Within the past week, gas prices in my area of the midwest have jumped almost 30 cents a gallon. This is the highest amount per gallon I've ever paid in my life, and the highest rate for regular unleaded gas I've ever seen here.  As outrageous as this is, I shouldn't have been surprised, but yet I still was.  The midwest seems to have lower prices than other areas of the country, so I won't be shocked to hear from others who are now or have previously paid higher prices that what I did earlier today.I can't imagine how high the prices must be on either coast or in other parts of the country.

I believed that if Shrub were re-elected, the U.S. would see gas prices reach $3.00 a gallon by the time he leaves office in 2009 (assuming he makes it that long).  At this rate, gas will be hitting that price by the end of THIS MONTH, and he's not even 1 1/2 MONTHS into his second term of infesting the White House.  Now it might take a paper Lincoln to buy a gallon of gas before Dumbya's out of office.

Now we all know that the war in Iraq is now a war for oil and the opportunities for Dumbya, Lon Cheney & all their oil company buddies to line their pockets.  Gasoline prices have jumped well over 50 percent (I estimate it's closer to 75 percent) since Shrub stole office in 2000.

Where is the outrage for this nonsense?  Do the American people really want to spend over $100/month just to fill up their gas tanks?  I would like to think they wouldn't, but of course they have no say in the matter.  Actually, I guess they did, and 60 million plus chose to put the numbnut back in office for another 4 years.  Just a little more proof that the wrong choice was made back in November.

I'm KCSHYGUY, and I approved this commentary.

You guys are doing well in the midwest - price of a gallon of gas in San Diego is now $2.24 for regular.

I saw a very interesting analysis, using Federal Reserve Data, that the price of a barrel of oil was constant in euros (to within a penny) over a six month period, while the price in dollars was moving up over $6.00/barrel.

Very likely much of the recent run-up in oil is due to OPEC effectively refusing to be paid in dollars, and defacto switching to euros. That is, the dramatic decline in the value of the U.S. dollar is intimately linked with the increases that we're seeing in gasoline prices.

Is this likely to continue? As long as W.'s policies defacto support an increasingly weak dollar (i.e., high federal and trade deficits subsidized by foreign investors), you can count on higher pump prices.

Hell boy, here in the Peoples Republic of California, specifically in the boonies called San Diego, we pay some of the highest prices for gas in the nation.

Regular unleaded is AVERAGING $2.25 a gallon now and I've seen it as high as $2.49.

And I got news for you, The left coast has been a democratic/liberal stronghold for a LONG time (long before Bush) AND we've been paying the highest gas prices a lot longer than both Bushes were in office.

This goes back to the Peanut President when the sand dwellers found that THEY (as in OPEC "they") could manipulate oil supplies and screw with the US.

I have a suspicion that the fractured national opinion & support for the admin. since Nixon may also have something to do with the problem. As long as the people of the US don't seem to have a clearly unified voice, other nations will attempt to manipulate national policy by using anything they can as a wedge.

Must be nice to let the facts not get in the way of the left's hatred for 'ole George W.

Forget the fact that gas per gallon adjusted for inflation & increased taxes that have been levied on it is at one of the lowest points in history.

Oh, and let's forget that we get more oil from the Central & South American Countries (places like Venezuela & Mexico) than we do from the Middle East.  I guess it is also pointless to point out that we also get more oil from Canada than we do from the Middle East.

Forget the facts!  let's just chastize Bush because he happens to be a former Govenor of Texas & people associate Texas as having no other economy other than Oil!

Liberals bemoan high oil prices and blame "shrub".  But, in the same breath, they

1. are against drilling for oil in Alaska
2. supporg higher taxes and environmental restrictions
3. are against the war in Iraq if it sniffs of any oil agenda.

What would the posters in this thread like to see in terms of policy?  I'm all for criticism but only with alternative solutions.  How many of you drive hybrids?

