Sweeping and Unprecedented Indeed

Vladimir Putin rattles his nuclear sabre and Joe Biden responds by telling him what we are not going to do.  Good strategy, Joe.  A somewhat nuanced nuclear threat by Putin and Mr. Biden reacts by stopping a scheduled nuclear missile test for fear of it being misconstrued as a provocation. Ironically, North Korea decided it was high time for them to unveil a longer range, more powerful missile and promptly launched a test of their own.  Zelensky has repeatedly asked for NATO to enforce a no-fly zone to prevent Ukrainian cities from continually being pounded from the air, but Biden deferred again citing the risk of direct engagement and the possibility that a US aircraft would shoot down a Russian aircraft and initiate World War III.  The Ukrainian President then requested that we supply him with aircraft for his beleaguered air force.  Poland engaged in what was perhaps a self-serving diplomatic two-step by offering up their older MIGs, an aircraft that the Ukrainians would be familiar with, by way of passing them along to the US in Germany who would then transfer them to the Ukrainians. This time the request went all the way to the Oval office where Biden promptly shot it down citing, once again, the risk of provocation,followed by a long diatribe about the aircraft being older, requiring too much servicing, and would likely be ineffective as opposed to sending more shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles like the Stinger.  As Mitt Romney eloquently put it “if they want MIGs, give them the MIGs”.   So we send more dangerous high-tech missiles, but balk at a few jets? 

 

And what exactly is Mr. Biden doing anyway, besides telling Putin what we are not going to do?  Whoa, punishing sanctions, of course.  I can imagine the fear this struck in Mr. Putin.  He may have to cut back on the caviar. According to Chris Murphy, yet another lightweight politician from Connecticut who described Biden’s diplomacy as “stunning”, the administration has imposed “a sanctions package that is sweeping, that is unprecedented, that is breaking the back of the Russian economy”.  Wow, Chris, were you wearing hip boots when you spewed that?  As Kim Strassel revealed in the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Biden has been a dismal failure on the sanction front as well. He failed to impose any deterrence as the Russians amassed troops at the Ukrainian border, and he continues to lead from behind, pandering to the Europeans and giving Putin a pass on energy exports. Only when Congress starting pushing a bill through the House did Biden respond with an oil embargo of sorts so he wouldn’t miss the opportunity to appear that it was his idea. And of course he followed up on that by begging the despots from Saudi Arabia, Iran and Venezuela to pick up the slack for us rather than ramp up US oil production.  Why would you enrich other decidedly unfriendly regimes so they can wantonly pollute when the US has the cleanest energy extraction technology on the planet?  Last I checked, Joe, we are all living in the same biosphere, so precisely who extracts the oil really doesn’t matter, it’s who does it with the least damage to the environment.  And that would be us.  It’s a lot like the days when we had smoking sections on airplanes. Didn’t work so well when you were the first seat in the non-smoking section did it?  And even the whole emphasis on going after the oligarchs.  I think Biden just likes to say oligarch.  Maybe because there are no sibilants in it.  He has trouble with those. Again Ms. Strassel reports that of the 35 oligarchs named by Alexei Navalny, the EU has sanctioned 12 of them, the UK 9, andBiden has sanctioned, uh….none.  Murphy was right, that is “stunning.”  But even more “sweeping and unprecedented” is Biden’s solution to appease the Europeans, to take command of the situation and take the proverbial Russian bull by the horns: we send Kamala Harris to fix it. You have to be kidding. If the Europeans thought for an instant that we weren’t taking this seriously, we could do no better to demonstrate that than send Vice-President Giggles.  What an embarrassment. Even after her developmentally delayed explanation of the crisis (recall “Ukraine is a country in Europe…”) the administration is currently trying to dig her out of her comment that “the United States stand firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance”, somehow failing to realize that Ukraine is actually not a NATO country. This gaffe was prefaced with “So I will say what I know we all say, and I will say over and over again.” That’s a lot of saying from the VP, and that’s something she really should avoid: talking.  

