Obama’s oil policy… “Drill, Baby, Drill… but only in Brazil.”
Jeffsays
Typically laughable “analysis” from the Heritage foundation. Pick an arbitrary timeline (that just happens to coincide with a very recent spike in gas prices) and act as if that is proof of … what exactly? Maybe I’m crazy, but could it just possibly be that a VERY RECENT external force over which Obama has no control, like, say, the greatest upheaval in the Middle East in many, many decades, has SOMETHING to do with the recent spike in gas prices over the past several months? This Heritage post is almost as dumb as the already-widely-mocked-and-disavowed-by-even-conservative-economists budget “projections” (aka, pulling a figure that makes the GOP look good out of its ass) from Heritage to support the fictional Ryan budget.
But, if you are convinced to lay gas prices, which are tied to a GLOBAL commodity, on a Democratic president, let’s compare, over a much longer period of time, the gas prices from the Bush presidency and the Clinton presidency:
When President Bush took office on January 20, 2001, the national average gas price was $1.46 per gallon. Six and a half years later, on August 27, 2007, the national average gas price had jumped to $2.76, roughly 89% higher. Compounded annually, this represents about a 10% jump each year Bush has been in office.
Now, let’s compare the numbers over the same time period for President Clinton.
When Clinton took office on January 20, 1993, the national average gas price was $1.06 per gallon. six and a half years later, the national average gas price had jumped to $1.22, roughly 15% higher. Compounded annually, this represents about a 2% jump each year.
So, QED, I’ve just proven (according to your and Heritage foundation’s implied logic) that Democrat presidents are far preferable than Republican ones in terms of keeping the price of oil / gas low.
[By the way, I don’t believe that — rather, I believe, again, that this is a global commodity that is dramatically affected by political upheaval and/or cartel decisions in the Middle East, all the more reason why we should be investing the vast majority of our efforts into seeking out alternative fuel sources that are sustainable both for America’s economic future and for the global environment. Which is, of course, a patently obvious policy to anyone who gives this issue even a modicum of fair, honest consideration].
Actually, Jeff, all you’ve proven is how racists like yourself refuse to hold Barack Obama accountable at the same level that you would a white President.
No one expects honesty from you, Jeff. You aren’t capable of honest evaluation of either Bush or Obama.
And just to build on that, notice the nene change: for eight years, Jeff and his fellow leftists howled that Bush was a moron who inexplicably was capable of constructing and executing vast, multi-country and industry conspiracies to precisely manipulate prices, foreign governments, and the like all towards his clear goal of resurrecting the Nazi state.
Democrat presidents are far preferable than Republican ones in terms of keeping the price of oil / gas low.
And so we should completely ignore that gas prices have been spiking ever since the Marxist Messiah all but shutdown offshore drilling in the USA.
ILoveCapitalismsays
And that it spiked under Carter. And that Clinton only lucked out with low oil prices then, because Reagan and Bush 41 did a good job on the security situation (fall of the Soviet Union, which made the U.S. master of the roost in the 90s).
Jeffsays
Love how according to all the commentators here, all liberals think alike, and we are treated as as monolithic entity incapable of differing views on various issues. I guess I should just assume Glen Beck speaks for all conservatives then, right? Thanks for calling me a “racist” by the way because I dared to express a dissenting view. I know you aren’t used to those, since I’m sure all you watch is Fox News and all you listen to is Rush Limbaugh, but believe it or not, the majority of the country is opposed to the GOP’s goal of cutting taxes for the rich on the backs of poor or middle class senior citizens.
Was Bush a terrible president? Of course. Did he, despite many warning signs, govern during the worst terrorist attack ever experienced on US soil (unlike Obama, who has kept America safe from anything remotely approaching that, but God forbid the right gives him credit), then in response attack the wrong country, wasting hundreds of billions of dollars, tens of thousands of lives, and a huge amount of international good will? Of course. Did he consistently appoint unqualified and incompetent ideologues to a degree unprecedented in recent history? Of course. Did, under his watch, a previously booming economy nearly utterly and completely collapse, thanks to excessive speculation without an iota of government oversight or intervention, leaving his successor to pick up the pieces? Again, of course. Did he protect the rich at the expense of the middle class and the poor, leading to radical increases in income disparity? Yes again. Sure, Obama only inherited a country in which major corporations and financial institutions were collapsing left and right, the market was in free fall, folks’ life savings (either in real estate or the market) were wiped out in a matter of months so that consumers were afraid to spend money for a year or so, and corporations were forced to lay off millions of workers (and millions more would have been out of work, of course, without the stimulus). the GOP solution to all of this: just do nothing, and let America go into free fall. And of course, the commentators here don’t blame Bush for ANY of that, but rather Obama for having the bad luck to inherit this disaster. I haven’t even touched on the gov’t response to Katrina, or civil rights debacles, or a million other issues.
