Skip to main content

oil platform
(U.S. Coast Guard)

Republican politicians like to take a few key angles on the basic theme of "drill, baby, drill." First off, prices should be rock bottom at all times, because it is the God-given right of Americans to use the maximum possible quantity of fossil fuels, the retail cost of which should therefore not reflect their true costs. Second, the way to keep prices at rock bottom is through the aforementioned "drill, baby, drill" strategy. Third, President Obama is a wild-eyed environmentalist-socialist who is coming between Americans and their God-given right to more oil, and therefore everything is his fault.

That means it would be inconvenient for Republicans to have to acknowledge that:

After declining to levels not seen since the 1940s, U.S. crude production began rising again in 2009. Drilling rigs have rushed into the nation's oil fields, suggesting a surge in domestic crude is on the horizon.

The number of rigs in U.S. oil fields has more than quad­rupled in the past three years to 1,272, according to the Baker Hughes rig count. Including those in natural gas fields, the United States now has more rigs at work than the entire rest of the world.

So ... Obama isn't keeping a stranglehold on domestic oil production in order to appease environmentalists and deny Americans the $10-a-tank gas they deserve? And yet despite the quadrupling of rigs in U.S. oil fields, gas prices are still going up? That sounds like the recipe for this being information that Republican politicians are going to universally ignore, as they've been ignoring it. And meanwhile the alleged promise of drilling keeps us on an unsustainable, harmful path.

Originally posted to Laura Clawson on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 02:36 PM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  "IT'S THE PIPELINE!" (10+ / 0-)

    That's all they keep saying.

    "CANADA IS SENDING ALL OF ITS OIL SANDS OIL TO CHINA!"

    Over and over...

    •  tar sands not oil sands (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FishOutofWater, Siri, eve
    •  Canada recently DID send its first (8+ / 0-)

      shipment of tarsands oil to China as described in this recent DailyKos diary

      there's not much evidence that's affect US prices, however a different pipeline may be having that effect:

      Back to the present, and to answer the question: Yes, the oil price of Brent and WTI exist in parallel universe, with WTI lagging behind Brent. Why? Oversupply of crude in the Midwest. With Canadian imports, and increased oil production in North Dakota, the Midwest gets more oil, which stagnates. In other words, there is a huge bottleneck in moving oil of Cushing. The physical delivery point for New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) futures contracts, Cushing has the largest storage capacity in the US. In 2009 Cushing had shell capacity of 16.3 mmb and working capacity of 37 mmb. According to the US Department of Energy, the shell crude storage by the end of March 2011 was put at 57.9 mmb, while the working storage capacity stood at 48.0 mmb. So, fewer pipelines out of Cushing mean more storage, which in turn, translates to lower oil prices, with excess oil (when compared to Brent).

      WTI is catching on

      Lately, though, WTI has been catching up on Brent, here's why: a new Seaway pipeline, moving oil from Cushing to the Gulf coast. Come April 2012, more of WTI crude oil would arrive in the Gulf coast. Initial estimate indicate 150,000 barrels of crude arriving in the Gulf coast every day (after regulatory approval), increasing to over 400,000 barrels per day by 2013. With the given evidence, looks like WTI is closing in on Brent

      link
      •  US prices are just a reflection of world prices (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mightymouse, Odysseus

        plus a kicker for control of refineries.

        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:59:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  But as the link I provided, and many others (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Odysseus

          out there have documented, there has been a fairly steep disconnect between WTI and world prices the past 2 or 3 years.

          Natural gas, of course, exemplifies this even more - what are Asian prices, 5x those in North America?

          •  I wasn't referring specifically to WTI, but to the (0+ / 0-)

            more generalized market for crude oil.

            I'm sure that specific segments of the market can be affected by structural issues like there being limited number of refineries equipped to refine a specific kind of crude.  Over time, however, those end up getting in sync as it becomes profitable to eliminate bottlenecks.

             

            LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

            by dinotrac on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 12:08:30 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  No! It's the EPA! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Bob Johnson, happymisanthropy

      Somehow, someway, it's the EPA's fault!  Abolish it now!

      •  If the news in this diary gets out (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jerry J, OjaiValleyCali

        to the mainstream media, the Republicans are going to have some 'splainin' to do.  Considering they already have their "blame Obama" meme going for this spring's expected rise in gasoline prices though, neither the Republicans nor the MSM would dare even mention it.

        Maybe it would help matters (or confuse them) if we sent it around.

        "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

        by SueDe on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:28:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  expected? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Jerry J

          Try already happening.

          And I don't think it has very much to do with the price of oil as a raw input.  Maybe it has something to do with distillate exports?  Wasn't it reported within the last few weeks that the U.S. is now a net exporter of gasoline?  Or that it's our BIGGEST export?

          "Mitt Romney has more positions than the Kama Sutra." -- me

          by billlaurelMD on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 11:36:36 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Refined oil is now one of our largest (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            OjaiValleyCali

            exports, if not THE largest.

            That can take many forms, however.  Gasoline, diesel and many other petroleum based products.

            We never imported very much refined product before, so turning around to being a net exporter of refined product is not that big a deal.

            Much of the refined product goes right back to Mexico - where we import a good portion of the crude from.  They don't have the refineries like we do, so they ship us oil and we ship back gasoline/diesel.

