David

Karki

Read David's bio and previous columns here

July 22, 2008

Democrats Love Expensive Gas; It Restricts Driving . . . and Freedom

Gasoline is at over $4 a gallon in late summer of an election year. Once upon a time, incumbent congressmen and senators would have reacted to this about as well as Dracula to sunlight and crucifixes. And they would have rushed to get prices lower by the first Tuesday in November, so as to best protect their precious re-elections.

But not this year. Democrats have stopped all attempts to increase domestic drilling with the ruthless efficiency of The Terminator. On its face, this would seem to be an insane and suicidal move. Even with a biased mainstream media giving them cover and a completely gutless and impotent Republican Party, this might just be a bridge too far.

Yet here we are, with Democrats stopping at nothing to keep gas prices as high as possible, and even coming up with a bill that would actually restrict drilling even further, by halving land lease periods and more than doubling the lease extension cost. Naturally, they lie and obfuscate to present it as somehow increasing drilling, when in fact it's the opposite.

In past years, Democrats would never dare try such a thing and if they stupidly did, the GOP would thank the heavens and unload on them mercilessly for it. That the former are and the latter are not speaks volumes as to what is really going on and what the stakes really are for you and me.

Bluntly put, the Democrats like expensive gas. They would be happy to see it get even more so, especially if the proceeds get taxed away to them and not left in the private sector. Why? Because they are totalitarians at heart, and the environmentalist wackos so prevalent within their base are of a particularly noxious hard-core strain. And so long as we can afford to drive away from and escape the disasters into which unfettered, unchallenged liberalism has turned most of our big cities, we as a people cannot be so controlled.

Our freedom and liberty as individuals is highly dependent upon motorized vehicles and the mobility they provide. That's a large reason the automobile is such a fitting symbol of Americana. They, in turn, depend upon affordable, plentiful energy to run. Take that away, and people will have no choice but to cram themselves into much smaller areas that allow work and other destinations to be reached by train, bicycle or foot. That, by definition, makes them easier for government to control.

And that is why the internal combustion engine has been all but targeted for extinction by the liberal left and the enviro-wackos: It stands in the way of their grand plan. Get rid of it by getting rid of the energy required to power it, and in one fell swoop, the suburban migration that liberals themselves caused by wrecking cities from the 1960s on forward with the consequences of their bad and wrong ideas will be reversed. Or so they hope.

Viewed through this lens, the Democrats' obstinate behavior makes perfect sense. Less so is the complete lack of a Republican response, much less a vigorous one. They ought to be hammering the bejeebers out of the Democrats on this major vulnerability. From President Bush on down to local-level GOP candidates, they ought to be speaking if not screaming in one loud voice on this, in a way that not even the biased mainstream media could possibly squelch.

But, as is the case on virtually every issue, the one guy who is best positioned to make this happen can't possibly because his position scarcely differs from the Democrats. Sen. John McCain, who as the presidential candidate is the de facto standard-bearer for Democratic “opposition,” also refuses to open ANWR and pulls a classic Clintonian phony triangulating dodge, saying he'd like coastal states to decide off-shore drilling for themselves, knowing darn well that Washington, Oregon and California are all much too liberal to ever go forward with it.

As is seemingly the case with every horrible Democrat bill, enough of the GOP caucus in Congress defects to make a spirited defense from within that institution impossible. Even if some conservative portion were to break off and try to go on offense, their credibility is already blown to heck and virtually non-existent due to that. So most do what is in their nature: Try their best to avoid collateral damage and get in on the pork-barrel gravy train. If you can't beat 'em, get re-elected some other way.

So we have one party hell-bent almost beyond comprehension to forcibly re-make American society in their Marxist image, and the other that is at best cowardly and impotent and at worst an unindicted co-conspirator in the effort. What does this mean? It means that the former is most likely going to eventually get its way. It may take time, its advances may be gradual and incremental – all the better to go unnoticed by the ignorant masses until it's too late – but when there is effectively no resistance, it's just a matter of time.

The fight to drill off-shore, drill ANWR, build refineries, build nuclear power plants and finally become truly energy independent (meaning not requiring it from elsewhere, as opposed to the liberal enviro-wacko definition of being independent of energy – i.e., not having any at all) is a fight for our nation's soul and future. And if no one on the political scene has the guts to stand in the gap, then it falls to us as citizens.

The Democrats have made their intentions as clear as they ever have. Will we recognize this for the threat to our way of life that it is? And will we respond accordingly? 

© 2008 North Star Writers Group. May not be republished without permission.

Click here to talk to our writers and editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.

To e-mail feedback about this column, click here. If you enjoy this writer's work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry it.

This is Column # DKK132. Request permission to publish here.