• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US to surpass Saudi as top oil producer by 2016: IEA

What's REALLY interesting is how many times I can say I'm not crediting Obama and people still don't seem to understand it. In your defense, you may not have read anything else I've said in this thread (which is completely understandable), but I have said several times what my statements were intended to be.

That's fair enough - perhaps you have altered your implied contention since the posting I quoted.
 
Of course. When something good happens, it happens because Obama is completely ineffectual and has nothing to do with the good. I'm sure when something bad happens, though, you keep the same position that Obama is ineffectual and had nothing to do with the bad thing, right?

From my perspective, Obama is on the wrong side of virtually every economic decision/issue of the day. When something good happens in the American economy, it is inevitably because Obama was completely ineffectual in getting what he wanted to do done.

With respect to when something bad happens - and boy have a lot of bad things happened - we are told we can't blame Obama because he didn't know. Apparently, the most transparent administration in the history of the US likes to keep the President in the dark - even though many former and current White House aids claim that Obama is very "hands on" - I have to chock it up to being on the golf course and unavailable for all those "hands on" meetings for the President never being aware of anything bad coming down the pike.
 
That damn Obama and his oppressive energy/oil policies. Conservatives told us for years Obama was doing everything he could to kill the oil business, and now we see just how right they were...

So you want to pretend Obama should be given credit for something he was dragged kicking and screaming into doing? Obama would have a windmill on your car if he could.
 
From my perspective, Obama is on the wrong side of virtually every economic decision/issue of the day. When something good happens in the American economy, it is inevitably because Obama was completely ineffectual in getting what he wanted to do done.

With respect to when something bad happens - and boy have a lot of bad things happened - we are told we can't blame Obama because he didn't know. Apparently, the most transparent administration in the history of the US likes to keep the President in the dark - even though many former and current White House aids claim that Obama is very "hands on" - I have to chock it up to being on the golf course and unavailable for all those "hands on" meetings for the President never being aware of anything bad coming down the pike.

I believe that Obama is very hands on! He wouldn't stand still for anything but! It's just that while having zero experience in running anything, he still thinks he knows everything, and apparently refuses to have anyone around him who disagrees with him. Ergo--today in America!

Greetings, CJ. :2wave:
 
Respond to what I was saying, instead of ranting on an unrelated topic and I'll consider it.
Don't have to. The point I was making was pointing out how wrong those who opposed Obama were when they said he was trying to kill the oil industry and that it was his fault gas prices were so high.
Typical Socialist policies, where he's trying to save money for the poor. Thanks Obama for ruining this country by saving poor people money on gas.
I'm looking....nope, I didn't say or even insinuate anything of the sort. But hey, good attempt at putting words in my mouth...err, letters on my keyboard.
Of course. When something good happens, it happens because Obama is completely ineffectual and has nothing to do with the good. I'm sure when something bad happens, though, you keep the same position that Obama is ineffectual and had nothing to do with the bad thing, right?

Show us ONE single Obama policy that encouraged oil and gas exploration and production.
 
As I said in my last post:

"Don't have to. The point I was making was pointing out how wrong those who opposed Obama were when they said he was trying to kill the oil industry and that it was his fault gas prices were so high."

These are Obama administration policies that went after drilling on Federal land, Coal, and Electric generation through coal fired plants...His administration flushed Billions down the drain through diverting money to cronies like Solyndra that failed to achieve his pipe dream of alternative energy, and made his friends rich off MY money.

If you "know that", then you clearly know nothing. Once more, I'll point you to what I've said before:

Just because you think you are smarter than everyone else in the room, and proclaim something as "fact", doesn't make it a fact.
 
New slogan - "Obama, he's our man - when he does nothing, America prospers" - that's catchy.


"The government that governs least, governs best" - attributed to Thomas Jefferson (though there's no evidence of him actually using that phrase)
 
LOL. So paying more is less now? $1.838 per gallon was the national average the day before he took office.

Obama should have totally left the financial disaster sit where it was. The fact that for most of the Bush admin, it hovered around $2.50 - 3 is totally irrelevant.
 
I believe that Obama is very hands on! He wouldn't stand still for anything but! It's just that while having zero experience in running anything, he still thinks he knows everything, and apparently refuses to have anyone around him who disagrees with him. Ergo--today in America!

Greetings, CJ. :2wave:

Good morning/afternoon Lady P.
 
"The government that governs least, governs best" - attributed to Thomas Jefferson (though there's no evidence of him actually using that phrase)

I like it!!

And when you have a disaster like Obama at the helm, no truer words could be spoken.
 
Nope, I was perfectly accurate.
Sorry. Being 180 degrees off the mark is not accurate.