            But here's the really important part - There is no shortage here.  Excess capacity at our refineries is due to lack of demand domestically, due to the recession.  Rather than lay off people, the refineries are finding other customers for their product, so they can stay at full capacity.

            So, exporting gasoline when there is no shortage here should not affect price at all domestically.

  •  talking heads of MSM are blaming off-shore (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mightymouse, Siri, shoeless, marleycat

    refineries for continuing high prices and environmental regulation for the lack of domestic refinery production - ah corporatism...

    dangerous voter for a "dangerous president"; Präsidentenelf-maßschach; Warning-Some Snark Above"Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) "Sciant terra viam monstrare."

    by annieli on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 02:41:41 PM PST

  •  And refineries in the U.S. are shutting down (13+ / 0-)

    because demand for fuel is down. The law of supply and demand is being affected by speculators who are buying up crude contracts in anticipation of problems in Iran. It also may be affected by the Kochs hoarding oil - something they did the last time prices were very high with no clear explanation.

    look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

    by FishOutofWater on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 02:49:01 PM PST

    •  Actually (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SammyJames, shoeless, Mindful Nature

      while demand for fuel is down, why bother to ship crude all that distance when the producers can make more money refining locally?  When you buy crude at $110/bbl and sell the refined product at $120/bbl, there's not a lot of margin there.  But if you produce it yourself and pay $30/bbl to lift, then that $120/bbl you get for refined product actually makes a profit.  

      The market has moved the price point on refining, towards the point that third party refiners, without a supply of crude to work with, struggle.  The only other adaptation I know of is the mega-refiners who have integrated chemical manufacturing into their refineries, where they can sell the end products for a lot more than what the market pays for refined product.

  •  Now why wouldn't one of these billionaire (7+ / 0-)

    contributors to the super-pacs throw 50  million at oil futures to help  drive up the price of oil right in front of the election?

    so what is they lose 30% on speculation gone wrong.. but if they can keep oil prices high before the election..isn't that just as good a use of their money as tv ads??

    no one would think of doing that .. would they..

    just sayin..

    •  Do you think throwing fifty million at the oil (6+ / 0-)

      market would have that kind of an effect?

      It would be a tiny drop in the bucket.

      •  Yes -- a tiny drop (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        shoeless

        of oil in the oil bucket barrel.

      •  "Tiny" is an understatement (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dinotrac, mightymouse, jrooth, Odysseus

        They would have to throw several billion a day at the market for a month to have any appreciable upward impact on prices, then they'd lose a ton of money when prices went back down to their natural level.

        Nobody

        a) has that kind of money
        b) wants to lose that kind of money

        $50 million?  Puh leaze!

        All you need is three chords and the truth, man - Jimi Hendrix

        by CharlieHipHop on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:39:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  there is such a thing as leverage.. (0+ / 0-)

          at 20/1.. 50 million would control 1 billion.. have 20-50 people doing this kind of thing with a market as edgy as this one is over Iran.. and it would make a bigger impact than you think

          •  Have you ever traded? (0+ / 0-)

            I have.  Trust me, a margin like that will kill you very quickly -- the slightest tick down will trigger a margin call, and there will be slight ticks down if you're trying to pump things up artificially.

            Believe it or not, the markets do actually work more or less as they're intended to work.  Conspiracy theories about oil price manipulation are absurd.

            All you need is three chords and the truth, man - Jimi Hendrix

            by CharlieHipHop on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 02:51:25 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  does the futures market determine (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      OldDragon, eve, shoeless, CharlieHipHop

      actual prices paid for oil?

      An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

      by mightymouse on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 06:13:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes n/t (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mightymouse

        All you need is three chords and the truth, man - Jimi Hendrix

        by CharlieHipHop on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:37:52 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  how and how much? (0+ / 0-)

          thanks

          An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

          by mightymouse on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 10:06:23 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Futures contracts are for real goods (3+ / 0-)

            I agree to deliver a certain amount of the commodity to you on some future date at a price we agree on today.

            To my knowledge, just about all crude oil is sold this way so "how much?" -- all of it, pretty much.

            All you need is three chords and the truth, man - Jimi Hendrix

            by CharlieHipHop on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 10:13:17 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  My understanding most oil does not go thru (0+ / 0-)

              futures markets.

              Most people in the futures markets (as I understanding) have no ability to deliver oil, and most futures contracts do not result in a delivery of oil.

              However, I would listen to a different explanation.

              An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

              by mightymouse on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 11:16:52 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It used to be otherwise (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mightymouse, FishOutofWater

                Thom Hartman discussed this earlier this week, or perhaps last week.  It used to be that you had to be able to take delivery in order to speculate.  Goldman Sachs got this regulation struck down.

                "It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said." "The War Prayer" by Mark Twain

                by Quanta on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 11:43:14 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  this change was made in the nineties iirc. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AnotherAmericanLie

                  but the question is, does speculating in the futures market significantly affect oil prices, and if so, how and how much?

                  My feeling is that many here, including me, do not have enough info to confidently answer this question. Witness the exchange above betw me and CharlieHipHop. I think I am correct that most global does not go through futures markets. CHH thinks it does.

                  We clearly need some basic info about oil markets to address this question sensibly.

