O’Reilly, Gas Prices and Reality

Townhall.com ^ | February 28, 2012 | Derek Hunter

[Kaslin]

I’m normally a fan of Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, but he is not a fan of oil companies. This is where he loses me.

It’s not that I’m a big fan of oil companies, or any particular company, really, except maybe Apple (can we get the new iPad already?). I rarely think about companies, let alone whole industries. But Bill does.

I don’t know O’Reilly’s politics, mostly because he’s all over the place. But his anger toward oil companies is misdirected and he ultimately misleads his audience.

Last week, Bill did one of his “Talking Points Memos” on high gas prices, blaming oil companies for the price at the pump. He opened up by paraphrasing Lou Dobbs, saying, “…because of the mild winter, there is plenty of oil and gas in the U.S.A. So supply and demand here should dictate lower prices. But of course, they are not lower. They are much higher because the oil companies are shipping their products overseas. Measured in dollars, oil products are now America's largest export worth $88 billion a year to the oil companies.”

That sounds great, and seems logical – more gasoline around means there should be lower prices, supply and demand. Only it isn’t that simple.

Were gasoline not manufactured, but pulled out of the ground ready to go, it would make sense. It would also make sense if for an iPad to cost $20 if they grew on trees and Apple simply picked them. Unfortunately on both accounts, it doesn’t work that way.

An iPad must be manufactured from countless parts, and the materials to make those parts cost money. Similarly, gasoline has to be refined from oil, and oil, particularly right now, is very expensive. And it’s costing more every day.

In other words, the amount of gasoline has no impact on the price at the pump. The cost of oil does. In fact, crude oil accounts for about 80 percent of the cost of fuels. As oil prices rise, gasoline prices rise. As gasoline prices rise, demand for gasoline drops, particularly in a sluggish economy. That’s why we have gasoline to export to the rest of the world, not some black helicopter conspiracy to drive up prices at the pump.

What O’Reilly doesn’t tell his audience is that exporting refined oil products is actually a good thing for our economy. When American manufacturers, like oil refiners, export their products, they create and sustain good-paying jobs, lower America’s trade deficit, and increase revenues for our Federal Treasury.

To be clear, refiners will only manufacture as much fuel as they can sell. They can’t store millions of gallons of gasoline that no one in the U.S. wants to buy. So if fuel exports are banned and taxed heavily, as O’Reilly suggests, refiners will manufacture less fuel. That could lead to refinery closures and worker layoffs.

If our federal government is serious about lowering gasoline prices, it should first start by eliminating EPA’s overreaching regulations on refiners, which make it more costly to manufacture fuels. We must also support policies that drive down the cost of oil. The only way for that to happen is to increase the supply of oil AND the stability of that supply.

O’Reilly and Democrats would have you believe that in addition to colluding oil companies, the price of oil is high because of “Wall Street speculators,” traders on the commodities market. They seem to think “speculators” are able to manipulate the price of oil. Commodities traders take large risks, and it’s called “risk” for a reason. Were they able to control the price of oil they’d be called something beside “speculators.”

But O’Reilly and Democrats need a boogeyman.

O’Reilly needs it because he fancies himself the champion of “the folks,” average Americans who he seems to think can’t figure things out for themselves.

Democrats need it to distract from the fact that high gasoline prices are something they’ve wanted and advocated for years. They’d prefer we’d have gotten to $5 per gallon gas through high taxes, rather than unrest in the Middle East, but this is where they want them to be.

President Obama wants high gas prices to drive consumers Americans to embrace alternate “green” sources of energy. The only problem with his plan is there is no “green” alternative readily available now to counteract high gas prices. The only result of his anti-domestic energy plan (denying new drilling permits, killing the Keystone XL pipeline, etc.) is to harm the wallets of all Americans, particularly low income Americans, those he claims to want to help.

But the President doesn’t seem to mind that. Instead of working to lower gasoline prices, he’s working to distract people, to shift the blame to Democrat’s boogeyman and Republicans while insulating himself. Bill O’Reilly and his irrational, illogical crusade against “big oil” is helping him in that quest.

If O’Reilly truly were interested in informing people as to why prices at the pump are high, he’d put his emotions aside, look past the oil companies, boogeymen and political spin and take a look at what’s really going on. When it comes to “big oil,” he hasn’t done it in the past, so there’s little reason to think he’ll do so now. But we can always hope.

