The Stupidity of Barack Hussein Obama, Chuck Schumer and Other Libtards

The Wall Street Journal had another fine editorial today, 5/3/2008, which is really an economics lesson for libtards. You can read the whole thing here.

This is one strange debate the candidates are having on energy policy. With gas prices close to $4 a gallon, Hillary Clinton and John McCain say they’ll bring relief with a moratorium on the 18.4-cent federal gas tax. Barack Obama opposes that but prefers a 1970s-style windfall profits tax (as does Mrs. Clinton).

Now it should come as no surprise that Hillary Diane Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama are in favor of a windfall profits tax; it’s completely in line with the true platform of the Democrats which is:

1) We have everything it takes to take everything you have; and,
2) Is what we’re doing good for America and Americans? We don’t care!

Mr. Obama is right to oppose the gas-tax gimmick, but his idea is even worse. Neither proposal addresses the problem of energy supply, especially the lack of domestic oil and gas thanks to decades of Congressional restrictions on U.S. production. Mr. Obama supports most of those “no drilling” rules, but that hasn’t stopped him from denouncing high gas prices on the campaign trail. He is running TV ads in North Carolina that show him walking through a gas station and declaring that he’ll slap a tax on the $40 billion in “excess profits” of Exxon Mobil.

The idea is catching on. Last week Pennsylvania Congressman Paul Kanjorski introduced a windfall profits tax as part of what he called the “Consumer Reasonable Energy Price Protection Act of 2008.” So now we have Congress threatening to help itself to business profits even though Washington already takes 35% right off the top with the corporate income tax.

You may also be wondering how a higher tax on energy will lower gas prices. Normally, when you tax something, you get less of it, but Mr. Obama seems to think he can repeal the laws of economics. We tried this windfall profits scheme in 1980. It backfired. The Congressional Research Service found in a 1990 analysis that the tax reduced domestic oil production by 3% to 6% and increased oil imports from OPEC by 8% to 16%. Mr. Obama nonetheless pledges to lessen our dependence on foreign oil, which he says “costs America $800 million a day.” Someone should tell him that oil imports would soar if his tax plan becomes law. The biggest beneficiaries would be OPEC oil ministers.

Sigh. Once again the tagline to my blog is proven to be 100% accurate. You have to wonder if either of the Democratic candidates could pass an Econ 101 quiz, much less an exam. As for Kanjorski, well, we already know the answer to that.

The final piece of advice for the two Democratic fucktards candidates is in the final paragraph of the editorial.

Late this week, a group of Senate Republicans led by Pete Domenici of New Mexico introduced the “American Energy Production Act of 2008″ to expand oil production off the U.S. coasts and in Alaska. It has the potential to increase domestic production enough to keep America running for five years with no foreign imports. With the world price of oil at $116 a barrel, if not now, when? No word yet if Senators Clinton and Obama will take time off from denouncing oil profits to vote for that.

In line with platform position #2, above, we already know the answer.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• State to Rename Office of the Governor to Office of the Moonbat
• GOP Drinks Gas Price Kool Aid
• Something Democrats Can Agree On: Oil Profits
• Democrats Divided Over Gas Tax Breaks