may a plague befall you if you oppose them.
   By the time I signed off last evening, I was plagued with a stiff neck and sore fingers from defending my position and the personal attacks to my allegance and my manhood. I was even called out for a fistycuff duel by a VFW member from my home state of Ohio, to 'kick my behind and other things'. A very un-civilized discussion from so many fustrated people that want, want, want and do not understand why they cannot get what they want. 
    I am a staunch supporter of Off Shore Oil Drilling on the Continental Shelf, but not in the ANWR, at this time!  It will be there when needed and need for it is not now. Greed for it yes but not need, and since the area is small and coastal plain, the Russians and other will not drill it all up, see 1002 area for oil fields.
 
Image:Anwrmap.jpg
 
 
    ANWR is approximately 19 million Acres, 79,318 Km2 or 36000 sq. miles and not a spot in the middle of easy accessablity. About 100 miles from Prudue Bay and the Alyeska pipeline, it sits on a vast area of deltas' and marsh land. Earliest date for getting oil from and into the market place, '10 YRS', 6 if they really push the envelope and the seasons are favorable to them.
   We are in a ever changing time right now, heck next sommer we may be able to ship an exploation vessel right over the sight, and then maybe not. Those demanding oil believe we can get it now and that will make the cost of oil drop. Many say, just the announcement will cause a drop in Oil prices. Not very likely, I hope I am wrong but I usually am not. 
    The following is from the Dept of Energy Survey for 2006;

Energy Information Administration/Analysis of Crude Oil Production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge vi

  1. Summary

The opening of the ANWR 1002 Area to oil and natural gas development is projected to increase domestic crude oil production starting in 2018. In the mean ANWR oil resource case, additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR reaches 780,000 barrels per day in 2027 and then declines to 710,000 barrels per day in 2030. In the low and high ANWR oil resource cases, additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR peaks in 2028 at 510,000 and 1.45 million barrels per day, respectively. Between 2018 and 2030, cumulative additional oil production is 2.6 billion barrels for the mean oil resource case, while the low and high resource cases project a cumulative additional oil production of 1.9 and 4.3 billion barrels, respectively.

Crude oil imports are projected to decline by about one barrel for every barrel of ANWR oil production. Opening ANWR results in the lowest oil import dependency levels during the 2022 through 2026 time frame, when oil import dependency falls to the minimum values of 46 and 49 percent for the high and low oil resource cases, respectively. During that timeframe, the mean resource case and AEO2008 reference case project an average oil import dependency of 48 and 51 percent, respectively. Because ANWR oil production is declining after 2028, U.S. oil dependency rises to 51 percent in 2030 in the mean resource case, compared to 54 percent in the AEO2008 reference case. The high and low resource cases project a 2030 oil import dependency of 48 percent and 52 percent, respectively.

   Does the above sound like you are solving the solution to our oil shortage. So lets say we begin drilling and in 4 years we are adding half of what we import daily, which is 11 million barrels a day to our usage. In 9.6 years the estemated 19 billion barrels of Oil in ANWR is gone or nearly depleted at the current consumption level, less than 10 years. 
   Continental Shelf Oil is estimated at between 66.6 to 115.3 billion barrels of oil, a lot of oil but not enough, even with the ANWR thrown in, it will be 10 years before we reach 11 billion barrels per day production, and then after a breif 10 years, it will be starting to taper off.  Or just fall off the scale.
   We do not need more spoiled brat liberal cry babies shouting, drill drill drill and give me, give me! We really need hardcore conseratives with solutions to get away from Oil dependency all together. We have good Hybrid Cars and trucks which are begining to show promise, we need more effiecent diesels for our truckers, we need to resort back to mass rail transportation of goods. Replace panic with order, and create more good paying jobs here at home so we can pay for the new American Future.
   Any moron can yell insults and tell you, your wrong, all the time. And distorting the facts to suit your philosophy is what the Democrats and Liberals do best. Facts are facts, we need change from Oil and if it is going to cost us a few dollars at the pump to do it, then so be it. 
   But the cost you are paying at the pump has nothing to do with supply and demand, as several of the post writers screamed. It is the manipulation of resources price by fear of a 'possible' not factual but possible disruption of  that supply of resources to you.
   Current supplies of oil are meeting or over the demand for its use, so why is the cost of oil so high. Fear of a war with Iran, that only Iran and the Liberal Press are pushing for. President Bush made the pivotal mistake of saying to the press 'if Iran continued to send arms and supplied the terrorist a safe haven he would not hesitate to attack them'! A really big foot in mouth speech, which gave the libs so much ammo to use against him.
   His spiel of an aggressive responce to the situation, brought on the rise of gas prices. We should not be paying more than $60-$70 per barrel for top crude according to Oil analysists in the market place. I say more like $40 a barrel is more than enough for the amount of demand, but that is me. And according to those on Ann's posting I am an ignorant and ill tempered person, So be it I care little about them, but care a great deal about America, my Party the GOP, and getting my freedoms back from the liberals who love to take them away.
   If you have a solution to add or believe I am wrong, please leave a civil response with true facts and where we can find them.

