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

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle 13126391

Keystone was never going to lower the price of oil...it simply provided a more secure way of transporting it! Instead of through a pipeline...it's now either trucked or sent by rail.

So yesterday you lied when you needed the Keystone as an example for ways Obama could raise gasoline prices.

Oldstyle's 13126381

I was using the Keystone Pipeline as an example of what a President can do to affect the price of commodities by wielding the power of agencies like the EPA.

So you lied and your argument is a huge failure without that lie.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle 13126486

...is that if we had a President who wasn't clueless..

Yes Oldstyle Bush43 was clueless and Obama was correct when he stated prior to the decision to invade that invading Iraq would be dumb and deadly.

 

[Faun]

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.

I was using the Keystone Pipeline as an example of what a President can do to affect the price of commodities by wielding the power of agencies like the EPA. How many times did the Obama Administration call for yet ANOTHER study on the environmental impact of the Keystone Pipeline, TotallyfooledbyObama?

Current low prices prove Keystone was never needed to begin with.

Good call, Obama!

Keystone was never going to lower the price of oil...it simply provided a more secure way of transporting it! Instead of through a pipeline...it's now either trucked or sent by rail.

That may be the rightwing meme now; but it wasn't when gas prices were higher.

Dude, Keystone was never anything other than a symbol to you on the Left...it's one more pipeline among thousands that already crisscross the United States...yet you've delayed it's being built for the better part of a decade. That oil coming down from Canada still would have been transported on essentially the same route as the Keystone Pipeline except it would have been sent in tanker trucks or in tanker rail cars...both of which have a higher probability of a spill than sending it by pipeline. So kindly explain to me why you're all so adamant that it not be built?

That tar sands oil is not coming in by rail either. It's not for the U.S. and the U.S. doesn't benefit from it.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

"Assault on Samarra. On 5 June 2014, ISIL militants attacked and captured parts of the city of Samarra. The ISIL operatives blew up a police station south of Samara overnight, killing several policemen, before they advanced on the city in pick-up trucks, raiding checkpoints along the way."

See link below.


"Oldstyle 13126386

That's total bullshit on your part...ISIS crossed hundreds of miles of open desert with large numbers of fighters in trucks along with tanks and artillery pieces BEFORE they were able to "embed" themselves in Iraqi cities where it's proving extremely difficult to use air power to dislodge them.

Cite required. You have no clue as to what you are talking about. I have posted how both Falujah and Mosul fell.

In Fallujah the terrorists were still affiliated with al Qaeda and they came in small groups as individual fighters offering to fight with local Iraqi Sunni fighters in the insurgency against the Maliki corrupt and Shiite favoring government.

In Mosul the Sunni insurgents in the western part of the city never left. When the now separated-from-al Qaeda daesh terrorist scum drove on main highways, in pickup trucks, shooting their way through Mosul checkpoints, a battle ensued and within two days the Mosul

Security forced thought they had defeated them and the scums top commander was cornered and blew himself up. To avenge his death many more pickup trucks showed up and sleeper cells inside Mosul and some embedded from within the Mosul security forces were activated.

Your version is pure hogwash. They had captured some military vehicle in Fallujah but they didn't acquire any magnitude of tanks humvees and other weapons until the Iraq forces fled Mosul on June 8 through 10.

They did not invade from Syria using tanks and artillery pieces as you claim, without citing anything that attests that they did.

.
Assault on Samarra
On 5 June 2014, ISIL militants attacked and captured parts of the city of Samarra. The ISIL operatives blew up a police station south of Samara overnight, killing several policemen, before they advanced on the city in pick-up trucks, raiding checkpoints along the way.[87]They entered the city from the east and west and quickly captured the municipality building, university and the two largest mosques. The insurgents had reached to within 2 kilometres (1.2 mi) from the Al-Askari Mosque, which was defended by three security belts. Militants targeted command centres near the shrine. Soon, government reinforcements were sent from Baghdad and the military managed to regain control of the city, pushing militant forces out of Samarra. 12 policemen and several civilians were killed in the fighting,[88] while an army official claimed 80 militants also died.

Northern Iraq offensive (June 2014) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They blew up the police station at night before they advanced in pickup truck into Sammara,

They were already there, you old fool, they did not attack from Syria with tanks across open desert. And the scum were defeated in Sammara because they had few Sunni sympathizers there.

In Mosul they had sympathizers and sleeper cells embedded for years. See next post.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldstyle 13126384

Chu sat in front of that Congressional Committee and said what he was told to say! You think his long held position suddenly changed once he became Energy Secretary?

