Since When is Profit a Bad Thing?

I'm so sick of all the complaining about the oil companies making money. Read and learn...

I drive nearly 100 miles a day to and from work. So these gas prices are a real problem for me. And I'm going to tell you, that neither party is doing much to help the problem. The democrats are vilifying the oil companies and the republicans seem to be standing around with their heads up their posterior orifice.

I'm not here to defend the oil companies. But I am here to combat liberalism. I can tell you this, liberalism is not going to solve this problem. The democrats, and many Americans are complaining about the profits the oil companies are making while we are paying $3 per gallon. I do hate paying $3 per gallon as I use about 4 gallons per day. But I'm not going to complain about the profits of a company that is providing me with something that I need. You know why? Because that is capitalism. Supply and demand. I demand it, they supply it. If they don't make profits, they won't be around to sell me what I need. If the oil companies don't make profits, they go out of business. If they go out of business, there will be less of a supply to meet the demand. When that happens, the price will really go up. We'll be praying for $3 per gallon. It's not rocket science.

Now, the democrat solution is to punish the oil companies with an additional winfall tax. The dems want to make the oil companies pay even more taxes than they already pay. As if profit should be limited. Why on earth would you want to limit a company's profits? Unless you're a socialist...

What may shock you is that according to an industry wide study, the Oil companies make about 9 cents per gallon in profit. 9 cents. Want to know what the government makes on a gallon of gas? Federal excise tax on gas is 18.4 cents. The national average for state excise tax is 20 cents but in PA it's 31 cents. For the sake of argument, we'll round the total excise tax, federal and state, at 40 cents per gallon. I won't even include the sales taxes that are collected on every gallon of gas which on average is 5%. Oh, and don't forget about the taxes the oil companies pay on what profit they do make. But I'll leave that out of the equation as well.

So out of that $3 per gallon, the oil companies get about 9 cents and the state and federal governments take in a minimum of 40 cents. Please tell me how in the world anyone in government can complain about what the oil companies are making? Government takes in over 4 times the profit and they do nothing but restrict what the oil companies can do. And those on the left want to call the oil companies evil? Seems to me, the government is 4 times as evil as the oil companies.

Think about this. The government does nothing to produce gasoline. They do nothing to distribute gasoline. They do nothing to find the oil that the gasoline is made from. The do nothing to get the oil the gasoline is made from. All government does in the regards to gasoline is regulate it. They have no investment in gasoline whatsoever and yet they take in 40 cents on every gallon of gas. Somehow, that just doesn't seem fair to me. The oil companies are more regulated by government than any other industry. If you consider all the drilling restrictions, refining restrictions, regulations for gas stations, it's quite mind boggling. The EPA restrictions, not only for gas stations themselves, but for drilling, refining and transporting, are enough to make you nuts. It's a wonder the oil companies make any money at all. 40 cents to the government compared to 9 cents to the oil companies, and it's the oil companies that are bad? I don't think so.

Need proof of the democrat position on the oil companies? How about this transcript between Neil Cavuto of Fox News and Senator Dick "The Turban" Durbin. Read some of this...

CAVUTO: Senator, do you know how much, out of curiosity, is built into a gallon of gasoline, the profits of the oil companies? Do you know what's the average?

DURBIN: Well, let me see. ExxonMobil, what did they make in three months? It was $10 billion, if I'm not mistaken, the largest corporate profits in the history of the United States.

-So if the oil companies took in $10 Billion in profit, the government took in over $40 Billion, remember that.

CAVUTO: Maybe you could answer my question. It's about 9 cents. Do you know how much taxes are, Senator? About 50 cents.

DURBIN: Let me tell you....

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: So, don't you think you should be more focused on the tax-gouging than necessarily the profit-gouging?

DURBIN: How do you explain their profits after taxes? You're ignoring that, Neil. You don't want to talk about it.

-Profits after taxes? Any money after taxes is profit you freaking idiot. He can't help but show his ignorance.

CAVUTO: Are you ignoring the taxes? Senator, I'm asking you simply, are you ignoring the taxes? Would you roll back those taxes?

DURBIN: No. I'm telling you the taxes pay for the roads that we use.

CAVUTO: Would you roll back those taxes?

DURBIN: No. Let me tell you, you look at the traffic congestion in America and the need for mass transit, you want to cut the source of funding to deal with that congestion? You're wrong. We have got to have taxation of users of our roads, in order to keep them safe and to keep them modern and to build mass transit. Neil, you can't walk away from that.

CAVUTO: So, $50 cents a gallon, the taxes are OK? The 9 cent profit, that's not OK?

DURBIN: Oh, stop the 9 cents.

Yeah, stop with the 9 cents because you can't beat that argument you freaking communist.