   I love a good discussion on pros and cons but hate name calling. I really do.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Lexington Project

Posted by Michael Gaijer on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 1:35:49 PM

 

Breaking Our Dependence on Foreign Oil

 

‘Our Nation’s future, security and prosperity depends on the next President making the hard choices that will break our nation’s strategic dependence, on foreign sources of energy and will ensure our economic prosperity by meeting tomorrow’s demands for a clean portfolio.’
            That is the beginning of John McCain’s campaign spiel on the Lexington Project, and in all honesty I was perplexed by the wording. In essence he is calling upon our nation’s leaders and its peoples, into producing more power, pushing technology to help free our transportation sectors needs and dilemma. Of its usage of foreign oil, to cleaning up the air we breathe and set about addressing the effects it may have on climate change, as well ensuring that Americans have dependable sources of energy.
            To quote him, “In recent days I have set before the American people an energy plan, the Lexington Project-- named for the town where Americans asserted their Independence once before. And let it begin today with this commitment: In a world of hostile and unstable suppliers of oil, this nation will achieve strategic independence by 2025.”    
John McCain, June 25 `08
            To succeed in this endeavour, we believe that the expansion of America’s domestic Oil and Natural Gas exploration, along with production and refining capabilities are a top priority to do this. However, a current federal moratoriums on drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf stand in our way of achieving this and places an undue burden on our society.
            In the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico foreign Oil interests have explored and tap the abundant under sea wealth of the region. While we are denied the right to this wealth for our nation through laws enacted to preserve an endangered form of habitat from pollution, and yet those that do not have to abide by our laws attribute also to the problem. As it is here and it is also along the Coasts of the Atlantic and Pacific, where vast quantities of known deposits of oil and natural gas reserves lay and estimated in the trillions of dollars, some have found it better to deny us the use of these vast resources, while we spend billions of our dollars a year overseas purchasing foreign energy.
            It is no wonder the dollar is weak and things are this bad, for this is the largest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind. Which is it better, to squander our hard earned incomes on foreign supplies of energy, or keeping our dollars at home benefiting American Jobs, American needs, while reducing our dependency on foreign suppliers and the trade deficit- 41% of which is due to Oil imports!
            “When people are hurting and struggling to afford gasoline, food and other necessities, common sense requires that we draw upon America’s own vast reserves of oil and natural gas.” Domestic supplies of natural gas; Err wait a minute; America has no vast NG reserves on which to delve for reserves, or do we? The Outer Continental Shelf alone contains 77 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas, and that is only what we know about. So it is time we capitalize on these resources and build the infrastructure needed to recover and transport this vital energy source.

            `The Nation Cannot Reduce Its Dependency on Oil, Unless We Change How We Power Our Transportation Sector’

            As I have stated before and find that John McCain also has a similar train of thought about this as I, a challenge must be made to the American automakers, in the form of a single and substantial tax credit for the consumer based on the reduction of carbon emissions. Well I want improved mileage as well, and we both realize that some sort of `X’ prize needs to be awarded to the individual or corporation that can produce a functional, reliable and economic system or design that would permit the attainment of 50 or 60 mpg for the average automobile as a minimum equivalence and must be able to transport five person, along with baggage and not some one person toy.
            The return to cross country rail transfer of goods verse the use of over the road transfer of goods by truck which could economically transfer more trailers loaded with goods per gallon of fuel expended that tractor trailers could. It would not be the end of trucking but rather the restructuring of it, as with our interstate high way systems and airlines. The introduced usage of a new generation of high speed trains for commuter travel over medium distances is seen by many as a viable form of energy conservation and use of resources.
            Viable concepts, which would not only push the envelopes of automobile design and the  propulsion systems they use to its extremes, but be available at a convenient cost to the average public person. This would also have to transcend into the Commercial transportation systems but also the Military as well. The DOD used 97 million equivalent gasoline gallons of fuel last year, but a total of 117 million barrel of oil was sold to it. If the Navy fleet was fully nuclear then about 17 million barrels of Oil or more would be available to consumers.
            These are but a few of the alternatives we have available, which would break our nation dependence on foreign oil imports and reduce GHG emissions. There are a lot more, personal options out there for us to chose, but as a nation together we can to these things.
             We also need to implement FFV’s (Flexible Fueled Vehicles) and demand adherence to the already CAFÉ Standards by the Automakers, with stricter punishments for not reaching the set goals. Had Congress already forced compliance of the law as early as 20 years ago, maybe we would be well on our way in depleting our need for dependence on foreign oil imports.

Investing in Clean, Alternative Sources of Energy

            “John McCain believes that the U.S. must become a leader in a New International Green Economy. We must focus on green jobs and green technology that will be vital to our economic future. There is no reason that the U.S. should not be a leader in developing and deploying these new technologies.”
            I whole heartedly agree with this position. It is in us as a nation to go beyond the normal and into the abstract for we are not hindered by one belief or out look on how it should and can be done. We are a nation of affirmed dreamers of ‘what if!’
             Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Eastern Kentucky have always had vast deposits of high sulfur coal which were banned from use in making electricity. Well we need energy now and those that say it is still over 15 years away before we can make it into a viable clean coal technology. But we believe that is too long to wait and the commitment of $2 Billion Dollars in Federal resources is not too high of price to pay for the science, research and development of the advance technology needed to once again make this areas coal viable to use here again.
            Nuclear power is a well proven, zero emission source of energy and it is about time we recommit ourselves to its use. Currently 20% of all our electricity needs come from Nuclear power plants, but it has been 30 years since we built the last one, while both Russia and China as well India plan on over 100 more new plants to meet their ever growing needs. So why can’t we build 45 new plants by 2030 and put our people back to work, building, maintaining and supplying the needed infrastructure necessary to support them. Just because Three Mile Island gave us all a scare, it is not a reason to abandon a proven good concept. 
            Tax credits to those companies or firms which attain and maintain a 10% of wages spent on R&D, rewarding those that really want to advance the needs of our nation.
            We also need to accept and encourage the market growth and development of clean low carbon fuels such as Wind, Hydro, Solar and Wave action generation of energy. Each of these is not a solution in its own but when combined they could produce and additional 20 to 25% of all the power needed to sustain us. According to the Dept. of Energy, wind alone could provide as much as one-fifth of electricity by 2030.

