Bluegrassrivals

TheRealThing Wrote:So, you're lining up on the side of the argument, which says even though Obama broke dozens and dozens of promises involving your tax dollars and other important issues, the common thread being gas prices are/were high under both administrations, that one point totally levels the playing field? At least Bush didn't nix the Canadian pipeline and pass a boatload of federal regulations which make it more and more difficult to explore and drill for oil which would alleviate some of America's energy woes. Remember the allegations with regard to high gas prices in 07 and 08 when dems accused Bush of being a Texas oil man, in bed with big oil? So using that logic I guess Obama now is in bed with big oil? Bush wasn't perfect but he didn't declare war on the coal industry. Obama himself admitted that the Bush national debt legacy for his 8 year term was 4 tillion dollars and declared that amount of added debt to be "unpatriotic", of course, I suppose it's just fine that Obama has added 6 trillion in less than one term?

I'm not seeing the parallels here. From Obama's first day in office till the end of what would be his second term the national debt will go from 10.4 trillion to something over 22 trillion in 8 years. For the sake of argument let's say W added 5 tillion to the debt. So, the total Bush deficit is 5 trillion vs the total Obama deficit which will be 12 trillion. Am I the only guy that thinks 12 trillion is worse than 5 trillion? When an administration's every move undermines the energy industry at some point wouldn't you say it might be prudent for voters to ask what is going on?

You were the one that brought up cheap gas prices under Bush, and high prices under Obama, yet failed to mention that gas prices set a record high under Bush, and were high for a big part of his tenure. He had a 3 month decline, and that's all you tout. You are no better than all the other twisters.

TheRealVille Wrote:You were the one that brought up cheap gas prices under Bush, and high prices under Obama, yet failed to mention that gas prices set a record high under Bush, and were high for a big part of his tenure. He had a 3 month decline, and that's all you tout. You are no better than all the other twisters.

Actually that decline of gasoline prices was a somewhat longer period than you claim--- "The recession caused demand for energy to shrink in late 2008, with oil prices falling from the July 2008 high of $147 a barrell to a December 2008 low of $32. Oil prices stabilized by October 2009 and established a trading range between $60 and $80." [Wiki]

The price of crude per barrell is what it is, therefore gasoline prices are driven by that number. But, there are still lots of ways to hedge against high oil prices by exploiting other resources. My complaint isn't only that the price of gas has been on the rise since Obama took office, even though that is the case. With jobs on the wane and energy prices through the roof why not exploit our own natural resources? The Obama policy has been one of buying more and more crude from OPEC rather than falling back to on shore oil production in the gulf and the Alaskan oil fields. And, of course, there is Obama's irrational veto of the Canadian Pipeline. We should be taking advantage of our own energy reserves. This would lower prices and provide jobs. I have yet to hear a plausible case made to defend current administration energy policy of simply doubling down on imports. In short, absolutely nothing has been done towards long term energy savings. Windmills, solar panels and battery powered cars have been the laughable focus of this administration. Add Obama's unexplainable war on coal to the equation and one is left scratching his head. What's he doing?

I said, in fact, that gas prices and the rest have been on the rise since the end of 2008 and they have. Call that twisting if you want, everybody knows it's true.

I hope that the hard-line Dems and hard-line Reps understand the the moderate/independent voters are laughing at them. I am waiting for a Congressional debate on whether or not the sky is blue and whose fault it is that is is, lol.

LWC Wrote:I hope that the hard-line Dems and hard-line Reps understand the the moderate/independent voters are laughing at them. I am waiting for a Congressional debate on whether or not the sky is blue and whose fault it is that is is, lol.

Moderate/independent voters are a just as ineffective as hard-line republicans or democrats, if not more. Can't drive in the middle of the road without getting hit head on. Right now, there's only two lanes, pick one.

