Consumer Energy Report is now Energy Trends Insider -- Read More »

By Robert Rapier on Sep 15, 2012 with 108 responses

Gasoline Prices Doubled Under Obama: True or False?

The Claim: President Obama Has Doubled Gasoline Prices

During the Republican primaries, a number of candidates made a claim that at first glance seems improbable: That under President Obama, gasoline prices have doubled. A current advertising campaign by the American Energy Alliance repeats that claim: “Since Obama became president, gas prices have nearly doubled. Tell Obama we can’t afford his failing energy policies.” Let’s examine that claim.

A Recent History of Gasoline Prices

We all remember $4/gallon gasoline under President Bush, so how could prices have doubled under President Obama? Let’s look at the recent history of retail gasoline prices. Barack Obama was sworn in as president on January 20, 2009. In the week that ended on January 19, 2009, the weekly retail gasoline price in the U.S. was $1.90/gallon. Most people don’t remember that given the recent history of high gasoline prices, but I will get to that.

In May 2011 retail gasoline prices averaged above $4/gallon for three straight weeks. The most recent retail price — for the week ending September 10, 2012 — was $3.91/gallon. So prices are more than double what they were when Obama was sworn in. But there is a very big caveat, and without that caveat a very misleading picture is presented. (See also: How High Have Gas Prices Risen Over the Years?)

Bubbles and Overcorrections

In the summer of 2008 — Bush’s last year in office — gasoline prices climbed above $4/gallon for nine straight weeks on the back of oil prices that reached nearly $150/barrel. But those prices were unsustainable in the short term, and unsurprisingly, they collapsed. By the end of the year, oil prices had retreated into the $30′s, and gasoline had fallen back to $1.71/gallon.

But those low prices represented an overcorrection. I noted at the time that I didn’t believe prices would stay at those levels for very long, and by the time Obama was inaugurated gasoline prices had already climbed by $0.20/gallon over the three weeks before his inauguration. Gasoline prices would continue to climb as oil prices recovered.

Conclusions: Technically Correct, but Misleading and Incomplete

So the claim of gasoline prices doubling under Obama is technically correct, but irrelevant because the reason it happened was that he came into office near the bottom of a price overcorrection. Blaming Obama for the price rise would be like blaming him for cases of lung cancer that were detected during his term. Energy policies that presidents implement will manifest themselves years down the road because of the lag time in developing projects. We have many historical examples of this. I have noted numerous times that a president has very limited means to impact gasoline prices over the course of their term. If McCain had been elected, you would have seen the same pattern, except in that case the exact same attacks would have come from the left.

Furthermore, I have noted that President Obama will be the first president since LBJ to preside over four straight years of increasing U.S. oil production. Natural gas prices are less than half the levels they were when Obama took office. I know some like to say “He had nothing to do with that.” And I agree that Obama’s policies did not result in increased domestic oil production, nor the plunge in natural gas prices. But neither did his policies cause the rise in gasoline prices after he took office. You can’t blame him for high gasoline prices during his term if you aren’t going to credit him for increased oil production or lower natural gas prices. That is, you can’t unless you are simply playing partisan politics.

There are substantive discussions to be had about President Obama’s energy policies, and how they will impact the U.S. in coming years. Blaming him for high gasoline prices are not part of that substantive discussion.

Link to Original Article: Gasoline Prices Doubled Under Obama: True or False?

By Robert Rapier

For more in-depth, nonpartisan discussions on energy, connect with me on Twitter (@RRapier), LinkedIn, Facebook, or at my R-Squared Energy Column.

  1. By Earl Richards on September 15, 2012 at 7:23 pm

    Big Oil, Wall Street and the GOP are a bunch of morally, bankrupt jerks. Romney is already oil-bought. Romney/Ryan will be worse than Bush/Cheney. Romney is an offshore, tax cheat. The price of oil and gasoline is determined by the traders and by the speculators, who manipulate and the control the crude oil futures markets, namely, the IntercontinentalExchange (ICE), ICE Futures Europe and the NYMEX and the oil price is not decided by Obama, OPEC, Iran, the Euro Zone, refinery fires, Nigerian pirates, embassy protests, the laws of supply and demand, hurricanes and so on. Google the “$2.5 Trillion Oil Scam – slideshare.” The US is a victim of this scam.

    [link]      
    • By Optimist on September 20, 2012 at 6:48 pm

      The price of oil and gasoline is determined by the traders and by the speculators…

      Sure. Just explain why the prices ever go down, since that mean the traders are leaving money on the table, and we both know they’d never do that…

      The US is a victim of this scam.

      Well, at least one person here is a victim of the scam…

      [link]      
      • By alion999 on October 11, 2012 at 12:03 pm

        Prices go down when buyers–even speculators–sell to take their profits, or when demand goes down.. You don’t trigger or join a bubble early just to stay in.. smart money gets in and gets out and sloshes around looking for new sectors

        [link]      
      • By Delta-flyer on November 4, 2012 at 11:37 pm

        I saw a place in Jackson for $2.99 a galltho last week. So it does sometimes go down, and no one left money on the table. It’s a dynamic market.  

        [link]      
    • By Steve Bishop on October 12, 2012 at 11:25 pm

      And Obama is the death of America.  He and his minions, the college professors and economic professors who never worked in business – drove our economy into the ground and now we have 1 in 6 in poverty, we have $16 trillion in debt, we have incomes of those with jobs down $4300, and we have the stimulus going to Finland, China, South America, and places that did not help us.  We HAVE TO GET RID OF BOZO OBAMA!

      [link]      
      • By D. ROSS on October 17, 2012 at 2:32 pm

        Bush drove the economy into the ground; Bush and his Republican friends who deregulated the financial sector.  Along with 2 wars (one of which was COMPLETELY unnecessary) and lowering taxes for the rich.  How can anyone say that Obama ruined the economy when it is slowly, but surely coming back?

        [link]      
        • By janeflaherty on October 28, 2012 at 8:55 pm

          Actually, it was Clinton’s repeal of Glass-Steagall  and his behind-the-scenes deal, albeit illegal, with Sandy Weill (Citigroup and Traveler’s Ins.) that was the genesis of the collapse.  It’s the old-boy-network rearing its ugly head.  And then Obama appoints Larry Summers as an economic advisor??  Summers is as much to blame as anybody….

          [link]      
      • By Brainiac on October 24, 2012 at 8:20 am

        To suggest that all of our current woes are the result of Obama and his posse is to presume that there has never been a prior US President who initiated programs without funding them.  Seriously?  That is your position?  Let me ask you, if I run up my credit card and even have monthly drafts on it for future purchases and then you get to pay it off, would we say that you ran up $25,000 in debt just cause you are the one responsible for figuring out how to pay it off?  Of course not, similarly while you may not like Obama’s stimulus packages, efforts to save the banking and auto industry (most of which money is already paid back but whatever) then fine, but they are NOT the bulk of our deficit. That falls on the spending spree of Bush primarily (but not exclusively) who came into office with a surplus and then told everyone how he would burn through it with tax cuts (that were not funded once that surplus was destroyed in the first year) and two wars that were not funded.  As a result, the NEXT President, regardless of who they were, would have to preside over negotiations to increase the debt cap.  Nice to know that the Republican propaganda machine found a home in your heart.  Otherwise all their effort to distort reality would have been in vain.

