An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about environmental spills and stress. This follows this post about China in the Bahamas. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.
Please follow me here for continued posts.

A Vaccine for Stress?

Posted on Jul 22, 2010 by Mike Bennett Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

Add to my study list

Login or Create an Account

With a UCG.org account you will be able to save items to read and study later!

Sign In | Sign Up

×

Stress from oil spills, unemployment, accidents and much more is slowly killing us. Will scientists really find a vaccine to prevent its harmful effects? What can we do now to deal with stress?

“While listless, oil-soaked pelicans may be the most memorable images of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the fishermen and business owners marooned along the Gulf Coast already are proving just as big a challenge for the mental health workers dispatched from Louisiana to Florida to help vaccinate against the fast-growing epidemic of despair,” reported The Los Angeles Times (Kim Murphy, “Oil Spill Stress Starts to Weigh on Gulf Residents,” June 20, 2010).
Although the reference to vaccination was metaphorical, there are researchers working on ways to literally block the deadly effects of stress on the human brain. Whether they will be successful is in question, but the long-term harmful effects of stress are clear.
Stress increases the risk of heart attack, stroke, adult-onset diabetes, Alzheimer's disease, major depressive disorder, back pain and much more.
What are mental health workers expecting from the Gulf oil spill? “The symptoms are well-documented: The Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 touched off a wave of suicides, domestic violence, bankruptcies and alcoholism in Alaska,” according to the LA Times article.

Stress from every side

Of course, the oil spill is only one of the many sources of stress in our lives: accidents and illnesses, relationship problems, money problems, toxic workplaces, frustrating bureaucracies and a general feeling of helplessness in the face of the bad news that bombards us every day.
For example, consider unemployment and how it affects not only the jobless person, but his or her family. U.S. News'HealthDay column reported:
“‘Whenever there's a downturn, it's the kids who suffer a significant burden,' said Dr. Christopher Bellonci, an assistant professor of psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston. ‘When families are doing well, they can buffer some of this stress. When they can't, it bleeds through to the kids.'
“Nationally, one in seven children (10.5 million kids) has an unemployed parent” (March 25, 2010).

A stress vaccine?

The August 2010 Wired magazine has the cover line: “The Search for the Stress Vaccine,” based on the research of Robert Sapolsky and others. A study published in Nature Neuroscience way back in 2004 outlined some of the promise of this research. Their work on rodents “reversed the outcome of the stress response by rendering glucocorticoids protective rather than destructive. Our findings elucidate three principal steps in the neuronal stress-response pathway, all of which are amenable to therapeutic intervention.”
But the research is still years away from clinical trials on humans. As Dr. Sapolsky said ,“It's not going to help anybody soon, but we've proved that it's possible. We can reduce the neural damage caused by stress.”
There are many hurdles to overcome, including the fact that you can't just eliminate the offending chemicals, “because they are involved in all sorts of important functions, like helping you run for your life” (Jonah Lehrer, “Under Pressure,” Wired, August 2010).
Solving stress with a vaccine is not only fraught with possible side effects and unintended consequences, it is also a long way off. What can we do in the meantime?

Stress reducers

The Wired article (which has not been uploaded to Wired.com yet, but probably will be next month) highlights a number of widely accepted stress reducers:

• Make friends.
• Drink in moderation.
• Get enough sleep.
• Don't fight.
• Confront your fears.
• Meditate.
• Don't force yourself to exercise. (Here they point out that exercise is a great stress reducer, but only if you want to do it.)

Coping techniques for Christians

Jonah Lehrer explained that some of the most dangerous stress involves “feeling that nothing can be done” and a sense of hopeless “existential despair.” Stress reducers and medicines can't deal with these fundamental issues of meaning, purpose and faith. Thankfully, our Creator provides the answers to these, the most important questions of life.
God has a purpose for your life. He wants you to enjoy eternity with Him achieving a potential even greater than we can imagine. This great purpose, and the fact that nothing is outside God's control, helps us to deal with the stresses of this life. God's plan helps give us the positive perspective that allows us to confidently cope with our trials and stresses. It gives us the peace of mind and contentment that are the ultimate antidote to stress.
To learn more about what the Bible teaches about this and other mental health issues, see “The Bible's Keys to Mental Health .” It provides practical help and real hope.

Don't Miss This Opportunity To Save JOBS! 2 Calls To Action.

A very interesting post from http://consumerenergyalliance.org about fighting for domestic energy resources. This follows this post about domestic resource strategy and this article about the recent news about the ban offshore drilling which would encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

Call to Action #1
Support Off Shore Energy
End the Deepwater Moratorium to save Jobs and the Economy


Call to Action #2
Support American Workers and Secure American Energy
Attend a Public Meeting

CALL TO ACTION Roll Back the Moratorium: Put Hardworking Americans Back to Work!

An interesting post from www.cea.org about the drilliling moratorium This follows this previous post about the drilling moratorium. This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about the ban on offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

CALL TO ACTION Roll Back the Moratorium: Put Hardworking Americans Back to Work!


Sign CEA's petition urging President Obama to reverse the moratorium on deepwater drilling now. While we witness the devastating consequences of the Gulf of Mexico spill on the environment, we now know that a moratorium on drilling will cause severe economic repercussions. The oil & gas industry provides significant amounts of jobs and revenue for Gulf residents. The Administration's kneejerk reaction may have consequences reaching far beyond the oil spill and into the future - rigs are already leaving the Gulf.

Please sign the petition to end the moratorium and safeguard American jobs before more damage is done. Sign the petition today!

Foreign Oil Biggest Beneficiary of Ill-advised, Non Bipartisan Bills

An interesting post from http://bigpeace.com about the drilling moratorium. This follows this post about the results of the BP spill. . This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about the ban on offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.


