President Obama fought back against rising oil and retail gas prices in a speech in Florida on Thursday. But it was a curious speech. He started out by mocking Republicans, stating that GOP candidates are licking their chops as gasoline prices rocket up. He said, “They are already dusting off their three-point plans for $2 gas. I’ll save you the suspense: Step one is drill, step two is drill, and step three is keep drilling.”
Very clever. It’s kind of what Newt Gingrich said in this week’s Arizona debate.
But here’s the curious part. Obama said, “If we’re going to take control of our energy future; if we’re going to avoid these gas-price spikes down the line, then we need a sustained all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy — oil, gas, wind, solar, nuclear, biofuels, and more.”
Advertisement
That’s a Republican policy. All of the above. George W. Bush used to say it. John McCain ran on it in 2008. And you hear Republicans talk in similar terms all the time. “All of the above.”
Obama next took credit for record oil and gas production. He took a bow for more rigs and the approval of pipelines (including from Canada!). He then argued that his administration has opened millions of acres for oil and gas exploration.
Well, I don’t know about the pipeline part. He sure hasn’t opened Keystone. And most people in the oil business say the administration has been slow-walking off-shore permits, restricting access on federal lands, and excluding Alaska and the Arctic. They also note the general nuisance of the EPA, including its recent attack on hydraulic fracking.
But people in the business will tell you that production is high, and that things began turning around years before the administration took office. Of course, the great energy revolution has come with all the new shale fields in the Dakotas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, and elsewhere, which has led to a gusher of new oil and natural gas.
Obama is a childish buffoon ("I know you are, but what am I?"). He'll take one item from an opposing position, criticize it in a juvenile manner, such as illustrated above, and then restate the same idea in a different way and expect that one and all will credit his brilliance. It's a formula which is getting very boring.
Besides we all know that oil prices spike because Bush and Cheney are in cahoots with Big Oil and market speculators.
So, BO...you want a little cheese to go along with that "whine"?
For three years the Iran crises has gotten steadily worse with BO doing virtually nothing about it. The Persian Spring in Iran was a huge opportunity squandered by BO.
Unlike what happened in Egypt...virtually ANY replacement regime in Iran would have been an improvement.
Plus, the vacuum created by abruptly pulling out of Iraq has contributed to the fear and uncertainty in the Strait of Hormuz.
Meanwhile, the increases in domestic output have been almost all due to Bush policies.
BO does rightly take credit for the drop in the US imports of foreign oil...because the economy is so blasted awful!
No, high oil and gas prices are all on him. Enjoy it you ignorant, arrogant, divisive non-leader!
Kudlow! Get real! It's all a sham! He's not going to do anything except stall until the house of cards comes tumbling down! Algae! There's nothing to critique! The energy policy is no energy policy!
Kudlow! Get real! It's all a sham! He's not going to do anything except stall until the house of cards comes tumbling down! Algae! There's nothing to critique! The energy policy is no energy policy!
When the voters fill up their automobiles and spend $80 to $100 each time, all this speechifying still sounds as hollow as it is. If prices rise and the economy tanks downward more, then Obama is wasting his breath lying. Gee, his administration has already spent nearly a Billion dollars supporting solar companies that can't stay in business and believe it or not, their employees are to get a bonus!! What's up with that?
"governments can reduce the rate of interest in the short run. They can issue additional paper money. They can open the way to credit expansion by the banks. They can thus create an artificial boom and the appearance of prosperity. But such a boom is bound to collapse soon or late and to bring about a depression." Ludwig Von Mises
Gasoline prices are NOT up. The value of the dollar is down. Gasoline is near an all time low priced in gold. This is the beginning of our inflationary run.
Maybe... but that does not explain why other commodity prices are not tracking with oil.If this was an inflation driven price increase you would expect other commodities to have increased in price in tandem with oil, which is not true.
How can the GOP and conservatives so terribly mess up the "message" on this issue. Just run two clips: (1) Obama saying he'd put coal generators out of business, and (2) Sec'y Energy Chu saying he wanted $5/ gal gasoline like Europe so it would drive alternative energies. The former assures higher electricity prices (a major cost component of refining) and the latter is merely affirming this Administration's policy intent. Well Sec. Chu - we're here, what's your Nobel mind telling you to do now?
A few things the public should know that the bloviating pinhead and star of The Factor on Fox doesn't understand:
1) By law, a company is not allowed to export domestically produced crude oil unless they import a similar amount to offset the export. Used to be you couldn't export ever. The change about 15 years ago was likely to allow producers of Alaskan crude (called ANS) to ship to Japan to save on shipping costs.
2) Gasoline is no longer merely a "refined oil product" and it hasn't been for some time. A refiner has to add ethanol (price of corn???), and a host of other additives or chemicals to make the chemical-gas we used to call gasoline. This new gasoline mix has about 20 or more varieties around the country, each with different additives to meet state and federal EPA standards vis-a-vis the particular area's ozone level, heat, etc. etc.
3) If gasoline markets in Europe need more basic gasoline, refiners here export some to make money. Just like agricultural firms and farmers do with wheat, corn, and other US produced ag products. AND - these products receive federal subsidies. Oil does not.
