Greenspan Blames High Oil Prices on Speculation and Supply

Photo of Noel Sheppard.
  • Bookmark and Share

Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan spoke with CNBC's Maria Bartiromo Thursday, and although a number of press outlets reported his concerns about the economy being close to a recession, his comments about high oil prices being a function of speculation and lack of supply went largely unnoticed.

This boycott seems especially absurd as Congress is currently deadlocked on an energy bill that would offer Americans any hope of relief at the gas pump (photo courtesy Reuters).

With this in mind, Greenspan said the following on Thursday that should not only be relevant to media members, but also to our political leaders that are about to take a five week vacation without having come close to addressing America's energy crisis:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓
There are long-term structural problems in the oil market which is the big, dominant element in the commodities thing, largely because of the fact that there's a trend which is very difficult to project mainly, that underlying consumption while rising as much as oil in the ground, the reserves of oil, is running far in excess of the rate of increase in the productive crude oil capacity because we're not investing enough to take the oil out of the ground and to essentially create a sufficiently large flow to not balance the demand that's coming mainly from Asia. The problem that we have here is that because there has been this pressure, the buffer is gradually disappearing between supply and demand.
There's been underlying pressures on prices which starting in 2004 caught the eye of the financial system, and if you look at the data that the Bank for International Settlements publishes, essentially on the notional value of basically crude oil futures, it's going flat, and that it just goes straight up. What that means is that we are moving forward a price increase which was going to happen anyway. And I think this is indeed speculation, but it's good speculation in that by creating prices moving forward more quickly than the would have, you essentially curb the level of consumption far sooner, and therefore the peak of prices which we'll ultimately get to without the speculation, is cut off.

In plain English, Greenspan basically said that the rate of increase in the demand for oil has surpassed the rate of increase in its production. Once folks on Wall Street -- and investors around the world -- noticed this, they began aggressively buying futures contracts on the various commodities exchanges thereby driving prices up well beyond what they would be today based upon current supply demand forces.

In effect, investors have brought oil prices to where they would be at some point in the future based upon their speculation of what that price might eventually be. As such, we are potentially paying a price for gas, heating oil, etc., that mightn't have been reached until years from now if such speculation didn't exist.

The following chart demonstrates Greenspan's point (courtesy TradingCharts.com):

As you can see, just as Greenspan stated, oil began its breakout in 2004 "when underlying pressures on prices...caught the eye of the financial system." At that point, speculators began aggressively buying futures contracts driving the price from $30 a barrel to almost $150 in four and a half years.

Unfortunately, Maria didn't ask the former Fed chief what prices might be today if not for this speculation. Regardless, if Greenspan is right, and today's prices are a function of both speculation AND supply, Congress should be creating an energy bill which addresses both.

Sadly, the Democrats only want to deal with speculation, and are totally stonewalling any efforts by Republicans to increase supplies through drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the outer-continental shelf (offshore).

Maybe if media began hammering this point that supply needs to be dealt with as well as speculation, folks like Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid would acquiesce rather than going on a five week vacation that they don't need anywhere near as much as the nation needs an energy bill.

As a post facto addendum, folks on the left love to make the case that any new drilling efforts will have no impact on prices for many years. However, if Greenspan is right -- and, as NewsBusters readers know, I've been making this same point for a very long time!!! -- any change in the future supply demand ratio will indeed impact prices today as speculators change their view of prices in the future.

Again in plain English: today's prices are a function of what speculators believe prices will be in the future based upon supply and demand. If America was to increase its future supply by beginning the process of drilling in ANWR and additional offshore sites, speculators would reduce their price expectations in the future which would force a liquidation of contracts today.

Such a liquidation could create a rush to the exits on commodities exchanges all around the world bringing energy prices down quite sharply and quite quickly.

Frankly, any elected official that doesn't agree with this lacks the financial knowledge to be in a position of authority concerning this matter.

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

This article basically sums

This article basically sums up the situation, and the final sentence makes sense as well.

 

------------------------------------------------------------

"It could be the answer to our age-old, philosophical question, 'Why are we here?' PLASTIC!"

I keep hearing these whack

I keep hearing these whack jobs from Obama and Pelosi to various trolls here at NB that say more drilling will not lead to downward pressure on prices. If that is true, I guess the opposite must be true. If we stop existing drilling there would be no upward pressure on prices. Can it get any more stupid than this?

The Kind of Speculation That Matters...

Is not the market speculators buying and selling futures.

It is mutton heads in the media and public servants past their prime (e.g., Reid, Pelosi) making speculations about the economy or the war on terror or Iran or the environment or...

Today, there were news reports about Iran's nuclear program and oild jumped up about 2 bucks a barrel almost immediately. Iran, Russia, Nigeria, Venezuela, et al.,  have a strong financial incentive to project political turmoil in oil producing regions and the mutton heads in the media play right along.

Today's word of the day:  Mutton heads. 

<insert witty signature here>

Seems to me that Greenspan

Seems to me that Greenspan wasn't "blaming" speculation at all; he correctly pointed out that it is perceived instability in the oil market, due to lack of US participation on the supply side, that has increased the need for speculation.  As you pointed out, Noel, as has already happened, any move toward our re-entering the world oil market as a producer will reduce instability, and reduce speculation.  President Bush has already taken two steps in that direction, and the per barrel price of oil has fallen $20/barrel very quickly.

Right

the NB headline says that supply/demand concerns cause speculation; speculation is merely the price reflection of supply/demand issues.  In essence, speculation is a necessary measure of the information currently existing in the marketplace.

<insert witty signature here>

Absolutely.  No perception

Absolutely.  No perception of instability, no speculation necessary, or needed.

speculation = supply/demand + currency value

speculation = supply/demand + currency value; they are incontrivertibly linked. To say they are separate issues is to misunderstand basic market economics.

Robert

Robert,

"increased the need for speculation."

That's not what he said at all. He said that once the changes in the supply demand equation became apparent to Wall Street, speculation began. He didn't say it increased THE NEED for speculation. Furthermore, he never said the word "instability."

Do you believe speculators are always right? As a former arbitrageur, and someone that's been involved in the markets for 28 years, I don't. Frankly, contrarian analysis states that speculators are typically WRONG. This is why we measure such things as bullish/bearish consensus, put/call ratios, short interest, etc.