Foreign Oil Biggest Beneficiary of Ill-advised, Non Bipartisan Bills
Posted by Peter C. Maffitt Aug 2nd 2010 at 3:06 am in Economy, Energy, Featured Story, Foreign Policy, Politics Comments (9)July 30th the House of Representatives, now on recess, passed the 225 page HR 3534 Offshore Drilling Regulation Bill and the 16 page HR 5851 Offshore Oil & Gas Worker Whistleblower Act. The Democratic Leadership headed by Congressman Ray Rahall of West Virginia allowed debate, amendments, and a simple majority vote. Representative Doc Hasting of Washington presented the Republican opposition. If the Rules had been Suspended, it would have required a 2/3 majority vote. The Bills can be accessed on www.thomas.gov or www.house.gov. There may be a C-Span video replay of the House HR 3534 Debate.



There was little drama. The Democrats control the House of Representatives with 255 members to 178 Republicans with 2 vacant seats. HR 5851 was introduced a few days ago with no debate. The one point of drama or frustration was when Representative Lummis of Wyoming reminded the House members their voter approval rating had fallen to 11% and this was a “crazy” Bill. Amendments were selected on a non bipartisan basis. Basically the House Democratic Majority can pass legislation on a non bipartisan basis as demonstrated today, but that is why we have Congressional elections every two years.
HR 3534 is an offshore oil industry restructuring Bill with billions of dollars in increased taxes, royalties, and fees. It vastly increases federal regulations over federal offshore and onshore drilling and state offshore leasing. It creates a new federal leasing agency with vastly increased powers. The main Republican criticism is that the Offshore Drilling Regulation Bill has major provisions which have nothing to do with the offshore industry. For example it mandates $30 billion of mandatory spending on public parks on shore. A further criticism is that it is a major “Job Killer,” with some estimates of a projected loss of several hundred thousand jobs. It will make the U.S. more dependent upon foreign imported oil. Plus the $22 billion in increased offshore industry taxes will not apply to foreign oil companies. One estimate is that the bill will create $17 billion in litigation. There will no limit on corporation liability, which will prohibit small and medium size offshore companies from obtaining insurance. Representative Hasting sees this as a revenue producing , job killing, and increased government regulation Bill. The end result will substantially increase the federal bureaucracy regulating the offshore oil industry.

Democratic Representative Rahall kept stressing that this is a Bill against “Big Oil.” Other Democrats praised this as a Clean Oceans Bill, a safety bill, worker protection, and a great tax and revenue bill to reduce our federal deficit.

To what extent these Bills will permanently damage our essential domestic offshore industry with unintended consequences cannot be estimated. The harm will be severe, especially combined with other Administration Bills which negatively impact the offshore oil industry.

Next week, perhaps Wednesday, August 4, the Senate may deal with the counterpart 409 page Bill presented by Senator Harry Reid. Since the Senate goes on recess August 6th, the effort to reconcile differences between the House and Senate Bills will be dealt with after the House and Senate return on September14th. There will be strong Republican Minority opposition in the Senate, but the Democrats control the Senate currently.

Punishing You for BP's Spill‏

An interesting post from www.americansolutions.com about the results of the BP spill. This follows this post about America's Uranium sources. This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about the ban on offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.


Punishing You for BP's Spill‏
Harry Reid is about to sneak an energy tax into the Gulf Oil Spill bill. Disguised as an attempt to introduce new safety measures for offshore drilling, Reid is actually using this disaster and playing off the hardship of the American people on the Gulf Coast as a way to play politics and increase your taxes.Help us stop this new tax today. Call your Senators today and tell them you do not support this job-killing energy tax plan, and that measures to address the oil spill in the Gulf should be introduced without playing politics.Also, please join over 218,000 other American Solutions members and sign the petition to Stop the Energy Tax so we can reach our goal of 250,000 signatures by Friday. The idea behind Reid's approach is that Senators will not want to vote against new oil drilling safety measures in the wake of the Gulf spill no matter if the bill also contains new energy taxes. He's using this tragedy to punish you for driving to work, adjusting your thermostat, and powering your home.Join us by telling your Senators that it's time for Harry Reid to stop exploiting a disaster to help fund his big government agenda. Please call your Senators today.Reid's global warming plan will likely limit how many tons of carbon dioxide electric utilities can emit, which makes it a massive new tax on energy that will kill jobs and send electricity prices skyrocketing.To give you an idea of exactly how destructive Reid's plan could be, a recent study found that cap and trade could kill 5 million jobs over the next few decades and cost each taxpayer thousands of dollars in higher energy costs.Addressing oil drilling safety in the wake of the Gulf oil rig disaster is too serious to be held up by a wildly unpopular effort by Senate liberals to impose a new energy tax on all Americans. Senate liberals should promote their new energy taxes in a separate bill and not waste any more time in passing oil drilling reforms.But that won't happen, because the Left knows new energy taxes are unpopular with the American people, and a bill that would kill jobs and raise the cost of energy would go down in flames.

Oppose the Uranium Leasing Provision in Rahall’s “CLEAR ACT” (H.R. 3534)

An interesting post from www.nma.org about America's Uranium sources. This follows this post about the Coal Industry's struggles. This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about the ban on offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

Oppose the Uranium Leasing Provision in Rahall’s “CLEAR ACT” (H.R. 3534)
Dear Friend:
The House National Resources Committee on July 14 will attempt to pass legislation introduced by Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) that will threaten our energy security.
Included in the Consolidated Land, Energy, and Aquatic Resources (CLEAR) Act is a provision to reclassify uranium - currently considered as a locatable mineral under the general mining laws - as leasable under the Mineral Leasing Act. For a more detailed overview of the legislation, click here.
Making uranium leasable not only negatively impacts the domestic uranium mining industry, but also the economy and national security of the United States.
The U.S. is already over 95 percent import-reliant on foreign sources of uranium. Moving uranium from a locatable mineral to a leasable one could deny access to some of the nation's richest deposits of uranium and dramatically weaken America's ability to produce affordable energy using abundant domestic resources.
This action will force America to increase its dependence on foreign sources of uranium by putting an end to growth of a viable domestic uranium mining industry, an industry that creates high paying jobs with good benefits and provides resources critical to meeting our nation's goals of decreasing our reliance on foreign sources of energy and reducing greenhouse-gas emissions.
We urge you to contact your Representative and urge them to oppose the so-called "CLEAR Act" (H.R. 3534). To find out the best way to get in touch with your representatives and voice your opposition to this legislation, visit our Action Center.