Protecting Our Environment and Addressing Climate Change:

            As we outlined above, our proposals will not only bring us away from dependency on foreign oil, but allow us to get people back to work making good wages doing the restoration of our nation. However this is but a part of our plan, the last is making America Green and Energy Efficient.
            Proposal of a Cap and Trade system which would set limits on the amount Greenhouse Gas Emissions could be reach before a fine or other mechanism would kick in. Thus as with Acid Rain trading, entities could sell or buy credits from others in the business to reach the levels emitted.
            Targets could be set such as; 2012 return emissions to 2005 levels (18% over 1990)
                                                             2020 return emissions to 1990 levels
                                                             2030 return emissions to below 1990 levels.
            This reduction would over time slowly restore the natural balance to our climate and be a retardant towards expanding any possible influence over it these emissions may have played. 
            With this we propose that the federal government do through example, being that they are the largest electricity consumer on Earth and occupies some 3.3 billion square feet of space worldwide. Applying higher energy efficiency standards towards themselves than towards their constituents, in energy efficiency standards for new building construction, buildings leased the purchase of or retrofitting of older ones. Saving the taxpayers a substantial amount in energy costs, while helping move the construction industry in the direction of green technologies. 
            Finally, both John McCain and I want to see what sort of role speculation had to play in the steady fast rising of the cost of Oil in the free market place. Congress has already begun the investigation into these allegations to examine what sort of wagering in our energy markets had to distort the market and drive prices beyond rational limits, which put the investments and pensions of millions of Americans at risk. John McCain believes that where we find abuse, we will need to act swiftly and firmly punish the abusers so it never happens again. Reform the laws and regulations governing the oil futures market, so that they are clear and well defined. Oil is our resource as well as those that deal and sell it, it is a national interest and should be treated as such when it threatens our National Security.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Return to Excellence, Choice and Competition

Posted by Michael Gaijer on Monday, July 07, 2008 8:45:41 PM
 

American Education

Return to Excellence, Choice and Competition

            John McCain believes American Education must be worthy of the promise we made to our children and ourselves. So do I, most strongly, but before we can change things for a better tomorrow and America. We must look at the true causes of the problems and correct them first and before we can move onward.

In the Decades since the end of the Eisenhower Administration, I believe one of those causes occurred in our Public Schools and the System that administered them. It has run the gamut from being okay, all the way to being the bottom of the industrialized worlds, most to be emulated List. We are a no longer a system of educating our young, rather have become a lame system of processing our students out and unprepared for the future.

The basic question is, why?

The most obviest answer, which no one wants to admittedly say is, the Democrats `Civil Rights Act’ of 1963 and the, over written and idiotic Amendments attached to and then passed under the Kennedy & Johnston Administrations! Dr. Martin Luther King had a Dream of racial equality in the south and acceptance as equals in the North. I truly do not believe, He and those leaders of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, sought to make being a Black person the only means of getting, what could not be gotten fairly and by honest hard work.

Now what is this racist cracker talking about? He is a bigot and prejudicial `White’ Republican Supremist! Hang him, lynch him, he is nuts.

Actually I am none of the above! I am a realist and investigative analysis of the problem, which we as a nation of `coloured peoples’ face. While I am Caucasian, I am not `White’ and really resent the implication that I am a mere unreal colour!

Prior to the Civil Rights Acts, of the `60s and those amended in the `70s. The free Black American population moved all about America and faced all sorts, of trials and tribulations. In the South after 1865, and up till the Civil Rights Marches of the late `50s, they faced vast racial discrimination in voting rights, living rights and just about every right given to them, by the laws written back in 1863, including Education. It wasn’t until the intervention, by the US Government in 1963-67, that these rights began to be honoured by those democratically run Southern States. States under Democrat leadership, who violated them every way and chance they could.

However, during this time great Black leaders, Judges, Scientist, Congressmen, writers and many others overcame this ordeal. Those like Sojourner Truth, Harriet Jacobs, Alexander Cromwell, Booker T Washington, and GW Carver, just to name a few. What did these great and outstanding Americans do that is not being done today. They over came the adversity before them and made it to prominence, by conquering the challenges set before them with clear and orderly determination. Self reliance is a characteristic trait, which is vividly evident in every self made man or woman, of the past and future.

But with the advent of certain Civil liberties, which were installed within the CRA, they no longer had to work for prominence; it was lowered to let all of them achieve it, at the cost of American standards of learning set for us all.  Or maybe it was intended to be that way all the time? Nah! Just yanking your leg there.

And over the years hence, it has been lowered and lowered by groups within the Black Community, those AFRICAN Americans, who distinguish themselves even apart from Black Americans, by being AFRICAN Black Americans. Since Africa is such a large Continent and composed of numerous Countries, these members of Black society must not know from whence they came and while it is a pity. It is not a valid reason to elevate them over; those with greater learning abilities and of more determined prominence, but who are not black.

Our education standard must be set so high, that only those who put aside foolishness for achievement scholastically will preserver.

Public Education should be defined as, one in which our public support for a child’s education, follows that child into the school the parent chooses. The school is charged with the responsibility of educating the child, and must have the resources and management authority to deliver on that responsibility. They must also report to the parents and the public as to their progress. Clear and well ordered guidelines, to curriculum and subject matter, as well in depth advance foreknowledge of what is expected out of each child and parent, with what is expected out of the teacher and the school system as a whole. 

I likewise agree with McCain’s stand here, and support it to the extent that it is a parents choice as to where, his/her child attends. But it is not the Governments or the local taxpayer’s responsibilities to pay for the parental choice of schooling, if it is outside the public realm. It is the parents of the child, whose responsibility it now befalls on to provide the tuition for private schools, progressive schools or privately operated academies. The only amendment I would of added to this, is if you pay for your child to attend a private school or be home schooled, you should be entitled to a tax break.

