Chu to Congress: We’re not interested in lowering gas prices

posted at 11:00 am on February 29, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Hey, at least Energy Secretary Stephen Chu gave an honest answer.  When asked by Rep. Alan Nunnelee whether the Obama administration wants to work to get gas prices to come back down, Chu replied that they’re not focusing on that — and that higher gas prices mean more of a push for the alternative energy sources the administration wants to push:

“We agree there is great suffering when the price of gasoline increases in the United States, and so we are very concerned about this,” said Chu, speaking to the House Appropriations energy and water subcommittee. “As I have repeatedly said, in the Department of Energy, what we’re trying to do is diversify our energy supply for transportation so that we have cost-effective means.”

Chu specifically cited a reported breakthrough announced Monday by Envia Systems, which received funding from DOE’s ARPA-E, that could help slash the price of electric vehicle batteries.

He also touted natural gas as “great” and said DOE is researching how to reduce the cost of compressed natural gas tanks for vehicles.

High gasoline prices will make research into such alternatives more urgent, Chu said.

“But is the overall goal to get our price” of gasoline down, asked Nunnelee.

“No, the overall goal is to decrease our dependency on oil, to build and strengthen our economy,” Chu replied. “We think that if you consider all these energy policies, including energy efficiency, we think that we can go a long way to becoming less dependent on oil and [diversifying] our supply and we’ll help the American economy and the American consumers.”

The Heritage Foundation jumped all over Chu’s comments:

As shocking as his remarks are, they shouldn’t come as a surprise. Chu has a long record of advocating for higher gas prices. In 2008, he stated, “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” Last March, he reiterated his point in an interview with Fox News’ Chris Wallace, noting that his focus is to ease the pain felt by his energy policies by forcing automakers to make more fuel-efficient automobiles. “What I’m doing since I became Secretary of Energy has been quite clear. What I have been doing is developing methods to take the pain out of high gas prices.”

One of those methods is dumping taxpayer dollars into alternative energy projects like the Solyndra solar plant. Another is subsidizing the purchase of high-cost electric cars like the Chevy Volt to the tune of $7,500 per car (which the White House wants to increase to $10,000). In both cases, those methods aren’t working. Solyndra went bankrupt because its product couldn’t bear the weight of market pressures, and Chevy Volts aren’t selling, even with taxpayer-funded rebates. What’s the president’s next plan? Harvesting “a bunch of algae” as a replacement for oil.

Meanwhile, the Obama Administration is seemingly doing everything it can to make paying for energy even more painful by refusing to open access to the country’s oil and gas reserves and blocking new projects that would lead to the development of more energy in America. Case in point: the president’s decision to say “no” to the Keystone XL pipeline, a project that would have delivered hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil from Canada to Texas refineries, while bringing thousands of jobs along with it.

And while Chu gave an honest answer that actually matches the actions taken by this administration, Heritage notes that Obama has offered nothing but double-talk on gas prices:

Sensing impending political fallout from the high cost of gas, President Obama last week spoke on the subject and attempted to deflect blame for the pain. He said that there is no quick fix to high gas prices and the nation cannot drill its way out of the problem, but as Heritage’s Nicolas Loris writes, the president ignored reality and dished out a series of half-truths. Among them, the president claimed oil production is its highest in eight years, that increasing oil production takes too long, and that oil is not enough. Loris writes that while production is up on private lands, unrealized production on federal lands and offshore could have yielded even more output, increasing supply and driving down costs. If the president had said “yes” to Keystone, oil could have reach the market quickly. And as for the president’s push for alternative energy, those sources simply cannot stand the test of the market.

Even before Chu spilled the beans, Democrats have begun pressing Obama to start taking gas prices seriously:

Congressional Democrats are ramping up pressure on President Obama to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to prevent rising gas prices from threatening the economy and their election-year prospects.

They are growing anxious that the price of fuel could reverse their political fortunes, which had been improving due to signs of growth in the economy.

Republicans have hammered Democrats on the price spike, repeatedly noting that gas prices — now at $3.72 per gallon for regular — have doubled since Obama won the White House.

