Skip to comments.As Gas Prices Rise, Obama Pushes His Green Energy Money Laundering Operation
Posted on 03/07/2012 11:44:01 AM PST by Kaslin
RUSH: Obama's press conference yesterday was amazing. No questions about the economy. There were very few questions about the budget, the debt, the lack of a budget, the debt. One person did ask -- Ed Henry of Fox asked -- about gasoline prices. And Obama said in answer, "Ed, just from a political perspective, do you think the president of the United States going into reelection wants gas prices to go higher? Is there anybody here who thinks that that makes a lot of sense?" Where was the follow-up? Where was the follow-up to this?
"Mr. President, in 2008 didn't you call for higher prices for gasoline and carbon-based energy? With all due respect, gasoline is carbon-based, sir! Didn't your Energy Secretary just say, in testimony up on Capitol Hill, that you're not interested in reducing the price of gas, you want to get us off oil?"
Where was the follow-up?
Here is a man who has stated numerous times that he wants the price of energy higher.
(impression) "Uh, Ed, you really think president of the United States wants rising gas price before the election?"
I'm not sure with this guy.
Can I say something about this whole notion of getting rid of oil? It's another one of these things you have to stop and think about logically for a second. Ask: "And replace it with what?" Obama's in North Carolina today. He's at a Daimler truck factory, a Mercedes Benz truck factory somewhere in North Carolina. By the way, he's spending a lot of time in North Carolina 'cause they're in trouble there. The Democrats are in trouble in North Carolina. They're not at all confident they're gonna win it. He's at this truck factory to promote new green energy. It's nothing but a slush fund! There's no business there. Every one of his solar industry things is a scam. Wind energy: Scam.
Now he wants green energy for this, this truck plant. The next time you're outside, the next time you happen to be looking in the sky and you happen to see an airplane (preferably a jet airliner), I want to ask yourself: "Okay, we take that out of the sky and we replace it with what? What 'green energy' is going to replace that jet airplane?" What's in that jet airplane? People. Cargo. If you are gonna be one of the first to try to get a new iPad, they're all being flown here from China. Apple bought up every ounce of cargo space on DHL and some others. Nobody else can get their stuff shipped in. How would Apple get that stuff here without oil?
How would anybody get their stuff anywhere without oil?
It's not possible to get off of oil!
RUSH: Seriously, it's just as fatuous, folks, to say that there is a war on women being waged by the Republican Party. It's patently absurd, if you just stop for a brief moment and think about it. Now, I know there are people that say, "Rush, Rush, it's not what you say; it's how people hear you." I know. See, I live in Literalville. I am the mayor of Realville. And while I understand deception, spin, perception, and all that, I prefer dead in-the-eye, straight-on, here is what I mean. I don't like speaking in riddles and I don't like assuming that people know what's in my mind before I say something. So when I hear that there is a war on women, it's absurd. It's fatuous.
The real hilarity is that there are armies of stupid, small-minded Democrat voters who actually will be made to believe this kind of thing 'cause they're so bent on having an outlet for their hatred every day. So it's the same thing with, "Well, really we're not interested in lowering the gasoline price. We want to get the nation off of oil." See, oil is the fuel of the engine of freedom, and that's dead-on accurate right between your eyes. That's not spin; that's not deception; that's not in any way painting pictures. Oil is the fuel of the engine of freedom, and there is no replacement for it. There is no substitute for it.
Okay, so what is the purpose, then, of all of this green energy stuff? The purpose is an expanding government with people like Barack Obama in command and control of as much of the daily workings of this country as they can be, all the way down to what doctor you see and whether or not you're going to be treated for an illness that you have. And perhaps even more control. What you eat. We just had the story yesterday of food injustice. It's coming. Every one of Obama's crony capitalist deals with solar energy has gone belly up. And every one of them has involved a slush fund that ends up coming back to Obama in the form of campaign contributions, just like the Democrat Party's relationship with unions is basically a money laundering operation.
I know there's some of you here today who've not listened to this program before. You're curious what's going on. So those of you who are regular, indulge me. I'm gonna go back, say some things for our new arrivals to try to help them understand. Now, I know, it sounds really bad to say that the Democrats and the unions are a money laundering operation, because money laundering, you associate that with drug cartels and stuff. "Wow, this Limbaugh guy, I can't believe how over the top he is. The president is a money launderer?" Well, yeah. Let me explain it.
