Regarding off shore and Arctic National Wildlife Refuge oil drilling, I say: Go ahead. The area of ANWR the companies want to drill has been compared to the size of a postage stamp on a football field or a single character on a full-page newspaper, relative to the wilderness preserve.

At the same time, we need to loosen restrictions and build more domestic refineries. When was the last time we had a catastrophic spill at one of them? Oil in transit, via ship and barge, is a greater risk for tragedy than those listed above. But that is not what the left wants us to hear or read.

I think an agreement could be worked out that fixes the price of oil from ANWR at, for example, $100/barrel for a determined number of years, while prohibiting oil companies from increasing exports from other domestic sources.

In 2006, people in our country were looking for solutions to high energy prices. Nancy Pelosi took over as House majority leader and stated that the Democratic Party had a "common-sense plan" of reducing energy costs by cracking dawn on price gouging, cutting tax deductions for Big Oil and providing taxpayer funding of alternative energy. So far, Congress has proposed that trial attorneys get the right to sue the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Companies and conducted public interrogations of U.S. oil executives.

For alternative fuels, Congress has mandated the use of ethanol. This has resulted in the quadrupling of corn prices and food shortages for the world's poor. Ethanol production has created an inordinate use of water, fertilizer and taxpayer funds. Congress also has decided taxpayer-subsidized wind power is an acceptable alternative energy source as long as it does not block people's ocean views.

Within our reach in the U.S., an estimated 112 billion barrels of oil and 656 trillion cubic feet of gas have been declared off limits. By keeping this energy off limits, one wonders if Congress is pro-OPEC and wants to maintain a high trade deficit.

With higher energy costs upon us, we are now getting the "common-sense plan" good and hard.

Hey Bloggers! this weeks rant!!!

It is unfortunate those who are so outspoken about the theory of global warming have little idea about what that theory demands. Such was the case with the Oct. 23 letter writers taking issue with the spot-on criticisms from columnist Cal Thomas.

The theory requires we believe humans are the cause of the current warming. What we fail to see is the scientific proof that human influences come anywhere close to eclipsing the Earth's natural cycles of warming and cooling. Nor do we see the scientific proof that humans are overwhelming the current increased output fluctuation of our sun, the likely cause of warming on three other planets and numerous planets' moons.

Rather than accept a theoretical belief system, a good place to start would be recognition of the so-called Little Ice Age that started in the 1300s and ended around 1800. We've been warming due to a cyclical change. Second, we should not succumb to projections based on comparisons to a peak in cooling that occurred a mere 30 years ago.

Third, we should not squelch opposition scientists. Finally, we should scrutinize the questionable methods, negotiated conclusions and politics of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. What is at stake is a potentially huge misallocation of resources

Don't just accept global warming theories, Accept the inevitable!

Until next time time, happy writing!