Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Shouldn't be hard. Republicans convinced voters that Obama had something to do with the price of oil when it was high. Now that it is low, they are backpedaling in hyperdrive.Look. Low gas prices means a stronger than expected economic recovery.
Now the trick is fooling enough voters into thinking Obama had anything to do with it.
Obama was the sole cause of the increase in oil prices, but he definitely aggravated the situation. On the other hand, it's clear he had nothing to do with the decrease in prices. Obama didn't want the price to decrease. He state quite plainly that he wanted higher oil prices, at least he wanted higher gas prices.
Fracking is what caused the price of oil to plunge. It was the free market operating as it always has. That's why all the libturds in this forum hate it so much.
If it was the free market operating as it always has, how do you justify accusing Obama for the price of oil? Looks like you didn't think very long before you posted your response?
Obama tried to interfere in the free market and reduce the supply.
That's how I justify it.
Anyone with a brain knows that Obama has been waging war on fossil fuels. The problem is that he lost.
Shouldn't be hard. Republicans convinced voters that Obama had something to do with the price of oil when it was high. Now that it is low, they are backpedaling in hyperdrive.Look. Low gas prices means a stronger than expected economic recovery.
Now the trick is fooling enough voters into thinking Obama had anything to do with it.
Obama was the sole cause of the increase in oil prices, but he definitely aggravated the situation. On the other hand, it's clear he had nothing to do with the decrease in prices. Obama didn't want the price to decrease. He state quite plainly that he wanted higher oil prices, at least he wanted higher gas prices.
Fracking is what caused the price of oil to plunge. It was the free market operating as it always has. That's why all the libturds in this forum hate it so much.
If it was the free market operating as it always has, how do you justify accusing Obama for the price of oil? Looks like you didn't think very long before you posted your response?
Obama tried to interfere in the free market and reduce the supply.
That's how I justify it.
Anyone with a brain knows that Obama has been waging war on fossil fuels. The problem is that he lost.
Really? And what evidence do you have that Obama interfered with the spot market where they sell the world's oil? In fact, what evidence do you have that he interfered with our energy policy with regard to oil? You do realize that when all those fracking wells were drilled that he did absolutely nothing to stop them, right? You didn't know this? Huh.
Shouldn't be hard. Republicans convinced voters that Obama had something to do with the price of oil when it was high. Now that it is low, they are backpedaling in hyperdrive.
Obama was the sole cause of the increase in oil prices, but he definitely aggravated the situation. On the other hand, it's clear he had nothing to do with the decrease in prices. Obama didn't want the price to decrease. He state quite plainly that he wanted higher oil prices, at least he wanted higher gas prices.
Fracking is what caused the price of oil to plunge. It was the free market operating as it always has. That's why all the libturds in this forum hate it so much.
If it was the free market operating as it always has, how do you justify accusing Obama for the price of oil? Looks like you didn't think very long before you posted your response?
Obama tried to interfere in the free market and reduce the supply.
That's how I justify it.
Anyone with a brain knows that Obama has been waging war on fossil fuels. The problem is that he lost.
Really? And what evidence do you have that Obama interfered with the spot market where they sell the world's oil? In fact, what evidence do you have that he interfered with our energy policy with regard to oil? You do realize that when all those fracking wells were drilled that he did absolutely nothing to stop them, right? You didn't know this? Huh.
Hahaha......Democrat presidents have been grabbing millions of acres of land all across the country turning it into national parks and putting it off-limits to drilling.
Carter, Clinton And Obama Land Grabs
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2011/06/03
Here is one of many reasons why merely defeating Obama isn’t good enough. Only a Conservative President will suffice. From Right Pundits, March 2010:
Clinton and Carter were grab happy – Carter for land, Clinton for land…and other things. According to a Washington Times article by Sen. Jim Demit, Carter snagged 50 million acres in Alaska, despite strong opposition from the state, and Clinton snatched 5.9 million acres across the country creating 19 new national monuments.
But Obama has big plans for his 10 million acres. He’s going to save the prairie chickens in New Mexico, a “center of climate change scientific research” in Nevada, and an oil-rich plot of land in Colorado because it’s under the threat of being developed for actual usage.
Clinton’s land grab stole 1.7 million acres from Utah — land that has a massive “clean coal” field, which could produce 100 million tons of clean coal over 45 years. And it was purely political.
Michelle Malkin has been keeping up with the Obama Administration’s land grabbing and Independence-minded people fighting to put a stop to it.
