$75.78.
By on Jul 7th, 2006 at 1:36 pm
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Road trip!
I know, I’m a disgusting person… :(
July 7th, 2006 at 1:39 pmAs he sits on a beach in Tahiti drinking rum drinks and laughing at everyone who bought his sudden “death” story, Kenny Boy lay is making more money than ever with the latest record oil price.
July 7th, 2006 at 1:42 pmWell if and when Bush attacks Iran, or North Korea if he really loses him mind, then the price for gasoline at the pumps might exceed 5 bucks a gallon, so expect the worst!
July 7th, 2006 at 1:46 pmThe price of a barrel of oil before the run up to the Iraq war was $25!!! But the president’s friends are not negatively affected by oil’s price at all!
July 7th, 2006 at 1:47 pmUh guys, I thought the war in Iraq was to make oil cheaper? Make up your bloody minds will you? Did Bush go to war in Iraq to steal oil and thus make oil cheaper for the USA, or did he invade Iraq to spike oil prices?
Oh wait, I see what’s going on here, you can claim Bush invaded Iraq for either thing because neither premise ever has to actually be proven by facts!
It’s kind of like global warming. If the temperature keeps getting warmer, just claim that humans are behind it. If the temperature goes down, just claim human intervention caused it to go down.
If the unemployment rate goes up, blame Bush. If the unemployment rate goes down, blame Bush for it not being low enough.
I love these selffulfilling partisan circlejerks.
July 7th, 2006 at 1:52 pmnorwegian footnote:
[wikpedia]
July 7th, 2006 at 1:58 pmBush invaded Iraq so the Oil Cartels could regulate/control the petroleum reserves of that nation! The intention was NEVER to give cheaper gasoline to Americans at the pumps! Bush, his daddy, and their oil chum CEOs make more profits by reducing the amount of oil available for refining into gasoline! Too much oil being available would cheapen gasoline, but less of it refined means higher prices, plus the oil in Iraq becomes more valuable by leaving it in the ground for a rainy day future!
July 7th, 2006 at 2:03 pmRoad trip!
I know, I’m a disgusting person… :(
Comment by Zooey
Yeah. That’s pitiful. You really are an absolute disgrace.
July 7th, 2006 at 2:04 pmJust because you thought something doesn’t make it true – except to you, of course.
You need more education and information than you could ever receive from a blog. I strongly recommend you study more and blog less.
July 7th, 2006 at 2:06 pmThe results of the illegal oil wars of the American Empire. Bush Co. needed to seize control of the Iraq oil economy because Saddam was about to do business with European countries which would have lowered profits for American oil companies. Now that they have control of how much oil can flow out of Iraq, they can make huge profits.
July 7th, 2006 at 2:07 pmAlso, I believe you love circle jerks.
July 7th, 2006 at 2:08 pmsEXXON,
July 7th, 2006 at 2:09 pmYou appear to be an expert in circle jerks.
I guess you’ve learned from the masters,
Big Dick & ‘Lil Bushie.
Your argument is just what you’re pretending
to be against; either way you claim rightousness.
Oil prices are based upon future speculation.
Isn’t it great to have such a valuable commodity
price index based on fear & innuendo?
Actually, that fits right in with Bush & Co’s master
plan…keep the people afraid of what ‘may happen’
and make sure rumors & gossip rule protocol.
Go blow a skinhead and keep your crap in Norway.
Speaking of straw man arguments, Seixon just keeps on baling them up like a machine. A propaganda machine.
July 7th, 2006 at 2:10 pm#13
yes, it is his specialty…
July 7th, 2006 at 2:14 pmBush’s North Korea plan of do nothing is working great!
July 7th, 2006 at 2:17 pmOil prices rise on Wall Street fear while he does nothing.
And who says this is a ‘man w/o a plan’?
Now more than ever is the time to start the mideast debate.
Supporting dictators does not lower the cost of oil.
Period
Divide and destroy the Democrats. It’s the only way.