TheRealThing Wrote:Actually that decline of gasoline prices was a somewhat longer period than you claim--- "The recession caused demand for energy to shrink in late 2008, with oil prices falling from the July 2008 high of $147 a barrell to a December 2008 low of $32. Oil prices stabilized by October 2009 and established a trading range between $60 and $80." [Wiki]

The price of crude per barrell is what it is, therefore gasoline prices are driven by that number. But, there are still lots of ways to hedge against high oil prices by exploiting other resources. My complaint isn't only that the price of gas has been on the rise since Obama took office, even though that is the case. With jobs on the wane and energy prices through the roof why not exploit our own natural resources? The Obama policy has been one of buying more and more crude from OPEC rather than falling back to on shore oil production in the gulf and the Alaskan oil fields. And, of course, there is Obama's irrational veto of the Canadian Pipeline. We should be taking advantage of our own energy reserves. This would lower prices and provide jobs. I have yet to hear a plausible case made to defend current administration energy policy of simply doubling down on imports. In short, absolutely nothing has been done towards long term energy savings. Windmills, solar panels and battery powered cars have been the laughable focus of this administration. Add Obama's unexplainable war on coal to the equation and one is left scratching his head. What's he doing?

I said, in fact, that gas prices and the rest have been on the rise since the end of 2008 and they have. Call that twisting if you want, everybody knows it's true.

While you fail to recognize that the gas rise started way before the end of 2008. See, that's where the twisting is, it went down for a few months at the end of 2008, so you can claim they started to rise at the end of 2008, while ignoring that before September of 2008, they rose at the rate of 35% per year. You are a political liar, and will never admit it. You are no better than the so called "non poster" here. The "real" truth is not in you.


[Image: mmm-71352565023.jpeg#mmm]

[Image: 20120914_020831_gasprez_400.jpg]

SKINNYPIG Wrote:Moderate/independent voters are a just as ineffective as hard-line republicans or democrats, if not more. Can't drive in the middle of the road without getting hit head on. Right now, there's only two lanes, pick one.

:lame:

The same is true if you drive off the road

I have to ask the question: why are they ineffective? Who is judging their ineffectiveness?

As terrible as Barack Obama has been, the Republicans should have been able to send a flea-infested dog, literally, to the White House before they lost this election.

How could anyone lose to one of the worst presidents in US history? The answer is the mindset of people like you. Hardcore Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot, figuratively speaking.

Romney's biggest stumbling block to the White House is not his ideals, is not his track record, it is his arrogant mouth and his insatiable need to appease big business and his base.

I am still going to vote for Romney because a bad president is better than an awful one. Myself and I am sure many are dumbfounded that the polling numbers are this close.

I know that polls can be misleading and no major news source would print or broadcast that the election was a run away, even if it would be. They will intentionally make the race seem close or closer than normal by skewing numbers. I'm sure CNN will try to say that Obama is leading by 2-3 points and that Obama is winning but needs your help to ensure it, vote for Obama. Fox News could take the same numbers and say that the liberal media is twisting the reports to try to make this race appear closer than it is, Romney is way behind so he needs your help, vote for Romney.

TheRealVille Wrote:Check the price for many months before that date. They started to fall about 3 months before that. Record high gas prices happened during Bush's watch. The new resident twister tried to make it look like gas prices under Bush were very cheap, when in fact they were higher under Bush, except for the last 3-4 months of his Presidency.

But again what does any of that have to do what has happened since President Obama's been in office?:pondering:

TheRealVille Wrote:While you fail to recognize that the gas rise started way before the end of 2008. See, that's where the twisting is, it went down for a few months at the end of 2008, so you can claim they started to rise at the end of 2008, while ignoring that before September of 2008, they rose at the rate of 35% per year. You are a political liar, and will never admit it. You are no better than the so called "non poster" here. The "real" truth is not in you.


[Image: mmm-71352565023.jpeg#mmm]

[Image: 20120914_020831_gasprez_400.jpg]

So President Bush drove the price of gas down before leaving Office to help President Obama get off to a good start yet President Obama and his green team turned that bus around and drove them back up to be like most of President Bush's term. That was mighty nice of President Obama to help the middle class like that.

George Washington warned us about political parties.

nky Wrote:But again what does any of that have to do what has happened since President Obama's been in office?:pondering:

Because TRT brought it up, and tried to make it look like gas was a lot lower under Bush, when that isn't true at all. It was record high.

