By on February 24, 2012

Florida Congressman Allen West is blaming President Barack Obama for paying $70 every time he wants to fill up his Hummer H3. Not surprisingly, media outlets, as well as commenters on West’s Facebook page, are up in arms.

The Hummer name undoubtedly carries negative connotations when it comes to fuel economy, but in the grand scheme of things, the H3 is quite mild, with its roots in the fairly light-duty Chevrolet Colorado/GMC Canyon twins. The DOE’s own fuel economy site lists West’s 2008 H3 as getting between 14 and 15 mpg combined – hardly impressive for a small SUV.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

161 Comments on “Florida Congressman Allen West Blames Obama For $70 Hummer H3 Fill-Up...”


  • avatar
    replica

    I’m trying to summon up that emotion, you know, when you’re concerned about someone. What’s it called? Oh right. Care.

    • 0 avatar
      Educator(of teachers)Dan

      Yeah reading that headline made me go… “LOL, wut?” In other news gas prices fluctuate and by West’s logic Bush must be responsible for the 2005 Hurricane season that raised prices so much.

  • avatar
    banjopanther

    Maybe Alan “War Criminal” West can hold his pistol up to the head of the gas station attendant like he did with an Iraqi POW and get a better price. Or simply accept that his choice of vehicle has consequences.

    • 0 avatar
      mkirk

      Yes, anyone who buys a large vehicle that uses a lot of gas should be prepared to pay a lot in todays world. As to your “War Criminal” rant I would kindly ask you to go fuck yourself. Much better if he would have respected the guy and let them behead another Soldier in your book I guess.

    • 0 avatar
      mkirk

      Well guess they didn’t like my original post as it is flagged for moderation. I will put it a little more civil I guess. First, yes, folks should be prepared for spending a lot on gas if they buy a large vehicle, especially a newer one like this that has been purchased since the gas boom.

      Now, as to your War Criminal stuff, I would ask you what was he supposed to do? Let a Soldier get beheaded to respect an enemy? Go back to applauding our Commander in Chief apologizing to those who killed 2 more Soldiers yesterday.

      • 0 avatar
        Southerner

        To your 2nd paragraph mkirk: Hell yeah!

      • 0 avatar
        banjopanther

        “what was he supposed to do?”
        Obviously, torture the guy properly and hide the body so he didn’t get caught. That’s what we expect of our soldiers, isn’t it? Some basic competence.

        I heard Barry Hussein will make up for the Quran burnings by dressing up like Christ and immersing himself in a giant glass tank full of piss. Hopefully then the Taliban will like us.

      • 0 avatar
        mkirk

        Well, I have never tortured anyone or killed any kids. However I did notice after being hit with IEDs that the trigger man was generally easy to spot…he was the one generally surrounded by a bunch of kids. And there were some kids killed on our missions…course it was the insurgents who killed them. But yeah your probably right, Us Soldiers are a bunch of bastards and our Salaries would be better spent on Welfare queens and buying weed for kids at Berkely. Now please refer to my original post that did get by the moderators apparently.

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        mkirk:

        A true conservative like Ron Paul would tell you that, when attacking a country that never attacked the US, like Iraq, you should expect the locals to defend themselves.

        You should thank banjopanther for paying private sector taxes so that you could have a government job. Actually, banjopanther might not work in the private sector, but I do, and pay a ton of taxes. Real income taxes, not FICA. So thank me.

        I’m not really that impressed that people fought in the manufactured Iraq war so that they could gain valuable skills and pay for college. Joining the military is the smart, logical self-interested thing to do, it’s not a sacrifice, it’s an opportunity. The oversized US military is a great job and training opportunity that the government provides at a VERY high expense to taxpayers. There is a huge amount of corporate welfare involved (I laugh at the moaning about the auto bailouts, when they are a drop in the bucket compared to the fleecing of US taxpayers by military contractors), and it would be a lot cheaper to provide the skills and training in the US than in foreign countries.

        In the end it took Obama having the nerve to say f*ck you to Pakistan with a small, quick night mission, not a prolonged occupation, to actually take out Bin Laden. Bush is the one that was too much of a coward to mess with Pakistan to get the guy that actually orchestrated 9/11. Obama is running foreign policy super efficiently and pulling off old school Mossad style missions left and right.

        Back to the subject: Gas prices are high because the US is destabilizing oil supply by screwing with Iran, another manufactured enemy, not because of any domestic policies. The US does not have enough oil to affect gas prices with its internal oil policies.

  • avatar
    Bowler300

    It’s true! I was there when Obama put a gun to this guys head and forced him to trade in his Prius for the Hummer. West was pleading “Oh the environment, you’re killing the environment”. Obama just gave a maniacal laugh. I was quite frightened.

  • avatar
    rentonben

    One think I sort of like about TTAC is that while it dips it’s toes into politics, it’s didn’t roll in it like a Irish setter rolls in it’s own feces.

    It seems that recently there’s been more political link-bait here, or maybe I’m just butthurt because one of your editors told me to put my pants back on and said “I don’t want to see those photos” even though I paid good money for them and even got the a release from from the whole family in question..

    • 0 avatar
      tankinbeans

      I’ve been noticing a lot more bait recently too. I’m not sure how long I’m going to be sticking around at this rate; it’s getting more and more difficult to find articles that aren’t fodder for our conspiracy theorists/Obama haters/republican haters/hater haters to get their nickers in a twist about.

    • 0 avatar
      rentonben

      Ah… nevermind. It’s my fault for being attracted to these articles like a black hole loves a photon.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      +1

      While I can sometimes have a hard time not-commenting when someone says something political, I come to this site for talk (and community) about cars.

      These political posts don’t really provide either. With an election year coming, finding parts of the web that aren’t involved in he-said-she-said political shouting matches is going to be more of a challenge (again). If we want to get partisan, I suggest we get back to our regularly scheduled bashing and defense of Toyota and GM. Toyota RULZ!… ;-)

    • 0 avatar
      damikco

      Are you kidding me? TTAC is right slanted and has had political bait for years. Not as much as Autospies. I now longer go to the sewage site any more, but TTAC is getting to be just as bad. I want Auto news not Fox news.

  • avatar
    aristurtle

    Just refit the Hummer with a four-gallon tank, Batman. Now it’ll cost less than twenty bucks to fill up. Problem solved.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    We’ve been down this road, and I’ve already proven that it is indirectly Obama’s fault, because he has enabled The Federal Reserve to print so many Federal Reserve Notes that the purchasing power of Americans is being debased.

    And anyone who half a brain can’t possibly refute this fact.

    The Federal Reserve is monetizing U.S. deficit spending (the U.S. now spends $1.46 for every $1 of revenue it takes in) by buying U.S. Treasuries in the secondary market (an end run around the law which prohibits them doing so directly at auction).

