Friends -

It is time to give President Obama credit for keeping a commitment.

This is, for this President, a pretty remarkable achievement.  I am not blaming him for the fact that the rise of the oceans has not slowed or that the planet has not begun to heal; only his true believers, i.e., the mainstream media, believed all that campaign rhetoric anyway.  On a more mundane level, President Obama promised to reduce the deficit in half by the end of this term; instead he has added more than $1 trillion to the nation’s debt each year he has been in office.  His Administration projected passing his $800 billion plus stimulus plan would keep unemployment below 8 percent; unemployment went above 8 percent in February of his first year and has yet to return.  The President promised repeatedly to change the tone in Washington and to unite Democrats and Republicans; he did succeed in convincing the House recently to unanimously reject his budget, but I don’t think that is what he meant.  The President campaigned against Hillary Clinton’s individual mandate and John McCain’s tax increases on certain health plans, and included both in Obamacare.  That would be the same Obamacare he promised would result in our premiums being reduced by $2,500.  He has promised every year in office to offer his own plan to reform entitlement programs, but a curious nation still waits.

Perhaps we should only give the President partial credit, since the commitment he has kept was not one he personally made.  His Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, infamously said even before the election in 2008, “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”  I should mention, since the President never fails to, that Secretary Chu is a Nobel Prize winner.  Sounds like Chu is getting advice from Al Gore, yet another Nobel Prize winner.  The President, who also has his own Nobel Prize, and Secretary Chu have done a remarkable job.  National average gasoline prices doubled since he took office, and, even more impressively, in 2011, the average annual prices of a barrel of oil and a gallon of gas were higher than at any time in the last 150 years.  As President Bush might say, “heck of a job.”

Even though then-Senator Obama was quick to blame President Bush for rising gasoline prices, he now complains current prices are not his fault.  For once, I think the President is being too modest, for clearly his actions have contributed to rising prices, reduced availability of domestically produced energy, and continued dependence on foreign countries.  I truly believe in an all of the above strategy, including oil and gas, nuclear power, wind and solar power, conservation, biofuels, other renewables, and clean coal, that leads to more affordable energy, an expanding manufacturing base, and an improved standard of living, whereas the President’s strategy seems to be based on a more European worldview of less consumption, higher energy prices, and more government regulation of our lives.  Trade in your SUV’s and suburban homes, and prepare to bathe less frequently!

The President has clearly been reading the polls and has promised in an election year to focus on the economy, make the creation of jobs his top priority, and work to reduce energy prices.  What can President Obama do to show this is not mere campaign rhetoric that will be quickly forgotten after the election?

First, the President should show through his actions that he understands the law of supply and demand.  While President Obama likes to take credit for higher domestic oil production, he fails to disclose these levels are based on decisions made before he took office and that much of this activity is taking place on private lands.  To put it simply, he was against domestic production before he was for it.  Despite a recent boost in activity, the average number of deep-water drilling permits approved monthly is down nearly 30% from the historical norm before the BP spill.  In 2011, lease sales for onshore drilling on federal lands reached an all-time low, since 1984, when discounting for leases sold in previous years.  Opening new fields means increased supply which means lower prices.  Certainly, our Ivy League educated President understands the importance of opening new fields, e.g., ANWR, and increasing supply; if not, he should demand a refund from Columbia for any tuition he paid towards economics courses.

Second, the Administration should stop sending a muddled message on fracking and instead provide predictability to companies making expensive multi-year investments that are opening up shale plays across the country and transforming the marketplace for natural gas.  This industry already supports more than 600,000 jobs, has helped reduce domestic natural gas prices by more than 75%, and caused companies to start the process of building multi-billion dollar terminals to export and not just import liquefied natural gas.  Falling natural gas prices mean more than a cheaper and cleaner heating and transportation fuel; natural gas is an important feedstock, and lower prices have already helped convince companies to invest billions of dollars and to create thousands of manufacturing jobs in America.

