Ed’s Cabinet/Agency Leadership Suggestions For A Potential Trump/Cruz Administration


.
EXECUTIVE OFFICES
President: Donald Trump – Real Estate Tycoon
Vice President: Ted Cruz – U.S. Senator

CABINET/OTHER KEY OFFICES
Chief Of Staff: Jeffrey Lord – Former Associate Political Director For The Reagan Administration
Secretary Of State: John Bolton – Former U.S. Ambassador To The United Nations
Attorney General: Trey Gowdy – U.S. Congressman
Secretary Of Defense: James Mattis – Retired 4-Star Marine Corps General
Secretary Of Homeland Security: Frank Gaffney – Founder And President Of The Center For Security Policy
Secretary Of Treasury: Thomas Sowell – Senior Fellow At The Hoover Institution
Secretary Of Education: Newt Gingrich – Former Speaker Of The U.S. House Of Representatives
Secretary Of Health And Human Services: Ben Carson – Former Director Of Pediatric Neurosurgery At Johns Hopkins Medical Center
Director Of National Intelligence: Keith Alexander – Retired 4-Star Army General
Secretary Of Veterans Affairs: Allen West – Former U.S. Congressman
Secretary Of Transportation: Ted Houghton – Former Chairman Of The Texas Transportation Commission
Secretary Of Energy: Tom Tanton – Executive Director Of The American Tradition Institute
Secretary Of The Interior: Sarah Palin – Former Governor Of Alaska
Director Of Immigration And Customs Enforcement: Joe Arpaio – Sheriff Of Maricopa County, Arizona
Chairman Of The Federal Reserve: Mark Thornton – Senior Fellow At The Ludwig Von Mises Institute
Director Of The Office Of Management And Budget: Romina Boccia – Grover M. Hermann Fellow In Federal Budgetary Affairs For The Heritage Foundation
U.S. Trade Representative: Carl Icahn – Business Magnate
Press Secretary: Lou Dobbs – Television News Commentator

OFFICES THAT SHOULD BE ABOLISHED
Department Of Agriculture
Department Of Commerce
Department Of Labor
Department Of Housing And Urban Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

NEW OFFICES THAT SHOULD BE CREATED
Secretary Of Free Market Capitalism: Arthur Brooks – President Of The American Enterprise Institute
Director Of Government Downsizing: Thomas Schatz – President Of Citizens Against Government Waste

POTENTIAL SUPREME COURT JUSTICE NOMINEES
William Pryor – Judge On The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Eleventh Circuit
Diane Sykes – Judge On The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Seventh Circuit
Roy Moore – Chief Justice Of The Alabama Supreme Court
A. Raymond Randolph – Judge On The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Washington, DC Circuit

.

*VIDEO* LevinTV: The Climate Change Scheme

.

If You Think Solyndra Was A Waste Of Money…

If You Think Solyndra Was A Waste Of Money… – Investors Business Daily

.
…………….

.
Energy: There’s no shortage of points to pick apart in the president’s final State of the Union, as we’ve done above. But one deserves close scrutiny: Obama’s claim that he “reinvented our energy sector.”

In the middle of a lengthy section of a speech spent patting himself on the back, Obama talked about how successful his energy policies have been.

“Listen,” he said, “seven years ago we made the single biggest investment in clean energy in our history.” Then he went on to list “the results”:

Wind power is cheaper, solar panels are a fixture on more rooftops, oil imports dropped by almost 60% and “we cut carbon pollution more than any other country on Earth.” And then he added, to self-satisfied chuckles on the Democratic side of the aisle: “Gas under 2 bucks a gallon ain’t bad, either.”

But up until very recently, Obama was telling the country that low gas prices were an impossibility. “We can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices,” was his mantra for years. He was emphatic about it.

“Anyone who says we can drill our way out of this problem does not know what they are talking about, or does not know the truth,” he said at a 2012 event in New Hampshire.

