Author Topic: Obama Admn keeping Oil drilling ban ($6 a gallon gas here we come) - Told You So  (Read 57655 times)

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
No, he is greatly adding to the problem by fdoing everything possible to make the matters worse and reacihng his stated goal of "SKYROCKETING ENERGY PROCES"   

Oh please.  More of the same alarmist nonsense.  It's bullsh*t, everything you write is written with a slant and no objectivity.  It shows even greater when all you can do is find right wing articles agreeing with you. 
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Yeah - real right wing source right here.   









kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
You're such a doofus.  Obama has little influence on a free market resource that the US has hardly any of. 
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

Editorial: Don't Let Alaska Oil Pipeline Shut Down
IBD Editorials ^ | May 17, 2011 | Staff
Posted on May 17, 2011 9:45:40 PM EDT by Kaslin

Energy: Lack of oil volume due to administration bans on new Alaskan drilling may force the shutdown of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline, denying us even the tens of billions of barrels left in already developed fields.

The Trans-Alaskan pipeline is dying, another casualty of the Obama administration's war on domestic fossil fuel energy and its deliberate effort to drive up energy prices to make so-called "green" energy alternatives more attractive.

It was built to handle the oil produced on Alaska's North Slope at Prudhoe Bay and was a marvel of American engineering and exceptionalism. When oil exploration began in Prudhoe Bay, 60 miles east of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, more than three decades ago, environmentalists claimed it would yield only a "few months' supply" of oil and would wreck the ecosystem.

Prudhoe Bay turned out to be the largest oil find ever in North America. It has in fact supplied an average of 9%, and as much as 12%, of our daily consumption since its inception and is among the most environmentally sensitive oil operations in the world. Caribou frolic and play by the pipeline, and the herds have thrived.

At its peak, the pipeline carried 2 million barrels of oil a day, 3% of the world's crude, to the port of Valdez 800 miles away, taking just three days to do so.

As oilfields do over time, Prudhoe Bay's output is declining, even though there's plenty of oil left. But it soon may not be enough to keep the Alaskan pipeline open.

With the pipeline carrying just a third of its peak volume, the pressure drops, so the crude takes five times as long to make the journey and sometimes arrives at a mere 40 degrees — vs. the normal 100 degrees.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; Front Page News; US: Alaska; Click to Add Topic

Eric15210

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1207
  • poor people are crazy I'm eccentric
RIP Bob Probert

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama Can't Feel Your Pain at the Pump
Townhall.com ^ | May 20, 2011 | Bob Beauprez


________________________ ________________________ ___


The price at the pump has increased 28% in just the last four months, 116% since Barack Obama took office. 

The reaction from the White House and the Democrats? 

Punish the energy industry with $85.5 billion in new taxes – a penalty that will further discourage domestic production and sure to be passed on to consumers driving prices even higher.


The President says that oil and gas should pay their "fair share."  I did a little checking and found that the industry pays an average 41.1% of net income in taxes compared to 26.5% for all other S&P industrials.  Only the most died-in-the-wool oil and gas haters can possibly think 15% more isn't enough.

Oil and gas also ponies up billions of dollars each year in royalties, rents, and leases.  Back in 2008 when the last gas price spike occurred, the Bush Administration encouraged more domestic production by issuing new leases and permitting new wells.   

Production went up, prices at the pump fell, and those royalty revenues more than doubled from the previous several years to $23.3 billion, according to the Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR). 


But, when the Obama Administration took over, one of the first actions by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar was to cancel many of those leases.  Then after the Deep Horizon well explosion, Salazar put a moratorium in place in the gulf as well as many other restrictions and drilling bans throughout the nation and offshore.   

In 2010, royalty, rent, and lease payments declined to just $8.6 billion from oil and gas companies; a decline of $14.7 billion from 2008. 

In the gulf alone, the Administration's policies have led to a decline in production of 300,000 barrels per day, and the Energy Information Administration projects another 300,000 bpd decline this year.  That means a 35% decline in production in the region that supplies about a third of all domestic supply.  In February, 2011 of 126 drilling rigs in the Gulf of Mexico, only 25 were operating; half the total prior to Salazar's moratorium.   


