Letter to the editor:

McCain’s finger-pointing shows desperation

Tom Harper, Henderson

Tuesday, July 29, 2008 | 2:03 a.m.

Kudos to Albert G. Marquis’ Monday letter, headlined “McCain’s smears reek of desperation,” wherein Mr. Marquis correctly suggests John McCain is willing to stretch the truth to win the presidential election and Barack Obama is rational and reasonable and deserving of our vote.

This reminds me of the recent McCain TV commercial suggesting Obama is responsible for high gasoline prices. The last time I checked, McCain was the longtime incumbent who must be blamed for many of the woes facing this nation and this world, and Obama was a first-term U.S. senator.

As Bob Dylan sang, “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.” The wind is blowing in the direction of Obama and, therefore, you can be assured McCain will become more and more desperate as we get closer to Election Day.

It’s time for us to heed the words of the late Tim Russert, who believed his highest calling was to make sure we are “an informed electorate.” This is not surprising given that Russert worked with U.S. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who stated, “You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.”

Discussion: 31 comments so far…

By jfnance32

7/29/08 at 9:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama, is stating the same old Democratic line for the last 20 years.

It is:

1) No to new oil and natural gas drilling
2) No to coal
3) No to nuclear
4) Yes to higher gas and energy prices

5) No to Las Vegas citizens that are losing their jobs because of higher gas prices

Obama has even said that he likes high gas prices.
By meek33

7/29/08 at 9:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Could you imagine McCain even having enough energy to run your local Mcdonalds. Seriously. Think about it next time your in line watching the Mcdonalds manager run around taking orders and shouting orders. McCain couldnt do it. So I ask You how will McCain be president??? my candidate lost, my vp isnt going to be on the ticket. Wow bummer. Good news is i think McCain is just about done, I wouldnt doubt the GOP ditch him at the last second and run a younger more charasmatic charachter. They could site his Cancer scare as the reason. I dont doubt that they will, Becuase he is becoming more unelectable by the day, with gaff after gaff. Did you see him knock all that stuff off the shelf at the supermarket. the video is at http://www.mccanes.com all the while barack obama is looking like an NBA super star, (arrogence and all) even taking time to stop and have a cigar break video at http://www.theobamaplan.com I mean really what is the GOP going to do. McCain cannot win at this point and we havnt even started the debates.
You could go to a site www.veeppeek.com to sign a petition for your favorite veep. and see where your veep stands in realation to the other veeps. Tim Kaine isnt a bad choice I guess, just not my pick.
By ksand99

7/29/08 at 11 a.m.

Suggest removal

John McCain is running a pretty weak campaign so far. He said he would keep it a clean campaign, but so far McCain has proven otherwise.

Voters know a single freshman senator is not responsbile for the price of oil. McCain must not think we're very smart.

Do you know about this enron loophole? It lets oil speculators drive up the price of oil without any regulations. It was put into law by one of McCain's advisors. Obama has wanted it closed for more than a year. Even Saudi Arabia blames a large percentage of the price of oil on this speculation that is brought to us by the Republicans. Last week the Democrats tried to pass a bill to stop the speculating, but the Republicans blocked the bill. I guess they do not take the price of gasoline seriously.

I also like Dina Titus's plan to divert some gasoline from the petroleum reserves to relieve prices now. But that bill was also brought up last week in the house and senate and the republicans blocked it. Again.

Who deserves the blame for gas prices? Voters are smart enough to figure it out: the Republicans.
By jfnance32

7/29/08 at 12:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Let's see.......NO NO NO NO to drilling for the last 30 years....by the Democrats....

Wonder who...who is to blame for high gas prices?

Nope, it can't be those stubborn Democrats....no Way....

Just a FYI,, Ms Taxus is rejecting Obama refusal to new drilling. She is for new offshore drilling.

Obama has said that he likes high gas prices.
By ksand99

7/29/08 at 12:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

jfnance32, why are the republicans blocking solutions like ending the enron loophole and diverting oil from the strategic reserves? The democrats have opened up over 50 million acres to drill on. That's plenty! They have not said no to more drilling. 50 million acres is "no?!" You are silly.

