Right Wingers eating crow on price of gasoline. $1.39 in Indiana.

Toddster 13123189
Yes, he wanted them to continue to rise. The recent decline saddens him.

That is a lie. You have no basis for telling it.




Obama clearly indicates that his problem with the high prices prevailing then was not that they are high, but that they ramped up too quickly. He talks about ways to mitigate the impact of high prices instead of ways to reduce them and suggests that the increase could be beneficial, saying, “we can come out of this stronger.”


He never says he "wants" higher gasoline prices. Never. That is a lie by whoever says it.


Obama clearly indicates that his problem with the high prices prevailing then was not that they are high, but that they ramped up too quickly. He talks about ways to mitigate the impact of high prices instead of ways to reduce them and suggests that the increase could be beneficial, saying, “we can come out of this stronger.”
 
Papageo 13123129
Do you honestly believe your partisan bullshit?

Did you bother to read my post? I said I would not say Bush or Reagan were 'responsible' for terrorist attacks during their presidencies. Your wingnut was saying Obama is ultimately responsible for terrorists killing people thus giving the terrorists who kill maim steal and tape a pass.

You are one mixed up dude. I'm not partisan at all. Is it partisan to hold the terrorists responsible for 9/11/01 attacks, not Bush?

Tell me, is it?
 
And the far left drone narrative runs without question or hesitation as they gear up to vote for worse than Bush, once again in 2016..

Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2014:
  • Coal = 39%
  • Natural gas = 27%
  • Nuclear = 19%
  • Hydropower = 6%
  • Other renewables = 7%
    • Biomass = 1.7%
    • Geothermal = 0.4%
    • Solar = 0.4%
    • Wind = 4.4%
  • Petroleum = 1%
  • Other gases < 1%
So what is your point?

Extra cost of capturing CO2 from Coal Power Plants is dwarfed by increased revenue from oil production gains from pumping that CO2 into oil wells, shale fracking & tar sands. It will take mandates to make that happen because oil companies figure they can make more return on their money from other places than paying for the price of Coal Power Plant CO2 capture & transport. My Electricity Rate has not increased any under Obama.

See how the far left drones can not deal with the facts as they will always destroy their religious narratives..

And they will lie as often as they can to protect their Gods..

You can't deal with facts. All you spout is propaganda.

Fact: CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery generates profits & more oil revenue!

The irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

The United States has been using CO2 EOR for several decades. For over 30 years, oil fields in the Permian Basin have implemented CO2 EOR using naturally sourced CO2 from New Mexico and Colorado

Hardly has anything to do with Obama..

But notice how the far left drone just spouts religious narratives with no real proof to back up their claims..
You are the Drone Idiot!

Electricity rates skyrocketed under Bush & barely moved under Obama!
fig24.png
?

Your chart does not show what you are saying it does. All it shows is that the prices are rising at a gradual and constant rate...

GROWTH exploded under Bush - likely because the economy at that time was very strong. Generally that is not seen as a negative thing.
 
Toddster 13124160
Obama clearly indicates that his problem with the high prices prevailing then was not that they are high, but that they ramped up too quickly. He talks about ways to mitigate the impact of high prices instead of ways to reduce them and suggests that the increase could be beneficial, saying, “we can come out of this stronger.”

So where does he say he "wants" higher prices. You admit they were 'prevailing then'.

We're not those high oil prices prior to the Great Bush Recession beneficial in the long run. The U.S. Fracking Boom is one pivotal foster child of high oil prices. If logic and reason were available to you, you would admit that Obama was correct to predict we could come out stronger anytime the market forces high oil prices on us.

We are now the third largest crude producer in the world thanks to high oil prices of the past. You'd have to be an idiot to argue that we are not stronger by achieving that domestic oil production milestone.
 
. Your chart does not show what you are saying it does.

Sure it does. The chart shows electricity rising 4 cents per kilowatt hour from 2004 to 2008. Then it shows electricity rising 1 cent from 2008 to 2015. Four cents in four years is a much steeper climb than one cent over six to seven years.
 
Toddster 13124160
Obama clearly indicates that his problem with the high prices prevailing then was not that they are high, but that they ramped up too quickly. He talks about ways to mitigate the impact of high prices instead of ways to reduce them and suggests that the increase could be beneficial, saying, “we can come out of this stronger.”

So where does he say he "wants" higher prices. You admit they were 'prevailing then'.

We're not those high oil prices prior to the Great Bush Recession beneficial in the long run. The U.S. Fracking Boom is one pivotal foster child of high oil prices. If logic and reason were available to you, you would admit that Obama was correct to predict we could come out stronger anytime the market forces high oil prices on us.