Organized labor, 90% or more of all campaign donations go to Democrats. That money comes from dues that are forcibly taken from union workers who have no say in how their union dues are spent. Many of those unions are made up of people who work for governments: federal, state, and local. They are paid by taxpayers. The taxpayers via their taxes pay these people. And on average, union, state government, federal government, union employees earn twice as much as nonunion American citizens who are paying their salaries. Well, where does the money, all this millions and millions of dollars that gets donated to the Democrats come from? It comes from union dues.
So the operation's very simple. Taxpayers pay for the salaries of union workers in government, anyway. Those union members pay dues, the dues are collected, and the money goes to the Democrat Party. Taxpayers are basically contributing to Barack Obama when they have no intention of it. It's a money laundering operation. It is a circuitous way. When Obama comes up with favorable policies, the Democrats favorable policies for union employees, it's because the beneficiaries of this new financial policy are gonna see jobs. For example, during the stimulus bill, so-called shovel-ready jobs, all that was, was money to keep union workers employed in the states and at various bureaucracies of the federal government, 'cause those people pay dues, those people contribute to the Democrat Party's reelection efforts.
The stimulus bill was to keep those people employed. It wasn't to create new roads and bridges. It didn't happen, did it? It wasn't to create shovel-ready jobs or to fill 'em. There weren't any, right? It's two years since the stimulus and the Democrats are complaining the same stuff needs to be done, but we spent a trillion dollars. Where are the results? What's to show for it? The money didn't go to jobs, to you. It went to unionized people for the most part, teachers mostly. Wisconsin got 16% of it. So the same thing with all this solar energy stuff, or wind energy. Solyndra is the big example. Totally underwritten by grants and loans that were forgiven by the federal government. The companies go bust because they can't compete 'cause there's no business. There is no solar energy business yet.
They're trying to force a business down everybody's throat that doesn't exist. Businesses evolve out of need and creativity and invention in the private sector. Government doesn't start anything. All it does, basically, is take from. But these dollars that Obama spent on Solyndra and other such organizations that failed also went to salaries, to the people who ran the companies and they have been found to be on record as donating to Obama, another slush fund, another money laundering operation. All this green energy stuff, it's simply a circuitous way for Obama to get his hands on taxpayer dollars. Folks, there's no substitute for oil. There's no replacement for it. We are not going to get off of oil. We are not going to have automobiles, airplanes, anything that moves, without oil. It isn't going to happen, because there is no alternative.
Have you ever stopped to think why we use oil and its derivatives, such as gasoline, kerosene, jet fuel, have you ever wondered why? Do you think it's a conspiracy? Big Oil's gotten together to conspire with others to make sure that only their product is used to power airplanes and cars? Not how it happens. It happens in the free market because it's what works. It's what powers the internal combustion engine. It's not a conspiracy. It's not big business getting together to monopolize and control and deny you freedom of choice, of fuels. It's because it works. It's found to be the cheapest and most economic and the most efficient way to move people and goods and services around. It works. That's why.
There's nothing better than oil. There's nothing even close to it. We are blessed to have it. We are blessed to have the technology to know how to refine it and make additional products from it, which you find in your everyday life. It is not evil. And the people who work in that business are not evil. They contribute to greatness and the possibility of greatness. They contribute to people's dreams coming true. They make it possible for us to feed ourselves cheaply without having to kill each other to get something to eat. Oil is something for which everybody should be thankful.
Now, Barack Obama himself, yesterday in his press conference, said, (paraphrasing) "Well, one of the reasons for high gasoline prices is the instability in the Middle East." Really? When is there not instability in the Middle East? There has always been instability in the Middle East, ever since Adam and Eve blew it. And there will always be instability in the Middle East. It's nothing new.
In fact, doesn't that instability in the Middle East argue even more for coming up with sources of oil that are not in the Middle East? If that's an unstable region, it is dangerous. If that supply could be negatively impacted simply by the Iranians blocking the Strait of Hormuz, why do we want to continue to make ourselves vulnerable to that when we have our own oil? We've got it in shale in the Dakotas. We've got it in Alaska. We've got it in the Gulf of Mexico. There's one guy and his political party making sure that we can't get it. Barack Hussein Obama does not want this nation to be independent of Middle Eastern oil.