Maybe the republicans just want to take advantage of high gas prices in November. They should be ashamed! We need short term solutions now! They should allow the enron loophole to be closed and allow us to divert some oil from the strategic reserves.

The republicans have no plans for a short term solution. It seems they only want to play games with the voter and point the finger, instead of acting on real solutions.

The voters are smart and will see through their charade in november.
By jfnance32

7/29/08 at 1:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

"democrats have opened up over 50 million acres to drill on" Yes keep playing games. It will bite you on the butt.

Most of that land has marignal oil reserves if any oil reserves on it.

There are trillions of dollars of known oil and natural gas reserves that Democrats for decades on kept off limits. I am sure 10 years from now, Democrats will say, "You have no short term solutions...no drilling...never ever ever even if Vegas becomes a ghost town!!!!!!!!!!"

The Enron loophole is bogus, too. There is some speculation and it deals with the very slim margin of available supply vs. demand. Most of the speculation is coming from oil suppliers and oil consumers not from non-oil consumers. Let's make a deal. Open offshore and ANWR and you can have the "closing Enron loophole" law. LOL

At least Ms Taxus has some common sense and she is for offshore drilling.

Hopefully, Obama will not stick to "NEVER EVER EVER DRILL!!!!!" Hopefully, he does not say this again, "High gas prices are good!".
By ksand99

7/29/08 at 1:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

This is funny. jfnance32 is making up quotations from Barack Obama. Jfnance32 said "Barack Obama is the BEST PRESIDENT EVER!" See? It's silly when you do that, jfnance32, people will not take you seriously.

Speculation is a huge problem. Here is a quote from foxnews.com:
"Recently we saw crude oil supplies rise to a six-year high. Gasoline stockpiles were at a three-year high. Distillates have come back from a steep deficit to inventory levels that are now above where they were last year. Natural gas inventories reside well above their five-year average.

Yet prices go up and up and up.

Still not satisfied?

Okay, OPEC is producing at levels not seen since the early 1970s — and that doesn’t even include Iraq, which is struggling to achieve pre-Gulf War production levels, but will soon be there. Furthermore, global production still outpaces consumption, even accounting for China’s unsustainable economic growth rates.

In short, there is nothing in that equation that says oil should cost what it costs today. Nothing! With one exception — speculation."

Also, this quote from F. William Engdahl,

"In June 2006, oil traded in futures markets at some $60 a barrel and the Senate investigation estimated that some $25 of that was due to pure financial speculation. One analyst estimated in August 2005 that US oil inventory levels suggested WTI crude prices should be around $25 a barrel, and not $60.

That would mean today that at least $50 to $60 or more of today’s $115 a barrel price is due to pure hedge fund and financial institution speculation. However, given the unchanged equilibrium in global oil supply and demand over recent months amid the explosive rise in oil futures prices traded on Nymex and ICE exchanges in New York and London it is more likely that as much as 60% of the today oil price is pure speculation. No one knows officially except the tiny handful of energy trading banks in New York and London and they certainly aren’t talking.

As a result, over the past two years crude oil inventories have been steadily growing, resulting in US crude oil inventories that are now higher than at any time in the previous eight years. The large influx of speculative investment into oil futures has led to a situation where we have both high supplies of crude oil and high crude oil prices.”

Supply is outstepping demand. It is obvious to everyone but you that speculation is a huge part. But the republicans filibustered a bill to stop the speculation. (the speculation that Phil Gramm deregulated. Phill Gramm is a major policy aide to John McCain)

Shame on the republicans for playing politics with the price of oil! It is killing our economy!
By jfnance32

7/29/08 at 3:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

All the Republicans want on the “Enron Bogus Bill” is the ability to vote on amendments. “Hell no to new drilling” Reid is not allowing that. Democracy working well in the Senate…LOL

You probably could get that bogus bill passed if Reid just allowed voting on amendments. I doubt that the Democrats want it to pass because it is bogus bill. It would be one big cream pie right into their faces.