[BillGunn]

Neil Cavuto did his final word the other day on the same subject, he pointed out that we are devaluing the dollar that we buy oil with. That is why I watch Cavuto and not BoR.

Up until recently, I had been watch Napalitano rather than BORe. Now that he is off the air, 8:00 PM seems like a good time of night to catch up on some reading.

[MarkL]

BOR is a typical, harvard educated fuzzy thinker. When I can stomach watching his show, which is rarely, I find myself thinking that he's a typical east coast elitist "deep thinker" of the sort that are currently "ruling" the American people.

Mark

[bray]

I saw it and just thought what a hack. We are using less gas thanks to the Obama Meltdown and they have excess to sell around the world at higher prices.

He doesn’t let any oil people on his show to give their side of the issue, only Dobbs who knows nothing about oil. They both think evil Big Oil can make it any price they want.

Pray for America

[FroggyTheGremlim]

The US dollar has lost about half its previous value under Obama.

Oil prices have almost doubled in the same period.

O'Reilly can't seem to figure out the correlation, but a fifth grader can.

[Carbonsteel]

"Neil Cavuto did his final word the other day on the same subject, he pointed out that we are devaluing the dollar that we buy oil with. That is why I watch Cavuto and not BoR."

Cavuto is spot on and Monika Crowley mentioned this when on the Factor last week, but O'Reilly just ignored her and continued to push the narrative Dobbs has been spewing lately.

The truth is that gas prices are high for several reasons, but the two main ones are due to an insane monetary policy and energy policy and both these issues can be tied directly to our current administration.

[DTogo]

Oil is priced in US Dollars, which Fedzilla has been de-valuing with high deficits, high debt, and "selling" Treasuries to the Fed in exchange for more printed (and worth-less) dollars.

O'Reilly ignores this fact.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Bill is simple-minded. That’s not his fault. But being ignorant is.

[mac_truck]

The US dollar has been 'devalued' for some time now and is currently in the same range it was when gasoline was much cheaper.

Ron Paul ignores this fact

[Racer1]

The problem is that there is a grain of truth to all of these arguments. Yes exporting oil and its products does provide American jobs. Yes speculators do run the price up a bit. I support drill here drill now, but if we are only going to sell the products to foreign countries and not realize a benefit to everyone in our economy by means of a price reduction, why bother. A dollar a gallon across the whole economy would be a tremendous stimulus. Better than anything the government will ever do. And as far as the speculators go, why should every barrel of oil be bought and sold many times over? That only benefits a chosen few and is harmful to our economy and our national security. That is why if you buy oil, you should have to take delivery. The bottom line is that the price of fuel is killing our economy and helping our enemies to profit in the mean time. This goes way beyond making a quick buck in the markets.

[Elle Bee]

Has FOX News 'Jumped The Shark' Over Mitt???

FOX News may have 'jumped the shark' over mittens

Fair and balanced is Juan McCain

I for one have had enough of the ‘wisdom’ of Bill Kristal, Chas. Krauthammer, Ted Baxter, Bret Beahr, Toyko Rove, Ann Colter, Chris Wallace, Sean Wannabe, Dana Parino, Brit Hume, Shep Smith, Judge Jeanene, Alan Comes, Bob Beckle, Juan Williams, Whoraldo, P.T. Trump, et. al. all acting the part of the Romney cheerleading squad

Does anyone else 'feel my pain'?

.

Name ONE true conservative who is regularly on FOX

There is clearly a hunger and a market for honest news and honest conservative news - and it is clearly not FOX

with apologies to Ted Knight ….Find O'Reilly:

.

[mcshot]

Same here but have a friend who worships him and who goes on and on about “big oil” And he thinks the Bushes are still manipulating someplace.

[Cboldt]

Same for me. If the author is a fan of O'Reilly (other than for whatever entertainment can be had watching a blowhard idiot), then what follows isn't likely to be insightful.

"O'Reilly" and "Reality" in the same title too ... snicker.

[snoringbear]

“I’m normally a fan of Fox News host Bill O’Reilly. Lost me right there.”

Yeah, O’Reilly is wrong on the oil/gas situation and has been for a long time. He’s wearing thin on me too. I get tired of him running his pie hole constantly and talking on top of his guests. I sometimes watch him if certain guests are on. As an example, Laura Ingram seems to be able to handle the old pervert ok. So, I’ll watch when she’s being interview - or hosting, even better.