        [link]      
        • By Nebraska on October 27, 2012 at 9:09 am

          Serious? You talk about your credit card debt is if it was similar to our national debt.  Why doesn’t anybody talk about “Budget”?  Could any business work without a budget? Could any household thrive without a budget?  I can tell you that pointing fingers doesn’t help and making more cash isn’t how you manage a budget either.  We need a true operating budget, we need to bring more jobs back to the US. Taxing the rich more isn’t going to  fix the issues either.  Getting people employed who by the way pay taxes, will be a major part of reducing the national debt.  Unemployed people don’t pay taxes.  Who employs people? The Government?  Sure they employ many but our country was built on private business and free market.  Making it difficult for business owners to hire unemployed people only exacerbates the issue.

          [link]      
          • By Rebecca Robinson on October 29, 2012 at 2:50 pm

            Excuse me…but I was unemployed and I payed taxes on the unemployment that I received. And when it came time to file the next year – I didn’t get a return back – nor did I have to pay any extra taxes. But the fact is that I did indeed pay taxes. So to say that the unemployed – or at least those who receive unemployment don’t pay taxes – is ridiculous. 

            [link]      
            • By Rebecca Robinson on October 29, 2012 at 2:53 pm

              btw – also while unemployed – I still had to buy things – like food and gas and pay bills – like mortage and gas, electricity, water, etc…

              And having the Republican congress and senate say that they are going to veto everything that Obama puts out – regardless of whether or not it’s a good idea or not – or whether they have a better – or just as good way of fixing the problem – to me is them not doing the jobs that they were voted in to do.

              [link]      
            • By Nebraska on October 31, 2012 at 3:08 pm

              Sorry about that, you are correct.  The Unemployed do pay taxes on money received for being unemployed but unemployment money doesn’t last for ever and the amount of tax is minimal at best.  I had been unemployed for over 8 months and the amount I paid in taxes being unemployed is 60 to 70 times less than what I pay today.   My point is, when the unemployed become employed their tax contribution is significant.

              You also missed the major point.  BUDGET.  Where is the budget?  How do we manage our money without a budget?  

              [link]      
            • By Charles Vallins on November 5, 2012 at 11:57 pm

              Dear Rebecca you don’t need philophosy just so as you know America has been one of the best country being advanced this was not to be that type of idea people were meant to learn and not to be segdegrated i don’t how you are with evolution this idea sedegrates people in classes we are all citizens with the same identity even in different countries i hope to offer you best in my country it is determination that brings out the best country the is no need to fail our eauction most is free we have courses every citizen uses for work applications our auction is called territitory and further education scheme as there are no limits for the students i can only say your dreams are the limits for your future Charles

              [link]      
            • By Jen DeAngelo on November 7, 2012 at 12:26 am

              You didn’t pay taxes, fool. You received more money fromunemployment than you ever paid in and then returned a little bit of that free money under the guise of paying taxes. That money you supposedly paid in taxes was never earned by you in the first place. All the people with real jobs paid your taxes for you since that’s where your unemployment came from. You paid taxes. What a joke.

              [link]      
            • By Jen DeAngelo on November 7, 2012 at 12:29 am

              Oh, and Rebecca, every time the House stops one of Obama’s idiotic and expensive ideas from going through they are doing exactly what I voted them in to do.

              [link]      
      • By huntleyamh@bellsouth.net on October 25, 2012 at 1:39 pm

        You are  Sad. Did you only pluck out words or did you read the article. 

        [link]      
      • By jeff on November 1, 2012 at 8:51 pm

        With all due respect Mr. Bishop, you may want to try doing some research rather than just repeating what is stated in televison commercials that do not give complete details. Bozo? That would be you. A Uneducated vote is worse that a no vote.

        [link]      
      • By Dave on November 22, 2012 at 4:42 pm

        So please do tell how Bush got us to 11 Trillion n debt.which is still higher than Obama? It’s ok to b left or right. But sometimes u have to look at the facts and get over your deep seeded hate for Obama! 

        [link]      
  2. By DownToTheLastCookie on September 15, 2012 at 9:43 pm

     ”except in that case the exact same attacks would have come from the left”

    With the above statement Robert you have become part of the problem. You are help training the public to accept “very misleading picture” from our Media. Each individual misreputation and lie must be exposed and held accountable on it own. Other wise it will just continue.  You have failed !

    [link]      
  3. By Robert Rapier on September 16, 2012 at 12:09 am

    With the above statement Robert you have become part of the problem. You are help training the public to accept “very misleading picture” from our Media. Each individual misreputation and lie must be exposed and held accountable on it own.

    My point is that neither side has a monopoly on these kinds of misleading arguments. Democrats made the same argument against Bush over gas prices. By pointing this out, I am trying to move the debate beyond the partisan bickering so we can talk about the real issues.

    I could play whack-a-mole and simply debunk arguments all the time, but there are far too many. I would rather people recognize partisan arguments for what they are — no matter which side is using them. 

    RR

    [link]      
    • By DownToTheLastCookie on September 16, 2012 at 2:37 am

      Well Robert, clearly by your reply you still don’t understand your mistake. Your statement just reinforces the politicians to lie because the other guy does it and it tells the public that it ok and normal. It also gives the impression that the lies are done equality and you don’t know that. You wouldn’t accept your children lying just because other kids do, if you have any.  As a writer, when you lower your standards. It lowers the standards of all of us. The point of your of your post was not about who lies the most or equally, but that the doubling of the price of gas under Obama’s watch is a misrepresentation. 

      You did a great job explaining the misrepresentation. Don’t bring yourself down to their level and help them to continue to lie. Your better than that. The country needs to here the truth. So please, don’t excuse them for lying. We only get from our politicians what we demand. Thanks

      [link]      
      • By Robert Rapier on September 16, 2012 at 3:08 am

        Well Robert, clearly by your reply you still don’t understand your mistake.

        I guess not, because I don’t view it as a mistake to point out that both sides engage in partisan politics on the topic of gas prices. Had this been an examination of a misrepresentation from Democrats, I would remind people (and in fact have done so) that Republicans are guilty as well. That is not to excuse the lie, but rather to help people recognize it even when it comes from their own side. You seem to think I am implying that the lie isn’t that bad since both sides do it. That is incorrect. 