As such, when changes in the supply demand equation of oil became apparent to Wall Street and others, that doesn't mean that we NEEDED speculators to drive up the price or that it was GOOD they did.

However, that's beside the point. Whatever led speculators to believe that oil prices were heading, Greenspan CLEARLY stated that such speculation DID move prices higher. Frankly, I don't know how anyone can read his statement differently. ns

Sure, they bid prices up. Rightly.

I feel the need to link AGAIN to Prof. Walter Williams' column on the subject, because regulation isn't  the answer...
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

I agree with Sarc that Regulation is not the answer

Speculators Aren’t Driving Up Oil Prices, Report Says (The New York Times)

"The report's key finding was that speculative investors more often changed their positions after prices had moved, not before. That suggests that these traders "are responding to new information - just as one would expect in an efficiently operating market," the report said."

6 Myths About Oil Speculators (U.S. News and World Report)
An Anti-Speculative Bubble (Townhall)
Blaming Oil Speculators for High Gas Prices (Video) (4min)
Bless the Speculators (John Stossel, ABC News)
Congress: The Real Speculators (Townhall)
Critics of oil speculators and short sellers are missing the point (The Daily Telegraph, UK)
Don't blame the oil 'speculators' (Fortune Magazine)
Don’t blame the speculators (The Economist, UK)
Greedy Speculators? (Richard W. Rahn, Ph.D. Business Economics, Cato Institute)
Hunting for oil villains (Fortune Magazine)
Just Speculating (Investor's Business Daily)
Let’s Shoot the Speculators! (Newsweek)
Oil Speculators Help Consumers at the Gas Pump (David Kreutzer, Ph.D. Economics, Heritage Foundation)
Restricting Speculators Will Not Reduce Oil Prices (Craig Pirrong, Ph.D. Business Economics, The Wall Street Journal)
Scapegoating the Speculators (Cato Institute)
Scapegoating Speculators (Walter E. Williams, Ph.D. Professor of Economics)
Speculators are not to blame for oil, says IEA (The Times, UK)
The oil speculator sideshow (Fortune Magazine)
What's Really Driving Oil Prices? (The Motley Fool)

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

I notice that the MSM has

I notice that the MSM has selective hearing. When Greenspan talks of recession they're all ears. When he nails the problem with the price of oil and it's not “Big Oil's” fault they ignore “the boy in the corner.”

As for the Dumbocrats we need to kick them out of congress. They are not listening to the American public nor caring for what is best for America. The Dumbocrats kiss the ground the environmentalists walk on. The environmentalists have been handed too much power by the Dimwits.

Right Noel, they seem to pay more attention...

Right Noel, they seem to pay more attention to Greenspan's wife, Andrea Mitchell, than they do to him. I doubt his views will affect her rants.

If the threat of increased

If the threat of increased American oil production somewhere down the road can cut the cost of a barrel of oil by $20 almost overnight, wouldn't the threat of an American-lead, Western powered, Apollo-style program to reduce our use of oil have the same impact?

Speculators betting today on the price of oil 5-10 yrs from now would certainly get nervous if they truly believed that the most economically and technologically advanced countries on the planet were devoted to energy solutions other than oil.

Furthermore, these same advanced countries just happen to consume the vast majority of the oil coming out of the ground today. If speculators believed that it were even remotely possible that OPEC might lose its biggest customers, wouldn't that have a big impact on today's prices as well? 

 

wouldn't the threat of an

wouldn't the threat of an American-lead, Western powered, Apollo-style program to reduce our use of oil have the same impact?

In a word, no. That is a bird in the bush. No one belives that you can come up with new technology, perfect it and get it to market in 20 years, let alone do it at a price that the public can afford. It is all make belive.

Ethanol produces more pollutants and green house gases than gas. It also is not as efficent and causes an increase in fuel consumption for any given distance. And that is the best they have come up with so far. The rush to ethanol production has caused a shortage of food and increased the price of corn, world wide, increased green house gas, contributes to increased atmospheric ozone, (smog) and just generaly is not what it was said to be. Thats what you get when you grab an idea and run with it.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Oh, and by the way, in

Oh, and by the way, in light of the recent church shooting in Tennessee where Jim Adkisson shot up a children's recital because he hates liberals, killing a couple people and wounding several more --- Wouldn't you think that the classy thing to do would be to stop this semi-comical incitement to political violence? "Club a liberal!!" -- are you kidding me? Don't you owe the families of the dead an apology? God forbid that Adkisson ever read your hateful posts, God forbid that (and Heaven help your soul if this is true) Adkisson might just well have trying to save a SeAL and clubbed him a couple of liberals.

You folks play with fire all the time. You ignore the fact that such talk often burns, and when it catches fire it sometimes burns all the way, like it just did it Tennessee. 

Glass houses?

That makes it tens of millions of murders by leftists to 2. Worry about your sick minions before throwing stones. We shoot ours, you guys make them heads of state.

Don't you owe anyone with

Don't you owe anyone with more than a brain stem an apology for your post?

 

"I don't have time for this. You all can continue your co-dependency posts and make yourselves feel all chummy... Frankly, you all don't represent where America is going and you might as well get used to it."

--The Dooper

The books on that guy's

The books on that guy's shelf weren't written by me. They were the work of your movement's leading luminaries: Bill O, Savage, and that "Great American" Hannity. 

Lee Atwater and Carl Rove's political chickens are coming home to roost. Decades of political divisiveness on a scale like this is bound to engender some violence. Good job fellas; you're real salt of the earth middle Americans.

"The books on that guy's

"The books on that guy's shelf weren't written by me."

That's too bad. No doubt instead of a delusional, bitter, liberal-hating wacko, he would have been an well-educated, Europe-loving, why can't we all just get along, cancer-curing aristocrat.

 

"I don't have time for this. You all can continue your co-dependency posts and make yourselves feel all chummy... Frankly, you all don't represent where America is going and you might as well get used to it."

--The "Dooper

Some guys I know say: "If

Some guys I know say: "If you've only got a hammer in your tool box every problem looks like a nail." 

Are you even carrying a tool box? 

Hey fk...  You really

Hey fk... 

 You really are Olbie in a terrible disguise... 

I heard this info in a rumor that's been going around...that I started by the way.

