Skip to comments.Obama's Double Talk on Sky-High Gas Prices
Posted on 02/22/2012 5:32:11 AM PST by IBD editorial writer
Energy: When gas prices hit $4 a gallon in 2008, candidate Barack Obama said it was due to previous failed energy policies. Now that prices are heading still higher, President Obama calls it progress.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
it is progress, because that is his goal. he wants to further cripple the economy.
It absolutely doesn’t matter what Obama says. The media will spin it, polish it, put a bow on it, and present it to the public as if it were passed down from on high.
This can be countered very easily. All that is needed is “thank you, president Obama, for the $5/gal gas” stickers to be posted on the nozzle.
Give credit where credit due.
Tomorrow when he starts lying just remember the following...
On Jan. 26, during a speech in Las Vegas, President Obama said, Weve opened millions of new acres for oil and gas exploration. Right now, American oil production is the highest that its been in eight years. Eight years. Last year, we relied less on foreign oil than in any of last 16 years. Were moving in the right direction when it comes to oil and gas production.
And today, Im announcing that my administration will soon open up around 38 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico for additional exploration and development, which could result in a lot more production of domestic energy, he added.
But, are these really new acres for oil and gas exploration and production? The acres are not new according to the National Oil Industries Association (NOIA).
Were pleased to hear that the long delayed Central Gulf of Mexico sale will finally occur in June. Sales are an essential step in providing much needed American jobs and energy, not only in the Gulf of Mexico, but across the country, said Randall Luthi, NOIA president.
However, this sale has been on the books since 2007 under the current five-year plan. Its nothing new, nor is the claim that 75% of the resources on the OCS are open to development. It is just smoke and mirrors to hide the fact that were still exploring in the same areas we have been for the past 30 years, he emphasized.
On the Dept. of the Interiors website, it was noted that the agency manages 1.7 billion underwater acres of Outer Continental Shelf. Lets see, 75% of that is 1.27 billion acres. And, Pres. Obama was bragging about 38 million acres (2.2%) in the Gulf of Mexico. And, most of that acreage has been offered multiple times.
This is the biggest lie among many whoppers coming from the ineptocracy we have in Washington.
If we elected someone who would reverse Obama's energy-strangling policies, over-night you would see the benefits of the futures speculation on oil. Crude prices would go down some immediately and a lot over time. With fast-tracking the issue of permits, rigs could be erected in a matter of months. With the new extraction technologies, we have massive amounts of crude on our lands and off our shores.
The argument that we shouldn't do this because "it will take a long time" is disingenuous in the extreme, and displays child-like reasoning.
Might higher gas prices might pay for UAW profit sharing bonuses for years to come?
Too bad someone doesn’t expose Obama’s flip flop on this issue in a campaign ad. The MSM will never report the truth.
If only, back in 2007, we had drilled when the no-drill excuse was that it would take 5 years to reap the price benefits so it isn’t worth it.
I know this will hurt many middle to low income Americans but I will pay more at the pump, grocery Store and many items if this is Obama’s Waterloo.
"It's Bush's fault. If Bush had started raising to cost of gasoline back in 2001, we could be at nine dollars a gallon right now and I wouldn't have to be taking the heat."
When is our side going to stop accepting the premise that what the left presents as “their side” of any issue really has anything to do with their agenda?
Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
or you will be like him.
If only you’d use these contradictions, not just to point out their “hypocrisy”, but GO DEEPER and actually STATE that “the issue isn’t the issue”. Because of their positions “then” and “now”, they’ve proven that fact.
Then GO ON to point out what their agenda must be,
simply advancing their own power over other people’s lives.
In order to accomplish (insert goal), it would require (insert number) year(s), ergo, we will not even begin because it would take too long.
I call it “contemporary bias”.
I had the funniest conversation with a lib-in-law one day,
and it wasn’t concerning politics, but food research.
She stated that “any research that is over 5 yrs old is worthless and wrong”.
“umm... do you see a problem with this? Doesn’t that mean that the information we’re relying on today will be, and more importantly, IS, worthless and wrong, if viewed from 5 yrs from now?”
“but it’s right today.”
I guess it’s a combination of the rejection of objective truth and contemporary bias.
F U B O
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.