COMMONWEALTH PARTY
OF AMERICA
THE PROVERBIAL OIL SLICK
(A Preamble to Declaration)
| |
There is a lot of contradictory information about oil drilling out there. Some are claiming that the oil companies are conspiring to keep prices high to rake in record profits. Others claim that the government is to blame for overregulating the oil companies and outlawing domestic drilling in various places. Then there are varying claims about how much oil we actually have and where we should drill and how much effect drilling has on the environment. Plus we have those who want to begin the switch to alternative energies and end the reliance on oil. Whatever approach advocated is based on certain information and then where there is contradictory information lies justification for another method. More duplicitous examples abound. For instance, pro-drillers cite the claim that herds of caribou in Alaska are strengthening because they can cuddle up to the Alaskan pipeline and stay warm from the flowing oil. Then a nature preservation society has a counter claim that herds tend to shy away from oil installations at 3-4 kilometers distance which is limiting their ability to forage. Another example is how we hear that America cannot drill its way to energy independence because there is not enough domestic oil but there are others who claim just the opposite. How about those who are saying that it will take us ten years (now down to seven) to get one drop of oil from new wells? This is countered with how we built up our navy in a relatively few short years after Pearl Harbor which exemplifies our ability to get needed infrastructure in place for quicker oil. New offshore drilling that happens to be near already existing infrastructure is mentioned as another possibility for getting oil in just a few years. A lot of the banter of late concerns ANWR and offshore drilling. There is claim that ANWR should be disregarded as being too much effort to get its inadequate supply of oil and instead it should be environmentally preserved. Others point to ANWR's potential yields as significant and question the environmental reasons to protect a more desolate tundra near the Arctic Circle. One may then ask: What if the drilling moves to areas of Canada with similar environs to ANWR? Or what if that essential drilling takes place in more tropical Mexico or lusher Venezuela in order to take up the slack of not drilling from a potential ANWR or some other domicile? Similarly, not drilling offshore of California, limiting rig expansion in the Gulf of Mexico or denying drilling off the Gulf of Georgia from the Carolinas to Florida may leave untouched those waters but how about the drilling that would expand elsewhere to cover the difference? Maybe it would happen offshore of Brazil or Mexico or even Cuba because of world demand. So in the end how much net environment or planet is saved by juggling drilling which still must supply our immutable oil needs? Whatever our approach it should be determined by how much oil we find out there, the time and expense it will take to change over to new fuels along with alternative energies and how long before new oil fields provide oil. And what are the real environmental concerns and how best do we suit our technologies to address them and what are we willing to give up to keep lands and oceans untouched? The best short-term solutions must be sought as well to bring down the current oil price or at least try to keep it from rising as much. Previous experience does indicate that the more we drill, the more oil is found.
The plans we take should be flexible and based on reason about the facts that we have. Some of it will be a gamble for sure, but we can readjust our approach as the facts evolve. The best way to do this is with honest and open debate on the issues amongst our citizens, think tanks, representatives and various organizations of highest credibility indicated by their rise to the top through the rigors of 'tit for tat' in reaching sound conclusions. We also need the competitive expertise of our free and unfettered markets and of our industries who are best in finding, processing, and meritously distributing end products in efficient manner. And of course, we need representative and adequate government to regulate within reason concerning safety, environment, land and mineral rights, the elimination of fraud -- all while relying solely on benign levels of taxation. Currently, however, this is not what our government is doing -- namely Congress as of this writing. A faction of Congress has taken a closed-minded, inflexible approach concerning our energy situation and thus also to the causes of high gas prices. They have no regard to the effects of high taxation on oil & gas and the resulting strain on the people's livelihood. Instead of considering both sides of the coin for true compromise, this faction uses authoritarian methods to quell discussion while denying reasonable and timely representative vote on the subject. Therefore, with the various facts gathered at hand (links provided below) the following stratagem has become appropriate....... |
|
In recent weeks the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has stood against domestic drilling for oil and has claimed that such an endeavour is a hoax. She and her entourage cite that certain domestic and offshore drilling will take ten years before there is any substantial yield of oil. Instead, she wants the president to authorize tapping of our Strategic National Petroleum Reserve which was created to be used only in times of emergency when access to petroleum for our country is blocked. The entourage claims that ANWR drilling will yield no significant supply of oil. Pelosi says that the oil companies already have domestic leases to drill from and need no more lands for drilling.
