In today's show and in many publications sites like NRO and IBD, today we were presented with yet another shining example of liberal insanity. Democrat representatives voiced the idea that OPEC is price gouging, harming American consumers and deserves to be prosecuted so that they don't engage in anti-competitive practices any more.

My first reaction was to laugh. Out loud. At work. Loudly. For forty-five seconds. Needless to say, it drew attention. When explaining why, I saw some eyes light up, but quickly dim at the point of some obvious truths.

First of all, as Rush has reminded us and callers numerous times, the Middle East is not out number one supplier of crude- it's Canada. You can hardly say that that would put them in the run for a monopoly. Secondly, the banding together of OPEC to set prices is very much akin to health group conglomerates we have here in the U.S. If that flies here, why should OPEC be any different? If other producers undercut them and sell us more oil and make more profit because of volume, they'll have to drop their prices to compete.

The main laughing point was the idea that anyone could try to take them to court. Where would we take them? The U.N.? Those sheiks can just tell us Up Yours! and keep on selling their product at whatever price they want. There is no world-wide executive branch that hold power over them. No one is about to invade them over feeling slighted in global business practices. Sorry folks, there's no international law governing every country on the planet, merely treaties which have to be agreed to by multiple parties.

If you want to know how successful international law and executive power is, go ask Iran to give up it's genocidal and nuclear programs again. Demand if you want. See what happens. For that matter, go throw a fit over the Chinese, North Koreans, and police state of Burma while you're at it. To try and make demands like this is childlike, naïve, and dangerous because we're not backing up demands with our "Big Stick," especially if all we want to do is talk. International entities don't respect laws unless the have incentive to do so, and the countries in question have no reason whatsoever at this point.

Which brings me to the over arching theme of this post: liberals think litigation is the be-all and end-all process to get what they want, however contrary it may be to common sense or actual legislation. There was talk of suing for the 2000 election results. There is talk of suing to make sure the votes of Michigan and Florida are counted in the Dem.'s primaries this year. National security has been severely compromised thanks to the likes of Pelosi and the majority of her party that panders to trial lawyers to make sure they get the enormous donations for campaign funding.

Don't get me wrong. The nuances of law are important, and not all lawyers are bad. My fiancée is almost done with Law School, and I deal with building codes and ordinances every day as an architect. Litigation is a necessary tool, but it isn't always used wisely, and when it comes to issued like the aforementioned ones, Dems. are more than happy to twist meanings and bull their way through with threats. It should be no surprise that they profess a strong belief in a *dripping with revile* "living Constitution." That whole issue also has roots in their beliefs that they know better than everyone else (almost never true), but that's a topic for another day.

It shouldn't, and didn't surprise us that they would have delusions of such power in the international scene. They think it theirs by right. How ironic that everyone else on the other side of the aisle and border would just laugh in their face. Perhaps we should take away their ear plugs...