Third, President Obama should instruct his Cabinet to cease and desist all regulatory actions undermining safe, affordable domestic energy production.  For example, clearly suspending Tier 3 gasoline standards that are expected to increase gasoline prices by as much as 25 cents a gallon.

Fourth, President Obama should end the EPA’s hostile stance on domestically abundant clean coal energy.  Then-Senator Obama described flawed cap and trade proposals that would “bankrupt” anyone wanting to open a coal plant.  China now produces more than three times as much coal as we do, and is the world’s largest importer.  Shutting down coal plants in America, while China continues to burn every pound of coal it can get its hands on, does not reduce global emissions; it simply makes our electricity more expensive.

Fifth, the President should reverse his decision on the Keystone XL pipeline, linking our Gulf Coast refineries to production facilities in Canada and the booming Bakken oil fields of Montana and North Dakota.  This decision would create 20,000 construction jobs and 100,000 indirect jobs, and reassure our friends to the north that their future lies with us and not China.  After facing intense criticism, the President did relent and approve the portion of the pipeline from Cushing, Oklahoma to Texas.  He was against the pipeline, before he was for it.  This is certainly a step in the right direction, but someone needs to buy the President a map to show him how far Oklahoma is from Canada.  Perhaps he should request Columbia also refund his tuition paid towards any geography courses.

Sixth, President Obama should stop singling out one industry for tax increases in favor of crony capitalism that rewards countless Solyndras, and should instead advocate for a flatter tax code with lower rates and no loopholes.  Let the different energy companies compete in the marketplace.  He must understand higher taxes mean higher prices for American consumers.

Many Republicans criticize the President for his incompetence on rising energy prices, but I believe this to be unfair.  I think the President’s radical environmental ideology, not his Administration’s incompetence, is to blame for his failure to adopt a comprehensive energy policy that makes the rational choices that would lower energy prices.

-Bobby

Respectful columnist George Will has also made a strong case for Jindal:

Here are two excellent choices:

***

Louisiana’s Gov. Bobby Jindal, 40, was a 20-year-old congressional staffer when he authored a substantial report on reforming Medicare financing. At 24, he became head of Louisiana’s Department of Health and Hospitals, with 12,000 employees and 40 percent of the state budget. Back in Washington at 26, he was executive director of the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare. In 1999, he became president of Louisiana’s state university system, which has 80,000 students. In 2001, he served as an assistant secretary of health and human services. He became governor after three years in Congress.

Even 2008 standard bearer Sen. John McCain agrees that Jindal is an excellent choice!  And he may be on the verge of a huge educational reform that in effect establishes a limited state-wide voucher system:

Gov. Bobby Jindal’s education reform agenda could be coming to a head in the Louisiana State Senate this week where the vote is expected to be close on some key bills. Jindal has proposed converting the New Orleans voucher program into a statewide option, expand the number of charter schools, and interlink tenure with student and teacher performance. The governor has encountered stiff opposition from the state’s two teachers unions—the Louisiana Association of Educators and the Louisiana Federation of Teachers. Jindal is also now the target of a recall effort initiated by individual teachers whom the unions have not yet formally embraced.

Here are some details of the Orleans Parish voucher plan passed in 2008:

Under the legislation enacted in 2008, the Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence (SSEE) program provides low-income families in Orleans Parish with the option to select a public or private school. Over 1,800 students in grades K-6 have received scholarships in the current 2011-2012 school year.

To be eligible, household income cannot exceed 250 percent of the federal poverty guidelines, which would be $55,875 for a family of four in 2011. Moreover, the student must have attended an “F” rated public school the previous year, or be entering kindergarten. The Louisiana Department of Education has published a list of the schools participating in the Orleans Parish program.

This article from the Alexandria Town Talk is breath-taking.

Gov. Bobby Jindal triumphed Thursday in his bid to embark on a historic overhaul of public education in Louisiana, receiving final House passage of his centerpiece proposals.

In a state where student performance lags that of the nation, the complex bills will make it harder for teachers to gain tenure while establishing a statewide voucher program for private school tuition and multiplying the ways to establish charter schools. The bills also lessen local school board authority in hiring and firing decisions, expand online schools and restructure public financing of education.