TheRealVille Wrote:Because TRT brought it up, and tried to make it look like gas was a lot lower under Bush, when that isn't true at all. It was record high.

Are you EVER going to be able to shake loose from Bush?

TheRealVille Wrote:Because TRT brought it up, and tried to make it look like gas was a lot lower under Bush, when that isn't true at all. It was record high.

But you've been arguing it was high under President Bush so It's no big deal it's high under President Obama. That's a poor argument. President Obama started on Jan. 26, 2009 and the price of gas has gone up ever since he's been in office.

SKINNYPIG Wrote:Are you EVER going to be able to shake loose from Bush?

Of course not. He and his ilk must have someone to blame for the dismal showing of their boy. Thanks to the media and the general stupidity of voters, Kardashian never gets the blame for anything negative. Can you imagine where this election would be if he were forced to own up to his incompetence? He'd have to go back to being a community agitator. What other experience does he really have? And don't give me that horse manure about him being a "constitutional law professor". That lie was exposed months ago.

nky Wrote:But you've been arguing it was high under President Bush so It's no big deal it's high under President Obama. That's a poor argument. President Obama started on Jan. 26, 2009 and the price of gas has gone up ever since he's been in office.

I've not been arguing anything of the sort. I'm just smart enough to know that the President has little, if any, control over gas prices. I didn't blame prices under Bush on him, and I don't blame prices under Obama on him. Yet, TRT was trying to make it look like Bush kept them low, and Obama was the reason they are high now.

SKINNYPIG Wrote:Are you EVER going to be able to shake loose from Bush?

TRT brought Bush up, not me.

Harry Rex Vonner Wrote:Of course not. He and his ilk must have someone to blame for the dismal showing of their boy. Thanks to the media and the general stupidity of voters, Kardashian never gets the blame for anything negative. Can you imagine where this election would be if he were forced to own up to his incompetence? He'd have to go back to being a community agitator. What other experience does he really have? And don't give me that horse manure about him being a "constitutional law professor". That lie was exposed months ago.

The gap is widening for Obama, especially in crucial states that Romney MUST win. November 7th is coming fast. The main battleground states are now leaning more and more to Obama. With an approval rating of 50% now, it will be a tough road, almost impossible at this point, for your boy.

TheRealVille Wrote:The gap is widening for Obama, especially in crucial states that Romney MUST win. November 7th is coming fast. The main battleground states are now leaning more and more to Obama. With an approval rating of 50% now, it will be a tough road, almost impossible at this point, for your boy.

Too close for me to even think about calling.

If Obama does win another term, I will not be sharing responsibility of the demise with the "Obama phone women" and the rest of the bottom feeders.

After the election, some of us will crow while others eat it. If your boy wins, crow fast and hard, because sites just like this one will more than likely be banned from the internet. Unless of course, you can get the "Obama phone lady" and her/your ilk to join in with you to even the score. You know, make it fair.

TheRealVille Wrote:I've not been arguing anything of the sort. I'm just smart enough to know that the President has little, if any, control over gas prices. I didn't blame prices under Bush on him, and I don't blame prices under Obama on him. Yet, TRT was trying to make it look like Bush kept them low, and Obama was the reason they are high now.

So if the President was to say " We are going to use our vast resources this country has been blessed with to get us off of OPEC oil within the next 2 years" The price of oil and in turn gasoline will not go down?

It appears we may be fortunate enough to share our wealth with the rest of the world. Guess a few billion or so here and there isn't enough.

TheRealVille Wrote:I've not been arguing anything of the sort. I'm just smart enough to know that the President has little, if any, control over gas prices. I didn't blame prices under Bush on him, and I don't blame prices under Obama on him. Yet, TRT was trying to make it look like Bush kept them low, and Obama was the reason they are high now.

NKY, you just got sonned. TRV you are the real deal. You have an amazing knowledge of the political field. You and Vector cannot be stopped in a debate.

LWC Wrote::lame:

The same is true if you drive off the road

I have to ask the question: why are they ineffective? Who is judging their ineffectiveness?