This is the wrong approach. Even if it does take ten years to get some of our own oil then that is a reason we must begin immediately and not a reason to just sit around doing nothing. Starting now would be a hallmark of long-term thinking instead of the short-term thinking which has limited access to our own oil fields over the years, contributing to the stranglehold position we are in today. Do we want to continue like this and be even worse off in ten years? The ten year excuse to do no new drilling shows their lack of foresight, doesn't it? If we were allowed to do more drilling domestically over ten years ago when the issue was brought up in Congress, we might have had 1 million barrels more of oil daily to help keep prices lower. In some cases, it may be possible to get oil quicker than ten years like when the oil sits near existing infrastructure. Maybe this would have been more so the case if our oil industry had not been restricted by Congress all this time. And get this: tapping the Strategic National Petroleum Reserve is not a real, long-term solution. It may give a little relief for a short period, but we need those emergency reserves if a hurricane hits or if war breaks out in the Middle East. The reserve has limited supply. It is only stocked to last up to 2 months even with current record capacity. Then what? Actually, ANWR has more oil than the reserve. And did you know that the government leases to the oil companies that Pelosi references are on lands of little to no oil or where the oil is not cost-effective to get to?
Now how long do you think it will take to get the alternative energy sources & infrastructure on line to fuel our cars? You gonna go out and buy a Tesla Motors electric car for $109,000? How much will it cost you to change your engine towards another energy source? How incredibly expensive will cooking oil or ethanol be when it is mandated that everyone drives with it? Yeah, let's all come to a standstill while Obama converts all our gas stations by decree. In the interim, we need cheaper and more plentiful oil to allow a smoother, painless transition until other fuel sources are ready for distribution. Cheaper gas will help the masses afford towards the research and infrastructure of any alternative fuel source goal. To attain such, we should reject the absolute zero energy policies of the Democrat party!
And so now there is talk of raising the tax on gas at a time when the price is already hurting consumers. The idea of pausing the national tax on gas was rejected by the entourage because they claim it would have been of little help. Note that this tax is greater than what the private oil companies profit on a gallon of gas -- a profit which the Pelosi entourage complains about all the time!
Foreign governments via state-run oil companies already raise the price of gas by their inefficiencies and geopolitics. Our government has contributed to the high price of gas by limiting domestic drilling, halting the building of new refineries, mandating certain blends of gas and now they want to invoke a windfall tax on oil companies. Pricey petrol Pelosi and her entourage could not be this wrong on their petroleum policies for this long by accident. It is of the opinion here that they are knowingly and maliciously manipulating the price of gas to go higher on behalf of environmental extremism, political scapegoating and as an effort to demand more government control of the oil companies while confiscating those record profits. Meanwhile, the average consumer is suffering at the pump & throughout the economy as higher gas raises the price of all commercial shipping and petroleum based goods get more expensive. This is at the same time that these poxy politicians allow for a 22% inflated cost on goods and services through their convoluted income tax scheme.
We demand that pricey petrol Pelosi resign as Speaker for helping to perpetrate this fraud on the American people. We cannot allow such an insidious bitch like her to be third in line at a time of war and approaching economic plight. If she resists calls to resign and stays, this will be a great tactical advantage for us. For then, she will have shown herself to be the unreasonable manipulator that she is -- further exposing her and her methods to the public. Take into account her terror flirting trip to Syria, her support of the horridly timed Armenian genocide resolution, her lack of concern by not divesting out of a terror-listed corporation, her speakership of the House as Congress approached single digit approval ratings, her expensive capital flower spree and her refusal to correct the public House record on her erroneous statements concerning the church on abortion . Once we make the case against her pattern of aggressive liberalism then she will be such an albatross that even Democrats will fear keeping her around as the election approaches. {See Pelosi Scandals below.}
If we sufficiently back her into a corner, then there should be only one way that she should be allowed to stay in office. If she really wants to keep her position of power, we should demand that she not only allow domestic drilling but she must also publicly support the passage of the FairTax as well. This would help everyone cope with the faltering economics while letting the poor go untaxed, whom of which Pelosi claims to care about. Remember, you called them on open borders and they had to give in. Then you called on them to open drilling and they are starting to come your way. You can do the same on getting them to accept the FairTax.