Coal Industry Mocks Ashley Judd’s Crusade to Destroy a Way of Life

An interesting post from http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ This follows this post about the drilling ban. This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about the ban on offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.



Coal Industry Mocks Ashley Judd’s Crusade to Destroy a Way of Life
by John Nolte
Ashley Judd’s been running around on a crusade to strengthen the power our oil rich-enemies hold over us and to put coal miners out of work. She calls it “opposing mountaintop removal mining,” but those of us who live in the real world understand the human consequences of her thoughtless narcissism. Speaking for all “hillbillies,” the actress went so far as to single out for criticism golf courses that have been built atop former mining sites, stating “I don’t know a lot of hillbillies who golf.”
Well, the “hillbillies” have struck back. The poster below was on display at a recent coal industry-sponsored golf tournament in Kentucky:
If you want to understand why Hollywoodists are so enamored with dictators, look no further than this. Ashley Judd and Oliver Stone and Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn despise being questioned, mocked and challenged by the hoi polloi, which is why you’ll never hear them criticize a Hugo Chavez for putting the “opposition media” out of business.
Judd’s crusade against the “rape of Appalachia” epitomizes thoughtless and cruel activism. If you remember, when she was asked how she planned to replace the working class jobs her activism against “environmental genocide” would eliminate, she freaked out and accused the interviewer of playing a trick on her.
I own a home in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina less than a mile off the famous and stunningly beautiful Appalachian Trail. From my front porch I can also see a golf course. No one loves and wants to preserve the natural beauty of that region more than the people who live there. Coal mining is not just a source of jobs, it’s a way of life, and these good, common sense folks have been remarkably effective at balancing the environment they love with the jobs they need. And they also understand that a golf course qualifies every bit as much as — oh, say – Central Park as “natural beauty.”
“Country” doesn’t mean “dumb.” If Ashley Judd needs validation she should stop searching for it at the expense of bankrupting and upending the lives of countless working-class families and a noble way of life that goes back generations.

US Ban To Cost 30M Barrels Of Oil A Year

An interesting post from http://sweetness-light.com about the drilling ban.This follows this post about Cuba drilling in the Gulf of Mexico while America doesn't. This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.


US Ban To Cost 30M Barrels Of Oil A Year
A report from Reuters that for some odd reason did not seem to make it to our shores:
U.S. drilling moratorium to take bigger output bite
By Tom Doggett and Timothy Gardner
July 7, 2010
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Obama administration’s contested moratorium on deepwater drilling will take a larger portion out of U.S. oil production next year than previously thought, the government’s energy forecasting agency said on Wednesday.
Oil production next year is expected to be cut by 82,000 barrels per day, or almost 30 million barrels total, due to delayed or cancelled drilling caused by the moratorium, the Energy Information Administration said. That is 17 percent more from the 70,000 bpd in lost output the agency predicted just last month.
Monthly production losses could reach nearly 100,000 bpd by December 2011, the EIA said.
In response to the BP oil spill, the administration imposed a six-month moratorium on exploratory and development drilling in waters more than 500 feet deep. A federal judge lifted the ban last month, but administration lawyers will go to an appeals court on Thursday to argue it be reinstated…
Because of the legal uncertainties, analysts said oil exploration will be hampered for months to come.
As a result, the moratorium will end a recent pattern of yearly increases in U.S. oil production, as according to EIA data total output from both onshore and offshore next year will fall by 26,000 bpd to 5.37 million bpd.
The American Petroleum Institute, which lobbies on behalf of oil and gas companies is fighting a blanket moratorium.
It has recommended to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar that as long as oil companies meet the department’s new safety regulations for shallow water drilling then companies should also be allowed to drill in deep waters.
What kind of crazy logic is that?
The safety rules for exploratory and development wells, which were issued last month, require companies to certify they have working blowout preventers to avoid oil spills, they will conduct at least two tests of cement barriers in underwater wells and that they will follow new casing installation procedures.
"The government has imposed significant new requirements. If companies demonstrate compliance with these new requirements, then they should be permitted to begin operations across the board and maintain the thousands of job that are at stake," said Erik Milito, who oversees drilling issues for API.
Obviously the American Petroleum Institute (aka ‘Big Oil’) is a little slow to catch on.
The whole idea behind the oil spill Mr. Obama’s moratorium is to drive up the cost of energy so high that his coveted (and largely imaginary) ‘green alternatives’ will be viable.
How on Gaia’s green earth can he carry out that noble mission that if evil oil companies are allowed to drill in the US?

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Thursday, July 8th, 2010 at 3:00 am. You can leave a response.

Cuba To Drill For Oil Off Of Key West, FL

An interesting post from http://sweetness-light.com about Cuba drilling in the Gulf of Mexico while America doesn't. This follows this post about environmental regulations This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