As terrible as Barack Obama has been, the Republicans should have been able to send a flea-infested dog, literally, to the White House before they lost this election.

How could anyone lose to one of the worst presidents in US history? The answer is the mindset of people like you. Hardcore Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot, figuratively speaking.

Romney's biggest stumbling block to the White House is not his ideals, is not his track record, it is his arrogant mouth and his insatiable need to appease big business and his base.

I am still going to vote for Romney because a bad president is better than an awful one. Myself and I am sure many are dumbfounded that the polling numbers are this close.

I know that polls can be misleading and no major news source would print or broadcast that the election was a run away, even if it would be. They will intentionally make the race seem close or closer than normal by skewing numbers. I'm sure CNN will try to say that Obama is leading by 2-3 points and that Obama is winning but needs your help to ensure it, vote for Obama. Fox News could take the same numbers and say that the liberal media is twisting the reports to try to make this race appear closer than it is, Romney is way behind so he needs your help, vote for Romney.

i believe it's there message cut taxs deregulation privatize medicare and social security IT DON'T WORK

SKINNYPIG Wrote:Are you EVER going to be able to shake loose from Bush?

no but the republican party has nicker:

vector Wrote:no but the republican party has nicker:

Hey, since that one's so funny, tell us another knee slapper there Heckle....How about answering those questions I asked you the other day.


Come on big talker.

TheRealVille Wrote:TRT brought Bush up, not me.

I brought up the end of the Bush administration because it is the start of the Obama administration. After you went on your tirade I posted a link to show the price of gas when Obama took office. Of course, I mentioned a number of other areas of our economy which are in the process of skyrocketing upward as well, such as food, utilities and insurance premiums. All of which were intended to establish a baseline for the beginning of Obama's economic record. It wouldn't have made any difference if gas had shot up to $10 or 20 dollars a gallon under the Bush administration as far as the context of my post is concerned. The point was, gas prices had stabilized and they were back down under two bucks a gallon. The inescapable reality here is that Obama hasn't done the first darn thing to help curb gas prices by taking advantage of our own replete reserves of natural resources. It took him a while but, W did get gas prices down before he left office. Prices have risen in exactly the way I said they did and anybody with half a brain, knows prices have risen. You can't deny that, but you sure can blow the smoke when trying to discredit me with yet another personal attack. He vetoed the Canadian pipeline and he has initiated a war on coal. You want to admit that?

Obama wants high energy prices because he wants to push the green agenda. He's more worried about satisfying environmentalists than trying to moderate energy costs. In his mind the higher fossil fuels become, the more folks will feel compelled to look to the so-called renewable energy field for some relief. I'm smart enough to recognize the technology to provide any meaningful supply of cheap green energy does not yet exist. A point that seems to escape your notice. Electric cars are a complete joke, I posted a link nearly a year ago proving manufacturers have been trying to make a viable electric (battery powered)car since the 1800's.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_...ic_vehicle
Same thing with windturbines, solar panels, whatever. Name any form of renewable energy and any of the machines that use it, they are novelties at best. Now, if science catches up will the liberal dreamers and get it's act together and actually puts something viable on the market, it will be different, but, for the foreseeable future, the renewable energy field is woefully inadequate to do anything of substance.

If Obama gave the first flip about folks that are hurting there are things he could do to alleviate the economic crush. He sees himself as some great visionary that will go down in history as the president that saved the planet. I thought Al Gore was a loon, Obama is cut from the same cloth. And, he's wiling to make everybody suffer in an effort to force the premature emergence of a field of resources and machines that don't yet exist. And while all this stuff, which would be better suited for a new chapter in George Orwell's book, is going on. Millions of energy related jobs go unfilled because America, under the guidance of this president, has turned her back on two centuries of progress in favor of a fantasy they call renewable energy. Obama is here to protect this nation's citizenry and provide for the common good, not steer us away from everything we know. Obama has the "common good" of roughly 315 million folks in this land on his hands. And all he has done to help is shown in his idea of leadership and that is to give us a war on fossil fuels and grind his social justice axe.

vector Wrote:i believe it's there message cut taxs deregulation privatize medicare and social security IT DON'T WORK

LOL, Obama extends the Bush tax cuts every year, and claims he is like Ronald Reagan. Whether you like it or not, and it won't matter who is president, there are changes coming to the entitlement structure of America. WHUT DON'T WORK, is giving foodstamps for perpetuity, as well as free housing, free medical, free utilities, &*#!!*$ Obamacellphones, and all the rest.

