In 1992 the lying klinton machine which included the MSM convinced the country that we were in the "worst economy in 50 years." We now know that was a bald faced lie, designed to scare the consumer into not consuming, slowing the economy and scaring people into voting dim. Again, in 2000, we were told by the same people that we were in the best economy in history, when in fact we were sliding into recession. The market had been robbed and was tanking, the nasdaq, part of the tech bubble that produced all those klinton jobs, losing 46% in 2000 alone. GDP in the 3rd quarter of 2000 was negative. The economy is stronger now than it was then. The economy is down now due to dims talking it down, in 2000 it was down because of the market robbery and high taxes, among other things.
Blame Rising Oil Prices on Bush
Wow, a lot of people must have bought Hummers last week. How else to explain the spike in oil prices? No, I'm not being silly: They are, and by they I mean the gaggle of media pundits and other administration apologists--abetted by some green zealots--who want to explain our energy crisis by reference to profligate consumers.
Sure, in the long run we consumers, particularly the most wasteful ones who happen to reside in the good old USA, and who have become accustomed to consuming many times our population's worth of the world's resources, do need to shape up. But that has little to do with the fivefold rise in the price of oil since George Bush became our president. Yep, he did it; Bush's deliberate roiling of world politics is the key variable in the run-up of oil prices. No president has been more brilliant in destabilizing the politics of oil-producing countries from Venezuela to Russia and on to the key oil lakes of Iraq and Iran.
This last will go down in our nation's history as one of the dumbest escapades ever, rivaling even the madness of the Vietnam War. But this time the neoconservatives bet their smart money on oil as the decisive missing ingredient for success. Vietnam was always absurd on its face as an imperial adventure because, as American consumers who check their labels must know, the Vietnamese dominate the market only in the provision of farmed shrimp.
I won't bother here to dignify the canard that Vietnam, any more than Iraq, ever represented a serious threat to U.S. security, John McCain's sacrifice in the former war and his apologetics for the current one notwithstanding. After the most ignominious defeat in American history, Communist Vietnam did not have to be fought on the shores of San Diego, as the hawks at that time predicted, but rather went to war with Communist China, the country that had occupied Vietnam for a thousand years. The Vietnamese later made their peace and now compete successfully in the capitalist marketplace without controlling anyone else's resources.
Something similarly unexpected is likely to occur if we get out of Iraq and permit the people of that region to make their own history. Events upon our departure will follow the vagaries of a historical script centering on religion, ethnicity and nationalism, which the talking heads in media and political circles are united in ignoring. As Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki demonstrated the other day with his third visit to his former safe haven in Iran, the politics of the region have already been sorted out in ways unpredicted by the neocons.
One need only note the words of advice extended to Maliki by Iran's "supreme leader," the Ayatollah Ali Khomeini, that the Iraqis must "think of a solution" to free themselves from the U.S. military. Maliki nodded, ever grateful for an audience with the man who holds Iraq's destiny in his hand, thanks to the Americans' overthrow of Tehran's nemesis, Saddam Hussein. As I said, Bush was brilliant.
But to be fair, the administration did finally get something right last week when Defense Secretary Robert Gates fired both the civilian and military chiefs of the Air Force. They were being punished in part for being in charge of an Air Force defense system that lost track of a nuclear-loaded B-52 that flew over the U.S. without anyone in the chain of command aware of its dangerous cargo. Then there was also the matter of ballistic-missile fuses that were erroneously shipped to Taiwan.
The Air Force has been particularly egregious in exploiting the hysteria over 9/11 to commit to hundreds of billions in future spending for high-tech weapons that make no sense with the collapse of the Soviet Union. One issue in the firings was the Air Force's pushing for hundreds more F-22 fighter jets, a $65-billion program that Gates had concluded was not needed as there has been no role for the existing force in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Gates rejected the argument that China, or any other nation, was on the way to providing the F-22 with a worthy opponent. Given his sudden commitment to logic, Gates may not survive long even in this lame-duck administration.
Better get someone in there fast who is content that we taxpayers pay the interest on the loans from China to pay for building up an arsenal to counter weapons that the Chinese show no sign of building. Hey, it's only money. Yours.