July 7th, 2006 at 2:26 pmThe Americans must leave Iraq,
July 7th, 2006 at 2:33 pmThe Americans will leave Iraq ,
The Americans can’t leave Iraq,
and that’s the equation that turns sand into blood.
Don’t worry Bush is just going to “jawbone” the Saudis and have them bring the price down.
July 7th, 2006 at 2:34 pmNEW YORK A new Gallup poll finds that roughly 2 in 3 Americans urge a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, with 31% wanting this to start immediately. But it also found that while 64% feel they “understand” the Bush administraton’s argument for staying in Iraq, only 54% understand the Democrats’ view–whatever that is.
-E&P, Gallup, Americablog
54%- Isn’t that perfect?
The Democrats are no longer the melting pot they claim. They are damaged and permanently divided.
July 7th, 2006 at 2:38 pmRandal,
Bush invaded Iraq so the Oil Cartels could regulate/control the petroleum reserves of that nation!
Ever heard of OPEC? The oil cartel?
The intention was NEVER to give cheaper gasoline to Americans at the pumps!
Well, ehhh Think Progress ran an article a few months ago claiming that a Bush administration official had claimed that the war would give us cheaper oil by passing off a false quote. So Think Progress was definitely suggesting that the Bush administration claimed the war would give us cheaper oil. Yet now you have just turned on TP. Interesting.
Bush, his daddy, and their oil chum CEOs make more profits by reducing the amount of oil available for refining into gasoline!
So they invade a country with the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world in order to reduce supply?
Too much oil being available would cheapen gasoline, but less of it refined means higher prices, plus the oil in Iraq becomes more valuable by leaving it in the ground for a rainy day future!
This is funny, since I always hear the exact opposite argument being made. I mean, just watch Fahrenheit 9/11. You guys can’t make up your damned minds because all of it is completely nonsense.
The USA was interested in keeping oil supplies stable. The USA is interested in stability of oil prices. The USA is interested in vast oil wealth being in the hands of democratic countries and not dictatorships that can use it as a form of blackmail.
The reason for the high oil prices has more to do with many other factors other than Iraq, such as China’s booming economy, they’re out of control increase in use of oil, no new refineries being built in the US for what, the last 30 years? Many other factors.
But once again, brainwashed fools will believe there is only one cause to a problem. Particularly a cause that fits well with their preconceived notions about political opponents.
RealScientist et al,
Keep pretending that anti-war people haven’t made the types of arguments I summarized. It’s on the record, only the foolish will deny it and claim I am creating strawmen. Or should I start reading right out of the transcript for Fahrenheit 9/11? Or how about I zoom on over to any antiwar site and see what I find? Give me a break guys, you guys aren’t interested in an honest debate at all.
July 7th, 2006 at 2:39 pmSeixon,
July 7th, 2006 at 2:53 pmYou’re splitting hairs, and you’re dishonest. The Iraq war was supposed to lower gas prices according to the Bush administration. But noone actually believed that. And yes, the supply aspect is complex.
But the intent of nationalizing energy here was to bring prices up. It worked.
Hard to have any debate since only YOU alone are correct about everything you spew on here Seixon! Regulating the oil supply creates higher gasoline prices, so reducing the oil output out of Iraq has worked very well for OPEC and the BIG 5 Oil Cartels! I have NO intention to argue with you on here, because you do a good job of that with yourself > lol.
July 7th, 2006 at 2:56 pmSeix-less,
July 7th, 2006 at 2:59 pmRIGHT, TP said Bush claimed invading Iraq would lower gas prices, which he DID claim. He also “claims” to be in favor of bringing down gas prices. However, most people here KNOW that the intent was to increase control over oil production, which means, whatever it takes to help the cronies in the Oil business.
“…honest debate…” with you, who makes nothing but GOP talking points the basis of your arguments? Pay attention, fool. Not everyone here agrees with the Democrat point of view. Most regulars have their own ideas formed from their own opinions, unlike your broken-record-spewing bullshit.