The reason, he said, was that we use 25% of the world’s energy but have just 3% of the oil reserves. So the only solution was mandatory conservation and spending billions on the “energy of the future.”

Turns out it was Obama who didn’t know what he was talking about. We did, in fact, “drill our way” to lower gas prices. Thanks to fracking, oil companies are now able to produce vast amounts of previously unrecoverable oil.

In the past seven years, domestic oil production shot up a stunning 77%, according to the Energy Information Administration, making the U.S. the biggest oil producer in the world.

That’s why gas prices are low today. And why oil imports have dropped so sharply. And none of it had anything to do with Obama, who tried to hamper oil production whenever he could – blocking Keystone, restrictions on federal lands, EPA attempts to hinder fracking.

Indeed, moments after bragging about low energy prices, Obama said he’d push to raise them, “to change the way we manage our oil and coal resources so that they better reflect the costs they impose on taxpayers and our planet.”

Fracking is also why we’ve cut carbon emissions, because it sharply lowered the price of natural gas, which in turn let power plants switch from carbon-heavy coal to low-carbon gas.

Yes, Obama did pour billions of dollars into wind and solar subsidies, and various state governments added still more to sweeten the pot. And what did the country get for all that money?

Solar and wind still account for just 24% of renewable energy supplies and a tiny 2% of total energy production, government data show.

And, incredibly, more than half of the gains in solar and wind under Obama were offset by declines in hydroelectric power — a clean, renewable energy source that environmentalists happen to detest.

So after spending billions subsidizing solar and wind, the share of our energy that comes from renewables is the same as it was when Obama took office.

Exactly the same.

The U.S. has a bright energy future despite Obama, not because of him.

.

.

TransCanada Sues President Asshat Over Keystone XL Pipeline

TransCanada Sues Obama Over Keystone XL – Washington Examiner

.

.
The builder of the Keystone XL oil pipeline company is suing the Obama administration in federal court over its refusal to approve the project.

TransCanada, which proposed the pipeline project to connect Canada’s oil sands in Alberta with U.S. refiners on the Gulf Coast, on Wednesday filed a lawsuit in U.S. Federal Court in Houston, “asserting that the president’s decision to deny construction of Keystone XL exceeded his power under the U.S. Constitution,” according to the company.

The administration squashed the project after a record seven years of review, saying the project would increase greenhouse gas emissions and worsen climate change.

“TransCanada’s legal actions challenge the foundation of the U.S. administration’s decision to deny a presidential border crossing permit for the project,” the company says. “In its decision, the U.S. State Department acknowledged the denial was not based on the merits of the project. Rather, it was a symbolic gesture based on speculation about the perceptions of the international community regarding the administration’s leadership on climate change and the president’s assertion of unprecedented, independent powers.”

The company says as a result of the U.S. permit denial, it is reviewing the total sunk cost in the project at $3.1 billion. It is also making a separate claim under the North American Free Trade Agreement to recoup $15 billion in “costs and damages that it has suffered as a result of the U.S. administration’s breach of its… obligations” under the agreement.

.

.

Newly Elected Tea Party Governor Of Kentucky Tells Obama’s EPA To “Pound Sand”

Tea Party Kentucky-Elect Matt Bevin Tells Obama EPA To ‘Pound Sand’ – Politistick

.

.
It was supposed to be a “neck-and-neck” race between Tea Party-backed candidate and political newcomer Matt Bevin and Democrat Jack Conway in the Kentucky gubernatorial race on November 3.

But Bevin crushed Conway by a whopping 9%, 52.5% to 43.8%. It was a bloodbath, with Bevin winning all but just a few counties.

If that wasn’t enough to twerk leftist Democrats and their establishment Republican brethren, the state elected another Tea Party champion, Jenean Hampton, the first black woman ever elected to statewide office in Kentucky.

But it’s not just Democrats and RINO Republicans who are threatened by these new anti-establishment, pro-liberty, pro-Constitution Kentucky leaders.

The unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats from Washington, D.C., who unconstitutionally pass rules, laws and regulations without any vote from Congress, were given a powerful two-word message from Governor-elect Matt Bevin.

The Tea Party favorite Bevin, fresh off his huge victory, appeared on The Glenn Beck Radio Program on Friday and said that in regards to the Obama EPA’s tyrannical and un-American efforts to shut down a great American industry – the coal industry – he will tell the controlist agency to “pound sand.”
.

“Why it is that we in Kentucky – that sit on two extraordinary basins, the Illinois basin and the Central basin, an abundance of this – how are we not participating in something that the world wants more of than they ever have?

And so, from my way of thinking, we will tell the EPA and other unelected officials who have no legal authority over us as a state, to pound sand.”

.
Bevin told Beck that the Constitution grants the EPA “no authority” over the state, because of the Tenth Amendment, and that the only thing the EPA can do is take the state to court because they have “no enforcement arm.”

Matt Bevin told Glenn Beck that he is fed up with the federal government “bribing us with our own money” and plans on putting a stop to it.

.

.

9 Reasons Why Obama Just Made Wrong Decision On Keystone Pipeline (Nicolas Loris)

9 Reasons Why Obama Just Made Wrong Decision On Keystone Pipeline – Nicolas Loris

.

.
It took President Barack Obama only 2,604 days to reject the permit application for the Keystone XL pipeline.

In a statement today, Obama said the pipeline “would not serve the national interest of the United States.”

“America is now a global leader when it comes to taking serious action to fight climate change,” Obama added. “And frankly, approving this project would have undercut that global leadership.”

Former Obama administration Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu hit the nail on the head: “The decision on whether the construction should happen was a political one and not a scientific one.”

Here are the top nine reasons Obama is wrong on Keystone XL.
.

1.) Jobs and economic growth. Opponents will minimize the job numbers, saying that the pipeline will create only “a handful” of permanent jobs – and that’s correct. In his speech Obama said, “So if Congress is serious about wanting to create jobs, this was not the way to do it.” But here’s what that argument misses: the tens of thousands of construction jobs that the pipeline project will create. In fact, simply building the southern portion – which didn’t need Obama’s approval – has already created 4,000 construction jobs. And if opponents are dismissive of Keystone XL, they should be dismissive of all construction projects, as they’re all temporary – because they’re construction jobs. Further, Keystone XL would add economic value, transport an important energy resource efficiently, and result in billions of dollars of tax revenue for states it runs through.

2.) Stable supply of oil from an important trading partner that will lower gas prices. The pipeline would carry up to 830,000 barrels of oil from Canada to the Gulf Coast, where U.S. refineries are already equipped to handle heavier crudes. The pipeline will efficiently provide supply from a secure source and a friendly and important trading partner. Contra Obama’s claim today that “the pipeline would not lower gas prices for American consumers,” increased oil supplies will lower gas prices, though the impact may be small.

3.) Safest mode of getting oil and gas to Americans. Many in the United States live near a pipeline without even knowing about it. America has more than 500,000 miles of crude oil, petroleum, and natural gas pipelines and another 2 million miles of natural gas distribution pipelines. When it comes to accidents, injuries, and fatalities, pipelines are the safest mode of transporting oil and gas.

4.) Should be a business decision, not a government one. In concluding with Secretary of State John Kerry’s assessment that the project would not be in the national interest, Obama said, “The pipeline would not make a meaningful long-term contribution to our economy.” It is not the role of the federal government to make that determination. The federal government shouldn’t make that determination with the construction of a new restaurant or boutique shop. And it shouldn’t make that determination with a pipeline. After the State Department concluded that the pipeline was environmentally safe, the decision to build Keystone XL should have been a business decision – not a government one.