Neither vouchers nor cash supplements to income be given, which would go towards the `Betterment of ones station in life’, over the benefactors. This defeats the purpose of endeavour to achieve ones goal solely on the merits of their ability. It is like giving a poorly skilled player preference on the field, because of skin tone or the vise versa. It must be achieved on ones own ability, not favoritism of colour or guilt of a past wrong doing by others, with whom you only have the association to, by skin colour.

It is a reverse profiling and does not benefit anyone. Yet it is the heart of the CRA, on the achievement of equality in education. It did not simply promote students to schools that would teach them equally as others, but allowed for the advancement of less able students over other students of greater achievement into higher schools of learning simply based on skin colour. It spread to work places and created the means to foster the separation of equality even further by adding to the resume a new classification of identifying, the Race decree. Why must you put anything other than you are an American or not on your job application.

With the deplorable status of preparation for our children, particularly in comparison to the rest of the industrialized world, John McCain will fight for the ability of all students to have access to all schools of demonstrated excellence, including their own home. He also believes in, that we can no longer accept low standards for some students and high standards for all others. In this age of honest reporting, we are finally able to see what is happening to those students who were previously invisible. We are loosing not only black and white, but other students of colour who could achieve better over all academic scores, if the incentives to learn exceed the incentives to fail.

We need to remove drugs, alcohol and other self destructive life perversions from their schools, neighborhoods and homes of many students. We need to emphasize also, that sports, while fine avenue of income in themselves, are not all there is to life and to maintain the wealth a career in one would generate, one must be knowledgeable about other matters. Not every job out there, will eventually take them where they wish to be at the end, so the ability to adapt and change as needed to succeed is as important as what they learn or are taught.

Some thing taught on Monday may be revised by weeks end. And so on and so on, with ever increased velocity, the knowledge taught to them now, will most certainly change many times over.

In the realm of things eternal, we are but a speck of a moment in the course of our knowledge. We need good minds to handle that which is ahead but yet unknown to us.  

Another value which needs to be taught is the commitment to others, in both life and in marriage. They need to be taught in the home and in the schools. Not sex education but rather other than sex, there is this and that. Be committed to yourself as well as your friends in safety, health and the need for abstinence from the urge to be grown up before it is time.

John McCain believes our schools can and should compete to be the most innovated, flexible and student-oriented centers of educating, learning and experiencing knowledge first hand any where in the world. We believe in fair competition for the most effective, character building teacher available and hire them, and reward them.

If your school or system will not change, we believe it is every parent’s right to see that the school system strive to change or be empowered with school choice. To move their student to another school that will best educate them in the field of endeavor they chose to explore, or gives them the best education available.

Until the States can no longer maintain the quality or direction we all envision for our children’s future educational need. It will be left up to them to reach the goals we as a society demands of them. We will work with every parent to see that the education of their child is rich in concept, knowledge and worth. The state public school system is managed by them only, it is you and me that should direct them though meetings, letters and votes to tell them where we want our children’s future to be heading.

Sports over education at many of our schools have been the focus to relieve revenue burdens in many States. Like my State, we depend solely on property taxes to abate our school systems and this can not fulfill the job anymore, we need a fairer means to do it. A state wide increase in revenue producing endeavours must be substituted for taxing home owners whose children grow and move out, while hundreds of renters continue to add little if nothing to the school district coffers.

Except for where highlighted, the words and expressed ideas, of this column are mine and mine alone. John McCain wants a stronger, more equal and less biased educational system for America that will not leave any child wanting. I want the same exact thing, with the added knowledge no child will be made to loose interest in achieving ones goal in life will placating to another’s.

We need new advanced trade schools for those that do not need to attend college for that four year degree in Teaching, Engineering etc. Do away with the two year college level associate degree and put it back in High School, so our youth can work anywhere they wish to. Being set in school to work only in a menial position is not an incentive to learn. It is a reason to give up on ones self and do wrong.

Sports are an extra curricular activity and if you do not make the grade, your not going to make the big times either. Well not for long anyways. So many up and comers that lacked educations and good common sense are destitute and homeless or dead.

  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Liberal Hysteria over Auto Sales