        RR

        [link]      
      • By Edward Kerr on September 16, 2012 at 11:44 am

        I am confused when you accuse Robert of “aiding and abetting” the lying that is all too common in politics. (in fact I think that it’s a job requirement) His analysis seems, as usual for him, to be straightforward. Personally, I attributed the rapid fall in gas prices this time four years ago leading up to the election as somehow being a tactic to get McCain elected. The drop was, in my mind, too fast and deep to simply be a “market driven correction”. Yes, our country needs to hear the truth but I see no falsehood in Robert’s post. I think that your complaint should best be aimed at the politicians who are the ones misrepresenting just about everything and not at Robert.

        [link]      
        • By DownToTheLastCookie on September 16, 2012 at 3:48 pm

          (in fact I think that it’s a job requirement)

          Thank you Ed for help making my point. If you and the media wouldn’t accept the lies it would hurt the politicans and they wouldn’t or couldn’t do it. But you have been trained by the media to accept it.  Thank you.

          [link]      
          • By Edward Kerr on September 17, 2012 at 8:05 am

            Cookie,

            I understand and agree with your assessment that “if we would just not accept the lies that politicians routinely spew at us, then they would be righteously throttled and behave themselves” ( my paraphrase)  Great  idea but there are a few flies in that ointment. First, you are asking people to see the world in the same way that you do and they can’t. You are supposing that politicians, when confronted with the truth (and who knows exactly what that is?) will change their ways. History suggests not. One of the problems is self delusion, many lairs actually believe what they say even if it is an obvious falsehood. Not enough people even care to research what they are told for lack of time, caring or other reasons. Asking them to change is an exercise in futility. Truth is an elusive thing at best, difficult to discern. Expecting today’s media (in bed with the very prevaricators that you mention) to hold politicians to task when they lie is being delusional on your part. But you can hope!

            Best regards,

            Ed

            [link]      
          • By Optimist on September 20, 2012 at 6:53 pm

            If you and the media wouldn’t accept the lies it would hurt the politicans and they wouldn’t or couldn’t do it.

            Where did RR accept the lies? He works very hard to expose the lies, in case you missed it. Saying both sides do it, is NOT the same as saying it is acceptable. Even a hard-core partisan cookie-eater should be able to figure that out…

            [link]      
            • By DownToTheLastCookie on September 23, 2012 at 1:14 pm

              “If you and the media wouldn’t accept the lies it would hurt the politicans and they wouldn’t or couldn’t do it.”

              First of all Optimist, the statement was directed to Edward not RR.

              “ If McCain had been elected, you would have seen the same pattern, except in that case the exact same attacks would have come from the left.” Let me add this:  True or False ?

              Second, Robert is a so called energy expert and I would guess many here would agree. But why is Robert making political statements with no facts or expertise.  Roberts political statements are no better than energy statements make by politicians he is trying to correct. Robert just replaces one error for another.  

              Back to my orginal statement, Robert is part of the problem.

              [link]      
            • By Robert Rapier on September 23, 2012 at 3:09 pm

              But why is Robert making political statements with no facts or expertise.  Roberts political statements are no better than energy statements make by politicians he is trying to correct.

              Those statements are made based on actual observations. I have seen the Left do exactly the same thing — play political games with energy policy. They were making exactly the same attacks when Bush was president, so it isn’t like I am conjuring up some remote possibility. They were arguing that Bush was driving up gasoline prices. I am stating an observed fact.

              Further, as far as my political statements go, how is this? I predicted Obama would win the presidency when Hillary Clinton led him for the Democratic nomination. And last December I predicted that he will win reelection, and that would would look back on the fact that Newt Gingrich was a serious candidate as a joke. So I think my political statements have been pretty spot on. I am not an Obama fan, but I did recognize his appeal to many people.

              RR

              [link]      
            • By DownToTheLastCookie on September 24, 2012 at 1:20 am

              “They were making exactly the same attacks when Bush was president, so it isn’t like I am conjuring up some remote possibility.”

              Here is your problem again Robert. When we look at the facts, like you did here in this post. Oil and Gasoline did go up during the Bush Adminstation. Gasoline about 2 1/2 times and oil almost quadrupled. So when the Democrat where making the statement it was true. Not a misrepresentation like the Republicans. Please forward me to your wedsite where you debunked the Democrat charges.

              [link]      
            • By Robert Rapier on September 24, 2012 at 2:07 am

              Here is your problem again Robert. When we look at the facts, like you did here in this post. Oil and Gasoline did go up during the Bush Adminstation. Gasoline about 2 1/2 times and oil almost quadrupled. So when the Democrat where making the statement it was true.

              Technically the charge by the Republicans is also true. Gas prices did in fact double under Obama. The point of my post is to show why that is misleading. The fact is — which I have stated many times with both Bush and Obama in the White House — that presidents have little impact on gasoline prices.

              Please forward me to your wedsite where you debunked the Democrat charges.

              That’s child’s play. I bet I have 2 dozen posts addressing Democrats who were claiming that Bush was driving up gasoline prices. Here is one, but this was a recurring theme while Bush was in office: Politics as Usual

              I presume we are done now. You can use the search function to find numerous posts debunking the likes of Pelosi, Schumer, Wyden, Menendez, etc. on this topic.

              RR

              [link]      
        • By Optimist on September 20, 2012 at 6:51 pm

          The drop was, in my mind, too fast and deep to simply be a “market driven correction”.

          Ed, please explain how you determined that. Free markets are supposed to be very fast and efficient. So when is the market working too fast? How fast is too fast? And who has the ability to get (and stay) in front of it?

          [link]      
    • By Eric W on October 17, 2012 at 7:27 am

      RR –  True, that.  
      And the debate last night was one big long Partisan Spin Commercial.  We’re in a sad place when there’s no honesty and no real truth being spoken by our leaders.  A lot of people believe what they hear instead of doing the research to try to glean as much truth as possible. 

      [link]      
  4. By Tom G. on September 16, 2012 at 12:48 am

    Oh my goodness – If you don’t like high gas prices just stop using so darn much of the stuff.  Go smaller, go lighter, go hybrid, or diesel or plug-in hybrid or all electric.  If you double your MPG  you cut your costs in 1/2.  If you drive a pickup truck to work and don’t use it for work, or drive an SUV; then by your own choice, you must have decided to enjoy the pain of $120.00 fill-ups.  Unless of course you  like to complain or are wealthy then you probably don’t care anyway.  Oh wait, most wealthy people became wealthy because they saved.  Hum, interesting paradox. 

     

    [link]      
  5. By Doug MacIntyre on September 19, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    Robert,

    It’s been a while since we last communicated.  Yes, I’m still here at EIA, and I appreciate you using our data for retail gasoline prices.  One clarification, however.  Our weekly retail gasoline (and diesel) prices are NOT weekly averages, but in fact, the price for that day (always a Monday).  We collect prices as of 8:00 am local time and release the data that same day (released Tuesdays when a Federal holiday falls on a Monday).  So, it is a 1-day look at prices, not a wekly average.  This is a minor point that EIA does not do a good job of explaining to people, so they are often interpreted as a weekly average.

