With today's recent developments in the US Senate, the media had a lovely May-day this day. To tell you the facts, the Senate did not pass a plan to increase taxes on profits earned by US oil companies. With all the focus of Americans today on the price of gas, this movement in the Senate was pretty profound and news-worthy.
Now, how did the mainstream media handle this news? The NewsBuster's site has two postings about this as well, here
, highlighting the media's bias in their reporting on the Senate vote. Let's take a look for ourselves shall we? From Yahoo News
comes this AP report:
Senate GOP blocks windfall taxes on Big Oil
The author of this piece is H. Josef Hebert. This was his second posting to the internet. This post occurred around 6pm (central). The first post
was around 2pm. Its title was:
Senate GOP blocks oil taxes
Evil Senate GOP'ers have actively blocked the passage of the plan to tax windfall profits of BIG OIL
. And that was just the titles. The body of the piece highlights the author's apparent bias towards GOP'ers and taxing BIG OIL
. (added emphasis is mine)...
From his second edition:
Saved by Senate Republicans, big oil companies dodged an attempt Tuesday to slap them with a windfall profits tax and take away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response to the record gasoline prices that have the nation fuming.
GOP senators shoved aside the Democratic (Ed: nothing democratic about this?) proposal, arguing that punishing Big Oil won't do a thing to lower the $4-a-gallon-price of gasoline that is sending economic waves across the country.
Whew!! Evil Republicans are preventing the kind and lovely Democratics from implementing their plan to save the world from the evil BIG OIL
. Nothing like scary code words to paint a picture of heavy-handedness on the part of Republicans "shoving aside" the Democratics attempts.
From his first edition:
Senate Republicans blocked a proposal Tuesday to tax the windfall profits of the largest oil companies, despite pleas by Democratic leaders to use the measure to address America's anger over $4 a gallon gasoline.
The Democratic energy package would have imposed a tax on any "unreasonable" profits of the five largest U.S. oil companies and given the federal government more power to address oil market speculation that the bill's supporters argue has added to the crude oil price surge.
So, please tell me what is an "unreasonable" profit? Who can tell me at what level profit becomes unreasonable? Who would you appoint to be the arbiter to decide at what level of profit is unreasonable and must be taken away and given to someone else?
Does Microsoft make too much profit? Does Wal-Mart? How can $0.08 per gallon of gas profit be deemed "unreasonable" when soft-drink and bottled-water producers (the Big Water) make GOBS more profit per gallon that oil companies do on a gallon of gas!!
And, let's make one thing clear. There is no way these profits the oil companies are making are "windfall" profits. A windfall profit would come about by lottery, or by making tons of money on very minor investments. Huge profits gained by putting very, very little effort or interest in to the venue. For example, the government. The government makes 3 times the profit on gas compared to the oil companies and no one has yet to proclaim we take away their profits!!!
This guy's article gets better...
"Americans are furious about what's going on," declared Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and want Congress to do something about oil company profits and "an orgy of speculation" on oil markets. But Republicans argued the Democratic (Ed: There's that idiotic word again. If it was a Republican proposal would they say "Republicanic"?) proposal focusing on new oil industry taxes is not the answer to the country's energy problems.
So, Americans are clamoring for oil company profits? I thought we were clamoring over high gas prices. Those two are not the same nor connected. Oil company profits are tied to the amount of gas sold and to the amount they paid for their oil when they bought it. High gas prices are tied to the global market since nearly 2/3 of our oil comes from elsewhere. If we controlled our own oil supplies, we could control our own prices.
The Democratic energy package would have imposed a 25 percent tax on any "unreasonable" profits of the five largest U.S. oil companies,...
"The American people are clamoring for relief at the pump," said Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., but if taxes are increased on the oil companies "they will get exactly what they don't want. The bill will raise taxes, increase imports."
The Democrats in the Senate wanted to add an ADDITIONAL tax on oil company profits to be incurred at some arbitrary level. That would have been, what, nearly 75% tax? And they would have gained more power over their operations and the ability to sue oil companies over profits and anti-trust issues. The anti-trust issues would have allowed the federal government to take over a company they felt was not acting in an appropriate manner. In other words, nationalize the industry just as the Democrats announced during their last inquisition of the oil company execs last month (May 2008).
May I remind you about who is in charge in the Congress over these last few years. Democratics, that's right. But, who do they blame for this current crisis?
"We are hurting as a country. We're hurting individually as Americans ... and the other side says, `Do nothing. Don't even debate the issue,'" complained Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "Average citizens are scratching their heads and saying, what's wrong with Washington," said Schumer.
What is wrong with Washington? That would be you and your party Sen. Schumer!!!
Sen. Schumer would not know an "economic hurt" if it bit his butt and spit in his eye. (Cletus, I will pay you to do that). How dare he say the Republicans do not want to debate the issue. This issue was debated all day long. And, if I might remind you sir, that it was the Republicans who put forth a sound energy policy, what two months ago, that would have allowed more drilling and opened up more areas to exploration and drilling. But no, you Slimocrats decided that it was not necessary and said it would have harmed too many squirrels and fish and scenic byways. And NOW you are crying about how humans are affected? OH NO!! NO SIR. You can not stand there and whine about how humans are impacted by this failed bill when you REFUSED to even consider how humans were impacted by your biased, illiterate and illogical votes on the Republican bill last time.
Separately, Democrats (Ed: not Democratics?) also failed to get Republican support for a proposal to extend tax breaks for wind, solar and other alternative energy development, and for the promotion of energy efficiency and conservation. The tax breaks have either expired or are scheduled to end this year.
So, the Democrats wanted to take away the profits from the free market oil companies and give them to the state-sanctionedmandatedgoverned alternative energy programs that only survive via government's socialized welfare programs.
Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has acknowledged that Americans are hurting from the high energy costs but strongly opposes the Democrats' response and has ridiculed those who "think we can tax our way out of this problem."
So, as you can see. According to this doofus of a biased writer for the @ssPirates, anything that the Democratics wanted to do was good for America and America's families because the Slimocrats said so. However, if the Republicans (RINOS of late) decide that it would not be in the best interest of working families, America and our economy, then they are blocking, ridiculing, arguing, dodging, and harming working families who are just trying to operate their Meals On Wheels or get their elderly parents to dialysis.
Obama, in a statement, said Republicans had "turned a blind eye to the plight of America's working families"
To any normal thinking person, increasing taxes on profits that are deemed unreasonable by some government bureaucrat will most definitely raise the price of gas and lead to the increase in reliance on foreign oil supplies.
But, here is the most scariest part. Sen. McCain, the liberal who is running as a republican (shiver) has announced that he will begin to attack CEO pay when he gains office. Can you say Marxism all around? All these candidates have only socialist and marxist ideologies behind them. NOT ONE has a pro-American pro-economy belief. They all want to TAKE, TAX, and SPEND and GIVE AWAY our country.
I am very sorry for this long rant of a post, but this author really ticked me off.