                  It is an important one, because oil prices are rising (today Brent is up over $3.00/barrel - about 3%). People want to be able to explain this. Some people say that speculators will undo Obama's re-election chances by manipulating oil price.

                  An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

                  by mightymouse on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 11:51:49 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  that is my point.. and to argue no one has that (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mightymouse

                    kind of money is not correct..

                    with leverage and the way these markets function you can certainly start a short term run to the up or downside if you have enough money.. but the thing is, when you do these deals you don't "buy" the oil..

                    you buy the right to purchase it at a certain price down the road..

                    so for example.. if oil is at 100 per barrel today.. you might pay a couple dollars to buy it at that price i two months from now..

                    note that you pays only a couple dollars to do that.. to control the purchase of a barrel worth $100 today..

                    so.. 50 million could under this example purchase rights to buy 1 billion..

                    now if you leveraged your 50 million by borrowing , at say 5% you could get 1 billion to invest and control 20 billion oil.. someone who is worth say, 25 billion might be interested in this kind of play.. esp if he really thinks he can also make a speculators profit on the play...

                    and of course there are more than one of these types of guys running around..

                    •  Somebody's still on the hook (0+ / 0-)

                      You would quickly reach a margin call if you were using that much leverage to artificially manipulate the market.

                      Nobody has that kind of money, including the banks.

                      All you need is three chords and the truth, man - Jimi Hendrix

                      by CharlieHipHop on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 02:32:24 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Leverage doesn't work that way (0+ / 0-)

                      $50 million would get you -- at most -- a billion dollars, and with such a slim margin you'd be f%(3d if the price dropped much at all.

                      The daily exchange in oil is $7-9 billion.  You could not move the market with $50 million, and if you tried, you'd be out $50 million damn quick.

                      Furthermore, you'd have to do this day after day, and if the price did happen to inflate artificially, it would drop the instant you stopped pumping in your foolish money, leaving you broke as a joke.  

                      Of course, you might get lucky and the price might rise, but it would have nothing to do with your piddly $50 million/day play.

                      All you need is three chords and the truth, man - Jimi Hendrix

                      by CharlieHipHop on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 02:42:16 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

              •  You're right and wrong (0+ / 0-)
                Most people in the futures markets (as I understanding) have no ability to deliver oil,
                You're right that financiers never physically touch the oil, but the oil is most definitely delivered based on the contract.

                http://www.telegraph.co.uk/...

                I've never heard of any other way of buying or selling large amounts of crude oil.  Though I'm sure deals are made, it's safe to say that the futures market sets the price.  

                All you need is three chords and the truth, man - Jimi Hendrix

                by CharlieHipHop on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 02:38:02 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  POTUS needs to do something here (10+ / 0-)

    This price is being purposely manipulated by speculators, even more so than usual, to create a political issue for Republicans.  I know, I can't prove it, but I know this is happening.

    Never before have so few controlled so many oil futures contracts as right now.

    The Justice Department or Congress needs to start issuing subpoenas on this.

    There is no logical reason for this price increase.

    •  Yes -- let's wait to see what he does. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eve, shoeless

      This president has been deliberate in everything that he has done since taking office. I doubt highly that he isn't formulating, calculating, or otherwise thinking about what to do here.

      He's got me on the edge of my seat -- but one of the things that I love about Obama is how he writes the best endings to his short stories.

      Unlike Michael Crichton (sorry Crichton fans...)

      •  well, I'm no Chrichton fan!!!! (0+ / 0-)

        He's not a good writer - a pretty sorry one IMO.

        no apologies to Chrighton fans, sorry...I calls 'em like I sees 'em.

        the fans of course are always welcome to enjoy whatever suits their fancy...

    •  of course that is what is going on! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      happymisanthropy

      If it is not stopped now, it will work too!   5 dollar a gallon gasoline and nothing done to stop it will be suicide in November.

      It is so very shameful that in 2012 we are still such slaves to oil!!  

      •  Yup (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mightymouse, Odysseus

        And $5-6/gallon oil is how we stop being slaves.

        Americans by and large don't give a shit about the environment, global warming, fossil fuel depletion, or any other similar issue.

        This is unfortunately as true of working class Americans as it is of the rich. Americans will write on surveys that "the environment" is a high priority, but they continue to want to drive around endlessly.

        Politicians like to support this as well. Look at all the support to the American auto industry, an industry that should be shrinking sharply as we stop building crap all over the landscape and start smart urban planning that involves walkable areas and light rail. But Americans want their McMansions, so here we are still.

        The only thing, and I mean the only thing that will stop Americans from excessive gasoline usage is high prices at the pump. That's it. Any other solution will not work.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:03:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  The US is not drilling, drilling, drilling (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    auapplemac

    We are drilling more, and oil production is rising, all good things. However, we are the only developed country in the world that keeps large oil and gas deposits off limits. Every other country has a plan to, over time, fully exploit it's oil and gas reserves. Brazil's economy is roaring not because it uses sugar cane to power it's autos, but because a huge new very deep water oil and gas fields have been found offshore and the world knows that Brazil will go out and explore and develop those fields.