I guess Democrats in Congress don’t see this as a feature rather than a bug in Obama’s energy policies.  The RNC came out with a video slamming Obama for high gas prices, but I suspect they’ll be rushing a new video to publication featuring Chu’s “who cares” attitude.  Otherwise, this is a pretty effective 1-minute spot, and it might start showing up on TV broadcasts soon:


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Save this video clip .. expect to see it a lot over the next few months

J_Crater on February 29, 2012 at 11:02 AM

The more they get away with, the more unafraid they are to show their cards. At some point, we need to get all the traitors in the same place, arrest them, and try them for conspiracy.

HomeoftheBrave on February 29, 2012 at 11:03 AM

These turds need to be flushed!

vietvet68 on February 29, 2012 at 11:03 AM

We’re so screwed. Good thing I bought that land in the Ozarks.

Keyser-Soze on February 29, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Congressional Democrats are ramping up pressure on President Obama to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to prevent rising gas prices from threatening the economy and their election-year prospects.

They agree with the policy, they just want short term relief so they can get through the election.

Doomberg on February 29, 2012 at 11:04 AM

I guess Democrats in Congress don’t see this as a feature rather than a bug in Obama’s energy policies.

Or they see this as a threat as the GOP or any other entity who wants to run and take their spot in the seat.

upinak on February 29, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Congressional Democrats are ramping up pressure on President Obama to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to prevent rising gas prices from threatening the economy and their election-year prospects.

They agree with the policy, they just want short term relief so they can get through the election.

Doomberg on February 29, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Ummmm hello! They have already done this in summer of last year!

upinak on February 29, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Keep talking Chu….. right out the door..

……with the American public bootprint on your rear end….

itsspideyman on February 29, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Hello

An honest answer, well I’ll be

cmsinaz on February 29, 2012 at 11:06 AM

These turds need to be flushed!

vietvet68 on February 29, 2012 at 11:03 AM

There’s so many of them…they block up the plumbing!

KOOLAID2 on February 29, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Chu should be fired. If his concern isn’t for making America more competitive, while also decreasing the burden on American families and businesses, then he needs to go.

Being a puppet for this administration and their desire to push a alternative energy model that European nations are just now abandoning is just absurd! How does this man still have his job?

Patriot Vet on February 29, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Ummmm hello! They have already done this in summer of last year!

upinak on February 29, 2012 at 11:05 AM

I haven’t forgotten. It didn’t work then and it won’t work now, but they don’t know what else to do. It’s why they keep trying to spend their way out of the recession.

Doomberg on February 29, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Steven Chu acts like he is part of the politburo describing a “five year plan.”

Central planning against market desires = fail

Meat Fighter on February 29, 2012 at 11:08 AM

The goal: Kill the ability of Americans to go wherever they want, whenever they what … and do whatever they want to do. Force Americans to urban areas and force them to use trains and other public transportation.

It has nothing to do with “greenhouse gases” or dependence on foreign oil. It has everything to do with control.

darwin on February 29, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Obviously

faraway on February 29, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Chu can’t lower gas prices. Stop the spending and Bernanke will stop having so much money printed to cover the spending. Then prices will fall, and not only for gasoline.

rickv404 on February 29, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Secretary Chu: Sure old folks will freeze to death this winter because they can’t afford the heating bill. Sure the poor will lose jobs or forgo food. But human lives mean nothing to me. Only this matters: We don’t want the Earth-Goddess to cry.

theCork on February 29, 2012 at 11:09 AM

MSM: “Secretary Chu was very forthright in admitting that the Administration has no power over gasoline prices”

forest on February 29, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Imagine if Bush said this.

Even Fox won’t run with this. Unafraid, indeed.

faraway on February 29, 2012 at 11:09 AM

“We agree there is great suffering when the price of gasoline increases in the United States, and so we are very concerned about this,” said Chu, speaking to the House Appropriations energy and water subcommittee. “As I have repeatedly said, in the Department of Energy, what we’re trying to do is diversify our energy supply for transportation so that we have cost-effective means.”

“Diversify our energy supply for transportation”?! I drive a Camry. The wife drives an SUV. They have internal combustion engines and run on gasoline. All the Solyndras in the world won’t make a lick of difference to us. What is their plan to make gas prices more affordable so they don’t eat up everyone’s disposable income(or worse)?

Doughboy on February 29, 2012 at 11:10 AM

We’re not interested in lowering gas prices

We know.

Kenosha Kid on February 29, 2012 at 11:11 AM

99.9% of vehicles on the road burn gasoline or diesel fuel. NO alternative energy sources can change that fact. What does Chu expect, that everyone will go buy new cars?