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.  In March he flew to Rio de Janeiro to announce the deal, and rubbed salt in the wound of U.S. energy workers when he told the Brazilians, "When you're ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers."  That likely didn't set well with workers idled by the moratorium in the gulf.


The U.S. has also loaned $2.84 billion for upgrades to an oil refinery in Cartagena, Columbia.    Because the permitting regulations are so excessively onerous and radical environmentalists keep proposed projects tied up in litigation, there has not been a new major refinery built in the U.S. in 35 years, so increasingly we are forced to not only import crude oil, but refined gasoline, as well. 

By now, the White House must be tracking jobs "saved or created" in foreign nations, too.

The President likes to demonize the oil-and-gas industry for what he says are $4.3 billion of "tax giveaways".  He's referring to various tax credits and deductions also available to every other business in America, like Microsoft, Coca-Cola, and Ford.   

While he pours out his venom against what he calls the oil and gas companies "huge profits," he doesn't bother to point out that the energy industry's profit margin (5.7%) is nearly identical to manufacturing, aerospace and food, and only about one-third as much as the beverage industry (21.7%), pharmaceuticals (19.4%), and computers (17.3%).


For a President that seems obsessed with being "fair" his hypocrisy knows no bounds.

While Obama rails against the energy companies, he is strangely silent about companies like General Electric that reportedly paid no taxes at all in 2010; in fact GE scored a $3.2 billion tax benefit.  But, then GE plays Obama's favored "green" energy game and applies a lot of grease to the Obama campaign machine, so "subsidies" and special favors for them are just fine.

GE's complete tax avoidance is because of "fierce lobbying for tax breaks and innovative accounting that enables it to concentrate its profits offshore," according to the New York Times.  Obama even rewarded Jeff Immelt, the CEO of General Electric, by choosing him to lead his Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. 


Immelt was a curious choice for a post supposedly to address "U.S. job growth" because GE not only concentrated profits offshore, their jobs have gone there, too.  Over the last decade, GE's overseas workforce increased to 154,000 even through the recent global recession.  However, their domestic labor force declined by 16%.  So, Obama put an American jobs slasher, Immelt, in charge of job creation.  Understand?

If Obama were really concerned about addressing the price of gas, job creation, or getting our economy back on its feet, instead of attacking U.S. companies with more taxes, regulations, and his white-hot rhetoric, he'd give them some relief and breathing room.   He could really champion reducing the corporate tax rate, as he has intimated he might support. 


He could remove Lisa Jackson at the EPA who has turned a "regulatory firehose" on the energy industry and U.S. business according to the Wall Street Journal.   In just two years, Jackson has proposed or finalized 29 major regulations and 172 policy rules.  A new Secretary of Interior that would actually issue drilling permits, offer new leases, and bring an end to what Steve Forbes called the "most anti-oil and gas record in American history" would be helpful, too. 

But, Obama is more focused on campaigning for re-election than doing something really helpful for Americans struggling though the recession and the impact of his failed policies.  He has no real intention of doing something right for America; he's just looking for enough votes to keep his job.  He'll continue to employ Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" strategy creating divisions, inciting class warfare, and tearing down the great American free-market economy. 


Such is the truth of the Hope-and-Change fraud that was perpetrated on America in 2008.


tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
You know 333... I'm on board man... I don't think he wants "to destroy america" exactly... But Obama is a fucking moron... I hate to say it, but I kinda' miss Bush.

Damn it all to hell.

:(


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Despite Opec’s Viennese whirl, the dollar is what determines oil prices



Seldom has Vienna witnessed such a tense opening to a meeting of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec).
 
Despite Opec?s Viennese whirl, the dollar is what determines oil prices  By Damian Reece, Head of Business
6:21AM BST 08 Jun 2011
 


In the long history of troubled Middle Eastern politics, today's gathering of the region's most powerful countries comes at a unique time.