You are sourcing pols’ buddies that got invited to the Senate committee meeting.

I understand that some of witnesses will have a financial gain if the bogus Enron loophole bill passes.

Very good source of material there…..lol…..

Why not just quote the Democratic Party official talking points memo on the subject?

http://www.cftc.gov/stellent/groups/publ...

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/storyPrint...

Above are two good articles.

You must have your head buried in sand if you do not realized that global demand for oil has skyrocketed over the last 4 years. The oil consumption has driven by the need for energy from emerging India and China economies.

You must also have your head buried in sand if you do not realized that supply of oil has been relatively flat over the last 4 years.

Of course, there is some speculation because all it takes is a storm in the gulf or Iran shooting a missile and there will not be enough oil to supply the world’s needs. The Bogus Enron Loophole bill will not end that speculation. Most of the speculation is coming from oil producers and oil consumers...not from non-oil consumers which the bill will magically "ban".

Prices are going down now. Why? Because demand is going down.

But go ahead….yell and scream over over over again before November….”HELL NO WE WILL NOT DRILL”.

Please do so. Americans will find out that there are trillions of dollar of valuable resources that the Democrats have been blocking for over 20 years.

“HELL NO WE WILL NEVER EVER DRILL” “We love high gas prices”….Hussein’s slogan for 2008.
By thebs

7/29/08 at 3:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

In the absence of fact, you have made-up quotations.

Ksand has done one heck of a job proving their point. The supply of oil has kept up with demand, it's cited in their articles. In fact, if you read the articles linked, you would see that oil inventories are rising, Nance.

But Ksand is 100% correct: Republicans don't want to solve this problem, they want to campaign on it. They want to take advantage of people's misery... otherwise they would stop obstructing the bill.
By ksand99

7/29/08 at 3:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

I did not say we will not drill. Drilling is happening right now. People will not take you seriously if you continue to make up quotes.

I agree, the Republicans should not stand in the way of getting this important bill passed. If they want to introduce a bill, they should.

My sources were from Fox News and F. William Engdahl, a very respected scholar on the topic.

The price of oil has fallen so rapidly in the past few weeks, that is solid proof that this is not a supply/demand problem. You also did not argue the inventories fact. If the price is because oil is scarce, why are oil inventories growing, instead of shrinking? That doesn't make any sense.

If the republicans were serious about reducing the price of oil in the short term, they wouldn't stand in the way of removing the enron loophole. If the loophole isn't the issue, as you have claimed with no direct evidence, then there is no reason NOT to remove the loophole.

But the republicans aren't serious about reducing the price of oil. They like that motorists and businesses are suffering because they want to use that as a campaign issue.

The republicans will pay the price in November. Voters are not stupid.
By jfnance32

7/29/08 at 4:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Your Fox News quote comes from an opinion piece from a talking head. He does not quote his sources for data.

F. William Engdahl often writes articles that are very conspiracy driven almost to an Oliver Stone degree. He likes to cry wolf a lot. He once promoted Peak-Oil theory but no longer believes in it. He now thinks there is an almost an endless supply of oil.

How hard is below to understand?

Democrats have been against offshore drilling and ANWR for the last 20 years and continue to do so. There are trillions of oil and natural gas that Hussein and Democrats have said "HELL NO… NOT NOW AND NOT EVER" That hurts us now and will hurt us in the future.

All the Republicans want is to have some amendments to be voted on. The Democrats have a majority and can easily defeat those amendments I guess your friends are so scared of that. Boo...and your Democrat Senators run away.

I never disputed the fact that speculation was part of the higher gas prices. If you only read my post fully then you will see that. Speculation only works in a tight market. If supply rose at the same rate as consumption over the last four years then there would have been the same abundant capacity that we had four years ago. Currently, that abundant excess capacity has disappeared because of the explosive growth of consumption in the last four years.

Which comes first, tight supply-demand or speculation?