Until our demands concerning Pelosi to step down are met, truckers should honk as they pass through D.C. to protest the imposed high diesel prices. Perhaps they should convoy to the mall in order to demand domestic drilling. Political commentators: Please allocate your available resources to spark a serious backlash against Pelosi. By concentrating our fire, perhaps we can force her out or put her into exposure or submission.
Right now the entourage politicians don't really care about the common folks nor the poor as they claim, do they? Pricey petrol Pelosi and company are happy to let us all suffer their high gas prices under false pretext. Their imposition of a small oil plan will not adequately fuel America. We cannot trust these poxy politicians to manage our economy and resources. When they are given a centimeter -- they take a kilometer!
Voters: While Republicans have worked hard over the years to make themselves irrelevant, you will need real opposition within the two-party system. Consider nominating independents and third-parties such as us and we will oppose and decimate those "No Blood For Oil" Democrats across-the-board on many issues.
Now with all the arguments above and the information in the links farther below, it seems reasonable to let the revolt begin with the following slogans:
http://www.commonwealthparty.net/petroleum.htm
The Commonwealth Party stance on petroleum from our planks.
http://www.commonwealthparty.net/polattack.htm#gasgouging
Our political attack page has a section ' Who's Gouging Gas?' .
http://www.commonwealthparty.net/nuclear.htm
Commonwealth nuclear energy policy proposes adoption of more efficient nuclear power plants that use
current waste as fuel just as France has been doing.
http://www.americansolutions.com
American Solutions petition to 'Drill Here, Drill Now' supports drilling
for American oil and finding/getting more of America's oil reserves.
http://www.pickensplan.com
Advocates wind for 20% of national electricity and the use of natural
gas for vehicles by ten years. Plan would supplant > 1/3 of imported oil.
http://www.liquidcoal.com
Company specializes in converting coal to clean burning fuel for cars. Argues
against the claims of global warming.
http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2008/07/07/bad-juice-ii-biofuels-maybe-not-quite-so-bad-world-bank-says/
This article was referenced by the next link's news section for the National Biodiesel Board.
A Guardian newspaper article had reported that biofuel was responsible for 75% of the
rise in food prices worldwide. This article mitigates that claim by interviewing
the World Bank writer who says that biodiesel was not fully to blame for the 75%
rise in prices. However, the article does not remove biodiesel as a significant
contributor of that 75%. In fact, it reiterates the draft paper's assertion
that biofuel (biodiesel & ethanol?) is ' the major cause of the increase in food prices'.
Submitted comments after the article provide interesting debate on the biofuel
status.
http://www.biodiesel.org
Site of national trade association for American biodiesel industry. Pro biodiesel site pointing to its uses
and features news and advocacy items.
http://www.macroworldinvestor.com/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=316533621
American Energy Act proposed by congressional Republicans is all-inclusive
strategy of 'conservation and alternative sources but also drilling'.
Democrats accused of not voting on it cause it would pass.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=201574
Republicans "silenced in Stalinist manner" in House over energy debate
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/164/story/389950.html
Republican lawmakers kept deliberating after the power was cut off and most of the media had left, staying on the floor and figuring out how to turn back on the power. Tourists cheered over the revolt against Pelosi & Democrats who had abandoned addressing drilling to counter high gas prices.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,398868,00.html
Pelosi claims Republicans too scared to face constituents since they support
big oil, says they have not acted on alternative and conservation bills
in the past.
http://www.alternativeenergyfuelsources.com
Articles and links on various types of alternative energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_energy
Gives definiton and links about alternative energy.
http://www.anwr.org/backgrnd/potent.html
How much oil is there in ANWR? The pros of drilling. Answers to many ANWR questions.
http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/anwr-oil-drilling/645
Says long infrastructure wait for ANWR not worth it compared to the Bakken play.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Arctic+National+Wildlife+Refuge?tid=informline
general ANWR links
http://www.survivalcenter.com/lw.html
Book & DVDs allege how the government is conspiring to cover up the massive oil reserves in Alaska & why.......