    The U.S. National Debt was 6 trillion USD when Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling in 2006 with this fine speech:

    Here are Obama’s thoughts on the debt limit in 2006, when he voted against increasing the ceiling:

    “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”

    Senator Obama (D-Ill)
    March 16, 2006

    And The U.S. National Debt is close to 16 trillion USD today.

    Some charts and links for those want some facts with the news of the day:

    Federal Reserve president: We’re responsible for surging commodity prices

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-30/hoenig-blames-fed-for-higher-commodity-prices-urges-monetary-tightening.html

    Commodities surge on US Federal Reserve statement on interest rates
    ET Bureau Jan 30, 2012, 12.37AM IST

    http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-01-30/news/31005527_1_wheat-prices-wheat-futures-commodity-prices

    And another article (Bloomberg has to sue the Fed to get the details of this ‘nice’ program):

    Secret Federal Reserve Loans Of $7.8 Trillion

    http://themoderatevoice.com/130732/secret-federal-reserve-loans-of-7-8-trillion-yield-13-billion-to-banks/

    And some chart porn re the monetary base/money supply:

    http://kitsch-posh.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/m0-081023-graph.jpg

    http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/United-States-Money-Supply.gif

    http://www.lesjones.com/www/images/posts/AMB-3.24_0.jpg

    http://www.yellowcapital.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/US-Money-Supply.jpg

    Of course printing and handing out those trillions didn’t allow much of that money to be invested into commodity futures, right guys?

    And the piece(s) de resistance:

    http://ilene.typepad.com/.a/6a010536583aff970b014e5fa3666a970c-popup

    http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/von%20havenstein/Austrian%20Money%20Supply.jpg

    https://seekingdelta.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/qe2-returns.gif?w=630&h=505

    • 0 avatar
      PintoFan

      >”And anyone who half a brain can’t possibly refute this fact.”
      Guaranteed replies. -1 to myself for indulging you.

    • 0 avatar
      Carrera

      As always, you’re right on! Save your breath though because denial is not just a river in Egypt with the left. Oh, before I forget, you’re a rasist just to mention that Obama is partly to blame.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        It’s sad that so many Americans don’t realize that 2+2=4

        Orwell predicted this day would come.

        Oil is priced in US Dollars (or Federal Reserve Notes, but that’s a discussion for a different day), and so few people realize the fundamental fact that the more of these “notes” that are printed, the more of these “notes” will be needed to purchase the same amount of [insert commodity/good] here.

      • 0 avatar
        PJ McCombs

        YESSS! “Orwell’d” in 12 posts!

        Not quite as good as the thread the other day where it happened in 3–but still, good effort.

    • 0 avatar
      Jeff Waingrow

      Apropos, the name.

    • 0 avatar
      KixStart

      And why was Obama taking a stand against raising the debt ceiling at the time? The other half of “fiscal responsibility” for Congress is to authorize taxes to cover the spending the Congress authorized.

      Congress cut taxes, again and again, through the ’00′s and declined to do anything about spending. In spite of (relatively) good times, the deficit ballooned during the Bush administration. Yes, you CAN go to war and cut taxes, as long as you are willing to let somebody clean up your mess down the road. Neither Bush nor the rest of the Republicans did anything about leadership on the matter. They played grasshopper for 6 years.

      Now, I don’t recall the exact events of 2006 but I’m quite sure Obama was trying to inject some sort of rationality into the process and bring revenue into line with expenditure and he was using political pressure on the debt celing to get us there. Gee… did that happen again a few years later? Are you lionizing those guys, too?

      Come 2008/9 and it’s time to pay the piper. Spending increases due to unemployment checks and other causes but tax revenues fall as a natural consequence of a recession. Obaman didn’t do anything in particular to cause that, he’s just going to suffer for it.

      And he did propose that we continue spending and even increased it, which WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. You don’t cut spending and turn a recession into a Depression (for all the Tea Party whining about how this was a Depression, well, you ain’t seen nothin’ and you don’t want to).

      We’re currently paying something like 3% to borrow to invest and stimulate our way out of this hole. We’re lucky that the Euros are having a similar tough time, because it makes the dollar look atrractive.

      Oil prices aren’t rising because the dollar is weak, it’s not much weaker than anything else, even the Remninbi or the yen and stronger than some (priced a Euro, lately) and gold has nothing to do with oil prices… gold isn’t taken as payment on oil. It’s all about worldwide demand and uncertainty, with some speculation thrown in for good measure.

      When you can get cheap money, you borrow. Now, we’ve already cut taxes, quite a bit. If the Congress would like to do something about the deficit/debt situation, I suggest that they grow a pair and tackle the spend. However, I cheerfully look forward to hearing more crap about Obama The Evil, although every Republican running (except Senor Looneytoon a/k/a Ron Paul, who’d be my man if this was 1790 but, alas, it’s not) has said defense and SS/Med are off the table. Good luck balancing the budget by twiddling with the tiny fraction that’s left over after that and, if you do cut all the rest in an attempt to somehow make it work, I look cheerfully forward to a time, say 20 years from now, when starvation of basic research reduces us to indentured Chinese servitude.

      Have a day.

      • 0 avatar
        TOTitan

        Right on KixStart. It was about time that someone calmly and methodically expose DW’s propaganda for what it is. I suppose he thinks that 43 was a good president, and that Limbaugh’s brand of hatred is good for the country too.

      • 0 avatar
        dolorean

        Kix Start +1. Deadweight’s argument is so tired, rerun and based on so many right wing publications it almost makes me wonder if he’s a bot for the teabaggers.

    • 0 avatar
      Byron Hurd

      That’s a delightful novel you wrote for us, DW, but at most it explains a rise in the fuel price “floor,” but speaks nothing to the fluctuation in prices over the last few years. Gas was more expensive in the summer of ’08 than it is now.

      I only have one link for you. It’s this one:
      http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

    • 0 avatar
      Byron Hurd

      That’s a delightful novel you wrote for us, DW, but at most it explains a rise in the fuel price “floor,” but speaks nothing to the fluctuation in prices over the last few years. Gas was more expensive in the summer of ’08 than it is now.

      I only have one link for you. It’s this one:
      http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      Just a suggestion, but if you want to be taken seriously, then you should avoid posting URL’s to “sources” such as Zero Hedge or something with a title as dubious as “Economic collapse blog”.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        Because when Pch101 can’t point out the error(s) in the specific data presented, he resorts to the ole’ slander the source in some vague manner shtick.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        “Because when Pch101 can’t point out the error(s) in the specific data presented…”

        That’s a bit presumptuous.

        For one, this is not an economics blog. If I was interested in discussing economics with looney tunes on the internet, then I would be posting on an economics site. This site is about automobiles and the automotive industry, and I’m here because of subjects related to that.

        For another, when I see someone providing links to the lunatic fringe such as Zero Hedge, I just assume the worst and skip the contents.