These people and their energy agenda are going to destroy our economy if they aren’t stopped.

If the Democrats really cared about the poor and or king classes they wouldn’t be punishing them with high energy prices.

This attitude IMO borders on treason.

Charlemagne on February 29, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Maybe the republicans can use this to find the soft spot in Obama’s armor/

HumpBot Salvation on February 29, 2012 at 11:12 AM

A leftist with the courage of his convictions.

Truly a pig flying moment. And also a time to wag that shiny little pill in front of the stupid, to get their attention back off of what Chu said.

MNHawk on February 29, 2012 at 11:12 AM

This makes my blood boil. I travel close to 100 miles a day in order to have a job. Thank God I live in Wyoming where gas is $3.00 a gallon (going up daily). I could not afford to keep my job if it goes up to $5.00 which means I lose my pension and benefits. We are all victims of these insane people who are in charge.

I’ll take my high blood pressure pill now.

lea on February 29, 2012 at 11:12 AM

I meant “middle” not “king” classes. iPad autocorrect.

Charlemagne on February 29, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Apparently Chu’s goal is to get Mitt Romney elected President….

radjah shelduck on February 29, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Chu takes Metro to work, he likes to rub elbows with the proletariat.

NoDonkey on February 29, 2012 at 11:14 AM

EU prices are double, but European countries are small. If you want to be able to drive the economy the last thing you need is to raise gas prices – they add to produce cost, each and every product the average consumer needs will be affected.

Masih ad-Dajjal on February 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM

We are building a great portfolio to whomever will be our candidate…that is why we need to choose the most conservative, that person will win.

right2bright on February 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM

“But is the overall goal to get our price” of gasoline down?”, asked Nunnelee.
No, the overall goal is to decrease our dependency on oil, to build and strengthen our economy,” Chu replied.

What does it say about the weakness of the GOP field and the (non) intelligence of a large part of the American electorate when an administration can give answers like this, and there is still a real chance 0bama will be re-elected?

MidniteRambler on February 29, 2012 at 11:16 AM

But all of our guys are somehow “unelectable”. Gimmie a break.

Obama is the only one “unelectable”.

Mord on February 29, 2012 at 11:16 AM

99.9% of vehicles on the road burn gasoline or diesel fuel. NO alternative energy sources can change that fact. What does Chu expect, that everyone will go buy new cars?

These people and their energy agenda are going to destroy our economy if they aren’t stopped.

If the Democrats really cared about the poor and or king classes they wouldn’t be punishing them with high energy prices.

This attitude IMO borders on treason.

Well said, Charlemagne. I would add that people who live in rural areas can’t drive Chevy Volts. Wyoming has winds of 50+ miles an hour most days, which would literally pick us up and blow us to Nebraska.

lea on February 29, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Last March, he reiterated his point in an interview with Fox News’ Chris Wallace, noting that his focus is to ease the pain felt by his energy policies by forcing automakers to make more fuel-efficient automobiles. “What I’m doing since I became Secretary of Energy has been quite clear. What I have been doing is developing methods to take the pain out of high gas prices.”

“And in doing so, I (Chu) have been escalating the tax burden on Americans by subsidizing crony “green” energy alternatives, which have been further bankrupting the nation. I (Chu) have simply shifted the pain so that the costs of government-sponsored energy sources are hidden and so that Americans will continue to blame Big Earl.”

Buy a clue, Chu.

onlineanalyst on February 29, 2012 at 11:17 AM

This is exactly why Republicans don’t need to be arguing about social issues.

Beat Obama and we have a chance to appoint some additional Supreme Court Justices.

Leave him be and any chance at changing anything ever, towards a more conservative bent, goes out the window for a decade.

NoDonkey on February 29, 2012 at 11:17 AM

“What I’m doing since I became Secretary of Energy has been quite clear. What I have been doing is developing methods to take the pain out of high gas prices.”

A beautiful quote from an intelligent idiot.

So Dr Chu, when will ‘the pain’ go away?

GarandFan on February 29, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Higher gas prices. Buy a new more fuel efficient car. What am I supposed to do if I can’t afford either one?

multiuseless on February 29, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Dear Secretary Chu,

According to the Congressional Research Service, not funded by BIG OIL, we have trillions of barrels of oil, centuries of natural gas, and more coal than any other country.