Look, I don’t NEED to create crazy conspiracy theories to attack George Bush. I don’t need to call him a Nazi or foreign-born or a Marxist or anything else. He took over a thriving country and left an absolute disaster, both domestically and in terms of foreign policy. That speaks for itself. He was a failure in every way it is possible to fail. It also speaks for itself that after inheriting this mess, Obama has righted the ship, with corporate profits booming, the stock market nearly fully recovered, employment (though still not where it needs to be) rising for many quarters now with future growth in employment projected as it catches up to corporate profits, and by keeping the country safe from any major terrorist attack.
I’ll take Obama’s record over Bush’s, and so will history. You’ll be left with conspiracy theories and claims of Marxism. Obama, and not Bush, is on the right side of history.
Jeffsays
Offshore drilling in the US, by the way, has NO effect on oil prices. We are talking about a negligible part of the global oil market. We’ve had huge price spikes in the past when there is offshore drilling in the US, we simply aren’t and don’t have the potential to be enough of an oil producer to have a material impact on oil prices. And of course, I think he shut it down for a pretty defensible reason, but of course, I guess you would rather see a bunch more environmental catastrophes rather than make sure we are (a) drilling in an responsible matter and (b) shifting our resources to energy sources that won’t be eventually depleted in all events.
The offshore, including the Gulf of Mexico, California, and Alaska, produces 37% of all the oil the U.S. produces – more than the state of Texas, more than Alaska, more than Louisiana. The total amount (Dec. 2009) is 2,025,000 barrels per day out of 5,460,000 total US production. Of that offshore total (2,025,000 b/d) 60,000 barrels comes from Federal waters offshore CA and Alaska, an additional 230,000 barrels per day comes from state waters offshore CA and AK, and all the rest (1,734,000 barrels per day) comes from the Gulf of Mexico. 19,000 barrels of that is from the state waters of Louisiana and TX, and the rest is from the Federal waters of the Gulf.
Not that you would be aware of these facts, Jeff. Your Obama told you that the US was “negligible”, and you obediently and mindlessly believed it and repeated these talking points. You haven’t actually researched or made an intelligent and informed decision; you’re just spouting what ignorant fools like Barack Obama and his media puppets like Rachel Maddow tell you to think.
Classic example:
I know you aren’t used to those, since I’m sure all you watch is Fox News and all you listen to is Rush Limbaugh, but believe it or not, the majority of the country is opposed to the GOP’s goal of cutting taxes for the rich on the backs of poor or middle class senior citizens.
A new Gallup/USA Today poll contains a counterintuitive finding: the age group most receptive to House Budget Chair Paul Ryan’s plan to deal with the budget – seniors.
The poll finds 48 percent of seniors (those 65 and over) support Ryan’s plan over President Obama’s plan, while 42 percent back the president.
That’s because people recognize that the Obama Party is just flat-out lying.
You have nothing, Jeff. You have no facts, no research, no intelligence, and no substance. All you have is your racism and your blind and irrational hatred of those who are successful and work hard in this country. Barack Obama has made it blatantly obvious to many millions of people that Obama Party members like yourself are nothing more than statists who want to punish those who work hard and steal their earnings so that lazy liberals like you don’t have to pay your own bills.
Um, Jeff, quick comment. In my post, I provided a chart comparing the increase in gas prices in the first two years of the W’s first term in the White House and the first two years of the incumbent administration.
You bring up Clinton.
Yes, I understand that there are more issues at play than the administration’s policies, but if you’re so ready to attack W, why aren’t you prepared to criticize Obama?