WideMiddle03 Wrote:NKY, you just got sonned. TRV you are the real deal. You have an amazing knowledge of the political field. You and Vector cannot be stopped in a debate.

huh? by deflecting and claiming something else:eyeroll: ok then

:eyeroll:

TheRealVille Wrote:Bullshit. They raised steadily the whole time he was in office.
Look at any chart on the years he was in office.If you know they were, then you are a liar, the facts are recored, and I drove though this period.


http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/me...ez_400.jpg

http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/...3.jpeg#mmm


Feed your BS to your cronies all you want, I drove through it, at the tune of about 20K miles a year.

TheRealVille Wrote:I'll start with this. Since I traveled to Ann Arbor extensively during W's years, I remember gas prices quiet well.



http://underthemountainbunker.com/2012/0...2001-2008/

TheRealVille Wrote:How much was it for many months before he left office, excluding the last 3 months before he left? You can sell that BS to the ones that already agree with you, but facts tell a very different story. Why would would even bring up "half truths"?


Maybe WC23 will honor us with the gas price chart from W's years in office? I can't seem to find it right now.

TheRealVille Wrote:Because you know you lied. I'm talking your gas price lie.

TheRealVille Wrote:Check the price for many months before that date. They started to fall about 3 months before that. Record high gas prices happened during Bush's watch. The new resident twister tried to make it look like gas prices under Bush were very cheap, when in fact they were higher under Bush, except for the last 3-4 months of his Presidency.

TheRealVille Wrote:Be cause you try to make it look like we had it made with gas prices under Bush. We didn't. Gas prices didn't spike under Bush, they were very high for many months, up to a record high. One could say they "spiked" down though, just 3-4 months before he left office.

TheRealVille Wrote:Did you take the time to really read this article? It tells you what I tell you. Obama is pulling away in Ohio, and other crucial states. I just added another quote to add to my November election post.

TheRealVille Wrote:You were the one that brought up cheap gas prices under Bush, and high prices under Obama, yet failed to mention that gas prices set a record high under Bush, and were high for a big part of his tenure. He had a 3 month decline, and that's all you tout. You are no better than all the other twisters.

TheRealVille Wrote:While you fail to recognize that the gas rise started way before the end of 2008. See, that's where the twisting is, it went down for a few months at the end of 2008, so you can claim they started to rise at the end of 2008, while ignoring that before September of 2008, they rose at the rate of 35% per year. You are a political liar, and will never admit it. You are no better than the so called "non poster" here. The "real" truth is not in you.


[Image: mmm-71352565023.jpeg#mmm]

[Image: 20120914_020831_gasprez_400.jpg]

TheRealVille Wrote:I've not been arguing anything of the sort. I'm just smart enough to know that the President has little, if any, control over gas prices. I didn't blame prices under Bush on him, and I don't blame prices under Obama on him. Yet, TRT was trying to make it look like Bush kept them low, and Obama was the reason they are high now.

:eyeroll: OK then:pondering:nope no arguing there

nky Wrote::eyeroll: OK then:pondering:nope no arguing there

Let me go slow for you. I wasn't arguing that it's no big deal under Obama. It's been high under both. He was insinuating that it was cheap under Bush, and high under Obama.

ok but you should look at where it was at the start of the administration, and see what policies, comments, or other innuendos may push the price one way or the other. Yes the President can effect the price of commodities both directly and indirectly

TheRealVille Wrote:Let me go slow for you. I wasn't arguing that it's no big deal under Obama. It's been high under both. He was insinuating that it was cheap under Bush, and high under Obama.

but you were arguing (I typed slow for you:eyeroll: