Yip Yip Yahoo folks! It's Friday, end of the week, and boy did it end with a bang!  I want to get right into it folks.  You know it's so funny how liberals always lecture us on compassion, and "understanding of real human issues and faults", but they don't tell you that you have to be a liberal to recieve that same treatment back from them.  I'm sure many of you by know have heard of the Patrick Kennedy accident that happened Wednesday night.  I'm sure all of you remember the incedent revolving Ted Kennedy driving a car into a pond and letting a innocent girl drown, and then going home and going to bed, like nothing happened and got off scott free. 

Surprise, surprise, then on Wednesday night Patrick Kennedy, after two witness's saw him drinking, and the first officer on the scene of thet accident, said he smelled alcohol on his breath and saw him staggering back and forth, in other words was reported drunk.  Kennedy, before crashing, nearly hit two other civilians, another cop car, and after crashing said he was on his way to vote at 3:00 in the morning, hours after the session of congress ended for the day.   However, two superior officers just happened to show up and override the first officer, and not only didn't they give Kennedy a breathalizer test, or take him into the station for questioning, they TOOK HIM HOME!  Seems pretty close to incedent involving old pompous Teddy, doesn't it folks?  Is this the "Kennedy Treatment"? Commit crimes and pretend like nothing happened?

So what did Patrick Kennedy have to say about the incedent?  Well, he claims he has a prescription drug addiction problem and is addicted to the sleep drug "Ambien".  He claims he has had a problem with this drug for a long time and others, and admits he needs to seek treatment.  He claims the drug was responsible for his reckless behavior on the road.  Well ok, I give him props for admitting he has a drug problem and needs to go to rehab.  But I have a few major problems with this case.  First, several eyewitness's claimed he was drinking at a bar. Secondly, the first officer on the scene which VERY IMPORTANTLY, was the officer who DID NOT know the offending person was Patrick Kennedy, IMMEADITLEY suspected alcohol.  Third, this officer was overruled by two superior officers who responded after being called in and the ID of the suspect was called in.  I'm sorry but my foul play antenna's are standing straight up on this one.  Red flags are dancing in my head!  Here is another problem I have with all of this.  Let's just say alcohol wasn't involved, even though all the fingers point that way, and lets say all of what Kennedy said is true.  Then WHAT THE HELL'S BELL'S WAS HE DOING BEHIND THE WHEEL?  If this guy's excuse for reckless driving was that he was high off of a pill or whatever, then he should be prosecuted the same as a drunk driver! What the hell is the difference?  Both are under the influence, via drugs or booze.  both endanger lives, both affect reaction time in vehicles, and both are illegal!  I don't understand why people are trying to separate the two.  Can't figure it out for the life of me!  Then you have these two wack job liberals on Hannity and Colmes comparing this to the Dick Cheney hunting accident, in which the local police reported that alcohol played absoluteley NO factor in the accident, nor was a vehicle involved, nor was Dick Cheney under the influence of ANYTHING, weither it be Ambien, alcohol or whatever.

Boy, not to change the subject, and I promise we will get back to this momentarily, but I just heard Jerry Springer tell Sean Hannity on Hannity and  Colmes that, him (Springer) and his kook fringe wing of the Democratic party are the "mainstream" of ideological thought in America.  HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh my oh my oh my!  He thinks Conservatives and Moderates are the exception and Liberals are the rule.  Well, I hate to break the news to Mr Springer but, buddy, you are a KOOK!  Every single shread of evidence tells the opposite.  Here is a bunch of examples:

A) Republicans control the house, the senate, and the presidency.  B) George W. Bush in 2004 got more votes than any other president in history.  C) According to a recent Zogby poll, 66% of Americans consider themselves to be either "somewhat conservative" or "moderate", and only 31% considered themselves either "somewhat liberal" or "liberal".  D) NO democratic presidental candidate has gotten a majority of the vote (50% or more) since Jimmy Carter in 1980, who got exactly 50%.  E) The Pro Life movement is growing by leaps and bounds with most polls showing split between Pro Choice and Pro Life, now at 50/50.  F) Elminate California and New York, and Democrats lose all presidential elections from FDR to present.  And I could go on and on and on.