Video of the same source,
Lindsey Williams, making the claim about this cover-up over Gull Island in Alaska.
http://www.adn.com/money/story/466869.html
Article dismisses Lindsey's claims by quoting drillers about the Gull Island area.
http://www.americansolutions.com/General/?Page=9d64a628-d028-48c1-840d-330aea987841
Claims facts on American oil prospects & debunks domestic drilling myths. Notes current leased lands
referenced by Pelosi's 'use it or lose it' have little to no oil or the oil is not cost-effective to reach.
http://borrowedearth.wordpress.com/2008/05/14/missing-the-point-again-congress-defies-bush-on-oil-reserve-nothing-solved/
ANWR might produce 1 million barrels a day, 14X the price reduction of the SPR, however opposers claim ANWR would provide only 6 months of oil ten years from now -- the latter concurred by Pelosi.
The poster admits that they oppose affordable gas for Americans: 'last thing this country needs'.
http://www.columbia.edu/~sp2023/scienceandsociety/web-pages/Prudhoe%20Bay.html
Dimensions of Prudhoe Bay compared to ANWR, spills in Prudhoe noted.
http://www.glc.org/docs/advisor/95/oil/dyk.html
A few interesting facts on oil contamination
http://arcticcircle.uconn.edu/ANWR/arcticconnections.htm
More environmental impacts about Prudhoe Bay
http://www.defenders.org/resources/publications/programs_and_policy/habitat_conservation/federal_lands/arctic/caribou_in_the_arctic_national_wildlife_refuge.pdf
Porcupine caribou herd in ANWR keeps 3-4 km from oil infrastructure. It drives herds away and lowers survival says article.
http://www.defenders.org/programs_and_policy/global_warming/index.php
Defenders of Wildlife has closed-minded debate on global warming.
http://www.defenders.org/programs_and_policy/policy_and_legislation/energy/index.php
Defenders of Wildlife stance on energy resources.
http://www.defenders.org/about_us/faqs/index.php
Last question cites option for federal employees to give automatically to Defenders of Wildlife
from their paycheck. Any dubious government bent possible regarding Defenders of Wildlife?
http://arctic.fws.gov/issues1.htm#section4
Government site with research indicating effects of oil infrastructure and exploration on different
species. Contains estimates of the amount of oil in ANWR. Gives history of the establishment of ANWR and the
National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska.
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=1123
Population numbers for the Central Arctic caribou herd show various increases and decreases for ranges
with and without oil fields. Thus, the presence of oil fields was not the culprit of the declination of the herd
as proposed by the media in previous years. Studies mentioned that indicate
that oil fields have limited effect on herd populations. Cites increase in number of various species about Prudhoe Bay installations
as an example. Central Arctic herd portrayed as highly mobile to oil installations.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/08/28/MNGR4EDJGT1.DTL
Illustrates the differences between the Central Arctic caribou herd (Prudhoe Bay) and the Porcupine
herd (ANWR) in their available options to oil infrastructures. Site references studies that say Prudhoe Bay
caribou are effected by oil fields. Piece says that despite plans for
small surface area wells, footprint will entail spider web effect of interconnected infrastructures
for access to oil and year-round productions. Porcupine herd in ANWR could be driven farther east on the narrow coast with less
ideal forage and fewer numbers of successful calving. One solution: eliminate oil activity for the three weeks of
calving during the spring green tundra. {Interjection: If they are so affected, how about a nickel
surcharge per gallon of gas to drop feed the caribou during the yearly calving festival?} Pictures of caribou hanging out near pipes or gravel roads speculated as method for them to
escape mosquitoes and bugs.
http://www.businessandmedia.org/news/2006/news20060419.asp
Predictions of environmental damage before the Alaskan pipeline was built are debunked here. Are they similar to
the predictions of drilling in ANWR?
http://www.alaskaphotographics.com/caribou_photos.shtml
Anecdotal stock photos of caribou. Caption notes how '70s concerns over the pipeline
were minimalized - "some displacement of caribou calving in the Prudhoe Bay oil field, in general,
caribou have not been adversely affected by human activities in AK".
Herd sizes more determined by cycles of climate, population, predation disease.
http://fairbanks-alaska.com/pipelinedefence.htm
'West Wing' tv show gets letter from AK legislator stating Inupiat
people in ANWR desire drilling and that there's 25 years of oil. Increase
of Central Arctic herd cited as proof Prudhoe development not malignant.
Brad DeVries, Defenders of Wildlife spokesman, says however development would
effect the Porcupine Caribou herd as USGS biostudy shows. White House says
that study uses a premise of a drilling method more invasive than what is being discussed
in Congress.
http://virginpolitics.com/?p=12
Michele Bachmann quote about "coffee klatch" caribou or how they warm-up to the
oil pipes. Sounds plausible but the search here yielded nothing to substantiate this claim. Disputed
virulently by opposition but without conclusion.