You say oil prices have gone up in three years well that is only to Americans
shall we say petrol prices in the UK 3 years ago were 85p a litre and today they are 95p a litre
so as you can see uk gas went up roughly 10% only
July 7th, 2006 at 3:11 pmAmerica seems to have had biggest hike worldwide
Keep pretending that anti-war people haven’t made the types of arguments I summarized.
Hmmm. Seixon makes a new straw man argument as cover and diversion for the previous straw man argument. Someone out there somewhere once made a claim about something that Seixon believes is wrong, so let’s trot it out as proof of….anything! Anything at all! It is an amazing trick. Take any non-sequitor and prove anything you want with it.
Maybe I have been wrong all along about this guy. Maybe he actually thinks this way. Maybe he believes this stuff. Maybe he is more of an imbecile than I have realized, just some clown putting on an ugly pantomime meant to resemble critical thinking.
July 7th, 2006 at 3:21 pmRandal,
Look, I just took you for a ride since you don’t have any clue what so ever on anything you talk about. Almost nothing you say makes sense, which was easy to illuminate.
DieNowForPeace,
RIGHT, TP said Bush claimed invading Iraq would lower gas prices, which he DID claim.
Eh, no he didn’t. Man you people are brainwashed. If you don’t believe me, please go find Bush saying this. Have a good time!
However, most people here KNOW that the intent was to increase control over oil production, which means, whatever it takes to help the cronies in the Oil business.
The US has no control over how much Iraq produces, or any other place other than the US. You are fleeing from the ridiculousness of the anti-war goons. First they say that Bush invaded Iraq to steal oil, which would make oil cheaper. Then when the oil gets more expensive, they change the argument to Bush wanting to control the oil to bring the prices up. In the end, neither notion is true, but is a typical conspiracy theory type game. When the evidence doesn’t support your claim, change it! That’s exactly what conspiracy theorists do.
“…honest debate…†with you, who makes nothing but GOP talking points the basis of your arguments?
Name a single GOP talking point I have come with.
Not everyone here agrees with the Democrat point of view. Most regulars have their own ideas formed from their own opinions, unlike your broken-record-spewing bullshit.
Oh please. TP is in the tank for the Democrats. When’s the last time TP criticized a Democrat? TP defends Al Gore all day long, they even have a banner up for his movie. TP puts out DNC talking points all the time. Not everyone here agrees with the Democrat point of view? Well why is it that they always say the DNC point of view then?
RealScientist,
Keep pretending that the anti-war movement did not make these ridiculous claims. You might not have been one of them, but they were there nonetheless. You haven’t commented on your own theories about this yourself. I wonder if I could find them if I looked back through the archives here.
What’s your position about oil and Iraq RealScientist? Do you believe Bush invaded to steal Iraq’s oil? Do you believe Bush invaded to spike oil prices?
Those of us with actual knowledge know that the high oil prices are due to a variety of factors, only one of them being the instability in Iraq. Those of us who are not TP-dupes know that the Bush administration never made the argument that the invasion of Iraq would lower oil prices.
July 7th, 2006 at 3:51 pmHere you go Seix:
Laurence Lindsey – President Bush’s senior economic advisor at the time — argued in 2002 that the Iraq war would increase oil supplies and lower prices:
“The key issue is oil, and a regime change in Iraq would facilitate an increase in world oil,†which would drive down oil prices, giving the U.S. economy an added boost.
Damn I’m glad you live in another country!
July 7th, 2006 at 4:03 pmHonest advice to the “brave” words emanating from our Norwegian troll…
Keep your IDIOTIC, IGNORANT ramblings on your own, wimpy, heavily ignored blog… maybe SOMEONE who reads it will give a shit. I seriously cannot and will not bicker with a child like yourself…
Oh, and lest I forget, you fool:
July 7th, 2006 at 4:11 pmName a single GOP talking point I have come with.
You mentioned (attacked) Fahrenheit 9/11 TWICE in post #20.
