Will a Real Conservative Please Stand Up

September 18, 2008 by  
Filed under SC Politics

I hate to continue to harp on Congressman Inglis (well, maybe I do enjoy it a little), but what in the world is going on!

Mr. Inglis claims to be a conservative.  He quotes scripture in his mailings, supposedly believes in off shore drilling, supposedly believes in smaller government, an anti-nanny state, recently claims to be a supporter of a balanced budget, somewhat questions how much government should be involved in the bailouts and supports cap and trade proposals.

Well, I believe Mr. Inglis’ supposed support of offshore drilling just sank!  He voted in favor of HR 6899 which banned any new off shore drilling development within 50 miles of the coast line.

Now before we go into arguing that if it is any closer it will destroy the view from the beaches, the average person (being a generous 6 feet tall) standing at sea level can only see 3 miles out (due to the curvature of the earth).  A mere 13 miles if you are 100 feet above sea level.  With that said, an oil rig 20 miles out will most probably not be seen by the tourists on the beaches.

Most researchers also argue that most of the oil and natural gases found on the continental shelf are within that 50 mile stretch.

Effectively, Inglis thinks he has pulled the wool over the peoples eyes and he can continue to claim that he supports off shore drilling.  Not if I have anything to say about it!  Here are Inglis’ comments on the vote complements of the Greenville News:

“Over and over, (constituents) asked why Congress can’t work together to get something done,” Inglis said. “This measure is far short of what we need, but it’s a start.”

It is pretty much given that we will have Inglis for another two years.  Will somebody please stand up with true conservative values and take a stand?

By the way…I will be at Wades Monday for Inglis’ “Let’s Talk”.  I can not wait to see how he defends his position on the bill to the people.

BI – Business Intelligence, Bob Inglis, or a New Tax

August 26, 2008 by  
Filed under SC Politics

Business intelligence application models were designed to allow businesses to make better business decisions.  Can someone tell me what BI model Inglis is using?

At Inglis’ monthly Let’s Talk at Wade’s Restaurant, the Congressman made the following statement (paraphrased):

My family has cut the air conditioning off for the summer and we are installing window screens…some of those high-tech ones.

Good for you Congressman.  How much did those window screens run you?  Were they 6 times as expensive as the CFL ($4.22/bulb) is to the incandescent bulb ($0.62/bulb)?

This statement immediately reminded me of one of Obama’s many sound bites:

We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times

Now with all do respect, a man and his family our welcome run their house however they wish.   And I am glad to see that Inglis is practicing what he preaches.  However, I really feel bad for his wife and younger children that are going to live in that heat daily while the Congressman is in Washington in the air conditioning.

In my opinion, I believe this highlights his trend to the left.

Inglis takes it a step further though…

I have a political problem…how do I convince people that we need the alternatives, we need to drill into our heads, not the ground.

He wants to drill stuff into our heads.  I’m beginning to belive that he wants to drill “green” into our heads.

Inglis stated that he wants America to focus on the alternatives, to be innovative, and use our heads to beat the Middle East.  I agree, lets be innovative. But lets be realistic and not choke off our nation in the process of developing the alternatives.  I still argue that we should be “multi-tasking”.  That is what I am required to do at work, at home, and life.  In Inglis’ world, it seems that “multi-tasking” the energy issue is out of the question.

On the plus side…
Inglis finally admitted that he was a supporter of a balanced budget (2 months after being questioned on the issue at Let’s Talk).

And finally…
When Inglis gets his “cap-and-trade” for carbon in place, make sure you check you check stub for the new BI line item in your pay stub deductions.

One Last Thing…
Did anyone figure out what BI model Inglis is using.

The “Greener” Side of Inglis – Why It Hurts

June 24, 2008 by  
Filed under SC Politics

Can someone tell me who Congressman Bob Inglis is Representing?

I continue to be utterly surprised by the bases acceptance of Mr. Inglis’ “green” values. Conservation is good but there should be a fine line in the means that are taken to “change” the system. That means should be one that does not adversely affect your constituency. Yet his “green” values are infringing on the traditional values of less tax, less spending, and open markets.

– Memorial Day, 2008

At a Memorial Day Let’s Talk, Bob was discussing energy with approximately nine people at Wades Restaurant in Spartanburg. At one point Mr. Inglis was challenged about his policy on ANWR. Facts were presented that if we had begun drilling when he was in Congress the first time, we could have almost replaced the oil we were importing from Saudi Arabia (ANWR could produce 1M barrels/day, Saudi imports = 1.4M barrels/day in 2006). If we were about energy independence why are we not drilling (ANWR or elsewhere)?

The Congressman responded stating that if we had increased our production, OPEC would cut their production and nothing would be accomplished. Prices would remain as high as they are now. I countered stating “Why can we not do two things at one time, drill more to reduce our foreign dependence and still develop the alternative fuels”.

Inglis replied if we drill more, prices will drop and the initiative to develop alternatives would be delayed.

Isn’t this a contradiction of his earlier statements? I confronted the Congressman on the issue. Mr. Inglis stated that he was contradicting himself but he never provided what he believed the result of increased production would be.