    I hope all is going well with you otherwise!

    [link]      
    • By Robert Rapier on September 19, 2012 at 2:08 pm

      Our weekly retail gasoline (and diesel) prices are NOT weekly averages, but in fact, the price for that day (always a Monday).

      Thanks for that clarification. I have always thought those were weekly averages since it says “Weekly Retail Gasoline and Diesel Prices.” I better remove “average” from my column. But calling it “Weekly” is indeed confusing. 

      Thanks for dropping by. Don’t be a stranger.

      Cheers, Robert

      [link]      
  6. By Matt on October 3, 2012 at 10:56 am

    Furthermore, I have noted that President Obama will be the first president since LBJ to preside over four straight years of increasing U.S. oil production. Natural gas prices are less than half the levels they were when Obama took office. I know some like to say “He had nothing to do with that.” And I agree that Obama’s policies did not result in increased domestic oil production, nor the plunge in natural gas prices. But neither did his policies cause the rise in gasoline prices after he took office. You can’t blame him for high gasoline prices during his term if you aren’t going to credit him for increased oil production or lower natural gas prices. That is, you can’t unless you are simply playing partisan politics.

    This is where we disagree and you are playing it both ways.  Current oil production growth is 100% private.  You acknowledge this, but then go on to say that while his policies did not help the current oil they also did not hurt.  This is not true.  Opening up the ability for private development on public lands would affect oil prices, so his policies have affected prices directly.  From your previous article on surging oil production and how it affects pirces:

    “It appears that over the next five years, U.S. oil production could climb to well over 8 million barrels a day.”  The rise in crude production in the U.S. has analysts predicting that oil prices will decline over the next six to nine months; already a growing natural gas stockpile pushed futures down to $1.907 per million BTU earlier in the year, its lowest point in the past 12 years

    We are currently seeing the affects of an energy policy focusing on conservation as opposed to production.  

    [link]      
  7. By Robert Rapier on October 3, 2012 at 12:33 pm

    You acknowledge this, but then go on to say that while his policies did not help the current oil they also did not hurt.  This is not true.

    No, that’s not what I wrote. I note — ironically — that oil production will be up all 4 years of his term. I also note that he has nothing to do with that. Never did I say that it couldn’t have been better, nor that long term his policies will hurt oil production. I am saying that his policies have had little impact on gasoline prices. And the reason for that is the length of time it takes to get projects done. His policies will have an impact on gasoline prices, but it will come later on.

    RR

    [link]      
  8. By Bill on October 8, 2012 at 12:08 pm

    So, if I’m reading this article correctly – the statement, “Gasoline prices have doubled under President Obama,” is true.  Caveats aside.  The bare bones, the facts, are, this is true.  You could just say that. 

    [link]      
    • By Robert Rapier on October 8, 2012 at 1:17 pm

      The bare bones, the facts, are, this is true.  You could just say that. 

      I could, but it would be a meaningless statement. What we are really interested in are the reasons gasoline prices doubled. Obama had next to nothing to do with that. He came in during an overcorrection to the downside. What we are really interested in is how his policies have impacted gasoline prices.

      RR 

      [link]      
      • By karen on November 8, 2012 at 5:38 pm

        Oddly, you didn’t explain why they were $4 a gallon during Bush’s term…..but you had an excuse, why they went up under BO’s term…..

         

        [link]      
        • By Robert Rapier on November 8, 2012 at 6:09 pm

          Not sure if that was aimed at me, but the reasons they went up under Bush were for the same reasons they went up under Obama, and neither president had any control over that.

          RR

          [link]      
          • By paganpink on July 3, 2014 at 12:39 am

            Then why use that as an excuse for Obama and not for Bush?

            [link]      
            • By Stephen Noyes on October 22, 2014 at 10:04 pm

              Fox News excused Bush for the price spike, but was to quick to blame Obama for 4.00 gas, yet they are strangely quiet as gas goes under 3.00.

              Seems to be a Fox News fair and balanced media message.

              [link]      
  9. By Edward Kensik on October 17, 2012 at 9:50 pm

    Robert, to compare the two you need to find the average lets just say to be equal, the average cost for four years in the Bush administration and the four years for Obama. You mention that the gas was at the $4 range during the Bush administration for nine weeks I believe, but the current $3.91 has been at level much longer than during the Bush administration so it has been sustaining and continually increasing at this level for several months, not for a two month period of time. The price of gas is just one example of continuing financial problems that have been under the Obama administration.

    [link]      
    • By Tony on October 25, 2012 at 12:55 am

      You are half right about the current gasoline trend, at least in the regard that it has been almost as high as Bush for a longer period of time. You, as well as most here have forgotten one SMALL missing part of this puzzle, Inflation. Look up “history of gas prices” on Google and check several of the sites. You will find that if you adjust the monetary value of the dollar to either what it was in 1950 or bring the 1950′s prices up to current inflation values, that the graphs level off quite a bit with the exception of the yrs after Reagan was in the White House. Just my 2 cents worth :)

      [link]      
  10. By Karen on October 24, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    It is truly sad that everyone is concerned about where and how oil prices got to be where they are. If Americans cared more about getting off oil, these types of conversations would not exist. We live in a country of selfish people because if you cared about our future and your kids, you would see that oil should replaced with renewal energies. Drilling is not the answer….you risk contaminating water supplies…..who wants to see oil rigs off our beautiful coasts?….. And those that drive gas guzzlers have no right to talk because they are contributing to the problem, not helping….but they will be the first to yell the loudest….. Get over yourself and vote for the most honest person, not the one who can bring down gas prices!!!

    [link]      
    • By Nebraska on October 31, 2012 at 9:00 pm

      I think you have a great point. We do need to transition to renewable resources.  The concern is trying to live during the transition from oil and coal to renewable resources.  The transition isn’t going to happen over night but the cost of current resources are preventing us from supporting a family like buying groceries or paying outstanding debt i.e. hospital bills, power, phones, gas, etc…  The vehicles that utilize the renewable resource (Electricity, which is manufactured by coal mostly and wind) are to expensive to purchase too.  Fuel alone needs to be reduced so we can survive during this time.  Auto manufacturers need to come up with a cheaper way of mass producing fuel efficient vehicles.   I believe the complaining about high fuel prices are valid for now but in the long run being creatures of nature, we drive…  Make it cheaper to drive, we spend.  It’s quite simple…  There needs to be a more national strategic direction to make more cost effective automobiles in two regards, fuel efficiency and purchase price.

      [link]      
      • By Adam Grant on August 7, 2013 at 12:18 pm

        As gasoline becomes more expensive, more people will buy electric cars. As more electric cars are manufactured, they will become cheaper and better. The falling cost of solar and wind energy will eventually price coal and natural gas out of the electricity generation market.

