In the letter, the author stated, "We need to hear what to do when gas hits $10 a gallon."

The assumption being that it will reach that price sooner or later, but I doubt it will be in the next two years.

The statement he made immediately raised two questions in my mind. Who do you expect to tell us to do anything, and what do you expect them to tell us?

I fear the letter's author must be so inured in the liberal mindset that he expects some arm of the government to tell him what to do and then to offer to help him do it.

In proceeding to further discuss the issue, the author pulled out the standard claims from the Democrat/Liberal whining book, the foremost being it's the fault of those greedy oil companies who should be patriotic and not make a profit.

The author asserted those who have oil are able to manipulate the price. I beg to differ. The issue is far more complicated, but is certainly impacted by the energy demands of China and India.

Most of our oil imports come from Canada and Mexico. The Brazilians have found what is anticipated to be huge offshore oil deposits. And as for us in the good old USA, it doesn't make any difference if we know where our oil might be. The environmentalist wackos will do everything in their power to keep us from exploration and the production of gasoline and other petroleum-based products.

Oil companies are private corporations. They exist to sell a product and to make a profit. Once we cross the line of trying to define what represents a "fair" rate of return and then go several leaps farther across the line and dictate that we are going to confiscate whatever we define as excessive, we have left capitalism and the free market and gone over to socialism.

As Ross Perot was fond of saying - "It's as simple as that!"

Let's say we establish a "fair" rate of return. Are we going to guarantee that return and give the companies back a certain amount of money if they don't achieve that return? I doubt it. No one seemed to care too much when the oil companies were losing money some years ago.

If we bothered to look into how many union, government and educational retirement funds and countless mutual funds are invested in "big oil" we might have a different perspective. I bet we would find hundreds of millions of U.S. citizens essentially invested in big oil.

Do you think they should be patriotic and refuse to accept the gains and dividends from their investments?

I suppose there are those who don't understand those increased profits are also taxed. Where does everyone think the increase in government revenues comes from? If we replace greedy oil with greedy government, what have we proven? We've proven everyone is greedy. Isn't that heart-warming?

I seem to remember our self-appointed energy conscience and oil evangelist Al Gore lamenting the fact we paid so little for gasoline compared to the rest of the world. The conclusion was we were gluttons and needed to pay the same thing everyone else did.

Well, we're getting closer to his wish - we're paying a great deal more - but most of the rest of the world is still paying relatively more. So, Big Al and his followers have accomplished something, yet realized nothing.

Did you hear about the founder of the Weather Channel stating that Al Gore should be charged with fraud over global warming? Time will tell if that's appropriate.

We are now racing to produce ethanol in massive quantities as an "interim" solution to our energy crisis - even to the point of generous subsidies per gallon. Are those producers going to be patriotic and forego their profits, too?

And for our troubles we have seen the prices of corn and corn-related products steadily climbing at a rate approaching gasoline.

I will make this point one more time - in a world where people suffer from malnutrition and die from starvation, is it moral to take a food product and use it to produce fuel instead of feeding those who do not have enough to eat? That should be a no-brainer. Who lacks the brains here?

I would love for us to develop a rational, national energy policy that balances all aspects of the problem. That policy must include a balance of nuclear, petroleum, coal, and renewable sources of energy. Since there are too many special interests - liberal and conservative - and too many gutless politicians who'd rather be re-elected than do something positive, I don't see this problem being solved unless we, the people demand it.

Who's going to ask the current group of presidential hopefuls to spell out their domestic energy plan and not quit asking until we get a real answer?

Oh, and to address his original concern, if you still have a car with a gasoline engine you're eventually going to pay $10 per gallon if you want to drive anywhere. It's as simple as that. Take heart, E-85 will probably only be $9.60!

Well, that's what's been on my mind.