Zzzzzzzzzzz.
the price of oil should hit ninety dollars per barrel this winter. buy oil futures. The price of gas will be over six dollars per gallon.
July 7th, 2006 at 4:30 pm#29 True dat!
July 7th, 2006 at 4:47 pmMy wife works with brokers in the “Energy Sector” who’ve been making a KILLING for several years now.
It’s not just the oil companies posting huge profits, but also energy related industries and their investment markets too.
Hmmm… now might be a good time to buy oil futures — short term. I’m just guessing that gas prices will keep rising all summer BUT they will FALL a month before elections to “prove” the Repub’s are “doing something” about our pain at the pumps.
July 7th, 2006 at 5:03 pmThe current barrel price of oil is only indicative of the collapsing dollar. A barrel of oil in real money is about 56 Euros.
July 7th, 2006 at 5:13 pm#8 :-D
July 7th, 2006 at 5:31 pm#5
July 7th, 2006 at 5:39 pmThe war in Iraq was NEVER to make fuel oil cheaper for us.
The war in Iraq was to enrich the oil barons (and their subsidiaries) among us.
#7 jay randal
July 7th, 2006 at 5:41 pmSorry – I didn’t mean to step on our toes in #34 – I see you said much the same – only better.
Seems like you guys don’t like Oil being this high. Since Bush obviously did it somehow, what is your plan that will bring Oil prices back down? Maybe you could start by writing to your congressmen urging them to open drilling in ANWAR and the Florida coast for starters!
July 7th, 2006 at 5:50 pmANWR would provide oil in 7 – 10 years and will last approximately two years. So how would that help today?
July 7th, 2006 at 5:55 pmIt would help the oil companies, that’s who would benefit.
Seixon > I hoped you were going to grow up on the TP threads someday, but the quick cash you get from the GOP to post on here is all you care about! Nothing you spew on here for them makes a bit of sense, so touche to you Norwegian!
July 7th, 2006 at 9:51 pmDieForNowPeace,
You’re a dupe, just like I knew. The last part of the statement is not a quote, because Think Progress lied to you. Go find the original article Lindsey was quoted and you will see that he said that oil prices could go down, but that it was hard to know whether this would happen after an invasion of Iraq. Stop letting Think Progress rule your brain, you just look like an idiot.
You mentioned (attacked) Fahrenheit 9/11 TWICE in post #20.
Ah, so only Republicans can criticize that movie? Sorry, but most intelligent folks saw right through that tissue of lies and innuendo. I’m sorry if you weren’t able to because you are too busy gulping down the propaganda to actually fact-check any of it. Just like with the Lindsey “quote” you thought you were citing. LOL.
Bluedog49,
Liberals argued that war would desabilize the middle east and increase the price of oil. Some liberals predicted that the war was for oil company profits.
Sorry, but I debated many, many anti-war goons about this, and they said that Bush was stealing Iraq’s oil to make prices cheaper in the US and thereby make him a popular president, not to mention allowing American oil companies to get oil cheaper from Iraq. I debated this with anti-war folks hundreds of times. Now you claim that it never happened. LOL.
Randal,
Seixon > I hoped you were going to grow up on the TP threads someday, but the quick cash you get from the GOP to post on here is all you care about! Nothing you spew on here for them makes a bit of sense, so touche to you Norwegian!
You have 0% clue about anything you talk about my friend, and you’ve shown it time and time again. When faced with that reality, all you have left is to make false allegations against me that you know aren’t true because you and your TP goons dug up a whole file of information on me like the digital brownshirts you are.
July 7th, 2006 at 10:59 pmOnly the GOP Bush lovers are Brownshirts Seixon! I see you posted at 11PM our time on here, so it was about 5AM in Norway > kinda early for you to be awake posting on here > lol. GOP likes to hire people from other countries to blog for them > they must save money in doing it?!
July 8th, 2006 at 12:39 amRandal,
Only the GOP Bush lovers are Brownshirts Seixon!
Just because you say it doesn’t mean you can cover up the truth that Think Progress goons acted like digital brownshirts to intimidate me into leaving Think Progress and suppressing my opinions.