    I don't understand how we can damage our economy with such large balance of trade deficits and the loss of thousands of high paying jobs by keeping so many productive areas off limits.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 02:51:33 PM PST

    •  You use the word "we" as in (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SammyJames, shoeless, Odysseus

      there is an all-inclusive American policy that takes all Americans in to account when deciding what goes down. Its the corporations and their government lackeys that decide energy policy. If current subsidies were redirected to alternative energy development and retro-fitting, American wouldn't need half the fossil fuels we use now.

      •  prettyobvious - that's not true (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SammyJames, eve, Odysseus

        I am a big believer and champion of alternative energy. I was a seed round investor in SunPower (the largest US solar company) in 1988 and have been an active investor and mentor in this space ever since. I am currently supporting a small group of very talented scientists and engineers who I think may have the answer to large scale storage of electricity, something which currently prevents utility scale use of alternatives. Until solar or wind can provide 24/7/365 power, and we have a completely different national grid, alternatives will play a small role in providing electric power. The cost of providing these is an order of magnitude more than the current "subsidies" provided to the fossil fuel industry. What the US needs is cheaper energy, if it wants to continue to be a manufacturing power. Manufacturing is very energy intensive and countries with low energy costs have an advantage.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 07:16:33 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Where are these areas kept off limits? (5+ / 0-)

      I think we are drilling this country about as hard and strong as possible right now.  

      I would like to see some verification for your statement.

      You must be talking about off shore drilling.  But I don't think Miami Beach wants oil rigs.

      •  The pro-drillers would offer example #1: (0+ / 0-)

        Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

        The coastal plain, said to contain a gazillion potential barrels of oil (only the oil companies know the exact amount, and they ain't telling), is off limits to drilling.

        As it should be.

        That land is incredibly valuable for other things, rather than just a spigot pouring more oil into the Trans-Alaska Pipeline.

        The plain is No. 1 on the drillers' hit list.

    •  Probably because its intelligent to do so. (12+ / 0-)

      Quite frankly, it makes strategic sense to buy up everyone else's oil and saving ours. Drinking their milkshakes so to speak.

      Over the long haul, when they run out, we will have plenty in reserve.

    •  Sure. And Brazil is the perfect country (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      shoeless, mightymouse

      to emulate. It isn't like, you know, they're destroying half of the Amazon rain forests, or setting up even more McMeat farms to export even more beef to hungry uric-acid lovers here at home.

      Seriously? I don't understand how you don't understand why we "damage our economy," while simultaneously protecting millions of acres of wildlife that we can use for important things -- like sightseeing, preventing huge dust storms from overtaking major metropolitan centers, preventing crops from drying up and leaving fallow ground for generations, causing tornadoes and wildfires...

      Do you really need to have all of this explained to you? Or are you just being all emotional?

    •  We don't have to use it at all or very little (0+ / 0-)

      if we would get off our collective a#$%# and change our oil dependency!

    •  Re (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Odysseus, happymisanthropy
      I don't understand how we can damage our economy with such large balance of trade deficits and the loss of thousands of high paying jobs by keeping so many productive areas off limits.
      We're going to need that oil later desperately when oil depletion really starts to kick in, it would be stupid to pump it now. For what, so soccer moms can keep driving their SUVs around alone?

      (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
      Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

      by Sparhawk on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:08:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nothing to do with soccer moms. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jennybravo

        Everything to do with oil companies' selling that oil and reaping the profits NOW - raise stock prices NOW.  Investors want to collect dividends NOW.  Land owners want to collect those royalties NOW.  The future is for wusses.

        These are the same people who complain that their children will have to "pay off the national debt."

        "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

        by SueDe on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:41:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  "areas of limits" (0+ / 0-)

      are mostly places that don't have any oil to start with.  We are already saving quite a few times as much oil with improved fuel efficiency than exists in ANWR, for example.

      Ask your barista what her degree is in.

      by happymisanthropy on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 12:47:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  with the prospect of $5/gal. gas by 2013, perhaps (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SammyJames, shoeless

    the crises will finally converge to declare all domestic oil a strategic national resource and just let them make their analogies to Hugo Chavez in the WH.

    dangerous voter for a "dangerous president"; Präsidentenelf-maßschach; Warning-Some Snark Above"Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) "Sciant terra viam monstrare."

    by annieli on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 03:06:22 PM PST

    •  WTF? (6+ / 0-)

      We don't have a Saudi Arabia and an Iraq inside our borders!  We use ~20 million bbl/day.  We produce between 5-6 million bbl/day.  Saudi only produces 9 million bbl/day....  

      So where's all this oil coming from?  Everywhere else, of course.  We're pigs.  We can't drill out of this problem.  Just can't be done under any conditions.  The administration can't fix this at all - unless we get rid of 75% of the oil demand.  Good luck with that.

      •  Demand is way down (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mightymouse, fladem, ZedMont, shoeless

        EIA data show a big drop in gasoline consumption.

        look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

        by FishOutofWater on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 05:40:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  somewhat down. in the USA. not globally though (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TomFromNJ

          An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

          by mightymouse on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 06:15:27 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Demand - I found this from 2-7-2012: (0+ / 0-)

          UPDATE 3-EIA boosts 2012, 2013 oil demand growth forecast

          NEW YORK, Feb 7 (Reuters) - The U.S. Energy Information Administration on Tuesday boosted its forecast for global oil demand growth for the first time since October and forecast the market would tighten as gains in non-OPEC production lag.

