Why Liberal Politicans Want Gas Prices High

It is a big mistake to believe liberal politicians who decry the high price of gasoline and condemn the oil companies for their 'obscene' profits.

Their crocodile tears are merely a smokescreen that hides their true intent.

And their charge that 'Bush did it to help his buddies in the oil business' is but a red herring to draw attention away from their sordid scheme.

Liberals, in fact, want our gasoline prices at the pump to be as high as they can go. And the reason is very simple--the higher the costs the more Americans will be forced to stop using gasoline.

The plan to which I refer is a simple but elaborate scheme to manipulate the markets so that gasoline prices will rise to a level that is totally beyond the reach of most Americans. The result, of course, is reduced consumption and a public outcry for alternative fuels.

Barack Obama openly admitted to this scheme in a news interview recently, during which he was asked if he were comfortable with the skyrocketing prices at the pump. He stated that he 'would have preferred a more gradual adjustment,' meaning, of course, that he did not deny at all his desire for gasoline prices to be high and for American consumers to hurt as a result.

He simply would have 'done it more gradually.'

To be fair, Obama is not the only liberal politician who has bought into this way of thinking.

Al Gore was one of the first to devise such a scheme of market manipulation, not only just prior to his 2000 Presidential campaign but going all the way back to 1994 when, as Vice-President, he cast the tie-breaking vote to mandate that oil companies provide a mixture of ethanol to be added to the gasoline sold at the pump.

The scheme has been a gradual increase in gasoline prices ever since, not to mention the fact that demand for ethanol has resulted in soaring food costs as politicians have sold their souls to the devil by taking food from the mouths of hungry children worldwide and making fuel out of it.

Democrats from Obama to Gore to Pelosi to Reed have all supported policies that prevent drilling for oil right here at home, where there are some of the richest crude oil fields in the world, while at the same time supporting measures that increase taxes on oil and gasoline and mandate alternative sources of energy that in essence do nothing to ease the financial burden on most Americans.

For example, they will not adequately fund the development of hydrogen fuel cell technology, nuclear power, or even wind power. Ted Kennedy, for example, has consistently opposed the placing of windmills along the east coast.

At the same time, Democrats have opposed increasing refinery capacity and the building of more refineries--two measures that, along with oil exploration and drilling right here at home, would have the net effect of lowering the price of gasoline at the pump.

Liberals are heavily indebted to environmentalist extremists who believe that gasoline and cars are evil and that we should do anything to wean the country off of oil.

But the problem is that the market has been relatively uncooperative--until now.

As long as gasoline remained relatively cheap according to the world's standards, Americans had no real incentive to push for alternative fuels. And thus, the Democrats and their cohorts developed a multi-pronged plan to manipulate the markets, prevent oil exploration and drilling in this country, oppose every single proposal to develop nuclear and wind-based power, and mandate the use of corn for fuel, thus driving up the costs of energy and food.

And let us not forget that oil speculators who moved offshore so as to avoid regulation in the U.S. are one of the primary sources of oil prices skyrocketing on the open market.

These persons can be easily manipulated by corrupt politicians with sordid schemes who lure their prey by dangling the carrot in their faces of mega-profits from the purchase of oil futures.

That way, 'everybody wins.' Liberal politicians get their wish for oil to be priced out of reach, thus manipulating Americans to cut consumption, while at the same time insuring that speculators get a bounty from the oil price boon.

It's not rocket science, my friends. Obama, Pelosi, Gore, Reed, Kennedy, and others want you to suffer for your own good. And they ARE succeeding.

ETHANOL TO SPIKE FOOD COSTS 50 - 65%

Washington, DC (TLS). The U.S. Agriculture Department reported today that Americans should brace themselves for a massive case of sticker-shock by the end of the summer...not at the new-car lot but at the grocery store.

Prices for common, everyday food staples such as meat, milk, cheese, corn and other veggies, will increase by 50 to 65 percent by September.

On balance, the average American family will pay at least 100 bucks per month more for groceries this September than they did last September.

What, exactly, is driving this numbing price hike? Ethanol production.

Corn is the main ingredient in ethanol and hundreds of other products, including the feed given to cows. Hence, the price hike in meat, milk, and cheese.

Because farmers are increasingly using farmland to grow corn for the FUEL industry as opposed to the FOOD industry, the law of supply and demand will result in a smaller supply of corn for food and an increasing demand for the food items that depend on corn, thus driving food prices through the roof.

We can thank the Einsteins in the 'environmentalist movement' for the coming train wreck at the grocery store.

For years the 'man-is-to-blame-for-global-warming' crowd and their comrades in the 'renewable bio-fuels' movement have been feeding to the public the notion that oil is evil and that ethanol is the answer to our energy needs.

We will now suffer the consequences of that notion as we pay out the wazoo for food...all because the corn is going to make fuel.

I have never had a problem with developing alternative sources of energy, weaning ourselves off of our dependence on foreign oil. But it is just as bad an idea to depend solely on ethanol and other agri-fuels as it is to depend solely on oil.

We need to begin developing and utilizing nuclear energy to the max, since we have discovered ways to make it safe. It is the cleanest fuel available. Fuel cell technology is another way to go, as are solar and wind power.

As for now, when you are shocked at how food prices suddenly skyrocket in about three months, remember that this is what we get for listening to the loons in the environmentalist movement.

Agri-Fuel to Cause Food Prices to Skyrocket

Washington, DC (TLS). In the frenzied rush to judgment amid the hysteria surrounding global warming, one little fact seems to totally escape notice on the part of those who are determined to ram 'agri-fuel' down the throats of consumers. Such 'green-friendly' fuel will cause food prices to skyrocket.

The increase has already been felt as prices are rising for grains, oils, eggs, corn, and other commodities that are used to make ethanol and other fuels that are made from farm-grown items. Meat prices are on the rise as well since farmers must purchase grains to feed their stock...grains that are also used to produce fuel.

No better example of the law of supply and demand can be found than that which is currently being played out in the push to develop grains into sources of energy. As the demand for these grains increases due to their utilization in the production of fuel, prices will increase for these grains...which means that farmers must pay more to buy them for their livestock, and thus, the consumer will pay more for meat at the grocery store.

Market watchers say we can expect such rises in prices for food to continue. Such inflation is the result of governments pushing the agriculture industry to grow goods that can be used as alternative sources of energy. This causes an unhealthy competition between that which is grown for food and that which is grown for energy.

To be sure, agri-fuel is one alternative source that can be utilized in our search for alternatives to oil. But it is a big mistake to think this is the only source or even the main source of such an alternative.

To rely solely on agriculture to provide for the nation's energy will end in disaster.

This is why modern-day nuclear power is long overdue a second look. Nuclear power is much safer than back in the days when the plants that produced it were lacking in some of the modern safeguards that prevent the infamous 'meltdowns' of Chernobyl and science-fiction films. Modern technology has rendered the production of nuclear energy to be safe.

And it is as clean and 'green-friendly' as it gets.

Another alternative that should be put on the fast track is hydrogen fuel cell technology. Here again, the process of production is safe and and the energy it produces is clean.

The utilization of these two important alternative sources of energy will take a great amount of pressure off of the agricultural industry, thus saving Americans a tone of money at the grocery store.

Read more about this here:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/consumer_goods/article1642746.ece