Cuba To Drill For Oil Off Of Key West, FL
From the Wall Street Journal:
Florida Sees New Threat to Its Beaches
Deepwater Drilling Project in Cuban Waters Set to Launch Next Year Could Kick Off a Spate of Exploration in the Region
By RUSSELL GOLD JULY 2, 2010
Florida has long fought to prevent oil drilling anywhere near its white sandy beaches. But as the state continues to deal with oil from the Gulf of Mexico spill washing up on its shores, it faces a new threat: deepwater drilling in nearby Cuban waters.
Maria Ritter, a spokeswoman for Spanish oil company Repsol YPF SA, said it plans to drill off Cuba, about 60 miles south of Key West, Fla., early next year. If successful, this would likely kick off a spate of exploration. Only one deepwater well has been drilled in Cuban waters, by Repsol in 2004. The effort found oil but not enough to justify commercial development.
Since then, the U.S. Geological Survey has said there could be a substantial amount of untapped oil off the Cuban coast, whetting the appetite of several global oil companies that have signed exploration leases.
U.S. companies won’t participate because of a longstanding trade embargo against Cuba. Repsol plans to use a floating drilling rig being refurbished in a Chinese shipyard, similar to the Deepwater Horizon rig leased by BP PLC that caught fire and sank in the Gulf of Mexico in April. Almost all parts and components in the rig to be used by Repsol are from non-U.S. companies.
Which guarantees that the environmentalists won’t object. Not that they would ever object to anything done by the workers paradise of Cuba.
The Obama administration has sought a six-month ban on deepwater drilling in U.S. waters to reassess risks and establish new safety procedures if necessary. But any new rules wouldn’t reach Repsol’s project in Cuban waters.
Actually, Mr. Obama’s illegal moratorium will ‘reach’ Cuba. They will give the Cubans still more incentive to drill, and make more equipment available to them.
A spill there, even one significantly smaller than the continuing BP spill, could turn into an economic and environmental nightmare for Florida. Some oceanographers say the oil would likely be carried up Florida’s Atlantic Coast, the heart of its tourism industry.
"We have one of the world’s largest coral reefs and a protected marine sanctuary there," said Dan McLaughlin, a spokesman for Sen. Bill Nelson (D., Fla.) "We should not be drilling there."
Maybe Mr. Nelson will write a stiff letter of protest to Granma or contact his dear comrade, Fidel Castro.
In any case, you can be sure that Cuba has studied all of the potential environmental implications and that they have instituted the most rigorous safety precautions.
Repsol has operations in many parts of the world, including the U.S. portion of the Gulf of Mexico.
Drilling off Florida in U.S. waters has been banned by federal moratorium for decades. To protect the state’s tourism-based economy, Gov. Charlie Crist, who is running for the U.S. Senate as an independent, is floating a proposal for an amendment to the Florida constitution to ban offshore drilling there permanently.
It’s not clear what U.S. or Florida officials could do to stop oil exploration in Cuba.
Even if the US could stop Cuba, it is unthinkable that Mr. Obama would.
The U.S. controls coastal waters up to 200 miles from its shores, but under a 1977 treaty it agreed to divide the Straits of Florida equally with Cuba. That means Repsol can drill a deepwater well about the same distance from Key West, Fla., as the Deepwater Horizon was from the Louisiana coast.
The rig headed for Cuban waters has five rams in its blowout preventer, each designed to help shut off an out-of-control well. The Deepwater Horizon’s blowout preventer had only four.
In the event of a spill in Cuban waters, many ships, equipment and personnel from the U.S. Gulf Coast could be prevented from helping because of the embargo. But that may be changing. A Treasury Department spokeswoman said some U.S. firms involved in oil cleanup have been issued licenses to travel to Cuba in case oil from the continuing spill hits beaches there.
Well, it is only natural that the Obama administration would make it easier to clean up any Cuban oil spills than US spills.
Cuba’s efforts to promote offshore oil exploration appear close to paying off. Cuba imports about 110,000 barrels of oil daily and produces an additional 52,000 barrels, mostly from onshore and shallow-water fields, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration…
Funny how even the Castros understand the need to drill for Cuba’s energy needs. Even when their good friend Hugo Chavez is literally drowning in the stuff.


This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Friday, July 2nd, 2010 at 12:09 am. You can leave a response.

Help defeat the Low Carbon Fuel Standard

An interesting post from http://consumerenergyalliance.org about environmental regulations This follows this post about the Gulf Spill.This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

Help defeat the Low Carbon Fuel Standard
The Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) is being sold to the American public as a way to blend transportation fuels with low-carbon alternatives so that tailpipe CO2 emissions can be reduced. But the fact is that affordable and reliable lower-carbon fuel options are not yet available. As a result, an LCFS simply will increase the cost of diesel fuel and gasoline and will place certain domestic supplies of transportation fuels off limits. Increasing the cost of transportation fuel and U.S. dependence upon foreign sources of petroleum is simply unsound energy policy.
While foreign oil producers from some of the least-stable regions of the world may benefit under an LCFS, American consumers would be stuck paying higher prices at the pump.
To learn more about the economic and strategic risks associated with an LCFS, visit www.secureourfuels.org.
Take Action and submit the following letter
Your Information
We need a little bit of information from you to properly address and send with the letter.

HOW OBAMA BUNGLED THE OIL SPILL: AN INSIDE STORY

An interesting post from www.dickmorris.com about the Gulf Spill. This follows this post about offshore drilling. This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.


HOW OBAMA BUNGLED THE OIL SPILL: AN INSIDE STORY
By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann
It’s one thing to say that Obama’s Administration showed its ineptitude and mismanagement in its handling of the Gulf oil spill. It is quite another to grasp the situation up close as I did during a recent visit to Alabama.
According to state disaster relief officials, Alabama conceived a plan – early on – to erect huge booms off shore to shield the approximately 200 miles of their state’s coastline from oil. Rather than install the relatively light and shallow booms in use elsewhere, the state (with assistance from the Coast Guard) canvassed the world and located enough huge, heavy booms – some weighing tons and seven meters high – to guard their coast.
So, Alabama decided on a backup plan. It would buy snare booms to catch the oil as it began to wash up on the beaches.
But…the Fish and Wildlife Administration vetoed the plan saying it would endanger sea turtles that nest on the beaches.
So, Alabama – ever resourceful – decided to hire 400 workers to patrol the beaches in person scooping up oil that had washed ashore.
But…OSHA (the Occupational Safety and Health Agency) refused to allow them to work more than twenty minutes out of every hour and required an hour long break after forty minutes of work so the cleanup proceeded at a very slow pace.
The short answer is that every agency – each with its own particular bureaucratic agenda – was able to veto each aspect of any plan to fight the spill with the unintended consequence that nothing stopped the oil from destroying hundreds of miles of wetlands, habitats, beaches, fisheries, and recreational facilities.
Where was the president? Why did he not intervene in these and countless other bureaucratic controversies to force a focus on the oil, not on the turtles and other incidental concerns?
According to Alabama Governor Bob Riley, the Administration’s “lack of ability has become transparent” in its handling of the oil spill. He notes that one stellar exception has been Obama aide Valerie Jarrett without whom, he says, nothing whatever would have gotten done.
Eventually, the state stopped listening to federal agencies and just has gone ahead and given funds directly to the local folks fighting the spill rather than paying attention to the directives of the Unified Command. Apparently, there is a world of difference between the competence of the Coast Guard and the superb and efficient regular Navy and military.
Now, the greatest crisis of all looms on the horizon as hurricanes sweep into the Gulf. Should one hit off shore, it will destroy all the booms that have been placed to stop the oil from reaching shore. And there are no more booms anywhere in the world according to Alabama disaster relief officials. “There is no more inventory of booms anywhere in Earth,” one told me in despair.
The political impact of this incompetence has only just begun to be felt. While Administration operatives are flying high after a week in which the president’s ratings rebounded to 49% in Rasmussen after his firing of General McChrystal, the oil is still gushing and the situation is about to worsen.
The obvious fact is that Obama has no executive experience nor do any of his top advisors. Without a clear mandate from the top, needed efforts to salvage the situation are repeatedly stymied by well meaning bureaucrats strictly following the letter of their agency policy and federal law. The result, ironically, of their determined efforts to protect the environment has been the greatest environmental disaster in history. But some turtles are OK!

