Bill O'Reilly WRONG About Oil

I happened to catch part of Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly's radio show this evening, and I must admit I was shocked to hear some of the positions taken by the popular media personality.

Of late I have found myself breaking ranks with O'Reilly on an increasing number of issues, but I was floored that he would spout the common 'blame the oil companies' mantra that one hears from Democrats in Congress.

To get straight to the point, O'Reilly is FLAT WRONG about oil.

In order to 'fix' the problem of rising oil prices, O'Reilly would punish the oil companies, as if they are the ones responsible for the problem, which they aren't. He also came close to spouting the Obama claim that the oil companies are guilty of 'price gouging,' though he stopped just sort of saying that.

Once again, let's set the record straight, shall we?

Out of every dollar we spend at the pump, 70 cents goes to purchase crude oil, most of which is imported from other countries. Crude is up by 100 dollars per barrel since 1998.

It doesn't take rocket science to figure out that most of the increases in gasoline prices at the pump over the last 10 years can be traced directly to the price of crude.

The big oil companies must purchase this crude, the price of which is set by the open market, OPEC, and investors/speculators.

Further, out of every dollar we spend at the pump, only about 3 cents goes to the big oil companies in profits.

But here is the biggie. Out of every dollar we spend at the pump, 6.5 cents goes for federal taxes, and anywhere from 15 to 20 cents goes for state and local taxes, depending on the state/municipality in which one lives.

As you can see, this leaves very little profit margin for local gas stations.

Thus, if Mr. O'Reilly wishes to play the blame game, he is picking on the wrong ones. Government at the federal, state, and local levels makes 8 times what the oil companies make in profits. And as long as crude oil accounts for 70% of the price we pay at the pump, Americans will see very little relief until the price of crude comes down.

And instead of brow-beating the oil companies for doing what a corporation is supposed to do--make a profit for its stockholders--why not brow-beat government for raking in multi-billions of dollars in taxes on gasoline? Why isn't anyone talking about or reporting how much government profits from these high gasoline prices?

It's very simple. They don't want you to know.

I can tell you this, the next time you hear a specific number on oil company profits, just multiply that number by 7, and you will get a ballpark estimate of what government is raking in from gasoline prices.

Those are the simple facts regardless of any demagoguery from O'Reilly or the Democrats.

Now It's Sean Hannity's Turn to Blunder

Yesterday we reported that Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly made a major blunder by suggesting that not only has Giuliani practically sewn up the GOP nomination but that he should tap Mitt Romney as his running mate.

Now it's Fox News commentator Sean Hannity's turn to blunder.

We have commented recently that Fox apparently wishes for the GOP to be dominated by northeastern liberals, such as Giuliani and Romney. Hannity seems to be no exception.

On his daily radio broadcast, Hannity took a call from a woman who stated that she was very concerned that some of the GOP front-runners cannot gain the support of evangelical Christian conservatives. The caller stated that the GOP nominee will need this block of voters to win.

We agree. We have commented at length many times on how desperately the GOP needs evangelical conservatives to beat Hillary Clinton.

Yet Hannity hedged a bit, stating that 'this is what the primary process is all about.'

Granted, that's true, but the primary process is certainly not being influenced by certain conservative commentators who have all but conceded the GOP nomination to Rudy.

As we have stated before, repeatedly, if Giuliani is the nominee the religious right will stay home on election day, throwing the election to Hillary. They have already told us that this is what they plan to do.

Why should we not believe them? Giuliani's record on a range of issues from gun control to abortion has alienated the vast majority of evangelical voters. Their view is, if there is essentially no difference between Hillary and Rudy on gun control and abortion, for example, then why vote at all?

Personally, I have some very good, sound reasons as to why they should vote for Giuliani if he is the nominee, not the least of which he is not a Socialist like Hillary, and he would appoint to the Supreme Court and the federal bench only strict constructionists, unlike Hillary.

Nonetheless, my position is a hard sell when it comes to persons who so value human life that they would rather die themselves than vote for someone who supports abortion rights. And just enough of these persons will, indeed, stay home on election day to throw the election to Hillary.

I honestly do not think that commentators like O'Reilly and Hannity truly understand the mindset of the evangelical voter. These pundits are far too prone to underestimate the commitment of evangelicals to principle over Party, to issues over ideology, to honor and faith over politics.

Issues oriented voters couldn't care less about what happens to the Supreme Court if the supposed alternative to Hillary is himself a supporter of abortion rights.

In a close election, or even a not so close election, the loss of a mere 5 million evangelical voters could tip the election to Hillary.

