Dem governor: Attacking Obama for higher gas prices is “baloney”

posted at 3:21 pm on September 4, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Is it, Governor Schweitzer? Is it? Via The Hill:

Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) and Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana both said that Obama’s administration had made strides in implementing an “all of the above” approach to energy, with emphasis on both oil exploration and renewable sources.

“They actually do it, and don’t just talk about it,” Schweitzer said of Democrats.

The Montana governor said the United States has quadrupled its number of drilling rigs, which he said had led to increased domestic production and less of a need for imports.

“I’m tired of hearing all their baloney about Obama doubled the price of gasoline,” Schweitzer said about Republicans. “Big damn lie.”

The Democrats are taking umbrage with the Republicans’ big assault on record-high gas prices that’s going on today:

But let’s step back here a moment and break this down. First of all, it is not a “big damn lie” that gas prices have doubled under Obama — because they most certainly have. Now, I would agree with Gov. Schweitzer that it would be pretty ridiculous to imply that this doubling of gasoline prices is due purely or even mostly to President Obama’s policies. There’s a whole hot mess of factors that can determine the price we pay at the pump at any given moment based on global trends in supply and demand.

As well as the political turmoil and natural disasters that can disrupt supply and cause price spikes, there’s also been a worldwide, steady, long-term increase in the demand for fossil fuels as other countries undergo accelerated economic growth (China and India are often cited as the ‘culprits’), and as the world’s various economies continue to develop, it’s likely that the demand for oil will keep right on rising. This process started long before President Obama, and shall continue long after him.

However, Republicans aren’t arguing that President Obama is entirely responsible for these price swings — rather that he’s failed take conscious steps that could and would conspicuously mitigate the level to which we’re at the mercy of global conditions (hint: “all of the above,” a.k.a. picking winners and losers in the energy market and deciding what forms of energy and how much of them Americans shall consume, doesn’t count). An increase in supply can put a downward pressure on prices, and if the Obama administration would simply allow Americans to take greater advantage of our own ludicrously abundant natural resources, we could make a greater contribution to the global oil supply and be less vulnerable to problems in other parts of the world. What’s more, we could also get in on a larger market share — thereby creating productive private-sector jobs and increasing our own economic growth and government revenue.

President Obama likes to argue that there’s nothing he can do to immediately bring down the price of gasoline (i.e., “no silver bullet”), but that’s not entirely true, either. Merely by approving drilling permits and projects like the Keystone Pipeline, President Obama can signal to global markets that an increase in supply is on its way — incentivizing speculators to let go of oil that they might otherwise have held onto.

As for that increased domestic production under President Obama’s watch? Seems like that’s one of the few things they aren’t willing to credit to “the previous administration,” even if that’s where credit is actually due.


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

Actually, a lot of progressives in the new economy support clean energy because it’s seen as the only great promise for working class job growth…
 
bayam on September 4, 2012 at 4:30 PM

 

Bayam, what percent of your total external/non-corporal energy consumption… is met by solar power?
 
rogerb on October 6, 2011 at 7:54 PM

 

I have no idea, but why does that matter? What does the present have to do with the future?
 
bayam on October 7, 2011 at 12:44 AM

 

So we’ll mark you down for “0% (zero percent) personal investment in solar.”
 
Thanks for that bolded part, btw. I never expected that to come out.
 
You’re a bright fellow. You still can’t see the problem?
 
rogerb on October 7, 2011 at 6:00 AM

 
Gosh, I hope bayam is okay.
 
rogerb on October 7, 2011 at 6:16 PM

 
(another abandoned thread, btw)

rogerb on September 4, 2012 at 4:51 PM

bayam hates science. I’ve been asking her to explain her hatred of science for a year, but she refuses.

blink on September 4, 2012 at 4:01 PM

It’s a traumatic thing, stemming from early childhood; and thinking of Science makes her cry. Something to do with baby seals…or cells…it’s hard to decipher. And Math is really hard!
Suffice to say, you’ll never get an intelligent answer to that question.