Mr. Loose Springs Springer then goes on to say that 2/3 of America is now against President Bush, so that must mean that liberalism is mainstream.  That has to be the dumbest thing he said all night.  First off, the polls that have Bush's approval rating at 34% are the same polls that put out exit polls showing John Kerry with a 12 % point lead in the 2004 elections.  They are the same polls in which 75% of respondants are registered Democrats, and 7 out of 10 respondents are either from California or New York.  Let me tell you something folks, polls of this nature are fradulenet and meaningless.  Don't get me wrong, I am not letting Bush off the hook here.  I have not been very happy with his stance on immigration and gas prices, and his spending has always been sour in my eyes as a fiscal Reagan conservative, BUT he has fought about as good a war you can fight, agaisnt a enemy using hospitals, schools, and nursing homes as battle sites, and we are winning.  Terrorists are on the run, their camps and training facilities all but destroyed in Afghanistan and Iraq, and violence is dwindling in Iraq, although if you listen to the drive by media, you wouldn't have a clue about either of those things.  You also wouldn't have a clue about the thriving economy in this country right now.  4.7% unemployment, wages up 5.7% since January, 5.8 million new jobs created the last 2 1/4  years, 4.8 % economic growth the first quarter in 2006, inflation in check, consumer confidence still high, and the stock markets seeing the highest numbers since the bubble burst in 1999, with the Dow Jones closing at just under 11,600 today.  But if you listened to the drive by media, all you hear is "gas prices are at record levels, oil company profits are at record levels, all this economic news is a shock and fluke according to the experts, and a collaspe is right around the corner".  Folks, these people have been spewing this retoric (sp) for the last 2 1/2 years and nothing has happened, except the economy keeps growing.  Here is the dirty little secret.  These people are invested in the defeat of the Bush Administration.  That has been their storyline ever since he "stealed" the election in 2000.  That is why doom and gloom, weither it be in Iraq, news about the economy, or what have you, is all you hear about in the media.

Getting back to Patrick Kennedy quickly as time is short for this segment, the bottom line for this story is that therer is clearly a double standard when dealing with people of political clout, as opposed to people like you or me.  Lets be realistic, Ambien or Alcohol, you or I would be in jail after Wednesday night.  What I think is more laughable than anything else is that the media wants us to give this guy a break because he is addicted to drugs.  A break to me would be a D.U.I, becuase he was obviously under the influence of something to be saying he is going to vote on the senate floor at 3:00 in the morning.  Here's the bottom line folks, don't ever let the left get away with playing the sympathy/compassion card.  These people can be the most ruthless, ravage, and in tolerant people on the politcal spectrum if you disagree with them.  Tolerance is only a rule if you agree with them on the issues.  Try talking with a liberal about abortion and gay marriage, and how they are re writing the english dictionary with both those issues, and you will see how tolerant they are.  Like I said a while back in this program, liberals have no concrete definiton of right vs wrong.  What is right to a liberal is what feels right for the moment or for the individual.  Patrick Kennedy went on a under the influence joyride, nearly taking out several vehicles, but we should be compassionate towards him because he has a admitted drug problem?  But at the sametime it is ok to smear Dick Cheney for a hunting accident, which no charges were filed, and no alcohol was involved.  Such hypocrisy.  The left never ceases to amaze me with their bizarre logic.

Anyways, gotta pack it up for tonight.  Have a great weekend, and back at it next week.  Goodnight.

Long time no see people!  Been extremely busy the last couple of weeks and haven't had a chance to write much which is a shame because alot has happened in the political scene since I wrote last.  What I hear everyone griping about lately is of course gas prices.  I had to laugh the other day when I read about a "price war" between two gas stations out in the Latrobe area (PA), who kept lowering and lowering their prices to try and out do each other, until the police had to step in due to traffic congestion, and "convince" them to raise their prices to dispirse traffic.  Gas prices bottomed out at about 2.35 a gallon before all was said and done.  The results of this silly calamity: two traffic accidents, one involving 3 vehicles, mass congestion on Rt 30, which is already a dangerous highway, and more gas being used from people sitting there waiting in line, then money being saved from the 50 cents difference in price in comparison with other gas stations.  Gas prices now a days have created a furor among many people and rightfully so and it is a problem and is tightening the budget of many families.  But it could be much worse. 

Before we get into economics of gas prices and the oil market, lets look at some of the current prices around the world.  In Canada the average price per gallon, when converted from liters is around $4.75 a gallon, in Europe gas averages about $6.00 a gallon, in Japan almost $8.00 a gallon.  So basically we are paying by far the lowest price anywhere in the industrialized world.

