Evaluation of the policies of George W. Bush and his Republican conservatives on America.



After the delightful pictures of President Bush walking hand-in-hand with Prince Bandar, we learned that he failed to do anything about record oil prices. In 2000, when gasoline was selling for $1.61 per gallon and oil was $28 a barrel, Bush chastised Clinton for high fuel prices and told him to "jawbone" the prices down with the oil producers. Well so much for that idea. Oil is more than $50 barrel and gasoline is $2.26 per gallon and the Bush's jawboning has done nothing to lower oil prices.

Again yesterday Bush failed to address the one thing that both help to create the crisis and holds the key of providing some help in the midterm which is forcing higher mileage for SUVs, cars and trucks sold in the U S. Although the long-term solutions suggested by President Bush are necessary, help from his suggestions will not be effective for a decade or more. He fails to recognize that the increased consumption caused by trucks, SUVs and cars getting poor mileage is a major part of this problem. If four years ago he had reinstated reasonable increases in the miles per gallon of vehicles sold in the United States, this crisis would be far less drastic than it is today. What is disappointing is that Bush still does not recognize or is not willing to deal with real conservation by demanding that our cars, trucks and SUVs get higher gas mileage and cut the consumption of gasoline.

Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Apr 28, 2005
You hit a whole new low with this one ColGene.

Why on earth should the oil companies, OPEC, or anyone else lower the price of gasoline? The price goes up, we still buy. The price hits record highs, we don't lower our consumption. You act like it should be the responsibility of the petroleum industry to make sure you and I can afford to drive 20 miles to work. News flash. IT ISN'T!! It is the responsibility of the petroleum industry to provide oil at the price the most customers are willing to pay for the longest time. PERIOD.

Again, the target of your ignorance is also off the mark. Back in the 70s, Americans responded to the "fuel crisis" by rejecting Detriot's "America is in love with the big car" paradigm, and opted for smaller, more fuel efficient cars. The shortsightedness of "The Big Three" led to (for all intents and purposes) the demise of the American Car industry. However, from the Fuel Front, we used a lot less gasoline, and the market was forced to respond by lowering the price of the product.

With the price so low, we went back to our "Love Affair with the big car" and the SUV war was on. So, now that the price of oil is back up to "crisis" levels, you expect the government to kiss it and make it all better. Well, I say to you, Kiss Off!! The government didn't cause this "crisis"... We, The People did. How much have you cut back on YOUR fuel consumption? Do you walk more now? Are you pushing a struggle buggy (bicycle) more? If not, why not??

You are great at pointing your finger at Prs. Bush and others. Well, other than whining like a private who has dropped his beer, what else are YOU doing about it??
on Apr 28, 2005
It was Bush who suggested jawboning OPEC to reduce prices. You're right is absurd and does not work. You are also correct that the current crisis has its genesis in the 70s. The point being we are in the 21st century and the issue is what is our current president doing to finally move toward a solution. He ignores the major cause of the increased demand in consumption which is car, SUVs and truck mileage. Anyone with any sense would therefore look toward that as a solution but not George Bush. We can't control the increased demand that is being caused by expansion in China or other countries. We can however mandate higher mileage for cars sold in the United States which would not only reduce the overall demand and people would spend LESS on gasoline if their cars got better mileage. The issue here is the ineffectiveness of the policies that we are following. They are not resolving the issues facing this country. Why? Because our president is not putting forth policies that are effective.
on Apr 28, 2005
Honestly, what can Bush do to fix this problem? He can't force OPEC to up production or lower prices, he doesn't have that power. At best, he can encourage hybrid cars and public transit through tax breaks and subsidies. There is in fact very little anyone can do in the face of this.

I'd like to see funding for companies with viable fuel alternative research programs
I'd like to see tax breaks for people who buy hybrid cars
I'd like to see major government funding to help build up and fix our public transit system
on Apr 28, 2005
Another useless anti-Bush post.
on Apr 28, 2005
ColGene, is your only answer to any situation, more laws? This is not the government's doing, this is OUR doing. Get off the "SUV's are the root of all evil" bandwagon! People who still drive them apparently can still afford to, so the price of gas is only a minor nusience. The real problem has nothing to do with the price of gas, it has everything to do with our consumption habits.

I noticed you didn't answer any of my questions. If you aren't willing to cut your consumption, it's pretty pathetic of you to call for govenment intervention to force others to cut theirs.

I'd like to see funding for companies with viable fuel alternative research programsI'd like to see tax breaks for people who buy hybrid carsI'd like to see major government funding to help build up and fix our public transit system


Zoomba. Kudos for at least coming up with some suggestions, instead of the excuses that ColGene seems to live by.

Unfortunatly, these won't help at all for the current "crisis", but they definitely would help for the future.

