Wednesday, July 2, 2008To: Friends & SupportersFrom: Gary L. Bauer Obama Gets Tough – On Canada! Everyone knows we are facing an energy challenge. We rely too much on oil from unsavory and hostile places – Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Libya, etc. The financial markets are in panic mode over the growing tensions in the Middle East, with Iran threatening to shut down the strategic Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the world's oil passes. And because of Iran's reckless rhetoric, you are paying more at the pump. This dependence has got to end, and today President Bush called on the American people to rise up and demand that members of Congress get serious about domestic energy production for the good of our economic security as well as our national security. But one of the few bright spots in the foreign oil market has been our neighbor to the north – Canada. In fact, it may surprise you to learn that the number one foreign supplier of our imported oil is Canada, not Saudi Arabia. Canada is not only a reliable supplier of drilled oil and natural gas, but it also has incredible supplies of oil trapped in "tar sands." At current prices, it is cost effective to "squeeze" that oil out of the tar sands and bring it to the marketplace. By every estimate, the oil in Canada's tar sands rivals Saudi Arabia's known reserves. Already that oil represents 47% of Canada's total output and other countries, especially China, are trying to sign contracts to get it. But if Barack Obama has his way, we are likely to watch that oil go everywhere but here. Last week, in a statement most of the media ignored, he called the Canadian oil "dirty," and his top energy advisor raised serious reservations about whether the United States under a "President Obama" would even want the tar sands oil. And since Barack Obama opposes drilling for our own oil, guess what will happen to the price at the pump when we take the Canadian oil off the table? But that's really the Left's dirty little secret -- it doesn't object to high gas prices. In fact, the Left see higher prices as just one more way for Big Government to control your life. From "windfall profit taxes" on the companies that provide the oil we need to gas taxes at the pump, higher prices and higher taxes are all part of the liberal agenda. One senior House Democrat has called for raising the gas tax by 50 cents a gallon! Barack Obama even admitted that he supports higher gas prices. When asked on CNBC recently about the rising price of gasoline, Obama acknowledged that it was "a shock to the pocketbook," but he also stated, "I would have preferred a gradual adjustment." Translation: He's not opposed to higher gas prices. Now get this: Last year, liberal California Democrat Henry Waxman snuck a provision into the 2007 energy bill that prohibits the federal government from using coal-based fuels, oil shale and tar sands, all of which the United States and Canada have in abundance, in order to combat global warming. The United States Air Force is desperately trying to get this provision repealed since it immediately recognized the potential risk to our national security of another Arab oil embargo now that Rep. Waxman and his fellow Democrats have prevented the Air Force from using Canadian oil sands. It's hard to fly planes if you can't get the jet fuel you need. Efforts to repeal the Waxman provision are being led by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) and Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), two outstanding conservative champions. The radical Left is just as much of a threat to our national security in the war against militant Islam as it is to our values in the cultural war here at home. The "Blame America First" liberals, like Henry Waxman and Barack Obama, are more afraid of global warming than of the Islamofascists who are trying to kill us! And one of the first things the new liberal Congress did after taking power in 2006 was to set the stage for the grounding of our own Air Force. It is clear that no matter what the issue – foreign policy, national security, economic security and our values – when it comes to the Left and Barack Obama, their radical ideology always wins out over common sense. Media Misses The Message -- Again Yesterday I told you about Obama's radical position on traditional marriage, and, of course, the media didn't mention that. They were too busy covering his outreach to faith-based voters. Yes, that's right – Obama delivered a major speech yesterday touting the triumphs of President Bush's Faith-Based Initiative program and promising to expand it. But before you get all warm and fuzzy inside about Obama's "post-partisan" embrace of conservative values, let me explain the message in his speech, which the media missed. President Bush has steadfastly defended the right of religious organizations to hire employees based on their own standards and beliefs. Under "President Obama," religious groups that accept federal funding would very likely lose that freedom. A senior advisor to the Obama campaign said yesterday that Senator Obama "only supports letting religious institutions hire and fire based on faith in the non-taxpayer funded portions of their activities." So whatever portion gets federal funding would be subject to whatever bizarre regulations the Left can come up with. But as we have seen from past experiences, it would likely be expanded to cover all activities of any organization that receives any federal funding of any kind. One conservative activist suggested that Obama was imposing a double-standard on conservative religious groups, noting that Obama certainly would not require Planned Parenthood to hire pro-lifers in any capacity just because it gets federal funding. So the freedom of secular leftists is protected, but the freedom of religious groups is limited. I know many conservatives objected to the very concept of President Bush's Faith-Based Initiative simply out of fear of federal regulation of religious groups. But President Bush demonstrated that if run properly, the program could work. The concept itself wasn't a problem. But liberal government bureaucrats and judges, like those Obama no doubt would appoint and the liberal policies that he supports, would be a big problem. The McCain campaign was quick to demonstrate the stark difference between Senator McCain and Senator Obama on this issue. Here is a statement released today:
"John McCain supports faith based initiatives, and recognizes their important role in our communities. He has cosponsored legislation to foster improved partnerships with community organizations, including faith-based, to assist with substance abuse and violence prevention. He also believes that it is important for faith-based groups to be able to hire people who share their faith, and he disagrees with Senator Obama that hiring at faith-based groups should be subject to government oversight."My friends, let me say this again: Elections have consequences!