Posted by Michael Gaijer on Wednesday, July 02, 2008 2:20:43 PM
   I once daily, recieve e-mails from several leading news sources, CNN, Rueters, ABCNews, BBC and of course Townhall.com, to name a few. I try to read, as many of the articles which I deem important, that I can in the amount of time available. Well, with work being slow for most, me included, I have a little more time today.
   I came across this report on the ABCNews site, posted by Tom Krisher/Bree Fowler of the Associated Press and titled `Big Auto in Big Trouble: Ford, GM Sales Drop on High Gas Prices.
   It starts off fair enough and reports the general knowledge that all across the board, automobile sales are down and not just for Detroits top three. Toyota's sales dropped 21 percent for June, because of truck sales, GM fell 18 percent and the over all market fell 18.3 percent, according to Autodata Corp and Jesse Toprak of Edmunds.com. According to this, the auto industry only sell gas guzzeling big trucks in large quanities and not enough small fuel efficient cars to meet the demand of consumers. It could not be the fact, that in general auto sales of all types are in the slumps, based on less spending as well higher gas prices.
   Oh my, the sky is falling, why don't I pannick and drill for more oil in my backyard right now. Where is that cordless drill of mine, and I'll get started right away. Whrrrrrriiiillllllll
   Well in all fairnes, the writers of this horror story do make a two line statement that and I quote, `Automakers simply did not react quickly enough to the staggering rise of gas prices. The shrinking market continued its shift towards more fuel-efficient models.' Basically saying that the industry was caught with its pants down. Including the all powerful Toyota Motor Corp. which I quote again, `which didn't have enough of it's fuel-efficient Prius, Corrolla or Yaris cars at the dealerships to keep up with demand'! They then listed a row of excuses for why. Is that foreign promotion or what?
   In a mention about Ford, they said `Ford has been trying to raise output of the lone factory, near Detroit, that makes the Focus compact, but could not meet demand this month'! They went on to say both GM and Ford planned to announce new `subcompacts' but it would be two or more years down the road.
   The only good report was for Honda Motor Co., who's entire line of miniature full size autos, have alway been toward the fuel-efficient side of the internal combustion engine. I say `miniature' out of no disrespect for Honda, It is just compared to an American built Five Hundred or Malibu or even the Dodge Sebrling, they are much smaller and less roomy in stature.
   I stand 6' 1" and I literally`DROP' down, into a Honda or Toyota, as  I do most foreign cars. Then I struggle to climb back out, and just forget about me riding in the back seat. I crawl in and crawl out, it is histerical. I mean it.
   Well in the story Honda sales fell also, but by only one percent. Why so little, they really did not have a US truck market share. The Pilot and Ridgeline models are poor copies of other American SUV and Pickup Truck lines doing well in sales here. And in the end I think it does not reflect a true report of its impact on overall sales of vehicles, since they have as I said, always steered towards the fuel-efficient.
   Now, the further you read the more you get that, these two are comparring the sales of our large Pickup trucks and their ever as large SUV buddies, meant to elevate the econamically advantaged, but intellegence lacking miscreants as being above the rest of us. So the article gets to the end of its reporting, it begins attacks upon Ford and GM, as well debasing Chrysler LLC. In order when they are compared to Nissan and Toyota.
   Nissan sales off 18%, while Ford, `which still relies on truck and sport utility vehicles, plunged 28%. And Chrysler fell 36%.'
   The vehicles used by this team was the F150 truck line and the Explorer SUV, Fords past best selling vehicles. Well I think those two where at one time past, the top sellers, but I find More people looking at Ford trucks still, look at the Rangers and of the SUV's they really like the Escape.
   I bought a Ford Escape V6 XLT in Feb 2008. Not the Hybrid, because I do very little down in town traffic driveing. I mostly do interstate driving with about 25% intown driving. Which is more like getting on and off near to where I need to be at. Wether it is home or work or shopping.
   In the Escape, I get 23 MPG in town and 27 Highway, with an average of 25 mpg. I seat 5 very nicely and have cargo space for extras like groceries or picnic items and beach chairs. I also own a Ford Ranger XLT 2001 4 Cyl. Full size, which still gets 24+ mpg on the open highway and 20 mpg in town. We recently sold a 2001 Focus that got 29-30 mpg highway, wife wanted my pickup ??? Any way, I buy for work as well for comfort. If I purchased a vehicle solely for pleasure based on gas prices. I would by a motorcycle. Harley all the way to the bank. No fake or immitate for me.
   So is it the gas crisis or the financial instablity of America at this time, that has auto sales down. Add this to the fact Ford Motor Co. still carries its very antiquated, 3 year & 36 thousand mile warranty, could very well be why its sales are way down, I have told them, well the salesman this before, get real with your warranty and come on into the 21st Century, I can get better vehicle care coverage and for less cost. I  don't because I just like Fords right now.
   The American three auto makers still build great cars and trucks, that get better mileage than before. But must re earn the publics trust and worthiness. Better warranties, better mileage and most of all better prices. How?
   Better US laws on foreign part imports, better wages for workers, better jobs and in better fields. Aide to upgrade the work pools from labourer to skilled trades and entry office staff. No more oh you pay to play in our game. These could make a big difference in our society and make better vehicles in the long run. Think out side the tomb.
   And if what they report is really true for Ford Stock, I am buying it today. At $4.41 a Share, I'll make a good profit at a later date. So go buy now.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why is it either Or? A Reply

Posted by Michael Gaijer on Tuesday, July 01, 2008 5:00:43 PM
Brian; You asked me the following Question: Why is it either or?
I respectfully ask why does it have to be a question of drill or develop alternative sources? There is no question that for now we must drill. Our economy cannot survive 4.00 even 5.00 or 6.00 gas and likewise to the derivitives you speak of.

