On her Tuesday evening "On the Record" program, Greta Van Susteren interviewed Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. The cost of gasoline was the first topic discussed. The speaker told of actions the Democrat-controlled Congress has taken. Charitably, these are marginal at best, yet Van Susteren didn't challenge Pelosi. Then the host asked about assigning blame for high gas prices:
VAN SUSTEREN: Do you assign all of the blame for the high prices on the Bush administration, or do you look back historically to a number of factors, including appetite by the American people, other administrations, other Congresses?
PELOSI: No, I don't assign blame to the Bush administration, I accuse them. I am more direct than that. I accuse them of ignoring something that was becoming apparent over time.
Ten years ago the price was under $11 in 1998--under $11. Two weeks ago, the cost of oil went up in one day nearly $11. So the policy decisions made by this administration in terms of energy have contributed to this oil crisis by not accepting early on the need for us to have renewable and other alternatives.
This would have been a perfect time to ask Nancy Pelosi about promises she and other Democrats made only two years ago. Three months before the 2006 elections that put her party in control of Congress, Newsweek and Princeton Survey Research Associates found that Americans trusted Democrats to do a better job of handling gas prices. A much better job, by better than a two to one margin over the GOP.
Was that confidence justified? The week the Democrats smashed Republicans in the 2006 elections, the retail price of regular reformulated gas was $2.22, according to data compiled by the U.S. Department of Energy. This week, the price is more than $4.00.
Before the election that made her House speaker, Nancy Pelosi cranked out a press release announcing: “Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices. . ."
Where, oh where, is that commonsense plan? Greta Van Susteren didn't even bring such assurances up. She just let Pelosi pass more Democratic gas. Quite a newshound and seeker of truth, that Greta.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Gretta is a trial lawyer...where do you think her loyalties lie?
June 25, 2008 - 09:47 ET by c5thenIf you want Pelosi and the other Dems to be asked hard questions, they need to go on O'Reily or Laura Ingram's new show. I bet you never see them on those shows.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
Forget O'Reilly (always
June 25, 2008 - 15:28 ET by soulpileForget O'Reilly (always making excuses for Obama), they should go on air with Neil Cavuto. He calls them out on their bull and pulls no punches.
Forget O'Reilly
June 25, 2008 - 17:01 ET by Michael M. BatesCan't forget him, but I don't take him anywhere nearly as seriously as he does himself.
"Can't forget him, but I
June 25, 2008 - 17:35 ET by marpel"Can't forget him, but I don't take him anywhere nearly as seriously as he does himself."
Michael, I agree 100% with you. I've gotten to the point of tuning out right after his opening statement. He takes himself way too seriously.
soulpile... I sure agree
June 25, 2008 - 17:06 ET by bigtimersoulpile...
I sure agree with you about Cavuto...he is the best, he gets right to the point and doesn't put up with the spin...plus he does it with class.
...and both you and Michael Bates about BOR.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
The shame is that the
June 25, 2008 - 09:56 ET by Ruths husband BenThe shame is that the conservatives haven't figured out a way to deal with the liberal's blame game. The Dumbasscrats take every piece of bad news and accuse the administration of orchestrating it. Nothing is every their fault. (BTW, the implication that "good government" can fix all our ills is probably the biggest lie perpetrating on the American people since..... well since forever.) This constant barrage has been very effective. You would think the war-mongering neo-cons (sarcasm here) would have read, The Art of War and applied it to the war of words this gas-bag-lady and her kind are engaging in.
VERO POSSUMUS - Latin for "Is that really your possum?"
Collegiality
June 25, 2008 - 10:05 ET by Michael M. BatesYep. For most of my lifetime, Republicans in Congress have placed an undue emphasis on "collegiality," while all the time getting their teeth kicked in.
the shame is.....
June 25, 2008 - 12:21 ET by larry on LItry this , once a month i send my rep.[d] the same fax asking when madam speaker plotski is going to reveal her plan to lower gas prices.
The Democrats have an
June 25, 2008 - 09:58 ET by KillgraveThe Democrats have an excellent energy plan, actually. They want us all to hook up to a giant windmill. And, in the unlikely event there are shortages, we will have to resort to rationing.
Sure, there might be a little "pain" for the Amercian people, but you have to go backward before you go forward. With much less energy, we will surge forward into the 21st century.
Democrat Energy Plan
June 25, 2008 - 10:07 ET by Michael M. BatesThe Democrats have an excellent energy plan, actually. They want us all to hook up to a giant windmill.
If it's operated by windbags on the scale of Ms. Speaker, it might work.
I always thought the plan
June 25, 2008 - 10:29 ET by Dan The Man 2I always thought the plan was to kill to kill many birds with one stone. They build giant hamster wheels and have everybody run; this accomplishes augmenting energy shortage, implements a health care plan and fosters a sustainable enviroment. If ya look at Paloosi real hard you can see the rodent in her.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Sorry for not addressing the
June 25, 2008 - 11:02 ET by KillgraveSorry for not addressing the giant hamster wheel. You're right, of course.
I also didn't mention, in the Democrat plan, that instead of using gas, we will all power our cars with our feet sticking out of the bottom like The Flintstones.
I don't assign blame to the
June 25, 2008 - 10:17 ET by motherbeltI don't assign blame to the Bush administration, I accuse them. I am
more direct than that. I accuse them of ignoring something that was
becoming apparent over time.
Translation:
Bush didn't do anything, so pay no attention to the fact that 2 years ago I said Democrats had a "common sense plan to lower gas prices"....of which you have seen neither hide nor hair...
It's all Bush's fault that I had to lie!!!
Shoot 'em all; let God sort 'em out! - Marge Simpson
This twitchy, liberal
June 25, 2008 - 10:42 ET by Republic1This twitchy, liberal fascist's pathological hatred of GWB would be amusing if she hadn't been handed so much power by the Democrats. Pelosi has proven there is no lie or cheap tactic that is beneath her, and I haven't seen her called on them once by the leftist media.
"Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him." -Muhammad
Twitchy liberal
June 25, 2008 - 11:13 ET by Michael M. BatesWe'd all be as twitchy if were were like Nancy, who's seen more knives than Joan Rivers.
And as Joan Rivers herself
June 25, 2008 - 11:28 ET by motherbeltAnd as Joan Rivers herself admits, she's "seen more knives than a Benihana!"
Shoot 'em all; let God sort 'em out! - Marge Simpson
mb... ...I laughed out
June 25, 2008 - 12:40 ET by bigtimermb...
...I laughed out loud the first time I heard Rivers say that on said commercial....it sure does fit Pelosi...heck Greta isn't that far behind either anymore come to think of it.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
Hi, Bigtimer! Doesn't
June 25, 2008 - 13:01 ET by marpelHi, Bigtimer! Doesn't Pelosi look like someone just goosed her? It's the Botox Look of Surprise! Yikes, what a nightmare!
Goosed!
June 25, 2008 - 17:03 ET by Michael M. BatesDoesn't Pelosi look like someone just goosed her?
Next time, she needs to tell the doc she want's to be able to close her eyes, too.
Another lift
June 25, 2008 - 13:18 ET by Eileen Rightand she'll have a goatee...
Not Surprising
June 25, 2008 - 10:57 ET by Rush FanI believe Greta Van Susteren is a Democrat. Her sister Lise ran for U.S. Senate in Maryland in 2006 as a Democrat. A search of her campaign contributions shows that she contributed to her sister (which would be expected) and another Democrat candidate.
REF: http://www.newsmeat....
Remember that Greta worked at the Democratic Party network CNN for over ten years before moving to FoxNews.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Which political party is invested in our defeat in Iraq?
Greta's campaign contributions
June 25, 2008 - 11:08 ET by Michael M. BatesThat other Democrat candidate to whom she contributed - Joel Hyatt - was out there in Obamaland before Barry was.
Greta's Bias is Showing
June 25, 2008 - 11:00 ET by minorchord2000I have been watching Greta for a long time and during the past 2 years, the mask she has heretofore used to hide her liberal bias, is beginning to slip a bit, revealing a decided tilt to the left. She is always giving "passes" to ideologues like pelosi. She should go back to CNN or MSNBC.