In your attack on W, you kinda help make the point of my post, i.e., the reason I chose to publish this piece with the title I gave it was to show that some on the left blame all the challenges faced by the incumbent on his predecessor.
ILoveCapitalismsays
Offshore drilling in the US, by the way, has NO effect on oil prices.
And in other news, spending has NO effect on deficits. Deficits have NO effect on the national debt. Sunlight has NO effect on skin cancer. Food has NO effect on hunger.
Offshore drilling in the US, by the way, has NO effect on oil prices.
A tenet of leftist dogma presented as fact but without any supporting evidence.
TGCsays
I haven’t even touched on the gov’t response to Katrina, or civil rights debacles, or a million other issues.
No need. You only repeat the same manufactured BULLSHIT that goddam liberal liars have been spouting for years.
Look, I don’t NEED to create crazy conspiracy theories to attack George Bush.
Well of course. You already have your handy-dandy Soros ball sucker lying point list right on your desk for quick access, if you choose to take your hands out of your pants.
And of course, I think he shut it down for a pretty defensible reason, but of course, I guess you would rather see a bunch more environmental catastrophes
I can’t help but notice that planes are still flying after multiple crashes since Chairman Obama was immaculated. And how many car accidents have there been? How many people have died because of them? Hell, Government Motors is still building cars even though the damn steering wheel comes off in your hands. How come the taxpayer funded union shop hasn’t gotten the same scrutiny as Toyota? How many people have to die?
Have anything in your lying points about how long it took Chairman Obama to notice said “environmental catastrophe”?
Timsays
well considering that the price in gas was still higher under Bush than Obama (so far) the graph is a pointless piece of drivel. there are many many reasons that the price in gas is spiking but blaming the government is a sad side note. The price of gas is controlled by the market, not any government decree, gas is subject to both speculation bubbles and supply and demand issues. given that the middle east is the largest supplier of oil in the world it stands to reason that instability there is the leading cause of oil price spikes. The price would spike even if onshore or off shore prices increased because it’s about a global market, not any one country. It is a point of fact that onshore producers would benefit even if they increased production. This argument is moot
Obama’s oil policy… “Drill, Baby, Drill… but only in Brazil.”
Typically laughable “analysis” from the Heritage foundation. Pick an arbitrary timeline (that just happens to coincide with a very recent spike in gas prices) and act as if that is proof of … what exactly? Maybe I’m crazy, but could it just possibly be that a VERY RECENT external force over which Obama has no control, like, say, the greatest upheaval in the Middle East in many, many decades, has SOMETHING to do with the recent spike in gas prices over the past several months? This Heritage post is almost as dumb as the already-widely-mocked-and-disavowed-by-even-conservative-economists budget “projections” (aka, pulling a figure that makes the GOP look good out of its ass) from Heritage to support the fictional Ryan budget.
But, if you are convinced to lay gas prices, which are tied to a GLOBAL commodity, on a Democratic president, let’s compare, over a much longer period of time, the gas prices from the Bush presidency and the Clinton presidency:
When President Bush took office on January 20, 2001, the national average gas price was $1.46 per gallon. Six and a half years later, on August 27, 2007, the national average gas price had jumped to $2.76, roughly 89% higher. Compounded annually, this represents about a 10% jump each year Bush has been in office.
Now, let’s compare the numbers over the same time period for President Clinton.
When Clinton took office on January 20, 1993, the national average gas price was $1.06 per gallon. six and a half years later, the national average gas price had jumped to $1.22, roughly 15% higher. Compounded annually, this represents about a 2% jump each year.
So, QED, I’ve just proven (according to your and Heritage foundation’s implied logic) that Democrat presidents are far preferable than Republican ones in terms of keeping the price of oil / gas low.
[By the way, I don’t believe that — rather, I believe, again, that this is a global commodity that is dramatically affected by political upheaval and/or cartel decisions in the Middle East, all the more reason why we should be investing the vast majority of our efforts into seeking out alternative fuel sources that are sustainable both for America’s economic future and for the global environment. Which is, of course, a patently obvious policy to anyone who gives this issue even a modicum of fair, honest consideration].
Actually, Jeff, all you’ve proven is how racists like yourself refuse to hold Barack Obama accountable at the same level that you would a white President.
