Pat Buchanan Tells MSNBC Host: 'You’ve Got to Learn Supply and Demand as Obama Never Did in That Saul Alinsky Outfit'
MSNBC's token conservative Pat Buchanan has really been having a lot of fun lately taking on the liberals at the so-called news network he contributes to.
On Monday's "MSNBC Live," Buchanan in the middle of a discussion about oil prices and subsidies told the host, "You’ve got to learn a little bit about supply and demand as Barack Obama never did when he was out there in that Saul Alinsky outfit in Chicago" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
PAT BUCHANAN: The problem Cenk is the American dollar is sinking like a stone. It’s almost at an all-time level. It keeps going down to the point where Standard & Poor's thinks we're going to have to default. This is the responsibility of Barack Obama and no one else. It’s in terms of dollars that the gasoline prices are soaring.
CENK UYGUR, HOST: Pat, if you're going to try to make a case to the American people that gas prices are going down relatively and that we should be giving the oil companies more subsidies, I'm going to wish you a lot of luck.
BUCHANAN: Well, maybe you can't make the case, but you know, you got, you know, Cenk, you’ve got to learn a little bit about supply and demand as Barack Obama never did when he was out there in that Saul Alinsky outfit in Chicago.
For those that are unfamiliar with Buchanan's point, part of the reason for the spike in oil and gas prices is the declining dollar. Historically, there hasn't necessarily been an inverse relationship between the two, but there most certainly has been in recent years largely due to what's called the carry trade.
Put simply, large investors can short the dollar borrowing the proceeds at a virtually zero percent interest rate and investing same in oil, gas, gold, or whatever they want. This has been a very profitable arbitrage in recent years as traders have made money on the downside in the dollar and the upside in commodities.
Of particular concern to average Americans not involved in such transactions, the lower the dollar goes as a result of this nation's profligate spending and runaway budget deficits, the higher oil and gas prices go.
One of the other reasons normally attributed to an inverse relationship between oil and the dollar is the fact that oil is traded around the world in dollars. So, as the dollar declines in value, it must therefore be able to purchase less volume of oil. This latter explanation has not always been the case historically, as there have been many times in the last century when oil and the dollar rose and declined coincidentally.
As for Uygur, clearly such economic and financial matters were way over his head leading Buchanan to have some fun at his host's expense. Doubly delicious was that this happened shortly after MSNBC's Chris Matthews demonstrated a similar ignorance of the law of supply and demand on "Hardball."
Makes you wonder if one of the requirements to be a host at this sad excuse for a news network is to have absolutely no rudimentary knowledge of business.
And Paul Krugman wonders why voters are so ill-informed.
(H/T Real Clear Politics)
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
No matter....
Submitted by saintknowitall on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 9:42pm.
...... how hard the liberals try, they can't repeal the law of supply and demand.
Nope......
Submitted by GregE on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 9:46pm.
............they just try really really hard to create a demand and muck with supply.
They just don't get it that
Submitted by robert108 on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 11:30pm.
They just don't get it that demand is the independent variable.
Not fair
Submitted by GregE on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 9:53pm.
Cent Uygur vs Pat Buchannan? Good grief, get that Cent guy a bload-soaking ShamWow..
Some liberal please tell me this...............Obama had super majorities in Congress for two years. TWO YEARS!!!!
So why, in 2011, do those oil subsidies still exist? Let me guess, they were too busy ramming obamacare and stimulus down our throats to remember that's something they cry about all the time.......OR, they didn't forget, but once it's done they can no longer use it as a political tool, so they'll never actually DO it, they'll just propose it and whine about it during times that they're in the minority.
I asked a liberal about those subsidies in an email today as she was making gas price excuses. Ironically, she skipped replying to that part of the email.
I like the New Buchanan ...
Submitted by LibertyAtStake on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 9:57pm.
... Same as the Old Buchanan - from Nixon's White House. Carpe Diem!
d(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
"Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive"
Pat Buchanan is the Dennis Kooksinich of conservatives...
Submitted by MightyMouth on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 10:49pm.
Funny how you never seem him on "Conservative" media. Fox must be wearing garlic or somfin'.
Big profits come from
Submitted by robert108 on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 10:06pm.
Big profits come from increased volume, not higher prices at the wellhead. The govt makes a lot more money than the oil companies do on a gallon of gas.
That fact has to be shouted from the rooftops.
Submitted by Red Jeep on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 11:12pm.
If Libs start screaming about high oil producer revenues, it's got to be made clear to the general public, that whatever the oil companies made, the government made more.
Gotta be staged
Submitted by jon_torlin on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 11:15pm.
