Bush Offers Little More Than GasX For Gas Woes

With price of crude oil hitting the $90 a barrel mark, one would think that the President of the country that uses the most petroleum would be a little concerned. However, true to his natural lack of concern for anything not related to the wealthy, Mr. Bush came out with the following forceful statement in defense of the middle-class. The stock market tanked on the news, so it appears that investors considered it a bit more significant than the White House. There are millions of Americans who are suffering under the stress of high energy costs and with winter around the corner there will be millions more. The rise in crude oil prices will fuel the rise in many other products forcing many families to have to make some tough choices this winter.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- With crude oil prices crossing $90 a barrel, the White House said Friday that President Bush would like to see prices lower.

At the same time, the White House played down the $90 mark. ''There's no magic to any particular number like $90 a barrel, but obviously we would prefer oil prices lower,'' said deputy press secretary Tony Fratto.

''The president certainly would like to see the price of oil lower and would like to see us rely less on foreign sources of oil and reduce our dependence on all forms of oil,'' Fratto said. He called on Congress to enact Bush's program to expand the use of alternative fuels and cut gasoline use by 20 percent in 10 years.[1]

The problem I have with this White House, Republicans, and George Bush in particular is their dismissive attitude towards the general public. It’s as if they are saying, “We know what is going on and you don’t, so don’t ask us any questions or question any of our policies”. They continue to live in their own false reality to where crude oil prices reaching new highs means nothing, because they say it means nothing. Who are you going to believe this administration or your freezing kids? This of course is in keeping with his forceful remarks on the mortgage crisis.

We need a President who is willing to lead in times of crisis, a President who is willing to do more than lead us into war. We need a President who will provide direction and leadership and not just the same old rhetoric. Mr. Bush is showing every day that he is in fact irrelevant despite his calls to the opposite. Rather than using his remaining time in office to provide leadership in a worsening economic crisis, he chooses to desert the average American and continue to stand firm with his wealthy friends.

Ninety dollars a barrel may not be a magic number for this administration, but it is a magic number for the majority of Americans who have to buy gas and fuel oil this winter. We need more than a President who wants to placate us, we need one who will do more than say he would like to see lower prices. Hell, I would like to see a bigger paycheck, but saying it won’t make it so. This President needs to do more to help the average American during these economic times. The economy currently is only benefiting those wealthy few who have already received the tax-cut give-away that was suppose to stimulate the economy. It turns out it was just another transfer of wealth from the middle income Americans to the wealthiest. When will Americans realize that giving money to the wealthy will never result in economic success for them, all it does is give more wealth to the wealthy at tax payer expense.

The income to the government must be paid and if the wealthiest are getting tax-cuts, who do you think is paying for it. So rather than being able to provide health care for our poor children, or mortgage relief to average Americans, or fuel relief, we have a public treasury that has been bankrupted by the wealthy looters. It is going to be a long cold winter for Middle America. After struggling through the high fuel prices of summer, it will be more of the same for winter.

Have these guys gotten anything right on Iraq? Where is the lower fuel prices we were suppose to see in exchange for our securing their freedom? Along with all the other Iraqi scenarios, this one proves to be just as false. So let’s break out the GasX, because I have a feeling we are going to need it.

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Bush-Oil.html

Read more!

When will it end?

Why is it that the administration can not acknowledge what the rest of us can plainly see? The war in Iraq has deteriorated into an ethnic cleansing/civil war. Why must they persist to ignore these facts?

The answer I am afraid lies in a secret and very controversial law that the American and British governments are pressing the Iraqi government to enact. This secret law being drafted and shortly to be signed involves the oil wealth of Iraq. It is disguised as an effort to reapportion the oil wealth to include all parties, but that is not it’s true purpose.

That’s right the same oil wealth that British PM Tony Blair stated on March 18, 2003, "Oil revenues, which people falsely claim that we want to seize, should be put in a trust fund for the Iraqi people".

And of course there was Secretary of State Colin Powell who stated on July 10, 2003, "The oil of the Iraqi people... is their wealth. We did not [invade Iraq] for oil”.

This new legislation being drafted and sure to be pushed through involves the exploration and development of Iraq’s massive oil reserves. It would allow British and American oil companies to lock in PSA’s (Production Sharing Agreements) signed today for 30 years. These PSA’s would allow foreign oil companies to keep 60-70% of the profits from the oil while they recoup their costs and then keep another 20% of any future profits. On the surface this may not seem too bad until you look at the other OPEC countries and their agreements. All of the major oil producing countries in the world do not participate in the PSA’s. Their leaders recognize that their oil is the wealth of their people and keep it as a state trust. None of them would be crazy enough to sell that wealth using these PSA’s.

What’s wrong with PSA’s you may ask? The problem is not in the PSA’s per se, it is in the terms and the timing. Iraq would be negotiating from a weak position and could get locked into a bad deal for decades. This would not only hand cuff the current efforts at reconstruction, but many future efforts as well. Iraq has been devastated not just by this invasion, but years of UN sponsored sanctions. They are going to need a complete rework of their infra-structure, not to mention their lack of housing. Our military has bombed them back to the Stone Age; the only people with consistent services are those hiding in the “Green Zone”.

I am not against capitalism, but I am against greed. Should the companies that risk their time, money, and manpower be compensated? Of course they should be, but not at the expense of those people who have already lost so much. Because of the political system that was in place before the new leaders have been without for so long they are allowing their short sightedness and greed to prevent them from seeing that they are impoverishing their country for years to come. Regardless of the terms of any PSA they have enough oil reserves to make money, this is not the issue. The issue is whether there will be enough to share with all Iraqis and to provide all Iraqis with a decent opportunity to overcome this devastation.

We should let our voices be loud and clear, “Iraqi oil is for the Iraqi people!” Let’s not allow the big oil companies who have a history of price gouging and price fixing in this country to create another “Saddam” that our sons and daughters may have to go fight again.

Read more!