What I’m saying is she needs to do is to explain from her mouth and not from some campaign worker on how she can make this happen and guarantee that it’ll happen. How tough can it be for her to give us an explanation?You act like it would be a huge accomplishment, as pointed out in several posts it would actually be pretty easy. The current administration has stated that higher energy costs were one of their goals, and its one of the few stated goals they’ve accomplished. To achieve lower fuel costs you simply reverse the current administration’s tactics.
What is amazing is that the price of oil is as high as it is given the world wide economic slow down and current low threat level to the oil supply.
This is not about Obama or GW Bush, so try not to deflect my question; its about a statement that Bachmann allegedly made and all I’m asking for is how is she going to guarantee what she said?This coming from the same people who were silent when obama made all of his campaign promises; now are crying foul when someone else on the “other side” makes a reasonable promise. Typical.
Because what she would do has already been done twice before and it worked just fine.This is not about Obama or GW Bush, so try not to deflect my question; its about a statement that Bachmann allegedly made and all I’m asking for is how is she going to guarantee what she said?
Then its not a guarantee; its nothing more then an educated guess. What she should have said was that she’d do her very best to get gas prices under $2.00 per gallon. That would be been more honest and up front.Because what she would do has already been done twice before and it worked just fine.
No.Then its not a guarantee; its nothing more then an educated guess. What she should have said was that she’d do her very best to get gas prices under $2.00 per gallon. That would be been more honest and up front.
Why do you say allegedly? Is there some doubt she actually made the statement being attributed to her? Isn’t the news article proof enough?its about a statement that Bachmann allegedly made and all I’m asking for is how is she going to guarantee what she said?
Now who will make money and pay decent wages by selling $2 gas over the long haul? Know that in many countries they are paying far less but the government subsidizes them. Not likely to happen in the states.[Obama] could be cruising to a certain re-election on account of a booming economy and sub $2 gas, by Christmas.
In 2001 oil was at $20 a barrel. In 2008 it reached $147, thanks to the loose monetary (“bubble”) policy of the Fed. The bank mess and the sharp drop in worldwide demand tanked all commodities, though they are still substantially above the 2001 level.But, both President Reagan and President Bush II deregulated oil and the price dropped. Substantially.
Out of curiosity, did she actually say the word “guarantee”?Then its not a guarantee; its nothing more then an educated guess. What she should have said was that she’d do her very best to get gas prices under $2.00 per gallon. That would be been more honest and up front.
I didn’t personally hear her make the statement, so I’m giving her the benefit of the doubt.Why do you say allegedly? Is there some doubt she actually made the statement being attributed to her? Isn’t the news article proof enough?
ChadS
I attributed that to her based on her statement “Under President Bachmann, you will see gasoline come down below $2 a gallon again. That will happen.”Out of curiosity, did she actually say the word “guarantee”?
Or is that the word that YOU attributed to her?
Just curious.
Nevertheless, thank you for admitting you put words in her mouth … words that Bachmann did not use.I attributed that to her based on her statement “Under President Bachmann, you will see gasoline come down below $2 a gallon again. That will happen.”
To me that’s an implied guarantee.
Not likely that the government “subsidizes” them.Now who will make money and pay decent wages by selling $2 gas over the long haul? Know that in many countries they are paying far less but the government subsidizes them. Not likely to happen in the states.
Monte, I agree with much of what you say but there is more than just having the oil. Witness Iran which makes ton of money producing oil but its poor technology can’t produce refined low price gasoline. Thus they have to import gasoline to satisfy their drivers.If you live in a country with abundant land-based oil wells and refineries, then the actual production cost is minimal. So there would be no need to use the world market price. No subsidies needed.
Technically your right; but I believe that most reasonable people in here who read that, will understand the implications based on what she “technically” said.Nevertheless, thank you for admitting you put words in her mouth … words that Bachmann did not use…
This is where I’ll have to disagree with you; its not 100% guarantee that it will occur, rather it most likely will occur and in my book thats like having a doctor tell you that he’ll guarantee to correct a medical problem involving your leg, that you’ll be able to walk normally and after the surgery you can sort of walk; just not 100% of what he told you would be able to do.She said “that will happen” because prices drop whenever free market deregulation is allowed to take place.
It happened with gasoline, … and with energy, in general, at least twice that we personally experienced;
… telecommunications, that we personally experienced and are experiencing;
… airline fares, that we personally experienced and are experiencing;
… railroad freight charges, that we personally experienced and are experiencing;
… and even … and especially … in retail, with the Amazon and eBay phenomena, which we personally experienced and are experiencing.
When the Catholic vote deems this important enough to actually vote for, she is a believer too. Until then, there is not a lot any politician can do to change things around.Never mind gas issues… Bachmann should be focused on shutting down abortion in the United States. She should be working on making abortion illegal. According to most Catholics here (CAF) abortion trumps everything. It’s very interesting that she has little to say to about it right now. Her “stump” speeches should begin and end with the topic of abortion.
I would never vote for her, but I do like candidates that stick to their convictions on and off camera.
Please, the word you should use is “actually”.Technically your right;
Please, the words you should use are “like minded” and “make an over reaching conclusion”but I believe that most reasonable people in here who read that, will **understand the implications **based on what she “technically” said.
.