$4 Gas in 2008 Good, $4 Gas in 2012 Bad?

Submitted by: Baalthazaq 5 years ago in

Media hypocrisy now on actual full display. Ya know, now from both sides rather than one.
There are 45 comments:
Male 43
I`d like to see any politician or newscaster ride a bike to work to conserve energy. Or even drive an economical car. That`ll be the day.
0
Reply
Female 1,894
fughh...were fughd.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@5cats: Clinton didn`t need to summon bimbos, they knew where he was most of the time.
0
Reply
Male 37,888
@Cajun & Simbah: It`s 1000 chars, but some things get counted incorrectly by the "Current" counter and can cut you off as early as 800, eh? I`ve had comments in the 950s come out clean.

@thelonious: Is that what that knob is for? I thought Clinton had it installed to summon bimbos...
0
Reply
Male 8
thats $4 a gallon? you dont know how good you`ve got it.
In the UK, £1.40 a litre, or £6.30 a gallon, or roughly $10.00 a gallon
0
Reply
Male 132
The rest of the media has gone from blaming Bush to explaining why it isn`t Obama`s fault, but they all get a pass on their hypocrisy.
0
Reply
Female 1,324
$4 from a non political/economic standpoint is always gonna be bad.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
birdawg68: Actually your own link says that US refineries need more crude oil and that keystone XL would provide that supply.

No where in your link does it say anything about exporting oil outside the US.
0
Reply
Male 3,310
Underneath the president`s desk in the Oval Office is a knob he turns to set the gasoline price. Let`s not joke around about this.
0
Reply
Male 1,399
I really don`t care who`s blaming whom for high energy prices.

If you believe current (or even higher) energy prices are a good thing, then you are an enemy of prosperity, and very likely a massive hypocrite.

Cheap, plentiful energy is required for economic growth and technological innovation. If you want the unicorn and fairy dust energy, we have to develop it using current energy.
0
Reply
Male 133
If you are supportive of the keystone pipeline extension because you believe it will bring jobs or fuel to the US you are misinformed, or just ignorant of the truth. If completed the pipeline will go to the gulf coast FOR EXPORT to Euroupe, China and South America. And do the math yourself on the 20,000 man hours of labor. How many jobs is that? Research it, don`t spew out some ignorance base4d on a party line. Look at http://www.transcanada.com/keystone.html the truth is on their own website. You just have to understand what you are reading.
0
Reply
Male 412
@Cajun: Well, that`s convenient... Then why doesn`t it say that on the bottom of the page - and enforce that limit, instead of 1,000?

/sigh
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@simbha

The char limit`s actually 800.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]Pickens` plan is tailor made to make him large profits, and that`s why he promoted it in the first place. So don`t think he`s being noble with his plan.[/quote]

Well if his plan promotes green energy as well, I can`t think of anything else put forth that could be anymore nobler. Power to him!
0
Reply
Male 412
[No idea why IAB`s form keeps cutting me off, when apparently I`m under the max characters but anyway...]

The last line should have read...

"but that`s the entire point of strategy; the society must choose to make certain inv[estments]."
0
Reply
Male 412
I never suggested that his plan is noble. It`s true that I`ve met the man and heard him speak several times - but what convinces me that (overall) it`s the best plan for the intermediate horizon isn`t these things. It`s my own analysis, which my team and I have exhaustively prepared several times. There was a time - even before Mr. Pickens publicly proposed his plan - that I had gone through the first steps of setting up a PAC specifically to support national candidates for office who would support a plan containing (as part) a transition through natural gas (too much to go into here).

That his plan, if realized, would make him billions is irrelevant - except only to suggest that he does believe the in his own rhetoric and has positioned himself to reap the rewards of such if it manifests.

And with regard to your own statement about `demonizing` other now-conventional fuels, I agree - but that`s the entire point of strategy; the society must choose to make certain inv
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Pickens` plan is tailor made to make him large profits, and that`s why he promoted it in the first place. So don`t think he`s being noble with his plan.

Having said that, we do have abundant natural gas and we should be using it. But demonizing coal and petroleum is just stupid until truly viable and profitable alternatives are developed.