You fit him to a tee.

"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh

I bored, so I'll play for a

I bored, so I'll play for a little bit...

No doubt you have a clean set of new tools, ready to solve the world's problems. What is your..

Wait a minute, aren't you that troll everyone talks about who can't stay on topic, insults the mastheads, and calls conservatives evil? 

 

"I don't have time for this. You all can continue your co-dependency posts and make yourselves feel all chummy... Frankly, you all don't represent where America is going and you might as well get used to it."

--The Dooper

  I guess my father and

  I guess my father and mother were right; I am a monster -- not delusional, a monster.

I can just imagine all the chicken littles running around in some back room on this site crying out that the sky is falling, that the sky is falling.

In other words: "Someone's making sense, someone's making sense."  

And from on high bigtimer and contrary proclaim: "off with his post."  

You have parents? I

You have parents?

I thought you were hatched by God himself.

 

"I don't have time for this. You all can continue your co-dependency posts and make yourselves feel all chummy... Frankly, you all don't represent where America is going and you might as well get used to it."

--The "Dooper

fk, what does the price of

fk, what does the price of oil have to do with your interjection of the Unitarian shootings into this thread ? Seems to me you were taken to task and in typical liberal fashion you try and derail the thread by changing the subject. "Oh look a bird !", " Your shoes untied."

Didn't you post on this ad-nauseum the other day on an open thread?

If your gonna blame the actions of one deranged individual on the books he had in his possesion and their writers, and our ideaology, then how come were all not out shooting the place up.

I have plenty of books in my own personal library that were written by people with both liberal and conservative views. I even read "Mein Kampf" and "The Communist Manifesto" without having the desire to invade The Rhineland or turn communist.

 Also as far as I see, noone over here is or has been celebratory or gleeful of what happened, like the left has been, or would be right now if this were a bunch of conservatives and not liberals that were gunned down.

 

So go on and manufacture your selective outrage somewhere else or take your "strawman" argument over to D.U., DKos or Huffblo, I am sure the choir over there would appreciate your preaching of it, than anyone not on drugs or with half a brain over here. 

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

                   - Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

                               " The Cake is a lie."   

The poster bassndude ends

The poster bassndude ends each entry with the injunction: "Save a SeAL club a liberal." 

I was raising the possibility that such sentiments might be inappropriate in light of recent events after Mr. bassndude replied to one of my comments.

Thank you. 

fk before coming to a

fk before coming to a conservative based website and playing "Miss Manners", perhaps you would like to go over to the nutroots and school them on ettiqutte and civility. Make sure you get back to us after you clean your own house up.

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

Blazer, The last time I was

Blazer,

The last time I was lectured like this I was told that this was primarily a libertarian site.

There is an identity crisis here. You guys can't figure out who to call delusional and stupid. Hold on, I just dropped some cheetos.... 

Noone told you this was a

Noone told you this was a primarily "libertarian" site and you know it, I was there. You were told it was a site where the members are of all political stripes, including liberals and libertarians, but it is primarily "conservative".

If you want to bust someones balls about ethics, manners, consistency, and hypocrisy, go clean your own house up, and then get back to us. We may all be a little more receptive to your preaching (ramblings) then.Until then your just a run-of-the-mill troll, and not even a creative one at that.

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

Blazer, If you say I'm not

Blazer,

If you say I'm not a creative troll, you mustn't have seen my 'chicken little post.'

If memory serves, cadence -- who I proposed marriage to that night, you might remember -- claimed that this was a libertarian site. You might also remember that it was me who said the spirit of this site is conservative republican.

I never did get an answer on that marriage proposal. 

Yea, but she doesn't run

Yea, but she doesn't run this site, she only posts here, but you felt it necessary to take a comment by one member and pidgeonhole the whole site.

At any rate who wants to marry someone who still lives in moms basement and that proposal to me sounded awfully trollish and lecherous.

"You might also remember that it was me who said the spirit of this site is conservative republican."

You say that like it's a bad thing.

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

time to stop the lies

Cadence here -

I told you no such thing. You went on a rant against Republicans and I informed you that NB was a site about exposing liberal bias with members of more than one party.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/07/27/susan-estrich-arrogance-will-not-help-get-obama-elected#comment-670993

Please get your facts right babe (I can call you that since you're sweet on me right?)

there ya go Cadence

get em steppin lively --- lert lert lert rih lert

"You can not support the Troops if you do not support their Mission" 

I'm crushed bot

One week he's asking me to marry him and the next he can't even remember my name. : - (

Cadence.

*growls under breath*

I'll show him some cadence.

C'mon, can, he says he

 

 

huh?

*scratches head at enigmatic post*

My bad, I was getting ready

My bad, I was getting ready to attribute something frank j. wilson wrote and attribute it to flash, in reference to your last post, by the time I realised my mistake it was too late.

It was along the lines that if you accepted flash's proposal you  could live happily ever after in his moms basement watching him play World Of Warcraft, while he sporadically supported both of you singing at weddings.

I couldn't remember if it was frank or flash that said they lived in "moms basement".

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

oh gosh Blazer

Leave my successful, intelligent, charming husband behind for all that? Where do I sign up?!

Hands off ladies! This one's taken!

LOL ! No disrespect

LOL ! No disrespect intended, I of course know your a married woman and am sure as a strong, intelligent, conservative woman make your hubby proud. : )

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

it's all good blazer

That comment was directed at flash's proposal, not you.

Oh in case flash was still wondering: the answer is no.

(that sound you hear is his wife heaving a sigh of relief)

libs

libs

"You can not support the Troops if you do not support their Mission" 

flashking, we have had many "creative" trolls here at NB.

Believe me when I tell you, you are in no danger of being confused with any of them.

The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz

*chuckles*

Thanks for that Dave.

flashking, 'chicken little post.' ??

LMAO-Haven't seen it as yet, but I would almost wager that it was most likely a chicken $h*t post.

Sorry, pal, but despite your alleged respect for the libertarian spectrum, your tireless support for all things democrat belies that assertion.

Either you are a supporter of true freedom, or you are not.

There is no middle ground here. 

Do you have the stones?

The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz

Ouch. Nice one

Ouch. Nice one RD.

 

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

flashking, what, exactly, is your problem with libertarians?