U.S. Must Move Ahead with Offshore Energy to Avoid Economic Downturn,Job Losses!!

An interesting post from www.consumerenergyalliance.org about offshore drilling. This follows this book to read when talking about The Gulf Spill and subsequent regulations.This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

U.S. Must Move Ahead with Offshore
Energy to Avoid Economic Downturn,
Job Losses!!
Tell Washington to Remove Six-Month Moratorium on Oil & Gas Development in Gulf of Mexico!!
Last month, President Obama imposed a six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Unfortunately, his decision has threatened the livelihood of tens of thousands of workers in the Gulf States.
While Consumer Energy Alliance recognizes President Obama's decision was made in direct response to the unprecedented disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, we do not believe the unintended consequences of this policy have been properly considered or measured.
Like the President, CEA supports safer drilling and holding responsible parties accountable. But the fact is that these rigs that are being forced to shut down have exemplary safety records and are being unnecessarily penalized, as are the people of the Gulf States.
As we continue to search for solutions to this crisis, and to make sure we have safety measures in place so that nothing like this ever happens again, we must also join together to avoid rash executive decisions that will ultimately only make matters worse.
Right now, the federal government is seeking comments from the public about U.S. offshore energy development. The public comment period closes on June 30th.
We need more oil & gas development, not less...but we MUST be allowed to access these resources safely and effectively. Offshore development is a vital part of our energy future. As President Obama told the nation - offshore oil & gas must be part of a balanced, sensible energy policy that includes wind, solar, hydro, nuclear and other energy sources.
Make your voice heard!!
Submit a comment today about the need to remove the six-month moratorium and ensure access to safe & responsible offshore energy development!
Click Here to Help

State of Fear - A book to read for the Gulf Spill

This was an interesting book to read when talking about The Gulf Spill and subsequent regulations. You can get it here from Amazon or here from your local library. This follows this post about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

A Scientist's View of "State of Fear",

By Roger W. Cohen (Colorado USA) -See all my reviews(REAL NAME)

This review is from: State of Fear (Hardcover) Crichton has written a surprisingly serious and well researched indictment of the favorite sacred cow of the environmental movement -- global warming -- embedded within a typically action charged Crichton novel. The author uses Socratic dialogue and other devices to educate the reader as to what the data are showing in this complex, politically charged issue. The principal characters come well armed with graphs and data selected to back up their points, often lecturing the less informed, though environmentally concerned, characters (and the reader) on the true state of the art of the science. At the same time, the author indicts the environmental NGOs, the media, the research funding agencies, and political leaders for promoting their agenda with slanted, inaccurate portrayals of what the science is saying. He paints a jaundiced view of the motivations and methods of radical environmentalist organizations and their supporters. At a higher level, the book's title derives from a semiconspiratorial view, espoused by an eccentric, not quite credible character, that the climate warming issue is actually part of a complex social dynamic aimed a creating and maintaining a continual sense of anxiety and fear among the population at large. These literary devices call to mind Ayn Rand's influential novels, in which for example Howard Rourke is used to lecture us on the virtues of individualism and integrity. As a scientist familiar with the climate warming issue, having managed research in the area, I believe Crichton's book makes an important statement to the many who believe that the issue is settled, that human-induced warming is real and that catastrophe will follow. He is absolutely correct in casting significant doubt on the definitiveness of the science and in indicting the politicization of the science surrounding it. He rightfully warns us to be skeptical about what we are told from the variety of mainstream sources we are exposed to. I suspect that it will be difficult for anyone whose mind is not closed on the global warming issue to read this book without gaining a different perspective. However, it would also be wrong for the reader to conclude that the opposite is true -- that the issue is a complete fabrication. The fact is that we understand little about the nature and extent of any effects of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and that much more research is needed, including work on new technology to provide humanity with the ability to stabilize atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide. This research needs to be conducted on a level playing field, in which funders and researchers seek only the best answers we can get.

Gulf Coast Oil Disaster: The (Immigration) Moratorium Option

A very interesting post from www.VDare.com about a solution to Gulf drilling.This follows this post about the President using the oil spill for a hidden agenda and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.


