Iranian freedom fight direct result of Bush policy

You have to believe that what is going on in Iran right now is a direct result of George W. Bush's foreign policy. It was Bush who almost single handedly helped the Iraqi people to form a democracy and stable nation.

While Iranians do not allow supporters of the new Iraqi democracy into this country for fear his people might see what it is like to be free, you know some do. You know there are free Iraqi's in Iran who show the Iranians what it is like to be able to speak freely, and protest without fear of the government killing you like what is going on in Iran today.

I remember when liberals were chanting how evil the war in Iraq was, and conservatives like me confirmed the idea that if a stable democracy can be formed in Iraq neighboring nations will see this and they themselves will want to be free (I wrote about this here way back on January 1, 2008).

Here is part of what I wrote:

In essence, whether you agree or not that the Iraq war was necessary in the first place, us keeping that nation stable has now become of vital importance to maintaining peace and stability in that region. And, if that region is secure, so
too will be our nations.

Thus, the ultimate strategy of the Bush foreign policy is create a stable Iraq. Once a stable Iraqi democracy is formed, people of neighboring nation like Iran and Syria will see what it is like to live in freedom, and will wish to have that for themselves.

And, thus, the ultimate goal is a free and stable Middle East.

After all the Bush hating, Bush lied rhetoric, one who has supporting the efforts in Iraq and our President W. all along can't help feeling some solace here.

True believers in the passage that there has only been one war in the history of the world between two democratic nations should also feel solace and hope for a democracy in Iran. And this is why our President should fully support the Iranian freedom fight.

The People have power to lower oil prices

I didn't plan on watching Bush's energy speech this morning on CNN, it just so happened to be all that was on while I was working out. What a better time to fill my mind with knowledge than when I'm working out.

This is the exact reason I have learned to work out alone, because I like to listen to talk radio and watch the news while I'm sweating, as opposed to a mind numbing TV channel such as MTV or some gossip show on one of the major networks. I'm boring this way.

As you regular Freadom Nation readers probably know by now, I do not always agree with George Bush. I voted for him twice, but that only means that I have the right to criticise him when I disagree. This morning, however, I so happened to agree with just about everything he said.

I also thought what he said would fit right into some of the major topics of this blog the past few weeks (see green conservatism) and a major discussion I had recently with a fellow intelligent blogger about how conservatism is not dead (see Ronald Reagan would be happy).

Bush talked about the fact that people are tired of high gas prices and that "people are calling on the government for a solution."

The people are calling on the government for a solution. This is a perfect example of why conservatism is not dead, because basically the people are calling for the government to undue the damage that it did.

This is a perfect example of why the government should not meddle in the marketplace. In 1982 Congressional legislation was passed banning drilling along American coastlines, during the 1990s Clinton vetoes a bill that would have allowed drilling in a small area in ANWR.

Likewise, fear of litigation and Federal red tape have made it nearly impossible to repair existing refineries or to build new ones. In fact, because of this, no new refineries have been build in over 30 years.

I'm not saying that all of this is the cause of gase being $4.00 a gallon, but all of these limit the ability of the U.S. to increase the domestic supply of oil, and if supply of oil were higher, the price of oil would go down. There's some economics 101 for you.

And that is exactly why George Bush has proposed that Congress get rid of its legislative ban on slant drilling. He said if Congress does so, he will remove the executive order banning slant drilling.

Like I said, this would basically undue what the government did to limit supply.

I completely understand why the government imposed the ban, but times have changed. Our demand for foreign oil from dictators we cant trust is bad for national security, and plus scientists have come up with new technology to make, as Bush said, offshore drilling "affordable and efficient."

In his speech the other day, John McCain said he now agrees with Bush on this call for off shore drilling. And he, as Bush, knows that this is not a permanent solution, and it is a solution that will not be felt for a few years, but it's something that must be done.

Estimates figure that slant drilling should be able to generate anywhere from 18-20 billion barrels of oil, or about 10 years worth. It would buy us 10 years to find an alternative fuel.

This will not make slant drilling legal, but it will give the states the option to decide whether slant drilling should be allowed or not.

