Gas prices and conspiracies

Bush and the Republicans are behind a global conspiracy to drive gas prices down! Well, that is the story being intimated by the Left.

This theme, that oil companies are trying to aid the GOP, was repeated or insinuated throughout the report. In the segment, which aired at 4:40PM, anchor Wolf Blitzer introduced Schneider by noting that a form of smog reducing gasoline will be pulled "as we head into the fall and the November elections." Schneider then prefaced a sound bite from a "oil industry critic" by stating:

Schneider: "But this oil industry critic believes that what drove prices up was speculation and a report from a bipartisan congressional investigation may be having an impact."

The critic, Tyson Slocum, is a member of Public Citizen, a liberal consumer advocacy group founded by Ralph Nader. The group’s left-wing ideology is not mentioned, the only ID onscreen is of the organization’s name. At this point, Schneider asks the question: Do oil companies want prices down through the midterms? Slocum elaborated for him:

Slocum: "Eighty-one percent of their money goes to members of the Republican Party. I cannot say for sure whether or not they are influencing prices to assure that outcome, but it is, I think, more than just a coincidence that we're seeing an easing of prices at a time of running up to a very, very important election."

King implies a theory that people are capable of believing this conspiracy theory because they are, well, ignorant about economics. He points to a report on what people know about economics. The report is sad. Our schools are failing to TEACH the important stuff. I nearly aced the test questions...that means the test was easy!

Back to the conspiracy that too many of our fellow citizens are foolishly believing.

Why are the prices really going down? The nutshell, because of the fear of a supply interruption and the fear of outrageous prices in the future many companies went on a buying spree. Since the fears were put aside (Middle East calmed down, apocolyptic numbers of hurricanes did not occur, etc.) companies are now left with huge surpluses.

Brimming U.S. distillates fuel inventories rose more than expected on Wednesday to their highest level since January 1999.

Distillates, which include heating oil, rose 4.1 million barrels, compared to forecasts for a 1.9 million barrel rise among analysts polled by Reuters.

Yeah, you read that right. Inventories are 215% higher than forcast.

The conspiracy, if there must be one to pursue, is how the media and the Left perpetuated (for purely partisan purposes) the gas price fears to a point that huge overstocks became the reality. In otherwords the most plausible conspiracy is that the Left's fearmongering drove supplies too high.

The reality is that this is pure market correction. That is all. No one is to blame and no one is to get credit...as far as politicians go, that is.

********** Update: 9/21 4:00pm**********

Good Call, Tony. this reminds me of other Politicking done in 2004:

CBS 5/22/04:

Kerry, Bush Eye High Gas Prices

Mr. Bush devoted a portion of his weekly radio address Saturday to responding to the criticism that his administration is not doing enough to curb gasoline prices.

And a full 2 years later, Its still Bush's Fault that Gas Prices are high:

ConsumerAffairs.Com 5/4/06:

Consumers Blame Bush & Big Oil for Gas Prices

The most recent Gallup poll finds three in four Americans are angry with the recent increase in gasoline prices and they are blaming the oil companies and the Bush administration.

Three in 4 Americans. think its President Bush's fault. Oh, how quickely we forget:

USA Today 9/19/06:
Prices at the pump keep tumbling

A hefty 42% of Americans polled over the weekend said they think fuel prices are being manipulated by the Bush administration to help Republicans in an election year. The USA TODAY/Gallup Poll has a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

What this means, friends, is we should believe that not only are High gas prices the fault of the Bush Administration, but Low gas prices are also the fault of the Bush Administration, but they're not good, mind you. Low gas prices, are not only just a ploy of the evil Bush Administration to buy your votes, but it also hurts the EnvironMental's whole "we're running out of Oil, SUVs should be Illegal, buy Hybrids" argument.

So, if Its President Bush's Fault that prices are going down (possibly as far as $1.15 for a gallon of regular), but then also President Bush's fault for gas prices going up... You can't have it both ways. Its either one or the other. Unless you, as a Left-Wing-Nutt-Job, are just LOOKING for reasons to Blame Bush for something. Which is what I think is happening here. It's like they aren't even trying any more. Lets just Blame Bush for Everything!

Come on people. If you blame me yesterday for dropping my cell phone, then blame me today for NOT dropping my cell phone because now, all of a sudden as of this morning, not dropping my cell phone is a bad thing, I would have to question your mental capacity.

School's 'No Drug Policy' is Void While Making Fun of President Bush

Pete here, forwarding to you a little "common sense."

Many schools have a Zero tolerance for drugs, Including images on t-shirts and what not.

apparently this policy can be voided if you Bush-Bash at the same time:
http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/youth/26631prs20060830.html

Now, just the fact that this lawsuit was brought on by the ACLU would be enough for me to disagree with it, but because I am an open minded "Moderate" we will hear them out. Here is the T-Shirt they are defending:

You can read the entire ruling here.

Paragraph 16 goes over the School's dress code policy, which states (in part):

"We recognize that personal expression through dress is an important aspect of our culture for developing a sense of individualism, and this should be allowed to develop within our system. However, we must remember we are a part of an academic community and our guidelines must reflect a sense of responsibility and integrity.

"Any aspect of a person's appearance, which constitutes a real hazard to the health and safety of self and others or is otherwise distracting, is unacceptable as an expression of personal taste. Example [Clothing displaying alcohol, drugs, violence, obscenity and racism is outside our responsibility and integrity guidelines as a school and is prohibited.]" (Brackets in original.)

Okay, So clothing that displays drugs or alcohol are prohibited. I can understand this, after all, this is a school of minors. That and we must be responsible with what we throw on.

Paragraph 17 and 18 is where I think the judge was paid off by the ACLU:

17. The Appearance and Dress policy is unconstitutionally overboard in that it sweeps within the terms of its prohibition a very substantial amount of protected political speech, including Zachary's t-shirt criticizing and satirizing President Bush.

18. The Appearance and Dress policy is unconstitutionally vague in that it is laden with terms whose meaning is unclear, both facially and when read in context.

Bullshit! Bull Crap! The policy does not say that a T-Shirt criticizing and satirizing President Bush violates their dress code, it says that "Clothing displaying alcohol, drugs, violence, obscenity and racism is outside our responsibility and integrity guidelines as a school and is prohibited." (note they use the word President in front of Bush, which is the proper way of addressing our President, whether you like him or not)

Though I think those who relate President Bush to Hitler, or anyone with a Anti-President Bush t-shirt is mis-informed especially at 14 years old), I would have no problem with this kid wearing an Anti-President Bush t-shirt if it was within the polices of the school. As in: No Drugs, Alcohol, Violence, Obscenity, or Racism

But this t-shirt contained lines of Cocaine, a Razor, and a Straw (the razor and straw are used for the intake of the cocaine),therefore is against the school's Policy.

In Paragraph 19 of the ruling, it states:

Defendants' actions in disciplining Zachary for wearing his anti-Bush t-shirt are based in part on its message. Defendants have permitted students to wear t-shirts expressing viewpoints opposed to Zachary's, including, by way of example, "These Colors Don't Run," "Go Army," "USA #1," and t-shirts promoting the National Guard. No students wearing such t-shirts have been disciplined for doing so.

Okay. So they are saying "Because other people have their Pro USA propaganda, you can have your Anti-Bush Propaganda." What do I think:

1. A 14 year old is not wise enough to make political decisions. This is why a 14 year old does not vote.
2. This issue has more to do with your opinion on the leader of the United States.
3. Did the Pro-USA T-Shirts have Drugs, Alcohol, Violence, Obscenity, or Racism on them?

So then, would it be okay to have a picture of a political figure that was Jewish being shot by Nazis, then some clever line about him being a bad politician?

Or what about a shirt with President Clinton and a phrase like "He F***ed an intern while he was married and F***ing lied aboutin frontit infront of a F***ing federal hearing"

Don't get me worng, I wear T-shirts that allow me to express myself (my Anti-Apple one is probably my favorite). But If my Anti-Apple T-shirt had a graphic representation of Steve Jobes snorting cocaine (or a clever line like the President Clinton t-shirt I mentioned) and my employer told me I couldn't wear it because it goes against their "nothing offensive" policy, would the ACLU run to my cause?

********** TONY ADDS **********
Quickly, I think this was the real danger in the Supreme Court's Tinker ruling. Kids do NOT have rights. They have potential rights. Even moreso they do not have full rights which properly would exclude from children's rights the First Amendment.

I think you can expect the lunacy over decades and decades to get worse in this regard before it is corrected.

**********Pete UPDATE**********

This brings up a good question: Should 13 year olds be allowed to vote?

I bring this up because of the ACLU's suit with the kid wearing the Anti-Bush t-shirt with drugs on it, being (and I quote) "a form of constitutionally protected political speech"

If this boy is "constitutionally protected" then does not the entire Constitution apply to him, including:

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."

You can vote on it here... If you're old enough.