Robert Scheer is the author, most recently, of "The Pornography of Power: How Defense Hawks Hijacked 9/11 and Weakened America," to be published this week by Twelve Books.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Boy, I'll bet even the Republican National Committee won't buy those talking points!
Check your meds please.
As usual, Mr. Scheer makes a few erroneous conclusions. The Vietnam war was not lost militarily, as our forces were never defeated, beyond a few small-unit losses. In pitched battle, the North Vietnamese/Viet Cong lost every time. The war was lost because the Left, in collusion with Russia and North Vietnam, orchestrated a political defeat here at home, which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands in Vietnam and millions in Cambodia and Laos. I attribute those deaths to the Left.
Furthermore, neither Bush nor the oil companies set the price of oil. The price of oil is set by commodities traders, who bid on the oil. Additionally, the oil companies only control about 7% of the worlds oil supply. The rest is controlled by sovereign governments. Oil companies make about 8% in profits across the board, some making less. Government, at all levels, makes about 16%. Who's gouging whom?
Semper fi
The US did not lose militarily?
Huh? What did Clausewitz say. "War is the extension of politics by other means.
All war is POLITICAL. There is no distinction between the military and the political.
Would you also say that Revolutionary War was won militarily by the British? I don't think that idea will get you very far.
The USA lost that war because Ho Chi Minh was clever enough to make it a War of National Liberation. In other words a war against colonialism.
Look to your history and find out how many wars against colonialism failed from 1945 to the present. Not many.
The USA also lost the war because the Vietnamese lived there. The USA were occupiers. In order to win the Vietnamese simply had to outlast the USA.
Which they could do because they were willing to accept almost any cost in order to achieve victory. Which the Americans were not willing to do. And rightly so.
Just what were the costs to America of losing that war? Cheap tennis shoes?
A little history.
Vietnam was a French colony before the Japanese started conquering the world. So naturally, when the Japanese frowned at the French in Vietnam, the French immediately handed the country over to them. After we kicked butt, we (USA) owned Vietnam, but here came the French demanding it back. So Mr. Truman (Dem, nuc-ologist) in his infinite wisdom said, (para) "sure, take it").
That was followed with the Chinese and other communists telling themselves that it's only the French, so this should be a cake walk. The French fooled them for a a few years, and started begging the USA for help again. So we sent some "advisors" and money to help out (because we are an angry and mean people). Well, it wasn't enough for the French so they gave up on Vietnam (1954) and we helped the Vietnamese with advisors, money and intelligence under Ike.
Then an American (McNamara, D, warmonger) got the idea that this could be a great money maker, so he had us escalate our presence in Vietnam. Enter LBJ (Dem the impaler) , who escalated it to the point where he killed about 35,000 Americans and the survivors were treated to unprecedented hate and disgust by mush-brained American leftists, pot heads, communist sympathizers and combinations of the above.
I hope you've enjoyed your little history lesson.
Oh, yeah, and while we're listing the wars the USA lost, don't forget the war with Iran that we lost in 1979.
Bs, not sure what the Marine corps was feeding you Rambo, but your stastement is a complete disconnect from reality. The "Left" lost the Vietnam war and got millions killed? The "left" didn't start the war and it didn't end it. And our governments actions, like threatening a war against Iran(an oil producer) has no effect on prices? If the Bush administration bombs Iran, what do you think a barrel of oil will sell for?
Actually, the "left" did start the Vietnam War. The situation went a from a few hundred non-combatant advisors under Eisenhower to a couple of divisions under LBJ and it started with JFK sending in the Green berets to engage in guerrilla warfare. US forces in Vietnam topped out at about half million by the LBJ left office in 1969.
So which Republican started this one?
Yes, please tax U.S. oil producers to cause them to produce less and thereby push up the price of oil because of reduced supplies. I own a nice little Tunisian producer, Candax (CAX.to) that pulls oil out for about $10/barrel so I would love to see $100/barrel/cashflow for years to come.
I blame it on Democrats who say OPEC should increase supply but refuse to allow U.S companies to find oil in the US in Alaska or off the coasts or to build a new refinery in the last 25 years.
Time to increase electrical generation from nuclear energy to France's 80% level and then mandate electric cars for all.
Let me know where you live.
That way we can build a nuclear storage facility in your backyard.Have to put that waste some where.
At the present rate of demand America can NEVER drill and pump enough oil. It is a simple matter that the oil is not here.
And it is certainly not the Democrats stopping new refineries being built. Ask Rev Pat Robertson. It is the Oil Companies.
(And who ever heard of anything being stopped in Texas or Louisiana anyhow?)
If you have the influence, please get them to build a few in my area, Florida.
And while you're at it, please get Sens. Nelson and Martinez to support drilling for oil off the Florida coast. As it is now, China is dilling 50 miles from the Florida coast.
I really appreciate this and a big Thanks.
FYI: I'm not joking.
Sounds simple. The only problem is that if the U.S. scaled up to provide 80% of its electrical needs via Nuclear means, our supply of P286 would only last about 20 years. Not even enough time to build all of those Nuke plants... and that doesn't even address the issue of the incresed waste which needs a thousand or so years to difuse.
Hardly. Remember all those nuclear warheads that were supposedly demilled? What do you think they did with all that enriched uranium and plutonium, throw it away?
In 2006 Mrs. Pelosi said that she was going to end the rise of the price of gasoline. She said she was going to go after price gouging. Where is she at on this? Gas was $2.60/gallon when she said this....
Is there gouging going on? Has she even had a commitee even look into this? But I guess we did just try to put in a tax on the oil companies....yeah cause you know when you raise taxes companies will just lower their prices....sigh (sarcasm)
We are going to have to do something, at the current rate of growth China will use ALL available barrels produced per day in 10-15 years. We are gonna have some problems if we don't put some of this blame game away.
Bush-Cheney's mission accomplished is to ENRICH BIG OIL pals and themselves.
War makes sense when you are PROFITEERING from it and have the whole
USTreasury pouring into your pocket!
There is no oil shortage, There is MEDIA HYPE about a shortage that doesn't exist.
MYTH rules the market.
FYI: There are 4 prime factors causing the price of oil to skyrocket.
1. The Federal Reserve has made the US dollar's value go done by half it's value. This is due to the continued ploicy of inflation fear instituted by Mr. Greenspan.
2. Low offshore oil supplies. OPEC is deliberately capping oil production in the face of increased global demand. While they my not be producing more oil, the increased demand makes it less available in the world's markets. Blame China for coming into the 20th Century as the mushbrains have been crying about since they put down their hash pipes.
3. Money mangers. The US Stock market is driving up the price on speculation that demand will continue. You know that it was a money manger that first bid $100.00 just to see it happen? He bought the minimum needed to make it "official".
4. The Democratic Party and cowardly Republicans in the US Congress. As group, they have prevented the acquisition of domestic energy sources for at least 40 years. Remember when Pres. Clinton made a million + acres of prime coal mining country? That is just one example of their plan to make all Americans wards of the state.
We need to kick both parties out of office. Ah, but then, they have made that nearly impossible.
I'm no fan of GWB to say the least, but is there any proof that he is enriching himself. I would'nt mind seeing something on how he has single-handedly made prices soar like they have. Just to assume ONE person is causing this to happen and to reject the 7 or 8 other factors is beyond odd.
There is alot going on here. We could say that since India and China are coming on-line and their people want to move up from the third world has something to do with it. We could say its because our SECOND largest supplier of oil (Mexico) has decreased production by 10% in the last 3 years. We could cite speculators. We could show where congress has outlawed drilling in the US/coasts has not helped. We could look at our refining capacity and that we are not allowed to build refineries. We could blame a weak dollar. BUT you push all these ideas aside and say NOPE, just one man, just one man is causing it ALL... your deductive abilities are astounding.
While its easy to blame high oil prices on everyone from GWB to the oil companies to the Chinese, truth be know that the real blame falls on the commodities dealers who have been bidding up the price. The US DOE reports last week that the current price of crude may contain as much as 72% of artificial pricing due to speculative bidding. Another factor is the declining US dollar that is currently 64.3 cents to the Euro.
