See, here is Dr. Deceitful again.
I forgot one: He habitually twists very basic facts into a pretzel, or worse. In this case worse.
He thinks others won't read and compare... and :Gingrich: is supposed to get weak minds into a lather... Knee Jerk.
This is Obama-like.
I present the above quote as evidence
You see Your Star,
I don't recall Gingrich researching and writing a paper on the subject, having it be submitted to a leading energy journal, and have it rejected because the conclusion is known and not original.
Compare the substance to slithering quote at the top of this post.
Deceit and deception.
To make it easy... the guts... posted below:
...the top academic energy journal, aptly named, ``The Energy Journal,'' recently rejected a study by economists Morris Coats and Gary Pecquet of Nicholls State University in Louisiana that found that higher production in the future would reduce prices today.
The study... wasn't rejected because it lacked academic merit. It was rejected because the finding was so well known. James Smith, the impeccably credentialed editor of The Energy Journal described it this way to the unfortunate authors:
``Basically, your main result (the present impact of an anticipated future supply change) is already known to economists (although perhaps not to the Democratic Policy Committee). It is our policy to publish only original research that adds significantly to the body of received knowledge regarding energy markets and policy.''
...if you want oil prices to decline, drill.
Start Drilling Now to Lower Oil, Gasoline Prices: Kevin Hassett - Bloomberg