 

As I have said before, as the world plays checkers, Russia and China have been playing chess.  Becoming dominant in the energy sector, expanding their global reach, making their economies sanction proof, expanding their military might and forging new relationships.  They have been opportunistic.  Meanwhile the West has been intent on shooting themselves in the foot, dismantling our energy independence, slashing our military budgets, infatuated with race relations and gender definitions, our countries are consumed by Covid restrictions, equity and green initiatives while our cities burn.  But all this theater aside, who is perhaps learning most from this debacle, who has been watching?  That would be Iran and North Korea.  What we now know is that all it takes is a little nuclear tough talk and Biden reveals the US to be a paper tiger.  Suffer through sanctions and inspections, my friends, because once you get the bomb, you’re on easy street.  And what’s the downside? China will continue to prop up your economy for the benefit of you being a huge thorn in the Great Satan’s side, distracting the US from other priorities while our economy suffers, our military is spread thin, our energy sector crumbles and we become more reliant on foreign oil and foreign mineral mining to satisfy our climate change agenda at home. And of course Taiwan is next on the docket as China seeks to expand its influence in the Pacific Rim.  And once the US loses credibility on the world stage, well underway after the Afghanistan fiasco, and becomes dependent on the importation of energy, the last straw will be to lose the dollar as the world’s reserve currency.  And then, it’s all over.  Checkmate.

Irritating

It is incredibly annoying to hear all these liberal urban dwellers lecture the rest of us on weaning ourselves off oil dependence by simply driving an EV. Aside from the financial burden of shelling out upwards of $50K for the privilege, it seemingly never occurred to these smug elitists that a vast number of we Americans don’t live in urban areas with short commutes to work, leisure activities, and supplies. EVs have neither the range nor the cargo capacity to satisfy the needs of our millions of suburban and rural residents; fossil-fueled cars, vans, and trucks are infinitely better choices for providing economic travel and utility. And what of infrastructure if EVs were economically available to The masses: how will the grid support their fueling; where will you find a convenient and economical charging station in our more suburban and rural outreaches. Further, they seem to forget how we heat our homes and where things like plastic and asphalt come from, blind to our critical dependence on oil at this juncture in history. Short-sighted, these “greenies.” 

NPR: The Twilight Zone

You have now entered the Twilight Zone.  No, not the Rod Serling variety. Rather NPR’s afternoon program All Things Considered.  Or more aptly, Only Liberal Things Considered.  I knew I was in for a bumpy ride when they announced that Biden has restored 90% of the jobs lost in the pandemic, solely responsible for adding some 467000 jobs in January.  Failing to mention of course that his Covid policies cost the jobs in the first place, policies that the democrats are furiously trying to reel back in.  Sorry, butthe economy is going to improve despite Joe Biden. And of course the claim that his approval rating in the polls was bumped up 9 percentage points after his state of the union address, despite the average bump historically being in the vicinity of 0.4%, is preposterous.  Did they survey only college educated white women in a Massachusetts Nordstrom’s? Or maybe just the audience that listened to the Ukraine portion of the speech, then promptly fell asleep for the mumbling, uninspired remainder. But the NPR program really started to take on a bizarre, otherworldly tone when they introduced “US Lawmakers are using the Ukraine Crisis to Push for Domestic Energy Production”.  And by US lawmakers, I assume they mean Republicans.  Oh, the horror.  They begin by stating that sanctions have the “notable omission” of Russia’s oil and gas exports, as their inclusion would “only worsen the price problem” that Americans are experiencing at the pump”. But this is where they reveal their true colors by stating “but that’s not stopping lawmakers who want a boost in domestic energy production”.  As if wanting to decrease the western civilization’s dependence on Russian oil to fund their incursion into Ukraine is a bad thing.  Rather the implication is that we should continue funding Russia by importing oil at $117 per barrel, a notable increase over the $55 a barrel during the Trump administration when we were net exporters of oil.  You recall those halcyon days now don’t you? Energy producers have supplied a wish list of solutions from approving the Keystone XL pipeline, to drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge and fast tracking export terminals, including ending the moratorium on new oil and gas leases on federal lands and waters, all proposals that NPR and liberal climate change activists call “not new”.  Like somehow old solutions are no longer viable.  But NPR labels all this “rhetoric” as “misleading”.  Get this: “The Biden Administration has signaled that it want to move the country away from climate warming fossil fuels”.  No kidding.  Instead it wants to move us towards climate warming battery production and mining for the resources to produce them.  They continue, “but it has not stopped development like critics claim.” Really? “In fact, LNG export terminals are at capacity right now and the industry is sitting on thousands of unused leases.”  Thousands?  Again….really? Could it be that the leases are being held up by government regulations? References, please. 