I`m a big believer in Thorium nuclear reactors, the fuel is cheap and abundant, it would be safer, wouldn`t need waste containment for thousands of years, and doesn`t require large amounts of water.
0
Reply
Male 546
It`s not his fault! Stop blaming BO! It`s GW`s fault. BO deserves four more years to straighten out the eight that GW ffff`d up.

...... I am so tired of hearing excuses for either of them.
0
Reply
Male 412
@Crakr: I`m not `forgetting` anything. My comment was simply relating to the cost of gasoline in inflation-adjusted terms over the past century or so. It wasn`t a judgment on American usage of this gasoline or any other factor.

Yes, people use a lot more gasoline today than they have in the past - and perhaps that`s the issue. Our country`s growth patterns and poor infrastructure development and maintenance have contributed largely to our need for fossil fuels - and moving strictly to so-called `alternative` fuels is not an effective solution; however, neither is continuing to build our dependence on oil.

I happen to be a proponent of most aspects of the Pickens plan, which moves us through natural gas as an intermediary fuel product (largely through power generation) as research is continued into non-fossil-based energy options in the coming decades. I don`t really see any other alternative. Pining for the days of yore - when oil/gas prices were low - is not going to
0
Reply
Male 17,512
simbha: You`re forgetting that most people rely on a car to get to work, get groceries, pick up the kids, run errands and many other things. In the 1930`s most people didn`t own a car and they drove a lot fewer miles. Factor in the increased costs of maintenance and insurance nowadays and it costs a lot more than it did then.
0
Reply
Male 412
AntEconomist: "Actually, gas today is as expense (relative to the average American`s income) as it was in 1975. Factor in that cars get 30% better mileage on average and the cost of gas-powered travel is actually cheaper than in 1975."

... And, just slightly higher than the sustained period in the mid-1930s, and also only slightly higher than the peak in the late-1910s. For example, in 1935 gas prices were $0.165 per gallon and average per capita income was around $475 per year. A thousand dollars of gas would have been around 35% of annual income. Contrast this with the average gas price of $3.82 for the past year in the US - compared with a per capita income of around $39,000. That puts a thousand gallons of gas per year at roughly 10% of annual income. Yes, it has been lower than this in recent years, but it`s still quite cheap.
0
Reply
Male 37,888
[quote] "No no, Fox still aren`t blaming the President, and if they were, I`d be shocked and appalled[/quote]
So... put up a video roundup of that eh @Baalth? But you didn`t. Or that`s right, it`s OK to ASSUME Fox hatred, and the MSM is assumed to be utterly fair! I forgot.
@DuckBoy: IAB does occasionally put up postings for `both sides` but it`s not common.
idk about "25:1" but I`d agree with a "Left 5:1 Right" ratio. The trouble is that lefties don`t see it as "left" they think their bias is the "center" eh?

AND: I submit tons of stuff, on and off. Not just politics either! But for some strange reason, few of my excellent suggestions get posted, except for the occasional political one.
Theory: @Baalth and @madest like to post my political topics in a misguided effort to discredit the "right"
@FancyLad does it for the lols!
0
Reply
Male 302
I think the one thing we can all agree on is that high gas prices suck. Regardless of what vehicle you drive, what party you support, or where you live.
Unless you are an oil tycoon, then you`re just an non-nice individual.
0
Reply
Male 371
Actually, gas today is as expense (relative to the average American`s income) as it was in 1975. Factor in that cars get 30% better mileage on average and the cost of gas-powered travel is actually cheaper than in 1975.
0
Reply
Male 3,463
Thetas, no, completely opposite. I want IAB to post BOTH sides to every political based story.

FoolsPrussia, I don`t know if you saw, but the first one was posted then almost immediately taken down. There was an outcry and it was put back. Why it was taken down? I don`t know, but IAB`s track record shows it was politically based.

Baal, I`m not quite sure I understand what you`re saying, but IAB does lean so far left it`s falling off the ledge. If you`re insinuating that I`m anti-Muslim, anti-global warming, rightwing nutjob, you`re wrong about that too.
I am anti-all-religion, anti-climate-change caused-100%-by-man, moderate-that-leans-to-the right-on-economics nutjob.
And 5Cats and Crakr esque posts are very few. I would estimate a 25-1 ratio of pro-left to pro-right posts on this site, and a lower ratio as of lately.
0
Reply
Male 38,511

Last I heard, the don`t give POTUS a magic pen that signs anything into law he wants. So what`s he supposed to do about gas prices?
0
Reply
Male 4,547
Also, to be clear, I approved (and posted) this one.
Not "IAB".