National Data, By Edwin S. Rubenstein
Gulf Coast Oil Disaster: The (Immigration) Moratorium Option
What can President Obama do? In the short run, very little. The Federal government has neither the expertise nor the infrastructure to contain oil gushing one mile beneath the surface of the water. A gas tax hike would hurt BP’s ability to pay for the cleanup more than it would deter Americans from driving their cars. Submarines can’t go that low. The nuclear option? Fuggedaboutit.
Almost as pointless is the moratorium Mr. Obama decreed on new offshore drilling. That idea is sure to win the “Horse Left the Barn” award for feckless public policy.
But a different sort of moratorium—on immigration rather than drilling—could effectively prevent future underwater oil disasters.
The Census Bureau recently examined the long term implications of halting legal and illegal immigration into the U.S. In its December 2009 report the agency projected population growth for years 2010 to 2050 under a moratorium and current policy. The trends associated with each are shown in the chart: Under current immigration policy U.S. population, currently at 310 million, would grow to 439 million by mid-century, according to the Census Bureau projections. Under this scenario annual net immigration would rise steadily from 1.3 million in 2010 to 2.0 million in 2050.
By contrast, under a moratorium U.S. population would peak at 323.0 million in 2047, before descending slowly, to 322.9 million, in 2050.
A forty-year immigration moratorium would reduce 2050’s population by 102 million, or 26.4 percent, from the level that would have been reached under current immigration policy. Instead of growing by 129 million, U.S. population would expand by just 26.4 million between now and mid-century.The 2010 Gulf coast oil spill offers a textbook example of how population growth contributes to environmental degradation – and how an immigration moratorium could prevent future catastrophes. Consider the following quantities:
14%: The share of total U.S. oil consumption supplied by offshore drilling in the Gulf
26.4%: the population reduction a 40-year moratorium would produce from the level that would have been reached under current immigration policyImplication: A moratorium on new immigrants imposed today could obviate the need for offshore drilling by 2050. Even a partial moratorium, one that reduces population by only half the projected 26%, would enable America to meet its current energy needs with slightly higher energy efficiency and conservation. Offshore wells would not be needed.
Forty years is a long time. A forty-year immigration time out is not unprecedented, however. From 1924 to 1965 legal entry to the U.S. was cut to a trickle, the better to cope with the social and economic problems attending mass immigration.
Surely the current emergency is no less dire.

Edwin S. Rubenstein (email him) is President of ESR Research Economic Consultants in Indianapolis.

Chris Matthews Crams Year's Worth of Anti-Tea Party Cliches into One Hour Special

A very interesting post from http://newsbusters.org/ about anti-Tea Party coverage. This follows this post about the President using the oil spill for a hidden agendaand this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.


Chris Matthews Crams Year's Worth of Anti-Tea Party Cliches into One Hour Special
By Lachlan Markay (Bio Archive)Thu, 06/17/2010

What do Tea Partiers, Truthers, birthers, Birchers, militias, Pat Buchanan, Jerry Falwell, Barry Goldwater, Joe McCarthy, Father Coughlin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Ronald Reagan, Strom Thurmond, Rand Paul, Alex Jones, Orly Taitz, and Oklahoma City bomber Tim McVeigh all have in common? Approximately nothing, but don't tell Chris Matthews.The MSNBC "Hardball" host spent the better part of an hour last night trying to associate all of these characters with one other. Of course he did not provide a shred of evidence beyond, ironically, a McCarthyite notion that all favor smaller government, and are therefore in league, whether they know it or not, to overthrow the government. Together, by Matthews's account, they comprise or have given rise to the "New Right."The special was less a history of the Tea Party movement than a history of leftist distortions of the Tea Party movement. As such, it tried -- without offering any evidence, mind you -- to paint the movement as potentially violent. Hence, after Matthews tried his hardest to link all of these characters, he went on to paint them all as supporting, inciting, or actually committing violence.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓
Matthews trotted out Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center to claim that "one spark" could set the militia movement off into a violent frenzy. But Matthews used the statement not to indict the militias Potok was discussing, but rather as evidence that the Tea Party movement at-large is a violent one. Set aside for a moment the fact that Potok is nothing but a partisan hack with a pathetic track record of predicting violence, the B-roll footage while the thoroughly-discredited Potok was making these predictions was footage of the 9/12 Tea Party rally in Washington.This is what Matthews did throughout the special: splice together clips of militias firing weapons with Tea Party protesters in order to create a mental association between the groups. That there is no evidence whatsoever linking Tea Parties to militia groups, nor incidents of violence occurring at rallies, did not dissuade the former Jimmy Carter staffer. Matthews simply chose the unseemly route of trying to associate the numerous characters in his special without any evidence to back up his claims.The only connection that Matthews managed to legitimately draw between the Tea Party and militia groups -- indeed, between any of the long list of characters mentioned above-- is their aversion to government intervention in their daily lives. That's right, in the same segment in which Matthews ragged against the late Joe McCarthy, he associated Tea Parties with the Hutaree Militia because both have a distaste for big government (the latter much stronger than the other, obviously). By Matthews's logic, every American who has qualms with some element of capitalism is complicit in, and supports, openly or not, radical anarcho-socialist violence perpetrated at the G-8, or any other incident of leftist violence (and there have been many of late). Matthews himself has touted the wonders of the "social state." So he must support, or at least acknowledge the justifiability of folks who wish to violently overthrow the government and impose a socialist system. That is the only logical conclusion, if we accept Matthews's premises.Such hypocrisy is rife in the special: if folks associated with the Tea Party use words like "revolution," they must be literally advocating violence, whereas when mainstream leftists literally advocate violence, they are not worth mentioning.The special's rank hypocrisy continues right through Matthews's final monologue. "Words have consequences," he states. "You cannot call a president's policies 'un-American,' as Sarah Palin has done," he claims. Or, Matthews forgot to add, as Salon Editor Joan Walsh and Time columnist Joe Klein have done, the former on Matthews's show and the latter on another MSNBC program.You can't "refer to the elected government as a 'regime'" by Matthews's account, unless, presumably, you are Chris Matthews or a host of other MSNBC personalities, in which case it is permissible.Given that the special really offered no new insight into the Tea Party movement -- just the same cliches the Left has regurgitated since the fall of last year -- it is hardly surprising, though worth mentioning, that neither Matthews nor any of his cohorts seem to remember their total lack of concern over the potential for anti-government violence during the Bush administration. A movie depicting the assassination of George W. Bush, the plethora of signs at anti-war rallies calling for his death, the litany of incidents of violence committed by leftist groups in the recent past -- none of these things were particularly worrisome for the Left throughout Bush's term.In all of these ways, the "Rise of the New Right" special was just more of the same.
—Lachlan Markay is an associate with Dialog New Media. Make sure to follow him on Twitter.
Get a Free "I Don't Believe the Liberal Media!" Bumper Sticker!