          The U.S. government agency hiked estimates for 2012 oil demand growth from last month's report by 50,000 barrels per day for this year to 1.32 million bpd. It revised 2013 growth up by 20,000 bpd to 1.49 million bpd.

          It is the first time the EIA had increased its global oil demand growth forecast in four months, having trimmed expectations by a total of 270,000 bpd in the previous three reports.

          and, specific to the US:
          U.S. consumption is expected to be largely flat in 2012 at 18.87 million bpd, the EIA said. Demand growth is centered in countries outside the developed economies of the OECD, with non-OECD consumption growth revised up to 1.48 mln bpd to total 43.80 million bpd.
          These are forecasts, of course. I am having a hard time digging up actual recent usage. Do you have a link?

          thanks

          An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

          by mightymouse on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 06:41:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  some of it comes from nat gas wells&production (0+ / 0-)

        we import a net of about 8 million barrels per day of "oil and petroleum products" per EIA.

        However, this is confusing, because we import crude and export refined ... so maybe the amount of crude we import is more than 8 million bpd.

        nonetheless, there is a sizable amount of fuel that comes from "natural gas liquids." This article says now the US produces 4 million bpd of this stuff.

        I don't know, that seems like a lot.

        An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

        by mightymouse on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 06:28:44 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Okay, crude oil imports only are here (0+ / 0-)

          EIA graph

          latest number is 8.72 million barrels/day.

          so - if we produce 5.6 mpd of crude, we import 8.7, and we use about 18.7 that leaves a gap of about 4.4 million barrels/day. which I believe is filled mostly by natural gas liquids.

          An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

          by mightymouse on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 06:56:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Doesn't matter what the cause of rising prices (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fladem

        is. The result of higher prices is very bad news for Dems.

        The meme out there has been that Obama and the Dems cut production (I know that's not true, but the message is already imbedded in the voter minds).

        Finger pointing by the Rs is a winning message for them.

        Most people don't feel all of the problems we face, but all of people feel their wallets shrink when they pay for heating oil and gasoline.

        It's in their faces. Can't be ignored.

        It's a giant FAIL. And, it's not easily changed.

        Didn't we take glee in blaming Bush II for the last surge in prices? The R's will do the same with the same enjoyment.

        Progressives will win when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

        by auapplemac on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 06:34:54 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Half of our oil comes from up north... (0+ / 0-)

        O, Canada!

        (Well, about 40%. Close enough though...)

      •  Actually.... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Odysseus, happymisanthropy

        .... at one time we had the largest oil reserves in the world -- much larger than Saudi Arabia.

        We've used most of it up already in a scant 75 years, during most of which we had a much lower population than we do now.

        Doesn't that tell anybody anything?

        All you need is three chords and the truth, man - Jimi Hendrix

        by CharlieHipHop on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:46:32 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  $5 a gallon -- oooooooooooooo.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Odysseus

      Like, as in --

      Try Great Britain sometime. People there routinely pay about 25% to 30% more per-gallon (well, per LITER of Petrol, of course) than what we pay for gas here.

      I'm not saying that this is a winning argument here in the states, especially when Republicans and right-leaning independents love to criticize "European ideals" (despite that most of our own ideals came from Europe...) but hey -- okay. Fine.

      We'll have it their way for now. Maybe someday, people here in the United States will wake up and realize that the ability to drive a hundred miles every day isn't like, you know, "freedom." In fact, the ability to walk to work in five minutes or less is. But try telling that anyone living in a suburb, edge city, et cetera now...

  •  Because (0+ / 0-)

    The tax cuts to the masses were extended, that's all folks!!

    Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

    by jimstaro on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 03:09:57 PM PST

    •  And it will be used up paying to fill the gas (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jimstaro

      tanks of the masses.

      Progressives will win when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

      by auapplemac on Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 06:36:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Was (0+ / 0-)

        When this all started and never came back down even before the bush put his signature to the tax cut bill and the masses still think they got a tax cut, while the wealthy write off those types of needs and we pay their bill as well!

        Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

        by jimstaro on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 08:59:10 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Some information on why US oil (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SammyJames

    prices are "surging" is given in this link

    Apparently a new pipeline is in place to take oil from Cushing offshore, thus ameloriating the anomolous price differential between WTI and Brent prices that have spikes as high as $20/bbl over the past couple of years.

    Also, ethanol subsidies were recently phased out, adding a few cents a gallon at the gas pump (which everyone notices).

  •  and the oil industry (4+ / 0-)

    is making record profits, baby, record profits...

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 08:33:17 AM PST

  •  Always a bit irritated (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomFromNJ, mightymouse

    When high gasoline prices become a big issue.  Isn't it usually a sign of an improving economy?  And high gas prices have helped affect where and how we chose to live (the rise of pedestrian-friendly spaces, etc., and the slow death of exurbs and strip malls).

  •  for the first time in decades (0+ / 0-)

    The US is a net exporter of oil.  

    Now how does that square with the "shortage-driven-price-hike" hysteria?

    It is all about money.  And making more of it.  The law of supply and demand has been repealed, thanks to the efforts of Exxon-Mobil, etc.

