Obomination: Gas Prices Grow More Under Obama Than Carter...

[paulitician]

So high gas prices under DA BOOOOSH was bad, but high gas prices under the Dear Leader is good? Just not following the loony Obama-Bots on this one. Is it just me?

Were high gas prices bush's fault, or n ot, in your own opinion? You do have one, dontcha *****?

I didn't think so.

Wow.

Is it just not fun when Obama is held to the same standard he demanded of Bush?

Bingo!

 

[Mr.Nick]

All I can say here is that it is fun watching progressives defend their savior...

How is that hope and change working for you idiots???

Oh yeah, you're so ******* delusional that you attempt to claim high gas prices are a sign of a recovering economy.....

Every time I read a progressives post (or article) I feel like my brain has been raped...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What Chu said

Chu is a a Nobel Prize-winning physicist who served as director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, a federal energy research center. His quote about European gas prices has become somewhat notorious since he uttered it almost four years ago.

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal in late 2008 -- before Obama was elected and at a point when Chu had no ties to Obama -- Chu told the newspaper that he favored raising gasoline taxes gradually over 15 years to coax consumers into buying fuel-efficient cars and discouraging sprawl.

"Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Chu said in an interview with the Journal in September 2008. The quote did not appear in print until December, when the Journal ran a story after news emerged that Chu was being tapped as energy secretary.

It has been a target of criticism numerous times since then.

"The popularity of Chu’s now-infamous quotation tends to track the rise and fall of gas prices: It enjoyed a huge surge of attention last spring and summer (2011) before largely vanishing from view in the fall, leading up to this month’s renaissance," reporter Bob King wrote in a story in POLITICO.

As it happens, after Gingrich's comment, Chu backed away from what he said. At a hearing of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on March 13, 2012, Chu said, "Since I walked in the door as secretary of Energy I’ve been doing everything in my powers to do what we can to … reduce those prices."

Chu added, according to POLITICO, that the "most important tool in DOE’s tool chest is moving off oil."

"So are you saying you no longer share the view that we need to figure out how to boost gasoline prices in America?" Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, asked him.

"I no longer share that view," Chu said.

"When I became secretary of Energy, I represented the U.S. government," Chu added. "Of course we don’t want the price of gasoline to go up, we want it to go down."

PolitiFact | Gingrich said energy secretary advocated raising gas prices

So stop acting like that's his policy, ya brainwashed MORONS.

You might want to read what you post.

"Chu told the newspaper that he favored raising gasoline taxes gradually over 15 years to coax consumers into buying fuel-efficient cars and discouraging sprawl.

"Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Chu said in an interview with the Journal in September 2008. The quote did not appear in print until December, when the Journal ran a story after news emerged that Chu was being tapped as energy secretary."

Did you?

In an interview....before Obama was elected and at a point when Chu had no ties to Obama -- Chu told the newspaper that he favored raising gasoline taxes gradually over 15 years......

"I no longer share that view," Chu said.

"When I became secretary of Energy, I represented the U.S. government," Chu added. "Of course we don’t want the price of gasoline to go up, we want it to go down."

I see.

He's for higher gas prices.

He's hired by Obama

An article comes out with him being on record for higher gas pricess and suddenly

He "no longer shares that view"

 

[paulitician]

All I can say here is that it is fun watching progressives defend their savior...

How is that hope and change working for you idiots???

Oh yeah, you're so ******* delusional that you attempt to claim high gas prices are a sign of a recovering economy.....

Every time I read a progressives post (or article) I feel like my brain has been raped...

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Marking the similarities between President Barack Obama's time in office and former president Jimmy Carter's is nothing new. But as of Monday, Obama has hit one more Carter benchmark - both saw gas prices double in their first term of office.

In fact, while just barely, Obama has seen an even higher gas price increase than Carter dealt with under his administration.

Under the Carter administration, gas prices increased by 103.77 percent. Gas prices since Obama took office have risen by 103.79 percent. No other presidents in recent years have struggled as much with soaring oil prices. Under the Reagan administration, gas prices actually dropped 66 percent. When Bill Clinton was president, gas prices grew by roughly 30 percent, and under both Bush presidencies, gas prices rose by 20 percent.

The National Republican Congressional Committee called attention to Obama's recent "dishonorable distinction," blaming the Democrats' rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline as a major factor for skyrocketing gas prices.