So why is gas so expensive?  Well if you ask anyone on the left, they will tell you it is the "greedy oil companies raping our wallets and gouging us from head to toe".  Of course this is just silly redundant gobbly goop from the anti-business left.  But with most other areas of liberalism the facts always speak otherwise from the retoric.  Lets take a indepth look at the oil industry.  The demand for crude oil has increased 5 times over in the last 10 years.  China and India are both experienceing 10% or better economic growth and this cournty the last 3 years has experienced growth around the 5% mark which is exceptional in itself.  Manufacturing in China and India is flourishing and growing by leaps and bounds, and with this dramatic growth, not to mention population growth, comes the demand for more energy, which means more oil.  China now leads the world in oil consumption, with India and the USA now neck and neck.  As the standard of living increases, more and more people are driving overseas, as they are in this country as oil consumption is at an all time high here also. 

Having said that, we now need to look at some of the economics behind the finished product in the oil industry, which is obviously called gasoline.  Gas is arguably the most in-elastic product on the market, which means demand is NOT effected by price.  We already looked at the demand end of the equation, now it is imparative to look at supply.  Back in the 1990's we had a excess of gasoline on the market and demand was much lower than it is today.  Basic economics tells you that a high supply of a product with relatively low demand for that product will keep the price down, as it did in the 1990's.  However, Oil, the primary ingredient to gasoline, which accounts for 55% of the price is a non renewable resource, which means a constant shrinkage in supply.  Another fact that must be accounted for is that for crude oil to be of any use, it must be refined, which limits the production capacity even more.  In current market with soaring demand and steady to slightly shrinking supply, high prices are a certainty.  The point about gasoline being the most in elastic good on the market is also a key factor as gasoline demand is not price related.  In other words, industry, and individual consumers need gasoline for daily operation regardless of the price.  This combination spells disaster and leads to high prices.  It is also an explanation as to why the slighest effect or potential effect on the supply end of the market can have dramatic effects on price.  Another economic rule is that when supply is steady to falling, demand is soaring, and the product is in-elastic, prices will rise.  This thing is truely economics folks, period.

Now of course, economics makes no sense to liberals, and a rule of liberalism is that success is never allowed unless "we" as liberals reap the benefits.  So of course the left is going to target the oil industry.  If you look at the targets of the left in the business world, they are always companies that succeed, like walmart, big drug companies, and of course the oil industry.  Lets look at some financial data for Exxon Mobile, the largest evil oil company of them all.  Exxon mobile reported 103 billion $ in revenue for the first quarter this year, and 94.6 billion in expenses for a 8.4 billion $ profit.  That comes out to about a 7.8% gross profit for the quarter, or almost 8 cents for every dollar's worth of gasoline they sell.  So if you do the simple math, with $3.00 a gallon gasoline, the oil companies are making slightly less than a quarter on every gallon of gasoline sold.  In case you are wondering the total industry average for gross profit margins in the USA is about 7.5 %, putting Exxon in line with the average.  So what does this mean for the price of gas?  Well lets say that the oil companies all decided to cut their profits in half to save the consumer money at the pump.  If this scenerio became a reality, it would save the consumer a mere 12 cents a gallon at the pump.  Bottom line is oil companies make very little off of a gallon of gas.  Only a few cents on the dollar.  However because the demand for gasoline is through the roof around the world, that few cents to every dollar is that adds up to billions of dollars when it is all said and done.  Interestingly though, of the 8.4 billion that Exxon mobile made the first quarter of this year, only 2.3 billion of that was made in the USA.  Exxon has customers in 200 countries around the world.  So what is the point of this?  Exxon's profit is NOT the reason for high prices.   It is pure economics as stated previously.

There is one group who is making more money off gasoline than the oil companies would ever dream of.  And that would be the government.  You see, liberals hate profit unless it is the government who is profiting.  How does that government make money of gas?  TAXES.  One of the favorite words of liberals.  The federal gas tax is currently 18 cents to a gallon, and state gas taxes average 27 cents a gallon.  Now lets say that the federal gas tax was cut, and that tax was moved to something like cigarettes and then doubled to make up for any loss.  That would save the consumer 18 cents a gallon, already more than one would save if oil company profits were cut in half.  Now lets take it one step further.  The federal government could get the states to lower their taxes by at least half by withholding federal highway funding if states do not comply.  That would save another 14 cents on average for a whopping 32 cents a gallon savings at the pump.  That is a true solution and only one of many.  Not that taxes are the reason for high gas prices but it would be a big help if they were suspended or cut. 

Folks I gotta run for today, but we will continue with this topic next time.  We have only scratched the surface today. Peace out!