***

Vouchers will be available to at most an estimated 2,000 new students to attend private schools with public tax dollars in the fall. New charter schools will take at least a year to get through the application and approval process. And the earliest a teacher can lose tenure under the new evaluation system is spring 2014.

Of course, the usual stuff from the other side:

“I have no doubt that there’s going to be a courtroom in the future for both bills,” Louisiana Federation of Teachers President Steve Monaghan said in an interview Thursday.

***

Opponents say the governor’s initiatives will siphon dollars from public schools and leave some of the neediest students in schools with fewer dollars to educate them. They complain private and parochial schools won’t be held to the same accountability standards as public schools even though they’ll get public funding. They criticized the record speed at which the bills were pushed through a session that doesn’t end until June. And they accused Jindal of advancing the ideas to boost his conservative credentials nationally.

***

Rep. Patricia Smith, D-Baton Rouge, said the voucher proposal and “pop-up” charter schools will take enough dollars away from traditional public schools that they will bankrupt school systems.

“This is a national agenda to do away with public education,” said Rep. Rogers Pope, R-Denham Springs, a retired school superintendent from Livingston Parish.

Let me say this as kindly as I can:  We’ve tried it your way for many years.  We have declining test scores, metal detectors, and psychobabble for history.  School choice is the wave of the future.  Bobby Jindal ought to be Vice President Biden’s worst nightmare.  He might even let Hillary have the job to avoid debating Gov. Jindal.  That debate will be like one of those one-sided boxing matches called for mercy!  Bobby Jindal should be the Vice President of whoever is nominated.

Well, maybe in B.C.E. it was a good deed but not today:  There are two wonderful articles suggesting that you give the kids some extra candy but NOT ONE CENT for UNICEF this or any Halloween.  You will be supporting anti-Israel, anti-capitalism and pro globalism – here some highlights:

From Yid with Lid:

The kids walking around with the Orange boxes don’t know about UNICEF’s  anti-Israel policy and support of dictators and terrorists. They are just doing the bidding of the politically correct educators who blindly push anything  that has the UN’s name attached to it. So instead of making a lame excuse like you don’t have change, just nicely explain to the kids why you aren’t giving them money. Tell them that UNICEF money helps terrorist groups. Then give the kid an extra handful of Reese’s.

If your kid’s school is handing out those orange boxes why not call the school and explain to them what UNICEF is really about…I did.

While the children and the orange box are very cute, remember a penny for UNICEF is a penny for terrorism, tyranny, and extremism.

Well said!  From the article at PJ (The Rosett Report) that cites Yid with Lid:

Then there are such items as UNICEF’s solicitation of funds in 2009 via an Iranian bank, Bank Melli, which is blacklisted by the U.S. Treasury for its role in Iran’s proliferation rackets. UNICEF in that case was raising money for aid to Gaza, which is controlled by the Iranian-backed terrorists of Hamas. One might suppose there are better ways to help children than to funnel money to a terrorist-controlled enclave via a proliferation-prone Iranian bank. Apparently, UNICEF didn’t see it that way.

How about some terrorism in your orange box!  If you click on the Iranian (that’s right:  IRANIAN) site, you’ll see the UNICEF collecting for Hamas-controlled Gaza, BTW that bank is illegal to give money to as Rosett warns:

Have a look at the web site of their Iran office, which has been soliciting donations for use in terror-sponsoring Iran and for relief for terrorist-controlled Gaza through an Iranian state-owned bank, Bank Melli. (Caveat: If you live in America, Australia or a country in the European Union, it is illegal to donate to the account listed on the UNICEF site).

