The above is from T.Boone Pickens' website and his plan for America.

For anyone who claims any form of financial conservativism, this plan should be looked at.

Yeah, I know he is pushing wind as part of his new business venture. But, it is refreshing to see an oil man take down the wildcatter's hat and put on a green sambraro.

Wurley

Liberals certainly should have confidence in US Industry.  Certainly it can be depended upon to produce oil if congress opens up more areas for exploration. 

With increased oil prices, the liberals have to justify the enormous expense the consumer will face if we don’t get more oil.  Oil is the best and most economical source of energy for  a long time (decades), and liberals need to show that their alternatives will either cost less, or provide benefits worth the added consumer expense.  Thy cant.  Al Gore did a good but ineffectual job today on the news shows.  Consumers are not ready to abandon their automobiles and a dim plan that leads down that road,  will be rejected by voters.

Xian

We need to do both.  Develop our oil resources AND alternatives.  As oil dries up (and that could be a long, long time) the price rises and alternate fuels become  more attractive. 

There is absolutely no sense in limiting the US use of  fossile fuels arbitratilly.  If we don’t use them other countries will and we will pay both ways,   more pollution AND higher prices  for US consumers.  That won’t sell in these economic times.

There is something about the Dem party that makes them obstructionist in developing new oil resources.  They are obstructing many energy generating plans (such as constructing nukes) that will reduce our dependency and be more friendly to the environment. 

France now produces 75% of its electricity from nuclear (Up for 70% a few years ago) but the dims still won't budge. 

The bind is that they will pay the price in November if they continue to obstruct and McCain and the Repubs make their case.

Actually, the current figure is that France gets 80% of its power from Nukes.

The bind is that if given the opportunity to express their opinion, the American public would vote for more nukes (certainly before all windmills as gorey proclaims) yet the dims prevent the people from getting their opinions heard.

Take that total and divide it  out over the per year increase--1.3% increase per year. Correspondingly, the oil production did not increase as much, but there was an increase.

Also, in the past, when  the prices have had a similar increase, such as the early 90s, the fuel costs only rose about 25%, not 200 to 300%, as is the case with the current situation.

The fact Enron was not involved in oil is irrelevant. The point is the way they took a segment of the market and manipulated it was the point and is the point. They played mostly in the electricity market, but had by some extension,  influence in the natural gas market. They played the games to make the money in the deregulated market. They took a gamble and they lost.

The issue with Enron isn't the end result of the market's being disrupted. It's the moral climate that exists within any of the big energy companies is so corrupted that the make money at all costs is destroying the US economy. Watch the numbers. The CPI is increasing in a way that hasn't been seen since the 82 recession. The number of new job creation is stagnant at best, shrinking at worse. The established job market is shrinking, as evidenced by the airlines and the auto makers trimming jobs left and right. What has not been reported yet is the downstream affects that these job loses will have. What isn't fully evident yet is the impact on the local main streets when the local businesses such as in Janesville cannot survive. Beloit is a good example of what happens when a singular large employer leaves town. They haven't been functioning as a community since the late 70s when they started to lose employment.

The fuel prices are merely an exacerbating affect. The added insult to the injury. Food prices are up, and there isn't a significant indication that the prices will come down any time soon. Wages are stagnant. So, what does a family do? All of those electronics that seem to be keeping the economy looking rosy are going to slow. Then what?

The fuel prices are also an example of the corporate contempt for the average person. After watching the Senate hearings in June, when the oil execs had to testify about what they are doing. One point that was hit home very clearly--the amount of money most companies are spending on "alternative energy" is roughly equal to the amount of total advertising they are buying on American airwaves. Not one of the oil execs could answer what exactly they have for an R&D budget. They seemed to be looking for a new question or a recess, because they were caught in their own reports pulling a shame on the American public.

I find it very interesting that so many people who are self-professed conservatives with a basis for this found in their Xian faith. How is this?

Acts 2:45 - "Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need."

If this isn't a blueprint for "sharing the wealth," I don't know what is.

I am not advocating a wide scale fire sale, but I am strongly in favor of trying to reel in this wide-spread desire to earn and earn without concern for anyone but a group of share holders.

Supporting corporate America isn't really a Xian position. In reality, the current state of American business would be anything but Xian.

f

I always cringe when I witness people trying to apply biblical standards to government policy.  And for good reason, they have nothing to do with each other.  It is based upon a fundamental misunderstanding of the gospel message and a fundamental misunderstanding of government as well.

First, the passage you quoted above is an example of Christian brethren sharing their property with other Christian brethren.  This is not a recipe or a blueprint for socialism as you seem to suggest.  Second, the passage suggests the sharing of property on the basis of need.  This means that they didn't forfeit everything they had, but rather made available everything they had according to whatever need may so arise.  The two are different.



And you are certainly welcome to your opinion, but trying to apply Christian principles to government policy is wrongheaded.  The gospel message is meant to guide us into holy living and provide us a message of salvation.  Government policy is meant to provide us protection from harm.  The goals of each institution are fundamentally different, and therefore should not be transposed upon each other. 