You want to diversify our transportation fuels? Oil, nat gas, and coal, can all be turned into various forms of combustible fuels.

Get the Hell out of the way and leave us alone!

I really hate these people. Even Russian Communists weren’t this willfully destructive of the USSR.

Charlemagne on February 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM

This attitude IMO borders on treason.

Charlemagne on February 29, 2012 at 11:11 AM

To replace on nuclear reactor, they would need to place solar panels on mile wide, from Los Angeles to San Fran…and forget out wind turbines, it takes more energy to produce them, maintain them, than they can produce…but we always have algae—and filling your tires with air.

right2bright on February 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM

oops….li’l bammie just HATES it when the truth slips out.

Tim_CA on February 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM

And Santorum is the ideologue

faraway on February 29, 2012 at 11:19 AM

This is exactly why everyone needs to support and vote for the Republican nominee whoever that may be. Not only do we have to get rid of Obama, but we have to clean out his radical Cabinet and appointees.

darwin on February 29, 2012 at 11:19 AM

I’ll take my high blood pressure pill now.
lea on February 29, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Indeed. As a struggling musician these prices are going to force us to stop touring. These people are a menice.

jawkneemusic on February 29, 2012 at 11:20 AM

higher gas prices mean more of a push for the alternative energy sources the administration wants to push

About three years ago, I saw a video of a college classroom where a professional lobbyist was teaching college students (many of them with Obama logo stickers on their laptops) about how to lobby.

The lobbyist talked about several “hypothetical” situations that seemed to be very thinly veiled descriptions of his real-world activity.

One of the things that struck me was how they (Democrats in Congress and Democratic lobbyists) wanted the price of gas to keep rising and increasing the pain at the pump until they found the point at which people cried out for things to change, and they had found that point: $4/gal.

He then went on to talk about what if the government thought the “fair” price of gas should be $6/gal, how would they go about getting gas prices there…

I wish I had a link to the video to share now, but I don’t. I am curious, though, if any other Hot Air readers happened to see that video…

ITguy on February 29, 2012 at 11:20 AM

The gas price will not be as important factor in the general election as you may want to believe. Obama base voters are

a) too rich and snobby to care,
b) too stupid to connect rising gas and grocery prices,
c) too jobless to commute anywhere or go to vacation,
d) living in urban areas without much need for a car,
e) charging gas bills to governmental expense account,
f) actually making money on oil futures,
g) some/all of the above.

The categories above describe ~40% of the population, which is Obama’s tungsten-alloy electoral floor. As for grocery bill inflation, that’s where media control comes handy. Come October, the talking heads will explain to the rubes (in great details) about poor crops, lack of illegal immigrants to pick them, and greedy supermarket chains.

Archivarix on February 29, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Obama’s energy policy: F Chu, America.

Josiah on February 29, 2012 at 11:21 AM

This is usually called ‘price gouging’

faraway on February 29, 2012 at 11:22 AM

That commercial sucks. The Republicans need to show those clips with Obama talking about how he wants gas prices to go up to European levels, then show the headlines about how he has denied drilling permits in the U.S., said no to the Keystone pipeline, etc., and then show the current gas prices.

All those clips in the commercial where Obama is talking about energy independence or his energy policy — they just make this sound like an Obama campaign commercial. Voters’ attention spans are too short, and their information levels too low, for a commercial like the one above to be effective.

AZCoyote on February 29, 2012 at 11:22 AM

The more they get away with, the more unafraid they are to show their cards. At some point, we need to get all the traitors in the same place, arrest them, and try them for conspiracy.

HomeoftheBrave on February 29, 2012 at 11:03 AM

It’s attitudes like this that actually make it -theoretically- possible for Romney to win this fall, not that that will mean anything positive in terms of the long term destruction of the country. I have every confidence that Willard will do his d@mnedest to create a dog’s breakfast of his opportunities, just like all his other political efforts to date.

ebrown2 on February 29, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Notice Chu did not say “foreign” oil. He meant oil period. These yokles have got to get out of government. We need to promote free enterprise, not crony capitalism.

jake49 on February 29, 2012 at 11:22 AM

I’ll take my high blood pressure pill now.

lea on February 29, 2012 at 11:12 AM

You and me both. I’m so mad at this I can hardly see straight. This jerk is costing my family thousands of dollars. Directly out of my wallet for no good reason. He’s why we’ll forgo projects for the house. He’s why there’ll be no fancy vacation. And I’m lucky! Some of my relations haven’t had a steady job for three years now.

theCork on February 29, 2012 at 11:22 AM

These turds need to be flushed!

vietvet68 on February 29, 2012 at 11:03 AM

There’s so many of them…they block up the plumbing!