Mass transit isn't always the best solution though. Here in my city, we have a lot of busses. The problem is, we have very few riders. If the major purpose of mass transit is to cut down on fuel use, ours is a dismal failure. 15 or so busses, dutifully running their routes, with maybe 1 or 2 people on them is not only a waste of fuel, it's a waste of taxpayer money.

Good suggestions in general though!!
on Apr 28, 2005
Island Dog-- Yes, your reply was useless

ParaTes2K

it has nothing to do whether some people can afford to drive gas guzzling SUVs. The issue is increased demand which driving up the price of oil. At times is necessary to impose regulations to get certain things done. It is clear that it individuals and the automobile industry have NOT acted in the best interest of the country . If everyone acted the best interests of this country, we wouldn't need so many laws and regulations. The energy situation is approaching a real crisis and Bush is reacting because of his is falling approval levels. When you hit Americans in the pocketbook as this issue does, people get upset. Again the issue is the policies that are being followed by our government are effectively in solving the problems that face this country! That is why poll after poll shows a drop in the satisfaction with George Bush as president and even less support for his policies . It is time for our elected representatives in Congress to wake up and try something different even if it means going against George W. Bush. Representative Ed Markey, D Mass offered an amendment to require higher mileage in the energy bill that just passed the House. The Republicans voted the amendment down which is a clear indication they are in not interested in resolving one of the most important causes of the problem which is the increased consumption of gasoline. Almost one half of all of the oil is used in the internal combustion engine.
on Apr 28, 2005
Zoomba

That is the subject of this Blog. Bush should propose requiring HIGHER GAS MILEAGE FOR CARS, SUV'S and TRUCKS! Just like Rep. Markey tried to do!
on Apr 28, 2005
ColGene..

The price of oil is higher than it has ever been, yet we haven't changed our habits in the least. Why shoud the government do anything about it? Why should the oil companies do anything about it? Obviously we don't care if the price of gas hits $3.00. Sure, we whine, moan, groan and feebly cry out, "there outta be a law", but putting it bluntly... WE DON'T CARE!

If our elected officials were free to say what they need to, they would yell...

SHUT UP!! Quit expecting us to fix everything so that your life doesn't have to be inconvenienced by your own actions! Do you want freedom, or do you want us to take care of your every whimpering whine?

That is what they should say, but politics being what it is, they can't.

Why can't they? Because we have far too many Americans like you who can't think for yourselves. Far too many who think that the government is the only entity that can do anything. Far too many babies, sitting in a dirty diaper, asking the government to add perfume to your food so your diaper doesn't stink so bad.

ColGene, it isn't the room that stinks, it's your diaper. Go home, change your own diaper and figure out what you can do, before you jump right to the conclusion that your problems are all Prs. Bush's fault and problem.

Again, I see you haven't answered my questions about your own reductions in fuel consumption.
on Apr 28, 2005
Ted -
I wasn't putting them forth as instant fixes to the problem. This isn't a problem with a quick fix but something we're going to have to work on over the long-run.

On the issue of mass transit, it needs to be improved and made to be an actual convenience for most cities and towns before it will be fully utilized. Where I grew up, the bus system made trips to the outlying areas (less than 10mi from downtown) 2 times a day at 8am and 5pm, making it essentially useless since most people had to be at work by 8 and stay until 5. No one will use a system that isn't convenient. It's a catch-22 really. If I could just hop on a bus and get to and from work quickly and easily, I would in a second because that $1.50 token each way beats to hell what I'm paying at the pump every week, but in order to get to work, I have to go into downtown Hartford during morning and evening rush-hour, switch busses, then get another leg to where my office is... A 20min drive takes over an hour on a bus.

Gene-
It is NOT the responsibility of a company to act in the interests of the public. Its responsibility ends beyond safety. There is nothing saying Ford has to make a car that costs less than $50,000 and gets more than 10 miles to the gallon. They set their prices and effeciency at the highest point people are willing to buy at. If people are willing to pay more, they charge more. It's elementary economics. It is not the responsibility of car manufacturers to stop making SUVs, it's not the responsibility of the government to limit SUV sales. If people want lower gas prices, they need to go out and buy more fuel effecient vehicles.

Also, mandating higher gas mileage in cars will increase the engineering costs that go into them, and up their prices on the market accordingly. In terms of psychology, a person is a hell of a lot more inclined to pay $3.00/gal at the pump and refil more often than to pay an additional $5-$10k for a car. Sure, it may be cheaper in the long-run, but the sticker shock is what decides it.

It is OUR responsibility to minimize this crisis, but to do so means personal sacrifices, which we Americans aren't very good at anymore.
on Apr 28, 2005
Well, even a stopped clock is right twice a day....

Overall, I'm going to agree with the Colonel on this one.