We are now the third largest crude producer in the world thanks to high oil prices of the past. You'd have to be an idiot to argue that we are not stronger by achieving that domestic oil production milestone.

So where does he say he "wants" higher prices.

Where does he say he wants lower prices?
What did he mean when he said they went up too quickly?
 
Toddster 13124528
Where does he say he wants lower prices?
What did he mean when he said they went up too quickly?

He meant they went up too quickly. There is no translation of that where Obama 'wants' gasoline prices to go up at all.

He meant they went up too quickly.

Yeah, when I complain about gas being too expensive, I don't say the price went up too quickly, I say the price is too high.

There is no translation of that where Obama 'wants' gasoline prices to go up at all.

Is that your admission that he didn't say he wanted lower gas prices?
 
Toddster 13124528
. Where does he say he wants lower prices?

He was not asked what he 'wants' he was asked about existing high prices and what that meant for consumers and America's energy future. Why would he answer what he 'wants' regarding gasoline pricing since setting the price of gasoline is not a function of the U.S. president or federal government. He was not asked about raising or lowering federal taxes on gasoline. He was not asked about filling or draining the strategic oil reserve. Those are about the only two ways a U.S. president can raise or lower the price of a gallon of gas in the USA.

So now you complain that Obama didn't answer a question that he was not asked.

You are really hard up for throwing dirt on Obama.
 
I want ISIS destroyed. I would have liked to have seen Barry respond as ISIS was taking over much of Iraq in the first place but that would have meant admitting that he'd erred by prematurely pulling out US combat troops.

U.S. Troops were not pulled out prematurely you fool. Obama kept as many there as long as they were protected with immunity. No military adviser civilian retired or active duty advised the President there when Iraw refused to extend immunity.

So it is only those who don't care enough about our troops safety and protection in the worst case court system in the world that would preferred to keep troops in Iraq without immunity.

Just because you don't give a damn about the troops immunity from Iraqi laws doesn't mean everyone else with a reasonable mind agreed with you.

Obama would never have to admit he erred because quite frankly that argument of yours is nuts.

Simple question for you, TotallyfooledbyObama...is it your contention that Barack Obama did everything he could to obtain a new SOFA from Iraq?
 
bripat 13001915
" I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment."

Meaning, he wanted the price to increase, only slower.

No. It means that given prices were going up due to freemarket forces, he would prefer that they rise gradually. There is no "wanting"
higher prices inferred, implied or directly stated.

You don't get to make up your own language or interpretations that distort the speaker's intent.

You don't appoint someone as your Energy Secretary who's message for the past twenty YEARS has been that we need much higher gasoline prices here in the US to wean Americans off fossil fuels unless you have the same belief yourself! The person that is "interpreting" Barack Obama's intent is you...Barry has been very clear in his actions towards the fossil fuels industries here in the United States about his intentions. You've got your partisan blinders on however and can't see what's right there in front of your face.
 
Toddster 13124528
. Where does he say he wants lower prices?

He was not asked what he 'wants' he was asked about existing high prices and what that meant for consumers and America's energy future. Why would he answer what he 'wants' regarding gasoline pricing since setting the price of gasoline is not a function of the U.S. president or federal government. He was not asked about raising or lowering federal taxes on gasoline. He was not asked about filling or draining the strategic oil reserve. Those are about the only two ways a U.S. president can raise or lower the price of a gallon of gas in the USA.

So now you complain that Obama didn't answer a question that he was not asked.

You are really hard up for throwing dirt on Obama.

So, you're admitting he didn't say he wanted lower prices.
He didn't say he was against the higher prices. He just wanted them to happen.....slower.
 
Toddster 13124528
. Where does he say he wants lower prices?

He was not asked what he 'wants' he was asked about existing high prices and what that meant for consumers and America's energy future. Why would he answer what he 'wants' regarding gasoline pricing since setting the price of gasoline is not a function of the U.S. president or federal government. He was not asked about raising or lowering federal taxes on gasoline. He was not asked about filling or draining the strategic oil reserve. Those are about the only two ways a U.S. president can raise or lower the price of a gallon of gas in the USA.

So now you complain that Obama didn't answer a question that he was not asked.

You are really hard up for throwing dirt on Obama.

Anyone that has ever had to deal with Government on any level knows only too well that people running different government agencies can by their action or lack of action affect the cost of most commodities. Your claim that the President of the United States only has two ways of raising or lowering the cost of a gallon of gas is laughably naive. All he REALLY has to do is simply call the head of the EPA into the Oval Office and tell them that from then on he wants EXTENSIVE studies done on any new requests for drilling permits or on any new requests for pipelines! It's what they did with the Keystone Pipeline.
 
Toddster 13124764
Yeah, when I complain about gas being too expensive, I don't say the price went up too quickly, I say the price is too high.