Bottom line, the government is way more complicit in the problem of high gas prices than the oil companies. And this notion that companies that make huge profits are inherently evil is a socialist notion. It's class warfare. It's right out of the Karl Marx playbook. That is not what this country is all about. This country is about freedom and capitalism. The left constantly complain about the rich. They constantly talk about bringing an end to poverty. And they believe that the cure for poverty is what Karl Marx believed. "From each according to his means, to each according to his needs." Take from the rich, give to the poor. Sorry, that's un-American. What they, and the rest of the country, needs to realize is wealth is the only cure for poverty. The only way to destroy poverty is to create wealth. And while we may be the richest country in the world, until we rid ourselves of this leftist notion that wealth is bad, we will never bring an end to poverty.

Socialist Party of Spain: Apes Should Have Same Rights as Humans

You just can't make this stuff up...

From the story:

The socialist PSOE party is apparently intent on introducing a bill aimed at giving apes the same rights as man, "and the immediate inclusion of these animals as people." As a result, the bill adds that apes "should have the same moral and legal protection that humans currently enjoy."

Equal rights for apes huh? Now, I understand some apes have learned sign language and that is impressive. But I really would like to understand how an ape can be trusted to vote. You think maybe they'd vote socialist? What if an ape wanted to be a conservative. How would that play out in the zoo? He'd be ostracized from all the other animals. He could probably have a very successful radio show, because lets face it, conservatives are good on radio. But he would be vilified by all the other animals. They'd probably end up accusing him of veterinarian shopping...

Easter at The White House

A little comic relief for you in this time of bitter politics...

I realize it's a little bit late for Easter humor. But I just got this and I thought it was worth sharing. Click the pic to be entertained for a moment...

Now that is funny...

Wildcats at War

That's Kansas State Wildcats...

Kansas State Alumnus, Major Roger T. Aeschliman, Deputy Commander of 2nd Battalion 137th Infantry Regiment, Kansas Army National Guard gave an interview to his alma matter's news paper, The Kansas State Collegian. This should be required reading for every left leaning politician, professor, student, woman, man, and child.

Here's an example of the question and answer from Major Aeschliman.

Q: Do you think the news coverage in Iraq is beneficial to the support of the war in Iraq?

A: No. In fact I believe the current media is directly responsible for undercutting the president's conduct of the war and is harming the American soldier over here. This war is already won. That remains is managing the peaceful transition from us to them. Spastic terrorism is big news but it is the worst kind of Onanism. The only way the bad guys can win is if we lose our national will, quit and go home too soon. If today's media had been at work on Dec. 7, 1941, the headlines would have read: "U.S. imperialism forces humble Japanese to defend themselves," "WE DESERVED IT," and "U.S. to surrender and apologize."

And my personal favorite:

Q: How has being deployed changed your outlook on the future?

A: It has reinforced my opinion that the United States of America is a force of good in the world. And that the continued advance of freedom and individual liberty over dictatorship and totalitarianism is a requirement for long-term world security and peace. I know it's a contradiction that we must fight to have peace, but the history of the world shows this is true. Those who will not fight for their freedoms are doomed to disappear from the Earth.

Click Here to read the entire interview. And you should read it because this is not something you'll hear from the Mainstream Media.

Code Red* Women for the Troops: John Kerry not throwing in the towel just yet, again

From what I like to call my "Sister Site" Code Red*, A little political perspective from a woman's point of view...

Click the link below:

Code Red* Women for the Troops: John Kerry not throwing in the towel just yet, again

Are you a Democrat or a Republican?

Here is a short test that will help you decide...

The answer can be found by posing the following question: You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and your two small children. Suddenly, a Jihadi Terrorist with a huge knifec omes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you. You are carrying a Glock Cal. 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?

Democrat's Answer:

Well, that's not enough information to answer the question! Does the man look poor! Can he vote? Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack? Could we run away? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of hishand? What does the law say about this situation? Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it? Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children? Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? Should I call 9-1-1? Why is this street so deserted? We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior. This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with somefriends for few days and try to come to a consensus.



Republican's Answer:

BANG!

Flag Waving Banned at Colorado School

That includes Old Glory by the way...

That's right ladies and gentlemen, it is official. We have witnessed the end of free speech as we know it. And it wasn't brought on by a Constitutional Amendment, or by a vote of the people, but by a High School Principal. From the story:

Skyline High School Principal Tom Stumpf said American flags were brazenly waved in the faces of Hispanic students and in one case a Mexican flag was thrown into the face of another student.