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2010/06/17/chris-matthews-fits-full-year-anti-tea-party-cliches-one-hour-specia#ixzz0r8Kc2rfo

Exploiting the BP Oil Spill‏

A very interesting post from www.americansolutions.com about the President using the oil spill for a hidden agenda. This follows this post about Barack offending his environmental base and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

Exploiting the BP Oil Spill‏

Fifty seven days after an oil rig explosion triggered an uncontrolled deep water oil gusher in the Gulf of Mexico, President Obama addressed the nation last night about his administration's efforts to address the crisis. After offering two short paragraphs to explain what is actually being done to stop the oil leak, President Obama devoted most of his speech to explaining why the oil leak means now is the time to dramatically and permanently raise the cost of gas, diesel, and electricity for every American. Jay Leno gave voice to the widespread puzzlement people have with Obama's misplaced focus last night: "President Obama said today he is going to use the Gulf disaster to immediately push a new energy bill through Congress. I got an idea ... How about first using the Gulf disaster to fix the Gulf disaster?" Good question, but we think we know why President Obama is not focused on plugging the oil leak and is instead focused on plugging new energy taxes. President Obama's Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, said at the start of the Obama presidency that "you never let a crisis go to waste," which we now know means that the Obama team never lets a crisis go without out more borrowing, more taxing, and more spending in support of their political allies. We saw this with the $862 billion stimulus law that didn't create jobs, the ObamaCare law that won't bend the health cost curve down, and now with ObamaEnergy that won't lower energy costs and won't increase energy supplies. Using the present crisis as pretext, President Obama is now urging the Senate to pass cap and trade energy taxes. Even though this has nothing to do with plugging the hole, Obama and his liberal allies in Congress want the power to spend billions in new tax revenues through a massive redistribution of wealth from taxpayers to green energy company shareholders. The Senate is reportedly going to take up a cap and trade energy tax bill shortly after it returns on July 12th. If it passes the Senate, the House will vote on and approve that new tax in a lame duck session after the November elections. Our opportunity to stop this new energy tax is now, and the next two months will be absolutely critical. These new energy taxes will hurt you and your family with higher gas and electricity costs. They will kill hundreds of thousands of jobs, prevent small business growth, and ship jobs overseas to China and India. We cannot afford to pass a massive energy tax in this economic recession, but President Obama is more concerned with redistributing wealth than he is in growing new wealth, even if that means destroying jobs in the process. Cutting up a shrinking pie is apparently not a problem if you're the one wielding the knife and giving away the pieces. It's the rest of us that have to worry about the consequences. Meanwhile, the oil continues to gush under the Gulf waters. Like Jay Leno, Senator Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, summed up well this President's misplaced priorities: "The climate bill isn't going to stop the oil leak...The first thing you have to do is stop the oil leak." The President should listen to his friend Senator Feinstein and plug holes, not taxes.

DEMS TURN ON OBAMA

A very interesting post from www.dickmorris.com about Barack offending his environmental base. This follows this post analyzing Obama's speech and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.



DEMS TURN ON OBAMA
By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann

To the left, the oil spill is not an index of presidential competence or an issue in the political sphere. It is a daily gushing of poison into the Earth’s waters as a direct result of the president’s failure to stop it. They blame BP. But they already hate oil companies. And they blame Obama, too. And they are coming to dislike him.
When Obama attempts to recoup this damage to his political base by pushing new legislation on the environment or by resurrecting his cap and trade legislation or by bringing criminal charges against BP or by setting up a liability fund for the spill’s victims, it does not solve his political problem. With each day, 60,000 gallons gush into the Gulf, Obama’s equivalent of the body count in Iraq that caused the left to loathe George W. Bush. Rhetoric or programs or visits to the Gulf or posturing won’t assuage the negatives. Only plugging the hole in the bottom of the ocean can do it.
The right and center of American politics turned off Obama over health care. And now the left is leaving him over the oil spill.
Why can’t Obama plug the hole?
Because he has no administrative experience. I often saw Bill Clinton, as governor and as president, call in experts and ask the tough questions when he faced a new disaster. In Arkansas, it was tornadoes or floods or fires. In Washington, it was Oklahoma City. But, each time, he thoroughly familiarized himself with all the technical issues. He took a bath in the science and substance of the hazard and became as knowledgeable as those who had spent a lifetime studying it. So he knew what questions to ask.
Any CEO or COO or manager has similar experience. But a community organizer, law professor, state senator, US Senator, and president doesn’t have the requisite experience. He doesn’t know not to trust his own bureaucracy. He hasn’t been burned enough to realize that he needs to intervene to waive restrictions, set aside regulations, and open up the process to new solutions. He’s like JFK during the Bay of Pigs. He doesn’t know how to avoid being betrayed by his own bureaucracy and the industry it’s supposed to regulate.
Why did he not waive the Jones Act (he still hasn’t) to allow foreign vessels to ply our waters to clean up the spill? Not because he was against it. He couldn’t have been against so obvious a course as waiving it. It was likely because nobody told him about it and he never knew to ask.
Why did he let the bureaucracy use only US contractors to dredge the Gulf and build the berms that Louisiana wanted? Why did he spurn the offer of Dutch assistance (half the country has been dredged from the sea and is below sea level)? Not because he wanted the jobs to go to Americans. That would have been an insane consideration in the face of this crisis. it is probably because he never realized that our capacity for dredging needed augmentation. Because he never asked.
To the right and the center, these failings show that Obama is in over his head. But to the left, which bleeds for each drop of water in the Gulf and cries over every turtle or shrimp or sea bird, it is an unpardonable sin.
It is the nature of things that presidential mistakes metastasize into presidential character flaws. Bush’s inaction over Katrina comes across as insensitivity. Now Obama’s incompetence and inexperience is causing liberals to see him as arrogant, aloof, removed, conceited, suspicious of outside advice, and even lazy. Long after the oil has stopped spilling, these supposed character defects will haunt the president, just as Carter’s reputation of timidity and inability lasted long after the Iran hostages came home. These defects will last until 2012 and beyond.