5.) We’ve done this before. The Keystone XL Pipeline is just a portion of the larger Keystone Pipeline System. You can view a map of the entire system here. Unbeknownst to many is the fact that the U.S. has already granted one of those presidential permits for the Keystone Pipeline System. For phase I of the Keystone Pipeline System, TransCanada filed an application with the Department of State (DOS) in April 2006, and the department began an environmental review in September 2006. TransCanada received its presidential permit for phase I in March 2008. From beginning to end, the process took 23 months. It has taken 86 months for Obama to say no.

6.) Environmentally safe. It was Albert Einstein who said the definition of insanity is “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” The State Department must be teetering on the edge of insanity, because after multiple environmental reviews concluding that Keystone XL poses minimal environmental risk to soil, wetlands, water resources, vegetation, fish, and wildlife, the Obama administration still rejected the permit application.

7.) Negligible climate impact. In a speech in June 2013, Obama said the climate effects of Keystone XL would have a major impact on the administration’s decision. These effects, however, would be minimal. The State Department’s final environmental impact statement concludes that the Canadian oil is coming out of the ground whether Keystone XL is built or not, so the difference in greenhouse gas emissions is minuscule. No matter your position on climate change, Keystone XL won’t make a difference.

8.) Can be built without the help of the taxpayer. Building and operating Keystone XL will result in real private-sector jobs that will grow the U.S. economy. This is very different from the president’s taxpayer-funded green jobs plan that merely siphons resources out of the market and forces pricier energy on the American public.

9.) The people want it. Lots of people want it. A CNN poll in the beginning of the year found that 57 percent of Americans support the project, while just 28 percent oppose it. Many unions want it. Former Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar called the project a “win-win.” Congress sent a bill to Obama’s desk, demonstrating their will to approve the project. Sadly, the Obama administration is catering to the small group of radical environmental activists who don’t want the pipeline.

.
Last April, the Washington Post slammed the Obama administration’s continued delay of a Keystone XL decision, calling it “absurd” and “embarrassing.” Rejecting the permit application is even more absurd and more embarrassing.

.

.

Federal Judge Blocks President Asshat’s Fracking Regulations

Judge Blocks Obama Administration’s Fracking Regulations – Washington Free Beacon

.

.
A federal judge Wednesday blocked the Obama administration from implementing new regulations on hydraulic fracturing, saying that the administration does not appear to have the statutory authority to do so.

The rule, finalized in March by the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM), is the federal government’s first major attempt to regulate the innovative oil and gas extraction technique commonly known as fracking.

Fracking is generally regulated at the state level. BLM sought to impose additional restrictions on the practice for oil and gas wells on federal land.

Judge Scott W. Skavdahl of the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming said that the agency appears to lack the statutory authority to do so and issued a preliminary injunction blocking BLM from implementing the rule.

“At this point, the Court does not believe Congress has granted or delegated to the BLM authority to regulate fracking,” Skavdahl wrote in his opinion.

In fact, BLM “previously disavowed authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing,” the judge noted.

The Environmental Protection Agency previously had the authority to regulate the fracking-related practices that the rule targets, but the 2005 Energy Policy Act stripped the agency of that authority.

“It is hard to analytically conclude or infer that, having expressly removed the regulatory authority from the EPA, Congress intended to vest it in the BLM, particularly where the BLM had not previously been regulating the practice,” Skavdahl wrote.

The ruling marks a major setback for Obama administration efforts to crack down on fracking, which has spurred unprecedented increases in U.S. oil and gas production since 2009.

The ruling does not scuttle the regulations, but rather prevents their implementation while a lawsuit brought by Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, Utah, and the Ute Indian tribe makes its way though the federal courts.

Two industry groups, the Independent Petroleum Association of America and the Western Energy Alliance, have also sued to block the rule.

“Today’s decision essentially shows BLM’s efforts are not needed and that states are – and have for 60 years been – in the best position to safely regulate hydraulic fracturing,” said IPAA spokesman Jeff Eshelman on the ruling.

.

.