Finally my two cents:  UNICEF is a UN agency and thus suspect to start with.  If you are a believer in Christ, you should give in such a way as to glorify Christ in your giving.  There are great needs – here‘s what my denomination is doing about the Horn of Africa.  Finally, some original research:

Here’s propaganda about CEDAW for teens printed in UNICEF!  At least they are truthful about the effects on sovereignty (Read this for more on CEDAW):

Articles 17-22 of CEDAW
set up a committee of international
experts called
the CEDAW Committee
(or the Committee on the
Elimination of Discrimination
against Women). The CEDAW
Committee monitors whether
governments that ratified
CEDAW are doing enough to
end discrimination against girls
and women.

There’s more – UNICEF supports the UN Child Treaty, too  (Prior blog posts on that here):

The rights of all children are laid out in
more detail in the Convention on the Rights
of the Child (CRC). The CRC says these
rights apply equally to all girls and boys.
For example, all girls and boys have the
right to food and health care, the right to
go to school and the right to be protected
from violence and abuse. All girls and boys
also have the right to say what they think
should happen when adults are making
decisions that affect them, and to have
their opinions taken into account. You can
read the CRC at http://www.unicef.org/
rightsite/484_540.htm

Finally, my favorite issue:  ICLEI and Agenda 21.  Here’s a document (use it only when you need to sleep soundly but may cause globalist nightmares!) showing how UNICEF plans to implement Agenda 21.  (It’ll cost you!)  Here’s the abstract:

The UN Conference on Environment and Development, known as the Earth Summit, was the largest meeting of world leaders in history. It built upon the achievements of the World Summit for Children, supported the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, fully integrated UNICEF strategies and programming approaches into an environmental and developmental action plan for the future, and strengthened the human-centered, poverty-alleviating approach to sustainable development adopted by UNICEF and other agencies. This guide to UNICEF issues in the Earth Summit’s blueprint for development and environment into the 21st century is comprised of sections on the Earth Summit and children, children and the Rio Declaration, children and Agenda 21, children and youth in sustainable development, global action for women toward sustainable and equitable development, protecting and promoting human health, the protection of freshwater resources, combating poverty, demographic dynamics and sustainability, strengthening the role of nongovernmental organizations as partners for sustainable development, financial resources and mechanisms, and promoting education, public awareness and training.

Need more?  Take Yid with Lid’s advice:  Give the kids with the orange boxes extra candy and just say:  We don’t give to that.

Here are the results from NOLA.com.  (A great place for Saints news, too!)

Let me be one of the first to congratulate Governor Jindal.  He has been instrumental in getting rid of the HueyLong era in Louisiana politics.  This second and final term will be a consolidation of good practices started in his first term (unless he is asked to be the GOP running mate!) and will give the state to whoever comes next!  Louisiana will be and is better off.

Go Ron Paul, Gary Johnson and other liberty candidates!  Always trust in Jesus as Savior and Lord!  Here‘s how to do it if you are interested!  (Here’s two reasons why – go to heaven and not to go to hell!)

In that light, I urge liberty activists to go the weekend of Feb 25 to see The Grace Card.  For grace is an essential part of the liberty of man under Christ.  This site talks about helps that churches and pastors can get based on this movie.  For the trailer and other information about The Grace Card, go here.  For those liberty activists who want to know more about true FREEDOM in Christ, go here!

The Sun (in the UK) reports dramatically:  Ban the bigots from school

The Education Secretary for a Conservative government (yes I know it’s a coalition!) will set up “special teams” to “monitor groups setting up free schools” to protect the children from “brainwashing” by extreme groups.  This is chilling:

Education Secretary Michael Gove unveiled the move amid fears of Muslim jihadists hijacking learning and Christian extremists teaching creationism.

I suppose Ken Ham will be banned from the UK!  The Sun apparently compares creationism with Islamic terrorism. Here is two excerpts from the BBC transcript:

Well to my mind, you cannot have a school which teaches creationism. And one thing that we will make absolutely clear is that you cannot have schools which are set up, which teach people things which are clearly at variance with what we know to be scientific fact. *  *  * If those [religiously fundamentalist] schools are properly regulated and inspected, then we can ensure that anyone who teaches in a way which undermines our democratic values can be brought to public light, challenged, and, if necessary, closed down.