The Morning After "President Obama's First Oval Office Address"

A very interesting post from http://www.hughhewitt.com/ analyzing Obama's speech. This follows this post leading up to it and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.


The Morning After "President Obama's First Oval Office Address"
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt
My impression, noted below, hasn't changed after a night's sleep, and it turns out it was hardly unique. John Hinderaker sums up nicely all of the terrible qualities of the substance --he read it as opposed to watched it-- and nearly everyone from the MSNBC gang on the left to Larry Kudlow on the right ripped the horrible delivery as well as the substance.
Even worse, president's don't get many of these, and there hopefully won't be another until after the November elections. (Though the sort of national or international crisis that brings them on may be brewing because of Iran's attempt to run the Gaza blockade as you read this.)
CNN and the rest of the MSM could barely contain their anticipation as the curtain rose last night, and president's don't get to raise the hype meter all that often and there is only one "first Oval Office address" for each president. Summoning up Jimmy Carter's "malaise" speech and calling on the nation to install new windows isn't what the MSM cheering section was hoping for. When, they wonder, does the announcement come that the oceans have stopped rising?
The president's pratfall reinforces the widespread and growing impression that he is simply way in over his head, and that his team of advisors are similarly overmatched. His dismal handling of the Gulf crisis is a reminder to future generations of voters that it is best to discover whether presidential candidates have executive ability as opposed to, say, debating skills, before entrusting the nation's defense to them.

Obama can't talk away these problems

A very interesting post from www.hughhewitt.com about Obama's speech. This follows this post about EPA rule changes and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.



Hugh Hewitt: Obama can't talk away these problems
By: Hugh Hewitt Examiner Columnist
President Obama has never been in this situation before.
Professor Obama could expound and explain, then close his casebook and leave the University of Chicago law students to marvel at his eloquence.
State Sen. Obama could vote "present," and colleagues on both sides of the aisle could nod at each other and mark him down as shrewdly planning a political future four moves out.
Candidate Obama could wow 'em in Boston in 2004, and then go on to thump the substitute candidate Alan Keyes.
Sen. Obama, D-Ill., could barely show up for work, pass little, but start a long-shot campaign for the presidency that, mightily assisted by a Beltway journalism elite deeply admiring of words, rode a financial panic into the White House.
The first 18 months of his presidency were all talk as Nancy and Harry and Rahm handled the details of which friends to layer $900 billion upon. Health care "reform" was more talk among Democrats, with almost no immediate consequences until 2011 and most years beyond that. The show went on.
But unemployment didn't begin to abate, and voters did not begin to cheer Obamacare.
Then suddenly an oil platform explodes, Israel's enemies stage a provocation, the jobs don't arrive, the Iranians push ahead with their plans, and Obama finds himself pushed by events to decide hard things and do more than talk.
These unpleasant, unprofessorial moments have arrived before but were mostly avoided. When the mullahs were mowing down the pro-freedom Iranians last year, the president waited out all the calls for action.
When Gen. Stanley McChrystal requested a troop surge, the president delayed and delayed until approving a slimmed-down reinforcement was the only option left that could be checked without evoking laughter from the world and scorn from the home front.
The oil spilling into the Gulf won't yield to delay, though the Iranians are even more adept at talking than he is, Israel's enemies are demanding the opening of Gaza, and the widespread rejection of Obamacare shows no signs of abating.
Faced with challenges that demand action, the president is turning to words yet again, telling seniors last week that -- despite the voluminous record to the contrary -- their Medicare Advantage benefits will be fine.
Reality a political problem? Then the president will wish it away.
Those bland assurances won't survive his new law's first contact with the seniors he and the congressional Democrats have bled, of course, but his faith in his own smooth delivery is undiminished.
He is also assuring us and the world that a new set of U.N. sanctions is leaving the Iranians "isolated," which, while risible, permits him to tell at least himself that he is working on the dire prospect of Ahmadinejad with nukes. He is leaning on the Israelis to come up with something that allows him to proclaim progress on the Gaza front even though Hamas has not budged from its position on the need for Israel to vanish from the planet.
He will try and wait out both crises even as he tries to wait out the employment disaster that his economic "policy" has brought about.
The oil just keeps pouring out, though, indifferent to all rhetoric, and the stories accumulate that he and most of Team Obama have hopelessly fumbled the response. It is such a monumental failure that it has begun to put in focus all the other failures since January 2009, and if not to define, then certainly to underscore the growing recognition that the Oval Office is empty of leadership.

Examiner Columnist Hugh Hewitt is a law professor at Chapman University Law School and a nationally syndicated radio talk show host who blogs daily at HughHewitt.comRead more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Obama-can_t-talk-away-these-problems-96257389.html#ixzz0qwqggtyO

Help stop EPA from imposing job-destroying climate rules

A very interesting post from www.nma.org about EPA rule changes. This follows this post about drilling in the Gulf and this previous article about the recent news about offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

Less than 24 hours until Senate vote--Help stop EPA from imposing job-destroying climate rules

In less than 24 hours the Senate will vote on a bipartisan resolution, introduced by Sens. Lisa Murkowksi (R-Alaska) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), which would block the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from unilaterally imposing massive new regulations on America's economy designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Already thousands of Americans worried about our nation's future economic prosperity have written their senators urging them to vote for the Murkowski-Lincoln resolution. If you haven't written already, it's not too late. Make your voice heard ahead of this important vote.
If EPA gets its way, American families will face huge hikes in their energy bills and American businesses will be buried under a mountain of new bureaucratic red tape.
But you can help. You can write your senators and urge them to support the Murkowski-Lincoln resolution by sending this letter.
You can also use our Social Capital tool to easily connect with your senators on Twitter and Facebook and let them know that you oppose EPA's plans to saddle America's economy with ineffective, expensive climate regulations. Simply select the "Stop EPA from Imposing Job Killing Climate Regulations" option from the issue drop down menu, then select your senator and choose how you want to contact them.
Act now and show your support for bipartisan, responsible, and effective solutions to our nation's most pressing energy and environmental challenges. Let the Senate know that allowing EPA to run amok is not the answer.
Thanks for your support.