        [link]      
        • By Dianne on February 21, 2014 at 6:50 am

          The problem is, electric cars are too expensive for the majority of people. Look around you, food costs are high, rent/mortgage, again high, health insurance, doctors visits, taking public transportation…yep high, electric bill, heating cost, phone bill….do you see what I mean. Who can afford solar heating, electric cars, the initial cost of those things do not fit into the “majority” of Americans household budget.

          [link]      
        • By Kevin on June 18, 2014 at 3:45 pm

          DO you realize how much it takes to make electric cars?
          How many batteries it takes and the waste in electric cars.
          On top of that, when people get in wrecks with electric cars battery acid spills all over the ground.
          Electric cars is not the answer. That’s why they came in big and fell.
          So far there is not a single resource that can replace gas or diesel. Diesel is the more efficient way but more expensive.
          Solar and wind energy will never take off and become huge.
          You do realize wind mills have to be serviced very very frequently and easily cost $100,000.00 per fix.
          Their maintenance costs vs their power output and income won’t sustain.
          I had a few friends who worked on the wind mills and they said if a wind mill broke down twice in one year they just left it to sit and decommissioned it because it was too expensive.
          Solar panels are in the same boat.
          You get less then 3 years out of a solar panel and the large scale solar panels cost a few million.
          They also take huge batteries that must be replaced every 3-5 years. Batteries that cost $20,000.00+ a piece to store the amount of electricity needed to run on a grid.
          Natural gas isn’t (reusable) but the earth does create more gas all the time.
          When sediment and layers of debris move down and start heating up in the layers beneath the surface natural gas is created.
          If the earth stopped creating natural gas today we would easily have 92 years of natural gas just in the USA.
          That isn’t including all of the other continents either.
          There are still hundreds of millions of miles of the earth not being mined for coal, oil, or gas.
          Through out the earth there is over 827,000,000,000.00 square feet of natural gas available.
          That is enough to supply the entire world of gas for over 100 years. Including the expansion of building and homes.
          There is more then enough natural gas and were not going to rob mother earth and run her dry of oil and gas.
          Oil right now we have enough to easily go 150 more years on oil.
          Stop reading all of the tree hugging magazines and news and research some facts about the topics.

          [link]      
        • By dadork on August 30, 2014 at 8:55 am

          Um, where does electricity come from? How is it produced? Are you happy with the answers to that and the ever increasing cost of electricity? If electric cars are truely the answer free markets will increase their demand, not an intrusive government trying to manipulate an outcome.

          [link]      
  11. By stempniak on November 5, 2012 at 7:03 am

    gas prices were as follows:pres.pres. carter==$.50 a gal.then reagan=$1.20-then bush sr.=2.20-then clinton=$1.80 for 8 yrs.then bush jr.=$4.00 to $5.00at one point..obama== $3.75.if you notice, gas doubled every time a republican got in office.also getting a job was all ways easy when a democrat was in office.democrats get the economy going then the republicans get in office,then double the price of gas and the economy shuts down or slows way down so the rich,which usualy are republicans,can snatch up what the middle class and the less fortunate have to sell,like their houses,you know exspensive.that is now at a bargain price for the rich to buy.and do you really believe osama bin laden is dead.seriously..the most wanted man in the world and no proof he was killed..that was a good story about how a muslim is required to be buried within hours of their death.he is still alive..kadafy,ruler of libya, was killed right after bin laden and was not buried until around 5 days later.he was a muslim.while people thought bin laden was living in a cave all that time,i told people i knew bin laden was in a palace or living nicely,not in a cave..with all his money,he could live nicely in all those muslim countries. obama is muslim,so do you think he had bin laden killed?bin laden is probably being protected and living a good life,but has to be in a reclusive type life style.

    [link]      
  12. By Lorrie on November 5, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    Obama is far from perfect but ya know what, at least he’s CONSISTENT. Romney can’t keep his story straight for five minutes & he hasn’t even gotten into office yet. In my opinion, Obama is the lesser of two evils. Romney has a 1920′s mental

    ity; he does not see women, African American’s, or gays as equals AT ALL, and in today’s day & age, that’s appalling. Romney is nothing more than a businessman pulling sales pitches out of his ***. Let’s not forget the fact that he is also a HUGE supporter of outsourcing and provides little, if any, information on HOW his plans are going to work. He says what he wants to do, what he is planning to do, but he never mention’s HOW he is going to do it. That’s as effective as me saying “I’m planning on winning the lottery.” or “I’m planning on going to Florida this summer.” Will I? Who the hell knows? At least Obama provides a strategy for HOW he’s going to accomplish his goals. Does that mean he’s guaranteed success? No, but it does mean I’m more willing to put my faith in him over someone who refuses to disclose barely any information on his “plans”. Obama/Biden 2012!

    [link]      
    • By Nebraska on November 5, 2012 at 8:53 pm

      It’s sad Lorrie that you think that way.  It’s okay, you have an opinion no matter how ignorant you sound.  Your impressions of another 4 years of this economic environment is congruant to looking though rose color glasses.  Get over yourself and look at a long term vision instead of immediate satisfaction.  Our economic future personally and as a country is in peril.  By the way, do you need me to explain what “congruant” means?

      [link]      
      • By Alcivar on November 8, 2012 at 11:32 am

        Comments, like the one here by Lorrie, lack any kind of legitimacy because they are not supported by a single confirmable fact. The smokescreen of calumny against Mitt Romney as promulgated by the Democratic campaign, upon any reasonable investigation, is not based on any practical realities. 

        [link]      
        • By Nebraska on November 17, 2012 at 12:21 pm

          It is unfortunate that people are so short sighted.  Obama is taking the US down very much like Carter did in the 70′s.  I’m a bit scared for my children.

          [link]      
      • By mick on January 21, 2013 at 12:41 pm

        if you’re going to come across as so catty – it would help if you could spell – “conguent”

        [link]      
        • By Marine1969 on March 1, 2013 at 7:54 pm

          You are the one who needs to learn to spell. Nebraska spelled it correctly! Now, do you know what it means?

          [link]      
        • By Kathleen Br. on July 17, 2014 at 10:42 am

          Do you mean “congruent”? Jesus.

          [link]      
  13. By Painlessone on December 13, 2012 at 5:04 pm

    Basic economics tells us that as the administration prints more money (quantitative easing) there are more dollars chasing goods that have relative value.  The food comodity index was at 145 in jan of 2009 and is now at 210.  Gas prices are up, copper, silver, gold, etc. etc.
    It is the governments way of diluting your spending power.  It now takes $100 to buy what you used to be able to by in 2008 for $80.
    Taxing the top 2% covers the government debt repayment for 8 days…what about the rest of the year?   Our kids and grandkids are screwed!

    [link]      
  14. By db on December 29, 2012 at 3:24 am

    What about his over all views on fossil fuels? His restrictions can definitely influence the price!