Greta's "work"
June 25, 2008 - 11:06 ET by Michael M. BatesI have been watching Greta for a long time and during the past 2 years, the mask she has heretofore used. . .
At first, I thought you were speaking of the "work" Greta had done a while back. Come to think of it, maybe that commonality is what makes her so non confrontational with Nancykins.
Uhm, Nancy engaging in
June 25, 2008 - 11:11 ET by dscottUhm, Nancy engaging in Projection are we? Now who was it that saw the whole thing unraveling and did absolutely nothing to increase the supply of oil and natural gas?
Who was it who blocked ANWR?
Who was it who blocked off shore drilling?
Who was it who blocked oil shale conversion?
Who was it who blocked tar sand conversion?
Who was it who blocked coal to oil conversion?
Who was it who blocked oil refinery construction?
Who was it who blocked the breeder reactor program to reprocess spent nuclear fuel rods?
Who was it who blocked nuclear plant contruction?
Who was it who is now blocking coal fired plant construction?
Who was it who insisted natural gas and not coal or nuclear supply electricity?
Why that would be you, Nancy and your buddies the Dems with your econut allies over the last 30 years. Yet somehow you have the nerve to accuse Bush for what? Not seeing or doing something to undo your foolishness? That's called gravitas. How can Bush do anything Nancy when it is you who have the power of the legislative agenda?
While we're pointing out the gravitas of Pelosi, let's also mention the ethanol scam she is directly responsible for driving up food prices around the world via her 5 fold increase in those mandates. The recent crop losses will now punctuate the folly of ethanol as corn prices zoom past $7/bushel. How many people in the third world will starve to death by the end of the year because you insist on keeping the ethanol mandates? Is your plan to set up a food cartel and extort money for food?
If you plead ignorance to the unanticipated results of high food prices from a additional naturally caused shortage on top of the artifical one you created, then you have an ethical obligation to undo your ignorance. If on the other hand you intend to starve the world's poor, then do nothing. Is it moral to intentionally starve people to death???? I'm curious as your thinking on this level.
http://conservablogs.com/publiusforum/2008/04/30/when-the-cure-is-worse-than-the-disease/
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Who was it who blocked ANWR?
June 25, 2008 - 11:29 ET by Michael M. BatesFacts can be so darn stubborn, can't they?
The last ones to block ANWAR
June 25, 2008 - 11:44 ET by bassndudeThe last ones to block ANWAR was the US Senate. Before that, when the bill was passed to drill ANWAR, it was Clinton that VETOED it. Yes, facts are a real bummer, uh?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
But I AM a thinker!
June 25, 2008 - 11:18 ET by dmntd1I’m not economist, oil/energy trader or anything of the sort. But I do have access to google, and all of the history that it will search. I also drive an average of 4000 miles a month. Here’s my personal take on the subject!
Going back to 1999, January, when Bill Clinton was beginning his final two years in office as President. I know people hate referencing ‘the past’ when it comes to Clinton, but it’s pertinent, I promise. Crude Oil averaged, in January 1999, $10.25/barrel. Gasoline, regular unleaded, averaged a whopping $ 0.921 per gallon (1/18/1999).
In 2001, with President G.W. Bush taking office, crude oil had almost tripled in cost, to $22.10 per barrel, with gasoline running us $1.456 (1/22/2001).
Flash forward two more years (if you haven’t caught on, I’m going with the swearing in of new poll-iticians) to 2003, where a barrel of oil went up a whopping $ 0.80, and sits pretty at $30.02 per barrel. Gasoline (regular unleaded) averaged $1.422 per gallon.
Zipping right along, we have another election, and upon the swearing in (and swearing at) new poll-iticians, a barrel of oil runs us $39.49 and a gallon of gas sets us back $1.839.
To break up the pattern, in 2006, gas is costing the U.S. Consumer soooo much money, that the democrats win the election based on a promise of lowering gas prices. In the summer of 2006, July, August and September, a barrel of oil averaged, respectively, $69.39, $67.86 and $58.89. It fell to $53.86 in October, just in time for the election.
With the democrats winning the election, January 2007’s crude oil falls to a nearly-two-year low of $48.20 per barrel. The lowest since May 2005. Gasoline ran us $2.107 per gallon.