No one expects honesty from you, Jeff. You aren’t capable of honest evaluation of either Bush or Obama.
And just to build on that, notice the nene change: for eight years, Jeff and his fellow leftists howled that Bush was a moron who inexplicably was capable of constructing and executing vast, multi-country and industry conspiracies to precisely manipulate prices, foreign governments, and the like all towards his clear goal of resurrecting the Nazi state.
But their super-genius messiah incarnate is completely incapable of and powerless to do anything of the sort.
And so we should completely ignore that gas prices have been spiking ever since the Marxist Messiah all but shutdown offshore drilling in the USA.
And that it spiked under Carter. And that Clinton only lucked out with low oil prices then, because Reagan and Bush 41 did a good job on the security situation (fall of the Soviet Union, which made the U.S. master of the roost in the 90s).
Love how according to all the commentators here, all liberals think alike, and we are treated as as monolithic entity incapable of differing views on various issues. I guess I should just assume Glen Beck speaks for all conservatives then, right? Thanks for calling me a “racist” by the way because I dared to express a dissenting view. I know you aren’t used to those, since I’m sure all you watch is Fox News and all you listen to is Rush Limbaugh, but believe it or not, the majority of the country is opposed to the GOP’s goal of cutting taxes for the rich on the backs of poor or middle class senior citizens.
Was Bush a terrible president? Of course. Did he, despite many warning signs, govern during the worst terrorist attack ever experienced on US soil (unlike Obama, who has kept America safe from anything remotely approaching that, but God forbid the right gives him credit), then in response attack the wrong country, wasting hundreds of billions of dollars, tens of thousands of lives, and a huge amount of international good will? Of course. Did he consistently appoint unqualified and incompetent ideologues to a degree unprecedented in recent history? Of course. Did, under his watch, a previously booming economy nearly utterly and completely collapse, thanks to excessive speculation without an iota of government oversight or intervention, leaving his successor to pick up the pieces? Again, of course. Did he protect the rich at the expense of the middle class and the poor, leading to radical increases in income disparity? Yes again. Sure, Obama only inherited a country in which major corporations and financial institutions were collapsing left and right, the market was in free fall, folks’ life savings (either in real estate or the market) were wiped out in a matter of months so that consumers were afraid to spend money for a year or so, and corporations were forced to lay off millions of workers (and millions more would have been out of work, of course, without the stimulus). the GOP solution to all of this: just do nothing, and let America go into free fall. And of course, the commentators here don’t blame Bush for ANY of that, but rather Obama for having the bad luck to inherit this disaster. I haven’t even touched on the gov’t response to Katrina, or civil rights debacles, or a million other issues.
Look, I don’t NEED to create crazy conspiracy theories to attack George Bush. I don’t need to call him a Nazi or foreign-born or a Marxist or anything else. He took over a thriving country and left an absolute disaster, both domestically and in terms of foreign policy. That speaks for itself. He was a failure in every way it is possible to fail. It also speaks for itself that after inheriting this mess, Obama has righted the ship, with corporate profits booming, the stock market nearly fully recovered, employment (though still not where it needs to be) rising for many quarters now with future growth in employment projected as it catches up to corporate profits, and by keeping the country safe from any major terrorist attack.
I’ll take Obama’s record over Bush’s, and so will history. You’ll be left with conspiracy theories and claims of Marxism. Obama, and not Bush, is on the right side of history.
Offshore drilling in the US, by the way, has NO effect on oil prices. We are talking about a negligible part of the global oil market. We’ve had huge price spikes in the past when there is offshore drilling in the US, we simply aren’t and don’t have the potential to be enough of an oil producer to have a material impact on oil prices. And of course, I think he shut it down for a pretty defensible reason, but of course, I guess you would rather see a bunch more environmental catastrophes rather than make sure we are (a) drilling in an responsible matter and (b) shifting our resources to energy sources that won’t be eventually depleted in all events.
Offshore drilling in the US, by the way, has NO effect on oil prices. We are talking about a negligible part of the global oil market.
Negligible, indeed.