If you truly believe that Christian ideology should be applied to government policy, then we should also expect government to preach the gospel, turn the other cheek, go the extra mile, love their enemies, and so on.  Governments aren't in the business of altruism.  If they were, they would cease to exist.

I don't know if you caught the announcement on Friday from the Senate Committee on Energy that put forth the plan that should take the US forward.

This is the type of plan that Cheney in his stupidity couldn't come up with. Offshore oil drilling, no closer than 50 miles--good idea. The tourism industry that no one seems to consider is protected form the eyesores of oil rigs and the coastal shores are protected from spills. Energy alternatives are part of the package that move the US forward--good idea. The research costs are subsidized by the feds, so, there should be some positive investment in the alternatives. Tax credits for alternate energy and for conservation programs--good idea. If the average American has an incentive to move to an alternate fuel or to button up their homes, the energy used is a savings to them and to the market.

The slams against the liberals being obstructionist or in some way against doing with what we have is a red herring. I have been against a drilling only plan. It is too short sighted. It would fail to correct the market conditions that seem to be 20 years behind the reality of the fuel supplies and demands.

The consideration of all possible energy programs in a single comprehensive plan is what the country needed. I believe this is the type of program that can meet the needs.

As for some of the pols that have been busy railing on Obama since his Friday statement, reality is the details of the plan are still being published and should be available early this week. The announcement was a brief explanation of the areas that were included in the plan was all that was presented. The details of how the financing is being performed are still being published, but the announcement said it was paid for.

I believe there should be an endorsement of the bipartisan plan from the Obama campaign. McCain would probably endorse it as well. This is the type of action the US needs and the citizens want.

Thank you for taking the bait. 

The point of the passage is to get the conversation started. The idea behind the passage and government is not to institute a biblical rule, or theocracy. I want Xians to examine where the process of politics and the Xian example of life intersect and how that intersection is at odds with one another--because it clearly is.

The current stand in the political right is to have corporate America as a general concept work out the best solutions for the country. That plan has been in place for the last 8 years. Where has it helped? September 11 excluded, the economy has been shrinking despite the "indicators." The indicators that are used are meant to encourage the stock markets. The majority of this country's wealth in the last 20 years has been found in the stock market. The 90's was a prime example. The DotCom fiasco was a watershed moment in greed for America. This instilled a concept in the average person that as long as the markets maintain an upward slant from left to right, things are good. This allowed the corporate interests to make plays on rule changes that have had disasterous results.

The housing market is suffering a contraction, something that hasn't occurred since the 1930s. Why? After the Great Depression, many controls were put into place to protect the economy and the taxpayer. This controls were pulled out in the last 10 years. The idea of a no income mortgage is ludicrous when you think about it. Sure, the argument can be made that people need to be responsible and take care of their finances. That's not an argument that I deny. But, the factor of intelligent understanding of the mortgage industry plays into the picture. When the broker or the loan officer is selling a product and they are getting paid only when they make a loan, the details will be lost in translation. Someone who isn't savvy with the ins and outs of a financial transaction are victims.

This is where the Xian has to say something. This is where the care for a brother or sister comes into play. If the mortgage industry is prohibited from predatory lending practices, the weaker among us are protected, the honest efforts of our brothers and sisters are considered important.

As for health care, there is a need. Jesus spent much of his ministry healing as he was preaching. Sure, a miracle worker got attention, but there wasn't a magic show. There was a physical manifestation of care and concern for a person, along with the spiritual. To deny a class of society access to health care because they cannot afford it only perpetuates the societal problems conservatives are complaining about. Get people off of wellfare. Good idea. But, one problem. When a person is leaving wellfare, they are often leaving their health care. The choice for some is easily understandable--stay on the doll and have food and health care, or work and loose one or the other. What kind of a choice is this? Is this a choice that really is in line with Xian values as Christ would teach. I doubt it.

My point is to force the issue of Xian charity and the political spectrum into honest discussion. Self-reliance is a Xian principle. But so is charity. In the current state of this country, with the prevalence of prosperity gospel preachers, there is little doubt that the poor among us are being ignored more and more. Xian charity through the social networks has been dismantled over the years. So, the government stepped into take care of what had been a private matter. With the current process in place, any changes have to be made in due consideration of the effects it will have on people.

THe idea of social justice should be high on everyone's list. Beyond the basics of Xian principles, but one a personal note that if it could happen to someone else, it could happen to you. Protection of a Nazi's right to free speech in the 70's was considered taboo. But, the basics of this protection is essential to a Xian's right meet on Sunday morning or any other night of the week. It isn't a religious principle that is fundamental to the Constitution, but the Constitution itself.