I see you posted at 11PM our time on here, so it was about 5AM in Norway > kinda early for you to be awake posting on here > lol.
Oh, so you know all about my sleeping pattern do you? Remind me again why I erred in calling you a digital brownshirt? You seem to know everything about me. How odd, I thought we were just discussing things.
GOP likes to hire people from other countries to blog for them > they must save money in doing it?!
So you continue your little fantasy smear against me, after being proven wrong time and time again in every smear you toss at me.
Not only that, but you are too ignorant to even realize that wages in Norway are higher than they are in the US, so the GOP would certainly not be saving any money by hiring anyone in Norway like me. As always, you smear me with nonsense, and the nonsense doesn’t even make sense because you are so damn ignorant of the world around you.
July 8th, 2006 at 10:03 amThe only one ignorant about the world is you Seixon > living in Norway as a student does not make you knowledgeable about the rest of the world! I am sure there is some reason WHY the GOP/Karl Rove hired you > maybe they think you being in Norway is a good cover? Your ignorance is displayed repeatedly by your obnoxious childish putdowns of other posters! TP is a site for progressives/anti Bush people, so if you cannot take the heat in here, then get out of the TP kitchen! Nobody likes you because you are mean, so chill out > you might make some friends being nice!
July 8th, 2006 at 11:59 amRandal,
You are so disingenuous that it literally makes me want to throw up. You talk about me being mean, and then you go and smear me as a GOP operative. Not to mention you and others calling me neo-Nazi and all sorts of other lovelies.
I can take the heat in the kitchen, I’m still here, even after you and others attempted quite a few character assassinations of me, as you just demonstrated again.
You thought the GOP would save money by paying someone in Norway, completely oblivious to the wage level in Norway – because you are ignorant. Instead of just admitting that, you smear me again and project your own filthy tactics onto me.
I seriously hope you don’t have children Randal, a person as delusional and disingenuous as you should not have any.
July 8th, 2006 at 12:07 pmLOL Seixon > I do believe you are mentally deranged or you like to be abused by posters on here?! You are the delusional person on here! Only a paid GOP troll would defend Bush and his torture on here! To do so otherwise would be nutty, so which are you?
July 8th, 2006 at 11:20 pmSeixon posted that it was liberals who claimed the Iraq war would result in cheaper oil. I claimed this was bull and it was conservatives mainly who pushed this argument. Seixon responded that I was stupid and that he’d had many “debates” about this with liberals…
Here you go, a-hole:
“Murdoch has acknowledged his major rationale for supporting the Iraq invasion: oil. While both American and British politicians strenuously deny the significance of oil in the war, the Guardian of London notes, “Murdoch wasn’t so reticent. He believes that deposing the Iraqi leader would lead to cheaper oil.” Murdoch said before the war, “The greatest thing to come out of this for the world economy…would be $20 a barrel for oil. That’s bigger than any tax cut in any country.” He buttressed this statement when he later said, “Once [Iraq] is behind us, the whole world will benefit from cheaper oil which will be a bigger stimulus than anything else.” [Guardian, 2/17/03]“
July 9th, 2006 at 2:27 pmBluedog49,
You have misrepresented what I said. I said that liberals claimed that the war was fought to get cheaper oil, which is true, many did. They argued that Bush was invading Iraq so that he could essentially steal the oil and thus make the oil cheaper for the US, which would make Americans happy of course.
Whether the liberals actually believed the war would bring cheaper oil is irrelevant because they claimed that that was the reason for why the war was being fought.
Murdoch’s statements reflect the fact that when all is settled down in Iraq after this war, it will lead to a greater amount of oil available on the oil market, thus lowering prices and stabilizing prices. That won’t happen for quite a while, though.
You can’t deny that liberals claimed Bush was fighting the war to get cheaper oil for the US. I have debated this hundreds of times with anti-war people from both sides of the Atlantic.
July 9th, 2006 at 4:13 pm