Also, Enron Loophole Bill will not do much about that speculation. Most of the speculation, like I said in the two previous posting, is not from non-oil consumer entities. The Enron Loophole bill is geared toward non-oil consumer entities. Buyers of oil futures are speculating that Iran might go to war, the US dollar might fall more, hurricanes in the gulf might destroy oil rigs, Nigerian terrorist might attack oil farms in Africa, etc… They are speculating that the marginal supply over demand can be easily upset by any of those events. That speculation will not go away unless supply significantly increases or demand significantly drops.

Demand has dropped off by 5% in the last two weeks. That is the reason why prices have dropped.

Summer is almost over and demand will continue to fall. There is less travel during the non-summer months.

Prices will continue to fall until January/February.

I would expect prices to go back up between the $130 to $200 price ranges next summer even with the Enron Loophole law.
By ksand99

7/29/08 at 9:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

JFnance32, rather than provide data which disproves what I quoted, you attack the source? That is a well known logical fallacy. Plus, you quoted some newspaper called the "Hawaii Reporter," which also published conspiracy theory stuff. Why is ok for you to quote those sources, but not me? I believe that is a double standard.

But you do not dispute the fact that oil inventories are rising. That disproves much of your argument. How can oil inventories rise if we're short on supply?

The simple answer is that they cannot. There is no problem with supply or demand. That is a false belief. We are able to drill to keep up with the demand, so why are prices so high?

Speculation. More importantly, unregulated speculation that was created by the enron loophole.

You have a poor understanding of what the loophole is. It allows unregulated trading of commodities on electronic plaforms. What that means is that anyone can on on eTrade and buy commodities, but those purchases are not regulated. This means that even oil companies themselves can buy futures of oil, because it is not regulated on electronic systems. I can't believe some people think unregulated futures trading is a good thing! It allow massive opportunities for fraud!

Did you know that Phil Gramm's wife was on the board of directors of Enron? And Phil Gramm is responsible for most of John McCain's economic policies! I think John McCain will veto the bill that reverses the enron loophole if he becomes president.

There is really good information on the loophole here: http://www.baltimorechronicle.com/2008/0...

Its too bad the republicans won't do anything to help. If they were serious about lowering the price of oil, they would allow this bill to get a vote. Why do they want to exploit the working class for a few votes? It's shameful!
By jfnance32

7/29/08 at 9:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

If the Democrats want a bill then they should allow for amendments to be voted on.

I guess they are very afraid to vote on amendments.

There goes Reid hiding under a desk.
By jfnance32

7/29/08 at 11:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

You say, “But you do not dispute the fact that oil inventories are rising.”

After researching this bogus oil inventory argument you stated, I realized that the Democratic Party has sold its soul to devil which is Al Gore. You and your friends are driving this country off a cliff and I just hope we pull back before we plunge off the end.

You, sir, have been duped and sold a bag of rocks.

There about 1,000 articles from dozens of good sources that over and over and over and over again explain why oil prices are higher. I just quoted a dozen or so. I could keep posting all night long.

These articles are everyday news sources. They frightened the crap out of me. In 2015 to 2020, the world market for oil might go into a super critical mode.

The demand to supply equation is so challenged that it would not take much for supply to be outstripped by demand. It could be a storm in the Gulf of Mexico or a war in the Persian Gulf or some Nigerian boy planting a bomb on a pipeline in Africa.

And yes, lots of people are speculating or betting one of those events will occur soon. It is good odds that one of these summers one of those events will occur.

It looks like we escape this summer. We will go through the same high gas prices next summer.

Article dated July 8th, it says, “OECD commercial inventories declined during the first quarter of 2008 by 39 million barrels. During the second quarter, inventories increased by only 36 million barrels, well below the average build of 83 million barrels during this time of year.”
It also says, “Global supply uncertainties, combined with significant demand growth in China, the Middle East, and Latin America are expected to continue to pressure oil markets.”
http://www.eia.doe.gov/steo

Article dated, July 12, 2008, “Referring to oil's recent trading range, Deutsche Bank chief energy economist Adam Sieminski said: "Why is oil at $US135 as opposed to $US100? The answer is inventories are low. Demand projections, despite the high prices, are still climbing. Everybody's worried about supply."
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/sto...