The session takes place as the world's most important oil-producing region is fraught with the tension caused by unprecedented popular uprisings which began in Tunisia and Egypt but which continue in bloodier and more brutal forms in Libya, Syria and Yemen.

This Opec meeting is not simply about whether to raise oil production but threatens to reveal the deep-seated political friction at play within the region.

Libya will be sending a new delegate, Omran Abukraa, who is still loyal to the Gaddafi regime following the defection of Shokri Ghanem last week.

There's no seat across the table from Abukraa for Libya's Western-backed rebels, but Qatar will be there, having helped shift oil on behalf of the rebels in recent months.

Related Articles
Will Opec raise supplies? What the oil nations and analysts say
08 Jun 2011
Which countries have the most oil?
03 Jun 2011
The oil price in 2011: in graphs
08 Jun 2011
And then there's Shi'ite Iran, holder of Opec's rotating presidency. Will it resist production changes that might help the US and the rest of the West? If so, that would mean picking a fight with the Sunni delegation from Saudi Arabia which is likely to push for production increases – the first official ones since 2007.

At a meeting notable for the number of new faces round the table, the Saudi's status of primus inter pares will be more important than ever, with an expectation that most countries will fall in behind the Saudis.

But while the political backdrop to today's event could not be worse, it's worth reflecting on just how long Opec has survived. Decades of war, conflict and antagonism in the Middle East have come and gone but Opec remains.

This reflects first and foremost the ability of large oil-producing nations to put political differences aside, just about, and do what's best for their long-term economic interests. Acting to boost supply to try to dampen oil price inflation as global economic recovery stutters into life would be sensible.

In fact, countries such as Saudi have, informally, been pumping more to try to stabilise the market for some time. The official influence of Opec can be overstated. But making higher production quotas official policy would be welcomed, not least by all those dovish economists on our own Monetary Policy Committee still praying for some kind of relief in the price of oil over the next 18 months to help deliver their long-promised fall in inflation.

But even they may be disappointed. There are plenty of factors affecting the price of oil other than Opec's production targets. Chief among them is the fate of the dollar, the currency in which oil is priced. When the dollar weakens, as is happening now thanks to concerns over the US's fiscal position, oil becomes a more attractive asset to hold for buyers in the UK or Europe, so forcing the price of oil up. This is one of the factors that's been driving oil prices higher for so long, despite the rather patchy outlook for large oil-consuming economies in the West.

So while the eyes of the world are focused on Vienna today, hoping to hear good news on oil supply from Opec countries, it is worth bearing in mind that over the next six months the dollar is more likely to have a greater impact on the oil price than anything the Saudis, Iranians, Qataris or Libyans are able to agree this week – however encouraging such a show unity might at first appear.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/damianreece/8562514/Despite-Opecs-Viennese-whirl-the-dollar-is-what-determines-oil-prices.html


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Exxon, U.S. Government Duel Over Huge Oil Find
By RUSSELL GOLD


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903596904576514762275032794.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection



Exxon Mobil Corp. is fighting with the U.S. government to keep control of one of its biggest oil discoveries ever, in a showdown where billions of dollars hang in the balance for both sides.

View Full Image

.The massive Gulf of Mexico discovery contains an estimated one billion barrels of recoverable oil, the company says. The Interior Department, which regulates offshore drilling, says Exxon's leases have expired and the company hasn't met the requirements for an extension. Exxon has sued to retain the leases.

The court battle is playing out at a time in which the Obama administration has made an issue of unused leases, which deprive the Treasury of valuable taxes. It also comes as regulators are being careful not to be seen as lax in their dealings with large energy companies in the wake of last year's BP PLC spill.

The stakes are high: Under federal law, the leases—and all the oil underneath—could revert to the government if Exxon doesn't win in court.

The loss of the leases would be an enormous black eye for Exxon. The company hadn't previously disclosed the size of the discovery in what is called the Julia field until it was mentioned in the suit Exxon filed against the Interior Department last week in federal court in Lake Charles, La.

The Texas behemoth faces the sobering prospect that it may have made the largest discovery ever in the Gulf of Mexico only to lose it. Tens of billions of dollars of oil could slip through its hands because it failed to follow federal rules for getting a lease extension while it moved forward with plans to get the oil out of the ground.

