Pelosi, Reid, Obama are either genuinely retarded, or evil

With an approval rating of 9%, Pelosi and Reid are realling pandering to that all-important voter who believes we should live in tents and substitute eggplant for steak.

Their steadfast refusal to accept the Economics 101 supply-and-demand law is staggeringly retarded, and I'm not using that term lightly. When oil cost $19 per barrel, it's fine to pander to people who live in trees, wipe with fallen maple leaves, and cry at the sound of chainsaws, but when oil costs over $130 per barrel, it's time to take action.

Suppose a virus destroyed our peanut crops in the US. The price would go up, right? People looking to cash in on its new increased value would find new places to grow peanuts. We saw it in the Inland Northwest with wheat recently. Crops were destroyed in other parts of the world, making the value of each bushel that much more. Our farmers planted more.

Instead, those who would deliberately retard America's ability to produce energy (e.g., Reid, Pelosi), are attempting to point blame on people who speculate on what the price is going to be. Since the oil executives slapped their faces and sent them running with their tails between their legs, they had to find a new target.

Here's the deal with speculators: they look at supply, look at demand, look at bottlenecks in supply, take educated guesses at how those will affect demand, and set a future price based on the best data at hand.

Is that evil? Is it evil to promise farmers $10 per bushel even before they plant an acre's worth of wheat? It's the same, so it has to be equally evil.

The biggest non-sequiter I've heard lately comes from Obama, Pelosi, and Reid. They squawk about how drilling now won't change the price now.

Huh? That is an incredible insult to our intelligence. No one is suggesting it will have an immediate effect. Talk about your straw man--try to debate on actual facts. I posit it would have an immediate effect on speculators' price guesses, but maybe not at the pump. The point is that we've started down the right path.

The rules of economics are not that mysterious. If there's plenty of product, the price will go down. News flash to those who prefer bumper stickers to books: we have plenty of oil. Here's where we have 3 choices for liberals:

1) They're genuinely and intentionally uneducated
2) They want American citizens to be forced to pay more for fuel

Since Obama said he doesn't think $4 gas is a problem, we know that he falls into #2.

Since we know that the higher fuel prices get, the higher ALL prices will be, Obama apparently favors a stagnant or slipping economy.

Since Obama favors raising taxes, spending trillions MORE, and raising capital gains taxes, we know he wants to stifle investments.

We can honestly say, then, that Barak isn't retarded, he wants, for some reason, to hamstring our economy. For the record, Carter probably was retarded in his understanding of economics.

So those of you who prefer politics as usual, Barak is definitely your man.

Not building a refinery since 1976 is the wrong path (Environmentalists: aka, Democrats). Not drilling offshore is the wrong path (Democrats). Forbidding use of oil shale is the wrong path (Democrats). Refusing to allow pumping of oil from a fraction of a percent of an area the size of ANWR is, by definition, retarding our ability to move our economy forward.