In this article, dated July 7, 2008, it says, “Oil prices set another record last week, closing above $145 per barrel for the first time, on the strength of heightened fears of an attack by Israel or the US on Iran, combined with a dip in US commercial oil inventories below 300 million barrels, their lowest level since the end of January and at the bottom of their seasonal historical average range.”
http://energyoutlook.blogspot.com/2008/0...
By jfnance32

7/29/08 at 11:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

In this article, dated June 18th, it indicates that inventories did not fall as expected (less demand) and that is why prices dropped. It says, “Oil treaded water at $134 per barrel Wednesday after the U.S. Energy Information Administration announced that weekly crude oil inventories fell a smaller-than-expected 1.2 million barrels.” It also states, “Oil futures did not jump, despite the fifth consecutive weekly decline in oil inventories. True, this week's inventories fell less than expected, but the key driver of price at this juncture is Saudi Arabia's expected increase in production.”
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/18...

In this NY Times article dated Nov 7th 2007 it says, “A leading international energy agency today urged oil-producing countries to replenish crude oil inventories in light of a record oil price. Since this time last year, the world outlook has deteriorated. Demand is higher and supply worsening.”
It continues to say, “In unusually urgent tones, the International Energy Agency warned that demand for oil imports by China and India will almost quadruple by 2030 and could create a supply “crunch” as soon as 2015 if oil producers do not step up production, energy efficiency fails to improve and demand from the two countries is not dampened.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/07/busine...

This article below says, “The world oil market needs a bigger oil stock "buffer" to cope with geopolitical tension, even though inventory levels are already above five-year averages, the International Energy Agency said March 11. “
They also say, “The IEA said the overall comfortable level of stocks masked some specific areas of low cover such as distillates in Europe and gasoline in OECD Pacific countries.”
Also stated, “Speaking on the sidelines of a refining conference in Paris, the IEA's chief economist, Fatih Birol, said the agency felt an increase in supply would reassure the market and ease current record prices.”
“Bottlenecks in oil services are contributing to the lack of spare capacity, as is reticence from producers about increasing capacity in the face of uncertain future demand growth. “
http://www.platts.com/Oil/Resources/News...

““Oil futures rose Thursday after the government reported larger-than-expected declines in crude and heating oil inventories… Inventories of distillates (heating oil, diesel fuel) fell by 3.3 million barrels, more than the .8 million expected… Oil supplies have declined more than expected for several weeks running, exacerbating a perception that supplies may be inadequate to meet winter demand”
http://wwolives.wordpress.com/2007/12/28...
By ksand99

7/30/08 at 1:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Jfnance, you claim the situation is very dire, with many sources that seemingly contradict each other.

A simple question: if it is so dire, why have oil prices dropped like a rock lately?

Earlier, you claimed demand has "dropped 5%," yet every indicator from your sources report a dire situation.

Why have oil prices dropped if the situation is so dire?
By jfnance32

7/30/08 at 9:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

I guess you have not google the internet not read one of the 10,000 articles by the kizzions of newspapers across the globe.

Perhaps if you open your eyes when reading that will help.

Summer is almost over and that means less people are using gas to travel. Prices will keep dropping because demand is dropping. That will keep happening until Jan/Feb when the need for heating oil will put pressure on demand again. Prices will go up in Jan/Feb. If it is a very cold winter in the USA northwest then prices will go dramatically. Demand will fall again in the spring and prices will drop some.

Next summer, prices and demand will climb and climb and climb. We will be lucky if we get $4.50 a gallon.

Summer is peak demand.

During the time of peak demand the marignal difference between supply and demand is very narrow. Speculaters pay a premium for oil futures because they are betting an event will push demand beyond supply and make the price of oil go dramatically up.

The value of the dollar, of course, also makes the price of oil go up and down.

If you want me to quote 100 articles I can.

Better yet, if you give me your email address then I can write a program that crawls on the internet and gets a story every five minutes and emails it to you.

You can argue with the NY Times and the International Energy Agency if you want to. If is your free right to do so. Also, if is your free right to drink the kool-aid that Democrats and Obama are pouring into your glass, too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/07/busine...
By ksand99

7/30/08 at 2:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

jfnance32, you made the point that oil prices are based in part on future supply. That is what the futures market is there for.

Then you quote all these sources which say we're going to have a serious oil crunch in the very near future. You were very clear about this and said it frightened you.

Why are oil futures going down, then? You said summer is when there is peak demand. We are still in July. Is that not summer?

And you said that demand dropped 5%, but the price of oil dropped even steeper than that. It is clear the price of oil is not directly related to demand. Demand is just one part.

I am glad the Democrats want to curb the oil speculation which keeps the price of oil fluctuating rapidly. The demand is not fluctuating, but the oil speculators are on the run, thanks to the Democrats!

Too bad the cowardly republicans want to stand in the way of helping out the average American. They are too busy being indicted for taking bribes and gifts from the oil companies like Ted Stevens, a senator from alaska. They should be ashamed!

Thank you for offering a program, but I do not want spam. I do not give out my email address to strangers because that is how you get spam.
By jfnance32

7/30/08 at 4:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

AP wire story today:

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=111&sid=577...

Read it or drink some more Democratic kool-aid.

You are hopeless. Go vote for Hussein.
By ksand99

7/30/08 at 5:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

There is no need to be mean. I am trying to understand your viewpoint. Please do not be rude.

I guess you have changed your mind about oil prices? You said earlier that prices would be lower at the end of the year, but the article you linked said they will be at $149 a barrel at the end of the year. That is higher.

Also you said the value of the dollar will make the price of oil go up and down. But in your article it said the dollar was stronger against the euro. I thought you said that meant the price of oil would go down if the dollar was stronger. Instead, the price of oil went up.

I think you may be very confused, because what you have said is not supported by your article.
By ksand99

7/30/08 at 6:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

I forgot something, jnfnance32.

Earlier you said Harry Reid was hiding under a desk because you said he would not let republicans vote on an amendment.

That is not true. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12173001...

He said he would offer them four different votes, but they are still holding up important legislation.

This is proof they do not want to make progress in reducing the cost of oil. They just want to complain and complain and blame this on others when it is their fault for not taking action and for blocking real reform.

It is shameful the republicans will not do anything to help us at the pump!
By jfnance32

7/30/08 at 6:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

I have a feeling that the Democratic Party is running scared over the offshore drilling issue.

I see Reid offering a white flag.

The question is will the Democrats actually will pass a offshore drilling bill or when they tried pull one of their smoke and mirrors thingy.

I hope that stick their guns and keep screaming 'HELL NO!!! WE WILL NEVER EVER DRILL!!!!!"

It will help elect Republicans and after Nov. we can pass a better offshore bill.
By ksand99

7/30/08 at 7:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Yes, you are right, Reid is doing the right thing but the republicans are still blocking the legislation. You said he wouldn't offer them the chance but he did!

Shame on the republicans! Playing politics with our pocketbooks!

The republicans are doing nothing to help us with the price of gas!

The voters will not forgive this in November.
By jfnance32

7/30/08 at 8:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

F. William Engdahl, Reid and Obama are saying the price of oil will drop to $60 a barrel after the Enron bill passes.

What are you going to say or do when it stays above $120 a barrel?
By ksand99

7/30/08 at 9:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

It looks like all of you are guessing as to what the price of oil will be. According to you, they believe it will be lower, but you believe it will be higher.

I will be patient and see what happens.

There are many estimates as to what the excessive speculation adds to the price of oil.

