Huge Bakken Oil Field A Myth

A few days ago I posted this about the Bakken Oill field.

It seems I jumped the gun a little:

Reports circulating on the Internet tell of an oil field spanning parts of western North Dakota and eastern Montana where 400 billion barrels of oil supposedly are just waiting to be tapped. However, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) tells Cybercast News Service that those huge estimates are "a myth."

A USGS report issued in April estimates that there are between 3 billion to 4.3 billion barrels of oil in what is referred to as "the Bakken Formation" -- well below the 400 billion barrels discussed on the Web, but up from the previous estimate of 151 million barrels made in 1995.

Richard Pollastro, Bakken Formation task leader at the USGS, said the myth stems from a 1999 draft report -- never published -- by a now-deceased USGS employee, Leigh Price. Price estimated that the Bakken Formation holds up to 400 billion barrels of oil. To put that in perspective, Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil producer, has about 260 billion barrels of known oil reserves.

So it looks like there is not as much there as I thought. The thing about the Bakken field is that we can drill there.

Something to smile about- Bush called for an end to the offshore drilling ban today:

President George W. Bush was to call Wednesday on Congress to end a decades-old ban on offshore oil drilling, as a way to tap new energy sources to combat soaring gasoline prices.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said in a statement late Tuesday that, with gasoline now priced at more than four dollars a gallon, the president "will explicitly call on Congress to also pass legislation lifting the congressional ban on safe, environmentally-friendly offshore oil drilling."

Bush was to make his statement Wednesday at 10:35 am (1435 GMT) in the Rose Garden of the White House.

This would open up huge amounts of oil and natural gas supplies. It would also open up ANWAR.

Charges Dropped For Haditha's Highest Ranking Defendant

John Murtha were are you?:

CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. (AP) - A military judge dismissed charges Tuesday against a Marine officer accused of failing to investigate the killings of 24 Iraqis.

Col. Steven Folsom dismissed charges against Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani after finding that a four-star general overseeing the case was improperly influenced by an investigator probing the November 2005 shootings by a Marine squad in Haditha.

"Unlawful command influence is the mortal enemy of military justice," Folsom said. "In order to restore the public confidence, we need to take it back. We need to turn the clock back."

Chessani, of Rangely, Colo., was the highest-ranking officer to face a combat-related court-martial since the Vietnam War.

One more to go. I am just sitting here wondering how Murtha feels about this whole deal. He was successful in making himself look like an ass, that is for sure. Of course, I wouldn't sit around waiting on big John to apologize.

Oklahoma 's State House Demands Sovereignty

From World Net Daily:

Steamed over a perceived increase in federal usurping of states' rights, Oklahoma's House of Representatives told Washington, D.C., to back off.

Joint House Resolution 1089, passed by an overwhelming 92-3 margin, reasserts Oklahoma's sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and, according to the resolution's own language, is "serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates."

The Tenth Amendment states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

...

Charles Key, the Republican state representative who authored the resolution, told WND that he introduced it because he believes the federal government's overstepping of its bounds has put our constitutional form of government in danger.

"The more we stand by and watch the federal government get involved in areas where it has no legal authority, we kill the Constitution a little at a time," he said. "The last few decades, the Constitution has been hanging by a thread."

Specifically, Resolution 1089 says the following:

"The State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States."

The resolution resolves that Oklahoma will "serve as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers."

A statute was set to take effect July 1st that would really crack down on illegal aliens. But, U.S. District Judge Robin J. Cauthron stopped it from going into effect. Read about it at the link.

It is about time some states started standing up for themselves. We are seeing the federal government overreach it's boundaries on a regular basis.

I believe sovereignty to be the key to the success of this nation. That is why I am against the invasion this country faces from illegal immigration. The leaders of this country are not interested in protecting it's citizens from the 12-20 million or more invaders. But do the individual states have the authority to address this problem?

I believe that each state's sovereignty is just as important as the sovereignty of the country as a whole. That is what has brought us to where we are today. And that is what will ensure our survival far into the future. Yes, Oklahoma has every right to defend itself against illegal immigration.

The federal government has been successful in eroding this concept. Sure it has taken decade upon decade of work, but it is becoming more and more evident that "states rights" will soon be a thing of the past.

What can be done to turn this around? The article mentions succession. I have been seeing more and more of this word's use lately. Although that is one option, I do not feel it is the right step.