alternatives need to be developed I won't argue with that, but to force economic disaster when it is not necessary is poor planning.
The question you ask is worth an answer and I will give it to you.;
Response is this;
   As you already know and I know, we have oil reserves here in the Continental US, as well just off Shore. There are Oil fields being dug in Mexico, the Gulf Of Mexico and in Canada. These will only surfice us and or neighbors for so long, but wait there is more oil here!
   There is also oil in two regions of the United States, that the major Oil companies here want and they want them badly. ANWR and the Oil Shale plains of the Dakotas. A vast area of live stock raising and farm lands
   Why it is that big oil and there supporters, like yourself, want to drill for oil in our National Parks and where we grow and raise our food  resources? Answer that and it will unlock tons of untold truths about them. But back to your question, with an answer.
   The Major Oil Companies in the United States, where allowed to drill in the Alaskan North Slope area around Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. After promiseing the American Congress and the American public, that the oil found up there would break our dependence on Foreign Oil imports back in 1972. Do you remember the big Oil Embargo on the US and Europe in 1972, I think probably not.
   Well, their loudly voiced promises to free us from imported oil, has not worked and the Great Pipeline ever so needed to move it South, and built over thousands of acres of permafrosted wilderness land, is in need of constant repairs and upkeep, they are no longer willing to do, nor pay for properly. Yes every Alaskian made money on it, but the prodject was a sham to begin with and still is.
   So today, they want us to believe that the ANWR will solve all of our oil problems and break the strangle hold on America. It is another lie by them, for more cheap oil ventures. Haven't any of you heard the story about the boy who cried Wolf all the time? Besides the cost of gasoline being $6.00 a gal. Might actually be more beneficial than lowering it.
   For one, it will send them and there cohorts a message that enough is enough. Nationalization of them would really make them scream, because if you think about it. Is not the Oil resources of America, ours and not theirs alone. It sounds Socialistic, but what they are asking for sounds a whole lot like dictatorship. `If we do not drill for oil now, it will rise and rise.'
   Another falacy they want you to believe is that it is not their fault oil prices are so high. Saudia Arabia andthe other nations do not, and I repeat this strongly, do not set the price per barrel of oil. They announce to the market how much Oil is being produced each month, then trading companies and refiners bid on that oil. Highest bidder gets the best oil first, then so on and so on.
   These major companies bidding against each other, full know that the highest market price for a barrel of oil, will set the refining cost for a gallon of Gasoline and its pump price. Only one has to bid the highest, and all the others benefit from it. It sounds like price fixing doesn't it. Well you have to prove it, I can only tell you that I believe it is like this.
   Now with my remark of $6.00 a gal. being a good thing, all inports coming to America, travels by boat, or truck, well 95% of it does. If fuel costs them $6 or $7.00 per gal. for diesel fuel or marine fuel just to ship it here! What happens to the price of goods. They rise out of sight and it becomes more economical to manufacture goods here at home again. Jobs return, wages return to match demand for talent and soon that $6.00 per gal. for fuel looks like $1.50. But it solves nothing. it merely resets the ball to roll around againt to the entire issue.
   The need for a cheaper fuel source, lets drill, drill and drill.
   So let us chop off the cycle by its knees now, and develope those needed power supplies while just sucking up the hardships that go along with it, and keeping those Oil reserves here for future needs in chemicals, products and materials.
   You know that man does not exists by oil alone, he needs to pass the gas and get ahead of the pack or game. So let us all reduce this need to use and thus curb demand for more. Build it smarter and better. Build it Greener and leaner so we live better and longer.
   
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Where do we go when the Oil is gone.

Posted by Michael Gaijer on Monday, June 30, 2008 7:03:43 PM
    With the price of oil now at $143 a barrel and climbing. What is the out look for a return to normal?
    Well, about as much as the Dodo bird has of becoming non exstinct and that is not very unlikely. So many believe that it is the opposite of this and we can return to the days of $25 dollar a barrel Oil, and gas under $1.00 per gallon. Oh if only that where true.
   The amount of oil on this planet is not infinite  ∞ , no matter who tells you different. And at this point in time, the vast majority of it, resides outside the continental US. So I guess its alright, to blame everybody else for playing our business game by our rules and now winning at it. Which angers us and makes us feel helpless. Not a good feeling is it.
   We can over come this obstical, yet we have chosen not to so far. Why is that I wonder? Is it arogance, stupidity, the rash indifferance to nolonger being in self control over our future. What?
   Since the discovery of Crude Oil in the early 1800s, most of our oil came from natural ponds of surface oil, or tar pits. We also derived oils from plants and animals. It was not until the advent of the Industrial Revolution that the full scale production of oil was even tought to be worth while. Why? Costs.
   It was more economical to continue on getting oils from animals such as whales and cattle, which are slaughtered for meat, hides and bone. Along with the free surface tar deposits, very little if any out of pocket cost was involved.
   But soom engines became more sofisticated and required better types of oils, which would last longer and protected better. The true culprit for this need, heat from friction and speed. So Oil became profitable to drill for and boy did we drill. From the late 1800s to the earlist 1900s, we drilled oil wells all over the Southwest and western PA, WV and eastern Ohio. We drilled so many holes that it was said, the southwest United States sounded like an organ when the winds blew. And we sold it to every one for pennies a gallon. Yes Pennies, 3-5¢ a gallon, and not just at home, abroad as well. We or rather the major oil investors, like Rockefeller, Hunts and the others made Billions of dollars from its sales and wasted thousands if not millions of gallons on the ground. Billions of dollars from pennies on the gallon. So a barrel has 42 US Gal. in it, you figure the cost of a barrel and then figure about how many barrels we produced in a year, etc.
   Now I am not going to give you a history lesson on Oil, but for almost 200 years now we have been dependent on the production of Crude Oil and its derivatives. Kerosine, Diesel, lubricants, medical glycerides, solvents etc., and do any of you wonder how long will we continue to need these items to survive.
   Well alot longer than we will need to drive our cars.
   So what is the scare to developement of new, replenishable and abundent fuel source to power us along for the next 200 years or longer? Costs, knowledge or both? Most monopolies have been based on the fact, that they have it and you need it. Our trouble is we no longer have it, or rather enough of it, to monopolize the market and thus are placed as dependent on it.
   If we where to get involved today in a global conflict and our supply of oil from the middle East was cut off for more than 180 days, we would run dry and come to a halt. Military needs would have everyone of us walking to and from work, if we had jobs to go to. Need for fuel would be broken down as need demanded, so Military, wealthy, Congress, Farmers, Medical, factories, Transportation, Civil Defense, local law enforcement, fire emergency and then general population.
   So let us ask if we have the know how? I believe we do no matter how poorly we place against Asian students, or other nations. For we have one of the best higher educational unstitutions in the world, we have the largest pool of skilled labourers at this time, we have willing and capable workers to do the job and we have the desire to be number one in the world. Ford created Job One but we all should strive for it.
   Well then if it is not the knowledge, then it has to be the costs that are keeping us from doing it. But why would the cost of a new endeavor be prohibitive to refining or finding a new source of energy for transportation. Greedy lack of interest in helping some one other than themselves.
   On this server, Townhall.com, there has been debates and aurguements as to why should or shouldn't we copy laws or means of doing things from Europe. Well for one, we copied the industrial revolution from them, but I would be off the subject if I went on further, and another was self importance. That self importance lead to being overly thrifty in their financing of new inventions or ideas. Saying why bother with new when the old has worked so well in the past and we have continued to profit by it. This attituted of self importance lead to the destruction of Englands leadership in the world of manufacturing and invention. It was not from their lack of  knowledge.
   Here is an example of what I mean. In the 1920s and 30's, aviation was in its infancy, yet while we played with bi planes and tri motored propeller aircraft. In Europe the race had already begun on the Jet aircraft engine. Yes Jet engines, where being built and designed in europe in the late 1920's and early thirties. Frank Whittle, perfected the first functional jet engine in 1936 in England, but a German named Hans von Ohain actually got his into an aircraft and flew it.
   This lead to the rumors of the Nazi master race and England being unprepared for war. In reallity she would have been prepared for war, had she not been so cheap mentally not to see the future. We stand in that same spot here in America. Before us lays the future and behind us is our dependance on foreign Oil. Which way shall we decide to go, forward on to the future or backwards to the same old same old and possibly not be ready for the next challenge. For if we had not aided England after Frances fall in 1940, WWII would surely had lasted longer and cost more lives than we can immagine. It may have ended differently altogether.
   I know that we can build far better fuel efficient cars than before, and better than or equal to the Japanese and Germans. I own a 2008 Ford Escape V6 XLT FWD. I get 23 mpg intown and 27 mpg highway so far, I have only owned it two months. That is a mega leap since the 2000 Ford Ranger I bought and get 24 highway and 20 intown with a 4 cyl. Automatic.
   So why not build one that gets 4o mpg highway and 30 mpg intown, we can if we try. And for hydrogen fuel cells, if these are so expensive to make and the process is so costly. Why haven't the stories of cars running on water not been desproven or labeled as bunk.
   We need new thinkers and shakers in government also, ones that will push for new incentives to build better cars, better fuel efficent motors and electric power plants. Not so much tax breaks but Government supports on imports tarrifs and restiction on quanities.
   Now for some, this will fly over their head like a spacecraft traveling at the speed of light. But for every dollar that the price of a barrel of oil rises, the cost of imports rise also. Making American made goods more favorable of a buy to those that would sell us out for lower prices. I know that I've heard and read how they bought this Nissan, or Toyota, or Honda, or KIA for so much less. Well Honda has stopped building its Ridgeliner, and is reengineering its Pilot, both with dismal 16 mpg in town and 20 highway, and a ride like, well a truck.
   So America are you going to be another whiner and clamourer for lets drill till it hurts everywhere. Or are you going to be a, I wont take it anymore Mr. well off CEO and I demand a better life out of this country and you for my work. If you ship my job overseas I will not buy your goods, if you bring in foreign workers because they are better schooled. I want my government to rework the education of my children for the future. I am tired of being the bottom of the pile. And if that does not please you, I will start my own business and but you out of a job.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Gun Laws Vs the Rights of Citizens