 

But then they dragged out their slew of experts.  The first the “liberal advocacy group” (their words, not mine) Public Citizen who reported that “Biden has approved more oil and gas drilling permits on public lands per month than Trump in his first three years.”  Have they now? “Oil and gas drilling regulation has already been loosened,” stated David Kieve, President of the advocacy arm of the Environmental Defense Fund. “The better way to hurt Russia is to boost”, you got it, “renewable energy production”. If solar and wind were truly viable alternatives, Dave, then yes, it would have an effect but the technology clearly isn’t there yet. Ask Germany how theirshift to renewable energy is working out for them.  Or Texas, for that matter, the last time Mother Nature showed us her ugly side.  But he continues: “Approving the Keystone Pipeline or spurring more lease sales will lock in greenhouse emissions long term”.  And NPR chimes in that “energy analysts say it will do little to alleviate the immediate pain that Americans are experiencing at the gaspump.” Yeah, but do you think it might help alleviate that pain farther down the road?  Or perhaps would have prevented it from occurring had we implemented it years ago? In an act of piling on, they introduced Jason Bordoff, founder and director of Columbia University’s Center for Global Energy Policy.  Now he can’t possibly be a liberal can he? He responds to the claims that increased production and leases would have an effect: “that impacts the amount of oil that comes to the market years and years into the future that doesn’t affect the fundamentals of supply and demand and prices today. The biggest driver of oil and gas products is the price of oil”.  He expects “oil production in the US to surge this year regardless of what the Biden Administration does.” Methinks you underestimate the power of the regulatory arm of the Biden Administration, Jason. 

 

 

 

But surely Public Citizen, the EDF and Professor Bordoffare not exactly unbiased sources.  In the interest of journalism, don’t you think NPR should have produced actual experts, or maybe a dissenting opinion?  Of course not.  NPR is the “liberal advocacy group” for the democrat party, after all.  So allow me to reference the Wall Street Journal’s dissent.  In a March 5 WSJ Editorial, they report that after Nancy Pelosi was asked how high gasoline prices have to rise before she’d support opening federal lands to oil and gas production, she was quoted as stating “I’m not for drilling on public lands”. There you have it. This despite a widely circulated video of her stating that she is against the importation of Russian oil now that they haveinvaded Ukraine.  Can’t have it both ways, Nancy.  The WSJ also reported that a federal judge has just dismissed the Biden Administration’s “social cost” estimates for greenhouse gas emissions when it was determined that the figures were grossly inflated, using a three hundred yeartimetable in an attempt to “restrict fossil fuels-from stricter fuel economy rules, to methane emission curbs for oil and gas production.” In yet another case of deception, apparently the White House, according to the WSJ, is floating the story that the injunction imposed by the federal judge is causing it to “halt permitting work on 18 wells on federal oil and gas leases in New Mexico and new lease sales”.   Despite a judge striking down Biden’s ban on oil and gas leases on federal land in June of last year, a ruling that also ordered the Department of the Interior to hold quarterly lease sales as required by law, they report that since taking office, the Biden Administration has been slow-walking oil and gas permits.  Is anyone surprised?  When the Interior finally held an offshore sale in November, lawsuits by climate change activists groups landed on the docket of a liberal judge who blocked the sales. And in direct contradiction to NPR’s assertion that the “rhetoric is misleading”, The Journal reports that “Mr. Biden hasn’t held an onshore lease sale and is the only president in at least two decades not to have done so in a given year.  Approvals for new LNG terminals and expansions are also sitting” although a better term would be languishing, “ at the Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.”  You better read that again. The journal sums it up better than most: “regulatory uncertainty and political hostility to fossil fuels discourage long term investment” and it is investment that is “needed to increase supply and keep energy prices in check”.  And this premise is crucial now that Russia has decided to use its energy stranglehold over Europe to extort the EU and fund his incursion into Ukraine. Yet after entering the Twilight Zone, the only thing of which we can be certain is that somebody is lying to us.  