Gas Prices averaged $1.86 a gallon when Obama took office.

Gas Prices Grow More Under Obama than Carter - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)
DRUDGE REPORT 2012®

So we've had since Carter to find an alternative to oil....


and we haven't. Did you expect oil prices would go down as we used more and more of it?

 

[KevinWestern]

That's not true at all, when there is less demand for oil it will be more expensive.

When there is demand prices will fall, when there is no demand prices will rise.

Nick, when Demand rises price rises too. When demand falls so does the price. This is a basic principle of economics.

Which ebay item do you think is likelier to be sold at a higher price: Item A with 150 people bidding on it, or Item A with 2 people bidding on it.

It's a fact people need gas..

It's a fact less people are driving.

How do you compensate for people not driving as much hence lost revenue??

You raise the oil prices..

If more people had jobs and drove to work there would be more of a demand hence oil prices would go down due to competition amongst the corporations providing oil...

Truth is our economy is shitty, our real unemployment rate is astronomical hence the oil companies are going to charge "Dave" for the fuel "Phil" doesn't use, because "Phil" is out of work and cant afford to buy gas and has no reason to buy gas because he doesn't have to commute as much.

If you drive up your prices to somehow make up for lost revenue, you will actually drive more customers away because people will drive less, so you won’t end up any better off by raising the price of gas.

No...

When there is a demand prices go down not up...

Competition amongst businesses drives prices down not up because every business is trying to provide a product at the cheapest price..

When there is no demand for a product there is no competition - hence prices are raised due to the fact there is no competition.

We're talking commodities here...

You need gas if you want to drive a car - you don't need paper plates if you want to eat..

There are different economic rules when it comes to "needs" or resources.

Commodities do behave differently, but are still affected by the principles of supply and demand. More demand and prices rise, surplus in supply prices fall, less demand price will fall.

Think about rice - for instance. Let's say rice is used as the key ingredient to this new wonder fuel, and demand skyrockets. You're telling me that the price is supposed to fall?

I think it's really incorrect to think that when demand rises for a product, service, or commodity that price will fall - especially when we're talking the relative short term here.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

You idiots should EXPECT the price of gas to continue to rise secularly - regardless of who is in office. Its a FINITE resource and we're using more and more of it.

 

[BlindBoo]

You might want to read what you post.

"Chu told the newspaper that he favored raising gasoline taxes gradually over 15 years to coax consumers into buying fuel-efficient cars and discouraging sprawl.

"Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Chu said in an interview with the Journal in September 2008. The quote did not appear in print until December, when the Journal ran a story after news emerged that Chu was being tapped as energy secretary."

Did you?

In an interview....before Obama was elected and at a point when Chu had no ties to Obama -- Chu told the newspaper that he favored raising gasoline taxes gradually over 15 years......

"I no longer share that view," Chu said.

"When I became secretary of Energy, I represented the U.S. government," Chu added. "Of course we don’t want the price of gasoline to go up, we want it to go down."

I see.

He's for higher gas prices.

He's hired by Obama

An article comes out with him being on record for higher gas pricess and suddenly

He "no longer shares that view"

Just like the Republicans on the Individual Mandate. We was for um before we was agin um! Imagine that. Flip-floppin.

Or it's okay for someone to change their position on a matter based on new facts.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Did you?

In an interview....before Obama was elected and at a point when Chu had no ties to Obama -- Chu told the newspaper that he favored raising gasoline taxes gradually over 15 years......

"I no longer share that view," Chu said.

"When I became secretary of Energy, I represented the U.S. government," Chu added. "Of course we don’t want the price of gasoline to go up, we want it to go down."

I see.

He's for higher gas prices.

He's hired by Obama

An article comes out with him being on record for higher gas pricess and suddenly

He "no longer shares that view"

Just like the Republicans on the Individual Mandate. We was for um before we was agin um! Imagine that. Flip-floppin.

Or it's okay for someone to change their position on a matter based on new facts.

So you're admitting that Chu said that and believed that, right?

 

[starcraftzzz]

ROTFL so according to Republicans gas prices going from $4 a gallon to 3.9 per gallon is an increase. Damn I always knew republicans were stupid but thinking 3.9>4 is beyond ridiculous

 

[starcraftzzz]

Lets list some of Obama's policies that have/will lower energy/gas costs.

^Rejected XL pipeline which would of increase gas prices in the Midwest by as much as .30$ per gallon

^Mandated that all government buildings reduce energy use by 30% by 2015

^2011 used 4 billion in energy savings to further improve energy efficiency for federal/private buildings will save 40 billion dollars yearly

^Added trucks and other transportation vehicles to be subject to MGP standards.

^Increased car and trucks fuel economy standards to 55 MPG by 2025 which will save consumers 1.7 trillion dollars.

^Obama’s energy secretary has released 30 million barrels from the strategic reserve in order to lower inflated oil prices caused by unrest in oil producing countries. Empirical evidence from the early 90’s showed that releasing 30 million barrels caused oil costs to decrease by 1/3 or by $11 per barrel. The day of announcing this plan oil prices dropped 5%.

^Increased energy research by 125% once, and 5% a year

^A 10% tax cut for homeowners whom increase the energy efficiency of their home, and deductibles for energy efficient appliances.

^Cut solar panel, fuel cell, and wind turbine taxes by 30%

^Cut geothermal, micro turbines and CHP’s taxes by 20%

^New Federal government energy efficiency such as retrofitting residential buildings and a manufacturing grant created/will create over 600,000 thousand jobs over a 2 year period.
----1) BBI (better building initiative) would/will create 115,000 jobs and save 40 billion a year
----2) The Home star (cash for claunkers) program would/will create over 160,000 jobs over a two year period and save consumers .735 billion dollars a year, sand increased GDP by 120 billion, and lowered CO2 emissions by 850,ooo tons
----3) The Building star program which offers businesses rebate for energy improvements would/will create 190,000 jobs over a two year period and save consumers lots of money.

^Obama’s DOE has mandated certain consumer items be more efficient saving the nation a net of 275 billion dollars over a period of 20 years (this will exponentially increase as time goes on).

^Obama increased the amount of energy; energy companies get from clean sources to 80% by 2035.

^Required government buildings to adopt the most energy efficient and water efficient standards. If these standards were applied to all buildings it would save the country a net of 20 billion a year.

^Stimulus grants for the DOE will create 170,000 jobs over two years by increase energy efficiency.

^Provided a 1,500 energy tax cut for goods that increase in energy efficiency,

 

[BlindBoo]

I see.

He's for higher gas prices.

He's hired by Obama

An article comes out with him being on record for higher gas pricess and suddenly

He "no longer shares that view"

Just like the Republicans on the Individual Mandate. We was for um before we was agin um! Imagine that. Flip-floppin.

Or it's okay for someone to change their position on a matter based on new facts.

So you're admitting that Chu said that and believed that, right?

Hardly have to admitt it, I never denied it. Show me where I ever denied it. Now you must admitt he has since stated that he does not hold that opinion anymore. They have not raised tax on gas and likely will not raise them during Obamas next term either.

 

[francoHFW]

Try looking at their POLICIES, not what somebody said FOUR YEARS AGO, when he was an academic talking hypothetically, and not trying to make it out as their policy, despite all evidence to the contrary. What lying a-holes and disasters Pubs are, what dumbasses their dupes.

 

[francoHFW]

So half the dupes think the Dems WANT gas prices to go up? Really pathetic...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So half the dupes think the Dems WANT gas prices to go up? Really pathetic...

"Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels of Europe," -- Obama's Energy Secretary on the record

 

[Oldstyle]

I find it amusing that you progressives choose to believe Chu's "conversion" to this new belief that we need to keep gas prices low ISN'T politically motivated. As Barry's open mike conversation last week proved...it's all about getting re-elected...whatever he has to say to GET re-elected, he's going to say. Once he IS re-elected however then he's going to be free to do whatever he wants. So he trots Chu out there to give one of the more unbelievable policy "about faces" I've ever seen and you guys all nod your heads and say...SEE, BARRY DOESN'T WANT HIGHER GAS PRICES!!!

 

[Londoner]

Which was the easy road that left us more dependant on foriegn oil than ever before. Which led to the collapse of the US Oil Patch. Thanks Ronnie.

Exactly. Carter predicted that dependence on petroleum in general, and on the middle east in particular would eventually destroy the American economy. He asked the nation to move 30% of its energy use off petroleum - this would allow the US to keep energy costs lower and protect food costs, which skyrocket when oil goes up. He called for a temporary sacrifice as we made the transition to alternatives, conservation, and enlightened energy-conscious urbanization. He knew that if we used less oil, prices would go down. [Do talk radio Republicans understand supply/demand? Conservation literally means lower oil costs]

Carter asked Reagan to price of oil to the middle east military budget so that Americans could understand the real cost of energy. He knew that if people understood the real cost of oil, there would be a greater push for alternative energy and less sprawl based living patterns. [Do Republicans understand the energy costs of sprawl, e.g., single use dwellings separated by large distances, requiring exponentially higher energy costs, not only for transportation but materials, etc]

Carter asked the country to sacrifice, like they did during WWII. Reagan - the snake - chose to give America an easy answer - zero sacrifice, no transition to alternative energy. Jump into the middle east, the water's fine! He gave us a 30 year vacation from the most pressing problem of our time. He trumpeted the Soviet Union as the real threat - and spent trillions on useless weapons like Star wars - when Carter wanted to devote the same amount to getting off petroleum. Bush 43 made a similar mistake when he ignored the real threat - the housing bubble - for a politically useful threat, terrorism.

Reagan was begged to take the energy problem seriously. BUT, his first act in the White House was to have Carter's solar panels taken down. Reagan and his big oil supporters waged a vicious information war against alternative energy, framing the Left as crazy for worrying about middle eastern oil or thinking the nation needed greater energy competition. Carter said that the USA could not afford the cost of the military extraction of oil - Carter said that we simply could not afford to stabilize Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Reagan winked, then he increased the Pentagon budget tenfold, then he hid the military cost of oil and prevented the nation from slowly moving toward a more diversified basket of energy solutions. Carter warned that the $5 dollar gallon would lower middle class consumption to the point of destroying job growth. Reagan laughed at him and took us deeper into the middle east. Had we take Carter seriously, our nation would not be in such an economic stupor. Suburban commuters cannot consume as much when they're spending so much on gas. And when people cannot consume, lay-offs follow.

American swallowed poison in 1980. People don't get. The game is over. We needed to be moving toward alternative energy and conservation for the last 30 years, instead... Reagan laid the foundation for Hummers and McMansions. He told America that it did not need to worry about using too much oil. Today, the USA uses more oil than any country by an unimaginable factor. This means that when prices go up, they hurt the U.S. the most.

Thanks Ronnie! You destroyed a great nation.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Which was the easy road that left us more dependant on foriegn oil than ever before. Which led to the collapse of the US Oil Patch. Thanks Ronnie.

Exactly. Carter predicted that dependence on petroleum in general, and on the middle east in particular would eventually destroy the American economy. He asked the nation to move 30% of its energy use off petroleum - this would allow the US to keep energy costs lower and protect the economy. He called for a temporary sacrifice as we made the transition to alternatives, conservation, and enlightened energy-conscious urbanization. He knew that we used less oil, prices would go down. [Do talk radio Republicans understand supply/demand?] Carter asked Reagan to put the middle east military budget into the price of oil so that Americans could understand the real cost of energy. Reagan chose to give America the easy answer - zero sacrifice, no transition to alternative energy. His first act in the White House was to have Carter's solar panels on the roof taken down. Reagan and his big oil supporters waged a vicious propaganda war against alternative energy, framing the Left as crazy for worrying about middle eastern oil. Carter said that the USA could not afford the cost of the military extraction of oil. Reagan hid the cost of oil and prevented the nation from slowly moving toward a more diversified basket of energy solutions. Carter warned that the $5 dollar gallon would lower middle class consumption to the point of destroying job growth. Reagan laughed at him and took us deeper into the middle east.

American swallowed poison in 1980. People don't get. The game is over. We needed to be moving toward alternative energy and conservation for the last 30 years, instead Reagan laid the foundation for Hummers and McMansions. The USA uses more oil than any country by an unimaginable factor. This means that when prices go up, they hurt the US the most.

Thanks Ronnie! You destroyed a great nation.

LOL

What happened to "Boooooosh"!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Reagan?

LOL

This is a ******* riot!!!!!!!!

Reagan???????

OMFGGGGGG!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

That damn Lincoln couldn't get us off fossil fuels