Exxon spokesman Patrick McGinn said the company expected to get the extension, which he said was traditionally granted as a matter of course. "You state your case and you got it. [This] was unexpected."

This high-stakes standoff is likely to spark a political, as well as legal, showdown between the federal government and the nation's largest oil company. It has also roped in Norway's Statoil ASA, which owns 50% of the Julia find. Statoil said it filed its own suit Monday in the same Louisiana federal court against the Interior Department to preserve the leases. Exxon is the field's operator and lease holder.

A spokeswoman for the Interior Department said, "Our priority remains the safe development of the nation's offshore energy resources, which is why we continue to approve extensions that meet regulatory standards."

The Interior Department, which oversees offshore oil development and collects royalties, has been trying to show that it has become a tougher, but still fair, regulator of the Gulf of Mexico's oil riches. Its reputation was battered during the massive Deepwater Horizon well blowout and oil spill last year, when BP sought—and the government approved—last-minute changes to the well design, which some investigators say contributed to a chaotic environment aboard the drilling rig. The government was roundly criticized for weak oversight of safety rules.

Now the department must decide whether to fight Exxon in court or settle and allow it to develop the oil. Turning the leases over to another company would mean further delays to the tax royalties that would go to government coffers. At current prices, potential royalties paid to the government over the lifetime of a one billion-barrel field would be about $10.95 billion.

The oil industry, led vocally by Exxon, has said that developing oil fields in the deepest reaches of the Gulf takes time to do safely. And by threatening to take away a massive discovery, the industry says that the government is sending the message that oil companies need to be in a rush to produce.

The possibility that Exxon could lose this oil will likely send shock waves through the industry. "This is unprecedented," said Amy Myers Jaffe, associate director of the Energy Program at Rice University in Houston. "The question is: Do our offshore rules allow for flexibility? You don't want to let companies sit on a discovery…We definitely don't want to send the industry a message that you need to be in a rush or we'll take the oil away from you."

Exxon's lawsuit said the government has granted "thousands" of extensions over time. It said the government's denial of its extension relied on legal interpretations that it "had never before applied and had never before articulated." Statoil asserted in its lawsuit that no request for an extension for a deep-water development "had ever previously been denied." The Interior Department couldn't comment on this.

The Exxon discovery is believed to be the largest in the Gulf of Mexico since BP found the Thunder Horse Field in 1999, and it could be larger. The find also cements the Gulf of Mexico as a rich exploration area with large amounts of undiscovered oil that may keep oil companies active for years to come.

"This is very deep water, very complex structures and difficult-to-produce oil," said Exxon's Mr. McGinn.

The dispute over Exxon's plans for the Julia field began in October 2008—about a month before its 10-year leases expired—when it applied for a five-year "suspension of production."

Such extensions are "fairly common," said Elmer P. Danenberger III, a former federal official who oversaw U.S. offshore-drilling rules until he retired in 2009.

"I can honestly say that people who manage that program are really strict, which they need to be or it will be abused. If you don't have a commercial discovery and a plan for moving ahead at the end of the lease term…that's it."

In February 2009, the government denied Exxon's request for an extension and after a brief appeal denied it again that April. Exxon said in a letter at the time that it was "committed" to producing the oil, but the government said it didn't present a specific plan. The government contended this didn't meet legal requirements and denied the application.

More appeals followed, but Exxon lost its final appeal in May. The final decision hinged on whether Exxon had a concrete "commitment" to produce the oil in December 2008, when its lease expired. The director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals at the Interior Department ruled that it didn't.

Exxon is known in the industry for moving slowly and studying all options exhaustively before committing billions of dollars. But even if it loses this court case, all might not be lost. The Julia field consists of five leases—or square blocks in the Gulf of Mexico—and only three are being disputed. The other two aren't set to expire until 2013.

—Deborah Solomon

and Angel Gonzalez contributed to this article.
Write to Russell Gold at russell.gold@wsj.com


________________________ _______________________




BUMP 


kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
It's great for the people of America if this is found in favor of the US government. 

Oil is such an important resource, for now, the logical step is to gather as much as possible under government control.  At least then we have some stability regarding supply.
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
It's great for the people of America if this is found in favor of the US government. 

Oil is such an important resource, for now, the logical step is to gather as much as possible under government control.  At least then we have some stability regarding supply.

Thank you Comrad Lenin. 

WTF is wrong with you?   

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
In their June report, the IEA warned that unless OPEC could increase production by at least 1.5 million barrels a day, world oil demand is going to surpass available supply during the second half of the year.

What happens when demand exceeds supply?  Do prices go up or down?  

Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
In their June report, the IEA warned that unless OPEC could increase production by at least 1.5 million barrels a day, world oil demand is going to surpass available supply during the second half of the year.

What happens when demand exceeds supply?  Do prices go up or down?  



You go find more supply we know exists but are trapped by the disgusting govt we have. 

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Thank you Comrad Lenin. 

WTF is wrong with you?   

There is nothing wrong with protecting American interests.  If the lease expired it belongs to the US government and i for one like that.  Having the ability to either sell it to the highest bidder, or as a strategic reserve is a great plan.  The fact we don't have a lot of government controlled oil fields is as dumb a move as possible.  Right now the government has little to no control over supply and market prices.  Gain some ownership and perhaps next time gas rises, we can pump a little more from our OWN reserves to drop local prices, or sell it off and pay off the deficit.

Abandon every hope...

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
You go find more supply we know exists but are trapped by the disgusting govt we have. 

Oh you mean the supply that is only affordable with high prices like shale?  Or has a huge environment cost and leads to little long term price benefit like ANWAR? 

Or are you implying that the US is apart of OPEC now?
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
There is nothing wrong with protecting American interests.  If the lease expired it belongs to the US government and i for one like that.  Having the ability to either sell it to the highest bidder, or as a strategic reserve is a great plan.  The fact we don't have a lot of government controlled oil fields is as dumb a move as possible.  Right now the government has little to no control over supply and market prices.  Gain some ownership and perhaps next time gas rises, we can pump a little more from our OWN reserves to drop local prices, or sell it off and pay off the deficit.



Are still so freaking oblivious to the damage $4 a gallon is doing to this nation?  

Well, maybe not - since you delusional communists are never concerned with the destructive impact of your ideas.  

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Are still so freaking oblivious to the damage $4 a gallon is doing to this nation?  

Well, maybe not - since you delusional communists are never concerned with the destructive impact of your ideas.  

You idiot centralized control over some oil can lower the cost for all americans.  It's then no subject to market prices but to the price of extraction and refining only. 
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Just paid $4 in NY.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Easy prediction here: oil companies about to be accused of gouging

February 17th, 2012, 12:42 pm · · posted by Mark Landsbaum


http://orangepunch.ocregister.com/2012/02/17/easy-prediction-here-oil-companies-about-to-be-accused-of-gouging/67603



Gasoline prices are on their way up again.

So too is the ire of gasoline purchasers who skipped Econ 101 in school.
Retail gasoline prices rose in California and most of the nation during the last week, according to the Energy Department. Average prices for California and the U.S. are well above records for January set last year.

Can you hear it now? Can you already envision the investigations launched by politicians in this election year?

Sure to aggravate the aggravated even more is the fact that the price spike is happening even weeks before refineries shut down for routine maintenance, including switching over to more expensive fuel blends for the summer when demand peaks.

“This definitely sets the stage, potentially, for much higher prices later this year,” said Brian Milne, refined fuels editor for Telvent DTN, a commodity information services firm. “There’s a chance that the U.S. average tops $4 a gallon by June, with some parts of the country approaching $5 a gallon.”

What dour-faced analysts predicted months ago might reach $4.00 a gallon nationally, may now go as high as $5.00 a gallon.

It’s noteworthy, perhaps, that when Barack Obama took office a gallon of gas cost $1.89. It’s about doubled and going up. Remember when he took office he canceled many drilling leases? What happens to prices when you reduce supply?