The solution lies within understanding the problem. The problem can be related to the old story of the schoolyard bully. He will keep picking at you until you stand up to him, right? This action by the Oklahoma's House relates to the little kid getting up in the face of the bully. Most of the time that is all that it takes. Of course in this instance their are 50 little kids going against a dominating bully. Can little Oklahoma take on the bully? Well yes. But will it do any good? Probably not. But what if 10, 15, or even 20 of those little kids decide that enough is enough? I would venture to say that may make the bully think about it a little harder.

The sole power to retaliate against the assault on states rights lie with the individual states themselves. My desire would be for many more little states to stand up to the federal government. Whether it would do any good in changing the direction we are going in is any body's guess. One thing is for sure, we cannot continue to follow the same path we are on right now.

I believe I'll throw an e-mail out to a couple of members of my state legislature right now.

Back For More

I'm back and ready to go again. Sorry about my absence for the past couple of weeks.

I was getting back into the swing of things and the first thing I see is this:

Saudi Arabia will raise oil production to record levels within weeks in an attempt to avert an escalation of social and political unrest around the world. King Abdullah signalled the commitment to the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, at the weekend after the impact of skyrocketing oil prices on food sparked protests and riots from Spain to South Korea.

Next month, the Saudis will be pumping an extra half-a-million barrels of oil a day compared to last month, bringing total Saudi production to 9.7 million barrels a day, their highest ever level. But the world's biggest oil exporters are coupling the increase with an appeal to western Europe to cut fuel taxes to lower the price of petrol to consumers.

Make sure and read that last sentence again:

But the world's biggest oil exporters are coupling the increase with an appeal to western Europe to cut fuel taxes to lower the price of petrol to consumers.

It's a shame when Saudi's King Abdullah feels the need to tell Congress to lighten up on it's citizens.

Then I see this on Ace of Spades:

You don't hear too much talk about the Bakken field from democrats these days. I wonder why? Could it be because of this:

...Best of all, the Bakken could be huge. The Geological Survey's Leigh Price, a Denver geochemist who died of a heart attack in 2000, estimated that the Bakken might hold 413 billion barrels. If so, it would dwarf Saudi Arabia's Ghawar, the world's biggest field, which has produced about 55 billion barrels.

Yes that is 413 BILLION gallons.

ANWAR, Bakken, Offshore, and any where else we can find it.

The time has come to drill our own oil. If you agree, go here and sign the petition.

I Will Be Back Soon

Sorry about not posting. I am having some trouble in my life right now. I am going to be taking a little time away from blogging. I should be back in a week or so. Please check back with me then. I should be able to pick up the pace with my blogging when I return.

Thank you all.

Memorial Day

A belated plea for everyone to remember the sacrifices so many have made to keep us free.

THANK YOU!

Maxine Waters On "Socializing" The Oil Industry

Can you believe that it is coming to this?:

Maxine Waters is known for her asinine views on, well, just about everything. However, this is one of the first times in my memory that a sitting representative actually openly threatens a private industry with "socializing"/"nationalizing". Does this barking-mad moonbat really think that the government can somehow do things more efficiently, once they've seized control of one of our most important industries? Or is she simply throwing some red meat to her loony constituents back home? Methinks that given her track record (# 35) of hard-left legislating, the truth lies somewhere in between Marx and Mugabe, next door to Chavez.

We conservatives have long believed most of the Dems to be closet socialists in disguise, but they are beginning to get bolder. Between Hillary Clinton's constant harping on nationalizing health care, and her race to protectionist policies with Barack Obama, it seems our gilded (gelded?) class has entered a new age of economic idiocy.

Hit the link for the video. Watch it.

That is right, she would be about socializing/nationalizing the oil industry. They want it for health care, why not oil? Hell, why don't we just forget about that whole FREEDOM thing and go ahead and make this a communist nation? Yes, what a great idea. I mean, who wouldn't want Maxine Waters deciding how there lives should be run?

This line is exactly right:

We conservatives have long believed most of the Dems to be closet socialists in disguise, but they are beginning to get bolder.

Wake up people.

What? The Democrats Lied.

Watch this:




The Story is here. Read the whole post.

The transcript:

"I'll tell you my impression. We really in this last election, when I say we...the Democrats, I think pushed it as far as we can to the end of the fleet, didn't say it, but we implied it. That if we won the Congressional elections, we could stop the war. Now anybody was a good student of Government would know that wasn't true. But you know, the temptation to want to win back the Congress, we sort of stretched the facts...and people ate it up."

We all knew it. It is just strange to see a Democrat admit it.