    [link]      
  15. By Bruno on January 6, 2013 at 12:34 pm

    The increases in production were due to policies enacted under Bush. You always blame him for everything else. Oil exploration takes a long leed time. The current restraints on it by this administration ensue that whoever is the next president will not show greater production. I insist that Obama lovers be consistent.

    [link]      
    • By Robert Rapier on January 7, 2013 at 3:46 am

      Not sure if you are talking to me, as I am not an “Obama lover” nor do I spend my time blaming Bush for things.

      The increases in production had almost zero to do with Bush or Obama. A slight amount is impacted by presidential policies, but the price of oil has a much larger impact.

      [link]      
      • By blucorsair on July 1, 2013 at 3:12 am

        While you may or may not be correct, that’s not what Obama and the Democrats campaigned on in 2008 when they blamed everything on Bush! …I find it hilarious that the beleagued liberal media is now trying to explain this in view of Obama currently setting new record gasoline prices!

        [link]      
        • By Dave Herrington on April 28, 2014 at 1:26 am

          Yeah because the incoming administration has never blamed the outgoing one before Obama came into office, it’s something new he came up with. Obama has no more of an influence on oil prices than Bush did. If the president could lower prices on gas as easily as many think he can, GOP or Dem. they would do it in a heartbeat if for nothing else but to make them look good.

          [link]      
          • By blucorsair on April 29, 2014 at 2:31 am

            If you’ll recall, the liberal media did infact blame Bush for higher oil prices during his presidency as did Obama afterwards! What’s ironic is that it was reported by the liberal “capital commentary”, that gas prices were $1.85/gallon when Bush left office. What we are seeing now is the results of record spending and a record $7 trillion addition to the national deficit in the first 5 years of Obama’s (federalbudget,com) presidency and he will easily double the deficit when he finishes his second term. You are correct in the fact, that presidents don’t set fuel prices, but inflation and a radically devalued dollar most certainly will affect it! …my, oh my, how the worm turns when the shoe is on the other foot!

            [link]      
            • By Dave Herrington on April 29, 2014 at 4:16 pm

              My sole issue with the post was the hypocrisy, I don’t care what side it comes from. It’s like people jumping all over Obama’s 41% approval rating when Bush’s got as low as 28%, there’s enough wrongs going on out there from both parties without having to make crap up or my favorite, manipulate crap out of context when you know full well what the message in it’s entirety meant.

              [link]      
            • By blucorsair on April 30, 2014 at 4:34 am

              People are fed up with this nobel peace prize winning president that has tried to start 3 new wars in Libya, Syria and Russia. In fact, he spent more money and lives in Afghanistan than Bush did, but you never hear about it! The point that I made was perfectly clear and in the fact the media has adopted a new low set of double standards in covering for this president and his record low approval ratings according to the AP press and Gallup beating out Jimmy Carters previous records at 27%. Even you have to admit that the lies, Benghazi, the IRS scandal and disapproval of Obamacare will be apart of his legacy and it gets very little media attention. …sometimes the truth hurts!

              [link]      
            • By Dave Herrington on October 23, 2014 at 3:21 am

              It’s funny how 6 months later people are screaming because Obama isn’t doing enough in the 3 places you mentioned, although I’m not quite sure how you can blame the Ukraine thing on Obama now or 6 mos. ago.

              [link]      
            • By Stephen Noyes on October 22, 2014 at 9:56 pm

              Hypocrisy is a Fox News thing to do….. They do it seamlessly.

              [link]      
            • By MJRinPA on October 23, 2014 at 2:09 pm

              Do you understand the difference between the debt and the deficit? Because Obama has cut the deficit in half!

              [link]      
          • By paganpink on July 3, 2014 at 12:31 am

            NO administration has ever blamed the previous one in the constant and dishonest way that the Obama administration does to this day. Every time there is a new scandal they first look to try and blame it on Bush, then resort to saying that they just now heard about it, and they will investigate so they can’t speak about it anymore, but “no one is madder then the President”. And then they wait a few months and call the scandals that they swore to fix “false scandals”, or old news, or racism, or partisan bickering, or congresses fault even though Obama was acting outside of Congress, or the C.I.A.’s fault, or computer crashes that lost e-mails from all the same people involved in a cover up at the IRS, or anyones fault but his that his inaction and support of terrorists like the Muslim brotherhood has left the middle east in flames and on the brink of a nuclear war. Not him that encouraged Putin with a misspelled reset button and a weak response to Syria to take over the Crimea and is on the march for more. Or the Chinese attacking islands that the Japanese had protected by the US navy for decades. Quite a guy this Obama. He may not turn out to be not only the worst President in our nations history but the one who got us all killed! Vote out every Democrat people! Fight back from these fools and monsters who take over more power every day and mock the co-equal branches of government as if they-and you- are their lackeys!

            [link]      
            • By Richard on July 17, 2014 at 11:04 am

              Well said.

              [link]      
            • By Stephen Noyes on October 22, 2014 at 9:58 pm

              Man you haven’t watched Fox News have you pagan? They constantly try to blame everything on Clinton from the 1990′s! It’s what you far right wing extremists are best at. Lying and forgetting the lies you put out. That’s why Jon Stewart is in business and is rich. All he has to do is show far right wing extremists on television sticking their feet in their mouth constantly. It’s what you do best.

              [link]      
            • By MJRinPA on October 23, 2014 at 2:11 pm

              “Every time there is a new scandal…” But there are not new scandals, there are only new right wing conspiracy theories. They keep throwing things hoping that something will stick. So far, nothing has stuck, so every week they make up something new.

              [link]      
        • By MJRinPA on October 23, 2014 at 2:08 pm

          I just saw a chart comparing gas prices under Bush & Obama. The spikes and dips were almost identical.
          http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/21/1085371/-Gas-Prices-Were-Actually-HIGHER-Under-Bush-Than-Under-Obama

          [link]      
    • By Douglas McKenzie on September 2, 2014 at 12:51 pm

      Market Skippy, Market. We are capitalists politics is played out with same old group of a few hundred people we see on TV. It isn’t real.

      [link]      
  16. By Jack on January 26, 2013 at 11:49 am

    Romney has infinitely more respect for women and men of every race than Obama could hope to understand in this life. You’ve had the wool pulled over your eyes.

    [link]      
  17. By Folonis on February 7, 2013 at 11:38 am

    What a roundabout ridiculous answer by a group apparently loving the liberal/lefties.
    Of course gas has doubled during the past 4 years. And of course this administration has everything to do with that. They can also correct it and obtain our own resources here in the U.S., but they ignore that course due the the playbook of the enviro religion.

    [link]      
    • By Robert Rapier on February 7, 2013 at 2:10 pm

      No, we just have a more detailed understanding of the energy industry. Gasoline prices in fact averaged more under Bush than Obama. Was that Bush’s fault? No, no more than the surge in oil and gas production in the US is Obama’s doing. Presidents have limited impact on domestic oil and gas production, or prices. They can have a minor short-term impact, and they can put policies in place that will have a greater long-term impact.