[I am Richard Brandon]

"Democrats need it to distract from the fact that high gasoline prices are something they’ve wanted and advocated for years"

Not 'Democrats' but the self-appointed elite leaders of the Democrat Party, plus the arrogant leaders of the 'greenies.' My bet is that if found found yourself a Democrat on the street nd asked them, they would HATE high gas prices. Hint for the eventual GOP candidate.

[calico_thompson]

God forbid that the Boeing Company would buy materials at world market prices and assemble an airplane and sell the plane to a foreign buyer. I guess all of the new Dreamliners with a 10,000 mile range should only be used within the US.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Cavuto is spot on and Monika Crowley mentioned this when on the Factor last week, but O’Reilly just ignored her and continued to push the narrative Dobbs has been spewing lately. The truth is that gas prices are high for several reasons, but the two main ones are due to an insane monetary policy and energy policy and both these issues can be tied directly to our current administration. “

We had the same problem 2006 to 2008 (for many of the same reasons as now too) and BoR and Dobb’s were pulling the same crap as now and BoR started pushing ethanol on his show claiming it would make us energy independent, and then boom, GWB and Pelosi pass into law the 2007 energy bill that mandates ethanol.

Back ~ 2007 Cavuto went on BoR’s show and tried to reason and BoR just accused Cavuto of being in the pockets of the greedy oil companies much like an Al Sharpton would do on MSNBC. I cant watch this a$$wipe, he really is targeting the gullible as Trump does,

[xzins]

I think OReilly has a point here.

When gasoline supplies were “low” due to “refining capacity” we were told pump prices had to go up. When gasoline supplies were “high” (like now) due to mild weather, low winter driving, etc., we're told that prices have to be “high” because the demand elsewhere is “high” so the gasoline gets shipped elsewhere.

I say BS to that last.

There is no way in the world that you can ship to here, refine here, reload a tanker, and then ship halfway around the world cheaper than you can sell here.

Why?

Because gasoline doesn't really cost $8 a gallon in Europe. The refining cost is roughly the same, the process is the same, and the product is the same. If it costs $2 here by the time refining is completed, then it costs $2 there, plus or minus a bit for wage costs. What's the difference between $2 and $8?

$6, but there is a difference because those governments tax the hell out of it. That's all cash in government pockets.

And that's what Obama wants here. $2 gas costing $8 with $6 a gallon going into the pocket of big government.

So, can you take that $2 refined gasoline and ship it to Ohio and sell it for $3.50 and make money ASSUMING no government will be intervening? They do here, so they can here.

Can you take that $2 refined gasoline and ship it elsewhere and generate somewhere around $1.50 if everything else is equal? No, you can't. Shipping 12,000 miles must cost something and then there's the entire distribution costs still to be met once you arrive at that far flung port.

Where could ANY possible profit come from? I'd say it's from that $6 worth of “difference” that the foreign government is collecting.

IOW, the intervention of foreign governments insuring a payback is the only thing making it profitable for the oil companies to stiff the American consumer.

In short, the American consumer will pay more at the pump to further the import objectives of hostile foreign governments.

[A'elian' nation]

BOR is equally ignorant when it comes to so-called ‘separation of church and state’ when he took off on Santorum for ‘vomiting’ over the JFK remarks about not being guided by Catholic morals in the presidency.

Santorum’s point was that he would hope a president would be guided by such morals.

This ticked me off so much that I finally had to send my first email to BOR which went like this:

So when it comes to a vote on the infanticide bill in Illinois that senator Obama passed, whose morals are you going to follow: Obama, JFK, or Santorum ?

Don’t tell us that what you call “sanctimonious religious morals” don’t have a place in public policy.

And before you get on your usual sanctimonious high horse, be honest and answer the question without evasion - Obama, JFK, or Santorum ?
Or are you going to split the baby in half?

[thackney]

it should belong to all Americans not the oil companies.

It "belongs" to the owner of the mineral rights. Those rights are leased to an oil company to produce.

Most of the owners of those oil companies are individual investors in retirement funds, mutual funds and other personal investments. Why do you think those people should be forced to sell the product at a below market rate?

They should be paid for the pumping and refining but the American oil should go to us and Canada first.

Nobody is denying access to crude oil, gasoline, diesel, etc. We still import more crude oil than we produce ourselves so we are quite dependent on world oil pricing.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Good letter. He drives me nuts too. But I usually enjoy his guests, and his Barney Frank interview justified his existence.

Still, I find myself tuning out more often.