        There is a smidgen of what you say that actually makes some sense, believe it or not, but then you’re flinging yourself off the deep end by taking it way too far, which does you no favors at all. I sense that you are a gold bug, and that puts you about 200 years behind in the field of economic theory.

        A gold standard would only produce a permanent depression. If you spent simply ten minutes working the math instead of reading a “source” whose author uses a pseudonym take from a movie character, this would be blindingly obvious.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        First of all, I cited numerous sources, including The Federal Reserve itself (Hoenig) in making the case that the Fed is literally admitting it is debasing the dollar.

        Second, Zero Hedge has a plethora of authors, many of whom are indeed quite well respected, who guest write articles, including Jim Grant (of Grant’s Interest Rate Daily and Kyle Bass, Jim Chanos, Charles Biderman, David Stockman, Laurence Kotlikoff, David M. Walker (the latter three all former economic advisers to U.S. Presidential Administrations) et al., who expose the manipulations in the data on everything from the true rate of inflation to the true rate of unemployment to the true rate of home starts/sales. In fact, Zero Hedge was the first to expose the high frequency trading scheme, which it took the main stream media (via 60 Minutes) a full year afterwards to even do an expose upon.

        Finally, I’m actually not a ‘gold bug’ per se (although any system that puts checks and limits on a governments ability to print its citizenry into poverty and welfare state dependancy is better than none), but are you with the old, honest Alan Greenspan, or the gone-silent-once-he-was-hired-by-the-Fed Alan Greenspan, on the wisdom of a gold standard (you’re obviously a fan of debasing currency and increasing debt to mete out GDP growth, so it’s rhetorical):

        http://online.barrons.com/article/SB120312013624372883.html

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        “I cited numerous sources”

        And you will necessarily be judged by the weakest link (no pun intended.) When you link to freak show sites as you have, then you have earned the negative responses that you get. Go get better information, and refrain from quoting the hyperbolic tripe as gospel.

        “who expose the manipulations in the data”

        See, this is the sort of stuff that will cause reasonable people to not take you seriously. Information conspiracies and black helicopters just aren’t going to score you any points with rational, informed individuals.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        DeadWeight,

        Not everyone has their heads in the sand in an effort to avoid facing up to their own intellectual limitations. Don’t let the imbeciles get you down.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        Having CJ on your side pretty much proves my point.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTheDriver

      are the black helicopters circling your house yet DW?

  • avatar
    stryker1

    My grilled cheese is burned on one side.
    Thanks, Obama.

  • avatar
    GS650G

    Heaven forbid we hold the current president accountable for anything, even if it’s as far fetched as how much it takes to fill up the tank.

    Debbie Wasserman-Shultz could blame Bush for the same thing and get nods from the lemmings in her audience. They both hail from south Florida, maybe they should have lunch and work out their problems.

    So Big O’s energy positions don’t affect the price of gas no matter how misguided they are?

    • 0 avatar
      PintoFan

      If somebody could, in one short paragraph, without hysterics or name calling, name a SPECIFIC POLICY that OBAMA HIMSELF initiated, that has led to a direct and traceable rise in the price of gas, I would be willing to listen. Everything that has been broached thus far has either been highly fatuous or an outright lie by people who were never sincere to begin with.

      • 0 avatar
        jjklongisland

        Ummm how about rejecting the Keystone pipeline construction, ummm how about rejecting off shore drilling permits, ummm how about failing to proceed with his investigations into oil speculation…

        HIS FAULT – THE END

      • 0 avatar
        Mark MacInnis

        And I quote our simultaneously esteemed and reviled President:

        “I wanted the price of gas to rise, it is just unfortunate it rose so fast.” Candidate Obama, 2008

        “We want the price of gasoline to rise in order to promote the use of alternative energies and tranportation technologies.” President Obama, 2009.

        “I’ve got BP down, and I’ve got my boot on their neck.” President Obama, 2010

        No lies. Just the truth. From the man’s own mouth.

        Are you convinced yet he is not the right person for the job? If not,you were never sincere to begin with, my friend.

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        http://naturalresources.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=15410

        Here are 45 specific policies this administration has enacted against energy production.

        It won’t fit in one paragraph. It won’t even fit on one page.

      • 0 avatar
        ExPatBrit

        “Ummm how about rejecting the Keystone pipeline construction’

        I am not against Keystone, however how does making it cheaper to move dirty oil from Canada to a Texas port help keep prices down for me?

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        Because the refineries at that Texas port are currently turning dirty Venezuelan crude into gasoline, output of that dirty Venezuelan crude is in the process of collapsing since Obama del Sur took over down there, and something needs to replace it.

        Doesn’t do anything to prices this year. Gas in 2017 has to come from somewhere.

      • 0 avatar
        ExPatBrit

        So we pump all that dirty unrefined oil thousands of miles to a Texas port and we really aren’t going to export any of it.

        Sure! Trust us on this. Nothing to see here!

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        What if it does get exported?

        Changes in the the supply of a fungible good have the same effect on pricing regardless of where it’s produced or ultimately sold.

        Reducing the trade deficit a little bit is no bad thing.

        Employing a few thousand Americans is no bad thing either.

        Except to Obama, apparently.

      • 0 avatar
        GS650G

        Hey pinto fan, try not to wave the Obama banner too much on this issue, he owns it and knows it.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        “Changes in the the supply of a fungible good have the same effect on pricing regardless of where it’s produced or ultimately sold.”

        And it follows that the influence on price is negligible, because the added supply is a small fraction on the world’s total.

        In any case, the oil is going to be produced, regardless. If it doesn’t enter the world market via a pipeline in Texas, then it will enter it from somewhere else. The route of the pipeline makes no difference on world supply.

        “Reducing the trade deficit a little bit is no bad thing.”

        If $100 of oil is imported and that same $100 of oil is then exported, then there is no net change to the trade deficit. $100-$100=$0.

        In terms of oil markets, the routing of the pipeline is meaningless. The pipeline would create a bit of employment and some associated risks, but the oil markets aren’t an issue.

      • 0 avatar
        golden2husky

        jjLI: How would you like it if Shoreham was in operation in your backyard?

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        “And it follows that the influence on price is negligible, because the added supply is a small fraction on the world’s total.”

        Of course any one project is negligible in the scope of the entire industry, oil is the largest and most important heavy industry in the world. But it’s a negligible step in the wrong direction and enough of those eventually amount to something that isn’t neglible.

        “The route of the pipeline makes no difference on world supply.”

        Routing it to a refinery that already exists via the most direct route reduces production costs. Profit increases output. Exploration money needs to come from somewhere.

        “If $100 of oil is imported and that same $100 of oil is then exported, then there is no net change to the trade deficit. $100-$100=$0.”

        It’s worth more than $100 when it’s exported because refining adds value.