      But to blame a doubling in gasoline prices on Obama just demonstrates a real ignorance of the situation in my opinion. Prices were where they were because an oil price bubble had just popped. But prices overcorrected — and I said that at the time. If McCain had won, we would be looking at the same oil and gas prices.

      [link]      
      • By paganpink on July 3, 2014 at 12:35 am

        Gasoline prices have NEVER averaged higher under Bush then Obama! You’re just making sh!t up and trying to correct others with utterly bogus information.

        [link]      
        • By dadork on August 30, 2014 at 9:00 am

          Yes, gas did spike under Bush but it was never this consistently high like it has been for the last 5 years.

          [link]      
  18. By christin on February 11, 2013 at 9:20 pm

    i under stand what the author here is saying, but more US production under obama has nothing to do with obama . it is the private citizen that has made that happen. do not forget he has decided there will be no drilling in our gulf of mexico. he has said no to the pipeline. he has continually done his best to impede coal production and fracking. because of him and all the fruitless goodies he has handed to his green energy pals, we are deeper in the hole than ever—on top of other America-killing choices he has intentionally made. He will continue to purposely hurt us—mark my words.

    [link]      
  19. By Billy Leger on March 17, 2013 at 12:49 pm

    I live in Texas and I do not remember ever paying over $4 a gallon for fuel. I do remember paying close to $4 a gallon but not over, The statement that the gas prices have doubled since Obama took office is true, but G.W. had them jacked up just as high, that’s because both of these clowns are protecting their investments.

    [link]      
  20. By Steven Haffley on March 18, 2013 at 7:28 am

    This is so biased and so left you’d have to be an idiot to believe anything this registered democratic author has to say. I remember a time when newspapers actually gave facts rather than just a bunch of liberal bias, unfortunately we used to have good journalists, now we have all the leftover “Robert Rapiers” who love to try to influence people with their opinion rather than educate them with the facts. You are a liberal hypocrite accusing others of misleading people with the facts while your entire article here attempts the same thing. Look in the mirror once in a while.

    [link]      
    • By Robert Rapier on March 18, 2013 at 11:31 am

      The only thing funnier than the fact that you didn’t address a single comment in the article is the fact that I get people just like you stopping by to rail at me for being a right wing conservative. People like you can’t imagine that I am neither, and just cutting through the spin to get to the truth. But that’s because you have been (as I see on your Facebook link) regurgitating the line that gasoline was $1.78 when Obama came into office, and it’s all been downhill from there. You seem to forget that gasoline spent a good chunk of time above $4 when Bush was in office, but rabid partisans tend to be selectively forgetful.

      [link]      
  21. By Icorps1970 on March 26, 2013 at 2:10 am

    But how much of the oil production is on private land and how much is on public lands? There is a very large reserve in Eastern MT and N. Dakota (200 years worth) and its being drilled, on private lands. Because the public lands are closed. So giving Obama credit for increased oil production is BS of the highest order. So far as I can see he has blocked drilling on public lands (note a land ownership map of the Eastern 100 miles of Central Montana) at every turn.

    That the liberals have blocked drilling and refinery building for years is also a fact. That Obama does not care if gas prices soar is also a fact based on his own statements. Our primary problem is that we have allowed our sworn enemies to set the price of crude by NOT developing OUR rather substantial reserves. This has been the result of agitating by environmentalists and their Democratic brothers under the skin (and some RINO types) who do their work in Congress. These folks have given us ethanol fuels which void warranties, reduce mileage and damage fuel systems and require more energy to produce than they deliver. There is no simple answer to this I agree. But having and anti-capitalist in the White House is not a good idea when out economy is built on capitalism.

    [link]      
  22. By blucorsair on July 1, 2013 at 3:05 am

    Yes, you are correct! You can not add a record $6 trillion to the national deficit like Obama did in his first 4 year term and expect things to stay the same. Bush was dealing with a robust economy until the recession and 2 wars, which emulates supply & demand policies, while Obama was dealing witk low demand and inflated dollars (O bucks) due to his outrageous spending policies! Both Bush and Obama dealt with the recession in different ways that definitely affected fuel prices! Bush brought prices down to $1.84/gal when Obama took office and Obama drove them back up to record highs! Canada is our largest supplier of imported oil and their dollar is now worth more than the U.S. dollar. Mexico comes in at the number 2 importer of oil and the dollar is now only worth 5 pesos to a dollar as compared previously to 10 pesos, before Obamas assault on the national debt!

    [link]      
    • By MJRinPA on October 23, 2014 at 2:14 pm

      Correction, Obama did not add to the “national deficit”. Putting the Bush wars into the budget increased the “national debt” on paper. But that is where that debt should have been since he started the wars.
      Obama has actually cut the “national deficit” in half.

      [link]      
    • By MJRinPA on October 23, 2014 at 2:16 pm

      “Bush was dealing with a robust economy until the recession and 2 wars,…”
      True, on face value. But, if he hadn’t cut taxes at the start of his wars, he would have continued to have a robust economy. Bush’s tax cuts were the first time in the history of the country when a President didn’t increase taxes to pay for a war. Bush’s economic policies are what created the huge debt. Not Obama’s policy to stop the Recession free fall.

      [link]      
  23. By ddavison on August 5, 2013 at 9:08 am

    Karen,
    With all due respect, your a jackass.You have good intentions I’m certain but, let me take a moment to explain a simple fact you may be overlooking. The price of fossil fuel greatly effects the price of virtually every manufactured product, all food products, obviously gas which comes in handy and EVERY product purchased by every consumer. You sound like a compassionate person which is a wonderful quality that I respect but I think your compassion could be better directed towards people who truly need our help. just a hint… it’s not the people who can afford those ‘gas guzzlers’ or drop a couple hundred extra bucks a week on groceries. If You want to talk about ‘sad’, let’s address the truly needy families in our country. They aren’t concerned about ‘getting off of oil’, they care about scraping up a few bucks to get to work and having enough money to feed their kids at the end of the day. You have some nerve to point your finger at others and calling them selfish because their priority isn’t your beautiful coast. Their children will not have a future if they can’t afford to unnessesarily pay $4.50 for a gallon of fuel and pay the 200% increase in food cost in the last 8 years. As far as drilling off our beautiful coast, were you aware that American oil companies are prohibited from drilling within 200 miles of our coastline. I’m glad our president put his foot down on big oil destroying our beautiful earth. BTW- Chinese oil companies are drilling only 50 miles off your beautiful coast with the approval of cour current ‘save our planet’ adminastration…

    [link]      
    • By Catherine McSherry on June 20, 2014 at 4:23 pm

      You’re a jackass because you used the wrong spelling for the contraction for “you are.” It’s you’re, not your!

      [link]      
      • By LaShell West on June 29, 2014 at 8:39 pm

        A minor misspelling is hardly a reason to call someone a jackass ! That says alot more about you than it does about them.