Solaratov on September 4, 2012 at 4:58 PM

argumenta ad verecundiam

….can’t continue without looking that up…….hope its not a Harry Potter reference.

BobMbx on September 4, 2012 at 4:58 PM

… I’ll stay with the Bill Gates, Eric Schmidt, and Jeff Bezos idiots who support incentives for domestic energy, even if their understanding of capitalism and lack of common sense is dwarfed by business giants such as Glenn Beck and other armchair observers.

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 4:30 PM

You keep repeating that same tired, silly line. Just how much experience do the idols you cite above have with energy production? What’s that? Exactly Zero? Yeah, self-proclaimed experts. There are many people who are stellar successes in one area and then think that, by extension, they are experts in all areas. Funny, you seem to leave out real experts who are also successful businessmen, the Koch brothers and Dick Cheney never seem to be cited by you regarding expertise in energy production.

Funny that.

AZfederalist on September 4, 2012 at 5:00 PM

There’s a lesson here for Republicans: Compromising with democrats only earns derision, no appreciation.

AZfederalist on September 4, 2012 at 4:01 PM

Worth repeating.

Solaratov on September 4, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Bayam, actually the navy keeps all the shipping lanes open, including for all the Chinese content that is in every windmill put up in this country. The biggest strawman is the DOD subsidizes oil – it subsidizes everything. It enforces a trading system that works to our advantage.

Honda – Bush 1 was my most unfavorite domestic issue president after Carter and now Obama – I wasn’t voting at the time of Nixon, but he wasn’t too good either.

Once the elder Bush did ANWR, it seems to me it got codified in subsequent law, and subsequently threatened to filibuster in the Senate. The price the dems pay to their looney enviro wing.

I will be more than happy to concede that the enviro side of the GOP is stupid, and makes many mistakes because they accept as a matter of faith that the enviro nuts on the left care about the environment. They don’t. Oh the ground troops might, but the masters don’t. This is all about control. Control by the beautiful people for the benefit of the beautiful people. That was behind cap n trade and also the byzintine complexity of our tax code. Only the rich and beautiful can afford the tax attornies to navigate it.

You are a fool.

Zomcon JEM on September 4, 2012 at 5:06 PM

Actually, a lot of progressives in the new economy support clean energy because it’s seen as the only great promise for working class job growth…

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 4:30 PM

Really? “The only great promise for working class job growth?”? Really? You were able to type that without bursting out in laughter? So, expanded offshore drilling, constructing the Canadian oil pipeline, developing our own shale fields, expanded coal production, building more refineries, more natural gas production, and expanded oil production would not contribute to working class job growth? Really? The lower energy costs would not be helpful to working class people? Really?

Well, we all have our places and purposes. Sometimes being useful idiot provides others with the ability to articulate the advantages and benefits of a market-driven economy. Thank-you for providing your function as a foil against which we can contrast liberty and freedom vs. your brand of command and control statism.

AZfederalist on September 4, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Who cares how it’s “seen” by other progressives that are just as clueless about science, economics, and math as you are?

Coming from the party of creationism, that really hurts. Any day now conservatives are going to kill off Apple, Intel, Google given your mathematical and scientific superiority.

It’s pure stupidity to build clean energy infrastructure that can’t be self sustaining. How many different ways does this need to be explained to you?

Yes, Germany is full of idiots who don’t understand science and economics. There’s no way that a clean energy infrastructure can be self-sustaining. It’ so simple!

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Sadly the truth is that Solyndra was a perfect storm of bad conditions.

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 4:39 PM

The real truth is that investors did to Solyndra what they do all day long…they studied the company and the market, and learned that Solyndra was a loser.