Up till now Bush has totally ignored the energy crisis we are in. (That couldn't have anything to do with his being buddy buddy with so many energy company executives could it? Nah.) That consumers are partially to blame with their horse-power and huge-monster-of-a-car obsessions doesn't excuse the government from taking a leadership role in addressing a serious national problem. The government is equally to blame in playing squeaky wheel politics by dropping their standards and their pursuit of alternative energy once the last energy crisis was "over." It's kind of like the "new economy" claims of unending prosperity. Whatever state people are in they expect it to go on forever. That's ridiculous. I'll forgive the unwashed masses for believing such hogwash, but not leadership who should know better.

Our current gas mileage standards are a joke. I'm glad those who can afford the gas guzzlers can also afford the higher gas prices, but not everyone can. Doesn't the increased demand they create help drive up the prices for everyone, regardless of means or personal conservancy? The penalty for such wastefulness may be built-in, but it doesn't affect just them. It's like second-hand smoke. The built-in penalty of higher prices isn't enough, because like a fined corporation, they can easily pay it and continue blithely along. A recent poll in Nevada showed that gas prices would have to be between $2.60 and $2.80 before a majority of drivers would change their habits. ?!?!?! Let's not just encourage conservation with tax breaks, let's penalize wastefulness with fines. Let's tax the suckers based on their gas inefficiency! If they want to buy vehicles that are so grossly wasteful and inefficient let them pay an additional penalty. Then put that additional money into bulking up the national oil reserves or some other such we could use to counteract the bad periods.

As for my personal conservation, my energy use is so low that people are shocked when they see the numbers. I make a game of finding new ways to conserve and seeing just how close to the bone I can cut. On the vehicle front, my '90 Mustang averages 33 M.P.G. in the city. (That's my real world number, not a government estimate.) I fill the tank once a month and leave it at that. When I have the money, I'm going to experiment with building some alternative fuel vehicles. I poke at the plans every once in a while just for fun.

As for this being more Bush bashing from a usual suspect... yep, it is. But Bush is going to be wrong at times so those who habitually criticize him are going to inevitably hit the target sometimes -- as much as it may chaff our hides to admit it.


(Probably needless to say, but I'm already critical of Bush over the energy issue, and also a long time SUV basher. For a good expose of Bush's energy company connections see "The Lies of George W. Bush" by David Corn.)
on Apr 28, 2005
ColGene and Gene Nash, two folks who smell their own diaper and cry that the government doesn't do something about the smell.

Why don't you both just admit that you think the government should play knight in shining armor, buy all the fuel and subsidize the price, so we can pay less at the pump.

Neither of you are willing to admit that it isn't a government problem.

ColGene won't answer my questions, but Gene Nash, maybe you will.

What are you doing to reduce your own consumption of fuel?

also, why should the government or the oil companies care about the price of gas, when We, the People show (through our lack of reduction in consumption when the price goes up)that we don't care?
on Apr 28, 2005
P.S. -- That'll be my only post on the topic. Bash at will. Just remember, the ability to bash does not make the bashing accurate.
on Apr 28, 2005
Oh well, looks like I'll have to answer at least one...

ColGene and Gene Nash, two folks who smell their own diaper and cry that the government doesn't do something about the smell.


Come now, don't you think insulting me like that might cost you some credibility?

If you'll look at my response, you'll note I placed much of the blame with consumers.

Why don't you both just admit that you think the government should play knight in shining armor, buy all the fuel and subsidize the price, so we can pay less at the pump.


And there goes the rest of your credibility.

What are you doing to reduce your own consumption of fuel?


You really didn't read my comment before your knee started jerking, did you?

I already answered it. To wit... As for my personal conservation, my energy use is so low that people are shocked when they see the numbers. I make a game of finding new ways to conserve and seeing just how close to the bone I can cut. On the vehicle front, my '90 Mustang averages 33 M.P.G. in the city. (That's my real world number, not a government estimate.) I fill the tank once a month and leave it at that. When I have the money, I'm going to experiment with building some alternative fuel vehicles. I poke at the plans every once in a while just for fun.

How much less than $20 a month do you think I should spend on gas?

on Apr 28, 2005
Why should we care about the price of oil you ask?

First it is draining monies from the poor and lower middle income Americans to pay the higher gas prices which affects the economy because they don't have money available to spend on other items.

It increases our balance of trade deficit because we pay higher prices for oil.

It complicates our political connections because of the increasing dependency on foreign energy suppliers.

It is driving up inflation, threatening independent truck drivers and the airline industry.

I think that's four GOOD reasons why Bush and the conservatives in Congress should care about the price of oil.
on Apr 28, 2005
Hand in hand...

wait... Bush is Gay??? This Prince is his lover?

Forget oil prices, lets talk about this hand in hand business.


If Bush is gay, this could mean more libreal practices, gay mariage aproaval and all around collapse of the world economy (based on racist, sexist thought about gay men).

What the hell!!!
Who agrees?
2 Pages1 2