John Hawkins On Why He Has Decided To Pull His Support For McCain

This is just one of the many reasons I cannot support, or vote for, John McCain:

Put very simply: John McCain is a liar. He's a man without honor, without integrity, who could not have captured the Republican nomination had he run on making comprehensive immigration a top priority of his administration. Quite frankly, this is little different from George Bush, Sr. breaking his "Read my lips, no new taxes pledge," except that Bush's father was at least smart enough to wait until he got elected before letting all of his supporters know that he was lying to them.

Under these circumstances, I simply cannot continue to support a man like John McCain for the presidency. Since that is the case, I have already written the campaign and asked them to take me off of their mailing list and to no longer send me invitations to their teleconferences. I see no point in asking questions to a man who has no compunction about lying through his teeth on one of the most crucial election issues and then changing his position the first time he believes he can get away with it.

Welcome to the club John. With all that McCain has said and done I just can't see how any conservative could vote for the man. Sure he is better than the Democrats on some things, but he is too willing to roll over on important issues in the name of bi-partisanship. Some things can be handled in a bi-partisan way. Many more can not. The difference between the beliefs of the two parties will not allow it.

The Republican party needs a leader that will stand up for it's basic principals. And spoken like the true hillbilly, gun loving, god fearing rube that Obama says I am: McCain ain't the man to lead in this manner.

So, You Want Universal Health Coverage?

Read this post:

Our good friend the Dowager Viscountess sent us a link to a great post on All American Blogger where Duane Lester explores what Ted Kennedy would have to expect from a nationalized health care system if he were an ordinary working class citizen:

Imagine for a minute that Ted Kennedy lived in an America where the government ran health care, and he was what pundits and talking heads like to call a “working class” American.

He’s sitting in his kitchen, reading the paper and eating his morning breakfast when he starts convulsing uncontrollably. His wife makes the call for an ambulance, only to be told that the ambulance would be there as soon as their government mandated break was complete. Unlike this British man, who died from a heart attack five minutes from an ambulance station while two ambulance crews took an EU-mandated break, the ambulance arrives before he expires and gets him into the back of the vehicle.

Ted rides to the nearest hospital and his ambulance parks outside the building, but he is not unloaded. Instead he sits. And sits. And sits. For nearly five hours, Kennedy waits in the ambulance, “in a holding pattern”, waiting to be allowed in the hospital. He can’t be allowed in because the hospital can’t treat him immediately, and they have a government mandate that says patients have to be treated within four hours of admission. So rather than being treated right away, Kennedy is stacked outside the hospital in an ambulance. During that time, other 911 emergencies are left unattended by his ambulance because it is being used to meet government regulations.

You really need to read the rest at the link.

It seems to be a made up story. And it is. But all of these things happened to somebody. Follow all the links and see for yourself. I am not saying things do not need to be done to assist uninsured people, but turning it over to the government is not the answer.

Who Cares What Book Obama Is Reading? I Do

This post is in response to one at Gateway Pundit:

During a break from his busy campaign grind, Barack Obama was able to unwind with some light reading:

The Post American World

Hit the link above for the picture.

This would probably not be a big deal, except for the fact that he has proven that he does not like America. OK, OK I know. I shouldn't say that. But the truth sometimes hurts. Listen to the man. We need to change this, we need to change that. Is there anything about the country he does not want to change? I can't think of anything. If he wants it to change, then he does not like it.

Obama's wife was never proud of her country until recently. Rev. Wright sure does seem to agree. What about Bill Ayers?

He don't come out and say he wants a post American world, but the policies he supports sure would work in that direction.

The Oil Executives Are Finally Fight Back

It looks like they have heard enough:

Malone's remarks were echoed by John Hofmeister, president of Shell.

"The fundamental laws of supply and demand are at work," said Hofmeister. The market is squeezed by exporting nations managing demand for their own interest and other nations subsidizing prices to encourage economic growth, he said.

In addition, Hofmeister said access to resources in the United States has been limited for the past 30 years. "I agree, it's not a free market," he said.

The executives pushed the idea that large parts of the U.S. that are currently closed to drilling - like sections of Alaska, the Rocky Mountains and the continental shelf - should be opened.

"The place to start the free market is in our own country," said one executive. [The drilling ban] sets the stage for OPEC to do what we are doing in our own country, and that is effectively limiting supplies."

The oil companies make about 8.4% profit. The average profit margin for American companies is about 7.9%. So while they are a little higher, the numbers are within reason. I find it laughable that Congress (who takes about 18.5% in taxes) are blaming companies that take 8.5%. After all the companies are producing this product. The government is getting more than double what the companies are getting, and they do absolutely nothing for this money.