      • 0 avatar
        ExPatBrit

        In other words Keystone will affect the price of gas at my local station by essentially a “rounding error” in 2017.

        I won’t be holding my breath!

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        “But it’s a negligible step in the wrong direction and enough of those eventually amount to something that isn’t neglible.”

        I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.

        What I do know is that the oil will end up on the world market. Whether it gets there via Houston or Vancouver or whatever has no bearing on the supply of oil.

        If you want to argue for economic activity within the US created by the pipeline, that might work. But arguing that this is going to impact world oil prices or US oil supplies is bogus. The oil is being sourced from another country and imported; if it doesn’t come along this particular route, then it will be delivered by other means.

    • 0 avatar
      GS650G

      Hot-dayhm look what I found from the video archives. How apropos
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBCjr28PdzI

      She really is deplorable. High gas prices were anti everything when Bush was in, now that Big O is in the house it’s not his fault.

    • 0 avatar
      TOTitan

      Excuse me all you haters of 44, here are the numbers for US oil production, in barrels, for the last four years. Now what were you saying again?

      2008: 1,811,817,000
      2009: 1,956,596,000
      2010: 1,998,137,000
      2011: 2,055,646,000

      • 0 avatar
        SwampBuggy

        Are you really trying to attribute those numbers to 44? You should know it takes a significant amount of time, years in fact, from the time that parties are told that they are allowed to begin drilling to the time oil first hits the market. However, and this is an important distinction, the market reacts much more quickly. Those numbers you cited are in large part due to actions taken from 1996-2000 Deepwater Royalty Relief Act. That was way before the current President was thinking about oil production.

        While the increase in production on public lands is mostly due to the two preceding administrations, a good part of the total increase in production since President Obama took office is on private lands. For example while North Dakota produced 20 million barrels of oil in 2003, in 2010 it produced 120 million barrels of oil.

        Since taking office, President Obama has restricted the flow of oil on several fronts. In addition to the de facto moratorium on deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico that the U.S. Energy Information Administration has said is going to account for a reduction of 150 million barrels in 2012 alone, there is a host of other restrictive actions. This is why, when you look at the future production estimates, the ones that can be directly tied to the current president’s policies, the EIA has projected an increase in imports and a decrease in US domestic production.

        It is fascinating how the President takes credit for the work of previous administrations when it suits him, but then offloads all possible negative effects as a part of the situation he met when he took office.

  • avatar
    Lokki

    Derek, I realize it’s all hip and cool and stuff to bash on Republicans and praise Obama, but I wish that you would stop the political stuff. Short term it will get you lots of arguments, but eventually it’s going to chase people away from this blog, IMHO. I’m sure that I’m not the only one getting tired of the “Let’s poke a stick in the ant-hill” tactics. Yeah Bertel does it too, but he at least does it on automotive subjects. Gasoline prices, you’re going to whine, are automotive related. Well, no, not in this context. It’s pure politics.

    Please… stop it.

    It happens in every election; always has (since the invention of the car) and always will (till we drive algae-powered cars). Here’s where Obama did the same thing in 2008. It would be too much trouble, although not much to go back and find ads from 2004, 2000, 1996, ad infinitum ad nauseum
    http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/obama-2008-ads-focused-on-gas-prices

  • avatar
    VanillaDude

    –The Hummer name undoubtedly carries negative connotations when it comes to fuel economy, but in the grand scheme of things, the H3 is quite mild, with its roots in the fairly light-duty Chevrolet Colorado/GMC Canyon twins.–

    The other thing is that Allen West is a 21 year military officer. Criticizing someone like that for driving a HUMMER is like criticizing an old taxi driver for driving a Crown Victoria. It is not illegal to own or drive one, and anyone at TTAC should recognize one’s right to do so. After all, this is a car blog, not a blog for environmental extremists, right?

    Representative West has earned his right to do what he wishes. He fought for that right, along with the right you have to criticize him. While you may not wish to agree with him on this issue, we should always be respectful for fellow Americans who have served us on the battle field.

    President Obama has attempted to use market prices and scarcity to force the US into what he sees as a more environmentally sound energy policy. His policy is a viable option supported by many people. His policies are driving up the cost of gasoline at the pumps as a result. Some see that as a good thing. I don’t know why anyone at TTAC should.

    When gas prices eliminate our vehicle options and prevents us from enjoying our cars and trucks, we should see this as a bad thing. Regardless of what those in power claim is the reason, high pump prices take from you and your family’s income and robs us all of a better standard of living. When basic commodities such as this cost more, we lose our freedom of economic choice.

    It is right and proper for a congressman to use this as an issue during a political campaign year. It is right and proper to blame a president for the situation. That’s their jobs. That’s what happens.

    Regardless of whether it is West or Obama, or Grayson or Bush, the personal politics is irrelevant.

    • 0 avatar
      PintoFan

      “His policies are driving up the cost of gasoline at the pumps as a result.”
      Nope!

      • 0 avatar
        GS650G

        Every time Congress or the Administration has turned away from domestic energy production and forced the US to import instead the price of oil on the world market has risen. Every time. Add to that the ridiculous QE2 and QE3 acts and your dollar doesn’t buy as much oil or gasoline as it used to. Hence we are getting screwed and much to the Obama admins chagrin we are not rushing out to buy Chevy Volts. The Leaf is a better deal anyway.
        Change your name from Pintofan to Obamafan, fits better.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        PintoFan,

        Obama said he was going to drive up prices at the pump. Are you denying his competence? This is one his greatest successes.

    • 0 avatar
      morbo

      …”he fought for that right, along with the right you have to criticize him. …”

      I hereby criticize him for being a hypocrite. When it cost $70 to gas up his Hummer in 2007, where was he criticzing the then president? I’m fine kevetching about the cost of gas. I’m not fine being hypocritical about it.

      Lest ye think I’m a pinko tree-hugging commie, my 300C with the Hemi gets slightly about the same mileage combined as Mr West’s.

      As a co-worker of mine that just bought a TDI Jetta said, “I shot too many people in the Middle East [during deployment] to drive a gas-guzzler.”

      • 0 avatar
        MrGreenMan

        I’m not a big Allen West fan because he raised the debt ceiling when he said he wouldn’t, but in 2007, if his official biography is to believed, Mr. West was in Afghanistan on assignment as a military advisor to the Afghan Army through November of that year. Therefore, it is highly likely he did not fill up his Hummer much then.

        It is nice that he still rolls in what he thinks is a good car for him. Vive la choice and all that. It’s a shame the current president dumped his 300C; he shouldn’t have accepted The Beast and instead kept the Chrysler.

    • 0 avatar
      ClutchCarGo

      “It is right and proper to blame a president for the situation. That’s their jobs.”

      Funny, I thought that their job was to work together to find a compromise that allows us to better get on with our lives, not endlessly blame each other for everything that irritates us.

