Part 2: Will President Obama be blamed for escalating gas prices as was Bush?

Part 2: Restricted drilling/Environmental and energy policies drive up price of oil

Read Part I: Oil in demand as a world commodity/U.S. in competition

President Obama’s environmental and energy policies are key reasons why gas prices are constantly heading higher, and not the result of corporate greed and not enough government intervention as environmentalists are want to say, dead set as they are against new refineries, the exploration of oil in the Gulf of Mexico and parts Alaska, and offshore drilling. 

For most presidents there is a direct relationship to the price of gasoline and their re-election. It remains to be seen whether the American people will blame Obama in November as voters have in the past elections  — Bush’s head was demanded on a platter — when and if gas prices do reach $4.60 and even $5.00 a gallon here in Chicagoland.

So far, President Obama has been able to skirt blame by telling the American people that outside forces beyond his control are causing gas prices to escalate. 

In a Tribune article on Feb. 24, "Obama fends off GOP on high gas prices," Obama admits, "There is no silver bullet; there never has been." Obama then goes on to inform the crowd at the University of Miami that his Republican opponents will likely renew proposals for more drilling with a three-step plan, each one of them involving more drilling. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-goes-on-offense-over-gas-prices-20120223,0,366639.story

If this nation would take advantage of its huge oil reserves, it could keep more of its domestic oil here at home to lessen its dependency on oil from unstable countries where unrest threatens a continuous supply of oil or where the amount of oil released on the world market can be manipulated to keep prices high at the whim of oil producing countries.  

There is no shortage of oil in the U.S. There are documented reserves of 1.79 trillion barrels available in North America. This is more than most likely will ever flow through the Strat of Hormuz and twice the oil of all OPEC nations combined.  That’s enough to fill the tank of every passenger car in the United States for the next 30 years! http://www.akdart.com/oil4.html 

An important oil fact to keep in mind is that oil is not a fossil fuel. Oil is abiotic, not the product of long decayed biological matter.  As such oil replenishes from sources within the mantle of the earth.  

Since the 1970's there has been a political battle over drilling for oil. Those who opposed drilling were apt to say each time the issue was addressed that drilling would not solve the immediate problem and restricted drilling access continued. 

It does take time for oil drilling to reap its rewards, but it is now 2012 and President Obama is still poking fun at Republicans for proposals that call for more drilling. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-goes-on-offense-over-gas-prices-20120223,0,366639.story

As a substitute for oil, President Obama suggested on Feb. 23 that this nation could use pond scum (algae) as a way of cutting dependence on oil by 17 percent. Obama did not say when he expected algae-based fuel to reach that level. 

Given the federal government's dodgy track record in respect to developing alternative vehicle fuels, any bets as to the future of algae as an alternate fuel to replace oil? Remember Ethanol?  

Converting algae to gas is still in its early stages of development. Nevertheless, the Department of Energy (DOE) is currently spending about $85 million on 30 research projects to develop algae bio fuel as a substitute to oil. Furthermore, Obama has committed another $14 million to the cause.  http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/obama-use-algae-substitute-oil/391536 

Given that this nation is awash in oil (besides the opposition to drill, drill, drill) blame can also be placed on the Obama administration's EPA as to why the  American people are grappling with escalating gasoline prices.   

Without a doubt the crown jewel of the Obama administration was realized on December 7, 2009 through a mandate issued by its EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). At that time CO2 was declared a dangerous pollutant (even though necessary for plant life) for the express purpose of being able to brand CO2 as a pollutant and the main agent of man-made Global Warming.  By Obama's EPA standards, all human and animals are now walking toxic pollutants because CO2 is exhaled.   blog.heritage.org/…/epa-formally-declares-co2-a-dangerous-pollutan….

Following are thoughts about man-made Global Warming, which has no scientific basis, and which more and more Americans are finally waking to realize is a hoax perpetrated on a gullible public, starting with the hysterical rantings of Al Gore about the earth's impending demise.   

Simply put, the global warming and climate change theory that everyone is talking is a great big lie which is damaging our economy, costing jobs, closing energy plants and which common sense and scientific facts can disprove. The “man-caused” Global warming theory revolves around the concept that modern man’s use of fossil fuels (oil, gas, coal) for energy and transportation create great emissions of carbon dioxide which accumulate in the atmosphere, causing the earth’s temperature to rise dramatically and thereby jeopardizing life on earth so that in 25, 50 or 100 years all mankind will be endangered.

These same “experts” claim that in the last 150 – 100 years the temperature of the earth has risen only about 1 degree Fahrenheit – and yes, that is what the panic is about. However, the fact is the planet has is always in a state of climate change. The earth has been going through natural cycles of warming and cooling since it began – remember the ICE AGE we were all taught about?  Mankind’s power to affect the climate is almost nothing compared to the immense power that the ocean, the Sun and planetary forces have upon the earth.  Simply put, mankind couldn't’t change the climate if we wanted too — we simply don’t have that kind of power.  http://www.greatglobalwarming.com/  

Well worth a read is an article published Feb. 21 in the Wall Street Journal, “Concerned Scientists Reply on Global Warming,” in which the authors of a January 27 Wall Street Journal op-ed, “No Need to Panic about Global Warming,” are responding to their critics. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203646004577213244084429540.html?mod=djemEditorialPage_h 

Following the initial Jan. 17 Wall Street Journal letter "Fakegate" developed. Scientists ascribing to man-made Global Warming panicked, afraid as they were that the weight of damning evidence against man-made Global Warming would collapse Global Warming Alarmism. 

One scientist/activist, Peter Gleick, committed a despicable act in which he committed fraud and identity theft, lying and stealing his way into possession of Chicago's The Heartland Institute internal documents, and then sending the media a forged document which contained fictitious, over-the-top accusations with the intent to embarrass The Heartland Institute and its president, Joe Bast. http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2012/02/24/climate-cha... 

In response to a surprising editorial published in the Chicago Tribune on February 25 about Fakegate, Heartland's President Joe Bast wrote the following (Although not widely circulated, I did obtain permission from Joe Bast to quote his response.): www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-climate-20120225,0,3701177.story 

This may be the first and only positive editorial the Chicago Tribune has run about us in the past 20 years. It's not entirely right -- the writer leaves no question but that they believe global warming is "dangerous," and doesn't mention the conspirators such as Desmogblog, etc., who shamelessly continue to post and cite the stolen forged documents.  

Chicago-based Heartland has for years been at the forefront of the debate about man-made Global Warming as a skeptic, in conjunction and in agreement with renowned scientists world-wide, which proves, as the saying goes, that a prophet is seldom appreciated in his home territory. http://heartland.org/

It is apparent that Global Warming promoters will stop at nothing to discredit Global Warming skeptics for their livelihood depends on it.

How much time will pass before Global Warming is relegated to the dust bin of history where it rightly belongs.? It can't arrive too soon!

Part three:  Wind and Solar lose favor world-wide/What about Nuclear Power?