YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 You guys are clueless, Bush and GOP have been way down in the polls, it is September, within strkining distance of the mid-term elections and all the sudden a new oil find is discovered in the Carribean, imagine that! Also, it won't come on line for another 3 years and details are sketchy as to its size and demand is still way up. Sounds like good old fashion political manipulation coinciding with the WH strategy to scare the public near the 911 anniversary. Good politics, lousy government. You wait after November and a little cold snap to justify it prices will be right back up. My advice, buy gas future long, contracts that close after the November elections. Nice try Bushies.
KRC Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 You guys are clueless, Bush and GOP have been way down in the polls, it is September, within strkining distance of the mid-term elections and all the sudden a new oil find is discovered in the Carribean, imagine that! Also, it won't come on line for another 3 years and details are sketchy as to its size and demand is still way up. Sounds like good old fashion political manipulation coinciding with the WH strategy to scare the public near the 911 anniversary. Good politics, lousy government. You wait after November and a little cold snap to justify it prices will be right back up. My advice, buy gas future long, contracts that close after the November elections. Nice try Bushies. 764848[/snapback] I was waiting to see who the first political hack would be to mention this. I was expecting conspiracy theorists like PastaJoe to make stupid statements like this, but I was not expecting this from you. This ranks right up there with the Karl Rove weather machine stearing hurricane Kartina to make sure it targetted black people. It just shows how desperate the Dems are to regain power. Of course, you do not see them coming up with actual ideas, it is just "vote for me because the evil Republicans will kill your children."
TPS Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 I was waiting to see who the first political hack would be to mention this. I was expecting conspiracy theorists like PastaJoe to make stupid statements like this, but I was not expecting this from you. This ranks right up there with the Karl Rove weather machine stearing hurricane Kartina to make sure it targetted black people. It just shows how desperate the Dems are to regain power. Of course, you do not see them coming up with actual ideas, it is just "vote for me because the evil Republicans will kill your children." 764858[/snapback] So true, republicans (swift boat) would never try to manipulate (terror alert) the public before an election (Al Queda video)...
KRC Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 So true, republicans (swift boat) would never try to manipulate (terror alert) the public before an election (Al Queda video)... 764874[/snapback] Nice to see you continue to prove my point. Nothing but conspiracy theories from the hacks on the left and no actual ideas.
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 I was waiting to see who the first political hack would be to mention this. I was expecting conspiracy theorists like PastaJoe to make stupid statements like this, but I was not expecting this from you. This ranks right up there with the Karl Rove weather machine stearing hurricane Kartina to make sure it targetted black people. It just shows how desperate the Dems are to regain power. Of course, you do not see them coming up with actual ideas, it is just "vote for me because the evil Republicans will kill your children." 764858[/snapback] No I am just cynical, if the shoe was on the other foot, the Dems would be doing the same, but I still think it is a little too convient. Enron wasn't a good enough example for you? They made a proven attempt to manipulate the energy markets for both political gain and profit. They were just too greedy and their plan was full of holes that they got caught. I don't think it is a conspiracy directly, i.e., with the Bush White House, although, I am sure idle conversation at fundraisers has indirectly gotten their wishes across to their buddies in the oil and gas industry. To deny this is ignoring political reality. And no it doesn't rise to the level of a Carl Rove weather making machine, this is just a little more practical, and based on my knowledge of the way DC works. It is election time and the party in power is feeling the heat, so its allies will do whatever they can. Check with me in December and we will see where gas prices are.
KRC Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 And no it doesn't rise to the level of a Carl Rove weather making machine, this is just a little more practical, and based on my knowledge of the way DC works. It is election time and the party in power is feeling the heat, so its allies will do whatever they can. Check with me in December and we will see where gas prices are. 764930[/snapback] Gas prices are going down this time of year. They always go down this time of year. It happened while Democrats were in power and it has happened while Republicans were in power. To think that gas prices are going down because of a grand conspiracy by the Republicans during mid-term elections is just stupid. It ranks right up there with the Karl Rove weather machine thingy. In fact, if you really want to analyze it with the same tinfoil hat, one could say that the Democrats are in such trouble that they need to tie great conspiracies to natural and common events, because they know that they cannot win based on issues (it would require them to actually stand for something). "Vote for me because the evil Republicans are controlling the world's crude oil prices."
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 So true, republicans (swift boat) would never try to manipulate (terror alert) the public before an election (Al Queda video)... 764874[/snapback] Yeah. Bin Laden and the new Iraq-al Qaeda leader are stumping for the republicans.
TPS Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 Nice to see you continue to prove my point. Nothing but conspiracy theories from the hacks on the left and no actual ideas. 764909[/snapback] Oops! those were supposed to be subliminal messages.... While I exaggerated the point, the terror alert seemed to be raised more often during the fall election cycle of 2004 than the rest of the year. About the only thing Bush has to run on is fear of terrorism. Do you believe politicians do not use fear to boost their chances of election or re-election? That's the hypothesis. It's not conspiracy; it's a political fact.
KRC Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 Do you believe politicians do not use fear to boost their chances of election or re-election? 765061[/snapback] You mean like calling anything and everything a conspiracy?