 

Give Me A Break

I’m getting tired of the latest Democrat talking point that Trump is defending Putin as Russia stages an invasion of Ukraine. Virtually all the mainstream media have repeated this nonsense. Like the “deadly insurrection” and the “murder of George Floyd,” these are labels the liberals hang on events to color our understanding of what actually happened. Call it what you will: spin, misrepresentation, propaganda, or outright lies; it is a tactic they use repeatedly, from the grossly unqualified Lester Holt to the hilariously inept Morning Joe. And don’t even let me get started on the hosts of The View. Vacuous doesn’t even begin to describe the mental capacity of that cast of miscreants. But I digress. Examples of Trump defending Putin include such examples of him calling the Russian President “savvy” and once called him “ a genius.” When asked whether he thought Putin was smart, he responded, “of course, I think he’s smart.” When asked about the comment, Trump elaborated and stated the problem is “not that Putin is smart” the problem is our leaders are dumb…..Putin is playing Biden like a drum”. Not exactly comments I would classify as Trump endorsing Putin’s excursion into Ukraine, an action that Trump specifically condemned. Once again, spin with a distinct leftward rotation. Who can disagree with Trump’s statements? Putin successfully took advantage of the west’s preoccupation with climate change and took control of Europe’s access to fossil fuel. He waited out the Trump administration to allow Biden to approve the Nordstream pipeline. He took Biden at his word that the US wouldn’t put boots on the ground and would be willing to tolerate a “minor incursion.” And he has been working to shore up ties with a surging China to sanction-proof his economy. As stated in these pages before, while the world was playing checkers, Putin has been playing chess. Trusted by Bush, summarily dismissed by Obama and unleashed by Biden, at the least, Putin has to be regarded as a savvy statesman and a smart, if not opportunistic, aggressor. And it remains to be seen if the western coalition will remain cohesive or resort to their usual bickering and selfish policies. Otherwise, it is too early to determine if Putin is indeed smarter than his western counterparts or whether he grossly overplayed his hand. Meanwhile, as sanctions bite, the west, including the US, continue to buy his oil at $117 a barrel. Whose the dumb party here?

Baffled

I don’t understand how Biden can claim “I get it” regarding inflation affecting families “struggling to pay their bills.” His proposed solutions merely excerpts from his stalled Build Back Better agenda. Cut and paste. Nowhere does it appear that he intends to strengthen the economy through domestic energy production and job creation. Rather he seems to suspect that more government handouts are the answer. Lowering the cost of prescription drugs, free universal pre-K, and free child care hardly seem like recipes for economic growth and sounds more like redistribution schemes. And precisely how “combating climate change” will “lower energy costs” remains the greatest mystery of our time. It would appear that Joe gets it alright. He understands how to misrepresent his radical socialist and climate change policies and cloak them in a guise of economic development to pander to the radical wing of the Democrat party. In this, his big chance to “pivot” and save his floundering administration, he chose to turn back to his failed BBB agenda.