Especially with those 1.6 gal/flush toilets!

PA-Cman on February 29, 2012 at 11:22 AM

I remember that the college classroom was one of the colleges in the Washington, D.C. area, but I don’t remember specifically which one…

ITguy on February 29, 2012 at 11:23 AM

To replace on nuclear reactor, they would need to place solar panels on mile wide, from Los Angeles to San Fran…and forget out wind turbines, it takes more energy to produce them, maintain them, than they can produce…but we always have algae—and filling your tires with air.

right2bright on February 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM

I’ve done the math. A wind “plant” would have to be a square 25 miles on a side to equal the output of the Palo Verde nuclear plant outside Phoenix. That plant sits on about 400 acres.

These people are insane and dangerous to all Americans.

Charlemagne on February 29, 2012 at 11:23 AM

If I owned a gas station I would put this on continuous video loop so everybody filling up would hear/see it.

gophergirl on February 29, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Chu asserts that, without the pain of high gas prices, there will be less of a perceived need to develop alternative energy sources. I get that, but apparently these guys cannot do two things at once—they assume that their efforts in pursuing alternative energy are predicated upon high gas prices alone and that those efforts will fail unless high prices are maintained. Thus, what’s the use of spending energy on lowering them?

This is your Democratic Party, liberals. In hot pursuit of farts, moonbeans and unobtanium mines…..while the economy sputters.

ted c on February 29, 2012 at 11:23 AM

What does Chu expect, that everyone will go buy new cars?

Charlemagne on February 29, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Actually, yes, I think that is exactly right. The Volt mandate — perhaps combined with a massive Cash for Clunkers II.

jwolf on February 29, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Chu is an idiot that is bright in one very narrow area and uses that to claim expertise in all other areas.

But wait until it becomes obvious to everyone that what we are really seeing is not high gas prices, but a weak dollar and an administration that solves problems by printing more money. Everything is about to cost more.

MechanicalBill on February 29, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Notice Chu did not say “foreign” oil. He meant oil period. These yokles have got to get out of government. We need to promote free enterprise, not crony capitalism.

jake49 on February 29, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Well, none of the serious candidates for President that are left agree with you, so we are strictly out of luck…

ebrown2 on February 29, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Biodiesel, especially from algae farms, has potential. But, like all “alternative fuel sources,” it’s not mature.

This administration is tearing this country apart.

Anything But Obama

…And I mean anything. Give me a dog before Obama. At least then, we’d only have to pick up their crap, and not the fragments of our Republic.

Asurea on February 29, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Ed, if the federal government intervened and helped to lower the gas prices, how low would it drop from its current level? 2%? 10% 50%? If we can get an adequate measure of the difference between what the price would be if they opened up drilling, allowed the Keystone Pipeline, etc etc and what it is today–then we can advertise that difference and twist the knife just as they are twisting it on us right now.

ted c on February 29, 2012 at 11:26 AM

“Obama is a moderate!” -Lib

visions on February 29, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Get interested in it for the next 9 months anyway, then go back to not being interested in it. When we (the Dems) have complete control of the government again once Romney is eviscerated, taking down the House with him.

besser tot als rot on February 29, 2012 at 11:28 AM

“Obama is a moderate!” -Lib

visions on February 29, 2012 at 11:28 AM

That’s as bad as “Romney is a conservative” or “Romney is center-right.”

besser tot als rot on February 29, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Hello

An honest answer, well I’ll be

They feel so entrenched in power that they can slip and expose their true ideology and agenda.

They have to lead the way in dragging the public has to be dragged from their gas powered vehicles and with as much persuasion and force as can be used pushed into using public transportation, all-electric clowncars, bicycles, and walking.

The use of automobiles is to be reserved for our ruling elite, don’t you know.

Not to mention the high cost of oil affects the price of just about every product and service we all use.

hawkeye54 on February 29, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Cars = Individualism
Public transport = Collectivism

Liberals have an innate herding instinct.

