PALIN: FEDS ‘STOCKPILING BULLETS’ IN CASE OF RIOTS AFTER DEFAULT

1 Comment

This is from Breitbarts Big Government.

I think Sarah is half right with her comments.

I think the stockpile is for when prices soar due to Obamacare.

 

Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin claimed the federal government is “stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.” Palin believes such calamity may result from the country defaulting on its obligations.

She claimed the threat of default exists because Washington politicians are not serious about reducing the country’s debt, as evidenced by the drama over the sequester.

“If we are going to wet our proverbial pants over 0.3% in annual spending cuts when we’re running up trillion dollar annual deficits, then we’re done,” Palin wrote of the sequester set to hit on Friday. “Put a fork in us. We’re finished. We’re going to default eventually and that’s why the feds are stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.”

In a Facebook note on Tuesday in which she blistered D.C. politicians for yet another “ginned-up” crisis, Palin wrote that the “real economic Armageddon looming before us is our runaway debt, not the sequester, which the President advocated for and signed into law and is now running around denouncing because he never had any genuine intention of reining in his reckless spending.”

Palin said the world knows that if Washington politicians cannot even deal with a modest 0.3% per year cut in the federal budget, then the country is heading straight for default.

“If we can’t stomach modest cuts that would lower federal spending by a mere 0.3% per year out of a current federal budget of $3.6 trillion, then we might as well signal to the whole world that we have no serious intention of dealing with our debt problem,” Palin continued.

- See more at: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/02/28/Palin-Feds-Stockpiling-Bullets-in-Case-of-Riots-After-Default#sthash.gwmNBfQY.dpuf

About these ads

Obama admin to withdraw millions of Alaska acres from development

Leave a comment

 

This is from Human Events.

Here is more proof Obama has his foot on the throat of the oil companies.

Obama wants to destroy the evil big oil.

If Obama gets reelected he will bankrupt the oil and coal industry.

Does so will hurt hundreds of thousands of employees for these industries.

Bit will also destroy the companies that provide equipment and maintain them.

It will affect retails shops be they grocery stores clothing stores etc.

The Obama administration’s plan to lock up nearly half of the National Petroleum Reserve from energy production has drawn criticism from key Alaska officials and Iñupiat Eskimos who say the plan is unacceptable and should be canceled.

The 23 million acre reserve on Alaska’s north slope was set aside by Congress 90 years ago to preserve the domestic supply of oil and gas, and critics say the proposal shelves the most prosperous lands.

“At a minimum, the administration’s proposed management plan would add uncertainty and delay development projects at a time when the U.S. badly needs both the energy and the jobs,” said Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska). “It begs the question, if we can’t develop (the reserve), where will this administration let us develop? Their proposed management plan is unacceptable to me and as long as I’m in Washington D.C., these recommendations will never see the light of day.”

Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell, a Republican, officially withdrew the state from further cooperation with the Interior Department unless the plan is canceled.

The “surprise announcement” and “complete failure” of the federal government to consider numerous concerns expressed by the state “shows a complete lack of respect for the views of the state,” Parnell said in a Sept. 12 letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

The Aug. 13 announcement, made with little fanfare after Congress left town for the summer recess, restricts leases for energy development to less than 12 million acres that the government estimates holds 549 million barrels of oil. The U.S. Geological Survey estimated in 2002 there were 9 billion barrels of recoverable oil in the reserve, but revised their estimate in 2010 to less than 900 million barrels.

By limiting energy production, the plan would protect “world-class caribou herds, migratory bird habitat, uplands, and sensitive coastal resources that are central to the culture and subsistence lifestyle of Alaska natives and our nation’s conservation heritage,” the announcement said.

Local support disputed

However, the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (ASRC) that represents the interests of the Iñupiat in Barrow, Alaska, is opposed to the plan and disputes Salazar’s contention it has local support.

Richard Glenn, ASRC executive vice president of lands and natural resources, says “despite the department’s statements of working and collaborating with Alaska Native groups we feel that our efforts are rejected.”

“Salazar’s choice would lock up large swaths of land with little or no additional benefit to wildlife resources found there and elsewhere throughout the petroleum reserve. Waterfowl, fish and caribou do not recognize boxes on a map,” Glenn said.

Rex A. Rock, Sr., ARSC president, said the plan essentially locks up the most prospective areas for increased domestic energy supply, while proposing lease sales on tracts of land with low oil potential.

“This is supposed to be used for energy production, they shouldn’t be treating it as a wilderness area,” said Dan Kish, senior vice president of policy for the Institute of Energy Research.

Obama has effectively blocked oil production on federally controlled property including the Outer Continental Shelf, ANWR, and onshore drilling in the lower 48 states, Kish said.

As the price of gas continues to rise, one option for consumer relief being considered by President Barack Obama is the release of oil from the country’s emergency supply of 700 million barrels in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

“Rather than allowing Americans to go to work and increase the supply of oil, Obama would rather take it from the bank,” Kish said. “He’s like a rich kid who won’t get a job because he has a trust fund, a bank account he can draw down on.”

 

 

 

 

Alaska sues to block low-sulfur fuel requirement for ships

Leave a comment

This is from Yahoo News.

Another power grab by Barack Milhous Capone Kardashian.

If the Constitution still mattered Barack would be impeached.

But as Mark Levin says were living in a post Constitutional  America.

We are seeing our right stripped away daily.

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) – The state of Alaska sued the Obama administration on Friday to block environmental regulations that would require ships sailing in southern Alaska waters to use low-sulfur fuel.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Anchorage, challenges the new federal regulations, which require the use of low-sulfur fuel for large marine vessels such as cargo and cruise ships.