Since day one of the Obama administration, I’ve chronicled Loathsome Cowboy Ken Salazar’s War on the West, War on Jobs, and War on Science/Rule of Law. The last straw was his attempted Wild Lands grab. GOP leaders rose up with farmers, ranchers, and Western governors to stop the scheme in its tracks. Utah and Alaska have filed suit. Wyoming joined the litigation this week.
And now, Salazar has officially announced the backpedal:
…
“On December 22, 2010, I issued Secretarial Order 3310 to address the BLM’s management of wilderness resources on lands under its jurisdiction. Under Secretarial Order 3310, I ordered the BLM to use the public resource management planning process to designate certain lands with wilderness characteristics as “Wild Lands.”
On April 14, 20II, the United States Congress passed the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (Pub. L. 112-10)(2011 CR), which includes a provision (Section 1769) that prohibits the use of appropriated funds to implement, administer, or enforce Secretarial Order 3310 in Fiscal Year 2011.
I am confirming today that, pursuant to the 2011 CR, the BLM will not designate any lands as ‘Wild Lands.'”
Carter Clinton And Obama Land Grabs Truth Before Dishonor
Obama Land Grab 10M Acres from Montana to New Mexico UPDATE Video added Right Pundits
Shouldn't be hard. Republicans convinced voters that Obama had something to do with the price of oil when it was high. Now that it is low, they are backpedaling in hyperdrive.Look. Low gas prices means a stronger than expected economic recovery.
Now the trick is fooling enough voters into thinking Obama had anything to do with it.
Obama was the sole cause of the increase in oil prices, but he definitely aggravated the situation. On the other hand, it's clear he had nothing to do with the decrease in prices. Obama didn't want the price to decrease. He state quite plainly that he wanted higher oil prices, at least he wanted higher gas prices.
Fracking is what caused the price of oil to plunge. It was the free market operating as it always has. That's why all the libturds in this forum hate it so much.
If it was the free market operating as it always has, how do you justify accusing Obama for the price of oil? Looks like you didn't think very long before you posted your response?
Obama tried to interfere in the free market and reduce the supply.
That's how I justify it.
Anyone with a brain knows that Obama has been waging war on fossil fuels. The problem is that he lost.
Really? And what evidence do you have that Obama interfered with the spot market where they sell the world's oil? In fact, what evidence do you have that he interfered with our energy policy with regard to oil? You do realize that when all those fracking wells were drilled that he did absolutely nothing to stop them, right? You didn't know this? Huh.
Shouldn't be hard. Republicans convinced voters that Obama had something to do with the price of oil when it was high. Now that it is low, they are backpedaling in hyperdrive.
Obama was the sole cause of the increase in oil prices, but he definitely aggravated the situation. On the other hand, it's clear he had nothing to do with the decrease in prices. Obama didn't want the price to decrease. He state quite plainly that he wanted higher oil prices, at least he wanted higher gas prices.
Fracking is what caused the price of oil to plunge. It was the free market operating as it always has. That's why all the libturds in this forum hate it so much.
If it was the free market operating as it always has, how do you justify accusing Obama for the price of oil? Looks like you didn't think very long before you posted your response?
Obama tried to interfere in the free market and reduce the supply.
That's how I justify it.
Anyone with a brain knows that Obama has been waging war on fossil fuels. The problem is that he lost.
Really? And what evidence do you have that Obama interfered with the spot market where they sell the world's oil? In fact, what evidence do you have that he interfered with our energy policy with regard to oil? You do realize that when all those fracking wells were drilled that he did absolutely nothing to stop them, right? You didn't know this? Huh.
He drastically reduced drilling on federal land. That's the only place he has control.
Obama was the sole cause of the increase in oil prices, but he definitely aggravated the situation. On the other hand, it's clear he had nothing to do with the decrease in prices. Obama didn't want the price to decrease. He state quite plainly that he wanted higher oil prices, at least he wanted higher gas prices.
Fracking is what caused the price of oil to plunge. It was the free market operating as it always has. That's why all the libturds in this forum hate it so much.
If it was the free market operating as it always has, how do you justify accusing Obama for the price of oil? Looks like you didn't think very long before you posted your response?
That's how I justify it.
Anyone with a brain knows that Obama has been waging war on fossil fuels. The problem is that he lost.
Really? And what evidence do you have that Obama interfered with the spot market where they sell the world's oil? In fact, what evidence do you have that he interfered with our energy policy with regard to oil? You do realize that when all those fracking wells were drilled that he did absolutely nothing to stop them, right? You didn't know this? Huh.
He drastically reduced drilling on federal land. That's the only place he has control.