Sharke on February 29, 2012 at 11:30 AM

So, let’s see if I get this straight … my car is paid off yet I will still struggle with paying $4 – $5 for a gallon of gas. But, Obama’s solution to my financial issue is to push me into buying an alternative fuel vehicle thereby assuming a new (big) car payment, higher insurance costs and still having a need to pay $4 – $5 for a gallon of gas. Brilliant … why do I have the impression that Obama uses a Magic 8 ball to set his policies?

If this idiot somehow gets re-elected, I despair for this country’s future.

OrbeaRider66 on February 29, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Ed, if the federal government intervened and helped to lower the gas prices,

ted c on February 29, 2012 at 11:26 AM

It’s not government intervention. It’s government getting out of the way and minding its own damn business.

besser tot als rot on February 29, 2012 at 11:31 AM

SPR can’t make a dent in oil prices. The democrats are stupid to think that releasing oil from SPR will bring down prices and help their reelection.

antisocial on February 29, 2012 at 11:31 AM

These guys are fringe and unelectable. They are not interested in what the citizenry of this country thinks nor wants, but their own agenda is what matters. This country is nothing but a host upon which they have latched themselves, feed upon it, and are determined to continue to do so. They wrongfully assume they are helpful, but they are harmful. They will be removed from office.

That’s just how it is, libs, plan your pity parties.

ted c on February 29, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Josiah, winner!

cmsinaz on February 29, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Anyone notice anything about Chu’s armor?

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on February 29, 2012 at 11:32 AM

The RNC needs to replay this over and over during the upcoming election. Sometimes the Ads just write themselves, if they will just take advantage of it.

Rollout on February 29, 2012 at 11:32 AM

It’s not government intervention. It’s government getting out of the way and minding its own damn business.

besser tot als rot on February 29, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Okay, you’re right. But what is the difference between the price now (when the gov’t is in the way) from what the price could be if it wasn’t in the way? If someone can SWAG that, I’d be interested to know and the RNC should as well.

ted c on February 29, 2012 at 11:33 AM

This is all part of the UN’s Agenda 21.

darwin on February 29, 2012 at 11:34 AM

why do I have the impression that Obama uses a Magic 8 ball to set his policies?

If this idiot somehow gets re-elected, I despair for this country’s future.

OrbeaRider66 on February 29, 2012 at 11:30 AM

What’s sad is that so many Republicans think that Romney’s visionless agenda would be better. It would be a similar disfunctional disaster (the train wreck may move in slow motion relative to Obama’s train wreck, but a train wreck it would be, nonetheless). I despair for this country’s future if either Obama or Romney is elected. Which means that I pretty much despair for this country.

besser tot als rot on February 29, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Heh

Dr Carl

:)

cmsinaz on February 29, 2012 at 11:35 AM

“We agree there is great suffering when the price of gasoline increases in the United States, and so we are very concerned about this…”

How concerned?

“But is the overall goal to get our price” of gasoline down, asked Nunnelee.

“No…”

Not THAT concerned.

theCork on February 29, 2012 at 11:35 AM

They live in a different world.

clippermiami on February 29, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Pompous a$$e$, from top to bottom.

Rohall1215 on February 29, 2012 at 11:36 AM

CAMPAIGN AD

The price of gas ALONE can defeat Obama.

This needs to be used over and over and over and over. When people are sick of gas prices they will be sick of the obstructor in chief and his constant acts against drilling, refining, and getting more oil from domestic or friendly sources.

wildcat72 on February 29, 2012 at 11:36 AM

But what is the difference between the price now (when the gov’t is in the way) from what the price could be if it wasn’t in the way? If someone can SWAG that, I’d be interested to know and the RNC should as well.

ted c on February 29, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Impossible to predict I’d say, particularly without some complicated algorithm, which nobody would understand. And as such, would be poo poo’d by the media and wouldn’t gain any traction. They might be able to guesstimate the difference if we’d opened ANWR when Bush wanted to do it, but I doubt that argument would be as persuasive. They can try it, but its more of a tangental than visceral connection.

besser tot als rot on February 29, 2012 at 11:37 AM

The most interesting thing about this story is that it cannot be found on the liberal blogs. Just tried several.

BullShooterAsInElk on February 29, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Also:

This.

Asurea on February 29, 2012 at 11:39 AM

This guy just might be the chink in Obama’s armor.