The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz

He doesn't know what they are

He is having an identity crisis and is confusing the various political affiliations of people who visit this site. The shock of knowing that conservatives and libertarians can function on the same site is making his head explode.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

I admire libertarians, true

I admire libertarians, true libertarians. I dislike the fake kind who dress up like cowboys, protect absolute freedom only when it applies to an economic free-for-all that tends to favor the cowboy's friends and allies, trample the 4th Amendment, severely punish kids for smoking pot while commuting the sentences of perjurers, ....

And on and on and on. I believe in freedom absolutely. Don't tell me that I can't hear dirty words on the radio, don't tell me that I can't look at nudey-books because you want to legislate decency, don't tell me that the government needs to read my email without a warrant, don't tell me that you need my tax money to give to KBR so that they can electrocute our soldiers, don't tell me anything.

Keep me safe from foreign invasion by circling this continent with a ring of fire so hot and so tall that the devil himself would melt if he neared it. But don't ask for my money or my sons to fight for something as shadowy as "the national interest." 

Flash is really confused

You need to stay off the progressive sites and do some real research. You are confusing  conservative and libertarian positions then inventing some out of thin air. Conservatives and Libertarians generally agree on the economy, limited government, taxes and the first and second amendment, after that it gets muddy.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

flashking, ultimate freedom does not include using government...

...as an instrument of plunder.

The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz

Conservative Book Propaganda

Could you point out the chapters and quote where these books state to kill liberals? I would like to clarify your propaganda with facts as I am sure the idiots you talk to never ask these obvious questions.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

No.

And quit using my trademark lines.

stop it flash

You didn't want to reply to the points about alternative energy so you went off on (another) rant about the Tennessee shooter.

That signature is a joke. You know, like joking around that a bomb should have hit Dick Cheney or John McCain ought to be in a wheelchair? Political satire is one of the biggest reasons we have the first amendment.

No one here has endorsed what that madman did. So let it go.

"Playing with Fire"

"Shoot Environmentalists - Save the Human Race" - I just made it up. Checking for Columbine Part 2 on CNN as we speak...

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

bass - No one belives

bass -


No one belives that you can come up with new technology, perfect it and get it to market in 20 years, let alone do it at a price that the public can afford. It is all make belive.

Except lieberals. They believe this crap. You mean nobody intelligent believes it.

Vote 4 change. Vote 4 anything. See Jack & Mr Shy's first campaign ad for the ONLY viable 3rd party candidate.

wouldn't the threat of an

wouldn't the threat of an American-lead, Western powered, Apollo-style program to reduce our use of oil have the same impact?

You mean the one in which NASA spent billions, developed amazing new technology, and on July 22, 1969 landed on the Moon.

Then six missions later, on December 19, 1972, because of the cost, the enterprise was ABANDONED lock, stock and Apollo when the final mission splashed down on Earth.

You mean that Apollo? NO. I don't think so. But thank you for asking.

Try to get this through your skull. Ther's nothing wrong with oil. Our economies are built on oil. And we'll be dependent on it for the next 50 years minimum.

And we don't need No stinkin' "government" programmes paid by taxpayers to pick the next energy technological advance. Thank you.

Vote 4 change. Vote 4 anything. See Jack & Mr Shy's first campaign ad for the ONLY viable 3rd party candidate.

Yeah there's nothing wrong

Yeah there's nothing wrong with oil except that we're running out of it, terrorists control the bulk of it, and the prices are only going through the roof. The environmental impact of oil was easy to overlook at 30$ a barrel. But at 120 or 140 or higher...

Guys like you want to sit around and sing to high heaven about the American worker, the American spirit, the driving genius of our citizens and yet you are willing to squash those native, human energies out of stubbornness and a blind devotion to corporatism.

We can't drill our way out of this mess but if we unleash the creative energies of our citizens we might just invent our way out of it. And sooner than you think. 

Your wires are all crossed and mixed up if you believe that the greatest expression of human freedom is the oil industry. All of the apologies going around make me think that this is the case.

Holy Crap! I actually agree

Holy Crap!

I actually agree with some of your points. I would say that government can help enterprising companies and individuals to invent the next great energy source by not taxing them to oblivion.

"I don't have time for this. You all can continue your co-dependency posts and make yourselves feel all chummy... Frankly, you all don't represent where America is going and you might as well get used to it."

--The Dooper

I appreciate that; you're

I appreciate that; you're the first person who ever agreed with me here. Everyone else will call you names. Edit your reply. Put "delusional" at the end and everything will be fine.

fk, Tell me what new wonderful energy source is out there?

here is one that will WORK!

Other than oil and gas, what energy source will work?

Hydrogen NOPE ! solar for cars NOPE! food to fuel NOPE!

Put more air in your tires NOPE!

coal or wood burning steam cars YEA!

I'm waiting where is that magic fuel source?

Liberal CAN'T save thy self.


IranianUranium and the new 13 year old secret.

As a matter of fact

As a matter of fact properly inflating your tires does increase fuel efficiency. Seeing as 70 some percent of the oil we burn is used for transportation, increasing the efficiency of 100's of millions of vehicles will save us on the demand side of the equation and that tends to influence the price.

I didn't say that we're on the cusp on running the country on gummy bears and sour patch kids. I said that we could think/invent our way out of it. Greater efficiency sounds smart to me.

To paraphrase Ben Franklin: "A barrel saved is a barrel drilled." 

Inflating your tires propaganda

Wow, most tire's are checked when people bring their car's in for oil changes and you have to be below 10 PSI of the car manufacturer spec (not the sidewall) to start to notice the difference in MPG. I don't see any cars with barely inflated tires.

Your naive imaginary energy sources and ridiculous solutions do not run the economy

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

Contradiction

We can't drill our way out of this mess

increasing the efficiency of 100's of millions of vehicles will save us on the demand side of the equation

 

Sounds to me like you're saying demand is very important but supply is basically irrelevant. Doesn't make sense.

 

My Ben Franklin quip

My Ben Franklin quip addressed just that issue -- A barrel saved is a barrel drilled.

What Ben and I meant was that a decrease in demand with no change in supply is virtually the same as an increase in supply with no change in demand. 

So, in other words, supply

So, in other words, supply is important so we can drill ourselves out of "this mess". Not arguing about demand. Who doesn't want to use less oil?

