Garbanzo Toons

My Representative Doesn't Represent Me Anymore

There was a time when I would have agreed with my elected congressional representative when he said garbage like this in his email newsletter.

On May 25, the House of Representatives voted 225 to 201 to approve legislation [H.R. 5429] opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling. Opponents of the bill underscored the fact that opening the Refuge to drilling would do nothing to bring down gasoline prices, since no Refuge oil would reach the market for at least ten years. They also objected to rewarding the oil industry when oil companies are posting record profits.

On his website, he continues in the same vein:

In 2005, the six largest oil companies reported $110 billion in profits. These profits will likely set a new record this year. The Majority's philosophy is that what's good for Exxon-Mobile is good for American consumers, but we have learned that this is not the case.

My question to my esteemed representative was, "why not let the oil companies use some of those record profits in the way they are intended, that is, by rewarding the hard working American consumer with a greater supply of oil? And why not let us buy our gasoline without, at the same time, sending record profits to the terror supporters in Saudi Arabia? Our oil companies actually invest and work to make their profits. The Middle East terror masters do nothing except sit on huge supplies of oil, which they would not even have access to, if not for "greedy" Western oil companies. Why condemn oil companies for powering our economy while giving the decadent, hypocritical Arab Oil Shieks a pass?"

He pretends to have a solution to our energy woes:

Yesterday, Representative Visclosky sought to offer a far-sighted amendment to the Energy and Water bill to provide $750 million to move the United States towards energy independence. This amendment would have made important investments in alternative energy, including ethanol and biofuels; renewable energy research and development, and energy efficiency. Yet, the Majority blocked the House from even considering this proposal.

We've been hearing about "alternative energy sources" for years. And some day, some of these new sources will be available on a large enough scale to actually do some good - except for nuclear energy, which is available today. If the scaremongers hadn't frightened us away from building the nuclear power plants that could power our cities, we'd be using clean, cheap nuclear energy today instead of dirty, dangerous coal and heating oil.

Instead we are left with empty energy promises and blatent green hypocracy like this from the Kennedys, who inherited their wealth and their disdain for us, the great unwashed.

Kennedy, a rabid green activist especially when it comes to other countries, showed up in the news last week to oppose a U.S. $700 million wind turbine farm in Nantucket Sound, located near Hyannis, home to the Kennedy family compound, among other stables for the rich and famous of the political left. Despite the emerging hypocrisy of course, as recently as this past weekend, Kennedy was back in Canada (in Montreal) to slam Canada’s record on the environment.

Forget the debate over whether wind turbines are economical or whether they might slaughter a few too many seagulls. It is sheer fun to watch Kennedy squirm in the face of 130 possible 40-storey windmills that might give clean, renewable energy for a couple of thousand homes in Martha’s Vineyard. The pleasure is acute given how Kennedy and his merry band of green activists warn Canadians not to put comfort, i.e., a job, ahead of environmental purity.

In the war between the Democrats and the oil companies, I'm solidly on the side of the oil companies. At least they are earning their money honestly by providing the consumer with a necessary product.

Labels: energy, environment, Oil, Ted Kennedy

posted by Harry @ 9:25 AM