AcidReflux on February 29, 2012 at 11:39 AM

The Bamster’s already said he’s buying a Volt after he leaves office which should be Jan 20, 2013. Maybe this is code for, we ain’t doin
nothin’ to lower the stinkin’ gas prices for you serfs. Isn’t Chu the one who wanted us to paint our roofs white? News flash, my roof is white for 6 months every year.

Kissmygrits on February 29, 2012 at 11:39 AM

What do they care? We pay for the gas in their limousines.

portlandon on February 29, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Are we allowed to say that Chu is the chink in the Democrats armor?

Special Forces Grunt on February 29, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Expect radio silence from the media on the gas prices. The media only cares about high gas prices when there is a Republican President. Much like the homeless.

besser tot als rot on February 29, 2012 at 11:40 AM

About three years ago, I saw a video of a college classroom where a professional lobbyist was teaching college students (many of them with Obama logo stickers on their laptops) about how to lobby.

The lobbyist talked about several “hypothetical” situations that seemed to be very thinly veiled descriptions of his real-world activity.

One of the things that struck me was how they (Democrats in Congress and Democratic lobbyists) wanted the price of gas to keep rising and increasing the pain at the pump until they found the point at which people cried out for things to change, and they had found that point: $4/gal.

He then went on to talk about what if the government thought the “fair” price of gas should be $6/gal, how would they go about getting gas prices there…

I wish I had a link to the video to share now, but I don’t. I am curious, though, if any other Hot Air readers happened to see that video…

ITguy on February 29, 2012 at 11:20 AM

The problem is these “hypotheticals” are just that. They never follow these scenarios to their logical(or illogical in the case of liberals) conclusion. If you deliberately drive gas prices up to 5 or 6 bucks a gallon, even if the entire country demands an alternative source of energy to replace gas, it’s not like the federal government can snap their fingers and make one appear out of thin air. And even if they did come up with some sort of breakthrough, what about the hundreds of millions of vehicles out there that rely on gas and diesel?

Doughboy on February 29, 2012 at 11:40 AM

it’s not like the federal government can snap their fingers and make one appear out of thin air.

Doughboy on February 29, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Try telling that to Obama. I bet he’s vigorously working on his snapping technique right now.

besser tot als rot on February 29, 2012 at 11:41 AM

“Let them eat cake buy Chevy Volts.”

Are you there Ramirez?

slickwillie2001 on February 29, 2012 at 11:41 AM

“As I have repeatedly said, in the Department of Energy, what we’re trying to do is diversify our energy supply for transportation so that we have cost-effective means.”

This makes zero sense…

If you have to force the price of one product up in order to make other products “cost effective” then all you have done is to destroy any cost effectiveness among all of the avialable products. Now NONE of them are cost effective. What good is that?

gravityman on February 29, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Obama says he’ll buy a Chevy Volt when he leaves office. Yeah, because it is going to be mandated. Another mandate that I’m sure Mitt “GM Fleet” Romney will support – well, maybe not at the federal level, but at the state level? Sure.

besser tot als rot on February 29, 2012 at 11:43 AM

“But is the overall goal to get our price” of gasoline down, asked Nunnelee.

“No, the overall goal is to decrease our dependency on oil, to build and strengthen our economy,”

The idiots are on the bullet train to their socialist/commie paradise. Their train is going so fast it will magically shoot past the tidal wave of high energy costs that will weaken or destroy the economy and come out the other side in their unicorn and fairy land of free everything for everyone.

yhxqqsn on February 29, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Has that Asian journalist group distributed guidelines for how we should talk about Chu? Because to me Chu is oriented toward an austerity program when it comes to energy. He shows a wanton disregard for the consumer and his goal of raising gas prices to me is a zero sum, dim sum game.

But seriously, if Obama is the Spock of his crew, this guy is the Data–absolutely clueless about the impact of his utterances. (Sorry for mixing the ST generations.)

EMD on February 29, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Doughboy on February 29, 2012 at 11:40 AM

I agree with you. The Socialist’s “Five Year Plan” never works!

And even if they did come up with some sort of breakthrough, what about the hundreds of millions of vehicles out there that rely on gas and diesel?

And the poorest people are least able to afford new equipment!

Democrats are NOT the party of the “little guy”!

ITguy on February 29, 2012 at 11:45 AM

what kind of green vehicle does chu drive?

Mr. Sun on February 29, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3