Does any Bush voter remember back in 2000 when he scrutinized Clinton for having gas prices at $1.50? Just because republicans control the voting machines and the media doesn't mean they should have a double standard. Or does it???
Just heard an interesting thing on NBC News tonight ......adjusted for inflation, the gas prices in 1981 were higher than they are now! Interesting, huh? Baron Max
Funny, wasn't that when Reagan was president?! The only president comparably bad to Bush. Interesting? Huh? And you still haven't even adressed another one of yours truly's lies. If Bush means nearly doubling the price of gas as lowering it....whew! That sounds almost like the american public electing Bush!!!
What happened to alternative enrgies to benefit all of mankind instead of the same polluting energy sources we have used for the last century?
Alternative energies cost too much! Why is that so hard to grasp? Many things are being tried to produce energy, but they all have major drawbacks, not to mention the high cost. Supply and demand, demand and supply ....they control everything that we do in one way or another. Idealism takes a minor backseat to supply and demand and the high costs. When we run out of oil or the cost is more than the cost of wind turbines or nukes or such, then we'll change. Until then, take a deep breath of that wonderful city air and enjoy it while you can! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Baron Max PS - National geographic magazine has a great article on energy for the future. Y'all should pick it up and read it ....you'll be educated and amazed.
Rather silly. Just how much control do you think the president has over gasoline prices, be it Clinton, Bush, or whoever. Perhaps you shoud consider a retake of Economics-101 and Politics-101 as well.
Minimal, at best. However Bush said that in 2000 he would lower the Gas prices when they were at $1.50. Maybe you should ask W. that question. Or maybe, just maybe were we deceived by this president??
Can you actually point to quote where he said that? About all a president can do is release some of the Strategic Petroleum Reserves or ask congress to impose price controls. As far as I can tell he's already taken all the steps he can, such as trying to open up protected areas to oil drilling and production. And what else would you possibly suggest?
you have to understand that oil is a limited resource, and now [with the peak oil scare] that is actually beginning to matter. besides that, major oil suppliers [like iran] also run on oil, and as their populations grow, they will require more oil within their own borders and thus exports diminish. some say the current highs are due in part to speculation, meaning a decline in the price of oil [and gasoline] is possible, but...i guess i'd better start distilling alcohol. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
full scale invasion of saudi arabia is the answer... *puts on his republican mask* deliciouuuus oil....*rubs hands together*
If we had responsible leadership, they would surely be making the Apollo Alliance a superpromoted, superfunded national priority. But like the Coal Barons of yore, they will first protect their own and jealously protect their own wealth until the very end of their age. Unfortunately, it looks like they are either willing or ignorant enough to wreck our economy and environment in the process.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4610936/site/newsweek/ In 2000, President Bill Clinton found himself on the defensive when midsummer oil prices jumped up to about $1.68 per gallon. At the time, as candidate George W. Bush campaigned for the White House, he said his predecessor should simply put more pressure on the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to release more oil.
Want to know the prices in America then check here: http://www.gasbuddy.com/ World prices: Netherlands Amsterdam $6.48 Norway Oslo $6.27 Italy Milan $5.96 Denmark Copenhagen $5.93 Belgium Brussels $5.91 Sweden Stockholm $5.80 United Kingdom London $5.79 Germany Frankfurt $5.57 France Paris $5.54 Portugal Lisbon $5.35 Hungary Budapest $4.94 Luxembourg $4.82 Croatia Zagreb $4.81 Ireland Dublin $4.78 Switzerland Geneva $4.74 Spain Madrid $4.55 Japan Tokyo $4.24 Czech Republic Prague $4.19 Romania Bucharest $4.09 Andorra $4.08 Estonia Tallinn $3.62 Bulgaria Sofia $3.52 Brazil Brasilia $3.12 Cuba Havana $3.03 Taiwan Taipei $2.84 Lebanon Beirut $2.63 South Africa Johannesburg $2.62 Nicaragua Managua $2.61 Panama Panama City $2.19 Russia Moscow $2.10 Puerto Rico San Juan $1.74 Saudi Arabia Riyadh $0.91 Kuwait Kuwait City $0.78 Egypt Cairo $0.65 Nigeria Lagos $0.38 Venezuela Caracas $0.12 Source: air-inc.com
So you're suggesting that, in a free-market society and in a democracy, the government should prop up one industry over and above the others? ..to give them an unfair advantage in the marketplace? What if someone else suggested propping up the oil industry? How would you like that? Why not? Please re-consider what you'd like your government to be and do ....and please don't forget where the goverment's money comes from, too! Baron Max
Baron Max: "So you're suggesting that, in a free-market society and in a democracy, the government should prop up one industry over and above the others?" Are you seriously suggesting that the US govt does not? Consider the recent energy bill and military appropriations. What I'm suggesting is that government responsibly and decisively lead the USA in transitioning into a more independent and prosperous future. I'm suggesting that our government cease propping up a handful of oil and military megacorporations, and instead encourage and fund the widest possible portfolio of alternative energy innovators, of whom there are legion. Here you can look over a list of individuals and companies who are already committed to this vital vision. With a national commitment on par with our 1960s moonshot initiative, America could really get going someplace promising, instead of playing a sick national Russian Roulette with the doomed oil and military cartels.
"What if someone else suggested propping up the oil industry?" That is being strongly suggested with every major initiative of present US government, and the major media is going along with the delusion. We are grasping desperately and single-mindedly for the last dregs of the petroleum era, regardless of who gets hurt in the process, and what the long-term implications are. "How would you like that?" Not very much. "Why not?" Because the future prosperity -and perhaps even national viability- of the United States will require that we make a focused andconcerted effort to now move past our obsession with petroleum while we have time to adapt. But we are presently stuck with petroleum Captains of Industry (and their boys) at the national helm at exactly the wrong time, when the petroleum heyday is ending. We need leadership free of vested interests that block them from an unobstructed view forward at the challenges fast approaching.