      • 0 avatar
        Sinistermisterman

        @ClutchCarGo
        You poor deluded fool. Don’t you know what passes for political discourse in the US these days?
        I liken it to two men stood in a burning house, one holding a gas can, the other a match, both screaming at each other that it’s the other’s fault that the house is on fire. Meanwhile the house is still on fire.

      • 0 avatar
        nrd515

        That’s all both sides do anymore, blame each other for everything, and make up stuff to blame each other for when they run out of new true stuff to blame each other for..

        The Republicans seem to be doing a little better job at this than the Democrats, if being even more hypocritical is “better”. The group of Republican POTUS candidates is making Obama more than an easy choice in November. Romney is the only chance they have, and the way he seems to hurt himself over and over again, I don’t think it’s much of a chance.

    • 0 avatar
      stryker1

      “we should always be respectful for fellow Americans who have served us on the battle field.”
      Yeah.
      No.
      Being a Veteran does not mean you get a free pass on any fool thing that comes out of your pie hole.

    • 0 avatar
      carlisimo

      “It is not illegal to own or drive one, and anyone at TTAC should recognize one’s right to do so.”

      No one here is saying the H3 should be illegal; we’re just saying it’s stupid to buy one and then complain about $70 fill-ups.

      Gasoline prices broke the $4/gal barrier in mid-2008. Nothing to do with the president at the time; the economy was doing well. When it was doing badly, prices dropped. Now it looks like things are getting better, so they’re going back up.

      Energy policies take a few years to have any effect, anyway.

      • 0 avatar
        Dynasty

        Nothing to do with the prez at the time in 2008?

        Isn’t that about the time the Feds were topping off the strategic oil reserves? Pumping untold sums of money into the oil market. Right about the time that the cost of oil per barrel was at its highest point? Increase demand, increase the price…

        A lot is forgotten in four years.

    • 0 avatar
      jwetmore

      “The other thing is that Allen West is a 21 year military officer. Criticizing someone like that for driving a HUMMER is like criticizing an old taxi driver for driving a Crown Victoria.”

      Right. Because an H3 has so much in common with an HMMWV he may or may not have used in the military.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    The H3 really does look better with an open bed.

    Oh, wait, were we supposed to talk politics?

  • avatar
    Jeff Waingrow

    Derek, it’s a big mistake to have these incendiary (though outwardly innocent appearing) postings at the site. Along with the usual blather, you create very bad karma that alienates one from another. Obviously, there are a number of world views represented at TTAC, and whatever their merit, readers just seem to respond as Pavlovian dogs would to the red meat that is sometimes tossed here. Unfortunately, many of us seem to have this fraility. For myself, I’m going to try to fight it. Might you try to help?

  • avatar
    Porsche986

    I hate these posts on TTAC, but I will take the bait and try to be rational. If the Gentleman from Florida doesn’t want to spend $70 to fill up his tank, he should not have bought a Hummer. See how simple this is? Must be a slow news day on the automotive front… *yawn*

    • 0 avatar
      Diesel Fuel Only

      + Ditto.

      Though I doubt he bought it, probably has it leased on his congressional or campaign expense account. The taxpayers are probably paying for this gas-guzzler.

      If fewer ignoramuses like West drove things like H3′s, fuel prices would be lower, so he just has himself to blame.

      The H3 is such a stupid vehicle. Isn’t it just a poseur’s Yukon (which means it handles as about well as a DC3)?

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        The H1 is the real deal, with full independent suspension, portal axles, and a drivetrain elevated into the interior to allow driving over fire hydrants.

        The H2 is a poseur’s Yukon.

        The H3 is based on the Chevy Colorado pickup truck. Which is based on the Isuzu pickup truck still sold in Asia.

        Which makes the H3 a poseur’s Isuzu Rodeo.

        Except that my Isuzu Rodeo got way better gas mileage.

  • avatar
    ttacgreg

    Then there is the viewpoint that this is political payback by the oil mafia, er I meant to say industry, for Mr. Obama standing up to them.
    http://news.yahoo.com/oil-industry-chief-warns-obama-canada-pipeline-204653380.html

  • avatar
    Astigmatism

    Man, it’s gotta cost Mitt Romney’s wife a ton to fill up her couple of Cadillacs.

  • avatar
    philadlj

    $70 to fill the good congressman’s H3′s 22-gallon tank works out to $3.18 per gallon. I can’t remember when I’ve seen gas that cheap up here in Philly.

    He should count his lucky stars he’s not rolling in an H2. Filling up its 32-gallon tank at that price is a $101 proposition.

  • avatar
    mzr

    Obama siphoned my gasoline!!

    OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!

  • avatar
    mkirk

    I would just like to see a clear energy policy. These politicians go out of there way to NOT make decisions.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    Seems like there’s two different points to be made here. One is obvious: the political point that Rep. West is making. Probably short-term the president is not doing anything that caused the particular spike we are experiencing. That seems to be related to continued barely controlled chaos in Nigeria and Iran’s increasingly belligerent response to the US-led economic boycott against it. It’s not just Iranian supply coming off-line, but major supply disruptions if there’s military action in the Strait of Hormuz. Long term, the President’s policies clearly don’t favor the development of domestic petroleum supply and both he and his Secretary of Energy have, at various times, been open about their desire to see the price of coal and petroleum rise, which would make so-called “green energy” more attractive economically. What they don’t want to talk about is the fact that energy is a fundamental component of our economy, from manufacturing to transportation, to running Google’s server farms. So, if the price of that rises, regardless of the reason, it’s a dead loss for the economy.

    The other aspect of the Congressman’s comment is not political: Congressman West, if you buy a vehicle that uses a lot of fuel, and you drive a lot, then your family budget is going to be pretty sensitive to the price of gasoline. If that is a situation that bothers you, then either (a) drive less or (b) drive something that goes farther on a gallon of gas. It’s that simple.

    • 0 avatar
      HEATHROI

      “Barely controlled chaos in Nigeria” Nigeria has been barely controlled chaos since independence (see Biafran War) and “Iran’s increasingly belligerent response to the US-led economic boycott against it”
      To be honest their response has been very restrained for an outfit that has been accused of everything by a nation whose foreign policy in the region has been hypocritical to say the least.
      +1 DW, Funny how people can’t see commodity prices taking an upward course if the money supply increases.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        They can’t see it even when voting members of the Federal Reserve itself, in rare moments of public intellectual honesty, admit that their massive ramping up of the monetary base is a direct cause of a significant component of commodity inflation!

        http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-30/hoenig-blames-fed-for-higher-commodity-prices-urges-monetary-tightening.html

        Commodities surge on US Federal Reserve statement on interest rates
        ET Bureau Jan 30, 2012, 12.37AM IST

        http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-01-30/news/31005527_1_wheat-prices-wheat-futures-commodity-prices

        And despite all the red herrings thrown at me for pointing out these basic truths, I despise the actions of both the GOP & the Democrats for being equally deeply captured by special interest groups, chief among them, the financial services and banking industries.