Which is such an asinine statement, it amazes me people are still using it. I suppose the fact our economy had just crashed and the stock market was in the pits had nothing to do with that, right? Nevermind the over $4 a gallon average in September 2008, and the gradual rise over the 8 years of Bush's presidency. Nope, let's just focus on a particular date which is completely inconsistent to the otherwise steady upward trend which had existed until the economy crashed.
Facts are facts. The price of gas has gone up since Obama has been President. He has done nothing to help lower the cost and in fact his policies have constantly applied pressure upward on the price of gas. Had he any interest in doing what's best for America and Americans the price would be lower today than what it is.

I am. I'm consistently in favor of facts and common sense. It's a shame there aren't more of me.
If you are in favor of "facts and common sense" change your ways and start using them instead of spin, twist, wiggle and lies for Obama.
 
Obama should have totally left the financial disaster sit where it was. The fact that for most of the Bush admin, it hovered around $2.50 - 3 is totally irrelevant.

I'd take $2.50 today over Obama's "necessarily skyrocketing" policy.
 
That's fair enough - perhaps you have altered your implied contention since the posting I quoted.
I haven't altered it, I explained it. The difference is that while tone/inflection may not come through on a forum, it doesn't change the original meaning. The entire point, as I said in a later post, is despite what has been alleged, Obama clearly hasn't killed the oil business and the price of gas is far too complex of an issue to simply point at the President and say, "He's to credit/blame".
From my perspective, Obama is on the wrong side of virtually every economic decision/issue of the day. When something good happens in the American economy, it is inevitably because Obama was completely ineffectual in getting what he wanted to do done.
From my perspective, that is foolish. I don't mean that to be an insult, but I just think it's foolish. For that to come to pass, you have to assume two things, neither of which are likely true. The first is that you know more about the economy and how it works than entire groups of economists who are some of the best in the field. The second thing you have to assume is that there is only one right way to do things, which is almost always incorrect, especially for something as large as "the economy".
So you want to pretend Obama should be given credit for something he was dragged kicking and screaming into doing? Obama would have a windmill on your car if he could.
I'm not pretending anything. I'm simply noting how the foolish the Republicans sound right now.

There's a difference between noting how evidence proves a foolish statement incorrect and assigning credit.
Show us ONE single Obama policy that encouraged oil and gas exploration and production.
Why do so many people not understand the difference between blame and credit?
These are Obama administration policies that went after drilling on Federal land, Coal, and Electric generation through coal fired plants...His administration flushed Billions down the drain through diverting money to cronies like Solyndra that failed to achieve his pipe dream of alternative energy, and made his friends rich off MY money.
I always love how people mention Solyndra, when it's been well proven that most of the money that went to green energy companies was money well spent (not to mention Solyndra was chosen and supported by Bush before Obama took office). Have you ever stopped to consider why you ONLY use Solyndra? Why there's only ONE company you mention? It's because of the many green energy companies who received money, most of them made good use of the money.

But that aside, everything you said here (even if it was true, which it is not) doesn't change the fact that Obama clearly has not killed the oil industry.

Just because you think you are smarter than everyone else in the room, and proclaim something as "fact", doesn't make it a fact.
It has nothing to do with me being smarter than you, and everything to do with you apparently not reading. Just because you chose not to read my post, don't push your faults onto me.
If you are in favor of "facts and common sense" change your ways and start using them instead of spin, twist, wiggle and lies for Obama.
I do no such thing, but considering how incredibly blind you are to anything aside from partisan attacks, it doesn't surprise me you'd post this. It never ceases to amaze me how many times I prove you wrong and you simply try to change the subject or ignore the fact you are wrong. It's happened many times.
You didnt say anything, except make a sarcastic remark. What would you like me to respond to?
:lamo

Think about what you just posted. Then maybe you'll come to realize why I'm laughing at you.
 
Gas prices are directly related to oil supply.

True; however, we're not the only supplier. If you think that OPEC wouldn't alter production to keep gas prices artificially high, I have a bridge to sell you.
 
Obama should have totally left the financial disaster sit where it was. The fact that for most of the Bush admin, it hovered around $2.50 - 3 is totally irrelevant.

I realize it was what you quoted, not your statement, but the "gas was XX when Obama took office" argument is totally disingenuous.

Gas prices plummeted because the economy dropped a phenomenal deuce and demand cratered. As the economy improved and demand rose ... guess what? So did the price of gas.
 
Yes, that and the opposite is true, depending on who you talk to and on what issue. I'm glad I always remember seeing you taking this tone when left leaning posters are explaining how any bad news is everyone but Obama's fault.....

As to this, great to see it. I imagine it will only continue as fracking becomes a more common practice and we start taking advantage of the reserves around this country.

I'd still personally rather see us investing money into technologies that can synthesize oil or get more out of it than attempting to push massively for an energy source that would require an overhaul of the entire infastructure that is currently in place.