    •  No it's not... (4+ / 0-)
      The US is a net exporter of oil.  
      It's a net exporter of refined fuels, and there's a huge difference:

      http://www.energybulletin.net/...

      contraposition.org - thoughts on energy, the environment, and society.

      by barath on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 08:49:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  technically, ok (0+ / 0-)

        But how does being net exporter of jet fuel, heating oil, and gasoline not put a serious crimp in the "we just ain't got enough supply is the reason prices are going up" argument?

        •  Well, it makes sense globally (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kay dub, mightymouse, Odysseus

          People in industrializing nations get more marginal benefit per unit of fuel than we do (since they use much less than we do), so what you might say is happening is that we're slowly being priced out of the global oil / fuels market.

          contraposition.org - thoughts on energy, the environment, and society.

          by barath on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:04:26 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  an interesting contrary view (0+ / 0-)

            positing that global petroleum demand is actually decreasing, is put forth by Chis Cook, formerly of of the International Petroleum Exchange

            we see North Sea oil being shipped – for the first time since 2008 – half way around the world to find Far East buyers. We also see Petroplus, a major independent Swiss refiner, crippled by inflated crude oil prices, and shutting down three refineries because demand for its products has disappeared, and it can no longer finance crude oil purchases now that banks have pulled its credit lines.

            In my world, refineries closed due to reduced demand for their products imply a reduction in demand for crude oil: but not, apparently, on the Planet Hype of investment banks with funds to sell.

            History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme, and my forecast is that the crude oil price will fall dramatically during the first half of 2012, possibly as low as $45 to $55 per barrel.

        •  net exporter of end product (0+ / 0-)
          But how does being net exporter of jet fuel, heating oil, and gasoline not put a serious crimp in the "we just ain't got enough supply is the reason prices are going up" argument?
          Because you need raw materials to make the finished product, (refrain from calling name beginning with "b" and ending with "s"). A rise in the prices of the inputs will hurt our exports of finished product too.

          All you need is three chords and the truth, man - Jimi Hendrix

          by CharlieHipHop on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:50:51 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  no - we are net exporter of refined products (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Odysseus

      We import 8.7 million barrels per day of crude.

      An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

      by mightymouse on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 10:08:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  BTW (0+ / 0-)

    Natural gas prices are very low--so low that some fields are being shut down.

    Apres Bush, le deluge.

    by melvynny on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 08:38:28 AM PST

  •  Tortured logic (0+ / 0-)

    Gas prices are going up because we aren't the sole provider of oil on earth.

    We are drilling and gas prices are going up, therefore we should stop drilling is logic twisted and beaten into a pulp. It doesn't make any sense.

    The fact that so much of the world's oil comes from a region known for instability which leads to constant flucuations in oil, which is absolutely necessary even if you hate that fact, is all the more reason we need to increase domestic production...in addition to finding other sources of alternative energy.

    Sheesh.

  •  Oil production has been flat since 2005 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mightymouse

    Globally:

    Since then prices have of course gone up quite a bit.  That's because demand is rising from China and India while production stays flat.  It's a pretty simple equation, really.

    Jeffrey Brown looks at the data and shows that net exports is a big deal, and is something that's totally ignored:

    http://www.aspousa.org/...

    http://www.aspousa.org/...

    We're at peak oil (really a plateau), and the best studies from Hirsch, Skrebowski, and others say that by 2014-2015 global production will start declining at a rate of 2-5% per year.  If this is what a global production plateau feels like, imagine what the decline will feel like.

    contraposition.org - thoughts on energy, the environment, and society.

    by barath on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 08:47:19 AM PST

  •  Laws must be passed (0+ / 0-)

    I don't care if he looks like a "wild-eyed environmentalist-socialist" laws must be passed to ensure our survival!  

    Laws such as:

    electric cars must be 75% of the private vehicles on the road by 2020.

    companies with fleets of gas powered trucks must pay for that privilege

    vehicle purchases for the poor, as long as it is electric, would be provided for by the government in some way

    Mandatory car pool or car sharing laws and policies in urban areas

    FINES! FINES! FINES!

    If they would just pass them, in a few years these ideas would not look so extreme.  We must let our congress people that environmental concerns are a fore front of the liberal base's demands.  We are not asking anymore, we are demanding it!   Oil prices are a concern to us too...so we simply DEMAND that they act in our interest by ending (not slowing down) but ending our use of fossil fuels to the barest of minimums!

  •  GOP is going all out Goebbels. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    annieli

    The lead time from getting a Federal permit to commercially producing oil from offshore is 10 years..

    Let that sink in: nothing Obama's done or not done will affect the price of oil until 2018 or so.

    This summer's oil price is because of supply decisions made in 2002 and beforehands.

    When the GOP blames Obama for this summer's gas price, it's an example of the Big Lie Technique, pure and simple/

  •  Speculators (0+ / 0-)

    driving up prices, based on middle-east unrest/supply disruption (real and imagined), an improving economy, greed ...

    Considering how vital the price of oil is to the health of the economy, it boggles the mind that we're still at the mercy of rampant and unbridled speculation in the commodities markets.

    Just like Enron.

  •  CFTC has NOT done its job of (0+ / 0-)

    getting rid of excessive speculation in the oil market.

    It is up to Democrats in the Senate to PUT PRESSURE on the CFTC to do its job.  Dodd/Frank was passed in 2010 and cutting oil speculation has not occurred.