The offshore, including the Gulf of Mexico, California, and Alaska, produces 37% of all the oil the U.S. produces – more than the state of Texas, more than Alaska, more than Louisiana. The total amount (Dec. 2009) is 2,025,000 barrels per day out of 5,460,000 total US production. Of that offshore total (2,025,000 b/d) 60,000 barrels comes from Federal waters offshore CA and Alaska, an additional 230,000 barrels per day comes from state waters offshore CA and AK, and all the rest (1,734,000 barrels per day) comes from the Gulf of Mexico. 19,000 barrels of that is from the state waters of Louisiana and TX, and the rest is from the Federal waters of the Gulf.
And why is that important? Because, given that the US is the number three oil producer in the world, producing only slightly less than Saudi Arabia on a daily basis, a reduction of 37% in that is a relatively-massive disruption to the world supply.
Not that you would be aware of these facts, Jeff. Your Obama told you that the US was “negligible”, and you obediently and mindlessly believed it and repeated these talking points. You haven’t actually researched or made an intelligent and informed decision; you’re just spouting what ignorant fools like Barack Obama and his media puppets like Rachel Maddow tell you to think.
Classic example:
I know you aren’t used to those, since I’m sure all you watch is Fox News and all you listen to is Rush Limbaugh, but believe it or not, the majority of the country is opposed to the GOP’s goal of cutting taxes for the rich on the backs of poor or middle class senior citizens.
Want to see how badly your propaganda is failing, Jeff?
A new Gallup/USA Today poll contains a counterintuitive finding: the age group most receptive to House Budget Chair Paul Ryan’s plan to deal with the budget – seniors.
The poll finds 48 percent of seniors (those 65 and over) support Ryan’s plan over President Obama’s plan, while 42 percent back the president.
That’s because people recognize that the Obama Party is just flat-out lying.
You have nothing, Jeff. You have no facts, no research, no intelligence, and no substance. All you have is your racism and your blind and irrational hatred of those who are successful and work hard in this country. Barack Obama has made it blatantly obvious to many millions of people that Obama Party members like yourself are nothing more than statists who want to punish those who work hard and steal their earnings so that lazy liberals like you don’t have to pay your own bills.
End hyperlink.
Won’t work, NDT. Jeff is a progressive, data that discredit his dogma will not be accepted. Thanks for bringing it to the rest of us, tho’.
Um, Jeff, quick comment. In my post, I provided a chart comparing the increase in gas prices in the first two years of the W’s first term in the White House and the first two years of the incumbent administration.
You bring up Clinton.
Yes, I understand that there are more issues at play than the administration’s policies, but if you’re so ready to attack W, why aren’t you prepared to criticize Obama?
In your attack on W, you kinda help make the point of my post, i.e., the reason I chose to publish this piece with the title I gave it was to show that some on the left blame all the challenges faced by the incumbent on his predecessor.
And in other news, spending has NO effect on deficits. Deficits have NO effect on the national debt. Sunlight has NO effect on skin cancer. Food has NO effect on hunger.
#13 and facts have no effect on liberals. 😉
A tenet of leftist dogma presented as fact but without any supporting evidence.
No need. You only repeat the same manufactured BULLSHIT that goddam liberal liars have been spouting for years.
Well of course. You already have your handy-dandy Soros ball sucker lying point list right on your desk for quick access, if you choose to take your hands out of your pants.
I can’t help but notice that planes are still flying after multiple crashes since Chairman Obama was immaculated. And how many car accidents have there been? How many people have died because of them? Hell, Government Motors is still building cars even though the damn steering wheel comes off in your hands. How come the taxpayer funded union shop hasn’t gotten the same scrutiny as Toyota? How many people have to die?
Have anything in your lying points about how long it took Chairman Obama to notice said “environmental catastrophe”?
well considering that the price in gas was still higher under Bush than Obama (so far) the graph is a pointless piece of drivel. there are many many reasons that the price in gas is spiking but blaming the government is a sad side note. The price of gas is controlled by the market, not any government decree, gas is subject to both speculation bubbles and supply and demand issues. given that the middle east is the largest supplier of oil in the world it stands to reason that instability there is the leading cause of oil price spikes. The price would spike even if onshore or off shore prices increased because it’s about a global market, not any one country. It is a point of fact that onshore producers would benefit even if they increased production. This argument is moot