In other news from around the world…

WSJ reports:

A high court in South Africa ruled on Wednesday that Chinese-South Africans will be reclassified as “black,” a term that includes black Africans, Indians and others who were subject to discrimination under apartheid. As a result of this ruling, ethnically Chinese citizens will be able to benefit from government affirmative action policies aimed at undoing the effects of apartheid.

You just can’t make this stuff up. The notions of “multiculturism” and “political correctness” run amok as practical applications. Not just an American export.

Sort of like renaming “illegal” immigrants as “undocument,” and offering them health benefits, education, etc.

It’s all just semantics, ’til the taxpayer gets the bill.

This couragous woman has summed up my questions about Barak Obama:

“First of all, what country does Obama think he is running for president in? Why didn’t the media share the fact that immediately prior to the Obama arrival, they put on several free music concerts in order to get people to show up? Why go overseas and bash this country, apologize for this country? Why go work out at the Ritz instead of see wounded soldiers in a military hospital in Germany? Why cancel your visit and then blame it on the Pentagon when the fact of the matter is that the State Dept told Obama that he could visit but could not take cameras and the media for photo ops? Why go to Iraq and see that we are winning and the surge is working yet refuse to admit it to Catie Couric and say that even though we have succeeded, saving millions of lives both American, Allied, and Iraqi, that you would and do not support the surge? Why go on a fact finding trip and then after it all say that it didn’t change ANY of your views? Why, Obama, would you try to claim credit for Bush’s strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq? And why in the hell Obama would you be trapsing around the world pretending to be the president and insulting our military, giving the enemy credit for the success saying they “stood down”, and pandering to every group you see, when we, Americans, are suffering paying $4.00 + a gallon for gas?”

Thus far, it’s fair to characterize the difference between the Democrats’ solution to the oil crisis and the GOP’s solution is one of short-term vs. long-term. Here’s a quote from Harry Reid on his impending dilemma:

On the Senate side, majority leader Harry Reid has talked about offering Republicans a floor vote on the issue, but he blocked amendments on the “Stop Excessive Energy Speculation” bill, including a proposal to lift the ban on offshore drilling. “Republicans once again have run away from an opportunity to provide a short-term solution to our energy crisis,” he said after the vote.

He isn’t the only senator with this type of mindset:

Obama aides say the Democrat supports legislation that would encourage oil companies to drill in offshore areas that are already approved but not used. And aides cite his plan for a $20 billion economic stimulus package that would provide rebates that people could use to pay for gasoline as well as efforts to crack down on oil speculators who drive up prices on the world market.

Reid’s and Obama’s initiatives do little to help consumers and small businesses over the next 5-10 years. It isn’t a stretch to think that they’re really only about bringing relief for the duration of the election season. I further suspect that they know that if they aren’t seen as doing something, they’ll get hurt this election season, especially Sen. Obama. (continue reading post »)

In this Washington Post article, the environutters’ desperation shows in their arguments against drilling on the OCS. Here’s how Cathy Duvall, the national political director of the Sierra Club, tried arguing against drilling:

“Apparently, hundreds of thousands of gallons of spilled oil, dead fish and oil-covered birds aren’t ideal conditions for peddling a misguided plan for more offshore drilling,” said Cathy Duvall, the national political director of the Sierra Club. “Unfortunately, the risk for such spills, and far worse, would only increase if John McCain and George Bush get their way and allow Big Oil to begin the ‘exploitation’ of our coasts.”

Much to my delight, the McCain campaign didn’t sit still. Here’s their response:

McCain and his advisers reject such criticism, saying the safety record for deep-sea oil rigs is very good. The oil slick in the Mississippi River was caused by a collision between a tanker and a barge, not a leak at an oil rig.

There’s only one way for us to never spill another drop of oil. That’s to never use another drop of oil. Clearly, that isn’t happening anytime soon. Will this spill stop the momentum for drilling? I’d bet against it. I’m betting that the American people will demand better safety precautions, then resume their call for increasing oil production. (continue reading post »)

During his interview with NBC’s Tom Brokaw, Sen. Obama showed himself to be as clueless as a deer caught in a car’s headlights. Here’s the first proof of that:

MR. BROKAW: That prompted this radio ad from your opponent John McCain, which is running today. So let’s listen to that and then respond.

SEN. JOHN McCAIN: (From political ad) Now that it’s clear that the surge has succeeded and brought victory in Iraq within sight, Senator Obama can’t quite bring himself to admit his own failure in judgment. Instead, he commits the even greater error of insisting that, even in hindsight, he would still oppose the surge. Even in retrospect, he would choose the path of retreat and failure for America over the path of success and victory. That’s not exactly my idea of the judgment we seek in a commander-in-chief.

MR. BROKAW: That’s a radio speech from Senator John McCain that is running on this Sunday in America. He’s referring to what you had to say on January 10th, 2007…

SEN. OBAMA: Right.

MR. BROKAW: …and repeated several times. Let’s listen to you now and your immediate reaction to the idea of the surge back in the beginning of 2007.

SEN. OBAMA: I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there; in fact, I think it’ll do the reverse.

MR. BROKAW: We’re not talking about angels on the head of a pin here, but let me ask you a direct question.

SEN. OBAMA: All right.

MR. BROKAW: Do you believe that President Maliki would be in a position to more or less endorse your timetable of getting troops out within 16 months if it had not been for the surge? (continue reading post »)

In her latest column, Pittsburgh Tribune Review columnist Salena Zito suggests that Pennsylvania could present a challenge for ‘citizen of the world’ Obama. I find Ms. Zito’s scenarios entirely plausible.

