Townhall.com The Blogspot for Political, Conservative and Republican Blogs and Bloggers

            If Congressional Republicans allow Nancy Pelosi and her Democrats to skirt responsibility for rising gas prices, they will once again earn the time-honored mantle of “The Stupid Party.”  Two years ago this week, Nancy Pelosi – as part of a concerted campaign of opportunistic mendacity – said she and her party had a “commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices.”   Their "plan" conveniently came to fruition after Democrats voted against a comprehensive energy plan that would increase fuel production and open up untapped oil reserves.

            Democrats won control of Congress partly because of such promises.  The day she took over as speaker, the average price of a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline was $2.33.  Today, it’s $3.60.  This $1.27 “Pelosi Premium” is the single most pernicious factor behind the struggling economy in general and middle class anxiety.  Recent polls demonstrate rising gas prices are the most important economic issue facing Americans today.  And here’s the thing: it’s all their fault.

            The spiraling cost of energy in the United States today is not one of those things that is nobody’s fault, nor is it a matter of shared responsibility.  The fault is absolutely, completely at the doorstep of the Democrat Party.  Their Kool-Aid-cult attachment to environmental extremism, their ideological hostility to free markets and free trade, their barking threats of tax hikes on American energy production, their weak and indecisive foreign policy toward the Middle East, and their limousine-liberal NIMBY hypocrisy are not present on both sides of the aisle. 

            To date, the only thing Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats have tried to do on energy is raise taxes.  The tax hike they passed in the House not only targets American energy companies, it specifically exempts foreign oil companies.  So, foreign energy companies, many of them subsidized by regimes hostile to the United States, would enjoy a reverse subsidy benefit from the Democrat Congress.  Is that really their “commonsense plan”? 

            Nobody knows.  All we know, for sure, is what the plan is not.  The Democrats’ plan to lower gas prices cannot include opening up the billions of gallons of oil underneath the Gulf of Mexico or Alaska because… well, because the Democrats apparently care more about caribou, fish, and even the views from their vacation homes than energy independence.  There is enough accessible oil in the United States to fuel 60 million cars for 60 years, and the Democrats will not allow it to be drilled. 

            This week, truckers rallied in Washington, D.C. to protest the failure of Congress to do anything about gas prices.  They were mad; they should be.  They should be furious at the arrogant refusal of Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats to lift a finger to lower gas prices.  They won’t allow increased production, they won’t allow the creation of new nuclear power plants, they refuse to reform our ethanol subsidy programs, which are not only driving up the cost and driving down the efficiency of our gasoline, but are now helping to starve the third world.

            If we wanted to, we could lower the price of fuel in a month – by opening up our oil reserves to exploration, by encouraging the development of next-generation nuclear power plants, and by removing government mandated manipulation of the energy market.  But Democrats oppose all of these measures for reasons ranging from partisan cynicism to ideological fanaticism.  But they maintain they have a “commonsense plan.”  Well, what is it?

            Voters have a right to know what exactly Mrs. Pelosi’s “commonsense plan” entails.  Her number is 202-225-0100.  Call your Congressman and Senator, ask the Democrats what their plan is to reduce the price of gasoline.  If they don’t give you a straight answer, if they don’t renounce tax hikes, if they don’t support increased domestic production, and if they feed you some nonsense about “biofuels,” you’ll know all you’ll need to.

            Energy prices are bankrupting the middle class, and the Democrats in Congress are doing nothing about it.  The real question now is: will conservatives do something about that?

Today, His Excellency Bertie Ahern, the Prime Minister of Ireland spoke to a joint session of Congress. Ahern will be stepping down as Irish Premier; his legacy will be synonymous with the longest economic expansion in Irish history.  

Ireland’s recent economic success is thanks to a steadfast reliance on the free market.  In 1987 Ireland’s per capita income averaged about 63% of the United Kingdom’s.  From 1990-1995 their economy grew more than 5% per year and from 1996 to 2000 it exploded to more than 9% per year. 

Prior to the Irish economic boom, Ireland had a 13 year period of stagnation.  Ireland then took an aggressive course of slashing government expenditures, abolishing federal agencies, and cutting tax rates and regulations.  Much to this conservative’s delight, the government made strong pledges to abstain from deficit spending or inflate the currency, and they kept those promises!

This year, the Heritage Foundation ranked Ireland as having the worlds 3^rd freest economy (click here). In case you were wondering, the United States came in at 5^th place (click here), behind Australia, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Ireland.  According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Ireland has outperformed all industrialized economies over the past decade.

In a period of economic downturn, solutions are needed.  However those solutions should not be entrenched in big government ideas, but rather a return to more Laissez-Faire economic policies.

Legislative initiatives such as the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, which includes the Spending Limit Amendment to the Constitution and the Taxpayer Choice Act, are ways that will limit government involvement and encourage free enterprise. 