This looks like it's staged, I doubt GE would allow Buchanan to say all this and mock their glorious leader in public like this without some kind of repercussion.
Kinda like Prissy getting all a-twitter(not to be confused with the website of same name) about the birther thing. I'm having some doubts about that as well.
But who really understands a liberal's way of thinking these days?
-Jon
How the Mighty Have Fallen...
Submitted by Chris Norman on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 11:25pm.
Even though Pat Buchanan lost me a long time ago with his erratic views and political gadfly-iness,
it saddens me that he not only stoops to being a token conservative (or is he this year?) on MSNBC, but he stoops all the way down to appearing on Cenk Igor's show. How desperate for air-time does one have to get?
I used to enjoy listening to Pat B.,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 1:01am.
as he is an intelligent individual; but Chris Norman's description - erratic views and political gadflyness - is a perfect picture in only five words.
MD
Chris...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 2:15am.
Does that mean Krauthammer should retire from Inside Washington?...Will from This Week?...Beckel from Fox News?
Actually, Buchanan's philosophy, for the most part [albeit not entirely] has remained consistent over the years. It is the Old Democrat/interventionist/neo-conservatism which has left him. His more traditional--many would say more authentic--conservatism is largely intact.
Jer
Definitely
Submitted by Boudin on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 7:38am.
Beckel from Fox
Maybe he does it for the NBC health insurance.
Submitted by Red Jeep on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 8:07am.
Who knows? I am disappointed that he's on MSNBC.
Broadcaster do so Only in The Public Interest
Submitted by Avitar on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 12:28am.
Why do the networks think that ignorance is a defense? The Courts have made it clear that ignorance of the law is not a defense and this is displaying ignorance of the terms of their own broadcast licenses.
Some day we will have to hold a hearing to determine if the Broadcasters were unaware that they were harming the public. Regardless of whether they were aware of it they lose their broadcast license because the complete ignorance of the talking heads violates the terms of their licenses.
They must learn the Laffer Curve Too
Pat's issues are beside the point..
Submitted by Mark81150 on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 1:01am.
I lost hope for him when he ran as an independent and started going isolationist. I still don't want him near policy, but he serves a rudimentary purpose here. Even the most basic free market conservative with a spine can dust the floor with a populist class war liberal every time. They do not understand the basics of even the balancing of a check book from what they say.
Pat in this instance is the hardnosed priest wracking the knuckles of an ignorant and acting out student with the classic wooden ruler. I wasn't Catholic but I remember that parlor trick... ouchie...
Pat's back in the trenches doing what he does best, gut checking liberals who try and breach the line. Even a flawed conservative can do the work of the angels if he sticks to basic principles.
A flawed progressive,,,?
Yet to find one who wasn't damaged goods.
and...
Submitted by muckdog on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 1:03am.
In addition to the declining dollar (stimulus, debt, interest rates near 0%), the other reasons are Middle East turmoil (risk premium) and then reduced drilling (Gulf oil output down 13% since BP oil spill). Oh, and growing world economies, as demand for oil is increasing in China and India, as well as with the improving US economy
Most of the time, no - all of the time, oil shocks lead to stock crashes and recessions.
How?
Submitted by okiehawk44 on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 4:27am.
How do Americans pay both higher prices for everything due to higher priced oil AND probably higher taxes soon too in a stalled economy?
I'd hate to be one of the elite who think they can survive an uprising of the people.
Liberal perversion #4: not paying tax is a "subsidy"
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 5:24am.
How many times must it be said that NOT paying tax is NOT a "subsidy."
CONSERVATIVES need to wake up and challenge this asinine LIBERAL fatuous "logic."
Let me explain it to the democretins... THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT OWN YOUR INCOME and allow you to keep certain portions of it it deems fit.
Of course the liberal's fatuous logic is that THE GOVERNMENT OWNS YOUR PRODUCTION, so when it decides NOT to tax theY pervertedly skew that to mean they, THE GOVERNMENT is granting a "subsidy."
See how this essentially MARXIAN CRAPOLLA works for liberals?
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
Noel, I hate to call you out here, but you are a bit off. ACA
Submitted by acaiguana on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 7:35am.
The requirement to be a 'host' on MSNBC is to have no fundamental understanding of anything.
But you have to be 1) spittle prone; 2) hysterical prone; or 3) blathering.
:-)
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana notes from the Underground' (Soon to be at theaters near you)
Yep, the same traitorous
Submitted by Patriot II on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 11:06am.
Bullshyt outfit that not only Boring Insane Oblahma studied under, but also the Hilldabeast!!!