The key for McCain is to win over Clinton Democrats from the primary as well as to maximize turnout among Republicans and pro-McCain coalitions.

He needs geographical voting blocs to go his way, too. He must win the traditionally conservative “T” across the top of the state and down the center but he also must “corner” Obama, meaning a four-corner strategy of wins in Erie (the northwest), Allegheny, Washington and Westmoreland counties (the southwest), Scranton, Lackawanna, Luzerne and Wilkes-Barre (the northeast) and Bucks County (the southeast).

Let’s remember how badly Obama performed with blue collar workers. Despite all his “Citizen of the World” talk, Sen. Obama still doesn’t connect with blue collar workers. Remember state after state where Hillary pummeled Obama with blue collar workers. That wasn’t just a trend. That wasn’t an accident.

It was state after state telling Sen. Obama that they didn’t like his statement about them clinging to their guns and their religion because of their poverty. (continue reading post »)

We’ve all heard about Nancy Pelosi’s insistence that bills containing provisions for increasing oil production wouldn’t see the light of day. I’ve known all along that Pelosi doesn’t have final say on that if enough legislators in the House sign a discharge petition. As Michael Franc writes, it’s time to put additional pressure on pro-drilling Democrats. It’s time for an in-your-face approach to undercut Ms. Pelosi’s authority.

But not only has Pelosi decreed that legislative proposals to allow for the production of American energy, whether it’s oil and natural gas offshore or in Alaska, new nuclear plants, oil shale from Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming, or promising coal-to-liquid technology, won’t see the light of day on the House floor. She has even fallen into the trap of allowing this to become a test of her leadership. Senior House Democrats understand this and will be reluctant to challenge her. The New York Times reported that Pelosi informed her leadership team that “a decision to relent on the drilling ban would amount to capitulation to Republicans and the White House, and that she was having none of it.” Pelosi, the Times added, “can prevent a vote on expanded drilling from reaching the floor.”

Oh, really? A procedural device is available to House minorities when the majority locks up popular legislation that could command a majority if given a chance on the House floor. It’s called a discharge petition.

Now that we’ve identified the tool to undercut Ms. Pelosi, we need to knwo if it’s possible to get enough representatives to sign onto a discharge petition. Thus far the answer is no, though that’s likely to change if we turn the spotlight on pro-energy Democrats: (continue reading post »)

Liberal in the Land of Conservatives posted about a poll that supposedly shows a majority of people “isn’t buying the arguments” being made by President Bush and others pushing for opening the OCS and ANWR. here’s the press release accompanying the poll results:

To: NATIONAL EDITORS

Contact: Kathy Westra, The Wilderness Society, +1-202-429-2642, kathy_westra@tws.org; or Cindy Shogan, Alaska Wilderness League, +1-202-544-5205, cindy@alaskawild.org

Majority Says New Drilling Would Enrich Oil Companies Rather than Benefit Consumers, and 76 Percent Support New Technology Development Over Drilling

WASHINGTON, July 24 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The American public is not buying the arguments of President Bush and the oil industry that new drilling will lower gas prices, a new poll finds. Despite a well-funded campaign to convince lawmakers to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska and the offshore waters of the Outer Continental Shelf to drilling, and to allow new oil shale projects in the Rocky Mountain West, a majority (54%) of Americans do not see more drilling as a solution to high gas prices. Instead, the public overwhelmingly believes (76% to 19%) that policymakers should focus on investing in new energy technologies including renewable fuels and more efficient vehicles rather than expanding exploration and drilling for more oil. These findings were reported in a national poll conducted over the past week by Belden Russonello and Stewart, and released today. (continue reading post »)

Yes, you read that headline right. What I haven’t told you is that the Reid I’m refering to is the AP’s Robert H. Reid. Surely, you didn’t think I was talking about Sen. Reid. Anyways, here’s what Robert Reid is reporting:

The United States is now winning the war that two years ago seemed lost.

Limited, sometimes sharp fighting and periodic terrorist bombings in Iraq are likely to continue, possibly for years. But the Iraqi government and the U.S. now are able to shift focus from mainly combat to mainly building the fragile beginnings of peace, a transition that many found almost unthinkable as recently as one year ago.

Despite the occasional bursts of violence, Iraq has reached the point where the insurgents, who once controlled whole cities, no longer have the clout to threaten the viability of the central government. (continue reading post »)

If you read between the lines, Michael Barone’s latest column paints a gloomy picture for Democrats. Here’s the opening paragraph of Mr. Barone’s column:

Sometimes public opinion doesn’t flow smoothly; it shifts sharply when a tipping point is reached. Case in point: gas prices. $3 a gallon gas didn’t change anybody’s mind about energy issues. $4 a gallon gas did. Evidently, the experience of paying more than $50 for a tankful gets people thinking we should stop worrying so much about global warming and the environmental dangers of oil wells on the outer continental shelf and in Alaska. Drill now! Nuke the caribou!

Though he closes the paragraph in dramatic tone, Mr. Barone is still onto something. He isn’t advocating the nuking of caribou. Instead, he’s pointing out that the American public won’t tolerate the environutters’ collaboration with Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi in locking up our energy supplies. The environutters’ successful lobbying against drilling in ANWR and on the OCS will cost Democrats this election. King even came up with a great slogan to capitalize on the Democrats’ alliance with the environutters: (continue reading post »)