Free Markets, Free People

Obama claims credit for something he hasn’t done

I’m sure that doesn’t surprise anyone particularly.  A) it’s Obama and B) he’s a politician who has yet to quit campaigning (mostly because he hasn’t a clue how to govern).

What am I talking about?  His attempt to claim responsibility for the fact that fossil fuel production is up under his watch and he’s somehow responsible for that.

Yes, it is, but that has absolutely nothing to do with him or his policies.   The Congressional Research Service has apparently made that official now:

The Congressional Research Service has released a report finding that, as was already generally known, U.S. oil and gas production has increased substantially over the past four years, but on private lands only, while it’s actually declined on federal land.

Or said another way, where Obama had control and the opportunity to do what he is claiming, he declined that opportunity and in fact impeded further exploration and production with his policies.  Where he had no real control, production boomed.  Federal lands – nada.  Private lands – bunches and bunches.

What has he sacrificed with his anti-fossil fuel polices?  Revenue and jobs.

Again, you have to wonder anymore what it takes to be fired.


11 Responses to Obama claims credit for something he hasn’t done

  • “Again, you have to wonder anymore what it takes to be fired.”
    While we are NOT finding this answer, we are certainly expanding the list of reasons you can’t be fired.
    Lying, every day, on issues both important or ridiculous, no longer presents a problem, for example.

  • Something else Obama hasn’t done…
    THAT could be HUGE.  And it would piss off greenies, as a bonus…!!!

  • Don’t you know it’s blasphemy for Obots to vet His Gospel when pontificated by the Anointed Won.
    The rest of us simply assume every word out of his pie-hole is either a lie or the obfuscation of some small kernel of truth.
    Everyday I have to ask myself how? How did this Post-Turtle get there?

  • So, you’re saying that “he didn’t build that” ?

  • Bruce:
    About 3/4 of the land in the US belongs to Federal, State and local governments.  If the remaining quarter has been responsible for a significant increase in fossil fuel production, wouldn’t increasing the area available by using government land solve our energy, revenue and unemployment problems?
    If we are stuck with socialist state spending, we should use the Shah of Iran’s plan, the White Revolution.  Use the nation’s energy resources to eliminate the debt and provide cradle to grave care.  While I believe in self reliance, many voters want “stuff.”  Here’s a way to have our cake and eat it too.
    There would be foreign policy benefits as well.  KT McFarland was on Fox last week advocating increased domestic production to protect our economy from the crazies in the Middle East. I think we can go farther than that.  If we were a major oil exporter, OPEC would be dead. Second, if we were to export natural gas to Northern Europe, we could limit Putin’s revenue and the accompanying threats.  China, India and Africa need coal.  Third, we aren’t going to stop mining it so why not export 500B annually to them and in the process gain leverage.  Wind, solar and bio fuels may someday become viable, but not in my life time.
    We would need to protect private fossil fuel suppliers by setting a reasonable price floor, but having another trillion dollars of revenue would make the dollar very strong and keep us out of national resource conflicts.

  • Let me see if I have this right: You think a net increase in oil production, powered entirely by the private sector and accompanied by a drawdown of government/socialist/”public” oil production, is a <b><em>bad</em></b> thing?

    • Does Obama deserve credit?  Or was that not the issue?
      The sun has risen every day since he first election, should he be given credit for that too?

    • Uh, no … but then I wouldn’t expect you to be able to figure that out.

    • Are you arguing that drilling on public land by a private firm is “socialist”?