Me?  I think oil is too cheap.  Its in limited supply, its bad for the environment, and making it cheap encourages its overuse.  Lets raise standards, taxes, and begin investing more heavily in alternative energy.  Unfortunately, any candidate with a platform that involves more expensive oil is DOA with and electorate as short sighted as ours.

To us that mean't he was suppose to manage the situation better and not have to destroy the environment and invade other countries to do it. Prices were lower under Clinton and he was trying to protect the environment. So you tell me which strategy works better for everybody involved? Bush's strategy works better only for the oil companies. The rest of us and the environment get srewed. Thank you GWB. We can do a lot better than this.

I don't blame W for all of this. While, without a doubt, the Cheney, whoops! I meant Witless Administration is by far the most criminal, incompetent and (this just in) latently homosexual* in history (let's see, bringing in convicted felons like Poindexter and Abrams, who's next, bringing back Cap Weinberger?), if you haven't been paying attention, we're consuming more than we can produce. That's why we're in Iraq, but we had to have the kabuki of 9/11 to justify it first. Even George XLI thinks these guys are nuts.

The real fun will begin if Iran and/or OPEC decides to dump the dollar in favour of the Euro, a move which is likely going to happen sooner or later. Without a doubt, the boys saw a crisis forthcoming, but they sent the wrong people to handle it.

*check out Wayne Madsen's article @ www.onlinejournal.com . While OJ runs a little too far left for my taste, I am a fan of Madsen's.  Regarding Rove, it's just a matter of time, this story has been around DC for years, regardless who wants to believe it or not.

ing of the environment.  I think we oughta take those stranded dolphins and feed them to the poor!!! Hahahahaha!!!!!   And as far as oil goes, we should drill up in alaska in that wilderness area.   It's what--- 1/300th of Alaska?  There's nothin but "democrat" monster bloodsucking Mosqitoes on that tundra in the summer and it's a frozen wasteland for 8 months!!!!!  Or wait-- is it 9 months!?! Ha ha ha!!! I'm sure glad I don't live up there with those Eskimos.  Plus, those reindeer like pipelines!!  They use the Alaskan pipeline as kind of a hiway for going north and south.

That's a non answer.  You've basically said, " I really don't understand the issues, I just know that prices have been higher under Bush, so it must be his fault.  The Red Sox and the Pats have been successful under Bush, but that doesn't mean its because of something he did.

FYI, your facts are actually wrong.  Bush and Clinton haven't had materially different environmental standards regarding gas.  Most, in fact, are driven by states - state regs are one of the greatest drivers of local gas prices (along with transportation costs).  

So, I ask you once again: What would you like to do to make oil prices cheaper?  How can we "do a lot better"?

and this was just for basic unleaded not premium stuff.....

This is what happens when oil is over $50 a barrel, usually it's about $30 a barrel.....

To paraphrase Monty Python: Aye lad, we DREAMED of only paying $2+ a gallon ...!!

In the UK we pay £3.60 or thereabouts per gallon.  At an exchange rate of $1.80+ to the £, that's somewhere in the region of $6 per gallon.  Most of this, of course, goes straight to the government as 75% is tax.  Bastards!!

Aphra

Liberals are not "bemoaning" high gas prices per se. They are suggesting that the Shrub is more interested in profits for the oil companies than he is in providing an environmentally safe and cheap energy supply to the masses.

Now, he was the one who said "we know someing about the oil business" during the 1st campaing. Most people thought that meant he had a plan to bring us environmentally safe and cheap oil. Neither has happened.  It is just another one of the many things Bush has said, implied or promised that has turned out to be a whole lotta bull pucky.

Many liberals actually think we should have a high gas tax as a way to incent conservation while using those tax dollars to invest in inventing alternative fuel supplies like hydrogen and others. This would aleviate our dependence on the middle east as well as eliminating out need to drill in the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge.

What we ARE bemoaning Bush's lack of forward thinking on this issue.