– June 9th, 2008

Congressman Inglis held a conference call and for the first time he admitted that the problem with oil is the weak dollar. Yet, neither he nor Congress seems willing to take on the problem of the fledging dollar.

– June 23rd, 2008

I took the opportunity to ask the Congressman to elaborate further on his statements from the conference call concerning the falling dollar on oil. Inglis proceeded to defer the question to an economic specialist who stated that the dollar was partly at fault. I challenged further to see a balanced budget to no avail.

I followed up this question with one concerning the new mileage standards passed earlier in the year. I questioned whether or not the standards were based on traditional gasoline or on the less efficient ethanol blends. He responded by stating they were based on traditional gasoline. Understand that the ethanol blends are less efficient resulting in a tank of gas not going as far. Whose pockets are being lined by this law?

And the tipping point for me on Monday was when Mr. Inglis stated that he supported the Lieberman/Warner Cap and Trade policy as long as China and India were included. In Mr. Inglis’ green world now campaign, he wants to place a tax on industries that have a carbon footprint. It would put a tax on everything around the world coming into America. So what does that do to the price of gasoline? Exactly, increases your cost. It is estimated that the bill would increase your gas costs 13 cents within 4 years. Not to mention the costs on other products that will be passed down to the consumer.

In my additional research, this isn’t the first time Mr. Inglis has expressed these views. He has been a supporter of a cap-and-trade policy for a few years now. Just do a search for “bob inglis cap-and-trade”.

When will Mr. Inglis begin to realize that his policy is pointing us in the wrong direction? It appears that he does not care about the pocket book of the citizens of America, much less those in Upstate, SC. I agree, we must get off of our foreign dependence, but by taxing and regulating, which stifles the economy, is not the solution.

A quick review of Inglis’ positions

  • Regulation – Inglis supports the Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs that cost more and requires special cleaning when one fails due to mercury
  • Regulation & Taxation – Cap and trade policy as long as it includes China and India.
  • Taxation – Would not declare that he would fight and work for a balanced budget

USC Upstate to Host Forum on Energy

June 24, 2008 by  
Filed under Press Release

Compliments of the Spartanburg Herald Journal and USC Upstate

Renewable forms of energy, including solar, wind, and biofuel, will be the topic for a forum to be held on the campus of University of South Carolina Upstate at 6:30 p.m. Wednesday in the Campus Life Center Ballroom.

The forum is free and open to the public, and it will include speakers from the South Carolina Energy Office, and the Departments of Geological Sciences and Mechanical Engineering at the University of South Carolina. Following the short presentations, the discussion will be open to comments and questions from the audience.

Attendees also will be able to view displays — sponsored by environmental organizations and energy groups — about renewable energy and energy efficiency.

For more information call 803-777-2221 or e-mail toumey@sc.edu

Energy Guzzled by Al Gore’s Home in Past Year Could Power 232 U.S. Homes for a Month

June 19, 2008 by  
Filed under Press Release

For Immediate Release: June 17, 2008
June 18, 2008

For Further Information, Contact:
Adam King, 615.383.6431
adam@tennesseepolicy.org


Energy Guzzled by Al Gore’s Home in Past Year Could Power 232 U.S. Homes for a Month
Gore’s personal electricity consumption up 10%, despite “energy-efficient” home renovations

NASHVILLE - In the year since Al Gore took steps to make his home more energy-efficient, the former Vice President’s home energy use surged more than 10%, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research.

“A man’s commitment to his beliefs is best measured by what he does behind the closed doors of his own home,” said Drew Johnson, President of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. “Al Gore is a hypocrite and a fraud when it comes to his commitment to the environment, judging by his home energy consumption.”

In the past year, Gore’s home burned through 213,210 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity, enough to power 232 average American households for a month.

In February 2007, An Inconvenient Truth, a film based on a climate change speech developed by Gore, won an Academy Award for best documentary feature. The next day, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research uncovered that Gore’s Nashville home guzzled 20 times more electricity than the average American household.

After the Tennessee Center for Policy Research exposed Gore’s massive home energy use, the former Vice President scurried to make his home more energy-efficient. Despite adding solar panels, installing a geothermal system, replacing existing light bulbs with more efficient models, and overhauling the home’s windows and ductwork, Gore now consumes more electricity than before the “green” overhaul.

Since taking steps to make his home more environmentally-friendly last June, Gore devours an average of 17,768 kWh per month –1,638 kWh more energy per month than before the renovations – at a cost of $16,533. By comparison, the average American household consumes 11,040 kWh in an entire year, according to the Energy Information Administration.

In the wake of becoming the most well-known global warming alarmist, Gore won an Oscar, a Grammy and the Nobel Peace Prize. In addition, Gore saw his personal wealth increase by an estimated $100 million thanks largely to speaking fees and investments related to global warming hysteria.

“Actions speak louder than words, and Gore’s actions prove that he views climate change not as a serious problem, but as a money-making opportunity,” Johnson said. “Gore is exploiting the public’s concern about the environment to line his pockets and enhance his profile.”

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research, a Nashville-based free market think tank and watchdog organization, obtained information about Gore’s home energy use through a public records request to the Nashville Electric Service.