It's no secret that we're being gouged at the pumps. The reason for soaring gas prices? According to Obama, it's not because of anything he has done -- not his devaluing the dollar via his disastrous economic decisions, his closing federal lands for oil production opened by his predecessor, his passing cap-and-trade legislation in the middle of the worst economy since the Great Depression or his refusing to stand strong against the regime in Iran, which controls 20 percent of the world's oil supply via the Strait of Hormuz.
President Obama would do well to take his own advice; in regard to the possibility of $3-a-gallon gas in 2006, the then senator said, "The time for excuses is over."
To add insult to injury, Obama has appointed some petroleum-pillaging politicians, such as Energy Secretary Steven Chu, who, according to The Wall Street Journal, said in 2008 that in order to wean Americans off gasoline, the administration should make them punitively pay at the pump: "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe."
And just two weeks ago, as reported by Politico, Chu told Congress that Obama's Department of Energy "isn't working to lower gasoline prices directly" but "is working to promote alternatives such as biofuels and electric vehicles."
When Rep. Alan Nunnelee, R-Miss., specifically asked Chu whether the Obama administration's goal is to lower gas prices, he emphatically replied, "No." (Out of the horse's mouth!)
But I suppose the views of Obama-appointed officials such as Chu don't have any bearing on soaring gas prices, right?
Chu again embraced the strategy to raise gas prices in order to increase green alternatives to Chris Wallace, host of "Fox News Sunday," in February 2011, when he said: "The price of gasoline over the long haul should be expected to go up just because of supply and demand issues. And so we see this in the buying habits of Americans as they make choices for the next car they buy."
Increasing gas prices in order to wean us off gasoline and onto biofuel alternatives is a ruse -- a deceptive strategy laid on the backs of American citizens.
This is what Obama meant two weeks ago when he repackaged and re-pitched his "new energy policy" from a gas station in Indianapolis. The words on his podium were "Investing in Energy Independence." Notice he didn't say who is doing the investing or with whose money he is investing. It might seem as if spending -- I mean investing -- your money is Obama's forte, but to me, it smells like more capitalism-crushing B.O. (See http://www.spreadingbo.com.)
This president has mastered cloaking the truth in oratory rhetoric. In last Saturday's presidential address, Obama hailed his oft-repeated petroleum apologetic: "While we consume 20 percent of the world's oil, we only have 2 percent of the world's oil reserves." The problem is that 2 percent to which he refers is extant reserves, not what we could produce. That's deceptive!
Speaking of misleading, this past week, Chu was at it again as he testified before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power. Dodging a question about whether he practices what he preaches by owning an electric car, Chu replied sheepishly, "No, I don't own a car at the moment." (Before you commend him for his bio-walking, it should be noted that he's chauffeured in U.S. government Cadillac Esplanades, which, of course, run on fossil fuels like his wife's BMW.)
If you are ready for real hope and change, then I have the option for you.
I believe we can continue to seek alternative energy solutions while lowering gas prices by implementing a super energy solution, the one that former speaker of the House and current GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has proposed.
Gingrich's plan? As I noted last week, it is the polar opposite of Obama's. Newt is ready on day one of his presidency to begin to implement his plan to expand leasing of federal lands for oil and gas development, condense regulations to make it easier for companies to build new extraction sites, tap shale reservoirs, start building the Keystone XL pipeline, replace the Environmental Protection Agency with a new, economically rational Environmental Solutions Agency, and, as a result of these bold solutions, end our dependency on foreign oil, reduce the cost of gas (to $2.50 per gallon), create millions of domestic American jobs, and bring in billions of dollars of new revenue for the U.S. by making us one of the largest global exporters of various fuels.
You can get many more details of Newt's energy- and job-building plan by watching his 30-minute address at http://bit.ly/xcKGuT.
Newt and I, as well as millions of other American patriots, believe in aggressively pursuing renewable energy alternatives and development, but not at the risk of losing our petroleum and economic shorts while we're doing it. As is often the case in life and politics, the answer is "both... and..."
It bears repeating that Bloomberg Businessweek reported in November that "unlocking vast reserves of shale gas could solve the energy crisis, the jobs crisis, and the deficit."
If you are ready for real change -- if you want to stabilize our economy, increase jobs, lower gas prices and restore our republic simultaneously -- then shout it out to Washington and the nation: "Get off your gas! Drill, and vote Newt Gingrich!"
For many more ways in which the Obama administration is contributing to higher gas prices, see The Heritage Foundation's February 2011 report "10 Things You Need to Know About High Gas Prices and Obama's Oil Policy."
In next week's article, I'm going to reveal a video more incriminating than Andrew Breitbart's.