your Gas prices

[stealthee]

"The current pres however doesnt seem to take any heat for the significant rise in cost."

Read that statement.

Read the rest. The media wanted to blame Bush because "He controls oil", but the current rise in prices has no media outcry to the president.

[CoreyB]

To clarify my posts. I stated the media was always after Bush when gas prices went up. But with Obama there is nothing in the media pointing to him as he himself having any control. Whether Bush was able to inflate prices and the reel them back in I have no idea but the media seemed to think he was behind the rising costs. Now that Obama is in office and prices are sky rocketing, not a word.
You see the way I view it is if Bush had a vested increase in prices to get his friends rich how does Obama not have a interest to appease his enviromental buddies. If we had a fair media wouldnt the each be viewed as equally having a interest in higher prices? Apparently not.

[95gto]

AO you just proved my point my friend. You are suggesting that Bush had a hand in rising oil prices but when it rises under Obama its some how ridiculous to think the president has any control over oil prices. I actually agree with your later statement, the president has little to do with oil prices. Somehow though people want to believe that Bush did. Just saying the media tied Bush directly to rising oil prices, Obama on the other hand seems to be free of this criticism.

To clarify my posts. I stated the media was always after Bush when gas prices went up. But with Obama there is nothing in the media pointing to him as he himself having any control. Whether Bush was able to inflate prices and the reel them back in I have no idea but the media seemed to think he was behind the rising costs. Now that Obama is in office and prices are sky rocketing, not a word.
You see the way I view it is if Bush had a vested increase in prices to get his friends rich how does Obama not have a interest to appease his enviromental buddies. If we had a fair media wouldnt the each be viewed as equally having a interest in higher prices? Apparently not.

Well I can't dissagree that Bush took more heat over oil prices than Obama has or is.

As for equal media coverage though we aren't exactly talking apples to apples either. The premise Bush got beat up over was quite linear where as you don't have the same type of blantant financial motivation for Obama to do the same thing. Not to mention that since Obama is in office under an economic nightmare time, doing something to the disparagement of the nation for the furtherment of a group's ecological ideals seems a bit presumptuous in comparison.

I'm not saying he shouldn't be criticized, I'm just saying you need more substance in his case since the motive isn't as obvious.

[AgentOblivious]

To clarify my posts. I stated the media was always after Bush when gas prices went up. But with Obama there is nothing in the media pointing to him as he himself having any control. Whether Bush was able to inflate prices and the reel them back in I have no idea but the media seemed to think he was behind the rising costs. Now that Obama is in office and prices are sky rocketing, not a word.
You see the way I view it is if Bush had a vested increase in prices to get his friends rich how does Obama not have a interest to appease his enviromental buddies. If we had a fair media wouldnt the each be viewed as equally having a interest in higher prices? Apparently not.

First off there are a lot better things Obama could do if he wanted to go all hippie with his envirobuddies, and if I was to point any fingers at Bush it would be that he had a vested interest in allowing american companies to increase their production and do more exploration, which wouldn't jack the prices. I think you can't really say its Obama or Bush because there's a trend there that covers both of them, and aside from the big drop brought on by the recession and subsequent drop in momentary drop in demand, gas is right where it should be based on the prior trend. As much as its an easy scapegoat to point fingers at the POTUS, or the previous POTUS, then come up with a motive after, I don't think this can be tied to any single government, or even OPEC, let alone the government of a country that could easily outproduce its proven reserves at current production rates, if it can't find enough new reserves.