So by that logic, apparently this is the first time I`ve disagreed with a post (which I don`t, I agree with it, it`s just one sided propaganda).

Now you get two sided propaganda, both of which are abominations to journalistic integrity.

However, it would seem to me, all the posters most outraged by the previous video seem to have run out of outrage for this one.

Oh no wait, they`re just redirecting their rage at the person who pointed it out. Well... if it helps you sleep at night.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
Very very bad.... i guess bikes are the way to go now
0
Reply
Male 4,547
"I believe the reason the title says "good" and "bad" is because it`s a snarky reference to the previous post. I don`t think Baal is actually making that assertion."

Your snark detector is in full working order. ;)

Duckboy:
"First time IAB has ever shown both sides and they only did it because the first post was the side IAB doesn`t agree with."

So IAB is an anti-Muslim, anti-global-warming, right wing sounding board apparently, saying as we rarely if ever show an alternative to the 5 Cat and Crakr post bombs we receive on the topics.

Good to know.

"I see NOTHING from 2012"

How about you make an assertion, like "No no, Fox still aren`t blaming the President, and if they were, I`d be shocked and appalled, as it would be `media hypocrisy, loud and clear`".

.... no?
0
Reply
Male 3,445
"First time IAB has ever shown both sides and they only did it because the first post was the side IAB doesn`t agree with."

Someone had to approve the first one, genius.
0
Reply
Male 1,540
@DuckBoy87

Would you rather IAB just neglected to post the POV that disagrees with its views? You`re that guy. The one that will never be happy. You`re pretending every IAB mod has the same political views. They don`t.
0
Reply
Male 3,463
First time IAB has ever shown both sides and they only did it because the first post was the side IAB doesn`t agree with.

Hypocritical much IAB?


And make matters worse, the video shows no evidence of saying high gas prices in 2008 were good and there were no clips from 2012.

I think it`s time we got some new mods, or at least de-mod the idjit that approved this post.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
I believe the reason the title says "good" and "bad" is because it`s a snarky reference to the previous post. I don`t think Baal is actually making that assertion.
0
Reply
Male 8,132
That`s because you have (for the most part) much better public transit and a smaller sphere that you drive in. So you consume less gas, so prices are higher. I drive 40 miles to work every day. It sucks.
0
Reply
Male 1,625
sorry if this was covered, but when did they say it was GOOD? when did they say it was bad?

all I kept hearing was, "we can`t do anything about gas/oil prices, get rid of the gas guzzling cars"
0
Reply
Female 833
stop bitching. our gas is over $9.
0
Reply
Male 1,678
The only info I got from this video was that Presidents don`t decide how much oil costs.
0
Reply
Male 37,888
I see several Fox newscasters and/or guests in 2008 (Bush) saying it`s not the President`s fault for "high" gas prices of $3.
I see NOTHING from 2012.
How does this, in any way, refute @Crackr`s video? That was Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton blaming Bush, not some rubes off the street! And the contrast of the MSM blaming Bush in 2007 and PRAISING Obama in 2010 is both obvious and sickening.
Nice try @Baalthy but you didn`t actually DO anything, eh?
0
Reply
Male 273
Fox News... misinformation at its finest. The worst part is that they get away with lying on a daily basis.
0
Reply
Male 599
Are we really citing Fox News now?
0
Reply
Male 10,440
IAB fail.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
Baal=Faal.
0
Reply
Male 1
It`s about time somebody remembered recent history!
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Title is misleading. No one in 2008 said the high gas prices were `good`, and no one in this video mentioned 2012 gas prices at all.

The fact still remains, Obama killed the Keystone XL pipeline that no only would`ve provided much needed jobs, but would`ve lowered gas prices.
0
Reply
Male 4,547
Link: $4 Gas in 2008 Good, $4 Gas in 2012 Bad? [Rate Link] - Media hypocrisy now on actual full display. Ya know, now from both sides rather than one.
0
Reply