        [link]      
    • By A on June 23, 2014 at 10:15 pm

      “With all due respect” … ? Really?

      [link]      
    • By Guest on June 30, 2014 at 3:29 pm

      Ddavison; With all due respect you have no idea what you’re talking about. You have ignored the fact that you have so boldly illustrated about how gas prices at this time raise all cost or what some might call is “cost push” inflation. If you had bothered to read what Karen had written you might not of just restated her point for her while sounding kind of like a cross between a stooge and an idiot. If your point is that we need cheap gas…well I think that’s the problem…idiots that think we need cheap gas…I bet back in the day if I cloned this sort of mentality and applied it to slavery you would be clamoring for more slums instead of integration. Best of luck and do us all a favor and stop voting; you’re most likely doing more harm than you might be able to understand. With all due respect though…

      [link]      
      • By paganpink on July 3, 2014 at 12:11 am

        You’re a fool. Of course cheap gas prices are good for everyone from taxes to the price of goods. And since we have higher oil and gas reserves NOW then we did in the 1960′s, no thanks to the fools like you in the government It should add save yourself trillions of dollars trying to crap out new energy sources from some bureaucrats arse. Let science, such as directional drilling and other breakthroughs, keep giving our world dependable power for centuries to come. And no need for Chicken Little. Or Climate alarmism for its now thoroughly debunked science. WAKE UP .

        [link]      
    • By Kathleen Br. on July 17, 2014 at 10:37 am

      I stopped reading after “jackass.”

      [link]      
  24. By SICKOFTHELAPDOGMEDIA on September 23, 2013 at 7:23 pm

    OMG!!!! You people will make any excuse for him

    [link]      
  25. By Forrest on April 28, 2014 at 7:57 am

    Not so fast. I remember a constant deluge of Bush, Cheny, Halliburton, oil interests, corruption, blood for oil, and hate full big oil corruption and puppet leadership within White house. The talk shows, blogs, opinion pieces, and entertainers were all accusing Bush of evil malevolent behavior. “He lied people died”. Remember the Saudi Jet flying after 9/11 or how the N.Y skyscraper imploded? The Left was aflame with hateful rhetoric, even his religion was a ploy. The closed door meeting Cheny had with Oil companies now a malicious strategy meeting to cheat the public. Bush and Attorney General Ashcroft were acting like tyrants. No one had privacy since discovery of warrant less wire taps, the U.S. lost respect, we were the terrorist per water boarding, we’re fighting the wrong war, remember the constant deluge of costs of war, deficit spending, demands for photographs of caskets on plane, how we were to honor the protestors, 9/11 was an inside job to gain oil land, Rosie shot to popularity per her partisan hate full rhetoric, and the 2% whom ruled the world profiteering from the 98%. These folks honorable vs the racist Tea Party. On and on and on….nonstop. Remember the right way wrong way polls, how popularity was a never ending story upon Bush if dropping. Every ounce of crappola was thrown at the news wall in hope of having a trace stick in mind of public.

    I do think there was some manipulation of oil market for the election. Arab oil producing countries probably supportive of Obama passiveness, his condemnation of country, his relationship with the Islam, and his parents activism. They probably thought this guy would knock the U.S. down a few pegs. Oil prices have tremendous leverage to persuade the voting public on wrong way governance. Meaning to switch to opposing political party. Oil prices shot up at critical time for earning critical votes and dropped when apparent Obama would win. Ask yourself why Presidents bow and kiss up to oil Sultans if not to gain favor?

    [link]      
  26. By Rich Nelson on June 22, 2014 at 4:36 am

    no such thing as a honest person to vote for ..THEY ALL LIE TO GET OFFICE THEN DO NOTHING!!!

    [link]      
  27. By kevhead on June 26, 2014 at 8:40 am

    Obama blamed Bush when prices went up , now you are saying it’s only the president’s fault when it’s a republican. The us should switch to diesel and make biodiesel instead of ethanol, cheaper and better for the environment. Switch all government vehicles to natural gas.

    [link]      
  28. By paganpink on July 3, 2014 at 12:38 am

    You’re a special kind of dumb, aren’t you. You make up numbers, then when you’re caught out you make up more numbers. You must be in the government!

    [link]      
    • By Stephen Noyes on October 22, 2014 at 10:03 pm

      Pagan, look in a mirror moron.

      [link]      
  29. By paganpink on July 3, 2014 at 12:41 am

    Conspiracy by the Bilderburgs? Make up some fanciful mechanism unrelated to the real world and go with it! That’s a good liberal.

    [link]      
  30. By Kathleen Br. on July 17, 2014 at 10:41 am

    Lorrie, how is that hope and change going for you now? ;) Romney predicted correctly on almost everything. And a fine thing you’re doing – labeling him as not caring about women, people of color, etc. Doesn’t see them as equal “AT ALL”? Pretty strong opinion, do you personally know him? I’m sorry but BO is a Presidential Titanic and I for one cannot wait for him to get the hell out of dodge.

    [link]      
  31. By egbegb on August 11, 2014 at 2:06 am

    #1

    ====

    Blaming Obama for the price rise would be like blaming him for

    cases of lung cancer that were detected during his term.

    ====

    AND

    #2

    ====

    Furthermore, I have noted that President Obama will be the

    first president since LBJ to preside over four straight years

    of increasing U.S. oil production.

    ====

    YIKES! US oil production has increased

    on private property only since the great

    zero was first elected. Obama has prevented

    any oil discovery and/or production on public lands

    since Feb, 2009. If O takes credit for America’s

    increased energy production, he claims accomplishments

    he has not powered. Believe in Obama on these issues

    and our have not studied what has happened in America in

    the past 20 years. YIKES!j

    Stupid is as stupid does.

    “Natural gas prices are less than half the levels they were

    when Obama took office.”

    But, but, but, Obama had zero to do with that. Is

    Obama taking credit for something he had zero

    involvement with? Fracking (which Obama hates) has

    produced major increases in natural gas production.

    So much so that America can now export natural gas.

    Did Obama have anything to do with this?

    #2 is disingenuous at best and fraudulent at worst.

    [link]      
  32. By dadork on August 30, 2014 at 8:48 am

    I hope you are enjoying your bicycle and walks. Oh! What? You are still driving? Then shut the heck up.

    [link]      
  33. By Stephen Noyes on October 22, 2014 at 9:54 pm

    Gosh, have we had a Fox NEWS ALERT today showing Obama has let gas fall below 3.00?

    I’m sure they have. Everyone knows Obama gets credit for that.

    After all, I remember last year we had some FOX NEWS ALERTS that gas could go over 4.00 a gallon and it was all Obama’s fault.

    Surely all the far right wing extremists and their network, Fox News, will now give credit the same as they gave blame.

    It seems to be the only FAIR AND BALANCED thing to do.

    [link]      
Register or log in now to save your comments and get priority moderation!