You and the oil companies

You and the oil companies who have powerful allies at every level of the government.  Those allies impede any progress that leads us away from our dependence of Exxon.

What garbage. I'm guessing

What garbage. I'm guessing there's about 6.5 billion people on this planet that want to use as little oil as they possibly can. Exxon is outnumbered. But everytime we use oil we're saying to ourselves "That was good value for my money" otherwise we wouldn't but it. But the truth comes out. We can drill ourselves out of "this mess" but that would help the big evil oil companies. Go ahead FK, spew out your venom. Get it all off your chest. I won't tell anybody.

Wanting to save money on

Wanting to save money on energy use is not the same thing as using less oil.

There are people who strive to consume less energy as a matter of principle; it makes them feel better about themselves and they often brag about it to friends and reporters.

Then there are people who are trying to spend less money on their energy needs. These people are not concerned with the amount of energy they use. They are concerned with their check books.

These two groups are not the same.

What they have in common is their desire to save, whether it's money or oil. A direct, massive investment by this country in energy supplies other than oil will eventually meet the demands of both camps. The only losers will be the big oil companies and their servants in the federal government. 

why flash

You're begging the question yet again. No one has a problem with alternative energy - we just don't see it happening yet. Our plan is to have oil available (and economical) until we find a feasible alternative.

You seem to think that some miracle fuel will pop up in a lab six months from now if *only* there was enough funding for it.

And are all of these "investments" supposed to come from, taxing the oil companies? Yeah that's really smart...I buy gas from Texaco, the government takes my money away from them, and then the government hands it back to me in a "rebate check" or gives it to a scientist.

Just drop the song and dance and tax me directly because that's all it boils down to.

flash...

 "There are people who strive to consume less energy as a matter of principle"

Not me, I strive to consume less energy because I'm a tightwad. For those of you in Rio Linda, that means I'm cheap!

 

45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goals.htm

Exxon Mobile Merchandise = Awesome

Look Flash you can buy some cool ExxonMobile merchandise here. I recently bought a hat and cannot wait to wear it to an environmental rally. I am going to test it out in local malls and at smaller functions first to see if I need to also buy one of these.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

Haha.

Exxon hat at an environmental rally. That pretty much made my day.

 

------------------------------------------------------------

"It could be the answer to our age-old, philosophical question, 'Why are we here?' PLASTIC!"

"Yeah there's nothing wrong

"Yeah there's nothing wrong with oil except that we're running out of
it, terrorists control the bulk of it, and the prices are only going
through the roof

 

flash you forgot to add " thanks to liberals" when you started that post. I took the liberty of fixing that for ya', no thnx necessary.

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

More Oil Propaganda - We are NOT running out of oil!

Where do you get your propaganda?

Myth: The World is Running Out of Oil (Video) (5min) (John Stossel, 20/20)

Reserves:
- 1.8 to 6 Trillion barrels of oil are estimated in the U.S. Oil-Shale Reserves (DOE)
- 175 to 315 Billion barrels of oil are estimated in the Oil Sands of Alberta, Canada (AGS)
- 100 Billion barrels of heavy oil are estimated in the U.S. (DOE)
- 90 Billion barrels of oil are estimated in the Arctic (USGS)
- 89 Billion barrels of immobile oil are estimated recoverable using CO2 injection in the U.S. (DOE)
- 86 Billion barrels of oil are estimated in the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (MMS)
- 60 to 80 Billion barrels of oil are estimated in U.S. Tar Sands (DOE)
- 32 Billion barrels of oil are estimated in ANWR, NPRA and the Central North Slope in Alaska (USGS)
- 31.4 Billion barrels of oil are estimated in the East Greenland Rift Basins Province (USGS)
- 7.3 Billion barrels of oil are estimated in the West Greenland–East Canada Province (USGS)
- 4.3 Billion barrels of oil are estimated in the U.S. Bakken shale formation in North Dakota and Montana (USGS)
- 214 Million barrels of oil are estimated in the U.S. Illinois Basin (USGS)

Really Terrorists control the bulk of oil?

Canada, Mexico, Russia and Venezuela are terrorist countries?

While it is true that:

- 95% of the world's known oil and gas reserves are controlled by national oil companies (Forbes)

Do not confuse nationalist oil companies with terrorists:

- Only 16% of United States oil imports come from Middle Eastern countries (EIA)

And...

- The largest supplier of oil to the United States is Canada (EIA)
- The second largest supplier of oil to the United States is Mexico (EIA)

I take it you hate Canada and Mexico?

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

Running out of oil?

That's like saying "liberals are running out of bad ideas". Neither of which will be running out anytime soon! 

45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goals.htm

You are absolutely right

You are absolutely right and I was wrong. I actually misspoke. 

What I should have said is that the world is running out of easily recoverable, cheap oil. 

Just yesterday NASA discovered lakes of combustible liquid on one of the moons of Saturn. That could power the world from here to kingdom come.  But at what price? How do you ever recover it?

My point was that we are reaching a point where the expense of oil makes it economically practical for the government to shift some of the federal subsidies currently in place from the oil industry and toward more future leaning technologies. It is difficult for these start-up green-energy corporations to compete in the realm of pricing when the federal government is subsidizing the production of oil, even more so for foreign sources. 

The Market will decide what energy we use next

Making ridiculous comparisons does not help your case. All these sources: Heavy oil, oil sands, oil shale and coal to liquids are all more cost effective and more so than "green" fuels once light oil gets too expensive.

Energy Efficiency of Strategic Unconventional Resources (PDF) (DOE)

Government subsidies are not making oil out compete "green" fuels. Where the hell do you get this propaganda? The oil industry is ridiculously regulated and taxed.

"Big Oil" at the Public Trough? An Examination of Petroleum Subsidies (Cato Institute)

Government subsidies only cause problems and distort markets. They are one of the main causes of the current price of oil:

Global Oil Subsidies (Video) (3min)

Governments should remove all subsidies and regulations and leave our energy supplies up to the market, which actually works.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

Its just a waste of time

Its just a waste of time P.T. providing facts and hard data to a liberal. To a liberal "talking points" are facts and hard data.

