How is it skewed?Well for starters the unemployment number is skewed so I didn't go any further.
He doesn't have anything to do with the oil numbers, either. If anything, his administration has been against oil exploration and production. But now his followers want to take credit because he happened to be in office when the fracing boom kicked off? Laughable.Well for starters the unemployment number is skewed so I didn't go any further.
It's more reflection of the fact that when gas was going up Republicans were blaming him when he had nothing to do with it.He doesn't have anything to do with the oil numbers, either. If anything, his administration has been against oil exploration and production. But now his followers want to take credit because he happened to be in office when the fracing boom kicked off? Laughable.
I agree the president has little to do with the numbers but since BiPo is using them as a badge of honor for his own agenda I think he should know the real numbers.He doesn't have anything to do with the oil numbers, either. If anything, his administration has been against oil exploration and production. But now his followers want to take credit because he happened to be in office when the fracing boom kicked off? Laughable.
That meme specifically mentioned oil imports, and that was what I commented on. And I don't care what somebody else has said. VA trying to blame gas prices on Obama is no more stupid than people that try to give Obama credit for the falling prices of gas. Different side of the same retarded coin.It's more reflection of the fact that when gas was going up Republicans were blaming him when he had nothing to do with it.
So were those numders not skewed in 2007?
I agree he should get minimal credit just as minimal blame.That meme specifically mentioned oil imports, and that was what I commented on. And I don't care what somebody else has said. VA trying to blame gas prices on Obama is no more stupid than people that try to give Obama credit for the falling prices of gas. Different side of the same retarded coin.
The falling prices go hand in hand with production and surplus of oil from our own shores. And like I said, Obama has been against that, so not sure how he should get credit now (as this meme is showing) for our country using more of our own oil.
I know they are old numbers but what I was saying is t the current +umbers are also skewed. This was n example of how it is done.So were those numders not skewed in 2007?
Are they using a different equation or criteria now?
Did these type of people just happen after 2007?
Discouraged: People who have stopped looking for work because they believe that there’s no work available for them.
Marginally attached: People who’d like to work and are physically able, but haven’t looked for work in the last four weeks.
Involuntary part-timers: People who want to work full-time, but can’t find a full-time position.
Using this same logic those 2007 numbers are just as skewed.
But he has done little to curtail production that was ramping up before he took office which discredits this notion that he was against anything going on during this boom.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/8/editorial-obamas-unemployment-rate-lies-exposed-by/How is it skewed?
What's the difference between 2008 to 20015?
And like I said nothing he spearhaedee or did curtailed the oil boom and exsporting oil could actually raise domestic prices because domestic supplies would be competing with the world market.
Ok.
EDIT: Here's a little something for your "notion discrediting". And this was just from a month ago. There's plenty more from the last 6 years or so. And I'm pretty sure you've heard of the Keystone Pipeline. You should check out the association between Obama and Warren Buffet over that little deal. Highly entertaining.
Obama stands firm against lifting oil export ban despite potential economic benefits
By Ben Wolfgang - The Washington Times - Sunday, October 11, 2015
By threatening to veto a bill greenlighting oil exports, President Obama last week sent a powerful message to Congress and to the American public: The administration is unlikely to sign off on any measures expanding fossil fuel production and sales, even if those measures carry economic benefits for the U.S. and national security benefits for key allies around the world.
The House on Friday passed a bill that would lift the nation’s 40-year-old ban on crude oil exports, a policy put in place at a time when global shortages and the Arab oil embargo of the 1970s forced the U.S. to guard its own supply. With U.S. oil-and-gas production at an all-time high, the ban, from an economic and energy standpoint, makes little sense, supporters of reversing the policy argue.
With Friday’s vote, the House has set up a showdown with Mr. Obama on energy, pitting the White House’s climate change agenda against the bipartisan position that expanding U.S. oil-and-gas production, and allowing American fuel to be sold overseas, will benefit the nation.
SEE ALSO: Obama threatens to veto bill allowing U.S. oil exports
Mr. Obama made clear in his veto threat that the administration will not go along with any legislation that furthers U.S. reliance on fossil fuels, and that stand comes despite the fact that the federal government’s own data have shown ending the oil export ban could lower domestic gas prices. Oh, look. Obama COULD have something to do with gas prices going down afterall...
In addition, ending the ban undoubtedly would drive up domestic oil-and-gas production, something the administration acknowledges is a good thing for the nation.
“Domestic oil production has grown in recent years, strengthening our economy, supporting new American jobs, and enhancing our energy security. The administration has taken important steps to support safe and responsible production growth,” the White House said in a statement of administration policy, the vehicle typically used to deliver a formal veto threat.
But the statement also explained why, despite the benefits of increased production, the House bill never will get Mr. Obama’s support.
Read rest at http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/11/obama-stands-firm-against-lifting-us-oil-export-ba/?page=all
Some critics contend that the pipeline could cause gas prices to rise, especially in the Midwest.That's because the oil that would be transported is not intended for American consumers. Rather, the Canadian oil currently sent to refineries in Illinois, Ohio and elsewhere in the Midwest would end up being diverted to Keystone, chiefly for export to markets overseas.
Obama has been a net neutral concerning the oil industry yes he wants to curtail dependence on fossil fuels but he is not activley trying to stop any kind of production."Midwest drivers would be hardest hit because the region currently imports more than half of its oil for refining from Canada," according to Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit public interest group. "Increases at the pump could range from 25 cents to 40 cents a gallon, depending on how regional refineries respond to paying $20 to $30 more per 42-gallon barrel for Canadian crude oil."
A 2011 report by Cornell University's Global Labor Institute projected that the Keystone's rerouting of oil from the Midwest would end up costing the region up to $4 billion in higher gas prices, which it said would "suppress other spending and will therefore cost jobs."
Nowhere in that article did it address the question of why those numbers should be looked at any differently than the 2007 numbers.
How would our country getting PAID more for its own oil from foreign countries cause us to raise the prices of gas and oil here for our consumers?Who would the oil go to? The highest bidder, which would raise prices overall.
He did not throw up any roadblocks quite making shit up.The oil boom happened DESPITE him and his efforts. He can throw up road blocks, but he can't blow up the road entirely.
I live this shit every day. You really should stick with what you know, because it certainly isn't this.
How would our country getting PAID more for its own oil from foreign countries cause us to raise the prices of gas and oil here for our consumers?
http://naturalresources.house.gov/roadblocks/He did not throw up any roadblocks quite making shit up.
All of that is expansion of the current drilling policies, I said he did nothing to roadblock the ongoing oil boom which is true.