That's what I like about Conservatives. They have such VISION. No matter what we do , oil will run out eventually. It only makes sense to prepare for that day.
 
Obama should have totally left the financial disaster sit where it was. The fact that for most of the Bush admin, it hovered around $2.50 - 3 is totally irrelevant.

You are dreaming again.

20120914_020831_gasprez.jpg
 
I always love how people mention Solyndra, when it's been well proven that most of the money that went to green energy companies was money well spent (not to mention Solyndra was chosen and supported by Bush before Obama took office). Have you ever stopped to consider why you ONLY use Solyndra? Why there's only ONE company you mention? It's because of the many green energy companies who received money, most of them made good use of the money.

"The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:
Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
Solyndra ($535 million)*
Beacon Power ($43 million)*
Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
SunPower ($1.2 billion)
First Solar ($1.46 billion)
Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
Amonix ($5.9 million)
Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
Abound Solar ($400 million)*
A123 Systems ($279 million)*
Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
Johnson Controls ($299 million)
Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
ECOtality ($126.2 million)
Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
Range Fuels ($80 million)*
Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
GreenVolts ($500,000)
Vestas ($50 million)
LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
Navistar ($39 million)
Satcon ($3 million)*
Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)
*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.
The problem begins with the issue of government picking winners and losers in the first place. Venture capitalist firms exist for this very reason, and they choose what to invest in by looking at companies’ business models and deciding if they are worthy. When the government plays venture capitalist, it tends to reward companies that are connected to the policymakers themselves or because it sounds nice to “invest” in green energy.
The 2009 stimulus set aside $80 billion to subsidize politically preferred energy projects. Since that time, 1,900 investigations have been opened to look into stimulus waste, fraud, and abuse (although not all are linked to the green-energy funds), and nearly 600 convictions have been made. Of that $80 billion in clean energy loans, grants, and tax credits, at least 10 percent has gone to companies that have since either gone bankrupt or are circling the drain."

President Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures

This was as of last year....So you're right, it's not just Solyndra, it's a lot more.....And the list of Obama cronies that got these grants, and then went belly up, reads like a donor list of campaign '08 insiders....Can you say corruption? But that doesn't matter to you right? As long as there is someone doing it that you can ideologically agree with.

But that aside, everything you said here (even if it was true, which it is not) doesn't change the fact that Obama clearly has not killed the oil industry.

No, he hasn't, but that is not for lack of trying....Think about who is effected most by his flippant statement of "energy prices would necessarily skyrocket".... Do you think it is the rich? NO. Those most effected by his scorched earth war against fossil fuels, hurts the poor disproportionately. But that's ok with you right?
 
True; however, we're not the only supplier. If you think that OPEC wouldn't alter production to keep gas prices artificially high, I have a bridge to sell you.

Actually, the Saudi's have frequently done exactly what you claim they don't. Historically, the Saudi's have increased production in order to stabilize or lower prices because they know that too high a price for oil harms world economies and without robust economic activity, their only export becomes less valuable. That doesn't mean that every member of OPEC agrees with the Saudis or appreciates what they do, but it's not true that OPEC always or even mostly keeps oil prices artificially high - in fact, more often they've kept oil prices artificially low.
 
Actually, the Saudi's have frequently done exactly what you claim they don't. Historically, the Saudi's have increased production in order to stabilize or lower prices because they know that too high a price for oil harms world economies and without robust economic activity, their only export becomes less valuable. That doesn't mean that every member of OPEC agrees with the Saudis or appreciates what they do, but it's not true that OPEC always or even mostly keeps oil prices artificially high - in fact, more often they've kept oil prices artificially low.

Mornin CJ :2wave: .....well with us surpassing them. They will have to keep them low and maybe go even lower.
 
True; however, we're not the only supplier. If you think that OPEC wouldn't alter production to keep gas prices artificially high, I have a bridge to sell you.

Perhaps you should read the entire thread for context before jumping in.
 
Mornin CJ :2wave: .....well with us surpassing them. They will have to keep them low and maybe go even lower.

Good morning MMC - at least until the economies of Europe, China, and India start to improve.
 
I do no such thing, but considering how incredibly blind you are to anything aside from partisan attacks, it doesn't surprise me you'd post this. It never ceases to amaze me how many times I prove you wrong and you simply try to change the subject or ignore the fact you are wrong. It's happened many times.

LOL. Partisan attacks uh? Show me where I support anything from the RINO side of the GOP. That side is almost as dumb and evil as the democrats and they get no support from me. I'm not surprised you are "amazed" at anything. You post spin, twists, wiggles and flat out lies in support of Obama and as far as I know you can't understand why everyone doesn't jump on board the nonsense train with you. You have never proven me wrong at anything, you can't. Your blind support for a liar who peddles lies will not allow you to check things out and find facts.
 
Back
Top Bottom