Good. I'm glad he did. That didn't stop the fracking, though, did it? of course it didn't. Nor did it stop other more convention methods from being used. The fact is that we are in an oil bubble. And when it bursts (actually, it already has), you losers will no doubt blame Obama for that as well. Oh look...
If it was the free market operating as it always has, how do you justify accusing Obama for the price of oil? Looks like you didn't think very long before you posted your response?
That's how I justify it.
Anyone with a brain knows that Obama has been waging war on fossil fuels. The problem is that he lost.
Really? And what evidence do you have that Obama interfered with the spot market where they sell the world's oil? In fact, what evidence do you have that he interfered with our energy policy with regard to oil? You do realize that when all those fracking wells were drilled that he did absolutely nothing to stop them, right? You didn't know this? Huh.
He drastically reduced drilling on federal land. That's the only place he has control.
Good. I'm glad he did. That didn't stop the fracking, though, did it? of course it didn't. Nor did it stop other more convention methods from being used. The fact is that we are in an oil bubble. And when it bursts (actually, it already has), you losers will no doubt blame Obama for that as well. Oh look...
So your argument is that he wasn't able to totally shut down all drilling? Really?
Obama tried to interfere in the free market and reduce the supply. Obama thought he could destroy the fossil fuel industry, but consumers want the products that come from oil. American know-how and can-do spirit got what they wanted.
The oil market without the influence of OPEC, is about as free a market as you will find. And in a free market when supply exceeds demand prices fall. When prices fall low enough, supply drys up and prices rise. Low oil prices are good for most businesses and good for the consumer. When prices rise, as they certainly will, drilling activity will will increase. I don't see this as anything other than as short term problem for producers.. The only options would be government price support, not a good idea.It is really surprising that the American people are not hearing from national politicians or economic leaders that the dramatic drop in oil prices the world is seeing holds potential grave danger for America's economy and calls for government action protection. The major concerns aren't being properly appreciated. First, there is no floor on the price of oil; today, WTI is trading at around $46/ barrel. In the next three months the country could see WTI trading in the $30 to $40 range. The super serious problem about this drop is that it will at some point result in the dramatic reduction in domestic production because the price will not provide sufficient profit considering the cost of drilling for oil. This is super serious because it will expose the country to skyrocketing spikes in oil prices if something happens to the world-wide supply of oil which could easily happen with a serious negative geo-political development with a major oil producing country or if OPEC and Russia can begin agreeing to control production!
The public debate is really not taking place on the issue of is this out of control decrease in oil prices really good for the medium and long-term well-being of America and if not can the American people do anything about it. Prudent thinking indicates the American people should be alarmed as all get out with this development. People should be asking themselves what happens after two more quarters of this $30 to $50 barrel of oil, does danger lurk here? After two more quarters of this retail businesses, airlines and health care companies earning are going to be up significantly because the American consumer will have a lot of additional money to spend because of lower petroleum and natural gas prices. In this six months OPEC countries and Russia will have learned their lesson crystal clearly that they are cutting their own throats not controlling production because now oil is half the price it could be with production controls. In two quarters from now, Saudi Arabia will find it as easy as pie to do what they wanted to do around three months ago which is to get a universal agreement amongst these parties to cut production and return the price of oil to the $100 range.
Now what do you think is going to happen in six to nine months when Saudi Arabia engineers a return to $100 barrel of oil? A recession for the United States because all these retail and other corporations that have been recording high jumps in quarterly earnings from increased U.S. consumer spending their executives can't just say sorry investors sales dropped due to the return of $100 a barrel oil no they are going to layoff employees big time scrambling to try to generate the investor expected revenue numbers. The resulting layoffs and other economic fallout from a return in oil prices will cut economic demand thus cutting GDP resulting in a recession. It is unbelievable that the country's political and economic leaders aren't warning of this likely recessionary outcome from this precipitous drop in oil prices and offering leadership on how this can be avoided.
There is another disastrous development from this sinking of oil prices. The size of the U.S. domestic oil producing industry is going to be substantially reduced as oil producing companies have to sell themselves because with such low oil prices they cannot generate the revenue to survive. Further bond investors and lenders for these producers are going to be economically hurt so severely during this period they won't get over this for at least the short to medium term already many of these producers bonds are trading at large discounts over concerns the producers won't have the revenue to repay the bonds. Therefore, from this oil price roller coaster ride Congress and the President is letting take place in America the country is going to be left with a smaller and weaker oil producing industry that is less able to get credit to drill for more oil and natural gas and meet America's needs.