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba603/
How government has impeded refining capacity & construction. No new refineries built in 30 years.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/27/politics/main691160.shtml
Bush proposed more refineries & nuclear power plants in spring '05. Democrats said no to that and instead went for alternative energy funding.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/15/america/15bush.php?page=2
Bush acts on drilling, challenges Democrats.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,196891,00.html
China is planning to tap drill for exploration about the Gulf coast of Cuba. Article cites
less equipped and less environmentally concerned Chinese oil company.
http://www.post-gazette.com/healthscience/20021223coalfuelsci1p1.asp
University research looking for ways to get a cleaner version of gas, diesel and aviation fuel
from coal. Military interest in the aviation fuel since it would not be
at risk of foreign intervention.
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/features/fex43159.htm
China getting Sasol to build two coal-to-liquid plants in China. Coal-to-liquid and tar-sand extractions
of Canadian oil with other technologies could give us decades more more of petroleum fuel and protect
against geopolitical risks. Article notes fuel cells which only emit water are still not economically
feasible yet.
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Lurgi-offers-coal-to-liquid-technology/348582/
Lurgi to produce coal-to-liquid (CTL) fuels in India.
http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/402/
A claim that CTL produces dangerous chemicals and that the most efficient manner to get
coal is a strip-mining process that destroys mountains and pollutes rivers -- MTR
or Mountain Top Removal Mining.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=flirting_with_liquid_coal
Political piece argues against CTL as an opportunity for corporations and 'Big Coal'.
Says it takes massive amounts of energy to produce. Piece then cites some
absurd global warming scenarios. Reading between the lines {see 'lifetime of the product', 'initially capture'} apparently progressives apply 20/85
greenhouse emmisions standard from the get-go, which would make lesser start-ups
impossible to finance as the first tier CTL plants. Calls CTL Coalition 'an unholy alliance between the coal industry and some elements of the AFL-CIO'.
Concerns of coal mining leveling mountaintops, polluting streams and rivers and
using massive quantities of fresh water mentioned. Obama used to support CTL but altered after criticism
and then limited support to 20/85 scenarios. This was seen as an example of his previous myopic Illinois
tendencies.
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080720/NEWS08/807200405/1025/NEWS
Says new gas tax is for infrastructure ....Points to no cuts of wasteful spending, they just tax more for roads we will use less as the gas price increases....Denotes bill as corporate welfare to construction industry & as a de facto union subsidy.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/07/pumping-up-taxe.html
They want to raise the gas tax because of their incompetence. Story mentions earmarks which made the Highway Trust Fund go into deficit.
http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/1130.html
Explains abiotic oil theory and origin and how it may explain
some things and why geologists reject idea
http://www.oilempire.us/abiotic.html
Site criticizes abiotic oil as disinformation, says Peak Oil
is a reason behind 9/11 conspiracy a la permitted to occur.
Mike Ruppert the site originator is a Hugo Chavez supporter.
http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/peakoil1.html
Banter between Peak Oil and abiotic oil theory. Debate
mentions Ruppert's support of radical population reduction.
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/davemcgowanstalinandabioticoil05mar05.shtml
Dave McGowan cites the intense research of the former Soviet Union into
petroleum that arrived at abiotic oil theory. Research on petroleum there
lead the USSR to be a major exporter of petroleum. Theory of abiotic
oil not merely empirical or speculative but highly tested in the lab.
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/080213-titan-oil.html
Article alludes to commonality of hydrocarbon fuels on hard planets like earth. Lots of natural gas and 'oil' on Titan acts as an indicator.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/2/10/11052/5441
Bakken Formation may have 271-503 billion barrels of oil. Montana production has doubled in last three years.
http://www.ndoil.org
North Dakota site on Bakken oil prospects.
http://www.ndoil.org/images/stories/PDFs/factsfigures08.pdf
|
US Energy sources: Petroleum 41% Natural Gas 23% Coal 22% Nuclear 8% Renewables 6% |
US Imports: 2007: 60% of US oil imported Canada 11.3 % Mexico 8.3% Saudi Arabia 7.1% Venezuela 6.8% Nigeria 5.4% Iraq 2.6% (in 2006) OPEC countries account for 26.7% daily needs |
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06095/679602-28.stm
History of the beginning Bakken boom.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/feature_articles/2006/ngshock/ngshock.pdf
Geochemist Leigh Price for USGS estimated an increased source of 271-503 billion barrels of recoverable oil
for entire Bakken Formation.