In the 18 months since then, Congress has passed a bill allowing the U.S. to sue OPEC for gouging. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have both promised to tax ‘windfall profits’. A barrel of crude oil has nearly tripled. Domestic Drilling has been voted down. A gallon of gas has nearly doubled. Congress, and the liberals in general, keep trying the same tactics over and over again to lower oil. Like the insane, they keep doing the same things over and over and over again, all while expecting different results.
It’s my personal contention, however flawed it might be, that if the Democrats DO get back in office, oil will float back down to the mid $50’s. Not by any overt action they take, but rather the general hands-off policy for the Middle East that was prevalent throughout most of President Clinton’s terms in office. At that point, the ‘windfall profits’ will disappear, the tax-windfall from the oil companies will disappear, and the Democrats will have to raise taxes in an attempt to raise tax revenues, only to act shocked when two years later, tax revenue has fallen even farther. Again, like the insane, they keep expecting different results when they add 2 and 2 together!
Cites: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/wrgp/mogas_history.html
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/wtotworldw.htm
Fascism is a religious conception in which man is seen in his imminent relationship with a superior law and with an objective will that transcends the particular individual - Mussolini
dmntd1 good stuff..
June 25, 2008 - 12:30 ET by Gary Halldmntd1 good stuff..
As I wathced bits of Greta's cute little patsy chat with Pelosi last night, the $11/barrel figure indeed jumped off the page; but I thought the price had gone back over $30/barrel by the end of the Clinton term. Actully it was over $30 briefly right around the Nov. election (shown in the data you linked). Probably fear of a Gore win - and then the drop back to $22 might have been relief that Bush won.
It's important to remember that we were also in the midst of the CA energy crisis and blackouts, which had raised it's ugly head in the late spring of 2000. Later the media, NPR, LA Times and Newsweek would recall the event as the 2001 CA energy blackouts, in their respective special reports - and their activist rewriting of history.
Of course, as President Bush was taking office, the county was in the midst of a historic market crash, with thousands of companies going out of business, millions of Americans loosing their jobs, and the federal governement set to see a tremendous shortfall in projected tax revenue, resulting in over a $trillion shift in budget fortunes in 3 short years time.
All would be blamed on Bush, by the press and the Democrats. The hapless Republicans can't seem to even find the words to set the record straight. Leave it to a radical lefitst economist, who the media loves (these days), one who referred to the financial leadership of the late 90's in Washington as the worst since Herbert Hoover, Dean Baker in Bursting Bubbles:
Liberals should stop pointing fingers, and look inward at their own record, first. I don't subscribe to Baker's economics - but, from the left, he called the duck a duck. The above should have been required reading for all of the MSM, before they started pointing fingers. (;~> gary
It's important to remember
June 25, 2008 - 13:05 ET by dscottIt's important to remember that we were also in the midst of the CA energy crisis and blackouts, which had raised it's ugly head in the late spring of 2000. Later the media, NPR, LA Times and Newsweek would recall the event as the 2001 CA energy blackouts, in their respective special reports - and their activist rewriting of history.
Which points out the failure of trying Socialism on anything. They essentially tried to undermine the deregulation of electricity by Congress giving the customer the right to purchase electricity from whatever supplier they wanted. The people in CA got into that pickle because the genius's in the state government, decided to buy electricity for the whole state and then thought they could dictate price terms to the suppliers. That whole fiasco backfired in their faces. Have they given up on undermining electrical deregulation? NO! That's why they are pushing the green nonsense, it's a way for them to avoid the consequences of their know-it-all stupidity.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
AKA, "Dead-Behind-The-Eyes"
June 25, 2008 - 11:23 ET by marpelAKA, "Dead-Behind-The-Eyes" Van Susteren... What a horrible show that is.
Greta
June 25, 2008 - 11:42 ET by easygoerYou'd expect anything different from someone who made a name for herself defending OJ Simpson on TV? Even Geraldo didn't do that.
greta
June 25, 2008 - 13:05 ET by larry on LIdidn't make it as a lawyer, not making it on conservative tv and certainly wouldn't be considered for a job as a pole dancer.fox needs greta and jerry rivers for balance. jerry maybe, as a pole dancer!