"Now, he was the one who said "we know someing about the oil business" during the 1st campaing. Most people thought that meant he had a plan to bring us environmentally safe and cheap oil."

How do you know what "most" people think or thought? Maybe YOU and some of your liberal cronies thought that, but you have no idea what most people think. I'd say your statement was rather arrogant.

"What we ARE bemoaning Bush's lack of forward thinking on this issue." Are you using the royal "we" in your statement? Besides, the US has suffered fuel crises for years before Bush was elected. The "lack" of forward thinking goes back before Nixon. Get a clue. I seem to recall a state of the union address where Bush announced plans to increase funding for alternative energy sources.

BTW-Are you and the other envirocons aware of the additional uses/derivative products from oil besides gasoline? And how do you suggest that hydrogen fuel cells be incorproated into long haul trucking and rail (I assume you're aware that diesel is an oil derivative). Then there's the plastics industry as well as natural gas.

That's ok though, I think it would be a good idea for you envirocons to try and live a lifestyle without using ANY of the products that are derived from natural resources you're so paranoid about. You might start by watching the PBS series Frontier House, that's pretty close to what life would be like.

For me, no thanks.

Liberals are not "bemoaning" high gas prices per se.

-->LOL, sure seems like it from these posts.  I have a hunch this thread wouldn't have started had gas prices not been high!

Most people thought that meant he had a plan to bring us environmentally safe and cheap oil

--> Did you think he was gonna pull a rabbit out of his hat?  You seem educated on the issue - don't you realize any clean/cheap energy policy will take decades to realize and that all the available solutions (higher gas taxes, alternative investments) fly in the face of political realities?

Many liberals actually think we should have a high gas tax as a way to incent conservation

-->Most states with high gas prices have high environmental standards.  Yet, the whining continues.

All I've been hearing from the left is that Iraq WAS A WAR FOR OIL!!

If that was so wouldn't prices be going down to help the President's approval rating? Boy, you guys on the left can't get anything right!!!

Prices have a long way to go before we break the all time high.

And your enire post is rather condescending and a personal attack. I must have struck a nerve again. I can always tell when my point is made -- you guys go nuts. "I will not be cowed" by you guys (to use a Bushism) --he he. In fact, I get quite a thrill out of getting you guys all worked up.

What do you think he meant? Did he mean high iol prices? Did he mean destroying the environment to get a very small amount of oil in the Alaskan Wildlife preserve? Maybe he meant he wanted prices high so his rich friends in the oil business down in Texas could make more money?

You can't see the forest for trees.

In the 2000 election Bush accused Gore of not having an energy policy. And where are we four years later under Bush? Worse off. That is among the many failures we are complaining about Bush. He says one thing and does another.  

Why doeson't Bush DO SOMETHING? Anything? As you keep telling us time after time, the Republicans control everything. Where is their plan? Why is it still messed up?

Maybe they want prices high oil prices so their rich oil company friends down in texas can make more money? Have you even considered this possibility -- I'm sure you haven't because you delude yourself into beleiving Bush is incapable of such deceit, right? All I have to say is WMD's, Swift Vets, John McCain and now Social Security and AARP. Oh he's cabable of big-time deceit -- maybe the worst we've ever seen in a president. He repeats what he know to not be true over and over and over.

I saw it coming and told my friends to be ready,
that gas prices were going to go up the very day Bush would
take office. And in California they did you can check on that.
I don't know about the rest of the country but Buch did hate California for not supporting him.

So, what you're saying is that the highest gas prices in history happened under Reagan.

That's correct, and if you look at the chart he also presided over the lowest gas prices in the last 50 years.

No, actually under our own peanut farmer, Carter.

You must be looking at a different chart. I don't necessarily hold Carter responsible for the second oil embargo,but it did happen under his watch. Yeah, yeah, I know, the first one happened under Nixon. I'll let you partisans argue about who was more culpable. I'm just pointing out facts.