How bout Dem gas prices..
 

$2.74 at local Shell station...and 2.70 at the cheap joint.:$:

Thank you President Obama:tro:

And we are outproducing imports:tro:....I heard it on the internet;)

According to Jim Cramer of CNBC, who does not introduce a lot of political material into his Mad Money show, and who himself is rumored to be a Democrat, the falloff in crude prices is due to a softening of demand in both Europe and China.

Our production levels here, on private land, are also up so there is the supply element of the equation as well.

One important part to realize though is that the Democrats, and Obama specifically, have terminated many leases on public land for drilling, have opposed in their weasily way the Keystone pipleline by not even having it come up for vote. They will "investigate" that for 100 years first :rolleyes:. And ever since the oil rig mishap in the Gulf, which since it was during Obama's term was the "BP Oil Spill" instead of "George W. Bush's irresponsible Oil Disaster", the amount of offshore drilling was also severely cut, with many of the rigs going to Brazil instead.

The bottom line is that the price of oil is down due to decreased demand and increased supply on private land, in spite of the Democrats doing everything they can to block our ability to actually drill for oil here on the public land.

Oh, and with the lower prices, though they are certainly temporary, some Democrats are proposing increases in the gas tax since we can "afford" it now. Those tax increases will of course be permanent, so if they turn this decrease into a recent average price by adding taxes, the future prices will be record highs due to the same taxation. Hopefully this will not come to pass.

So don't pull a muscle waving that flag for the Democrats. We'd be that much better off had their opposite been in office.

This whole ****ing thread is absurd. Republitards previously blaming Dems for High oil prices and now that they are low Dems pounding their chest about it. The only way a president can affect oil is by waging War in the Middle east and that isn't going to drive prices down. Your last sentence kind of puts an exclamation point on how truly ****ed up this whole thing is. Your ****ing Gang ****ing completely burned through a budget surplus and drove this country to the brink of depression. How could anyone but the truly BRAIN DEAD say we'd be better off continuing with that same party???

I’m afraid we may have hit FUBAR status and both parties are to blame.

The fact a small city is ready to riot over a cop who justifiably shot and killed strong armed robber named Michael Brown while the country’s biggest city goes nonchalantly about its business after a cop, without a name as far as the media is concerned, is unjustifiably attacked with an ax, is an indication of how far we’ve come. Or gone?

Meanwhile the President says nothing about Ferguson and dismisses the NYC attack as just another lone wolf attack similar to all the other lone wolf attacks. No pattern to the actions or pattern of particular religion, ethnicity. Our biggest threat continues to be home grown terrorism.:wf

Oh, and the economy, our schools, the job market and healthcare systems are doing so well we can admit 34 million more to the country and share the overabundance of money and resources we have.:zz:

Just for your own edification: the use of insults does not camoflage your own apparent level of ignorance. Quite the opposite actually.

So according to your model, a president cannot drive prices down, so your problem is with bigrun?

And, sorry to say, there was no true surplus. There was an accounting trick used during the Clinton administration to show a "surplus" for a couple of years if you "don't count" social security - which you kind of have to since it's also in the general fund. And Clinton touted a "peace dividend" which was a nice way of saying cuts in military preparedness. This is now coming home to roost. At all times we had a large debt on the order of trillions so the term "surplus" needs to be qualified in any case.

And your guy Obama is the 18 trillion dollar man. He has taken us to the cliff's edge. And you know where that spending is going - the Democrat bread and butter of social programs. The bottomless pit where we will continue to throw our ever declining dollars into.



Sounds like you are having a bit of an emotional reaction to just how bad your guy has turned out to be. Sorry but even you will have to put up with him for two more years, as will the rest of us.

Any politician who doesn't want to END THE FED is a traitor or an idiot unfit for office.

If we truly want sovereignty and are actually concerned about our fellow citizens this is the first issue that must be addressed.

The rest is just window dressing and a distraction.

Have to agree with that. I read "The Creature from Jekyll Island." If even a fraction of it is true, the whole banking system as currently implemented is antithetical to the existence of a sovereign state. Until then will have to choose the lesser of the two evils as far as political parties go.

My definition of ignorance is someone that looks at an issue and always has a response that is the party line. Unwilling to have an original thought on anything. Lazy thinking.

My problem was with both you parrots. Both parties are equally as bad and at fault. That basically has been my stance all along. Obama's performance at addressing the jobs crisis has been abysmal. For you to say that we would be better off if the Republicans were in charge after they took us to the brink of a depression just boggles my mind. We would be where we are or worse. Just like 8 years from now we will be in the exact position. The problem is with the process. Citizens United cemented any chance that we would get out of this mess regardless of whose colors are flying at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington DC.

$2.71 today...yipeee...$2.25 by Christmas;)..Keep up the good work B.O.:tro:

$2.62 @ Costco - Milk = $3.25 + Elsie better get pumping ;)

$2.43 today, maybe make 2.25 by the 25th...thanks again B.O.;)

It looks like the Saudi's strategery for knocking US shale oil producers out of the market is in full bloom.
http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-s...eeting-2014-11

Not that the current administration would mind.

Nor the last one:tro:

what should the admin do?

Hey more money in me pocket for Tampa trip

and mine to the west coast!

I hope gas prices stay low through the holidays. We don't own a car (living in a city with good public transit, you don't need one), but the cost of renting one to go visit my parents ain't cheap. It's so expensive to rent a car in Manhattan, that being willing to travel an hour by subway to a branch in one of the outer boroughs is saving me over $200 off a week rental. Yeesh. The rental is still almost $500. Sigh. So yeah, less expensive gas would be nice.

If you drive 8 hours each way or 1,000 miles total in a rental that gets 30mpg highway, the savings reaped with gas being $2.50 as opposed to $3.50 is a total of $33.30 and may cover half the taxes charged on the rental.

Nice, but not all that nice. ;)

Sadly, this year has been rough enough that $33.30 seems like a gift. There are things I like a lot about working freelance, but waiting 9 months to get paid is not one of them, for sure.

Nothing. My point was that his interests typically coincide with his environmentalist supporters, who wouldn't mind seeing US shale oil production decrease. Hence he -- and they -- wouldn't mind what the Saudis are doing. They might even welcome it.