        We don’t have a government of, by and for the people anymore. We have a government of, by and for the special interest groups, with a literal revolving door between government-corporations-lobbying, with both parties absolutely equally culpable in succumbing to the rot of the republic.

    • 0 avatar
      carlisimo

      I think we’d be idiots to drill our own oil. Use up the rest of the world’s supply first, while it’s relatively cheap, THEN tap ours as a last gasp while we figure out alternatives. If our reserves turn out to be significant, we can even sell it, at huge prices.

  • avatar
    bikegoesbaa

    This enthusiast welcomes higher gasoline prices.

    Why? Fewer people on the road and fewer big vehicles on the road increases my driving/riding pleasure more than the additional fuel expense decreases it. It’s a net win for me.

    The guys who are spending $70 to fill their Hummer can cry me a river. I don’t care, because the summer when gas was $4+/gal was the best motorcycling season of my life.

    If somebody bought an inefficient vehicle without calculating the costs if fuel prices increased significantly, they dug their own hole. I have a hard time feeling bad for them.

  • avatar
    stryker1

    Re: everyone who is climbing over themselves to hang current gas prices around Obama’s neck. It makes precisely as much sense as blaming Bush for gas prices during his tenure as president. Either it makes sense, or it doesn’t, your cursory understanding of introductory macro-economics aside.

  • avatar
    Beerboy12

    This guy is whining about filling an H3′s tank? If he was bitching about how much it cost to fill a Sonic’s tank… but an H3… Send this jerk to South Africa where they made that H3 and see how he like’s fill that gluttonous beast at $10/gal using hard earned rand’s, not US Doller’s, South African rands at R7.60 to the USD.
    I am sure that this guy is a “smaller goverment, cut spending” type but he can’t apply that philosophy to his personal life? Wow! The hypocrisy.
    And who needs a Hummer H3 that badly…?

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    I got sunburned on my last vacation.

    Thanks Obama.

    • 0 avatar
      morbo

      Weak human flesh is easily injured by photonic energy. My race shall find this information very useful indeed.

      • 0 avatar
        shaker

        “…while Global Warming will gradually move temperate zones northward, there will be no net benefit to plant life, as the increased methane content of the atmosphere and the inconsistent levels of rainfall could only benefit an ambulatory, chlorophyll-based life form…”: Professor Percy Peepers, Global Climate Expert.
        MORBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

  • avatar
    bd2

    Typical, ignorant politician.

    Why doesn’t Allen go after the REAL culprits?

    Such as those who pushed thru legislation about a decade ago which allowed just about anyone to get into the speculation game when it came to oil futures, Iran behaving badly and oil refiners EXPORTING gas and other fuels to overseas markets where they can get higher prices.

  • avatar
    Geekcarlover

    It’s the silly season. Things will return to normal after November, and we can go back to only mentioning politics in every third article.

  • avatar
    FromaBuick6

    As a right-of-center voter, I consider Allen West an embarrassment. I lump him in with Palin, Bachman, Sharon Angle, Carl Paladino, the “I’m not a witch” lady from Delaware and the guy who yelled “You lie!” at the State of the Union. I’d prefer that we have a different president by this time next year, but unfortunately conservative base insists on nominating crass, foolish and outright insane people like this.

    I dislike Obama enough that I’m willing to hold my nose and support just about any generic Republican in November. But if the GOP insists on wasting the nomination on Santorum, I’ll stay home; It won’t matter, because he’ll lose by twenty points after turning an election that should have been about the economy into a referendum on gay marriage and contraception. If it’s Gingrich, I swear to God I’ll vote for Barry.

    What was this thread about? Oh, yeah, stupid comments about the price of gas. Didn’t we already hear this same nonsense five years ago when the parties were reversed? Blaming whoever’s in charge for something like this is a great way to make people think you’re a fool. Complaining about it while driving a gas guzzler removes all doubt.

    • 0 avatar
      nrd515

      Were you bugging my phone about 9 hours ago? It’s spooky how close your post was to what I said to a friend of mine, who would vote for Gingrich in a heartbeat, if he would somehow end up being the nominee.
      I don’t understand him at all. But since he somehow has the insane idea that Nazis are left wingers, I guess his Newt lovin’ shouldn’t shock me at this point.

      • 0 avatar
        FromaBuick6

        I’m not a praying man, but if I were, I’d get down on my knees and thank God Gingrich’s campaign imploded for the third or fourth time now.

        It blows my mind that somebody can go around talking about global warming with Nancy Pelosi, lobbying for government healthcare, taking millions from Freddie Mac, repeatedly stating FDR was the greatest president of the last century and spouting off about building a moon base, and then get mad when people question his claims of being Reagan’s Anointed One. And the base actually buys into his crap! Why? Just because every time he shouts at some halfwit talking head, they get to live out some revenge fantasy against the liberal media. Now there’s a great reason to nominate somebody…

        I’m only in my twenties, but I’m still old enough to remember how awful Gingrich was as speaker. He was pompous, self-serving, hypocritical, unethical and ideologically unreliable. He is and was a petty, ill-tempered sociopath who won’t listen to other leaders, advisors or the electorate because he’s too convinced of his own superior intellect. I can’t vote for somebody like that with a clear conscience. I don’t like Obama’s policies or political tactics, but at least he’s not morally bankrupt or unstable. Unfortunately, many so-called conservatives have a much shorter memory.

        I used to think the Ron Paul supporters were nutty, but they’ve got nothing on the “Annoy a liberal, vote for Newt!” crowd. Do they not grasp that nominating somebody that makes Barry Goldwater look electable will not, in fact, annoy a liberal?

    • 0 avatar
      alf42

      Right of center my butt. Thanks for the good laugh.

  • avatar
    ttacgreg

    can’t resist some sarcastic, simplistic brainless tit for tat

    Jan ’09 1.81 a gallon
    Today 3.65 a gallon

    I blame him for doubling the price in 3 years.

    ?????????

    $4.114 that AAA reported on July 17, 2008. ( can provide references)

    Today 3.65 . . . I blame him for bringing the price down.

  • avatar
    zerofoo

    I lump this idiot with the folks who bought McMansions at the height of the bubble with no-doc loans and then bitched about the costs of owning a huge house.

    If you buy a large vehicle you should not be surprised at the amount of fuel that it uses. If this guy can’t understand cost of ownership, then he probably shouldn’t be a congressman.

    I just filled the tank of my GTI with 93 octane and it cost $43.00, and I blame no one. I chose a turbocharged vehicle KNOWING it would require premium fuel for the duration of my ownership.

  • avatar
    LectroByte

    What kind of self-respecting republican drives an H3? Figured he was at least an H2 man.