In the same way the Xian has to make sure that the politics of the whole is addressed before committing to a political arena. Liberal and conservative are two choices out of many. Libertarian, Green and Independent are also in the spectrum. While each holds points that could be easily taken as a the only reason for selecting that affiliation, within the overarching political aims of each, is there a place where a Xian's values can find a majority agreement? Is there a true compassionate conservative? Is there really a values liberal? Sure, one can find a person that fits the mold. But, the bigger problem is the way the platform of values and concerns are set. I don't find either side of the political aisle is effective in their actions. The end of the argument usually falls to how to keep power and not how to help the most with the biggest bang for the buck.

The concept of socialist government was tried and successfully used in Milwaukee in the early 20th century. The park system and the water and sewer systems are prime examples of how the best advantage for the people was reached. In the process, the concerns of public health were addressed. The environment was protected, as was the livelihood of fisheries along the lakefront. The advent of a water and sewer system allowed for a greater economic development. The beer for which Milwaukee is famous is largely a product of the water that was available. The expansion of the water supply system allowed for an expansion of the breweries and the addition of good paying jobs.

Is socialism without problems? No. There is no such thing as a perfect system. But, when the concept of greatest good for the greatest numbers is considered, socialism generally serves the people the best. The ideals behind socialism are simple. Everyone needs water. Everyone needs fire protection. Everyone needs health care. Everyone needs help when a company closes up and income is gone. Everyone needs a school system that actually teaches children to succeed. Everyone needs to have the opportunity to care for immediate family when they fall ill. Everyone has the right to decent pay for honest work. Care for the elderly is a common interest. Healthy children only help society.

These are core concepts of socialism. They are also pretty much inline with Xian values.

Then why is there such a focus by the Xian right on doing this very thing? Abortions are a government is that is allowed to exist. If a person is Xian, they wouldn't look to abortion. If they are not a Xian, then it really isn't an issue.

According to your statement, the government is amoral. There is no right or wrong, and therefore Xians have no place to voice any opinion.

But, isn't there a Xian directive to be witness to the world? The idea that we need to be standing on a street corner to serve as a witness is one dimensional and misses the point of letting our actions speak for us. Sometimes the simple act of performing an act of Xian charity is the loudest witness that can be given.

I've been called wrongheaded before. Doesn't matter much to me. I continue to weigh the actions of politics with the convictions of Christ. For much of my life I have been in a slightly different place than most of the people around me. Through much retrospection I have found that others aren't wrong, they just take a little longer to see what I see.

Another example of the Bind is that Pelosi and the Dems  try to convincthe public that the Republicans don’t have a comprehensive energy plan.

The do and it differs from the Democrat plan is that it really will result in more Oil and Gas and other alternate fuels.  It is comprehensive and  compares with the Dem plan that is no plan at all to produce energy, but a plan to prevent the development of oil and Gas.

The Republican Plan

http://www.gop.gov/energy/americanenergyact/


To increase the supply American-made energy in environmentally sound ways, the legislation will:

Open our deep water ocean resources, which will provide an additional three million barrels of oil per day, as well as 76 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, as proposed in H.R. 6108 by Rep. Sue Myrick (R-NC). Rep. John Peterson (R-PA) has also worked tirelessly on this issue.


Open the Arctic coastal plain, which will provide an additional one million barrels of oil per day, as proposed in H.R. 6107 by Rep. Don Young (R-AK);


Allow development of our nation’s shale oil resources, which could provide an additional 2.5 million barrels of oil per day, as proposed in H.R. 6138 by Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI); and


Increase the supply of gas at the pump by cutting bureaucratic red tape that essentially blocks construction of new refineries, as proposed in H.R. 6139 by Reps. Heather Wilson (R-NM) and Joe Pitts (R-PA).
To improve energy conservation and efficiency, the legislation will:

Provide tax incentives for businesses and families that purchase more fuel efficient vehicles, as proposed in H.R. 1618 and H.R. 765 by Reps. Dave Camp (R-MI) and Jerry Weller (R-IL);


Provide a monetary prize for developing the first economically feasible, super-fuel-efficient vehicle reaching 100 miles-per-gallon, as proposed in H.R. 6384 by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT); and


Provide tax incentives for businesses and homeowners who improve their energy efficiency, as proposed in H.R. 5984 by Reps. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), Phil English (R-PA), and Zach Wamp (R-TN), and in H.R. 778 by Rep. Jerry Weller (R-IL).
To promote renewable and alternative energy technologies, the legislation will:

Spur the development of alternative fuels through government contracting by repealing the “Section 526” prohibition on government purchasing of alternative energy and promoting coal-to-liquids technology, as proposed in H.R. 5656 by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), in H.R. 6384 by Rob Bishop (R-UT), and in H.R. 2208 by Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL);


Establish a renewable energy trust fund using revenues generated by exploration in the deep ocean and on the Arctic coastal plain, as proposed by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA);


Permanently extend the tax credit for alternative energy production, including wind, solar and hydrogen, as proposed in H.R. 2652 by Rep. Phil English (R-PA) and in H.R. 5984 by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD); and


Eliminate barriers to the expansion of emission-free nuclear power production, as proposed in H.R. 6384 by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT).

As to the last,  How come Nuclear works in France???