And this is precisely why choosing Rudy as the GOP nominee is highly risky and therefore terribly ill-advised, unless the candidate experiences a major surge in popularity over Hillary. Thus, Hannity has it wrong...at least for now.

Bill O'Reilly Blunders

Whether you like the guy or not, you have to admit that he is quite a force with which to be reckoned when it comes to political and social commentary. Sometimes I find myself agreeing 100% with him, and sometimes I cringe at his comments. Yet I keep watching and listening because he matters.

But Bill O'Reilly is certainly far from perfect, and sometimes when he misses it, he misses by a mile.

O'Reilly's blunder came on the radio this evening. In commenting on the various political campaigns, he stated that Mitt Romney would be a good running mate for Rudy Giuliani should Giuliani get the GOP nomination, of which O'Reilly is certain.

The reason cited by O'Reilly? Because 'Romney is a true conservative, and Giuliani will need a bona fide conservative on the ticket.'

Now let me get this straight. O'Reilly would place on the GOP ticket two northeastern liberals, Republicans in Name Only. My question is, does he wish to hand the election to Hillary?

It will be bad enough for many parts of the country for Giuliani to be the nominee. Many have already vowed to stay home on election day if he is. But some of these could be persuaded if there is a solid REAL conservative on the ticket.

Put Romney with Giuliani and you have immediately lost the entire South and Southwest, along with the Rockey Mountain States.

No Republican will ever win the White House without the South. Period, end.

O'Reilly's contention that Romney is a conservative is based upon his indefensible philosophy in taking a candidate at his/her word and totally ignoring that person's record. The record shows that Romney is no conservative.

It should be noted that ever since the campaigns began in earnest Fox News and their conservative pundits have all been in Giuliani's hip pocket just as CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN have been in the hip pocket of Hillary Clinton.

This fact shows just how thoroughly Fox wishes for the GOP to be dominated by politicians in the northeast corridor.

The people out in the heartland want none of it.

Should Giuliani get the nomination, he will need Fred Thompson or Mike Huckabee. But let's hope such a scenario will never become a reality. Giuliani is simply not a viable alternative to Hillary Clinton.

Two-Pronged Attack on Limbaugh/O'Reilly

Two things immediately come to mind concerning the attacks this week on Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly.

First, the notions that Limbaugh is 'against our troops' as the Democratic leadership in Congress claims, and that Bill O'Reilly is a racist as some in the mainstream media claim, are so completely ludicrous as to be laughable. Over the past 20 years as America's premier radio talk show host, no one has been more supportive of the American military than Rush Limbaugh. And those who know Bill O'Reilly know that the man is nowhere near being a racist.

These charges make those who claim them look like buffoons who cannot be taken seriously.

That would be no problem at all were it not for the fact that the nation's top Democrats are saying these things, from Harry Reid, to Hillary Clinton, to Tom Harkin, and many more. Their charges against Rush Limbaugh are so utterly over-the-top as to render the entire lot irrelevant.

Second, it is important to keep in mind who is bankrolling these types of character assassinations. The same money that is behind Moveon.org and its Petraeus-bash is also behind the orchestrated attacks on Limbaugh and O'Reilly.

Media Matters is part of the same network of ultra-leftwing organizations that include Moveon.org. It was Media Matters that took O'Reilly's statement out of context and labeled him a racist--a story picked up by CNN without even thoroughly checking out the veracity of the story.

Both Media Matters and Moveon.org get much of their funding from atheist Democrat billionaire operative George Soros.

Democrats depend on these groups for the majority their political campaign cash. And thus, while the country desperately needs leadership from Congress on a variety of issues of crucial importance to our future, the Democratic leadership spends taxpayers' money to go on a character assassination spree against two conservative talk show personalities.

Many inside the Beltway believe that this is only the first step, a dark foreshadowing of what is to come if the Democrats gain the White House. The Fairness Doctrine, as it is envisioned by Democrats, is designed to silence conservative voices in the media.

For example, with Hillary in the White House and the Democrats in Control of both Houses of Congress, there would be nothing to stop the march toward implementing the Fairness Doctrine, which would force Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, and many more off the air.

Thus, once again the Leftwing will be in complete control of all media as it was from the 1940s until the 1990s.

Perhaps the Democrats in Congress and on the campaign trail for the Presidency are underestimating the American people. The citizens have already seen the garbage, and therefore they are giving Congress the lowest approval rating in history--a mere 11%.

Further, a backlash occurred against the Democrats with the Moveon-Petraeus ad. We can reasonably expect yet another backlash as apparently the Dems have lost not only their political compass but their minds as well.