Posted by Michael Gaijer on Sunday, June 29, 2008 8:41:48 PM
 
   I was really hoping to be first on this subject, but unfortunately my server decided not to work during a passing thunderstorm, was the wiser thing to do. But I will perserver and go on with it.
   Yesterday, June 26th, 2008, is a day worth noting on the calender of every good American, Republican or Democrat, who thinks his rights to defend his family and home where violated by the DC law.
   As many of you know, the DC law forbade homeowners and gun owners in general, from protecting their properties or lives. By makeing it manditory to either, A: Purchase a trigger lock for the weapon and use it. Which makes it difficult to protect yourself with, or B: Keep the weapon dismantled and , `AND,' sealed in a box or tin or locker. Now that really makes it impossible to defend yourself.
   So who do you suppose passed into law, this perticular one 32 years ago?  Well in 1979,  Jimmey Carter was POTUS, Democrats controlled Congress, Washington DC was 40% Black and the Drug trade was running amuck.
 
Year
Population
Index
Violent
Property
Murder
Forciable
Rape
Robbery
Aggrevated
assault
Burglary
Larceny
Theft
Vehicle
Theft
 
1979
656,000
56,430
10,553
45,877
180
489
6,920
2,964
13,452
28,819
3,606

   Well, it seems in 1979, that they were not killing themselves, only 0.02%. But 29.32% of their homes where being victimized, 1.61% where being beaten and robbed, but of those violent crimes 65.57% where robberies. 0.14% of the women were being raped.
   Today we see, well for 2006:
 