Nobody can convince me he does. He opposed building the Keystone pipeline to get oil from Canada, that would create eventually tens of thousands jobs, by the way. But he doesn't have that because his left-wing, fringe kook base would be really mad at him because they hate oil. They hate progress. They hate technological advancement. If they had their way, we would all be living like they do in the hills of Afghanistan. "Instability in the Middle East." That's one of the reasons for high gas prices. Well, wait, we have a solution: We have our own oil.
"Nah, it's too dirty, too risky. It kills wildlife, kills plants, kills grass, kills frogs. It's too risky, too expensive. It pollutes! Global warming destroys the planet."
Well, then why are we using it at all? Why don't we ban it if it's that bad? We can't ban it because we can't get along without it! For 30 years the Democrats have been saying, "You can't say that the answer is drilling for oil 'cause gonna take four or five years." Well, four or five years was NOW in 1970. In 2000 they said, "Oh, you can't drill. It's gonna take three to four years, maybe five years for us to get any oil." Well, now is five years after 2000. If we'd have increased drilling at any point in the last 30 years when the Democrat Party objected, we would have independence when it comes to foreign oil. The Democrat Party's not interested in that. In fact, your best bet is to believe the opposite of what they say on most everything.
What economic purpose does an artificial scarcity of any and all forms of energy serve?
People will swiftly adopt any source of energy that has acceptable costs, so long as it is not more expensive than what it replaces. But to arbitrarily increase costs, with no compensating offsets or benefits, is tantamont to rationing, a bad idea whenever it is applied. What we have today is another form of the stagflation we were suffering under the misguided agenda of the Carter Administration, with energy costs substituting for the outrageous interest rates that then prevailed.
Remember the push in this country under Carter to adopt the metric system? We still have miles, gallons, pounds and acres. I know what a kilometer, a liter, a kilogram and a hectare are. I just don’t care.
Obama can’t lie his way out of this one, but he is going to give it his best. People might want to look at the last big spike, and what made those prices drop. It is clear that the biggest obstacle in the way of more production and discouraging OPEC is Obama. We are experiencing Obama gas prices. Don’t let him lie his way out of it.
There is no “economic purpose”, unless you count “crashing the American economy” as an economic purpose.
It’s part of the control agenda. People who can’t afford energy become dependent. And when they’re dependent, they’re controlled.
Energy is LIFE. Without energy, our lives are pretty much forfeit.
Check out the E85 MPG/BTU adjusted prices!
I wonder if the amount of TAXPAYER money that subsidizes the ETHANOL in it has been factored in.
Forget what the price per GALLON is; what is the cost per MILE?
IIRC, the expalnation is at the bottom of the page in the real small print.
... according to the Energy Information Administration E-85 delivers approximately 25 percent fewer BTUs by volume than conventional gasoline...
So; with 12 Gallons of E85 run thru my tank; I could have to put in 9 of regular to go the same distance.
I’m due for gas this morning; so I’ll check the prices at the the pump here in Greenfield, IN.
Catch you a bit later...
Regular was $3.689
E85 was $3.399
Equivalence would be $3.689*3 compared to $3.399*4
It would cost me $11.07 for regular to go distance X,
and $13.60 to go the same distance.
I just got 3 new tires for the rust bucket yesterday.
It’s been a while since it has set level!
Mine is in worse shape that this!
LOL....That is pretty rough.
Don’t know what they are getting for gas in Mt. Carmel or Orderville. I need to make a run to Kanab this morning. They are usually $.10-$.15 less down there. I hope is is under your prices.
Hmmm... In Texas, E85 is Regular, they also have ethanol in premium, IIRC.
It’s salvageable. Put a K-member and a 327 in it!
Those conversions are VERY heavy in front and tend to plow thru corners.
Now a small V6 might do better and not jam up against the firewall so much.
There’s not much room in the engine compartment even for the small stock 4 cylinder.
Excellent piece. Guess they didn’t succeed in shutting him up. LOL.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.