As a matter of fact, the government is already cutting the oil companies legs out from under them, by not allowing them to use the recourses underneath this country. Let alone allowing new refineries to be built. The Senate needs to open up the areas that can be drilled. I am getting tired of seeing our President beg OPEC for mercy.

Congress needs to take a good look in the mirror to see the real problem with the soaring gas prices.

Drill Our Oil!

White House Ignoring "Global Warming" Debate

A few days ago I wrote this post. It was in response of this story. When asked about it the White House spokeswoman Dana Perino responded with this:

The spokeswoman for President Bush says the thousands of scientists from across the United States that reject the theory of "global warming" about human-caused greenhouse gases posing a major threat to future life can have their "opinion."

But no further comment came from Dana Perino, the White House spokeswoman, when asked about the issue by Les Kinsolving, WND's correspondent at the White House.

At today's White House news briefing, he asked, "WorldNetDaily reports that more than 31,000 U.S. scientists, including 9,000 Ph.D.s, now [have] signed a petition rejecting global warming, the assumption that human production of greenhouse gases is damaging the Earth's climate. My question: What is the White House reaction to these 31,000 U.S. scientists?"

"I would say that everyone is entitled to their opinion," Perino responded. "What's your next question?"

"That's all?" Kinsolving asked.

"That's all I'm going to say," she said.

What I want to know is why? Why can we not debate this issue. I speak out against "Global Warming/Climate Change" every chance I get, and I never get an honest debate. I get treated as if I have lost my mind.

Until we reach a point on this issue where we can hear both sides of the argument, this country is going to continue to throw our money, and corn down the "ethanol" drain. All while not doing a thing to help the environment, or stop Global Climate Change.

We have listened to Al Gore and his bunch, let's listen to some people on the other side.

Are The Republicans Waking Up?

Maybe:

Conservative Republicans in the House plan to urge their colleagues to rally behind a new manifesto that mixes antispending initiatives and tighter restrictions on government benefits as the party seeks a fresh message after a string of election defeats.

Leaders of the Republican Study Committee intend to use a closed-door party meeting on Tuesday to present a seven-point proposal calling for a constitutional limit on federal spending, a new simplified income tax alternative and a proposal to require recipients of food stamps or housing aid to meet work requirements.

...

A draft of the conservative agenda calls for the endorsement of a constitutional amendment to prohibit federal spending from growing faster than the economy except in times of war or national emergency. The plan seeks support for an income tax overhaul that would provide a simplified flat tax and allow people to choose between it and the current system.

The conservative proposal seeks tax credits for buying health insurance, more domestic energy production and a streamlined terrorist surveillance program. The draft also said that House Republicans should extend existing welfare work requirements to food stamps and housing assistance “so that those who are not old, young or disabled are either working in the private sector or serving in their community.”

Read the rest at the link.

These ideas would be a good start on the road to recovery for the GOP. I don't expect them to get much support though. The RINOs are not likely to go along with any of this.

John Bolton On The Foreign Policy Debate

After hearing the politicians ramble incoherently along about foreign policy Mr. Bolton thought it would be nice to hear from an adult. So he gave us this:

President Bush's speech to Israel's Knesset, where he equated "negotiat[ing] with the terrorists and radicals" to "the false comfort of appeasement," drew harsh criticism from Barack Obama and other Democratic leaders. They apparently thought the president was talking about them, and perhaps he was.

Wittingly or not, the president may well have created a defining moment in the 2008 campaign. And Mr. Obama stepped right into the vortex by saying he was willing to debate John McCain on national security "any time, any place." Mr. McCain should accept that challenge today.

...

On one side are those who believe that negotiations should be used to resolve international disputes 99% of the time. That is where I am, and where I think Mr. McCain is. On the other side are those like Mr. Obama, who apparently want to use negotiations 100% of the time. It is the 100%-ers who suffer from an obsession that is naïve and dangerous.

Negotiation is not a policy. It is a technique. Saying that one favors negotiation with, say, Iran, has no more intellectual content than saying one favors using a spoon. For what? Under what circumstances? With what objectives? On these specifics, Mr. Obama has been consistently sketchy.

Like all human activity, negotiation has costs and benefits. If only benefits were involved, then it would be hard to quarrel with the "what can we lose?" mantra one hears so often. In fact, the costs and potential downsides are real, and not to be ignored.

Read the rest. It is refreshing to hear someone speak that understands foreign policy.

It is a shame this man is not representing this country in the UN. He has proven time and again that he has an thorough understanding of international affairs.