  • avatar
    asapuntz

    If we’re gonna blame the President for raising prices by “strangling production”, then we’d better also blame the Congressman for “inflating demand” by using a 15mpg vehicle when there are plenty of good 30 – 50mpg personal / family transportation options.

  • avatar
    Wheatridger

    No, blame Dubya. The previous president sold a lot of big iron like this with tax cuts that allowed full first-tear depreciation to be taken on “work” vehicles weighing over three tons. That gave Hummers a tax incentive comparable to anything offered with hybrids and electrics.

    There’s been plenty of time to see what’s coming, though. So Hummer owner, blame yourself.

  • avatar
    jerseydevil

    should blame his mother for raising such an effin moron.

  • avatar
    forraymond

    WHAT A STUPID D-BAG. Allowing unscrupulous speculators set oil pricing is where the problem began.

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      “I wanted the price of gas to rise, it is just unfortunate it rose so fast.” Candidate Obama, 2008

      “We want the price of gasoline to rise in order to promote the use of alternative energies and tranportation technologies.” President Obama, 2009.

      So you’re a subscriber to the belief that Obama is just an incompetent fool watching the world unfold?

      • 0 avatar
        shaker

        In a sane world, these policies make perfect sense. But that’s not the world we live in.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        That’s the sane world where you want standards of living to implode?

      • 0 avatar
        shaker

        If there were an actual *plan* for energy independence (rather than a series of knee-jerk reactions to oil price increases), then it could work. Politics, special interests, etc. will do all they can to prevent such a plan. And, “planning” is a dirty word.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        Interestingly enough, I googled both these Obama quotes. Know what I got? A bunch of posts on this site from…wait for it…CJinSD. Fascinating.

        The truth? Rising gas prices HURT sitting presidents politically. That’s such a no-brainer that it hardly seems necessary to state it, but the right wing seems hell-bent on convincing people that in some alternative universe (maybe the one where Mr. Spock wears that wicked Fu Manchu beard) rising gas prices are politically beneficial to Obama.

        CJ also fails to point out that under Obama, domestic oil production is up SUBSTANTIALLY over Bush, who presumably wasn’t to blame when gas prices hit $4.00 a gallon in 2008.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZxnT5tHVIo

        Here you go. Obama his own vile self talking about his plans. Don’t ‘people’ like you always mutter about the long lead times required to ramp up extraction of oil? Giving Obama credit for increases in production that were years in the making seems disingenuous, unless you really can’t think that well.

  • avatar
    Adamatari

    I’m just going to remind you all that oil is finite, while people in India and China are getting richer and buying cars. Oh, and the oil exporting countries use more and more of their own oil, which reduces exports. And still the US has dirt cheap oil compared to much of the rest of the world.

    Please repeat that to yourself until you get it. Oil is finite.

    I don’t feel sorry for anyone for buying more car than they can afford to keep running. This is one of the simplest mistakes to fix, at least if you have the money for an H3 – go trade it in and buy a small car. Fixed. Nobody is holding a gun to his head and making him drive that car, or buy that gas. Drive less, drive smaller cars, don’t complain if you drive a gas guzzling truck.

  • avatar

    It’s an election year. People are engaged in politics. As a result, political articles appear. I think that’s just a fact of life.

    What I don’t understand is why people are so hateful to Allen West, when all he’s saying is that Obama has policies that encourage gas price increases, and these policies have led to pain at the pump. I don’t think there’s any doubt that both statements are true.

    Here’s some evidence about the Obama Administration’s attitude towards energy prices: http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/02/23/rising-gas-prices-all-part-of-obamas-plan/ Interesting, thoughtful and worth reading.

    D

    • 0 avatar
      ciddyguy

      Look, I have NO problems with gas prices going up, but I KNEW they would and KNEW that I would need to downsize to a car with better mileage at some point this year.

      Though it didn’t go quite as planned (had to do it MUCH sooner than anticipated, thanks to a dying truck that decided to get worse last month, forcing the issue). So I downsized back to a small passenger car a B segment Mazda Protege5. Though it’s not the most fuel efficient vehicle, it is much better than the truck ever was and it wasn’t bad for a small truck with a large V6.

      So knowing that, it behooved West to have anticipated that and downsized his not so small H3 to something that got double that grand monstrosity gets and thus would not have had to kvetch about how much it now costs to fuel the tank up in that behemoth.

      • 0 avatar
        shaker

        Even the smallest Hummer is a raised-middle-finger to anyone concerned about the planet. Those who buy them are likely making a political statement, because there are few practical reasons to own one (unless the fenders are constantly caked with mud).

  • avatar
    Number6

    So let me get this straight.

    Easily 6-7 presidential terms with an energy policy that is devoid of science, economic wherewithal, or anything that doesn’t involve political self-interest. Mass-media whines ad nauseam about a bailout, firing up the citizenry while the tally of a 3-front war goes ignored. US foreign policy that involves killing democratically elected policians and replacing them with dictators. The rest of the world, being the big place it really is, offers up some loonies that fly planes into buildings. The US economy teeters on the edge, the ENTIRE planet for once sympathizes with the USA, and the Feds respond by declaring war. At the time, it was a 1-front war. Let’s give GWB some credit there.

    And all this politician can say about all this is that the gas is too expensive. Both sides square off and the finger pointing begins. Nobody says a peep about the big picture, what really got us here, all they can do is blame Obama for printing more money (I’m not big on Obama, mind you).

    Both sides are to blame here. As are the voters that not only tolerate but support policitians like Nixon, Bush 1, Regan, Clinton (and her husband), Bush 2, Kerry, Gore, Palin, McCain, Cynthia McKinney, all those others i didnt mention, but let’s not leave out the fruitcakes that say “god” to collect votes…

  • avatar
    Volt 230

    Big effing deal, the other day I spent $70 filling up my sis’ 4 cyl Journey, so this is a Hummer, nuff said

  • avatar
    ravenchris

    Allen West is just another turd lawmaker from Florida.
    Protect yourself and the future by not reelecting incumbents.

  • avatar
    jjklongisland

    You guys are all missing the point. It isnt about the expense of filling up a Hummer or me filling up my Pick Up… Its about the collateral damage that high oil prices cause… Everything has to be delivered in a TRUCK! Thats right, trucks deliver goods and run on Diesel (most of them). Farms get cultivated by equipment that runs on fuel, most houses are heated by fuel… Its not just our cars ITS EVERYTHING!!! When the price of fuel goes up so does delivery surcharges and the price of goods leading to INFLATION!!!!!!!!!! Stop playing politics for your warped views of clean energy and alternative energy and maybe we can bring this Country out of this economic mess….

    • 0 avatar
      FJ60LandCruiser

      Food is grown at local co-ops in a carbon neutral and sustainable way, it is harvested by hemp-wearing college students who do the work for free/in trade for little plots of land where they can grow their own vegetables. It is carried to the local market on bicycle or in an old VW bus that has been converted to biodiesel which runs off of the fry oil from a local vegetarian grill which sells tofuburgers and gluten-free beer.

