The Real Cause of High Gas Prices: Libruls

The problem isn't oil depletion, greedy oil corporations, or evil Arabs.  And it's certainly not that we use too much.  No, the problem is liberals:

http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=14352

The trouble with this country isn't that we don't have the technology or the resources to free ourselves from the grip of foreign oil dependency. We do. Our problem is that, for the past 25 years or more, we've let a bunch of whinny, let's-all-hold-hands-and-sing-kumbyah environmentalists undermine our viability. We've allowed these tree-hugging peons to set us back economically, because we haven't had the guts to confront them and their representatives in public office, head on, and expose their political correctness for the dangerous lunacy that it is.

I'm not really surprised.  I expect the attacks from both ends of the political spectrum to heat up as oil prices keep rising.  The right will blame "tree-huggers."  The left will blame the Big Oil monopoly.  Few want to think about oil depletion.  

But wait, here's a solution:

http://houston.bizjournals.com/houston/stories/2005/02/21/newscolumn1.html

A Texas thinktank predicts that China will collapse in sixth months.  This will cause oil to drop back to under $30 a barrel by the end of the year.  Fearing the political instability, foreign investment will flow into the safe haven of the United States, propping up the dollar as a nice side benefit.

The article claims the thinktank is nonpartisan, but they sound conservative to me, blaming China's incipient collapse on their failure to fully embrace the free market.  

And gee, I guess Wal-Mart will be in trouble.  They get 80% of their goods from China.

On a more serious note, UPI reported today that the real reason for Crown Prince Abdullah's visit to the U.S. was to inform President Bush about the condition of King Fahd.  The long-bedridden King is rumored to be clinically dead.  

Crown Prince Abdullah, Fahd's brother, has been the defacto head of state for some time now, but the succession may not be as smooth as expected, at least according to this article:

http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Politics&loid=8.0.159874842&par=0

If I had to bet, I'd say Saudi Arabia is probably more likely to collapse than China.  In any case, I'm not planning to buy a Hummer any time soon.

•  the real problem...

  is reading anything on chronwatch; from what I've seen in the past, they are nuttier than a crate of fruitcakes over there. How'd you find that one, Google News?

  by pb on Mon May 02, 2005 at 10:20:38 PM PDT

  •  LOL!

    I have wingnut friends who actually read these sites regularly, and send me links in order to "prove" they're right and I'm wrong.

    by randym77 on Tue May 03, 2005 at 04:22:00 AM PDT

•  China's gonna collapse in six months?

  Riiiiiiiiiight. That's the best one I've heard all night.

  by incertus on Mon May 02, 2005 at 10:36:33 PM PDT

  •  I hope they don't....

    want to cash in all them IOU's from the filing cabinet.

    by God loves goats on Mon May 02, 2005 at 11:55:45 PM PDT

•  The "oil Problem" and who is to blame

  I find this finger pointing quite familiar. In my computer consulting experiences, passing the buck has always been part of the mess in determining "who dunit"---meanwhile, the problem continues to go unsolved because all the people who could team together to fix it are busy pointing fingers.
  My suggestion is ask the right questions:
  

  1. Where can we come up with affordable personal transportation that doesn't depend on only one source to power it?
     
  2. Once we figure out what transportation options we have, how can we maintain a steady supply of whatever energy source(s) we need to keep the transportation devices running efficiently, cleanly, and safely?
     
  3. Maintenance of transportation device needs to be affordable and not eat up all the fuel savings dollars by costing too much.
     
  4. And so on. . . types of focused questions, used to help solve almost any technical problems.
     
  5. Get away from bash you bash me type of argumentation, since the problem won't go away no matter how many people you blame.
     
  6. Don't give up! Most technical problems need some serious brain power, but not something that a bunch of good brains can't handle.
     
  7. Don't bite the hand that comes up with the cool toy that gets you from point A to B. Especially if it meets all of the above criteria for a damn good transportation device. Work with the inventors/producers to improve the new toys.
     
  8. Reinvent, reinvent, reinvent.

  by Lewstermax on Mon May 02, 2005 at 11:02:35 PM PDT

•  As they said in Apocolyse Now

  The shit is piling up so fast you need wings to stay above it.

  The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has assessed that the United States is sitting on as much as 112 billion barrels of recoverable oil. And even if they've overestimated the true amount by, say, 30 percent, we've still got enough oil to meet our energy needs for many years to come, yet the majority of these reserves continue to go untapped. The main reason for this is federal environmental laws, which have effectively made drilling off limits in much of the country (tens of millions of land acres), as well as in most areas off shore.

  This is no doubt USGS's F5 number (meaning there is a 5% chance there is this much oil). The USGS's mean estimate of US oil as of 11/04 is 40 billion barrels. Many think the USGS is full of shit anyway.

  Actual proven reserves for the US are 21-29 billion barrels of oil.    US production peaked in 1970 and proven reserves peaked in 1959 (Before the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts). In other words, we aren't in some "blip" caused by overly burdensome regulation. We are in full blown decline. Of course, even the pubs know that, this is just red meat for their angry, angry base.

  Conservative crybabies have to blame someone.
  

  by Olds88 on Tue May 03, 2005 at 12:09:00 AM PDT

  •  I agree, we have no reason to tap the last

    of the oil reserves.
    What we have from our oil-crazed anti-tree huggers:
    More stupid people in Washington thinking with their wallets, not their gray matter.
    These same people need to get lives, since lots of what they do is spend more than they take in, so the Bushies have to payback, payback, payback---by get oil money, get oil money, get oil money.
    Simple but stupid personal finances.
    I would like to buy a hybrid vehicle, but I'm one of the wealthy poor---I've got the desire, but not enough change. So I'm stuck not driving unless its an emergency, or a well planned adventure.
    Stupid people think that dying with the most toys is the way to go---oil money is one of those stupid things. And the yacht to burn it, and so on. . .

    by Lewstermax on Tue May 03, 2005 at 11:15:49 PM PDT