A Second Hand Conjecture

« The NIE and AgendasFriday Islam Q and A (take deux) »

Those Slippery Profits

Lance on Sep 26 2006 at 6:09 pm | Filed under: Domestic Politics, Humor, Lance's Page

The greedheads at Exxon/Mobil and Chevron/Texaco are at it again. Those clever devils who artificially raised oil prices so high that their profits gushed forth at @ a mediocre 10% margin have now cleverly turned the profit spigot down just in time for the election. Just down the street someone is selling gas for $1.98 a gallon! As Barbara Mikulski the renowned economist and commodities expert reminded us:

it is often the large, vertically integrated oil companies that dictate the prices that gasoline retailers can charge.

They know where their bread is buttered and that is with the Bush/Halliburton team, and they are pulling out the stops to get the Republithugs back in office. Once the dirty deed is done we can expect heating oil prices to climb just when we need it the most. This will be followed in the spring by another “market driven” increase in the price of gas just as the summer driving season begins. It is an old game, drive prices higher just at the time when we need it the most and let them decline just when we don’t use it as much. These gyrations are just a way to tamp down our outrage enough to let them get away with it again next time and conveniently keep their profits down when elections are about to occur and our outrage might lead to change.

Think I am wrong? When did we invade Iraq to seize their oil? March, just before driving season. Easy cover for jacking up oil prices wasn’t it? When will we invade Iran? Before May, I promise.

It is no accident that elections are held in the fall. Long ago the oil companies figured out that the fall was not an especially profitable time for them due to low gasoline usage and relatively tame energy usage for heating and cooling. What better time to manipulate the market for lower energy costs?

What? You say that oil was not a source of energy when we set up our election dates? Hah! Capitalists are a nasty bunch, and far sighted. The only reason petroleum wasn’t used at the time was because oligarchic whale oil combinations in the Northeast and slave holding interests in the South were keeping it from us. They knew what was to come. It is no accident that the petroleum based economy began its rise soon after the end of slavery as a means of labor. How to avoid paying laborers their fair share, especially the duskier ones? Drive down the need for labor with mechanization based on? That is right, petroleum, oil, gas, black gold! Once we were hooked the profits were guaranteed and we have been at their mercy ever since.

It is time we marshaled our forces to put Pelosi and Reid in charge so they can stop “Cheney’s Secret Energy Task Force” and the collusion with the Bush regime. Gas guzzlers of the world UNITE!

Update: It seems I was channeling Rich Lowry.

Technorati Tags: Gasoline, oil, Exxon, excess profits, Bush, Halliburton, collusion, Pelosi, Reid, Mikulski, Michael Moore’s feverish brain

Sphere: Related Content

Your Ad Here

27 Responses to “Those Slippery Profits”

on 26 Sep 2006 at 6:14 pm 1MichaelW

I KNEW it!
on 26 Sep 2006 at 6:26 pm 2Lance

Yeah, well we already knew you favored the oligarchs. What kind of law do you practice? I bet you represent corporate interests don’t you!
on 27 Sep 2006 at 10:40 am 3Pablo

This will be followed in the spring by another “market driven” increase in the price of gas just as the summer driving season begins. It is an old game, drive prices higher just at the time when we need it the most and let them decline just when we don’t use it as much.

Yes, a game as old as time, that one. Nicely done, Lance.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 1:47 pm 4Jimmy the Dhimmi

drive prices higher just at the time when we need it the most and let them decline just when we donâ€™t use it as much.

Do you wipe your ass before you take a shit?
on 27 Sep 2006 at 2:05 pm 5Lance

I know it ruins a joke to explain it, but, uh, I can be a bit slow, which might be the point of the joke. Either way, I missed it, right over my head. My apologies;^}
on 27 Sep 2006 at 2:54 pm 6Otherpat

Well, I sure hope this IS humor!!

You really CAN’T believe that Bush and Haliburton really control everything. Get a grip man. Business owners have screwed people with high prices at peak demand times SINCE the beginning entrepreneurship.

I’m not in favor of being screwed at the pump, but c’mon. ALL business owners sell their wares at the highest price the market will pay. WAKE UP!…if you are serious that is.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 3:16 pm 7Craig Blohm

I didnt know that Halliburton signed off on the US Constitutionwhen they picked the second Tuesday in November for elections.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 3:22 pm 8Lance

Heh,

I thought I was so over the top nobody could think I was doing anything but satire, which means it was bad satire. Just in case though I tried to put in a clue with the last of my technorati tags.

Anyway, I guess this means this commenter at QandO was right:

Whatâ€™s really screwy is that the Moonbats have driven the tone of discourse so far into left field that I had to read a couple other blog entries to tell this guy was being faseeshus. Faceetious. He was kiddinâ€™.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 3:27 pm 9Lance

Oh, and glasnost, I meant moonbats, not intelligent reasonable people who disagree with me. I also am well aware of the ridiculousness of people’s claims from across the ideological spectrum including those who sit pretty close to me. Can every time I critique some liberals and leftists in a less than gentle manner from now on we all just assume that disclaimer applies? Please, I hate upsetting you.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 3:31 pm 10PogueMahone

I thought I was so over the top nobody could think I was doing anything but satire,

It’s not your fault, Lance.
Dale neglected to adequately frame the excerpt in context. He could’ve easily done so with a better title to his post.
That is, of course, assuming that Dale knew the context.

He had to of…
Right?
on 27 Sep 2006 at 3:46 pm 11MichaelW

That is, of course, assuming that Dale knew the context.