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/11834.html
A new technique to obtain oil could double US oil reserves.
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/ask/prices_faqs.asp#diesel_surcharges
Indicates oil prices are up because of shorter supply and geopolitical concerns; crude accounts for 73% of gas price.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0872964.html
Largest oil reserves by country.
http://www.iags.org/n0331043.htm
Controversy over whether Saudi reserves are dwindling or not: pro & con.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/oil-reserves-are-double-previous-estimates-says-saudi-508699.html
Excerpt: ' Mr Naimi said talk of oil scarcity reminded him of the 1970s, when people also thought the end of the age of oil was at hand. "But in the intervening years, when we were supposedly facing a precipitous decline, world oil reserves more than doubled". '
http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=6455
Mexico may double its known reserves in the Gulf said Mexican oil company.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18201990/
Iraq oil reserves may be double of what was estimated.
http://www.state.gov/e/eeb/rls/rm/2008/107598.htm
Energy Issues In The Western Hemisphere
Excerpts:
...' Nearly half of our total crude oil and petroleum imports, and virtually all of our natural gas imports, come from Western Hemisphere countries.'
...' Canada’s proven crude oil reserves are now estimated at nearly 180 billion barrels, making it the world’s largest holder of oil reserves after Saudi Arabia.'
.....' The environmental footprint of heavy oil development has been improving.'
...' In 2007, the Government of Brazil announced that the Santos basin, located off the country’s southeast coast, could contain 30-40 billion barrels of oil – three to four times current proven reserves – potentially putting Brazilian reserves in the top 10 in the world.'
......' the area north of the Arctic Circle holds about 22 percent of the undiscovered, recoverable oil and natural gas resources identified so far in the world.'
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/reserves/spr/spr-facts.html
Currently 58 days of protection in Strategic National Petroleum Reserve to replace importing oil (08/08). A recent record made at 700 million barrels.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG414.pdf
RAND study says 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil in the Green River formation. (CO, UT, WY)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17920536/
Pelosi trip to Syria gives legitimacy to terror state that supports insurgents, Hezbollah, Hamas. Syria had alleged hand in assassination of former Lebanese PM.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/30/AR2007033002010.html
Bush cut off most high level contacts to Syria since 2005, reportedly Bush did not object to trip when Pelosi first informed him of it.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/845365.html
PM Olmert of Israel contradicts Pelosi statement that Israel ready for peace talks with Syria. Olmert denied Israel relayed message to Assad.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173879247562&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Olmert said Pelosi trip to Damascus a mistake. Olmert told Pelosi that Syria must stop terror activities first and only then would Israel be willing to hold discussions.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10142007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/playing_politics_with_genocide.htm?page=0
Pelosi disingenuously pushes Armenian resolution to anger Turks and cut off Iraq war logisitics and usher in our defeat.
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,287216,00.html
Excerpt:
' House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has disclosed that she holds stock
valued at up to $15,000 in Alcatel-Lucent (formerly Alcatel SA), a company
with extensive investments in Iran and Sudan -- nations that sponsor
terrorism.'
http://www.gallup.com/poll/108856/Congressional-Approval-Hits-RecordLow-14.aspx
Pelosi Congress gets lowest Gallup poll result ever - only 14% !
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/pelosi-buys-16k-worth-of-flowers-2007-12-12.html
Pelosi's flower power spending spree.
http://www.lifenews.com/nat4256.html
House members of the Catholic faith asked Pelosi to correct public record on erroneous
comments she made about the church's stand on abortion -- she refused.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/17/pelosi.interview/index.html
Pelosi opposes offshore & ANWR drilling, disparages lowest Gallup approval poll of congress, cites already open & exisiting domestic drilling leases (dubious), wants 10% release of oil from Strategic Petroleum Reserve. {58 days oil in the reserve, a week of oil?}
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/pelosi-hits-back-at-bush-on-gas-prices-2008-04-24.html
Pelosi & co. call for halting purchase of oil to the SRP, other methods bantered, Congress
chided for not passing various energy bills (conservation, alternative fuels, expanded drilling) over the intervening years
http://speaker.gov/
Pelosi page