Solyndra raised more than $650 million in equity financing from the likes of the Kaiser fund and KKR & Co. LP, the private- equity powerhouse, and then received a $535 million loan guarantee from the U.S. Department of Energy in March 2009, soon after Obama took office. Then it got the actual loan of $527 million from the Treasury, which is pretty odd since, with the Energy Department guarantee, it should have been easy to get a loan from the private sector.

Even with a government guarantee, it still couldn’t get the loan from the private sector. There was no storm of bad conditions that ran over Solyndra. They had the Weather Channel on, and went to sea in someone else’s boat anyway.

Abandon ship!

BobMbx on September 4, 2012 at 5:19 PM

Solyndra was part of a proxy trade war with China:

Solyndra was a very bad investment from the start. Don’t try to pretend that China was the sole reason Solyndra failed.

As much as we might like to use it to batter Obama poor decision making skills there genuinely was more to it than that.

Obama’s huge green initiative was a terrible idea from the start, and Solyndra was a perfect example of these poor decisions.

Then it’s odd to see so many business and even conservative sources describe Solyndra as a victim of Chinese unfair trade practices.

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/02/24/chinas-trade-war-bankrupted-solyndra/

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Any day now conservatives are going to kill off Apple, Intel, Google given your mathematical and scientific superiority.

Isn’t it strange how those companies are leaving My Progressive Little Ponyland on the Pacific for or expanding to Texas, Utah, Nevada, etc?

Yes, Germany is full of idiots who don’t understand science and economics.

Germany’s failing environmental projects

http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/germany-s-environmental-protection-policies-fail-to-achieve-goals-a-821396.html

Resist We Much on September 4, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Yes, Germany is full of idiots who don’t understand science and economics. There’s no way that a clean energy infrastructure can be self-sustaining. It’ so simple!

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Germany closes all nuclear power plants, plans to replace with coal/gas fired units.

Achtung!

BobMbx on September 4, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Any day now conservatives are going to kill off Apple, Intel, Google given your mathematical and scientific superiority.

Isn’t it strange how those companies are leaving My Progressive Little Ponyland on the Pacific for or expanding to Texas, Utah, Nevada, etc?

I didn’t know that any of the above were leaving California. I thought they were opening internal sales and call centers in those states while greatly expanding the size of their campuses and R&D in silicon valely.

Not that CA doesn’t have huge problems caused by state unions. I agree entirely.

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Germany closes all nuclear power plants, plans to replace with coal/gas fired units.

Achtung!

BobMbx on September 4, 2012 at 5:22 PM

That’s called irrational fear. Most Germans even realize that it’s a stupid decision but fear once unleashed has a way of clouding the thought process.

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Then it’s odd to see so many business and even conservative sources describe Solyndra as a victim of Chinese unfair trade practices.

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/02/24/chinas-trade-war-bankrupted-solyndra/

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Funny, you keep talking about Solyndra as if it is the only failure (oops, in your words, “victim” of a trade war with China). Solyndra was only one of numerous failed green energy companies funded by the administration that have gone bankrupt. Clue: When multiple companies in a particular sector go belly-up, that is generally a sign that the market segment has not been properly researched or that the solutions in that segment are not viable.

AZfederalist on September 4, 2012 at 5:30 PM

That’s called irrational fear. Most Germans even realize that it’s a stupid decision but fear once unleashed has a way of clouding the thought process.

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Sorta like “Ryan throws grandma off a cliff” irrational fear, eh?

No matter what you call it, the super-duper engineers in Germany have decided to use whats available for energy, unlike the idiots running the US at present.

BobMbx on September 4, 2012 at 5:33 PM

Then it’s odd to see so many business and even conservative sources describe Solyndra as a victim of Chinese unfair trade practices.

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/02/24/chinas-trade-war-bankrupted-solyndra/

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Funny, you keep talking about Solyndra as if it is the only failure (oops, in your words, “victim” of a trade war with China). Solyndra was only one of numerous failed green energy companies funded by the administration that have gone bankrupt. Clue: When multiple companies in a particular sector go belly-up, that is generally a sign that the market segment has not been properly researched or that the solutions in that segment are not viable.