    President Obama, January 9, 2012: "Change is hard, but it is possible. I've Seen it. I've Lived it."

    by Drdemocrat on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 08:54:59 AM PST

    •  speculation is a crucial factor (0+ / 0-)

      Some commentors have said the cause of the oil price risk is not important.  I disagree.  the perceived cause of Gas price hikes could harm the Democrats. If Obama's policies can be credibly blamed for high gas prices, (he cancelled the XL pipeline!!) we'll be living in a sad world.

      In contrast, if Obama can run against the futures market speculators as the cause of high gas prices, that would help the D's.

      I am relying on information from "The Asylum," by Leah-McGrath Goodman, who blames the CFTC's poor regulation of speculators in the Nymex oil futures market for much of the bizarre oil price hikes.

      These speculators bid up the price of oil everytime a refinery valve freezes up even though those events have a less-than-trivial impact on oil supplies.

      This book claimed that the CFTC recently spent millions of dollars and 3 years of research on oil price fixing, including "hiding" inventories on tanker ships, and didn't even produce a report.

      On other issues, VClib said we are raising power prices by keeping oil sources off-limits. First, we don't use oil to generate power so that's not even relevant. Second, the only places off-limits are the Cal and Florida coasts and the ANWR. Everywhere else is wide-open.

      The Denbury company, for instance, is among the leaders of injecting carbon dioxide into played-out oil fields in several states to wring out previously inaccessible oil. Their production is skyrocketing. Obama's DOE is subsidizing them with about $1 billion in loans to their CO2 suppliers.

      Obama (and his supporters) could tout that funding, which both reduces greenhouse gasses and increases oil supplies, against Republican BS.

      Finally, the US refinery industry has in fact built several new refineries in the last couple of decades; they've been built within the footprint of existing refineries.  These include multi-billion expansions at Whiting, Indiana, Port Arthur Texas, Garyville, Louisiana and many others.  

      Two or three brand new refineries (AZ, ND, SD) are also fully permitted, but the developers chose not to build.  The gov't did not block the new construction, the economics didn't work.

      This is important as a rebuttal point to Republicans who claim that D's have prevented any new refinery construction.

  •  But, but.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    althea in il

    So...

    The number of rigs in U.S. oil fields has more than quad­rupled in the past three years to 1,272,
    But from what I've heard, this really happened when Bush was President and Obama has put in place an eleventy-billion percent tax and incredibly onerous regulations that means all these wells now can't pump anything but fruit juice to China.

    (The information in this comment soon to be headline news on Fox Nation.)

  •  Big Change is Coming (0+ / 0-)

    The best kept secret by the oil companies is that the world market is set to change.  With new drilling techniques, drilling in the Rocky Mountain West (Colorado, Wyoming, Montana and North Dakota) is about to change the world ecomony.  Previously unproductive formations are being drilled with horizontal drilling and producing amazing discoveries.  A well was recently drilled by Conoco just south of Denver International Airport.  It is producing 15,000 bbl per month of oil from a 320 acre parcel!  Oil companies are leasing up minerals for outrageous bonuses and royalties ($2,500 per acre up front and a 20% royalty).  The likes of this has never been seen in this area.  

    If you know the area of land in these states that is in the drill area, you know that this is big.millions and millions of bbls. of oil, previously thought to be unproductive in areas mostly just high prairie grassland.  Easy to get to , easy to drill, oil.  It's coming folks.

    •  The oil estimates for the Bakken (0+ / 0-)

      formation still seem to be a bit contentious... The latest official estimate of recoverable oil I know of from USGS puts it between 3 to 4 billion barrels (not insubstantial, but US consumption goes through that amount annually).

      It's a shale formation, so a lot of the recovery would also require hydrofracking, which is receiving quite a bit of attention for its environmental impact.

      I worry that the region's economic boom has less to do about actual long-term potential (from both a production and environmental sustainability standpoint), and is more just an effort to start drilling on as many possible sites to avoid statutory expiration of the leases.

  •  Gas is still too cheap (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ocschwar, Odysseus

    America needs a balanced energy program where pricing and conservation are used to encourage wise use and manufacturing including mass transit.  

  •  The oil, it is a'peaking! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    barath, ocschwar

    We're running into the limits of how much oil can be produced at one time.  Conventional oil supplies have peaked, most of what supply growth that exists is being supplied by unconventional sources(tar sands, oil in shale rock, ultra deep water).  These sources are having trouble keeping up with the declines in conventional production so we have a plateau in oil production while the demand for the product is ever rising. How do we moderate demand to fit the supply?  Higher prices.
    Speculation doesn't help matters, nor does the geopolitical realities of the areas of the world that happen to have the most oil(Middle East, Africa, Venezuela, etc).  But the primary cause of the high oil prices is the fact that the world economy would ideally like more oil than can be realistically produced now.

    Frothy, Mittens, Wifeswapper and Gold Bug, surely Robert Smigel can make an animated hit out of this Clown Show.

    by Blue man in Red Land on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:03:12 AM PST

  •  New Oil - Deep, Dirty, Dangerous, Expensive (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mightymouse, Odysseus

    We will continue to find new oil at $150 a barrel, $200 a barrel, $300 a barrel as we develop new expensive extraction technologies.

    The days when we found pools of oil lying around on the surface, like The Le Brea Tar Pits are long gone.