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

Is the military protection

Is the military protection racket that guarantees the Saudi Princes' Thrones a government subsidy of the oil industry? Are the Carrier battle groups (2 or 3) patrolling the Persian Gulf a subsidy paid out by the american taxpayer to protect the property of oil companies -- is that a subsidy?

You will say that that is all about "national security." And that is a nebulous term. No fat Saudi Prince sitting on a golden throne lighting a bong with hundred dollar bills is gonna keep my family safe when push comes to shove. My idea of national security is to secure the borders of this country from foreign invasion, including illegal immigration. 

"My idea of national

"My idea of national security is to secure the borders of this country from foreign invasion, including illegal immigration. "

Thats the most sensible thing I've seen you post so far. However remember by your own screed,  the only reason our carrier battle groups are over there protecting our interests is because we cant' drill for our own oil here. By that assertion the Democrats are creating the problem two-fold, crushing our economy and putting our national security at risk.

Almost sounds treasonous doesn't it?

 

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

listen here flash

We can't agree with you more about illegal immigration and many folks on here have been railing against it (and Bush on that issue) for months.

But it's a real stretch to call security around our oil ports a subsidy. If you think that's not a national security issue then let's stop securing oil until we all end up back in 1979. For my tax dollar, it's worth it to see our military doing that - and it's not like an oil company could buy their own battleship to patrol like they're playing the cops.

    What I'm saying is

    What I'm saying is that it crumples up the playing field and puts certain energy companies above others.

For example, if Exxon was required to pay a portion of the cost for all of those battle ship escorts through the Straights of Hormuz, the cost of a barrel of oil would be a lot higher than it is today.

On the flip side, if the government used some of that protection money to encourage alternatives to oil -- at the same time that it forced Exxon to pay for its own battleship escorts -- the price of the two energy sources would be much, much closer.

We don't need billion dollar bombers to protect wind-driven turbines on the plains of Texas. If we add the military cost of protecting this oil to the price at the pump, more people would realize that we need to transition from the old to the new. 

"If we add the military

"If we add the military cost of protecting this oil to the price at the
pump, more people would realize that we need to transition from the old
to the new. "

Your right flash, the problem is, "the new" is not here yet. Until then we need to drill for our own oil right now, plain and simple.

 

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

 The "new" is not here yet

 The "new" is not here yet because these technologies are constantly being killed in the crib by the servants of big oil.

You don't believe that these corporations have your or our nation's best interests in mind when they throw around hundreds of millions of dollars spreading lies and muddying the water surrounding alternative energy sources? 

Finally the truth comes out! Conspiracy Propaganda!

Please list all these magic energy sources that were "killed" by Exxon. Obviously Exxon has worldwide control and has managed to kill these in every country on the planet too! Amazing the power of Exxon.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

Here's an analogy straight

Here's an analogy straight from the headlines ---

The two satellite radio companies in this country wanted to merge. Both companies were drowning apart but might swim if combined.

So they go to the government and ask for permission. But who should pop up and call this merger a detriment to the public good but the folks from free, regular old radio.  These folks spent millions of lobbying dollars to spread the rumor that the merger of XM and Sirius would constitute some gross monopoly and harm consumers.

None of this is true of course. But it illustrates how entrenched industries fight tooth and nail to kill in the crib anything competing while they're still in their infancy. 

Has it ever occurred to you

Has it ever occurred to you to ask why the government has a role in the business relationship between XM and Sirius?

Satellite Radio is a new energy source?

I had no idea... How did Exxon know?

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

Thats a weak comparison

Thats a weak comparison flash. Noone has to have satellite radio, it's an indulgence not a necessity. The same thing cannot be said about oil.

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

Your analogy...

 "But it illustrates how entrenched industries fight tooth and nail to kill in the crib anything competing while they're still in their infancy."

You mean kinda like how Planned Parenthood fights tooth and nail to kill in the womb?  

45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goals.htm

"You mean kinda like how

"You mean kinda like how Planned Parenthood fights tooth and nail to kill in the womb?"

And lets not forget Clear, P.P is nothing more than government subsidised murder, but you dont' see liberals complaining about those subsidies. 

 

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

Blazer...

Of course not, that's done for the sake of humanity. Or some bullsh*t like that. 

45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goals.htm

wait

Why were they asking permission from the government to merge? What is this, Britain?

"The "new" is not here yet

"The "new" is not here yet because these technologies are constantly being killed in the crib by the servants of big oil."

If thats the case flash what/where are they ? How much and how efficient? C'mon tell us, we're all ears. Otherwise, thats just another talking point you threw out there.

 

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

flash...

Exxon already pays for those escorts.

 

45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goals.htm

*spits water onto screen*

if Exxon was required to pay a portion of the cost for all of those battle ship escorts through the Straights of Hormuz, the cost of a barrel of oil would be a lot higher than it is today.

Sweetheart do you have any clue how much money Exxon is paying in taxes? It's almost three times their profit margin.

Let's turn that statement around a little bit, shall we??? If Exxon wasn't paying tens of billions in taxes so Obama can pass out government giveaways the cost of a gallon of gas would be a lot cheaper.

And you really believe the government would use that money to fund research. That's cute. Kinda how the extra taxes on tobacco all pay for rehab services and the income from the lottery always goes to education.

 

It's funny that you bring

It's funny that you bring up the tobacco business. I remember when these cigarette tycoons sat around telling everyone that smoking was harmless, that all that coughing was strengthening your lungs, and the doctors on their payroll encouraged pregnant women to smoke to keep their weight down.

Does any of that sound like the modern oil industry and all of the denials and obfuscations regarding climate change and global oil reserves.

What if we wake up tomorrow and discover that the oil companies have been playing us like smokers? The country's got the first signs of lung cancer, there's nothing to treat it, and --- worst of all --- there's no more cigarettes.

Does any of that fake science, experts in white lab coats, contradiction to common sense sound familiar? 

flash...

The next time I smoke a barrel of Oil I will let you know. 

45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goals.htm

"What if we wake up

"What if we wake up tomorrow and discover that the oil companies have been playing us like smokers?"

Yea, "what if". After all is said and done this is where you end up.

Well "what if" the Dems in Congress let us drill offshore and in ANWR getting those billions of barrels of oil at the same time we're researching our alternative needs for the future? What are they so afraid of ?

