Anti-Bush People and Oil Prices.

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BerettaNut92

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2002
Messages
9,723
I'm confused.

Bush is bad because he isn't doing anything about gas prices rising.

Bush is bad because we invaded Iraq for cheap gas.

Someone please educate me.
 
Simple and quick education.....Liberals are hypocrites.

Bush is bad we didn't do anything to stop 9/11

Bush is bad we invaded Iraq when they weren't an imminent threat.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
Most people who criticize Bush are doing it just for the sake of doing it, it doesn't make any sense.:uhoh:

Gas prices are kicking me in the @$$. $2.20 for regular!
 
Doesn't go over $2.00 often here.

But then, I only leave the house once or twice a week...

I remember when it was $.87
 
Someone please educate me.
Click to expand...
1) Anything bad that happens, is Bush's and the republican's fault.
2) Anything good that happens, is because of Kerry and the Democrats.
3) If the Democrats do anything to make something bad happen, see rule 1.
 
3) If the Democrats do anything to make something bad happen, see rule 1.
Click to expand...

Case in point: a few days ago, I posted abnout either DU or Kerry's forum. The AWB was Bush's fault, because he is in office right now, according to one all-knowing liberal.

I hear the best people to confuse are the ones with 'Free Tibet' on one side of their car, and 'No War' on the other :D
 
Wars for natural resources have little to do with making said resources inexpensive for the common consumer. They are about securing the profits from said resources for one elite group or another.

If Powerful Nation-State conquers tiny Backwards State for its vast oil resources, why shouldn’t Big Oil Company charge $2.50 for a gallon of gasoline, if that’s what the consumers in Powerful Nation-State are willing to pay?

You can’t beat the market.

~G. Fink
 
you really must be an old fart, SW...

the lowest I remember is 14.9, during one incredible gas war in Willmar, MN, about 1955, I think....

But, like you say, that was pumped by the help, and the windshield washed, oil checked.
 
I would like to hear some wise, logical, and reasonably doeable answer as to how to get the $50 oil prices down to some reasonable level.

Don't waste time saying to nuke 'em, but who has a good solution that can be done in the near time frame?

It appears that OPEC holds most of the cards. However, the Arabs have nothing except oil. If we refused to sell them goods, then they would be hurting. I don't know to what extent that can happen.

I wonder if there will come a time when we say to either drop the price or we will fight.

Jerry
 
I saw 69 cent gas at quicktrip in the St. Louis, late 1990's.
Lasted one day only, then the price went back to hovering in the seventies.

Oh ya, gas in the bay area is 2.49 a gallon.

atek3
 
I remember .24 self-serve in the 60s and the awful spike to 39 in the 70s. I guess I'm younger than someone around here, at least.

Now to answer the original question: Bush got us into a stupid war. Whether it was to get cheap fuel or not, it sure didn't do much good in that regard. I personally think it was to get control of a large segment of the oil production in friendly hands, with a corollary effect of keeping prices from exploding when we start seeing the effects of peak oil. It is still too soon to know if the tremendous gamble in money and lives will have a pay-off down the road, but right about now it looks like the probability is very small.
 
Like people have already said, the anti-Bush types just like to have an excuse.

The wife and I rarely talk about politics because we "agree to disagree." Tonight I said something about "I don't know what you have against Bush." She said, "I don't think we should have gone into Iraq." I said, "OK, but you voted for Gore in 2000. Are you saying you WOULD have voted for Bush if he hadn't gone into Iraq?" She said no.

Many of the most vocal critics of Iraq are the same way. They will tell you all the mistakes the Administration made in Iraq and how "Bush must be stopped at all costs." But ask them who they voted for 2000. They will not only almost always say Gore but then they will launch into a rant about how Bush stole the election. It only takes a little digging to discover that they would have never voted for Bush NO MATTER what he did or didn't do.

I talked to my sister today on the phone. She lives in CO. I didn't even bother trying to talk her into voting for Bush because she would be the same way. But I asked her to consider voting for Coors for Senator. She brayed laughter and said that was crazy and no way she was voting "for somebody like that!" I asked her what that meant. She said, "he's a Coors and they just have a lot of money and do whatever they want." Hmmm. So I asked her, "does that mean you don't believe in voting for people from 'old money' families? So you WON'T be voting for Kerry, right? They are worth over half a BILLON dollars after all?" But she said that was different. What appeared to be different was one candidate is a Republican and the other a Democrat.

Trying to argue logically with these people will make your brain hurt. Try to argue with one of them about the AWB and you really will be hitting your head on a brick wall. They don't know what it said. They don't know what it banned. They don't even CARE if it was effective or not. But it's just "common sense" to have such a law. Oh, I've got to stop before my head starts to hurt!

Gregg
 
I would like to hear some wise, logical, and reasonably doeable answer as to how to get the $50 oil prices down to some reasonable level.
Click to expand...

Very simple really, start drilling for oil in ANWR. It's estimated to be the largest oil deposit in the continental US and holds enough oil to supply us for 30 years. So if we tap ANWR that gives us 30 years to come up with a better source of energy as a long term plan while getting us out from under dependance on mid east oil for the short term.

The only reason this hasn't happened is because of the national Democrats and the wacko environmentalists who don't want to upset the "porcupine caribou". The facts are that ANWR is composed of some 2 million acres. The amount that is needed for drilling with modern technology is a whooping 2,000 acres.....or in other words .001%. But you won't hear that from the enviros. Even the Democrats from Alaska support drilling there, but apparently they don't know anything....being that they live in the state or anything. :rolleyes:
 
Kevin,

I agree that we need to drill, but that is not a short term solution. I do not know how many years it would take until it would produce.

In addition, it might take one or more years just to get it through the political and legal processes.

Jerry
 
Jerry,

You're right, but even still 1-5 years is a short term solution in the scheme of things. In order to develop and transition to a different energy source it will take MUCH longer than that. Since we already have gas stations everywhere as well as millions of cars on the road that require gasoline, and many houses are heated using oil we can't expect to switch over to another power source for quite a few years. If we start now drilling in ANWR we can start getting oil much sooner. That's what I meant by the short term.
 
Standing Wolf:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hah! I can remember gasoline wars when I was a lad: the price was sometimes 9.9 cents per gallon, plus free glasses, and the guy who filled the tank cleaned the windshield and checked the oil, too.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

checked the air in the tires and only a few short years later
Green Stamps were given out too.

D#$n, I'm getting old.
 
Best way to bring down the global price of oil: slap a trade embargo on China (if you need a reason, pick one-rampant copyright infringement, unfair trade practices, human rights issues, whatever). The rapidly expanding Chinese economy and its accompanying need for oil is one of the major price drivers right now.

A huge chunk of that economy is based on selling stuff to us. If we stopped buying, their economy would go in the ????ter overnight, a la Tom Clancy's The Bear and the Dragon.

Of course, Wal-Mart would have to find somewhere else to buy all their junk from.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top