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 I know Ken that you are not a Bush defender unless it suits your point of view, but I still don't see a reason for the size in the drop in prices. Yes, they usually drop this time of year, granted, but a .40 drop in Mass is more than normal, especially given recent demand news. I have heard from my mutual fund investor that the market was at least 25% speculative, so I guess maybe that would account for some of the drop, but the timing is suspect, hence why I am pointing out the political angle. If you ask me your argument that gas prices always drop before the election even under Dems is not necessarily true. They did during the Clinton mid-term, if I remember correctly, but I don't think gas prices dropped before the 2000 election and energy prices were way up because of Enron et., al. So either way your criticism of this argument doesn't hold water. Now understanding that energy companies would oppose a candidate that calls for stricter regulation and support one that allows them to do whatever they want is a no brainer..duh. It is just simple politics and denying it is rather niave, can't believe that I just implied you are niave, not true, but your contrary argument is either that or purposely distortional.
GG Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 GG looks more like a genius every single day. 762970[/snapback] I'm sure it has more to do with the one eyed man being in a world of the blind, than with any sheer brilliance...
KRC Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 I know Ken that you are not a Bush defender unless it suits your point of view, but I still don't see a reason for the size in the drop in prices. Yes, they usually drop this time of year, granted, but a .40 drop in Mass is more than normal, especially given recent demand news. I have heard from my mutual fund investor that the market was at least 25% speculative, so I guess maybe that would account for some of the drop, but the timing is suspect, hence why I am pointing out the political angle. If you ask me your argument that gas prices always drop before the election even under Dems is not necessarily true. They did during the Clinton mid-term, if I remember correctly, but I don't think gas prices dropped before the 2000 election and energy prices were way up because of Enron et., al. So either way your criticism of this argument doesn't hold water. Now understanding that energy companies would oppose a candidate that calls for stricter regulation and support one that allows them to do whatever they want is a no brainer..duh. It is just simple politics and denying it is rather niave, can't believe that I just implied you are niave, not true, but your contrary argument is either that or purposely distortional. 765171[/snapback] Silly me. I actually used hard data to form my opinion instead of just speculation derived from political bias. What was I thinking?
TPS Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 You mean like calling anything and everything a conspiracy? 765143[/snapback] I guess the Sydney Morning Herald believes in conspiracies too... Fear factor Bush has nothing else to run on. That's a fact.
GG Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 Gas prices are going down this time of year. They always go down this time of year. It happened while Democrats were in power and it has happened while Republicans were in power. To think that gas prices are going down because of a grand conspiracy by the Republicans during mid-term elections is just stupid. It ranks right up there with the Karl Rove weather machine thingy. In fact, if you really want to analyze it with the same tinfoil hat, one could say that the Democrats are in such trouble that they need to tie great conspiracies to natural and common events, because they know that they cannot win based on issues (it would require them to actually stand for something). "Vote for me because the evil Republicans are controlling the world's crude oil prices." 764962[/snapback] I'm also positive that the report forecasting less hurricanes and fewer disruptions to refining capacity in the Gulf was ordered by Rove.
Taro T Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 I know Ken that you are not a Bush defender unless it suits your point of view, but I still don't see a reason for the size in the drop in prices. Yes, they usually drop this time of year, granted, but a .40 drop in Mass is more than normal, especially given recent demand news. I have heard from my mutual fund investor that the market was at least 25% speculative, so I guess maybe that would account for some of the drop, but the timing is suspect, hence why I am pointing out the political angle. If you ask me your argument that gas prices always drop before the election even under Dems is not necessarily true. They did during the Clinton mid-term, if I remember correctly, but I don't think gas prices dropped before the 2000 election and energy prices were way up because of Enron et., al. So either way your criticism of this argument doesn't hold water. Now understanding that energy companies would oppose a candidate that calls for stricter regulation and support one that allows them to do whatever they want is a no brainer..duh. It is just simple politics and denying it is rather niave, can't believe that I just implied you are niave, not true, but your contrary argument is either that or purposely distortional. 765171[/snapback] The size of the drop wouldn't have anything to do with the size of the spike up last month when BP shut down the pipeline in Alaska would it? And as GG mentioned, a reduction in the probability of disruptive events might also result in a decrease in the "speculative" premium.
KRC Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 I'm also positive that the report forecasting less hurricanes and fewer disruptions to refining capacity in the Gulf was ordered by Rove. 765244[/snapback] Why not? He controls the weather, so he would know exactly how many hurricanes he will be creating this year.
SilverNRed Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 I guess the Sydney Morning Herald believes in conspiracies too... Fear factor 765238[/snapback] It's hard to take an article seriously when it is written as an editorial and literally titled "On his knees, Bush pins his hopes on fear." If that was supposed to be unbiased, it was a pretty sad effort. On the other hand, I recommend that you continue posting links to articles to state your case. Regardless of their quality, they are always less embarassing than the stuff you type yourself.
Chilly Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 It's hard to take an article seriously when it is written as an editorial and literally titled "On his knees, Bush pins his hopes on fear." If that was supposed to be unbiased, it was a pretty sad effort. On the other hand, I recommend that you continue posting links to articles to state your case. Regardless of their quality, they are always less embarassing than the stuff you type yourself. 765272[/snapback] Wait, its an editorial, but you expect it to be unbiased?
KRC Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 I guess the Sydney Morning Herald believes in conspiracies too... Fear factor Looks that way. So? Bush has nothing else to run on. That's a fact. 765238[/snapback] Bush is up for re-election? When did the election laws change?
SilverNRed Posted September 8, 2006 Posted September 8, 2006 Wait, its an editorial, but you expect it to be unbiased? 765284[/snapback] If it is an editorial, then I could care less. But it doesn't say "editorial" anywhere. It does say "article", which is laughable.
Recommended Posts