Of course it suddenly changed. Obama was his new boss and he was answerable to Congress whom he just told that his views on that were changed.

It's reasonable to accept his views were changed because at the time he was being confirmed as Energy Secretsry the price of gasoline was low but demand was also down because of the Great Bush Recession. So the Great Bush Recession had already forced millions of jobless people around the world to cut their use of fossil fuels even though that low demand had kept oil and gasoline prices low.

Then I have provided this thread with a quote from Obama where he emphatically says he wants gasoline prices to be low because high gas prices hurt Americans.

If you got a new job and your new boss tells you what he wants - do you agree to do what your new boss wants or do you spend your time on the job undermining what you've been tasked to do?

 

[Oldstyle]

Oldstyle 13126384

Chu sat in front of that Congressional Committee and said what he was told to say! You think his long held position suddenly changed once he became Energy Secretary?

Of course it suddenly changed. Obama was his new boss and he was answerable to Congress whom he just told that his views on that were changed.

It's reasonable to accept his views were changed because at the time he was being confirmed as Energy Secretsry the price of gasoline was low but demand was also down because of the Great Bush Recession. So the Great Bush Recession had already forced millions of jobless people around the world to cut their use of fossil fuels even though that low demand had kept oil and gasoline prices low.

Then I have provided this thread with a quote from Obama where he emphatically says he wants gasoline prices to be low because high gas prices hurt Americans.

If you got a new job and your new boss tells you what he wants - do you agree to do what your new boss wants or do you spend your time on the job undermining what you've been tasked to do?

Why would you even HIRE someone who's views are supposedly completely opposed to yours? So that you can then force them to change those views to match yours? That's laughable! Barack Obama appointed Steven Chu as his Energy Secretary because Chu's views on fossil fuels matched his own! Then he had Chu lie to Congress because that's what this Administration DOES when it's concerned that the American people might not agree with it's agenda!

 

[Wilbur Right]

oldsty.

You have taken a severe ass whipping on this thread.

How ya feelin?

 

[Oldstyle]

Oldstyle 13126391

Keystone was never going to lower the price of oil...it simply provided a more secure way of transporting it! Instead of through a pipeline...it's now either trucked or sent by rail.

So yesterday you lied when you needed the Keystone as an example for ways Obama could raise gasoline prices.

Oldstyle's 13126381

I was using the Keystone Pipeline as an example of what a President can do to affect the price of commodities by wielding the power of agencies like the EPA.

So you lied and your argument is a huge failure without that lie.

The "lie" that was told yesterday was that the only way a President could affect the price of gasoline was by raising taxes or by releasing oil from the strategic reserves...TotallyfooledbyObama! The truth is that a sitting President can use the power of Government to bring an industry to it's knees. It's what Barry threatened to do with the coal industry. I used the example of the Keystone Pipeline to show how a President can delay something through the use of agencies like the EPA for such a long time that it becomes a waste of time for the Private sector to even pursue. You make a company jump through a never ending series of bureaucratic hoops and every time they comply with your latest request for a "study" by changing their plan to address your concerns, you then ask for a NEW study to look at the new plan! That's been the process employed by the Obama Administration since way back in 2008 when Keystone was first proposed.

 

[Oldstyle]

oldsty.

You have taken a severe ass whipping on this thread.

How ya feelin?

Hate to break this to you, Wilber but the liberal chorus that's braying at full throat in this string hasn't "whipped" anything!

The underlying premise by you liberals that Barry had anything to do with the lower cost of gasoline that we're enjoying in the US right now is so laughable that it borders on FARCE!

 

[Oldstyle]

I was using the Keystone Pipeline as an example of what a President can do to affect the price of commodities by wielding the power of agencies like the EPA. How many times did the Obama Administration call for yet ANOTHER study on the environmental impact of the Keystone Pipeline, TotallyfooledbyObama?

Current low prices prove Keystone was never needed to begin with.

Good call, Obama!

Keystone was never going to lower the price of oil...it simply provided a more secure way of transporting it! Instead of through a pipeline...it's now either trucked or sent by rail.

That may be the rightwing meme now; but it wasn't when gas prices were higher.

Dude, Keystone was never anything other than a symbol to you on the Left...it's one more pipeline among thousands that already crisscross the United States...yet you've delayed it's being built for the better part of a decade. That oil coming down from Canada still would have been transported on essentially the same route as the Keystone Pipeline except it would have been sent in tanker trucks or in tanker rail cars...both of which have a higher probability of a spill than sending it by pipeline. So kindly explain to me why you're all so adamant that it not be built?

