Romney Lies About Gas Prices and His Own Economists Won't Defend Him!
2012 Obama
2012/03/24 01:49:57
|
|
|||||
|
13 votes
|
|
57% | |||
|
10 votes
|
|
43% | |||
It is looking pretty bad when Romney's own economists won't defend his attacks on Obama over higher gas prices:
"Mitt Romney on the campaign trail has chided President Barack Obama for failing to curb prices at the pump, even as prominent economists have debunked those talking points, saying there's little the president can do to lower prices in the short term. Now the latest twist: No one from Romney's economic team will step forward to defend him.
And not for want of opportunity.
After Romney insisted that more drilling in Mexico and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge could bring down the cost of gas, The Huffington Post contacted members of Romney's economic team -- two revolving-door lobbyists and two former chairmen of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush -- to ask if they would vouch for the claim.
"I will pass. Sorry," prominent macroeconomist Gregory Mankiw, a Romney advisor, replied when contacted by HuffPost about an interview. Other queries were similarly denied or unreturned.
Consider the argument: "The best thing we can do to get the price of gas to be more moderate and not have to be dependent upon the cartel is: drill in the gulf, drill in the outer continent shelf, drill in ANWR, drill in North Dakota, South Dakota, drill in Oklahoma and Texas," Romney said on "Fox and Friends" on March 16.
Other economists haven't been shy about debunking the claim, explaining that U.S. energy policy has very little effect either on oil prices or on overall U.S. employment. Recent studies have backed them up. The Associated Press' statistical analysis of 36 years of monthly, inflation-adjusted gasoline prices and U.S. domestic oil production found no statistical correlation between gas prices and how much oil comes out of U.S. wells.
"The truth is that we're already having a hydrocarbon boom," Paul Krugman explained in a recent article, "with U.S. oil and gas production rising and U.S. fuel imports dropping. If there were any truth to drill-here-drill-now, this boom should have yielded substantially lower gasoline prices and lots of new jobs. Predictably, however, it has done neither."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/23/romney-economists-wo...
"Mitt Romney on the campaign trail has chided President Barack Obama for failing to curb prices at the pump, even as prominent economists have debunked those talking points, saying there's little the president can do to lower prices in the short term. Now the latest twist: No one from Romney's economic team will step forward to defend him.
And not for want of opportunity.
After Romney insisted that more drilling in Mexico and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge could bring down the cost of gas, The Huffington Post contacted members of Romney's economic team -- two revolving-door lobbyists and two former chairmen of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush -- to ask if they would vouch for the claim.
"I will pass. Sorry," prominent macroeconomist Gregory Mankiw, a Romney advisor, replied when contacted by HuffPost about an interview. Other queries were similarly denied or unreturned.
Consider the argument: "The best thing we can do to get the price of gas to be more moderate and not have to be dependent upon the cartel is: drill in the gulf, drill in the outer continent shelf, drill in ANWR, drill in North Dakota, South Dakota, drill in Oklahoma and Texas," Romney said on "Fox and Friends" on March 16.
Other economists haven't been shy about debunking the claim, explaining that U.S. energy policy has very little effect either on oil prices or on overall U.S. employment. Recent studies have backed them up. The Associated Press' statistical analysis of 36 years of monthly, inflation-adjusted gasoline prices and U.S. domestic oil production found no statistical correlation between gas prices and how much oil comes out of U.S. wells.
"The truth is that we're already having a hydrocarbon boom," Paul Krugman explained in a recent article, "with U.S. oil and gas production rising and U.S. fuel imports dropping. If there were any truth to drill-here-drill-now, this boom should have yielded substantially lower gasoline prices and lots of new jobs. Predictably, however, it has done neither."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/23/romney-economists-wo...
Top Opinion
-
Tea in the Harbor 2012/03/24 02:02:13Just shake the etch-a-sketch and start over...
+8His statement wasn't meant to be factual, wait, that's the GOP Senate rules isn't it?
Not a damn thing, but he, as with many out of touch politicians, will have us believing they have all the answers, and they are "looking out" for us...Can ya say B- U - L - L -S -H - I -T !!!!
Looks like it's Back to the drawing board, or should I say etch-a-sketch for poor ole Mitt..
Let's see what other BS he can come up with to make people believe he is truly the best candidate...
Amusing though that the people he's paying won't stake their careers on this disinformation campaign.
If we double domestic production, it may affect our balance of trade, but it would have little effect on oil prices. American oil production is a small fraction of world oil production. Even if we doubled domestic production, it would still be a small fraction of world oil production.
It should be obvious that domestic oil prices reflect world oil prices. If they were significantly higher, refiners would buy from foreign sources. If they were significantly lower, suppliers would be throwing away money.
They feel that any criticism of Bush or McCain even when true, should now be lobbed at Obama even if untrue, because it worked for Obama. I think they believe in the repetition method. For instance if you listen to a Limbaugh program, whenever he states a falsehood, he repeats it 3 - 5 times in short order. To make it stick in the sub-conscience and make people believe it.
Sounds like Romney. It also sounds like the Trinity Doctrine of Christendom.