Republicans, who apparently know that answer, passed a bill this week to expand offshore drilling, allow more exploration in Alaska and authorize construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. A no-brainer, no? House Republicans supported it with 89 percent in favor. House Democrats opposed it with 86 percent opposed.

Which ones do you expect to clamor for price gouging investiations?

Another Republican, Newt Gingrich, reminds everyone that “the United States is sitting on enough technically recoverable oil to power us at current rates of consumption for over 250 years. We are estimated to have 1.4 trillion barrels of oil—or 1.7 trillion, adding in the resources of Canada and Mexico.”

That is more than the world has used since the first oil well was drilled over 150 years ago and 6 ½ times the proved oil reserves of Saudi Arabia.

But heck, it’s an election year. Let’s find out who is gouging. How have past investigations on gouging gone, by the way?

Energy Forum Director Amy Myers Jaffe of the Baker Institute for Public Policy at Rice University says so-called price-gouging investigations are a political shell game: “That’s just camouflage. That’s just ‘I want to pretend I’m doing something even, though I’m doing nothing.’”


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Ridiculously High Gas Prices Expected To Hit Major US Cities By Memorial Day (OBAMA'S FAULT!)
business Insider ^ | 2/19/2012 | staff
Posted on February 19, 2012 11:35:27 AM EST by tobyhill

From the Mercury News: Gas prices surging beyond $4 a gallon -- and they will go higher

Gasoline prices are rising at an almost unheard-of pace, and painfully so in California, where the cost for a fill-up now exceeds $4 a gallon in five cities and is approaching that dreaded mark in numerous others, including San Jose and Oakland.

The statewide average of $3.96 on Friday is 25 cents higher than just a month ago and 46 cents more than this time last year. ... Some oil analysts predict $4.50 a gallon or more by Memorial Day on the West Coast and major cities across the United States such as Chicago, New York and Atlanta.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Ridiculously High Gas Prices Expected To Hit Major US Cities By Memorial Day (OBAMA'S FAULT!)
business Insider ^ | 2/19/2012 | staff
Posted on February 19, 2012 11:35:27 AM EST by tobyhill

From the Mercury News: Gas prices surging beyond $4 a gallon -- and they will go higher

Gasoline prices are rising at an almost unheard-of pace, and painfully so in California, where the cost for a fill-up now exceeds $4 a gallon in five cities and is approaching that dreaded mark in numerous others, including San Jose and Oakland.

The statewide average of $3.96 on Friday is 25 cents higher than just a month ago and 46 cents more than this time last year. ... Some oil analysts predict $4.50 a gallon or more by Memorial Day on the West Coast and major cities across the United States such as Chicago, New York and Atlanta.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


You do realize that the (Obama's Fault!) doesn't show up in the article at all right?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
You do realize that the (Obama's Fault!) doesn't show up in the article at all right?

that was addded by the poster by FR.    However, Obama is greatly at fault for high prices.   he single handily is mostly responsible for this.   

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
that was addded by the poster by FR.    However, Obama is greatly at fault for high prices.   he single handily is mostly responsible for this.   

I'm not saying he is not... However... Let's say he is.

What did Obama do to cause this? You believe that because he is not willing to drill for more oil that he is responsible for this high cost?

If so, then how can that be when the Drilling wouldn't take place for another 5 years at the earliest... That certainly wouldn't help the pump this year or for the 4 upcoming next.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
I'm not saying he is not... However... Let's say he is.

What did Obama do to cause this? You believe that because he is not willing to drill for more oil that he is responsible for this high cost?

If so, then how can that be when the Drilling wouldn't take place for another 5 years at the earliest... That certainly wouldn't help the pump this year or for the 4 upcoming next.

reappointed bernake, banned drilling in the gulf, violated the F'ed judge orders to approve drilling leases, cut off supply in many areas in the nation, vetoed keystone, banned drilling off shore, has EPA mandates on fuel blends spkining costs, refineries shutting down due to EPA regs, devaluation of the dollar, etc etc etc.   


Obama is the mullahs best friends ever.