That tar sands oil is not coming in by rail either. It's not for the U.S. and the U.S. doesn't benefit from it.

"Canada's oil sands are currently pumping out approximately two million barrels a day, an amount expected to nearly double within the next ten years. Oil trains are taking up some of the excess: In an annual forecast, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) predicted that oil transported by rail would increase from about 200,000 barrels a day in late 2013 to 700,000 a day by 2016."
Blocked on the Keystone XL, the Oil-Sands Industry Looks East

A train pulling seventy-two tank cars laden with oil from fracking in North Dakota derailed and exploded in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec on July 6, 2013, killing fifty people. Such accidents are themselves a product of the boom in unconventionals, coupled with “pipeline on rails” methods of shipping the oil (as well as the decrease of labor used in rail transport). In 2009, corporations shipped a mere 500 tank cars of oil by rail in Canada; in 2013 this is projected to be as much as 140,000 tank cars.17 North Dakota tight oil is also shipped by rail to Albany, New York, where it is loaded onto barges for shipment to East Coast refineries.
The Fossil Fuels War by John Bellamy Foster • Monthly Review

You were saying?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

"Oldstyle 13126386

That's total bullshit on your part...ISIS crossed hundreds of miles of open desert with large numbers of fighters in trucks along with tanks and artillery pieces BEFORE they were able to "embed" themselves in Iraqi cities where it's proving extremely difficult to use air power to dislodge them.

Please note that Mosul is about 150 miles from the Syrian border. Raqqa is over 300 miles southwest of Mosul as the crow flies. It says here that Mosul was attacked from the west and northwest using only pickup trucks. Perhaps a couple hundred pickup trucks.

.
Fall of Mosul On 6 June, ISIL attacked Mosul from the northwest and quickly entered the western part of the city. The ISIL forces numbered approximately 1,500, while there were at least 15 times more Iraqi forces.

Sunni sympathizers live in the west side of the city.

A couple hundred pickup trucks could blend with traffic from many areas and assemble just a few miles from the first Mosul checkpoint. That would keep the element of surprise in the terrorists favor. I doubt they all came at one time. Only two guards were at each checkpoint.

So it is clear Oldstyle that the attackers did not attack across hundreds of miles of open desert from Syria with tanks and artillery pieces. They massed in convoys of pickup truck on Iraqi highways and came through checkpoints.

The assault started at 02:30 in the morning when ISIL convoys of pickup trucks advancing from the west shot their way through the two-man checkpoints into the city. By 03:30, street fighting was raging in Mosul.

Tell us Oldstyle how US bombing could have been ordered to stop street fighting as the assault began.

In southern Mosul, five suicide bombers attacked an arms depot killing 11 soldiers. Two suicide bombers also killed six people in the village of Muaffakiya, near Mosul. Heavy fighting continued in the city the next day. Over the two days, 61 militants, 41 government troops and seven civilians were killed.

They didn't have the tanks and artillery that you claimed they brought across the desert from Syria. Do you realize that you've been lying all this time yet.

As the militants advanced they seized military vehicles and weapons and reportedly hanged soldiers and lit them ablaze, crucified them, and torched them on the hoods of Humvees.

You see they seized them after they were advancing across Mosul.


June 8, 2014 sleeper cells inside Mosul are activated:

By this time, insurgents surged into Mosul, sleeper cells hiding in the city had been activated and neighbourhoods rallied to them.

Some police joined the terrorists.

By the afternoon of 9 June, some 40 members of the fourth police battalion were among the very last local police fighting to hold back the jihadists in western Mosul. The rest had either defected or deserted.

They didn't need tanks they used s water truck.

At 04:30 in the afternoon, a military water tanker, rigged with explosives, raced towards the Mosul Hotel where the policemen were stationed.

They released more terrorist scum recruits from Mosul prison.

The militants also claimed to had released at least 2,400 prisoners, after seizing police stations and prisons across the city.[99][100] However, after the takeover of Badush prison in Mosul, ISIL separated and removed the Sunni inmates, while the remaining 670 prisoners were executed.[101]

In four days it was over:

At the end of 10 June, ISIL was considered to be in control of Mosul.ISIL seized large quantities of US-supplied military equipment. It also freed thousands of prisoners, many of whom are likely to join the insurgency.