This is a TORY government?  Another reason why I cheer for the UKIP.

You fellow followers of Christ don’t think the West will someday condone persecution?  Jesus Christ in the Olivet Dialogue (Matthew 24) says so!

“Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake.” (KJV – my emphasis)

(If you want to know more about Jesus Christ and salvation, go here.  I wouldn’t wait; Jesus is coming again!)

The previous Labour regime accused the Tories of creeping creationism if schools are decentralized.  See the Times of London for November 21, 2009, where Labour Education Secretary Ed Balls said exactly that.

But liberty means the right to teach whatever you want.  I agree there should be standards in areas like science; evolution should be taught (along with its problems) as well as creationism.  The Bible says God created the world in six literal days.  If He wants to do that in billions of years as the scientists count time that is His prerogative.  But there are serious questions arising (thanks to Answers in Genesis):

What about animals eating other animals before the Fall of Man?

Was there death before sin?

If the answer to both questions are no, then the billions of years theory is not viable.  I can say I am not sure.  It is difficult but not impossible to reconcile science and the Bible.  But the issue here is liberty.

It is wrong for the British government to compare creationism with terrorism.  I know of not one violent act associated with creationism.  This is why we need liberty.  Remember, this is a Tory government in the UK.

Two recent YouGov polls have put UKIP on 5 per cent including one which, hilariously, put them above the Liberal Democrats in the 18-24-year-olds age group.

The young know that they have decades to live (Lord willing) and they know the policies of the past and present will be foisted on them – with debt and statism.  They also know that a strong, sovereign UK is critical to their well-being.  It was true that many young adults flocked to Cong. Paul’s campaign in 2007 and 2008 as well.

There was a scholarly article that suggests that the UKIP may push the BNP into oblivion.  That would be great if the party did nothing else.  Here’s the article and a highlight:

So what does all this mean [that the UKIP is more acceptable than the BNP] for the Conservatives? It suggests UKIP has now emerged as a potent competitor on two very different fronts. On the one hand, UKIP is tapping into widespread Conservative scepticism about Europe to win over large numbers of Tory voters at European Parliament elections. But in Westminster elections, UKIP is also attracting a very different following. The party is becoming an outlet for the frustrations of voters who are angry about rising immigration, anxious over the presence of ‘threatening’ Muslim communities, and cynical about mainstream politics, but repelled by the BNP’s reputation for racism and fascism.

These polls also show that the UKIP can be a viable party.  I believe that the eurosceptic MPs in the Tory Party need to ask the question:  Can I do more in or out of the Conservative Party?  I suggest OUT is the answer.  If 20 or 30 MPs defected in masse to the UKIP, they could do more to bring hope and liberty to the UK (and Europe) than all the bills and amendments introduced and defeated in the Commons.  The ConservativeHome article concludes:

The established parties ignore this challenge at the peril – in recent years populist right wing parties have pulled off dramatic victories across Europe, dramatically altering the political landscape in longstanding bastions of moderation such as the Netherlands and Sweden. One day soon, UKIP might pull off the same trick here.

Liberty is on the march because it comes from God.  The Bible says “…proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.”  Lev. 25:10 (KJV).  The Declaration of Independence proclaims that “…all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”  Jesus brings liberty to those who trust in Him.  (See this website for more details on how to know God personally.)

There is a recent case [Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Counsel, 530 U.S. 363 (2000)] where the Court discusses a Massachusetts law that forbad state agencies from dealing with the government of Myanmar (Burma).  The Court held that this law was unconstitutional for several reasons, one of which was a conflict with an Act of Congress but another reason was that “…the state Act is at odds with the President’s intended authority to speak for the United States among the world’s nations…”

The Court held further that various acts of Congress indicated clearly the national government would speak as one on the issue of relations with Myanmar.  The state law hindered the President’s actions and threatened the US with adverse rulings by the EU and WTO (Of course I dissent from any hint that I recognize the WTO or the EU has ANY power to govern OUR actions.) and thus was also invalid.