In other words, Bush and McCain realize that people can be trusted to make the right decision on their own, and don't need to rely on the Fed to make those decision. This is a conservative philosophy here. Polls are currently shifting in this direction.

McCain is being risky agreeing with Bush on this, and some people may even say he is a flip flopper. But, to me, it proves once again that he is willing to negotiate and change his position when it is to the benefit of his country.

Obama disagrees about slant drilling. He thinks that the states should not have this right. He does not trust the people to make the right decision.

According to news.Yahoo.com, "Congressional Democrats were quick to reject the push for lifting the drilling moratorium, saying oil companies already have 68 million acres offshore waters under lease that are not being developed."

Perhaps democrats fail to see that our current oil producing capacity is taxed with the resources currently available to the oil market. Of course, this dem response makes sense, considering they are fosusing their efforts on decreasing oil demand, something far more complicated than increasing supply (a topic for a later post).

However, no republican has said this is a permanant or a quick solution. Yet doing nothing at this time may result in nothing more than higher gas prices. And, with polls shifting toward republicans on the matter, I think republicans hold the upper hand here.

As McCain is already doing, he will keep this on the forefront of voter's minds, and pressure democrats on this issue, to show the public that the democrats aren't interested in doing anything that will ultimately lower the price of gas.

McCain still agrees with Obama that drilling for oil should not be allowed in ANWR (Alaskan Wildlife Wilderness Reserve), even though, Bush said, "scientists have developed innovative technology to reach ANWR oil with no environmental impact."

It must be noted here that Congress had set aside a mere 2,000 achres of the 19 million ANWR achres for oil drilling, which is less than 1/10th of 1% of ANWR land. While Congress approved of this drilling in the 1990s, Clinton vetoed it.

There is estimated 10-12 billion barrells of oil in ANWR.

It is true that it would take 3-10 years to start doing this drilling, and only if respective states approve it. But it's better late than never that the government undue the damage it did to oil supply, the price of oil, and the impact of high oil prices on the market.

Thus, by removing government legislation, red-tape and the threat of litigation, the government will be getting out of the way of progress. And, in turn, this will allow the people to have the power to lower energy prices.

They will do this at the same time with environmentally safe technology, and while continuing the search for alternative energy forms -- something the government should provide financial incentives to do, as I writie about in a previous post about green conservatism, Eight step solution to energy crisis.

Bush also called for Congress to make it easier for refineries to be repaired, and easier to have new refineries approved. As is noted, all of the refineries that we currently have are running at full tilt and gas is still $4.00 a gallon.

We definitely need to be having this discussion.

Bad week for America

One of the things we like to do here at Freadom Nation is correct the media when it gets it wrong. And that's something I get the priveledge to do today.

How many times have you heard this: "This was a bad week for president Bush." It was a bad week because the supreme court ruled the detainees being held at Guatanamo Bay have a right to U.S. lawyers.

In essensce, these thugs who tried to kill our U.S. soldiers on foreign soil, men who hate the U.S. and all it stands for, have the same Constitutional rights as the men who captured them. How is this justice?

One Judge can set these people free so they can go right back to what they were doing up to the point they were sent to Guatanamo Bay: killing Americans.

Now these men have the right to go before a judge and ask to be set free. This has not happened yet, but it is possible now with this insane ruling.

Justice Kennedy and the other Justices who made this rulinig firmly believe, as does Obama, that the U.S. Courts should make decisions based on foreign law, while disregarding the Constitution.

So now, for the first time in U.S. history, prisoners of war get to be treated as "common criminals with Constitutional rights."

That is exactly why Obama applauded this ruling, and McCain said it was a bad decision. This shows the character of both candidates, and pegs only McCain as the only true patriot.

And this is exactly why the decision of who we want to be our leader is so important. Obama will nominate activist judges. McCain will nominate judges who will rule by the Constitution. If nothing else, this ruling is sure to fire up the base in support of McCain.

So, I want to take this opportunity to correct the media: This Supreme Court decision is not a set back for the Bush Administration. This did not result in a bad week for the Bush Administration. It resulted in a bad week for America. We are all less safe as a result of this ruling.

And the Justices who favored this ruling should be ashamed.