I'm sure you will all understand what I mean when I say I'm just a little upset about the cost of gasoline! I'm disappointed that in nearly half a century the United States of America hasn't been able to get over its addiction to foreign oil. No matter what your political bent, you probably recognize that our dependence on imported oil is dangerous.

I am particularly disturbed by the prospect of having to buy oil from the wonderful folks in the middle east and/or the nice gentleman in Venezuela who has such a high regard from our democracy. In the middle of this chaos, our politicians seem to be more interested in political rhetoric than coming to grips with reality. But most of all, the persistent failure to use our technology simply boggles the mind!

At the end of the day, we blithely continue calling each other names as if the names themselves were evidence of the truth of the allegations. Talk about picking up a chair while you're sitting in it.

As the price of gasoline climbs toward the $5.00 mark I would suggest to you that we are now facing a point in time when the rhetoric needs to stop. We must begin to take care of ourselves. China isn't going to. Hugo Chavez isn't go to, and Herr Ahmadinejad and his Pasadaran buddies certainly aren't going to.

So what do we do about the oil? Contrary to radical left wing thought, higher gasoline prices will not motivate innovation on a timely basis. Higher prices are however, guaranteed to destroy the economy.

Ok, the obvious solution is to drill more oil here in the USA. Won't help you say? Wrong. Current oil prices are set at the result of the price of futures. If the future supply of oil is seen to be something which will increase - then obviously the price of futures will go down and so will the price at the pump. Therefore, drilling will actually help now, as opposed to 20 years from now.

This brings us to ANWR which is only one of a large number of places in the USA where it is currently unlawful to drill for oil. Why? Because the liberal media, the left wing politicians, and the green guys don't want us to damage the environment. I think that may be a misdirection. Instead, I think one or more of these groups just don't want us to use oil. They don't want us to burn fossil fuels for any reason, no matter what. And, they're willing to say and maybe do almost anything to get their way.

For purposes of discussion let's assume the right wing conservatives are all liars. If that's the case, do you think there just might also be one or two liars on the left?

I recently received a forwarded email regarding ANWR. That email used some interesting photos and provided some information I'd like to share with you.

By the way ANWR, isn't the name of a place it's an acronym which stands for, "Arctic National Wildlife Reserve." What follows is the gist of the email:

Despite what we've been told, all of ANWR is actually small when compared to the rest of the state of Alaska, and even smaller when compared to the continental United States.

Then, if we take a look at the proposed drill site within ANWR

we can see that it's a tiny dot located on ANWR's Coastal Plain which, taken as a whole, is only a very small part of the Reserve.

The really interesting part is yet to come. We're being told by the forces opposing drilling in ANWR that they only want to preserve the "pristine" nature and beauty of the area.

The question becomes, is this the truth or is it a "spotted owl" used as a cover for a secret agenda? Maybe we can find a glimmer of the truth in the argument over drilling in the ANWR coastal plain. Recall the opponents are showing us a lot of beautiful scenery like the following:

Absolutely gorgeous country isn't it? The only problem is this isn't where they want to drill! Go back and take a look at the map. The drilling is limited to a tiny area in the Coastal Plain. Do the two pictures above look like a coastal plain? No, of course not, because they aren't. The actual drilling area is (like most plains) flat as a pancake and it looks like this in the summer.

The first two photos were possibly taken somewhere in the ANWR so it's not a lie to say they show the area. They just don't happen to show the area affected by the drilling. This type of disingenuous parsing of the truth suggests that someone is highly motivated to persuade you to agree with their position. Why? Because they don't want to spoil (assuming it will be spoiled) the "pristine" pancake of the coastal plain? That seems a little short sighted given the severe impact it will have on our economy.

The same people opposing ANWR also tell us that oil drilling in Prudhoe Bay is destroying the wildlife. Maybe the concern is the animals and not the scenery. Let's take a look.

I'd say the critters in Prudoe Bay look pretty happy. Maybe, the real criticism is that the oil wells are leaking like sieves and the snow is black in the winter.

Well I guess that's not it either. Maybe the opposition is because the Prudhoe Bay operation is forcing the bears into extinction.

We doubt it. This Grisly looks like he found an easy way to avoid the muck and mosquitoes of the summer tundra.

Recall the Alaskan pipeline? The one that was supposed to utterly devastate the carabou population? Of course, we now know that didn't happen.

I submit to you that a party, untruthful in one respect should not to be trusted in others. The argument that the wildlife of ANWR or the pristine beauty of its coastal plain will be destroyed by oil drilling is patently false. This means the situation is being driven by another agenda. What might that be?

I think it's a safe bet that factions both in and out of the government do not want us to use oil in any way. That agenda would be consistent with the refusals to allow any new refineries to be built. It's also consistent with the continuous blockage of drilling, even in the face of data which suggests we have more untapped oil in the US than in all of Saudi Arabia. Apparently, the same can be said about nuclear energy. They don't want us to have it.

The current use of the "environment" as an argument against drilling is reminiscent of the way the spotted owl was used in the Northwest to resist old growth logging. The tactic is a form of misdirection, and it obfuscates the true issues facing the country. For example, almost nobody in the room knows why we shouldn't cut down a 200 year old tree. It's not about the poor owl and it's not because the tree is just old; it's about the proven resistence of the old genetics to disease, and that should have been the focus of that discussion.

Back to topic. We need to cease the name calling and begin discussing the real problems. If the issue is whether or not to stop using fossil fuels, and a well-informed public decides that is the course we're going to take, then the ultimate question is - how do we do that without destroying our country?

I don't know about you, but I really resent being "managed".

Note: My thanks to the unknown photographer and the author of that email.