I agree the Crosby case did not directly say that states could not hold foreign policy positions however, a prior case did:  Zschernig v. Miller, 389 U.S. 429 (1968).

Zschernig arose from an otherwise admirable statute that prohibited a heir from taking an intestate’s (one who died without a valid will) share if that heir was a resident of an Eastern European satellite nation of the former (Praise God!) Soviet Union.  The Supreme Court does not ordinarily take state probate cases but the Zschernigs, residents of former (Thank God!) East Germany, made a pure constitutional claim that the Oregon law involved the state in foreign policy determinations.  Here’s what the Court concluded:

“The present Oregon law is not as gross an intrusion in the federal domain as those others might be. Yet, as we have said, it has a direct impact upon foreign relations, and may well adversely affect the power of the central government to deal with those problems.”

“The Oregon law does, indeed, illustrate the dangers which are involved if each State, speaking through its probate courts, is permitted to establish its own foreign policy.”

389 U.S. 429, 441 (1968)

If the state probate code or the probate courts cannot establish its own foreign policy, local governments cannot join a organization that has foreign policy goals.  The fact that our present administration agrees with ICLEI today does not mean a future one might disagree tomorrow.  Such an enlightened administration does not need local governments attempting to undermine it to the cheers of globalists in other nations.  We speak with one voice abroad (or we should!) and the Attorney General needs to rule that no Virginia municipality can legally assist ICLEI in its foreign policy goals.  Hence they must withdraw.  I call on liberty activists throughout the Commonwealth to urge those cities in the thrall of ICLEI to follow the lead of Carroll County MD and simply get out of ICLEI and to urge their attorney general to make such a ruling if your state allows it.  All it takes is one request.  One liberty activist.  One brave legislator.  The globalists have taken a huge hit over a community of 150,000 residents in a blue state withdrawing from ICLEI.

On Jan. 12, the new, five-member board unanimously voted to terminate its membership with the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, an organization that provides technical consulting, training and information services to support local government in the implementation of sustainable development at the local level.

The Commissioners got the message.  One of them, Doug Howard, was quoted as saying that ICLEI was calling for anti-free market methods to sustain the environment (you don’t say?  An UN-blessed organization being anti- free market?  Imagine that!)  Commissioner Richard Rothschild agreed and said that ICLEI’s ideas were a marriage of “environmentalism and socialism”.  I think you got it, Commissioners Howard and Rothschild!

Rothschild continues:

“I care about our environment,” Rothschild said. “But I believe the last great hope to save our environment rests in capitalism and not big government.

“Capitalism breeds the kind of creativity and ingenuity which leads to cost-effective solutions,” he said.

Can we borrow Commissioner Rothschild for a year of two?  He’s right.

The county saved between $1600 and $1800 yearly by leaving ICLEI.  They also abolished a Sustainability Coordinator and a local Sustainability Committee.  DOUBLE RAH!  The report did not state that cost to taxpayers.  My only regret is that the commissioners did not agree with my thesis that ICLEI is an illegal, unconstitutional foreign policy by local governments.  My question is:  Who is the unsung hero here?  Some Tea Party or patriot activist may have privately suggested it to his or her commissioner and it went from there.

You can be the unsung hero in your community!  Here’s the website for the commissioners if anyone wants to thank them for their patriotic and money-saving act.  May it spread throughout the Commonwealth and nation!

I have blogged elsewhere that Romney will be out of the race due to his Obamacare type health plan in his home state and thus this is good news for Paul.  But Paul needs to decide and come out swinging, so to speak, as it appears former Speaker Newt Gingrich is running (Gingrich is actually right now a legal resident of our own Commonwealth of Virginia but will run from Georgia, his former home state.  He is a native of Pennsylvania.) and Michele Bachmann got a mostly warm welcome in Iowa as the alternative to Sarah Palin.  People may be starting to make decisions and this will hurt Paul in key states.  I strongly suggest that the RP meetup groups immediately re-form in Iowa, NH and SC for immediate action!