Sorry for the delay in a response. I got booted yesterday from the computer and am just now getting back on. I appreciate your apology and owe you one of my own. I shouldn’t be so sensitive. Rereading my own post, I guess one could make the assumption that I hate Billo. I do not, I’m just not as impressed with him as I used to be.

But then we are talking memory… his and ours.

upinak on September 17, 2008 at 6:06 PM

I didn’t mean to isolate the problem, so much as the beginning. That mess started in Houston and the Texas oil industry, but spread throughout the country.

He followed up when he could. He had a limited amount of time to ask as many questions as he could. He tried, he moved on. The fact is that no one else (to my knowledge) asked Obama about Ayers. And if anyone did, I could have been Olbermann is a ‘can you beleive these A*hole neocons trying to derail your campaign’ types of ‘questions’ about Ayers. And while some people on the left claim that O’Reilly shouted him down and was the typical neocon puppet of Roger Ailes doing the evil right wing’s smear job by asking the Ayers and rev. Wright questions, I think it’s pretty amusing that some here think that O’Reilly is in the tank for Obama. And that’s clearly not the case.

wise_man on September 17, 2008 at 5:32 PM

Well you’re wrong. Two things..one O’Reilly had time to chit chat about his basketball prowess, when he could have been the “hard hitting” interviewer he claims to be. And two, Obama would not have given all those answers I listed in quotes if others had not aked him about Ayers before.(I can’t believe I had to explain that last part.) But I guess you have forgotten Stephanopoulos aking him about Ayers during the April debate with Clinton and that’s only one example.

And questioning O’Reilly’s willingness to be what he claims, a hard hitting interviewer, is not saying he’s in the tank for Obama. Although I am beginning to wonder.

If he is SO wrong on something that is SO simple to understand, how can I take anything he says seriously?

Are you sure that it’s really so simple? That’s a sweeping statement to make. I can’t say with 100% certainty that I know there’s nothing improper going on in the market.

On of the simplest rules of economics is that competition drives down prices

You have a very naive understanding of the business world.

What if the competition doesn’t lower prices… knowing that lowering prices won’t increase market share, it will only cause your competitors to also lower prices. This happens all the time. When companies formally communicate pricing plans to one another, it’s called collusion. Or as ADM executives would profess during their major price fixing operations of 80’s and 90’s, ‘the customer is the enemy’.

“They’ve never lost money!”

Bill O’Reilly

In the mid-80s, the price of a barrel of oil dropped to $8, and the entire Houston area fell into an economic depression

O’Reilly wasn’t talking about the 80’s, he was talking about the last 4 years. Big difference between an era with rising oil prices and tanking oil prices. If you took the time to do any research, you’d also see that in the 80’s there were more refinery owners and far more competition.

O’Reilly might be running with a populist message to boost his tv ratings, but Cavuto isn’t much better. Cavuto would still defend Exxon if they gang raped his mother.

Thanks Allahpundit for saving me 30-40 minutes a day. (TiVo and blast past the stuff I didn’t care about). I had given up on H&C long ago because Colmes is such an idiot on EVERY subject I can’t watch it any more. That leaves only the best news show on TV, Special Report.

Whenever O’Reilly starts shooting his mouth off about market economics, I picture him with a tie dye T-Shirt, three day old beard, and a seashell necklace. Suddenly, it’s easier to accept his blunt ignorance on the subject.

Dennis Miller : “How you doing tonight, Bill? I understand Neil Cavuto sleeps with the fishes.”

Bill O’Reilly : (wipes smile from face, tries his best to look confused) “What do you mean? Explain yourself.”

I wouldn’t say “yeah woo O’Reilly got his ass kicked!’ etc etc, as I thought both brought up valid points and I got to see some actual thoughtful discussion on the program for the first time in quite a while. Admittedly I don’t watch it much anymore so.. hmm. But yes.

And I do like how everyone seemed all nicey-nice at the end of it, too.

Aaaaaaaaaand ultimately I liked his line about prices not being 3 times as much. Might have to pull that one out the next time a customer with no memory bitches about why the price of petrol per litre hasn’t come down because the price of a barrel of oil has..

a free market without morals is bound to fail.

No, a society without morals is bound to fail. A market is the interaction between supply and demand – nothing more, nothing less. What morals does a barrel of oil have? How about a dollar bill?

a free market without morals leads to revolutions. (see Obama’s recent poll numbers)

As a matter of fact, Obama’s poll numbers are illustrative of the success of free markets. Only in countries as rich as those of the West could a metrosexual weakling like Obama rise to such national prominence.

A free market is not amoral unless the people that live under that free market are amoral

Some people buy a gun at Dick’s Sporting Goods to protect their homes and families. Some people buy a gun at Dick’s Sporting Goods to kill convenience store clerks.

Tell me: do they pay different prices according to their moral intent?

The market is what it is.

the difference is that people can not just quit buying gasoline. They NEED it.

Once again, you’re incorrect. People need food, water, and oxygen. And depending on climate, shelter from the elements. That’s it. People want gasoline; albeit, badly. But in the end, that doesn’t really matter. The market is what it is. And people pay what the market will bear – no more, no less.

That would be like saying if some company could corner the market on water. that company would be entitled to charge whatever the market would bear for that water.

This is completely pointless because there is no monopoly on oil. Dozens of countries around the world produce oil – some more, some less. That oil is traded in an open market, no different than oranges or gold.

Your problem is that you just don’t seem to be capable of comprehending that oil companies are doing nothing different than any other business: they produce a product and they sell it at the price that the market will bear. Period.

…the oil companies and gov thru their policies/lobbying/ and strong arm tactics have made gasoline/disel the only transportation fuel in this country.

Please provide some proof in the form of documentation for that claim. I know that it’s a favorite conspiracy theory of the Left, but just like Roswell, until I see a body, there’s no “there” there.

This means that they no longer have the right to act like any other company.

As long as they are privately held companies, they most certainly do. Whether or not you like that fact is beside the point.

the oil industry itself with mergers has gotten rid of internal competition. So they have destoryed the competiton both internal and external and now can be considered a monoploy.

“Competition” is “destroyed” everyday, in the form of mergers and acquisitions. There are several US oil companies. They compete against one another for customers. The end.

The gov has said over the course of its history that they have a right to control monoplies for the commmon good.

Then that kind of throws water on your “oil companies are a monopoly” shtick, doesn’t it?

Therefore saying the oil companies should be allowed to act like any other type of company is wrong.

Why? Because you say so?

Price controls are not the answer. The answer is requiring oil companies to increase supplies…

That’s a great idea. Mind telling us how all how you’re going to make OPEC, Russia, and Canada produce more oil?

…to have a control on thier profit margins. A flat return no matter what the price of oil is.

I’m asking this in all seriousness: are you 15 or something?…and just found your older brother’s “Rage Against The Machine” albums?

I’ll start with a disclaimer: I like Bill O’Reilly and really don’t have much use for “Big Oil” whatever that might be.

I’ll start with a disclaimer: I like “Big Oil” and really don’t have much use for Bill O’Reilly whatever that might be.

“Big Oil” has done more to make cars, trucks, trains and planes run (and thus the engine of free enterprise) than Bill O’Reilly ever has.