Originally Posted by RichieLion

The trouble with the NYT story, Kahuna, is that it is predicated (OK, here it comes) ON A LIE!!

You may find it hard to believe that the NYT lies. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt; maybe they just have really bad researchers for their stories and the stories aren't just written for "cover Obama's backside" purposes.

The Big Energy Lie, Revisited | Maley's Energy Blog

Senators Call Obama On His Energy Lies | Power Line

Good articles, Richie. Now we're beginning to expand our collective knowledge base so we can understand what our government is doing or not doing.

There are often two sides to many stories. In politics, the way words are parsed by the partisans, it's safe to say that there are two sides to every story.

After reading all the articles, I guess there's one common thread--that the effect of political decisions on oil exploration and production often take several years to have an effect.

I don't know what the answer is, but having different presidents with different priorities when it comes to energy seems to have created a stop-start, herky-jerky national policy with regard to the needs of the country for energy and how they will be satisfied. When was the Department of Energy (DOE) initially formed, under Jimmy Carter wasn't it?

What is the DOE supposed to do? From it's own website, it says...

"The Department of Energy's overarching mission is to advance the national, economic, and energy security of the United States; to promote scientific and technological innovation in support of that mission; and to ensure the environmental cleanup of the national nuclear weapons complex."

The budget requested by President Obama for the DOE for FY 2012 is $27 billion. That's going on 1% of the entire federal budget!

Now I ask you, has the DOE done any of what they were established to do? Are we getting our money's worth from the DOE? Or from the politicians who fund and direct the department? When is the American public going to begin to ask--no DEMAND--a consistent policy which bridges all administrations, regardless of political party, to accomplish the energy independence of the country?

Would that be asking too much? Yeah, it probably would be.

Originally Posted by Bucco

DJPLONG..now this is where I really separate from the left leaning posters.

I know you are an intelligent fellow, so you surely know that EVERY President is blamed for high gas prices when they occur. That includes Republican presidents and I know that you are aware of that, YET....you folks always go for the politics of "getting somebody" and in this case, for NO reason you take a totally unnecessary shot at Fox news.

I recall VIVIDLY many cable channels and news sources blaming Bush for the same thing and it goes even further back, YET you still FOR NO APPARENT REASON had to make it appear as a right wing scenario.

Yes, but as memory recalls (and I'm certainly willing to be corrected), Fox was the only channel defending Bush. They said back then that there wasn't much a President could do about oil prices - and now that it's Obama, they seem to have changed their tune and are saying the exact same things that MSNBC, et al, were saying about Bush back then.

Originally Posted by djplong

Yes, but as memory recalls (and I'm certainly willing to be corrected), Fox was the only channel defending Bush. They said back then that there wasn't much a President could do about oil prices - and now that it's Obama, they seem to have changed their tune and are saying the exact same things that MSNBC, et al, were saying about Bush back then.

Look I understand.....but the thread had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with Fox...NOTHING.

That is my issue..you folks bring up FOX when it does not apply...the issue is oil.....I just do not understand the reference to FOX. I started a thread backing Obama and you guys still have to find a way to go after somebody !!!!

Originally Posted by Posh 08

I'm not as simple minded as that. Sanctions on Iran need to happen. Gas prices have risen because of the Iran problems. That suits POTUS. His Secretary let that cat out of the bag. He also doesn't need any more green business failures on his record. I get that politically it works out swell for the Administrations Green agenda.

Paid 3.89 a gallon in The Villages for gasoline. Gas today in Montreal Que. is 1.42 per litre or approx 5.32 per gallon. Be thankful. Will take your price there any day.

Originally Posted by Topper1

Paid 3.89 a gallon in The Villages for gasoline. Gas today in Montreal Que. is 1.42 per litre or approx 5.32 per gallon. Be thankful. Will take your price there any day.

$3.89 gal in The Shenandoah Valley today. Mowing is killing me. The good wife is paying plenty for her commute in the Civic. I'm still convinced that the current Administration has an agenda to get prices to Europe levels. Maybe then we'll break down and buy a Volt. Heck the POTUS said he'll get one after his next term.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

I The national debt has increased by three trillion dollars or so since Obama was inaugurated. But it's increased by a trillion dollars in the year or so since the Republicans took control of the House and the country's purse strings.

VK, You are wrong here. The Republicans do not have control of the purse strings.Budgets must originate in the House but do not go into effect until an agreement is reached between the House and the Senate and then signed by the President. It is now close to 1,000 days since we have had a budget. The Republican House has fulfilled its responsibility by passing several budgets. Harry Reid, the Democrat Senate Majority Leader has blocked these budgets from going to committee or coming to the Senate Floor for a vote.