As the old political saying goes, these character assassinations 'will not play in Peoria.'

LIBERTY ALERT! Dems Won't Back Down on Fairness Doctrine

Washington, DC (TLS). Like a bad rash that won't go away, Democrats in Congress just keep scratching the infected itch to do something to silence conservative talk radio.

After losing a round in the House when an amendment to an appropriations bill was passed that barred the use of federal funds to revive the Fairness Doctrine, Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate indicated that they have no intention of giving up on trying to revive the ominous doctrine that would have the effect of silencing free speech on the radio.

There was a time back in the dark ages when such a doctrine was necessary. Radio was the ONLY form of electronic media. The Fairness Doctrine was implemented to keep citizens informed of political news on all sides of the issues.

Today, such a doctrine is simply not necessary due to the many various ways that Americans get their news. The fact that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly dominate radio does not mean the other side is not heard loud and clear.

And, as I have said, if Democrats and Liberals are hell-bent on bringing this monster back, then Republicans and Conservatives should make sure that the doctrine applies to mainstream network news.

This would mean that conservatives could demand equal time when Katie, Charlie, and what's-his-name on NBC roll out their nightly slant in favor of the Democrats.

And, of course, I would demand equal time to respond to Chris Matthews' nightly shenanigans.

Here are the details about the plan the Democrats are waiting in the wings to implement when they get a chance:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200707/CUL20070705a.html

LIBERTY ALERT! DEMS TO PUSH RUSH, HANNITY OFF THE AIR

Washington, DC (TLS). This is a major Liberty Alert. For months we have been alert to rumblings among politicos in the Beltway that Democrats may revive the Fairness Doctrine from the 1940s as a means to silence conservative talk radio.

What started as rumor and whispers has now become reality in the form of a bill entitled, 'The Media Ownership Reform Act,' and is sponsored by Leftist Democrat Rep. Maurice Hinchey of New York.

Hinchey has made no attempt to hide his agenda in sponsoring this bill. At a forum entitled the 'National Conference for Media Reform,' which is funded by atheist Democrat billionaire George Soros, Hinchey blasted Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and other conservatives for being responsible for leading America into war.

Under his bill, he said, their voices would be removed from the airwaves.

'All that stuff will end,' Hinchey stated.

The Democrats and the Leftwing in America have suffered ever since the advent of conservative talk radio. For the very first time since the invention of electronic media, the Left has steadily lost its monopoly on the news. CBS, ABC, and NBC totally dominated the airwaves with a liberal slant on news stories for nearly 50 years.

It is interesting that during this era the Left enjoyed some of its greatest success. The forces that control the media get to determine content as well as which news stories get air time. The Democrats have been exiled from their perch as kings of the hill with the advent of conservative talk radio and Fox News.

They are determined to regain their lost position of power.

The problem is that the left-leaning media did not go away. It is still there in all its glory. ABC, CBS, NBC, and now CNN are all still giving us their leftward spin on news items, as always. But for the Liberals this is not enough, particularly in light of the fact that these news organizations have been losing viewers.

Thus, using the ruse of 'the Fairness Doctrine,' the Democrats want Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and others forced off the air by insisting on equal time for opposing points of view.

Of course, this demand does not apply to CBS, ABC, or NBC news programs, for as always, the Liberals vehemently deny any bias. In their minds it simply does not exist. The Left views ABC, CBS, CNN, and NBC as totally fair and unbiased sources of news.

And thus, with the Fairness Doctrine forcing conservative talk radio off the air, once again the Democrats and the Left will hold a complete monopoly on the news.

This is a George Soros-inspired scheme from start to finish. Soros' philosophy is that it is essential to control the news outlets as a prelude to introducing sweeping reforms in society, essentially turning the U.S. into a socialist nation.

My friends, this is a call to action. It is now time to contact your lawmakers in Washington to tell them that you vehemently oppose the Hinchey bill, 'The Media Ownership Reform Act.' And don't let them convince you that this bill is simply aimed at preventing monopolies from forming in the media, as some of them will surely try to do. Actually this bill does exactly the opposite. It will CREATE a leftist monopoly, meaning that Liberals will completely control the dissemination of news.

In the Senate, Leftist, Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is the point-person for this bill.

So, don't waste precious time in putting off contacting your representatives in Washington, both in the House AND Senate. We MUST stop this push to silence conservative talk radio!

Read a complete analysis of this dangerous, subversive bill here:
http://www.insightmag.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=5D3B38F8A2584DB5A77BA05660C6045C&nm=Free+Access&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=346CF94D8F6C442FB25AC38AD486013C