Year
Population
Index
Violent
Property
Murder
Forciable
Rape
Robbery
Aggrevated
assault
Burglary
Larceny
Theft
Vehicle
Theft
2006
581,530
34,165
8,772
27,063
169
185
3,829
4,589
3,835
15,907
7,321
   So it looks, statistically that as the population dropped 74,470, and the index shrank by 39.46%, violent acts dropped 17%, Property damages dropped by 41%, Murders where down to 0.5% and rapes were 0.54%. Basically everything is down correct.
   Let us look at it another way. For the city of DC, 2006 saw crime as 5.88% overall rate, of which, 25.68% was violent and 79.21% was Property damage. Of the Violent crimes, only 1.93% was murder and 2.11%. Now in the first and upper diagnosis I left out these because they perplex me as to why the seperate catgories.
   Robbery and Aggrevated Assaults are listed as sub-catagories of Violent crimes. It must be that during your robbery you where not raped, murdered or had the crap beat out of you and while being assaulted you where not raped, robbed or murdered. Just felt like you had been, and be ever so thankful this did not happen while you where at home because you'd now be in a new category.
   So robberies were 11.21% of all indexes, and assaults were 13.43%. But now since I believe that all roberies and assaults especially are violent crimes, I get robberies at 43.65% and assaults are now 52.31%. The last two catagories are car thefts and petty theft. So what else is there, well what about burglary. Apparently only the victim believes haveing your home burgaled is a violent crime. Apparently, most judicial, prosecutural, advocates and arresting officers see it, as a victimless crime. What was taken, oh your personal valueable belongings, just things you can replace.
   Just things, like was Uncle Harry's gold pocket watch from 1898, that had an inscription and still worked like new, just a thing to you. How about the Diamond ring that you scrimpt for months to save for, to give your wife or mother on a special occasion. This is just stuff also.
   Maybe the really tragedy is the loss of your self seteem, your feeling of safety from harm, the fear that it happened once it can happen again. Do you feel vulnerable or safe in your home? Scared? Angry? All of them and more. Who do you look to protect you now, not the police. They are sorry but they have bigger crimes to solve, like crack, drugs and murders.
   All financed by your stolen items of no, or little worth to them, but to you everything.
   Repeeling handgun ownership and rifle ownership has done nothing to stop violent crimes, nor have they increased it. Stataticians, who manipulate the figures, Catigorize events to make or break the formula and then puplish their findings only to incite termoil and fear are the culprits to crime.
   If laws where passed in favor of the average citizen instead of against them, crime would drop. violent life taking crimes might rise momentarily, but in the long run wil drop to less that 1/10th of 1% of all crimes. Because criminals will be persecuted and detained in accordance with the law and not get that free pass from justice they currently get.
   Lets break some of the numbers down better, so back in 1979, when they must of said handgun ownership aided in the crime statistics and a law was needed to out law there easy use and access to. Plus yes registration of them. The main crime index for DC was 56,430 reported crimes, Now to see why homeowners where singled out, lets work with the stats for them only, so all others are the only `violent crimes' covered by the hype.
 
   In 1979, of the 56,430 indexed crimes in DC, Only 10,553 were classified as violent. Which when subtracted from the total, would now give us a total index of 45,877. But wait a moment I think I see a problem here, if Larceny theft and burglaries are not violent crimes as reported, their individual totals exceed the combined total for violent crimes, then they must be non-violent crimes. So that would give us 42,271, leaving 3, 606, or the number of Auto Thefts.
   And all others are violent crimes, right. In the number of car thefts, would car jacking be considered a non violent offense, when a child is abducted in the vehicle. Or the Owner of the vehicle being stolen was beaten near to death for it. What of the spouse, if he/she was involved. How can anyone generallize that sort of trearment as non violent.
   But back to what I saw as an error in the report. Burglary and robbery, as defined by the Webster dictionary are as follows,  Burglary= Noun, 1. Entering a building unlawfully with intent to commit a felony or to steal valuable property.: is a crime; related to theft. a felony, involves trespassing, or entering a building with intent to commit any crime, not necessarily a felony or theft. Burglary laws in some jurisdictions also encompass certain types of shoplifting. Robbery=Noun, 1. Larceny by threat of violence. 2. Plundering during riots or in wartime. Robbery is the crime of seizing property through violence or intimidation. This is different from embezzlement, larceny, and theft. Piracy is a type of robbery. Armed robbery involves the use of a weapon. Highway robbery takes place outside and in a public place. Robbery is generally an urban crime. Carjacking is the act of robbing a car from a victim, usually at gunpoint.   If these two words mean virtually the same thing, by what means did they authenticate the validity of their data in this index. None, as I can see.
   Now look at Larceny theft, and once again defined by Websters, Larceny= Noun, 1. The act of taking something from someone unlawfully; Larceny is a crime. Under English common law, larceny consisted of (1) a taking (2) and carrying away (3) of tangible personal property (4) of another (5) by trespass (6) with intent to permanently deprive. Larceny by Trick occurs when the victim of larceny is tricked by a misrepresentation of fact into giving up possession of property. This should not be confused with false pretenses, where the victim is tricked into giving up title to the property. Grand larceny is typically defined as larceny of a significant amount of property, in the US this is often defined as an amount valued at $200.00 or more. Auto theft is also included here. 
 
   By 2006 not one thing had changed, do the math and see for yourself. If anything it got worse and the Black city leaders want you to believe it is all because of handguns being owned by responsible citizens and not crooks. How stupid does that make you feel mister and misses Washingtonian. A bit miss used and abused. And by whom, those that lied to you and tell you white society wants you dead. We do not.
   So if your confused, do not be allarmed, because everyone else is also. Those criminal minded anti-gun lobbeyists, use terror and miss leading numbers to offend the intellect of the average citizen. Who was the only benefactor of the no gun in the home law. Crooks.
   They have been given free reign in committing robbery, theft, vandalism, murders, rapes, terrorizing and mayhem in all catagories of crime. It is time to end the cherrade this moment. Send those that commit the most crime back into the pits of hell from which they spawned.
   During the entire Mafia heyday of the twenties and thirties, not one law was ever enacted to ban the right to own a gun. In the Forties and early fifties the same. It was not untill we granted unconditionally the rights of free men on a ethnic society that still harbours tribal life over civilized life, that we began to see the requests and demands for gun control.
   Black leaders would like for us to think, every black man or person of colour is honest and educated. What a ton of hogwash that is. We peoples of colour know full well that there are eliments within our society and make up, that are of a violent nature and need to be restrained if not removed from this planets face.
   The most terrible thing about it is, they where able to convince their own kind that this was needed. All the while they murdered, raped and distroyed there families lives hopes and dreams. Being a criminal is not just a Black issue or a white issue or an Italian, Chinese or Japanese. It is a world problem, and how do we make the world safer for us. By retaking the laws back into our hands, ridding our society of these crooks and making Gun Ownership less of an issue than is your yard as neatly trimmed as your neighbors.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) |