“For nearly eight years, the Bush-Cheney Administration has turned a blind eye to this increasingly excessive speculation, which has driven oil future prices to record levels and directly contributed to soaring prices of gasoline at the pump. In fact, the former head of the CFTC’s trade division said speculation has increased the price of oil by as much as 50 percent.

“That is why Democrats have introduced legislation to curb excessive speculation and increase transparency and accountability in the oil and gas markets. This bill will address the rising cost of gasoline in the short-term, prevent Wall Street traders from gaming the oil markets and ensure that American consumers are paying a fair price at the pump.”

"The central portion of the bill on the Senate floor targets speculation in the oil market, which some analysts say has added between $40 to $60 to the price of a barrel of oil."

"On Tuesday, Sen. Byron Dorgan, a Democrat from North Dakota, called that "excessive, relentless speculation."

In 2000, 37 percent of the people in the oil futures market were speculators, Dorgan said. Now, speculators make up 71 percent of the market.

Democrats cite estimates that speculation is responsible for between 20 and 50 percent of the recent spike in oil prices. "

""Forty-seven different Republican senators have spoken at one time or another on the need to do something about speculation," Reid said. "That was before they heard from the oil companies, and I guess some people on Wall Street.

"Now, suddenly, they don't think speculation's a big deal."

Yes, speculation is a big deal, said Sen. John Ensign, a Republican from Nevada, but he warned that curbing speculation in the United States could mean that foreign markets will take over."

See, even John Ensign believes it is a part of the puzzle. A "big deal," even! You should hold him accountable if you are right and speculation turns out to be nothing.

Speculation is one piece of the puzzle. Inflation and the weak dollar is another. The supply/demand equilibrium is another. I noticed you did not quote Obama or Reid with your claims that they say the price of oil will be that low.

I'm glad Harry Reid is holding the line and not letting the republicans load the bill with pork and special interest projects! No more deficeit spending for the republicans! After eight years of fiscal irresponsibility, it is nice to see someone trying to help!
By thebs

7/30/08 at 9:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

"F. William Engdahl, Reid and Obama are saying the price of oil will drop to $60 a barrel after the Enron bill passes."

Do you have a source/quote for claiming Reid and Obama say the price of oil will drop to $60 a barrel? I'd like to read it.
By jfnance32

7/30/08 at 10:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Reid and Obama say they are reling on experts that say if you pass the Enron Loophole it will reduce the price oil to at least $60 a barrel.

That is what the experts said in the Senate committee meeting.

I guess you are saying that they are not trusting those experts and all this is a bunch of hogwash.
By ksand99

7/30/08 at 10:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Oh, I see jfnance32. You were exaggerating. I'm glad you admitted they never said that. As I pointed out earlier, there are many theories as to how much excessive and deregulated speculation will affect the price of oil.

Barack Obama and Harry Reid want to pass legislation to guard against unnecessary speculation. That is a very sensible thing to do. If it lowers the price of oil, which most suspect it will, then it will be a win for all of us!

We have seen the price of oil fluctuate outside of the supply/demand relationship. I am glad they want to pass a law that will guard against such fluctuation.

It is too bad the republicans will not allow a vote. They just want to play games with the price of oil. Unfortunately, it is costing us jobs!

John McCain should act as the leader of his party and get this bill passed if he is serious about helping us! Enough games!
By jfnance32

7/30/08 at 11:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOL.....yesterday it was.....speculation is causing the high prices...there is never ever a demand/supply problem....you see we have super high inventories...there is absolutely no problem with supply...it is all made up by those speculators

Now....it is uh..hmmm...ugh..........perhaps maybe somehow we think speculation might have a small part in high prices.....we are really not sure...we are just guessing...just maybe we will see a small decrease ....we are crossing our fingers and hopes that it works

How much of the price of oil is due to speculation? Is it $1, $5, $10, $20, $60, $100?????

All those experts that you, Obama and Reid that are relying on say it the price oil should be no more than $60. Some even said $35. They all said the price will drop to that level within one month after the bill is passed.

Are the experts full of hogwash?