Only an idiot could believe US military action could have prevented this or lie about how the fall of Mosul happened.

months preceding the attack:

Sources within the Iraq government allege that in the months preceding the assault, Ba'ath loyalists led by al-Douri had been in contact with disaffected Sunni officers who either defected or withdrew upon the ISIL-Ba'ath attack.

How does Obama know which Iraqi officers to bomb or assassinate if he could do such a thing?

Are you aware of your lies yet Oldstyle?

Northern Iraq offensive (June 2014) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Faun]

Current low prices prove Keystone was never needed to begin with.

Good call, Obama!

Keystone was never going to lower the price of oil...it simply provided a more secure way of transporting it! Instead of through a pipeline...it's now either trucked or sent by rail.

That may be the rightwing meme now; but it wasn't when gas prices were higher.

Dude, Keystone was never anything other than a symbol to you on the Left...it's one more pipeline among thousands that already crisscross the United States...yet you've delayed it's being built for the better part of a decade. That oil coming down from Canada still would have been transported on essentially the same route as the Keystone Pipeline except it would have been sent in tanker trucks or in tanker rail cars...both of which have a higher probability of a spill than sending it by pipeline. So kindly explain to me why you're all so adamant that it not be built?

That tar sands oil is not coming in by rail either. It's not for the U.S. and the U.S. doesn't benefit from it.

"Canada's oil sands are currently pumping out approximately two million barrels a day, an amount expected to nearly double within the next ten years. Oil trains are taking up some of the excess: In an annual forecast, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) predicted that oil transported by rail would increase from about 200,000 barrels a day in late 2013 to 700,000 a day by 2016."
Blocked on the Keystone XL, the Oil-Sands Industry Looks East

A train pulling seventy-two tank cars laden with oil from fracking in North Dakota derailed and exploded in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec on July 6, 2013, killing fifty people. Such accidents are themselves a product of the boom in unconventionals, coupled with “pipeline on rails” methods of shipping the oil (as well as the decrease of labor used in rail transport). In 2009, corporations shipped a mere 500 tank cars of oil by rail in Canada; in 2013 this is projected to be as much as 140,000 tank cars.17 North Dakota tight oil is also shipped by rail to Albany, New York, where it is loaded onto barges for shipment to East Coast refineries.
The Fossil Fuels War by John Bellamy Foster • Monthly Review

You were saying?

What I was saying apparently sailed clear over your head.

I said we're not transporting the tar sands oil Trans-Canada wants to send to the Gulf. You apparently didn't understand that as you're pointing to where that oil was transported in Canada; as well as a train wreck carrying oil from the Bakken.

Do you understand now?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Grampa 13119776

Dumb leftwingers don't realize that FRACKING and PRIVATE domestic drilling have driven down the cost of oil DESPITE Obama's anti energy policies

How is it that Obama's "All of the Above" energy policy which includes FRACKING and PRIVATE domestic drilling did not contribute to driving down the cost of oil. Where in the hell does 'DESPITE' come from? Explain how you've excluded that which Obama has not excluded?

How is it that Obama's "All of the Above" energy policy which includes FRACKING and PRIVATE domestic drilling

What were Obama's awesome policies that encouraged "FRACKING and PRIVATE domestic drilling"?
Gotta list?

 

[Synthaholic]

The Iraqi Army has ousted ISIS from Ramadi.

Thank you, President Obama (praise be unto Him!)

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Toddster 13128617

What were Obama's awesome policies that encouraged "FRACKING and PRIVATE domestic drilling"?
Gotta list?

I have said nothing about awesome policies or encouraging fracking and private domestic drilling. No list needed.

My point was that fracking and private domestic drilling were included in Obama's "ALL OF THE ABOVE" energy strategy.

Private stuff is encouraged by the profit motive if you believe in a free market capitalist system. Perhaps you want the Federal Government to do such innovation and investment?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Toddster 13128617

What were Obama's awesome policies that encouraged "FRACKING and PRIVATE domestic drilling"?
Gotta list?

I have said nothing about awesome policies or encouraging fracking and private domestic drilling. No list needed.

My point was that fracking and private domestic drilling were included in Obama's "ALL OF THE ABOVE" energy strategy.

Private stuff is encouraged by the profit motive if you believe in a free market capitalist system. Perhaps you want the Federal Government to do such innovation and investment?

I have said nothing about awesome policies or encouraging fracking and private domestic drilling.

Yes, your inability to prove your claims is well known.

My point was that fracking and private domestic drilling were included in Obama's "ALL OF THE ABOVE" energy strategy.