    There’s always free cheddar in a mousetrap, baby

    by bernardpliers on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:04:24 AM PST

  •  Sigh (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus

    Trying to tell the average American that oil is a fungible commodity and when you only have 3% of the World's reserves, no amount of drilling will make any difference is like beating your head against the wall. Some people just don't get it.
    So many want to blame government for problems like this, but it's really more to do with market forces and speculation.

    Just another day in Oceania.

    by drshatterhand on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:08:03 AM PST

  •  The fix is in; we've been set up; there is no (0+ / 0-)

    free market!?

    The radical Republican party is the party of oppression, fear, loathing and above all more money and power for the people who robbed us.

    by a2nite on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:09:47 AM PST

  •  No one could have predicted.... (0+ / 0-)

    It really irks me that some how we continue to do things (drill, austerity) that literally makes things worse because the 1% have used their propaganda machine and donations to corrupt our politicians, in both parties...

    "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

    by justmy2 on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:24:58 AM PST

  •  More offshore drilling on the way.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mightymouse

    Hard to understand oil industry complaints about Obama's offshore drilling policy. Gulf of Mexico production rising and seems likely to continue to rise, see:

    http://gcaptain.com/...

  •  Their new spin.... (0+ / 0-)

    The newest take on this from the Repubs is not drilling that's the problem (or lack thereof), it's that the EPA has prevented enough new refineries from coming on line.

    Of course, none of this actually addresses the reality of what
    causes prices to rise and fall: speculation and demand.

    And today we have Santorum saying we need to push coal to the max....notwithstanding it's the dirtiest energy source around.

  •  Well, Duh. All those Chinese, Indians, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus

    Indonesians and other emerging economy types who are out there buying cars want to drive them, and that means buying fuel.

    Fossil fuel is a dead-end technology: continuing to deplete a fixed resource as more and more people demand a piece of what's left guarantees higher and higher prices.

    Spending so much as 1 governmental dime to support petroleum-based fuel is lunacy.  National security -- especially in the broader sense that incorporates a vibrant economy -- requires us to be rushing headlong into energy sources that won't dry up.

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:58:37 AM PST

  •  Threatening Iran = rising price of oil (0+ / 0-)

    Iran just cut off oil to France and Britain in anticipation of those countries joining the US boycott of Iranian oil. That means the price of oil is going up, up, up because Europe is suddenly scrambling for oil.
    Iran halts oil shipments to Britain, France

    [Iran's] semiofficial Mehr news agency... also said the National Iranian Oil Company has sent letters to some European refineries with an ultimatum to either sign long-term contracts of two to five years or be cut off.

    Mehr did not specify which countries were sent the ultimatum, but Spain, Italy and Greece are among Europe's biggest buyers of Iranian oil.

    The spike in the price of oil -- throughout the world --
    is in response to the US threat to punish any nation that does business with Iran's Central Bank.
    Read Pepe Escobar on this

    India and China are just saying "No" to the US although China has the stronger hand.
    India's dilemma: How to pay for Iranian oil

    India does not have the flexibility of China, whose economic power gives it genuine independence. China pays for Iranian oil with the yuan, which it is trying to put forward as an international trading currency. India does not have that freedom.
    Pepe Escobar on how the oil embargo against Iran that the US insists upon is forcing oil prices upward and hurting Europe.
    The Iranian oil embargo blowback
  •  When did Oil become socialized? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    billlaurelMD, schnecke21

    I hear many, especially Republicans, discuss US oil and "our" oil, but oil produced in the US is no different than oil produced somewhere else.  The US hasn't socialized oil.  It belongs to the multinational corporations that pump in out of the ground.  "We" don't own the oil produced in the US.

    Oil is a fungible asset.  There is no "we" in the oil production business unless you own some oil company stock.

  •  This need to be an AD right NOW. Where are our (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    billlaurelMD

    billionaires?  Heck, millionaires.  $ 56 K for the SuperPac?  Srsly?

    Now is the time to get this out on TV, before the lie that 'BO caused it' solidifies into truthiness.  Clinton knew that.  The political op of this WH never seems to have learned - yeah, I mean you, Axelrod.  You win elections in the electronic livingroom.

    Thugs have Fauxaganda and billionaire-toys SuperPs. We have chance to win an historically large victory here.  If we seize it.  We are not. Much as I hate CU, we will not only not win huge, we will lose if this unilateral disarmament continues.

  •  Who benefits from higher gas pump prices??? (0+ / 0-)

    It's time to end the subsidies and stop this crazy talk about oil and tar sands.  The only reason to extract this oil for the sands is if the price of oil goes over a certain number to make it cost effective as it is expensive to get oil from tar sands.. They are pushing for that.....  

    By the way, who has large holdings/investments in tar sands??  

    The Koch Brothers.

    Who are one of the  oil commodity speculators that can bid the prices higher if they want?

    The Koch Brothers.

    Who benefits from the energy attack on our President?

    The Koch Brothers.

    Follow the money as they are pissed that President Obama killed the Keystone Pipeline scam, and this is but one of the ways that they can fight back.

    "..tinfoil hats have become a common, if not mandatory, G.O.P. fashion accessory." Paul Krugman, New York Times Op-Ed, 2/12/2012

    by LamontCranston on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 03:17:54 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site