I love blaming GWB just as much as the next guy, but the true blame should probably be directed at former Pres. Bill Clinton who deregulated the gas and oil futures industry back in 2000. We should also remember Hillary who, herself, made a whopping $ 99k profit with a $ 1,000 investment the commodities markets back in 1994.
Its true that oil companies are making record profits. One has to understand the oil industry model to understand how they generate these profits. Oil companies make a set percentage on the sale and refining of oil. If the price is high, they make a set percentage of that sale. Just like the real estate brokers who cashed in on the housing boom.
To go after the oil companies without engaging the commodities industry is just unrealistic. If we ever get to the point of relying on organically derived fuels, these corrupt marketers control those markets too. The only difference is that when organics go up, third world nations starve.
For every speculator going "long" there is another one betting "short." That is not the reason for high prices it is buying on the margins by new buyers in China and India coupled with declining supplies.
What is fueling speculation in oil? The United States and Israel are threatening to blow up Iran.
Now, now now,
The Blame Clinton era should be long over.
I believe you. I believe as much as 72% of the artificail pricing is because of speculation.
But they have GWB and Dick Cheney in the White House protecting them. And the scam wouldn't wok without that protection.Remember how they protected Enron and Ken Lay during the California energy crisis? Anyone go to jail over that one?
I would bet anything Clinton would have acted long ago. And strongly. And intelligently.
I am no Bill Clinton fan. But I will acknowledge that he was not one to sit on his ass and watch the world economy collapse around him.
"Anyone go to jail over that one?"
Yes, they did. And Ken Lay died before serving his sentence.
Short memories make a wonderful electorate, eh?
America should have a-
"War on Oil Companies"
Why do republiCONS love high gas prices soooooooo much??????????
I"m sick to death of hearing how We need to wean ourselves from Foreign Oil and the price of gas will have that effect; as if to punish us for what is beyond our control. People are suffering and are in peril of losing jobs, homes and feeding their families and just affording the ability to get to work and no one seems to be concerned enough to an emergency solution to this very desperate situation. Obama and McCain don't have any solution that can provide any immediate relief. We need long term solutions, but we also need some immediate relief to prevent the looming calamity of what is destroying the Public NOW! We can"t wait for the Congress and the White House to vote or propose legislation. These speeches by Obama and McCain are only "political pandering" for votes. We must face the fact our Government has been failing us for decades. All this BS of "alternative fuels", such as Ethanol, wind energy, solar energy, etc., are totally bogus, has been bantered about for over 30 years and yet nothing has resolved our situation. Our Leaders have allowed Corporate America to control American Policy. The Auto Industry was allowed to drag their heels on the the production of more fuel efficient vehicles. They spent more time legislating quick food restaurants from marketing fatty foods and "biggie sizing", protecting weak-minded obese from their own gluttony. They want to act high and mighty about our dependence on Oil.
Before the war the price of gasoline was around $1.60 per gallon. Now, after Bush's fine adventure in Uraq, the price of gas is well over $4 per gallon. The difference is Bush's Saddam Hussien Tax that resuled from this failed neocon vision of Empire
As explained elswhee on this thread. The price of gas more to do with expanding demand in places that didn't use a whole lot of it before and some Americans who believe that pumping more oil in the middle east, as opposed to pumping it out in this country, will somehow fight global warming.
But the biggest factor is the value of that US dollar. When 2 years ago, it would buy twice as much oil as it buys now. The quick fix is the federal reserve. They have to stop printing money that we can't guarantee.
Call me naive. Call me innocent.
Although I could see the Iraqi adventure to be a catastrophe from the beginning. . . None the less, I did think that we would see lowered gas prices as a result.
Call me stupid.
So you are going with the "end the war and gas will be $1.60 again" theory?
Wombat made no such claim.
He just correctly assessed the situation.
were going with the "end the rule of republicans and things will be better" theory.
Posted June 11, 2008 | 03:48 AM (EST)