Yes, he says something, does nothing to help it happen and then claims credit if it does. Great strategy.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Toddster 13129305

Yes, your inability to prove your claims is well known.

Name one claim has not or cannot be proven. Are saying that private fracking and drilling are not part of Obama's ALL OF THE ABOVE energy strategy? That is my claim.

If it's not true show us why you think it's not.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Toddster 13129305

Yes, your inability to prove your claims is well known.

Why did you run from this conversation?

NFBW 13125463

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.

2012? I'm still trying to get you to admit that in 2008 he wanted higher prices.
That in 2008 he didn't want lower prices. That he wanted higher prices, just more slowy, in 2008.

 

[KissMy]

The US government was behind the massive hydraulic fracking revolution, 3-D mapping, horizontal drilling, and horizontal wells. I'm conservative as hell," Dan Steward, a geologist at Mitchell Energy the company that pioneered shale gas in Texas, But when asked about the role of government, Steward told us, "They did a hell of a lot of work, and I can't give them enough credit for that. The Department of Energy started it, and other people took the ball and ran with it. You cannot diminish DOE's involvement."

Steward said the government supported Mitchell energy every step of the way. "The government helped us to evaluate how much gas was there and evaluate its critical properties," he explained. "They helped us with our first horizontal well. They helped us with pressure build-ups. And we worked with them on crack mapping."

President Jimmy Carter initiated the energy push in response to the oil crises of the seventies. "The DOE's [1976] Eastern Gas Shales Project in the Appalachia basin determined there was a hell of a lot of gas in shales," explained Steward. "Mitchell was interested in Barnett shale and his geophysicist said, 'It looks similar to the Devonian shale, and the government's already done all this work on the Devonian.'"

Steward emphasized the critical role played by government mapping technologies, in particular "micro-seismic mapping," which was first developed by the DOE to anticipate mine failure. "Frack mapping," as it is called in the industry, puts seismic tools into wells near where fracking is taking place, allowing geologists like Steward to understand where the gas fractures were. "The microseismic frack mapping was being done out of Sandia labs," Steward explained. "There was a brilliant engineer there. I was extremely impressed with him."

Investigations found myriad fascinating details of how government-funded scientists, geologists, computer modelers, engineers, and bureaucrats made the shale gas revolution possible:Taxpayer investments went well beyond basic research. Consider:

• Massive hydraulic fracking (MHF) was first demonstrated by DOE in 1977. Mitchell received his 'slickwater' (or 'light sand') fracking technology from another oil company, Union Pacific Resources, which had adapted it from MHF.
• In 1986, the Department of Energy partnered with industry in Wayne County, WV, to achieve the first multi-fracture, air-drilled, horizontal Devonian shale well.
• In 1991, DOE and the Gas Research Institute, funded by a surcharge on gas, helped pay for Mitchell's first horizontal well -- a breakthrough technology that allowed gas to be absorbed from multiple fractures in the shale.
• In 1991, DOE provided micro-seismic (3D) mapping assistance through scientists with Sandia National Laboratory, allowing Mitchell to determine the location of the shale fractures.
• Twenty years of President Jimmy Carters 1980 federal tax credit subsidies and different price supports provided strong taxpayer incentives for Mitchell's explorations. "The tax credits helped," Steward said, "as did the different pricing scenarios for newly discovered gas.
• Government support for unconventional gas dates back to Bureau of Mines' support for pulling natural gas from coal mines to reduce the risk of explosion in coal mines, resulting in the rise of coal-bed methane, a major source of natural gas.
• The U.S. for years funded radically experimental efforts, including large explosions underground, that were too expensive and risky for private firms to do.
• For decades DOE supported better drilling technologies, including better drill bits, which better protect the integrity of the rock formations, allowing for greater gas extraction.
• In 2009 Government removed Boundaries & Setbacks for Environmentally Friendly Multi well Pad Drillers, reducing production cost by $15/barrel igniting the Fracking Revolution.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

2012? I'm still trying to get you to admit that in 2008 he wanted higher prices. That in 2008 he didn't want lower prices. That he wanted higher prices, just more slowy, in 2008.

You have provided nothing that shows Obama wanted higher prices in 2008 or didn't want lower gas prices. You said you wanted to see where he said he wanted lower prices. You didn't stipulate a time frame until now.

As I said before he was not asked in 2008 what he wanted, so he didnt answer or need to answer an unasked question,

In 2012 he was asked what he 'wanted' and his answer was that he wanted lower prices and now lower prices are what we got.

You have your answer now you run away from your question.