AZfederalist on September 4, 2012 at 5:30 PM

You completely missed the point of the article. Yes, the market has been properly researched and everyone realizes that China is trying to dominate the market by undercutting US solar innovation.
However, I agree that government funding is best dedicated to pure R&D. No one from either party has a serious plan for dealing with China, including the free trade geniuses who gave China a path to destroying so many US jobs.

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:38 PM

Any day now conservatives are going to kill off Apple,

Do you think Apple can explain how over 12 million USIDs for Apple devices, with personally identifying information (name, address, phone number) came to be in the possession of an FBI agent, and hacked by Anonymous?

Of course, the FBI has denied it.

BobMbx on September 4, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Old/busted:
 

Yes, Germany is full of idiots who don’t understand science and economics. There’s no way that a clean energy infrastructure can be self-sustaining. It’ so simple!
 
bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:14 PM

 
New 15-minutes-later hotness:
 

That’s called irrational fear. Most Germans even realize that it’s a stupid decision but fear once unleashed has a way of clouding the thought process.
 
bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:29 PM

rogerb on September 4, 2012 at 5:43 PM

“I’m not going to give advice to the best communicator in the history of this country about how he talks about things.”

Thanks for the endorphin release.

Goebbels laughs his dead azz off. It’s all simply surreal. His expectations/imgaination have been surpassed, by far.

Schadenfreude on September 4, 2012 at 5:44 PM

No one from either party has a serious plan for dealing with China, including the free trade geniuses who gave China a path to destroying so many US jobs.

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:38 PM

Here’s Bayam now trying to blame both parties for the failures of the Presidents’ energy policy masquerading as an incompetent loss of other people’s money, and hints at Obama’s failures being the fault of the Chinese.

No, dear, Solyndra and all the other bankrupt “green” energy companies fall squarely on Obama’s plate.

BobMbx on September 4, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Yes, and fearing CO2 is irrational as well.

Hey, those Germans have a history full of irrational fears…CO2, tsunami’s, radiation, Jews, etc.

I could make an argument the Germans aren’t the best support feature in an argument.

BobMbx on September 4, 2012 at 5:49 PM

No one from either party has a serious plan for dealing with China, including the free trade geniuses who gave China a path to destroying so many US jobs.
 
bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:38 PM

 
Any number of readers are interested in what brand of computer you’re posting with.

rogerb on September 4, 2012 at 5:50 PM

You completely missed the point of the article. Yes, the market has been properly researched and everyone realizes that China is trying to dominate the market by undercutting US solar innovation.

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 5:38 PM

Wow. Just wow. I missed the point? The market was thoroughly researched yet Solyndra was bankrupted by Chinese competition? What does “thoroughly” mean in your mind? The administration poured 500 Million dollars into a company and had no clue that China would undercut the market? Really? China is undercutting US solar innovation? If it was so @#$%’d innovative, then how come China came out ahead? Because, you see, that’s what innovation really is, a creative solution that reduces the cost of a good or service below what the competition can produce.

Again, that only covers Solyndra, how about the other companies, after all the flywheel energy storage company didn’t get undercut by the Chinese.

AZfederalist on September 4, 2012 at 5:51 PM

rogerb on September 4, 2012 at 5:43 PM

Why are you conflating Germany’s solar energy infrastructure with the decision to shutter nuke plants? Those are separate issues.

Here’s Bayam now trying to blame both parties for the failures of the Presidents’ energy policy masquerading as an incompetent loss of other people’s money, and hints at Obama’s failures being the fault of the Chinese.

Yes, Forbes and HumanEvents are just tools of Obama, looking to justify his solar investments. China isn’t undermining US solar companies, nothing to discuss here.