      If a liberal actually saw a harvester combine or a Peterbilt delivery truck his brain would shut down from how much sense it makes that driving up gas prices drives up food prices. Other things also gets delivered on those evil, evil trucks, but we’re getting ahead of ourselves with an administration which dines at 1000 dollar DC and NY restaurants and only goes shopping with the rest of us ‘plebs when there’s a photographer in tow.

    • 0 avatar
      golden2husky

      All the more reason to find alternative ways of powering our future. As fossil fuels become more scarce, the price will rise and in the process everything else will follow suit. Encouraging energy to be cheap only speeds up the process. Like it or not folks, the near term answer is nuclear power. Get used to it.

      • 0 avatar
        jjklongisland

        I couldnt agree more but by forcing Americans to go bankrupt in the process and cause business’s to close due to escalating operating costs isnt the way to for alternative energy down our throats. Alternative energy will happen regardless of our fuel usage.

    • 0 avatar
      Wheatridger

      The prices I pay for diesel in Colorado have been pretty steady for the past year. I would expect it to soften soon, given that there must be plenty of unused heating oil left over from a warm winter. But that diesel, like all fuel, will flow towards the highest bidder. Because it’s the world market that sets the prices, stupid. You conservatives like to praise the market as a fair & proper determinant of value. To an extent, this liberal agrees. So why do you pretend, every election year, that the president can determine oil prices? Your prez can’t do that, and neither can mine.

      We’re drilling like crazy right now, all over the US. We’ve found so much natural gas that prices have crashed. Natural gas is different from petrofuels; it comes out of the ground essentially ready to be used. Informed observers note that US operational refinery capacity is the lowest in years. That’s your bottleneck, gentlemen, and it won’t be solved by more drill rigs or pipelines.

      The quickest way to moderate the price of gas would be to crack down on the speculators who have entered the market en masse and bid up the price. That’s an issue that could be quickly solved by creating barriers to speculation. Let’s make the oil traders put down more money on their bets, and take actual delivery of tank-trailers full of the stuff.

      How many of ya’ll know that the US is exporting gasoline right now? It’s true…

  • avatar
    jjklongisland

    Rising oil prices weigh on the economy, pushing leisure and business travel costs higher. Every 1-cent increase in the price of gasoline costs the economy $1.4 billon, analysts say.

  • avatar
    daviel

    another good reason to take over all the middle east oil fields – where’s rumsfeld and chaney?

    • 0 avatar
      Wheatridger

      Do you really think that would work out as well again as the first time, In Iraq? Wasn’t that war paid for with our share of their oil, as Rumsfeld promised?

      Sorry if I’m painting over the chrome here, but I tend to get lost when the sarcasm here becomes three-dimensional…

  • avatar
    willbodine

    It may surprise you to learn that refined fuel (gasoline, diesel and jet-a) were the largest US exports (by value) in 2011. We import the crude, refine it, and ship it out. So the normal countervalence to raising prices (increased production) doesn’t apply. The US energy refiners make more money selling it abroad. And then gouge the local market because, well, they can. In an auto-based society, you either pay up, or you walk.

  • avatar
    FJ60LandCruiser

    There’s really no arguing with libs on this topic. We are dealing with generations of people brainwashed by college professors to believe that fossil fuels are a rapidly dwindling, FINITE resource, whose use makes America evil and corrupt and the sooner we switch to alternative fuels that the market doesn’t want, have never been proven, and exist in their infancy at best, the better–completely ignoring vast America’s natural gas, coal, and even crude resources which we don’t want to tap because some unwashed minority doesn’t want us to destroy some unspoiled wilderness or kill off an endangered sand cockroach. The ugly truth is that Western countries, poisoned by their own socialist idiocy will drive their own gas prices up through their misguided left wing green lunacy while emerging nations like China will meet the need we have left a gaping hole in the market for and prosper, because they will be growing stronger while we sit around recycling and occupying like the privileged idiots we are.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      “We are dealing with generations of people brainwashed by college professors to believe that fossil fuels are a rapidly dwindling, FINITE resource…”

      …uh, yes, oil IS a finite resource, so those evil profs aren’t brainwashing anyone.

      • 0 avatar
        FJ60LandCruiser

        Finite as in crazy liberals saying it will run out in 20 years? 50? 100? Does anyone even know? Will it run out before water?

        Let’s just be safe and drive our gas prices up while we wring our hands.

      • 0 avatar
        kenzter

        Newsflash…we don’t burn water. When we’re done using water it’s still….water. It can be cleaned and re-used. All we do with water is move it around.

      • 0 avatar
        replica

        Is it finite? How much is left? We certainly have to know how much is out there to know it’s finite right?

      • 0 avatar
        aristurtle

        Replica, I don’t know precisely how much sulfur dioxide is in Venus’s atmosphere, but I’m fairly certain it’s a finite quantity.

        But hey, maybe fossil fuel deposits are being supernaturally replenished or something and so don’t follow the normal laws of physics.

      • 0 avatar
        replica

        By all means, lets create energy policy based on…uh…feelings?

      • 0 avatar
        aristurtle

        Yes, Replica. The second law of thermodynamics doesn’t apply to fossil fuels. Jesus Christ himself replenishes American oil fields on a regular basis and a limitless supply of energy is possible through expanded drilling alone.

        Do you even know why they’re called “fossil fuels”?

        FJ here saying “our estimates for depletion seem a shorter and more chicken-littleish than we’re actually seeing” is reasonable. You saying “maybe there’s an infinite amount of mass in the Earth’s crust and everything we know about geology and thermodynamics is wrong, and if you can’t pinpoint every last drop of crude then clearly there’s a limitless supply” is, to put it lightly, wishful thinking.

      • 0 avatar
        newcarscostalot

        I just KNEW Jeebus was involved.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Republicans on gas prices when they hit $4.00 under Bush in 2008:
    “It’s not the president’s fault.”

    Republicans on gas prices in 2012:
    “It’s all Obama’s fault!”

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      Did Bush say he was going to raise energy prices? Look for my link above, since you claimed you couldn’t find it yourself. Liberals sure blamed Bush. Consistency isn’t a concept that you’ve got a substantial grasp of.

    • 0 avatar
      newcarscostalot

      @FreedMike Yep. How it can’t be Bush’s fault directly or indirectly and yet It’s all Obama’s fault is beyond me. I wonder if Obama is also responsible for raising gas prices in the rest of the world? I wonder if Europeans blame Obama when their gas prices rise? Its a commodity traded on free market principles. There is more than one reason why gas prices fluctuate. Blaming it on one man is ludicrous. I know because I used to blame Bush until the light went on.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • J & J Sutherland, Canada
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India