If you went beyond complaining to actually thinking about doing something about it would it mean you wanted gas being too expensive? Or are you just a complainer. A poor helpless complainer that can't find anything to do about high gasoline prices whether they come quickly or gradually.

When you are so busy complaining do you address your complaint to anyone that can do something about it? Or do you just like to hear yourself complain?

What is the exact right price of gasoline today? Are you complaining about $2 a gal for regular right now.
 
It's what they did with the Keystone Pipeline.

What effect did rejecting the Keystone pipeline have on the price of a gallon of gas six plus years into Obama's presidency?

It appears your theory and your example of its implementation has a very serious flaw. The study and rejection have nothing to do with the price of gasoline we are buying these days and very long into the future. The President had no effect.
 
Last edited:
Toddster 13124764
Is that your admission that he didn't say he wanted lower gas prices?

I don't have to admit anything because when he was asked the direct question if he 'wants' higher gas prices he said no, that makes no sense and then he said clear and plain as day "I want gas prices lower because they hurt families,..."

Here is the direct question from Ed Henry of Fox News during a Press Conference on 03/06/12:

. HENRY: And related to Iran and Israel, you have been concerned about this loose talk of war as you call it driving up gas prices further. Your critics will say on Capitol Hill that you want gas prices to go higher because you have said before that would wean the American people off fossil fuels to renewable fuels. How do you respond to that?

Here is Obama's reply:

. OBAMA: Does anybody here think that makes a lot of sense? Look. Here's the bottom line with respect to gas prices. I want gas prices lower because they hurt families, because I meet folks every day who have to drive a long way to get to work and them filling up this gas tank gets more and more painful and it's a tax out of their pocketbooks, out of their paychecks. And a lot of folks are already operating on the margins right now. And it's not good for the overall economy because when gas prices go up, consumer spending oftentimes pulls back. And we're in the midst right now of a recovery that is starting to build up steam and we don't want to reverse it.

Fox News' Ed Henry Smacked Down By President Obama During Presidential News Conference

So eat your crow and quit complaining that Obama didn't 'say' he 'wants' lower gas prices.
 
Oldstyle 13124939
Simple question for you, TotallyfooledbyObama...is it your contention that Barack Obama did everything he could to obtain a new SOFA from Iraq?

Of course he did. The votes were not in the Iraqi Parliament if it included immunity.

Nothing could be done to change the Party in power which was led by Muqtada al Sadr.

Sadr's Shiite political party the Sadrists were formed from Sadr's militia, the Mahdi Army. The Mahdi Army was the main Shiite militia that fought the U.S. occupation from the early days of the U.S. Invasion. While Bush was still President the Sadrists with American blood on their hands became the political kingmaker in the election where Maliki became Prime Minister.

Sadr called the shots on Bush's SOFA and again when Obama tried to extend it. No amount of persuasion could change Sadr's mind about extending the SOFA specifically if it included immunity.

Now here's a similar question for you.

Is it your contention that George W Bush did everything he could to obtain a long term SOFA with no fixed date for complete withdrawal as well as at least five permanent U.S. Military Bases in Iraq. That was Bush's starting point in the negotiations. Instead he got a measely three year SOFA with a fixed date for withdrawal and no permanent bases.

So did Bush having no limitations in writing do all he could to get a SOFA the length of time he thought Iraq needed to stand on its own? Or was three years and no permanent bases sufficient enough to actually sign that deal in December 2008?

Did Bush do everything he could?
 
Last edited:
Oldstyle 13124991
You don't appoint someone as your Energy Secretary who's message for the past twenty YEARS has been that we need much higher gasoline prices here in the US to wean Americans off fossil fuels unless you have the same belief yourself!

Chu refuted that policy when he was sitting before Congress Members who were preparing to approve him as Energy Secretary. Do you have any evidence that shows Obama appointed him not knowing what his current up to date position was?

You don't, so how can you say what Obama had in mind when Chu was selected?

You make stuff up, that's how you can say it.

We are on to you Oldstyle. Facts mean nothing to you. Absolutely nothing.
 
FAQ2 13105618
Obama has expanded military operations all over the ME. We are dropping hundreds of warheads a day.

It is great isn't it? And now Obama helped the Iraqi Army take back control of Ramadi. And Now the terrorists supply routes from Syria into Mosul are being severed.

Nothing to hide from. Why are you hiding now?
 
Last edited:
FAQ2 13120027
Yes yes, we all know that it certainly is not the presidents job to have negotiated a new SOFA for the area.

The SOFA was to be extended only with Iraq's consent. Obama certainly negotiated but it never could be 'his job' to give Iraq!s consent to terms they could not accept.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top