The Republicans want to free up the trillions of dollars of oil and natural gas that Reid, Obama and Democrats have locked up for over 10 years.

Only giving the Republicans 4 admenments is not a serious attempt to have a serious debate on our energy problems.

The Senate Democrats should be more mature than that.

It is the Democrats that are playing the games.

They should allow full and free debate on the bill. They have the votes to pass whatever they want to. Let's have true democracy.
By ksand99

7/30/08 at 11:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

There is not a supply/demand problem. Demand has not outstripped supply. Oil inventories are above zero.

I guess you cannot make a distinction between normal speculation and excessive speculation. There will always be speculation in the futures market. That's why it's called the futures market, because it's speculating as to the condition of the future. I thought you knew this.

You ask how much speculation has driven the price of gas, and I quoted many sources in one of my last comments and noted that there was a wide range. One of those even said "up to 50%." But you exaggerate that and claim they said "exactly 50%." It could be as little as .01%, as some of the experts have noted. The point is that we need to regulate the system in order to figure out exactly how much the price of oil should be.

This excessive speculation was regulated until Phil Gramm the republican threw the enron loophole into the mix. And at the same time demand rose, and we watched oil prices double, and then triple. But I do not see anyone saying that demand tripled. Demand certainly increased, but tripled? And at the same time Enron was manipulating the price of energy. And ever since, the price of oil has fluctuated more than it used to.

And then in an earlier post you said the price of oil would go down by the end of the year, but then you linked to an article which said it was going to go up by the end of the year.

And you said the weak dollar causes high gas prices, which I agree with. But then the article you linked to said that oil prices rose dramatically while the dollar remained strong.

And you claimed Harry Reid was not allowing the republicans to offer amendments, but he was. And they still want more.

Well, the American people want more. They want bills that haven't been neutered by amendments. Or bills that aren't loaded with pork and special interest money. If the republicans want to offer a bill to increase drilling, they should introduce one, not hijack another bill. It is a ploy that Harry Reid has foiled, and the republicans are stomping their feet and refusing to vote.

The Democrats have tried to reason with the republicans but the republicans stick their fingers in their ears and become like children. That is immature.

My question to you is: why is regulating the speculation a bad thing? Why are the republicans fighting this? What do they have to gain? Why not enforce regulations and see what happens with the market? What if some of the experts are right and a large percentage of the price of oil is excessive speculation? Is that just as much of a gamble as more offshore drilling? Isn't it worth the five minutes it will take them to vote the regulations back into place?
By jfnance32

7/31/08 at 2:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

"There is not a supply/demand problem. Demand has not outstripped supply. Oil inventories are above zero."

I do not think anybody has said that demand has actually outstripped supply.

But there are over 10,000+ articles by various newspapers, government agencies, etc... that say the current capacity of supply vs demand is dangerously marginal during peak demand periods like during the summer. Those articles also state that certain events, like war, storms, terrorist activity, etc... can create a situation where demand could oustripped supply.

This dangerous marignal supply capacity over demand makes contracts that promise future delieveries of oil very valuable.

When demand actually outstrips supply over a significant period of time like a days or weeks then we will all know about it. It will be like a thuderous shot that will be heard around the world. If it is a long term situation like months then it will be a castrophe for our country.

Once supply over demand returns to a safe level then contracts to promise future oil deliveries will be less valuable.

I hope you get the marginal capacity of supply over demand concept but I think you are so stubborn that you will refuse to read the 10,000+ articles on this subject with an open mind.

"why is regulating the speculation a bad thing?"

I do not care if they regulate or not regulate. It will have no significant effect on oil futures prices.

The Republicans want to free up the trillions of dollars of oil and gas that have been locked up by Obama and his friends.

I really really really care about that.

The sooner that we can bring on more supply than the quicker that we will can increase the safety margin of the supply capacity over demand.

If the Enron Loophole law is so important then why limit anything.

The Democrats have 50+ votes they can vote down all the Republican amendments.

What are the Democrats afraid of? They should allow this thing called democracy to reign supreme in the Senate.