Well, he did include this bit of information:

Lance’s post, like mine, is sarcastic, of course.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 4:05 pm 12PogueMahone

I see now. He hid the bit of information under the tag…

I assumed that the “continue reading…” was to continue reading Lance’s post. Which of course I didn’t bother clicking because I had read that post before. Which I knew was meant as satire when I read it the first time.

I guess I shouldn’t assume.
My bad.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 4:16 pm 13Otherpat

All I can say is WHEWWWWWW!!!!

Thanks Lance.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 4:41 pm 14Lance

Heh,

I noticed Red State has put in a link and it definitely threw some people, especially those who didn’t click through. There are even people defending my rant. One of the commenters left this comment:

When I was listening to NPR this morning, they were interviewing an oil market expert from The Economist. The interviewer asked something along the lines of:
“Some people say the government is manipulating markets to bring gas prices down just before the election. Is there any truth to this? How much can the government move the prices?

Expert: “Not much, if at all.” Then explains a bit about prices having been driven up by fear of things that didn’t happen. Mostly fears of Iran and hurricanes (both of which are things the libs have also been playing up).

Interviewer: “But what about the government buying and selling oil reserves to manipulate prices?”

Expert: “The only country that has the capacity to do that is Saudi Arabia. No other country has enough reserves to effect the market and there’s no indication that Saudi Arabia has tried to manipulate the prices this time.” Then goes on to explain about supply and demand, with China increasing demand and lack of new oil field development limiting supply.

The interviewer seemed to play up the conspiracy theory angle and the expert gave good sound answers that shot it down. I’m not certain if the interviewer really believed the consiracy stuff or was just playing devils advocate.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 4:53 pm 15Otherpat

My guess is that he was fishing for some sort of quote slip up that he/she could use to make a name for him/herself. Every report wants “the scoop” true or not…HA!

Conspiracy…there sure is. The people who own the old fields control the price. It’s plain and simple. However, I do not think it’s about money…it is about control and trying to get a rise out of getting a rise from other’s woes.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 5:25 pm 16glasnost

Lance, it’s all good.
Moonbats exist. People not realizing you’re sarcastic is funny.

I think your representation of this issue is way out of line, but hey, only in the standard Orthodox-Libertarian Classic, and I’ve got too many other fronts going to get into it
on 27 Sep 2006 at 5:51 pm 17Otherpat

EXCUUUUUUUSE ME?????

Is glasnost calling me a Moonbat? Not, I hope! Look around buddy. There ARE people who actually believe the satire that Lance (and others like him) wrote. This is the first time I ran by his article which was listed under “humor” hence my first sentence.

Moonbat? I’ll say no more!
Otherpat
on 27 Sep 2006 at 6:00 pm 18Lance

Pat,

He wasn’t saying you were a moonbat. he was just saying they exist, it wasn’t directed at you. It is funny for regular readers (which you are not) because to them it was obvious I was joking since they know me.

glasnost,

It is way out of line, though since many lefties took it seriously or defended its premises on other sites I will say not as out of line as it should be. Though that cuts a lot of different ways to be sure.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 6:12 pm 19Otherpat

Thanks Lance.

I’m sure this is not the last item of yours I’ll read. I’ll keep all these things in mind as I read.

What is it they say…communication (i.e. a message/comment) is 20% delivery and 80% receipt! …or something like that. What ever the correct numbers are, you can bet they are not anywhere close to each other. :{D

Have a good day!
on 27 Sep 2006 at 6:54 pm 20Robby

Lance, I hear that some blogger by the name of Swift is proposing that we use children as food. To me, that’s a lot more controversial than what you’re suggesting. Yet where are the condemnations of Swift’s idea from lefty blogs?

I, for one, want to go on record as denouncing it.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 7:01 pm 21MichaelW

Lance, I hear that some blogger by the name of Swift is proposing that we use children as food. To me, thatâ€™s a lot more controversial than what youâ€™re suggesting. Yet where are the condemnations of Swiftâ€™s idea from lefty blogs?

I, for one, want to go on record as denouncing it.

Jeez, Robby. Why so quick to condemn? There may be very good reasons for doing so, and think of the potential benefits! I would suggest a fully detailed cost-benefit analysis before going off all half-cocked.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 9:03 pm 22BrianOfAtlanta

Lance, I hear that some blogger by the name of Swift is proposing that we use children as food.

The proposal sounds modest to me.
on 27 Sep 2006 at 9:56 pm 23Billy Hollis

Lance, I hear that some blogger by the name of Swift is proposing that we use children as food.

Not only that. He’s also on record as making fun of people who are much shorter than average. He’s clearly a politically incorrect establishment tool, and probably has ties to the Bush administration.
on 28 Sep 2006 at 12:34 am 24Robby

I knew Bush was responsible for this somehow. Now that the Chimperor’s on record as being pro-children eating, can we get the impeachment rolling?
on 28 Sep 2006 at 2:41 am 25Jimmy the Dhimmi

That was satire? … good show! ya fooled me. You actually could have posted that on Huffington or Move-on and some moderator probably would try to hook you up with Howard Dean.
on 28 Sep 2006 at 4:34 am 26Peter Jackson

Something’s wrong. Although I’ve spent the last two hours trying, I can’t sing your post to the Beverly Hillbillies theme.

I don’t get it.

?peter
on 02 Oct 2006 at 8:30 pm 27A Second Hand Conjecture » The Politics of Oil

[...] I will say I was surprised in many ways by the reaction to my satire of oil conspiracies, especially at the other sites which linked to the post, but I do hope that some people noticed I was also making some arguments about what does drive the price of oil as well as making light of some people’s beliefs. [...]