Common sense indicates clearly what the answer to this problem is which is that Congress and the President need to pass a law putting a floor on oil prices. The legislation could start with a floor of $45.00/barrel and give the Secretary of the Energy Department, with the Senate Energy committee having veto power, the power to raise the floor up to $75.00/barrel - the standard for the Secretary should be that the floor price should be such that in all major oil fields in America, whether shale, off-shore or other, the floor price would still make such drilling profitable so such production does not stop. The legislation could have a time limit of five or seven years so if there is bad repurcussions from this legislations the harm would be limited and this period of time would give the oil industry and the country time enough to prepare for a market with no controls and stop the economic earthquakes that are currently going on!
The American people are really not being lead to appreciate how vulnerable they are to oil prices shooting back-up. It would only take Opec and Russia agreeing for just four years to take one to five million barrels a day off the market an easy deal for them to reach to reverse things. They could start with a cut of one million barrels a day and meet on monthly basis to increase it to raise the price of oil to their desired level. Remember Opec and Russia don't have to reduce supply to exactly world-wide demand to get their desired price; oil prices are driven hugely by the efforts of speculators so Opec and Russia only have to convince the speculators they have the power to control prices and they will be back in the drivers seat on price and Opec and Russia with a deal like outlined above and implementing it will achieve this needed objective. The bottom line is that a return to a hundred dollar a barrel of oil is easily possible and anyone that says otherwise is a huge fool!
The other thing is that below $50 a barrel of oil is not good for America not by a long shot. America has invested heavily in electric cars, smaller cars, natural gas trucks, fuel efficient planes, etc. to succeed in a world with high priced petroleum. Cheap oil throws these plans into disarray and will thus cause significant economic impact and at minimum medium term harm as this transformation falls into a state where the economic sense of such transformation is very much hurt as demand for this transformation falls off because of low oil prices. Leaders of America need to lead America off its dependency on oil and the mantra need to be no turning back, America long-term well-being depends on it!
The oil market without the influence of OPEC, is about as free a market as you will find. And in a free market when supply exceeds demand prices fall. When prices fall low enough, supply drys up and prices rise. Low oil prices are good for most businesses and good for the consumer. When prices rise, as they certainly will, drilling activity will will increase. I don't see this as anything other than as short term problem for producers.. The only options would be government price support, not a good idea.
The oil market without the influence of OPEC, is about as free a market as you will find. And in a free market when supply exceeds demand prices fall. When prices fall low enough, supply drys up and prices rise. Low oil prices are good for most businesses and good for the consumer. When prices rise, as they certainly will, drilling activity will will increase. I don't see this as anything other than as short term problem for producers.. The only options would be government price support, not a good idea.
I wouldn't oppose government price support for our drillers should the Saudis try to take oil to $20 a barrel. Remember, Putin's oil is state owned as is Saudi oil. We have to be a little careful with Putin because he's mentally ill and could send his tanks into Europe if the russian economy crashes. The Saudis on the other hand are due a severe ass-beating and we can deliver it to them now.
The "big oil" horseshit should be disregarded as it's simply our domestic communists trying to shit on free enterprise. The problem is that we have a muslim feakshow for a president and all that's been accomplished in fracking has happened on private property....if leases went given in public areas, we could quadruple our output and never import another drop of oil from our sworn enemies.
Wow, another "Obama is a Muslim" Looney. I hate that for you.
“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” The quote comes from page 261 of the paperback edition of “The Audacity of Hope".
That's how I justify it.
Anyone with a brain knows that Obama has been waging war on fossil fuels. The problem is that he lost.
Really? And what evidence do you have that Obama interfered with the spot market where they sell the world's oil? In fact, what evidence do you have that he interfered with our energy policy with regard to oil? You do realize that when all those fracking wells were drilled that he did absolutely nothing to stop them, right? You didn't know this? Huh.
He drastically reduced drilling on federal land. That's the only place he has control.
Good. I'm glad he did. That didn't stop the fracking, though, did it? of course it didn't. Nor did it stop other more convention methods from being used. The fact is that we are in an oil bubble. And when it bursts (actually, it already has), you losers will no doubt blame Obama for that as well. Oh look...
So your argument is that he wasn't able to totally shut down all drilling? Really?
Obama tried to interfere in the free market and reduce the supply. Obama thought he could destroy the fossil fuel industry, but consumers want the products that come from oil. American know-how and can-do spirit got what they wanted.
Other than the utter disaster that was the BP Gulf of Mexico debacle, what wells did Obama personally order shut down? The only way Obama could have influenced the oil supply was by order all our wells shut down, which probably could not be done, or bomb the Saudis, which no one in Congress would ever allow. The spot market is as free a market as exists anywhere.
Further, politically speaking, this drop in price seems to hurt all of our adversaries more than anyone else.
too much.