The rule is scheduled to be enforced starting on August 1 by the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Coast Guard for ships operating within 200 miles of the shores of southeastern and south-central Alaska, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit faults the EPA, the Department of Homeland Security and others for using a marine treaty amendment as the basis for the new federal regulations without waiting for ratification of that amendment by the U.S. Senate.

The Alaska Department of Law said in a statement that the low-sulfur-fuel requirement would be costly, jacking up prices for products shipped by marine vessel and harming Alaska’s cruise industry.

“Alaska relies heavily on maritime traffic, both for goods shipped to and from the state, and for the cruise ship passengers who support thousands of Alaskan jobs,” Alaska Attorney General Michael Geraghty said in a statement.

“There are reasonable and equally effective alternatives for the Secretary and the EPA to consider which would still protect the environment but dramatically reduce the severe impact these regulations will have on Alaskan jobs and families.”

Totem Ocean Trailer Express, a major shipper operating in Alaska, estimates that the move to low-sulfur fuel will increase its costs by 8 percent, Geraghty said.

A spokesman for EPA’s Seattle regional office was not immediately available to comment on the lawsuit.

The treaty amendment at issue is a 2010 agreement under the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, or MARPOL. The United States has signed onto MARPOL, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has accepted the 2010 amendment.

Domestic enforcement of the amendment is not permitted without ratification by two-thirds of the U.S. Senate, Assistant Alaska Attorney General Seth Beausang said. He said the EPA also erred by failing to conduct an environmental analysis.

“The only thing they relied on was the treaty amendment in issuing the regulations,” he told Reuters, adding that Alaska was not coordinating its effort to overturn the regulations with any other state.

The lawsuit names as defendants the EPA and its director, Lisa Jackson, the Department of Homeland Security and Secretary Janet Napolitano, the Coast Guard and its commandant, Admiral Robert Papp, and Clinton.

 

Regulation Nation: Shell Ready to Move on Alaska Wells — If Alphabet Soup of Challenges Would End

Leave a comment

 



The story and video below are from Fox News.
It is time to put a stop to all of these out of control regulations.
It is also time to shut down all of the tree huggers.
We need to drill our own oil.
We could tell OPEC to drink their oil.

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com“>video.foxnews.com

An estimated 27 billion barrels of oil are sitting just off the northern coast of Alaska in waters controlled by the United States, but despite spending more than five years and $4 billion, Shell Oil Company still can’t get to it.
The company was planning to announce this week plans to move ahead with drilling three test wells in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas next summer, but it’s still lacking several permits and a roadmap of how to get them.
Shell doesn’t blame strict environmental protections. The company’s beef is with a seemingly endless web of legal appeals and challenges available to drilling opponents.
“We’re not disputing any of the high standards we’re being asked to work with,” said Pete Slaiby, vice president of Shell Alaska. “What’s concerning to us is the fact that there’s not any real certainty in how these processes will be met.”
The Environmental Protection Agency granted an air permit in September, but the permit is still in legal limbo because it’s been challenged a second time by Earthjustice and other environmental groups — despite the fact the closest village to the proposed drilling is 70 miles away and has a population of 245.
An EPA board now must weigh in again.
 ”The majority of them are not thinking about America,” said Alaska’s lone congressman, Don Young, a Republican. “They’re thinking about their own little agenda.”
Young said if Alaska’s resources were tapped, the U.S. would not have to buy $400 billion worth of oil each year from overseas and consumers would not have to pay nearly $4 a gallon at the pump.
Young has introduced legislation that would strip away every federal environmental regulation and force the agencies to get Congress to reauthorize them. Environmental groups say it would be a disaster.
Earl Kingik is an Alaska Native from Point Hope, a small village near the Chukchi Sea. He says offshore drilling regulations are not strong enough, and points to the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico as evidence.
“The fishermen lost everything,” Kingik said. “I don’t want to lose everything up north. We’ve been living like this for thousands of years.”
I
n addition to still needing an air permit from the EPA, Shell has to clear nine other government hurdles before it can drill. The list is an alphabet soup of federal agencies and red tape.
The Bureau of Ocean Energy, Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOERME) has to sign off on Shell’s Exploration Plan. It gave conditional approval in August but needs to wait for Shell to clear other bureaucratic hurdles before granting final approval. The bureau also is considering the company’s Oil Response Plan and Application for Permit to Drill.
The U.S. Coast Guard has yet to approve Shell’s Safety/Security Zone application. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) must issue Incidental Harassment Authorization, which would allow for the incidental killing of whales and seals.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has yet to issue a letter of authorization for the incidental take of protected polar bears and Pacific walrus. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers still must approve the Oil and Gas Structure, Nationwide permit.
And the EPA is still considering Shell’s Discharge Authorization and Vessel General Permit. Most of the permits have been approved by the various agencies, but they have been challenged in court, which leads to uncertainty.
Shell officials say they can move forward with some of the permits tied up in court battles, but the EPA air permit must be in hand before they can proceed. Pete Slaiby is confident the company will succeed this time.
The decision rests with the EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board, a panel that hears challenges when permits are issued. In March, a three judge panel rejected Shell’s air permit ruling its calculations for how much pollution would be produced by the drilling rigs were wrong.
Environmental Appeals Board members are appointed by the EPA Secretary Lisa Jackson. All three judges on the Shell case are registered Democrats and one, Kathie Stein, was an activist attorney for the powerful Environmental Defense Fund.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/16/regulation-nation-shell-ready-to-move-on-alaska-wells-if-alphabet-soup/?test=eim#ixzz1escxwbPV


 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 178 other followers

%d bloggers like this: