Throwing Gasoline on the Fire

Gasoline has jumped to an all-time high in the U.S. for this time of year and on track to hit an all-time record later this spring of $4.25/gallon. That begs the question, will the people who are still employed and spending most, if not all of their payroll tax cut on gas vote to reward Obama with 4 more years?  Will the 14 million unemployed who can’t afford to drive much of anywhere, regardless of the price of gas, vote to give the guy another shot?  How about senior citizens who see the $150 million raid on the social security trust fund and a half trillion dollar cut in Medicare as hastening the day when their benefits will be cut?  Will they take a chance that things will improve during a second Obama term?

There are a lot of interesting dynamics at work right now.  How they play out will likely determine the outcome of November’s election, not just for President, but for House and Senate races as well.  If you’ve made up your mind to vote for Obama, what, if anything, could happen between now and November to make you change your mind?  If you’re undecided, what factors will weigh on your final decision?

About these ads

39 thoughts on “Throwing Gasoline on the Fire

  1. tiredoflibbs

    Who are the Democrats going to blame now?

    Before they blamed the “two oil men in the White House”. . and “their “protectors” in the Senate” after the Democrats supposedly passed initiatives to lower high energy costs – according to the hag from Haight Ashbury, Nancy Pelosi.

    They had no problem blaming the then REPUBLICAN President for gasoline that peaked at one time close to $4.00/gal during the summer of 2008. At the end of 2008 after Bush lifted the moratorium on new drilling in the Gulf, the price dropped to about $1.60 – right about the time a wave of idiot voters elected Barack Obama — and have been increasing ever since. In fact under the obAMATEUR January gas prices set a new record last month — the most expensive January ever at U.S. gasoline pumps. Your pas at the pump averaged $3.37 in January. In 2010, January gasoline prices averaged just $2.71 a gallon. And experts predict that gas will be around $4 by this summer.

    Remember – oil production on federally owned lands in the US is down … that’s DOWN … by 40%. Deep water drilling rigs that used to work in the Gulf of Mexico now work off the coast of Africa and Brazil. And some Obama sycophant was telling us in the last election that Americans really needed to be paying the same for gas that they’re paying in Europe.

    None of obAMATEUR’s past statements or actions to reduce oil production matter now. As gas prices go up they’ll find a way to blame Bush or Wall Street. Ditzy Debbie will be the first out of the chute followed by the chief dogwasher Jay Carney and the leftist drones will mindlessly follow after that.

    1. watsonredux

      tired said, “Remember – oil production on federally owned lands in the US is down … that’s DOWN … by 40%.”

      Is that really true? Even if it is, everything I read indicates that oil production in the U.S. is on a major upswing. An Oct. 29, 2011 article in the Los Angeles Times states that “The number of oil rigs in production in the U.S. has reached a 24-year high, according to oil field services company Baker Hughes. In 2005, domestic production was 1.89 billion barrels. This year, experts say, production is expected to surpass 2 billion barrels.”

      A Sept. 28, 2011 Houston Chronicle article says, “Combined, the U.S. and Canadian oil output will top 11.5 million barrels per day, which is even more than their combined peak in 1972. Goldman Sachs has estimated the U.S. could move from being the No. 3 oil producer behind Saudi Arabia and Russia to the No. 1 spot by 2017.”

      This chart shows that U.S. field production of crude oil is higher now than at any time since 2002:

      http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS2&f=M

      1. tiredoflibbs

        watty: “Is that really true? Even if it is, everything I read indicates that oil production in the U.S. is on a major upswing.”

        Watty I posted thisfact last month, but here is the reference since you cannot do the necessary research for yourself.

        http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2012/01/24/president-obamas-record-on-oil-and-gas-production/

        Second, read my statement again. I said that oil production ON FEDERAL LANDS is down by 40%. The increase you are reading about is production from PRIVATE land. The GOM leases are controlled by the federal government as well and we know those are down too.

        This means that obAMATEUR is not doing anything to bring the price of oil down, much less gasoline, and his claim that he is responsible for the increases in production is a lie, which is very typical for this administration. But we would not expect you to question the obAMATEUR. You just trust what he says, no questions asked. You lack of willingness to perform a simple search the statement “oil production on federal lands is down by 40%” is proof of that.

        Again, who are the Democrats going to blame now? Of course, they will blame the “greedy” oil companies. When instead they should be looking in the mirror.

  2. J. R. Babcock

    The Obama administration’s weak dollar policy, exacerbated by the Fed’s zero interest rate policy have been the primary drivers of higher oil prices. If gas does hit $4.25, 4.50 or even $5 by summer as many are predicting, there’s no way Zero gets re-elected. He’ll be in a lose/lose situation. If he does nothing to reverse it, he loses the working class vote, and if he acts as Bush did in the summer of 2008, he loses his liberal/environmental whacko base. God I love it when a Donkrat gets put in that position.

  3. RetiredSpook Post author

    Despite Jay Carney’s attempts to portray a positive picture, the Obama administration’s energy record has been pretty dismal.

    Oil and natural gas production on federal lands is down by over 40% compared to ten years ago. Carney does not explain that the vast majority of increased production is occurring on private lands in states such as North Dakota, not on federal lands.

    Under the Obama Administration, 2010 had the LOWEST number of onshore leases issued since 1984.

    The Administration held only one offshore lease sale in 2011. Conducted on December 14th, the Administration narrowly avoided making 2011 the first year since 1953 without an offshore lease sale.

    1. watsonredux

      Spook, when I read the article you cited, and go to the link that claims that “Oil and natural gas production on federal lands is down by over 40% compared to ten years ago”, I get this:

      THE DATA USED IN THE GRAPHS IN THIS FIGURE, AS PUBLISHED
      IN OCTOBER 2011, WERE INCORRECTLY EXTRACTED FROM ANOTHER AGENCY’S DATA. EIA IS WORKING TO CORRECT THE DATA SERIES.

      Not very persuasive. Sorry. It seems that both you and tired are citing the same flawed data. The fact is, U.S. oil production _is_ higher than it was in 2003, just as Jay Carney said.

      1. RetiredSpook Post author

        I don’t usually miss stuff like that. Glad I can count on you to fact check. There’s probably nothing Obama can do to bring the price at the pump down. Guess he’ll just have to suffer the consequences at the polls next November.

      2. watsonredux

        Well, at least we’re on speaking terms again, spook. :-)

        I certainly agree that high gas prices cannot help Obama’s election chances. Only time will tell what prices are in November, and how much the electorate punishes him for it.

  4. bardolf

    I still don’t understand this “Oil and natural gas production on federal lands is down by over 40% compared to ten years ago.” meme. If the federal government decides that there is an adequate supply of oil on the world market isn’t it better if the oil on federal lands is preserved for times of scarcity?

    1. tiredoflibbs

      Balddoof, obviously there are those who purchase oil and they don’t have the confidence in the “adequate” oil supply as those in the federal government. Remember, those in the federal government have a different agenda to reduce hydrocarbon use through lower supply and higher prices.

      1. bardolf

        Tired

        So if speculators bid up the price of oil the government should deplete a limited resource in response. I prefer my elected officials not be so easily pushed around by Wall Street.

  5. watsonredux

    turdy said, “Second, read my statement again. I said that oil production ON FEDERAL LANDS is down by 40%. The increase you are reading about is production from PRIVATE land.”

    I read it the first time, tired. I didn’t say it wasn’t true. I merely asked if it was. Thank you for the link. I really tried hard not to show any hostility towards you or spook because I realize how sensitive you are. So lighten up, and maybe we can have a conversation.

    I have to ask essentially the same question as Bardolf: Why is this a bad thing when U.S. oil production is clearly at a high point and on a trajectory to becoming the world’s No. 1 oil producer?

    Whether or not President Obama has had anything to do with it, you simply cannot claim that U.S. oil production is down since he took office, unless you want to lie.

    Plus, I tried to follow the link in your article, that was footnoted as the basis for the claim that “Oil and natural gas production on federal lands has fallen by over 40 percent since 2000.” When you following the link, you get this: “THE DATA IN THIS TABLE, AS PUBLISHED IN OCTOBER 2011, WERE INCORRECTLY EXTRACTED FROM ANOTHER AGENCY’S DATA. EIA IS WORKING TO CORRECT THE DATA SERIES.”

    My apologies, but I don’t find that very persuasive.

    1. tiredoflibbs

      Watty, that small questionalble piece of data does not invalidate the obAMATEUR’s lie, that he is responsible for the increased production (an excuse he uses to kill the pipeline). Oil production leases are way down under this administration – FACT.

      Plus, I should not have to spell it out for you but, supply and demand for oil and gasoline determines price. Both attempts to increase the supply of oil and increased production of gasoline by increasing our refining/delivery infrastructure have been crushed by DEMOCRATS, their special interest environmentalists and their failed policies of “renewable” energy.

      I ask again, with their efforts to reduce hydrocarbons as a source of energy for thei pie in the sky schemes, who are they going to blame? Bush and Cheney aren’t their whipping boys anymore?

      1. watsonredux

        The small questionable piece of data? It is the entire basis of your claim that “oil production ON FEDERAL LANDS is down by 40%.” You haven’t offered any data to back that up, so it’s more likely to be a politically motivated fabrication. Try again.

      2. tiredoflibbs

        Again with the wattling, Watty?

        My whole point, the BIG PICTURE, is that obAMATEUR LIES when he takes credit for increased oil and gas production, which primarily is due to the production on PRIVATE lands.

        If you take all the public land leases out of the equation, offshore leases are still way down from Bush.

        Apparently, you still have a problem with reading comprehension. You haven’t proven what data is incorrect, will the results be less than 40%, but still a decline. But, the Dept. of Interior (an obAMATEUR CONTROLLED ENTITY) saying the data provided was incorrect and will provide corrected data is extremely dubious, like the unemployment data.

        An assertion that is not in question: The government leases less than 2.2 percent of federal offshore areas[i] and less than 6 percent of federal onshore lands for oil and natural gas production.[ii]

        And, Under the Obama administration, 2010 had the lowest number of onshore leases issued since 1984.

        Also from my source, “President Obama cannot honestly claim credit for the increase in oil and natural gas production over the past few years. This misconstrues the facts and it is an inaccurate portrayal of his administration’s record on energy issues. ”

        This was my whole point. ObAMATEUR has fought against improving our oil and natural gas sources. His lies for taking credit is just more fodder for the ignorant voter, which apparently you are a member.

      3. watsonredux

        turdoflibs, you just throw these “statistics” out there that cannot be verified. Why should I trust any of your other stats when the very first one leads me to a disclaimer that the data was “incorrectly extracted”? You may call what I do wattling, but what you do is drop turds of unsubstantiated data all across the B4V landscape.

      4. tiredoflibbs

        Again Watty that one piece does not invalidate my whole point. Other data shows that leases approved under Obama are down, but you want to desperately stick to something that will make you feel good go right ahead.

        Your response again shows that you do not look at the big picture just a brief little snapshot.

      5. tiredoflibbs

        Watty, here is more information to show that oil proction leases are way down. ObAMATEUR made the claim that lease revenue was up in 2011. Sadly for him, and you is another bold faced lie.

        Revenue for 2011 was at $36 million, while 2010 was over $979 million and when he first took office it was a whopping $9.4 BILIION.

        http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2012/01/10/interior-department-energy-propaganda-misleading-disingenuous/

        Which again proves my point obAMATEUR LIED WHEN HE took credit for oil production increases and he has hurt oil production in this country with his pathetic energy policies.

        Don’t you hate being bitch-slapped like that. Please read. Ore carefully so I won’t have to do it again.

      6. tiredoflibbs

        More wattling there watty.

        Again, I see reading comprehension is not your strong suit. There is no chance to have a dialog with someone who can’t understand the written word.

        The questionable data was not the only source for my point. I have explained it three times already. You just regurgitating the same crap. I provided other data and sources (ones that are not questionable mind you) to back up my point and like the typical drone you ignore it.

        Refute my point, refute the other sources I provided or just STFU. You too have a problem with rectal-cranial inversion.

  6. greg-o

    watsonredux,

    The link you’re referencing is http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/pdf/sec1_30.pdf

    Ironically, it’s the same source you used earlier to state “that U.S. field production of crude oil is higher now than at any time since 2002″

    So I am curious as to the reliability http://www.eia.gov now.

    I do know that it takes time to develop oil production. Even the leftists accurately point out that it would take several years to develop ANWR, but use this as an excuse to not develop it since it wouldn’t “help right now.” But if we had gone ahead with developing ANWR, it would have been producing oil “right now” when we need it to help with rising fuel costs. So much for foresight among the leftists.

    Back to the taking time to develop point, as it does have bearing on whether or not we should credit Øbama for any of this production. Even if he were to have granted oil leases from January 20, 2009, even the leftists know that there hasn’t been enough time elapsed since then to account for any increase in oil production “right now” so it must be due to leases granted prior to then.

    Gasoline prices are predicted by oil analysts to reach $4.50 per gallon by Memorial Day along the West Coast, just in time for summer vacations. I am curious, though, to see how the Kneepad Media will protect Øbama from this bit of bad news.

  7. Cluster

    If the federal government decides that there is an adequate supply of oil on the world market isn’t it better if the oil on federal lands is preserved for times of scarcity? – barstool

    I thought this was an interesting comment considering that liberals favorite line is to claim that any reserves currently in the ground will not have any impact on current markets for at least ten years. So liberals want the oil in the ground preserved for harder times, but then scream and yell that it wont do any good when it comes time to extract it. Annoying as hell isn’t it.

    The FACT of the matter is that gas IS at an all time high despite Carney’s and watson’s insistence that all is well. (interesting to note that watson is not a liberal, but he agrees with every liberal position). And much of the reason for that high price is the weak dollar, as JR said up thread, and our weak foreign policy that has speculators worried that we wont do anything to assure the free flow of ME production. So this turns around to bite us in the ass again for failing to take the necessary steps to assure energy independence in the years past – and here we are again today with barstool saying we should leave the reserves in the ground and watson and Carney telling us that everything is ok – has everyone had enough of liberal brain damage yet?

    1. watsonredux

      Do you ever read, cluster? I didn’t say all is well. I gave you data that shows that U.S. oil field production is higher than at any point since 2002. That is fact. I’m sure you looked it over. Funny how it is higher during the Obama administration than it was for all but the early years of the Bush administration. Go google “U.S. oil production” and see what you find, cluster.

      Did you guys all get the same talking points memo from the Republican party yesterday?

      1. Cluster

        watson, again your talking about a topic and not the issue, field production is really not even relevant. If you would even look at the chart, field production in 2008 was one of the lowest years of production on record, yet prices were lower at the pump, and the variance for any given year over the last ten years is insignificant as well. Yet that doesn’t stop Carney and yourself from trying to deflect from the actual issue – which is high prices as a result of no coherent domestic policy and weak foreign policy

  8. Cluster

    This article is from May 2011, but pretty much hits the nail on the head:

    The oil and gas industry pumps $85 million into the U.S. Treasury every day in taxes and production fees. They also employee over 9 million people and invest about $300 billion each year in capital projects that benefit local communities and our struggling national economy.

    Instead of limiting regulations and punishing taxes, the Administration should encourage and unleash the industry, just as Bush did. Instead of declining revenue to the U.S. Treasury, there would be more, and we might get a little relief at the pump, too.

    Ronald Reagan reminded us that you get more of what gets incentivized, and less of what is penalized, and his economic policies proved it. So did the Kennedy and Bush tax cuts. But, Obama and the Democrats seem obsessed with defying history, as well as common-sense, by pillorying oil and gas with more taxes, regulations, and punishing rhetoric.

    Capital is fungible- that is, it can move from one place to another quickly- and energy production is the prototypical global industry. Plenty of nations around the world are providing a far more welcoming business environment for energy production than the U.S. where the corporate tax rate is the highest in the world and more than 81,000 pages of federal regulations control every move.

    While Obama’s policies were busy choking off domestic production and driving up prices at the pump, his administration agreed to underwrite a $2 billion off-shore project in Brazil.

    http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/bobbeauprez/2011/05/20/obama_cant_feel_your_pain_at_the_pump/page/full/

  9. RetiredSpook Post author

    Obama has not only told the thousands of unemployed oil industry workers in the Gulf region to pound sand, he’s thrown white, middle class workers in general under the bus “in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment — professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists — and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic.”

    Probably won’t hurt Obama at the polls, though. I mean, who else are they going to vote for?

    1. neocon1

      Ubamba has set out to destroy Americas coal business, our nuclear business and our oil business.
      He has lost the entire middle east on his watch, there are more conflicts, wars and mayhem in the world than ever before, and what does this marcist POS do?
      Stops the F22 program, scraps the missile defense program, GUTS our nuclear force,GUTS our military, encourages violent mobs of anarchists to rampage in our streets, and gas is now at $4 + a gallon?

      Joe and Mao are dancing in hell, one man (anti christ) has succeeded in what their armys never could.
      We have our Trojan horse within the gates and 48% just love it.

  10. doug

    It’s an election year, that guarantees one thing: Gas prices won’t even sniff $4 by the time October rolls around. Look to be in the $2.80 range come election time.

      1. bardolf

        Go back to econ101 and learn about comparative advantage. No need to deplete US resources when the Canadians are willing to sell their supply.

  11. hesindnile

    “If you’ve made up your mind to vote for Obama, what, if anything, could happen between now and November to make you change your mind?”

    Nothing – the potential candidates for the GOP suck. Instead of focusing on the economy, jobs, education and things that are really important to the majority of American families, the GOP has gone off on cultural issues. Gay marriage, contraception, abortion. Add to that the blood baths against each other during this primary campaign. The Super Packs that are trying to destroy the candidates have done more harm to the GOP brand than the Democratic Party could ever do. Romney has no personality and changes his mind to fit the latest conservative idea; Gingrich is a serial adulterer and his plastic wife is a huge turn off for most women; Santorum’s view about women’s rights is frightening. He is so behind the times and if he could I believe he would revoke a woman’s right to vote. The GOP has done sever damage with its war on contraceptives – millions of women will be afraid to vote for a far right conservative. You can try to frame it as a 1st Amendment argument for freedom of religion but not many woman are buying that argument. You have no one – Obama is a much better risk.

    1. tiredoflibbs

      Come on velma. You can’t honestly say that the Democrats do not participate in such politics.

      The last Democrat pResidential race gave us the question of whether or not obAMATEUR was Muslim, whether or not he was a citizen, whether or not Hillary was under fire in Bosnia, Edwards unfaithfullness, etc. etc.

      The cultural issues were influenced by the libs and their sychophants in the media – primarily, the contraceptive issue.

      Can’t you post anything of thought rather the tired old crap you continue to post. Remember, changing your name will work for a little while, but eventually your pathetic ideology and poor writing style shines on your true identity.

      Nice try velma/sunny, but you have been outed.

      1. hesindnile

        tired, continue to go down the same old road you have been traveling and we will see the outcome next November. If things continue to go they way they have for the past few months the GOP will loose not only the presidency, but quite possible the House. Women do not appreciate a bunch of old men thinking they have the right to tell them what they can do with their bodies. Continue down this road at your own risk.

        The only ones raising questions about President Obama during the presidential race were conservatives who were trying to create as much doubt about him as possible. Didn’t work, did it? At least Democrats do not eat their own like Republicans. Most of the smack talk came from the right – not the left. The Republicans have the problem of “anyone but Romney” and yet Santorum scares the heck out of most conservatives.

        You post the same old crap everyday. Maybe you could take your own advise. You are just so scary with the picture of aiming a gun as “who”?

        And Red Neck Rick – I believe it. You sound like the typical red neck. Stupid and under educated. I would guess local authorities already have an eye on you – this talk of a revolution. Really – get a life little boy.

      2. Cluster

        hesindnile,

        You certainly have mastered identity politics, which is very important if you’re to be a good foot soldier. Congrats.

      3. tiredoflibbs

        “tired, continue to go down the same old road you have been traveling and we will see the outcome next November.”

        We have to go through this again. The race going on now is among Republicans only. What would you expect? As I said, the same thing happened during the Democrat primaries. Democrats DID EAT THEIR OWN and I gave examples. How do you think obAMATEUR got where he is today. He “ate” away at his competition and managed to get them tossed from the ballots through legal maneuvering and he was able to win unopposed.

        The Republican candidates are speaking of the economy.

        “Women do not appreciate a bunch of old men thinking they have the right to tell them what they can do with their bodies. Continue down this road at your own risk.”

        Wow, if anyone is traveling down the same old road its you and the Democrats. We have seen the same things, “the Republicans want back ally abortions”, “the Republicans want dirty air and dirty water”, etc. etc. The same old crap.

        We have also seen the same old crap for “solutions” to the economy. Tested and true methods are ignored and the same old “democrat” crap continues to be the “solution”. ObAMATEUR’s own committees gave him recommendations on debt reduction and economic recovery. They were ignored after much fanfare about their formation and praise for the pResident by media and mindless drones such as yourself.

        Keep it up velma. You can change your name but your stupid ideology outs you every time. You’re a hack and can’t rise above that.

        Pathetic

      4. tiredoflibbs

        Velma: “You post the same old crap everyday. Maybe you could take your own advise. You are just so scary with the picture of aiming a gun as “who”? ”

        Wow, projecting again! If anyone posts the same old crap it’s you! You’re a hack! You post the same dumbed down talking points – Republicans all bad – Democrats all good….two wars not paid for… telling women what to do with their bodies…Republicans won’t let the President succeed…inherited economy…yada yada yada.

        take my own “advise”? “…aiming the gun “as” who?

        Feeling intimidated? Trying to be a victim again?

        Typical liberal drone playbook – going down the same old road.

Comments are closed.