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Baloney is kinda what Brian is full of especially if it’s made from a non performing bull. He’s termed out this year but has long range plans to take over from Baucus when he retires. Hope the MT Rs have a plan for someone with good name recognition in the state to run against him. Empty Chair’s fiscal policies have a lot to do with lowering the value of our money which is going to have a lot to do with higher prices all around.

Kissmygrits on September 4, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Erika, you’re be way too nuanced about this whole thing. Why? Well, I’m sure we can all remember when GWB was president, and the Democrats, as well as the media made sure to tell us that rising fuel costs were all Bush’s fault, that somehow he had the magic power to order them to drop.

Shoe, on other foot… live with it lefties. Which also is the danger in electing a guy who claims his simply being in office will fix everything, because he’s so transformational – that is lower the oceans, heal the planet… ect.

Sharr on September 4, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Erika: I agree with your analysis, but I would add one thing: these are the same leftist dolts that tried to blame President Bush when gas prices spiked during his administration.

I think we need to be quite frank in pointing out the double standards and rank hypocrisy of the left. I, for one, am not willing to let them haul Bush over the coals for something and then give the current administration a pass for the same thing.

JamesJr on September 4, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Actually, a lot of progressives in the new economy support clean energy because it’s seen as the only great promise for working class job growth…

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 4:30 PM

um, before the latest news on the manufacturing stall, Biden was telling us in was manufacuring, not clean energy…

socalcon on September 4, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Actually, a lot of progressives in the new economy support clean energy because it’s seen as the only great promise for working class job growth…

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 4:30 PM

I’m just guessing, but ‘a lot’ under your definition must be more than can be counted on one hand?

socalcon on September 4, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Actually, a lot of progressives in the new economy support clean energy because it’s seen as the only great promise for working class job growth. Manufacturing jobs are clearly aggregating to the developing world while software and digital services continue to destroy jobs in the traditional economy. Clean energy is one of the few opportunities to turn the tide.

And you’re not addressing the indirect subsidy of the US military presence in the Middle East.

bayam on September 4, 2012 at 4:30 PM

Manufacturing jobs fled under the combined pressure of labor costs and regulatory burdens. Reduce the latter, and the jobs will, to the degree that they can, stay here, and flourish. Skilled manufacturing jobs do not get moved offshore strictly for labor cost reasons, due to the inherent support costs attendant to moving parts offshore.

Traditional energy jobs, and jobs in the refining industry, offer a much better way to build permanent, high-wage jobs.

massrighty on September 4, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Funny. Big damn lie, but when Bush simply lifted the Executive Moratorium on offshroe drilling, the price of gas was cut in half, despite Nancy Peloser’s House doing nothing to reciprocate and actually make offshire drilling happen.

So – RIGHT THERE – is DIRECT evidence that even APPEARING to be willing to start drilling lowers the price at the pump – DRAMATICALLY.

PJ Emeritus on September 5, 2012 at 9:42 AM

A dead thread already, bayam? Well done.

rogerb on September 5, 2012 at 9:55 AM

Keep it simple… $4 Gas hurts the working poor by potentially thousands of dollars a year. Barry said he wants gas prices to go up, just not too fast. They have gone up… Thanks to Barry.
-

RalphyBoy on September 5, 2012 at 10:20 AM

I can’t believe the people of Montana elected this Moron to be their Governor! I always thought Westerners were mostly Conservatives. Guess I was wrong. Go ahead Montanans, vote for Obummer and watch your gas prices go to five or six dollars a gallon! You deserve it!

Jersey Dan on September 5, 2012 at 11:13 AM

That post betrays such an ignorance of market economics and common sense…
 
AZfederalist on September 4, 2012 at 3:53 PM

 
Not only market economics but Physics as well…
 
mnjg on September 4, 2012 at 4:02 PM

 
Add math to the list.
 
rogerb on September 4, 2012 at 4:11 PM

 
And seeing a thread through to the end as well.
 
Strong debating skills as ever, bayam. Well done.

rogerb on September 5, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Comment pages: 1 2