"Have you heard about that old Confederate junk she's selling in them stores she owns?" one man asks.

"What junk?"

"Perdue's stores sells those hats with Rebel flags and that Confederate junk."

"Perdue sells Confederate stuff?"

"Yeah caps and beer holders that say 'Old times will not be forgotten.'"...

"And Perdue wants to be our governor?"

"Well maybe in 1958, but not in 2008."

"Now, one of the things I'm proud of at the beginning of this campaign I said, this is a different time. This is an extraordinary time. We've got to run a different kind of campaign. So we're not going to go around doing negative ads. We're going to keep it positive. We're going to talk about the issues."

 ... I guess his unwillingness to tell MoveOn not to run the ad is just another example of how Obama embodies "real change?"

Mr. Day relayed to me one of the stories Americans should hear. It involves what happened to him after escaping from a North Vietnamese prison during the war. When he was recaptured, a Vietnamese captor broke his arm and said, "I told you I would make you a cripple."

The break was designed to shatter Mr. Day's will. He had survived in prison on the hope that one day he would return to the United States and be able to fly again. To kill that hope, the Vietnamese left part of a bone sticking out of his arm, and put him in a misshapen cast. This was done so that the arm would heal at "a goofy angle," as Mr. Day explained. Had it done so, he never would have flown again.

But it didn't heal that way because of John McCain. Risking severe punishment, Messrs. McCain and Day collected pieces of bamboo in the prison courtyard to use as a splint. Mr. McCain put Mr. Day on the floor of their cell and, using his foot, jerked the broken bone into place. Then, using strips from the bandage on his own wounded leg and the bamboo, he put Mr. Day's splint in place.

Years later, Air Force surgeons examined Mr. Day and complemented the treatment he'd gotten from his captors. Mr. Day corrected them. It was Dr. McCain who deserved the credit. Mr. Day went on to fly again.

Another story I heard over dinner with the Days involved Mr. McCain serving as one of the three chaplains for his fellow prisoners. At one point, after being shuttled among different prisons, Mr. Day had found himself as the most senior officer at the Hanoi Hilton. So he tapped Mr. McCain to help administer religious services to the other prisoners.

Today, Mr. Day, a very active 83, still vividly recalls Mr. McCain's sermons. "He remembered the Episcopal liturgy," Mr. Day says, "and sounded like a bona fide preacher." One of Mr. McCain's first sermons took as its text Luke 20:25 and Matthew 22:21, "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's." Mr. McCain said he and his fellow prisoners shouldn't ask God to free them, but to help them become the best people they could be while serving as POWs. It was Caesar who put them in prison and Caesar who would get them out. Their task was to act with honor.

Yesterday's Wright-ditching press conference was for Obama what the disastrous New Hampshire debate was for Bush 41. The occasion called for Obama to take control of the issue, however belatedly. He had to be in charge. He had to be authoritative.

Instead, voters got the same Obama who slouched through that infamous Pennsylvania debate in which those meanies Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos asked him questions that weren't to his liking. Once again, Obama seemed like a defeated man. Chuck Todd described him at yesterday's press conference as "somber." Obama referred to himself as "outraged," but nothing in his manner communicated "outrage." What he looked like was a man whose political future was in jeopardy, and yet still couldn't rally himself to show some passion.

"... It was OK for kids to believe in God, they said the pledge of allegiance each day and prayed before lunch.

"I don't think that any kid really got warped from that,' he said."

“(McCain's) grandstanding turned out to be right on a lot of things,” said Representative Jack Kingston, Republican of Georgia. “More troops in Iraq, earmarks, cutting out some of the spending.”

Many Republicans have now concluded that it is only Mr. McCain’s willingness to challenge recent Republican orthodoxy that has left him in a position to credibly contend for the White House, given public dissatisfaction with Republican leadership.

“If he hadn’t disagreed with us, he wouldn’t have a chance of being president,” said Representative Zach Wamp, Republican of Tennessee. “He is the one guy who can be the candidate for us this cycle.”

Isn't it ironic?   By being "difficult" McCain may have saved the Republican Party from absolute collapse this year. (Note:  I disagree with many of the things McCain has been "difficult" on.  For example, I oppose his campaign finance reform.  I also oppose drug re-importation, which he is now advocating).

This, of course, is good news for everyone who enjoys sticking it to the man from time to time. 

I, for one, can only hope that my contrarian outbursts will some day pay off for me as they apparently have for McCain ...

By the way, I have this theory that liking or disliking McCain has less to do with your political philosophy than it has to do with other factors, including whether or not you are a contrarian.  Without getting too much into it, I think micro-targeting could help identify McCain Republicans versus, say, Romney or Huckabee Republicans.  Here's one thought:  I bet there is a positive correlation between how much you like John McCain and the number of Johnny Cash cds you own.  Again, I have no proof of this.  But it is my hypothesis based on observation ...