4) Some have suggested, especially Mr. Pinhead, that the "oil is ours, the American people's, it's on American land". Well, yes it is. And in Russia, China, and Mr. Chavez's Venezuela - all of the land is owned by the government. Here, believe it or not we have "property rights" and individuals are allowed to own property.Those owners also own the mineral rights below their land. These "rights" are leased / sold to oil companies for money, which, if there's oil / gas produced, puts lots of money in the pockets of these people who then invest it, spend it, and donate it to charities.
As to oil found on Federal and State lands, oil companies pay a 1/6 th interest or about 15% or so. The Government does NOT collect royalties or fees on the production of any minerals on Federal lands other than for oil.
And so, with that, as a background - the oil industry balances international exploration projects, often multibillion $ projects, competing against very unregulated national oil companies. They have to risk millions if not hundreds of millions in a project in hopes it returns an adequate return in politically hostile and challenging situations - usually always without any US Government support (unlike France, UK, Japan, China, and most others).
But that is what Obama and the marxist democrats don't want to hear - "return". they won't have any of that. They merely want to milk anything that makes money. In this sense, Congress is just like the Mexican govt. who confiscates tremendous sums from PEMEX, its national oil company. But, the problem is that in the end, government is killing the golden goose. PEMEX is in terrible shape and the country's reserve base is in peril.
That is what our Congress has done to America's energy picture. Obama will likely do worse and make the situation far more perilous than it already is. He may blame Bush. But the fault lies with the radical Democratic party.
All good points TX, especially those refuting some of O'Reilly's strange misconceptions. I can't explain his strange animus for the oil companies, or why he thinks that U.S. exports of petroleum products, along with the wealth and jobs those exports bring, are a bad thing.
Also hanging over the oil companies' heads is the threat of another "windfall profits" tax, which the Democrats dearly wish to impose, so great is their hatred of successful, profitable, free enterprise. No wonder oil companies are reluctant to invest in more production or refining capacity.
Having been long CL since 2005, I can tell you that oil prices will (1) probably continue to creep up, and (2) will retreat after any run-up. There are really two possible outcomes here.
Iran really heats up (let's say the Israelis bomb, Iran blocks the strait, whatever), in which case Obama can play the rally-round-the-prez card perfected by George W.; or
Iran cools off, oil prices retreat, gas prices follow, just in time for the summer driving season which, gosh, just happens to be right before the general election brouhaha starts.
Since both of those outcomes favors Obama's reelection (as opposed to a slow simmer, which would favor the Republicans), and since we know who is cooking this stew, I think we should hope that Iran backs off, as the lesser of two evils.
Despite - not because. That's the salient political fact about energy good news - to the extent there is some. If not for private development and the prior administration's all of the above policy, it would be very, very much worse.
The administration's decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline is the latest acknowledgement by Barack Obama that jobs are unimportant, but it is only one of many. The administration has turned the Gulf of Mexico into a "no drill" zone, ignoring court orders and using the permit process to halt development.
Recent regulations from the EPA are a naked attempt to shut down coal-fired electrical generation, responsible for 50% of America's electricity.
Shell Oil, having spent $4 billion trying to develop tracts, already leased and paid for, north of Alaska, gave up when the EPA denied permits to begin exploratory drilling.
At every available opportunity, Barack Obama has waged war on energy, shutting down future drilling off our coasts and in the interior. Production is up, but this is despite Barack Obama, not because of him.
“But here’s the curious part. Obama said, “If we’re going to take control of our energy future; if we’re going to avoid these gas-price spikes down the line, then we need a sustained all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy — oil, gas, wind, solar, nuclear, biofuels, and more.””
It’s difficult to believe that three years into the Obama presidency, there are some people of prominence who haven’t figured out that our president will say anything if he thinks it will confuse or deceive the masses. But what he actually tends to do is entirely different. Why would Larry quote Obama without immediately noting this fact? What an odd article, and one of not much use.
Agreed, Brad. Doesn't Larry Kudlow know that Obama lies like a rock whenever it suits him? Having recognized the political danger to him that his own energy policies represent in light of increasing gas prices, Obama did what he always does - pretend that he cares and that his policies are something other than they really are.
Message to Larry: Obama doesn't care about skyrocketing energy prices (he thinks that's a good thing), he doesn't care about jobs, and he doesn't care about the economy except to the extent that it could sink his re-election bid. He cares about POWER. When you get that, you'll understand why he does the destructive things he does, and you'll know he's going to continue to do everything he can to discourage the use of fossil fuels (everything that works, in other words).
Obama is the single best thing to happen to backwards, right wing america in the last 40 years.
I haven't heard a single policy on which I have grounds to doubt his intentions of bettering the world and empowering the individual.
If you genuinely think he is wrong- politically or personally, you have been corrupted by your absolute joke of an excuse for news media (really politically motivated comment) - I'ts managed to make you think that free medical care is a drag on the system. Hmmm maybe because most republican elects are supported by large pharmaceutical companies?
Follow