 

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

thanks flash

You know what's really funny? How you ignore the point of my post and wander off topic to discuss tobacco.

No sweetie, denying the effects of tobacco does not sound anything like denying global warming. You're stretching to connect dots that don't really connect.

But since we're on the subject of that now, let's discuss how government intervention has done such a wonderful job of making tobacco obsolete, how modern teenagers are really not smoking earlier than ever, and how all those extra taxes slapped on there have done sooo much to prevent future smokers.

Let's get down to the meat of this: the government saw a handy villain, promised to punish them by taking away more money, and continue to watch the money roll in while nothing is being done to keep their promise about stopping it. Why should they make it obsolete when they would lose those millions?

THAT sounds familiar to me.

candance

Very good response and counter-analogy.

But, I'm afraid, the award goes to CT.... see two posts up. THAT was perfect, and about the funniest comeback I've seen in quite some time.

:p 

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *
For REAL Change

MrShy...

Thanks, but I don't deserve the recognition. It was 'flashking' that made me do it! 

45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goals.htm

no Shy

You must not have gotten the memo:

When referring to me in flash's presence my name is Cadence.

You like his comeback better? Yeah...well...I wasn't even trying to be funny, so there!

:p

cadence

Substantively, yours blew CT's out of the water, no question.

He edged you out on comedic flair, that's all.

:p 

Btw, I DID like the closing of your post to Biffy The IQ Slayer in another thread.... "Will someone please ban this troll..." or something to this effect. :) 

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *
For REAL Change

can't...stop...laughing

Biffy the IQ Slayer

there are actual tears

too funny...stomach hurts now

 

Re: my comeback - well when I climb upon my soapbox I tend to lose my funny bone.

 

IQ Slayer

 

hee hee

Biffy The IQ Slayer

Thanks Candance :) As I typed it, was thinking, "whoa, I think I have a good one here..." 

"You like me..... you reeeeeally like me!"

- another liberal twit actor (but man was she a hottie in the 70's... DAMN, that Burt Reynolds!)

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *
For REAL Change

Tobacco vs. Personal Responsibility

It is obvious candace that "big tobacco"makes people smoke and they have no free will.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

It's funny that you bring up Al Gore's Propaganda

I remember when science was judged based on the actual science and not comparisons to irrelevant things. Will a new drug cure cancer? I don't know because I remember when the Nazi's said eugenics were a good thing.

Good propaganda for naive idiots. After environmentalists were successful in brainwashing millions of Americans that oil companies were evil this sort of irrelevant propaganda attaches to the brainwashed mind easily.

Oil companies are only composed of millions upon millions of employees, share holders and their families who are all willing to sacrifice their families to an eternal hell to make a buck now. No it couldn't be that the science is a joke and the whole propaganda designed to directly attack hydrocarbon energy. It is obviously an oil funded conspiracy.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

you're right poptech

And all of those evil middle-class housewives who are banking on that share in Exxon to full up the IRA...their windfall profits must be confiscated too.

I cannot find any Middle Eastern Exxon Owned Oil Reserves...

Could you please give me a break down of every major middle eastern oil reserve and who owns it.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

Hello Flash? Where is Exxon?

I really need your help as I cannot find their middle eastern oil reserves.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

Which oil company owns Aramco Flash?

After you figure that one out... Hint it is not Exxon!

Protecting our nation's energy supplies is called good foreign policy. But you failed to grasp this fact:

- Only 16% of United States oil imports come from Middle Eastern countries (EIA)

Unfortunately we became the middle east's police when the British pulled out in the 70s and have since established our own energy supplies in Alaska, the North Sea, Canada and Mexico. We are now looking to improve on those with the OCS, ANWR, more oil sands, shale oil and coal to liquids which your buddies are standing in the way of.

The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource

It was nice for the Dems in

It was nice for the Dems in The House to go on a five week vacation without letting a vote come to the floor on drilling.

At least someone was watching though.

http://mine.icanhasc...

 

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

- Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

" The Cake is a lie."   

Mr. Greenspan's

quoted remarks do not take into consideration that international oil prices are dollar demoninated.  A weak dollar (at least partially due to a large current accounts deficit) results in higher oil prices for American consumers.

The Energy Information Agency has stated more than once that whatever oil production could eventually come from ANWR would have a very limited impact on domestic gasoline prices.  Roughly six cents per gal. many years in the future.

Commentors may blame Sen. Peosi and Sen. Reid - they don't have much to do with EIA research and studies. 

American gasoline consumption has reduced dramatically.  Surely this has had a positive impact on oil prices.

As to speculation, we can thank Sen. Phil Gramm for the deregulation that allows folks to make huge bets on oil prices with very limited rules - including margin requirements.

Finally, if the US were to significantly increase oil production - and we know today there are vast areas available for exploration, and hundreds of thousands of already leased acres that are not being tested - why wouldn't other oil producers simply reduce their production to maintain high prices?

Major oil companies are spending between 25% and 50% on new production as they are on stock buybacks and dividends.  They enjoy record profits - fully utilizing generous GAAP - and seek to divert negative comment by claiming they just need to drill more.

Republicans - having failed to create a rational national energy policy during the six years they controlled both houses of congress and the White House - are now indulging in election year hot air blathering to avoid accepting blame. 

 

Maybe I'm getting old...

Ok, no "maybe" about it. But whenever I talked about the weakening US dollar under the Clinton administration, Clinton partisans screamed. Now, they're on my side and Republican partisans scream about it when I tell the exact same truth. It's kinda like this issue, where (if Obama wins) I hereby predict conservatives will suddenly & magically go from screaming at libertarians for complaining about it to joining us in our condemnation (like everyone knows they would have if this obvious violation of the 4th Amendment had gone on under Clinton instead of Bush). Ah, principles...
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

Frank

Frank,

Talk about your low hanging fruit! The only thing you know less about than politics is economics, and I can fill a streetful of warehouses with what you don't know about politics! :-)

So let me get this straight: you believe a 16 percent decline in the value of the dollar since December 31, 2003, is responsible for a 360 percent increase in the price of oil during the same period?

Forgive me, folks, but the lack of economic and arithmetic acumen on display here is astounding. That folks like this are allowed to vote makes me sick. :-)

One of the things that has amazed me for years as folks have blamed higher oil prices on the falling dollar is that the country experiencing the greatest increase in oil demand is China. As its currency is pegged to the dollar, a falling dollar actually makes oil MORE expensive for China NOT LESS. Yet, its demand is increasing.

Why don't you explain THAT to the class, Frankie? :-) 

Folks, the belief that a lower dollar is causing prices to inflate is based on the assumption that as our dollar goes down, the demand for dollar-based assets goes up. However, as the dollar has only declined by 16 percent versus a basket of other currencies, since oil has gone up by 360 percent, oil is still DRAMATICALLY more expensive for everyone else around the world despite it being tied to the dollar.

As such, blaming oil's rise on the falling dollar is really just a Bush bash. Might it represent a component of the rise? Sure. But not very much when you consider an almost 600 percent rise since 2001. Capiche? ns

P.S. NewsBusters should brace themselves for a response from this genius which includes links to leftist economists like Reich and Krugman that will support Frankie's theory. It must be wonderful to always have shameless pols like that available to support whatever lame economic point one posits. :-)  

Braced

Reich should actually love more drilling since he's a big (actually short) labor economist who loves unions.  And if I'm correcct, the roughnecks are unionized.

As for Krugman, every point he makes in the media can usually be countered by something from his earlier textbooks or articles.  Granted, he was always a lefty-ish economist, but he had a greater sense of realism back when he didn't get overcome by fame.

 

<insert witty signature here>

Krugman...

Can anyone remember when he was right? I can't.

45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goals.htm

It's easy to underestimate

It's easy to underestimate your genius Noel when you use a smiley face after every thought.

Keep it up buddy. You're this :-0 close to saving the country from common sense. :*^(> 

Hey Noel, can I call you a

Hey Noel, can I call you a *&%# and still post here? Seems to be the new way of debating you. 

 

"I don't have time for this. You all can continue your co-dependency posts and make yourselves feel all chummy... Frankly, you all don't represent where America is going and you might as well get used to it."

--The Dooper

contrary

contrary,

Well, and that probably explains my ill-humor. The trolls lately have been more and more offensive, and my previously even-temper is getting tougher and tougher to maintain. Maybe I can go back to being myself next year, although I suspect that regardless of who wins in November, our liberal guests will be even more intolerable. ns

You think their recent

You think their recent exchanges on this site are a sign of their desparation? It probably is an output of their whole political philosophy. If you can't say something with emotion and bravado, it must not be worth saying.

 

"I don't have time for this. You all can continue your co-dependency posts and make yourselves feel all chummy... Frankly, you all don't represent where America is going and you might as well get used to it."

--The "Dooper

OK Noel

Put down the demedia propaganda you're reviewing for your next post real slow like, back away to the dining room....eat some of Mrs. Noels most excellent pasta and nobody gets hurt.

Tired of dealing over and over with trollish moonbats?  It could be worse.  Mrs. acumen is dragging this poor soul to the mall.  Have a good evening y'all and if I'm not back later send help to the women's shoes department.  I'll be the one sitting in the corner babbling; like the last hundred pairs you tried on honey, they don't make your feet look too big.....honest.

acumen

Laughing out loud acumen...

Say hello to Mrs acumen and try to have a good time...

No babbling allowed.

"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh

That's the way most Liberals will debate

Look at McCain's ads. Instead of debating the ad they are calling it racist, saying its bizarre, etc. 

Thomas Jefferson once said, 'We should never judge a president by his age, only by his works.' And ever since he told me that, I stopped worrying. 

- Ronald Reagan

I didn't call Noel any

I didn't call Noel any names.

My point was that using emoticons after every serious point undermines the power of your argument and erodes your credibility. Is that controversial and uncivil? 

If so, I'm sorry for being a dope. 

NBers

NBers,

To interject, I use emoticons to make the intent of the point more plain as it is possible that folks might read something that wasn't there. In this instance, the use of smileys was akin to a laugh-track: I added them when I wanted readers to know when they should chuckle unless it wasn't obvious. :-)

Of course, our liberal readers didn't pick this up even though THEY believe they have a monopoly on humor, and WE are DEVOID of such!!!

Now THAT's entertainment!  :-) ns

 Seriously FK, did you

 Seriously FK, did you just criticize Noels smiley faces? Are you really that ridiculous,? Good grief : '

 

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

Mr. Sheppard:

Why, thank you for such a friendly post!  You certainly are a pleasure to have a conversation with.

I said the falling dollar was one reason.  This is a complex matter, and it would be silly to say it is caused by just one thing - say, like suppy and demand.

I could not help but notice that you avoided the other issues I raised.  But why attempt to have an adult discussion?  Just keep hurling insults - it's a great way for you to make your point.  Or to hide the obvious facts that stand in the way of your sincerely held beliefs.

Others - who might be interested in actually learning something about this issue - should read Howell Raines' very interesting article "Crude Reporting" in the August 2008 issue of Conde Nast Portfolio.  He addresses a number of viewpoints - there is more to this than supply and demand.

Frankie

Frankie,

Don't play the victim here, pal. My not-so friendly response is the product of the hate-filled rhetoric you've tossed at me and others here for over two years. Quid pro quo, mon amie.

Of course, you didn't disappoint with your refuting source by recommending readers waste their time reviewing a piece by the former executive editor of the New York Times -- the very moron that hired Paul Krugman!

I couldn't have scripted it any better! Thank you VERY MUCH for playing my game. :-) ns

Frank....the victim

I don't have a horse in your race for NB victim of the day; however, the dog you posted in your first comment just won't hunt --

The Energy Information Agency has stated more than once that whatever oil production could eventually come from ANWR would have a very limited impact on domestic gasoline prices.

For your edification a missing critical statement from the EIA is as follows; "the coastal plain of ANWR has had little exploration activity, there is considerable uncertainty in the size of the oil resources that might be eventually recovered."

Apparently you are satisfied with Congress refusal to allow more exploration to get to the truth.  But do you really find it necessary to discard the rest of the EIA position on ANWR simply to make your point?

BTW - I considered providing a link to the EIA quote but decided against providing something to you which you are evidently against providing to others....much like domestic energy.

Hoping my response satisfied your criteria of responding to someone that I consider willingly supports and promotes the unnecessary suffering of millions of Americans.

Journalism is dead