Here's an idea, if a kid acted inappropriately towards another student, then punish the student, not the statement. There is something called Freedom of Speech. Seems like I read that somewhere before... Let me think, where was that again? Oh yeah, IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Politcal Correctness is a plague on all our houses and we had better wise up to that fact or we are freaking doomed as a society. Want to know what is really bad? They have no problem banning the waving of an American flag, but they say burning the is a form of free speech.

You can burn it, just don't wave it. Yeah, maybe there is something to the idea that Liberals hate America...

Another Reason I Despise Liberals

One of many more to come, I'm sure...

You may have heard about the incident last Wednesday involving Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. Apparently, she walked around the metal detector while entering the Capitol and after being asked three times to stop, a Capitol Police Officer put his hand on her shoulder and allegedly she reacted by striking him in the chest with a cell phone clutched in her hand.

Now, I'm the first to admit that things happen. There are misunderstandings and unfortunate incidents all the time. I was a bouncer in a bar for five years and I can tell you I understand how things can get out of hand in a hurry. The thing is though, we're not talking about a bar. We're talking about the United States Capitol where security has to be of the upmost importance.

In the first day or so after the incident, Congresswoman McKinney seemed almost apologetic and somewhat embarrassed by the incident. In a statement released late Wednesday night:

"I was urgently trying to get to an important meeting on time to fulfill my obligations to my constituents. Unfortunately, the police officer did not recognize me as a member of Congress and a confrontation ensued. I did not have on my congressional pin but showed the police officer my congressional ID. I know that Capitol Hill Police are securing our safety, that of thousands of others, and I appreciate the work that they do. I deeply regret that the incident occurred."

She seems appologetic to me in that statement. She didn't actually apologize, but she does express regret and that's reasonable.

But then on Thursday, the Democrats get involved and you start to see a shift in position. Democratic House Minority Leader, Nancy Palosi labled it:

"A mistake, an unfortunate lack of recognition of a member of Congress."

She added that the police officer was not at fault. But apparently, it's not Cynthia McKinney's fault either. It's a lack of recognition that is to blame for this. OK, for me, that's a bit of a stretch, but not a completely whacked out moonbat position.

But now, the full power of the "Equal Rights" crowd is envolved and the moonbat positions are being put forth. Ms. McKinney's lawyer James W. Myart Jr. said she is:

"just a victim of being in Congress while black."

She's a victim? This is yet another demonstration of how to be a liberal, you must see the world upside down and back to front. SHE PUNCHED HIM! But she's the victim... OK, that makes sense. Her idiot lawyer continued:

"Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, like thousands of average Americans across this country, is, too, a victim of the excessive use of force by law enforcement officials because of how she looks and the color of her skin."

Excessive use of force? Really? He is responsible for the security of this freaking lunatic Congresswoman and he was doing his job. He asked her to stop THREE TIMES and she did not so he PUT HIS HAND ON HER SHOULDER! And that is an excessive use of force? Evidently this lawyer needs a lesson on exactly what is excessive force.

And guess what, this freaking idiot lawyer plans to file charges of "excessive use of force" according to a Fox News story, McKinney Decries 'Inappropriate Touching' by Capitol Police.

Misdirect blame and accuse the innocent of wrong doing, the state of the Civil Rights movement of today. Inappropriate touching... Give me a break. What a bunch of freaking cry-babies.

At a press conference held at Howard University, where actor Danny Glover and idiot Harry Belefonte stood by her side to "show support" Belefonte said:

"In America and Washington, D.C., issues of race have always been at play and have often been central to justice miscarried. ... We're here to be sure that this process is handled fairly and it is not rooted in a familiar racist behavior, that the outcome of this is going to be done on a very fair and a very square basis."

Racist behavior? She struck a white police officer after refusing to obey his request! If anyone is a racist in this incident, I submit to you that it's Cynthia McKinney. This woman has accused the Bush Administration of knowing about 9/11 ahead of time. An assertion that cost her the House seat in 2002. She got re-elected to Congress after the man that beat her in 2002 gave up his House seat to run for the Senate. She's a moonbat whack job with no business representing anyone in the United States Congress.

She wasn't wearing her Congressional Members lapel pin, which I've read she has refused to do in the past. She walked around the metal detector, which I understand is a customary for members of Congress, but certainly not required of members of Congress. And most importantly, SHE PUNCHED HIM after refusing to stop when she was asked to. She completely over reacted and is now claiming excessive force. Again, the state of the Civil Rights movement, lie, misdirect, scream racism. How pathetic.

Bottom line here, yes it was a misunderstanding. The Security guard didn't recognize her and did his job. She completely over-reacted and struck a police officer. And now, this police officer that was DOING HIS JOB is about to feel the full wrath of what the Civil Rights movement has become, a bunch of candy asses that want to cry racism and excessive use of force, even when they are the ones at fault. Dr. King must be very proud...