Fracking Lowers Gas Prices/ Obama Dithers on ISIS

You probably have noticed gasoline prices falling recently. It costs $3.40 per gallon in my area. This is a direct result of “fracking” for crude oil in the US over the last five years. “Fracking” refers to hydraulic fracturing, a process of fracturing underground rock formations which makes crude oil much easier to extract in big quantities.

Fracking first put a lid on the relentless gasoline and heating oil price increases under Obama, and now is actually bringing prices down. If it were not for fracking, gasoline could easily cost $5 a gallon or more.

Meanwhile Obama and his enviro cronies oppose fracking and we suffered the consequences with high gasoline prices. For decades ecologists have predicted falsely that the world is running out of oil. They desperately now want to stop fracking because it is exposing them as liars.

These environmentalists are ruining our economy with their “green” policies. After all higher fuel prices push up the cost of everything from food to lumber to computers because all commodities need to be transported.

Today America domestically produces 7.5 million barrels of oil a day more than we did 10 years ago, all because of fracking and even with Obama restricting oil production offshore and on federal lands. This brings down world oil prices because it is increasing the world supply, and we know that bigger supplies lower prices naturally under the law of supply and demand. Meanwhile a website called Platts.com recently reported about the prospect of exporting some of this new American oil bonanza:

US gasoline prices will fall 9-12 cents/gal and prices elsewhere in the world will fall 10-13 cents/gal if current US restrictions on oil exports are dropped next year, a leading Washington think-tank said.

“The more the US exports crude oil, the greater decline in gasoline prices,” the study from The Brookings Institution’s Energy Security Initiative claimed. “As counterintuitive as it may seem, lifting the ban actually lowers gasoline prices by increasing the total amount of crude supply, albeit by only a modest amount.”

Brookings’ finding are nearly identical to those of a May study from energy consultancy IHS which concluded that free trade of crude would cause US gasoline prices to fall 8-12 cents/gal due to the close link between gasoline and world oil prices.

Like IHS, the Brookings study claimed the impact of crude exports on gasoline prices dulls over time, falling from a 9-12 cent/gal drop in 2015 to 0-10 cents/gal by 2025. (end of platts.com excerpt)

This is interesting because we tend to think that this could never be true, and that we should “keep the oil in the US”. But the world is a global oil market and US oil companies can bring down world oil prices and gasoline prices by adding to the global supply in any way they can, from producing oil to exporting it. Platts.com also reported:

The steepest hurdle to overcome to liberalize crude exports may be the long-standing “scarcity mindset” from consumers and some members of Congress who fear shipping US crude overseas will lead to a domestic shortage and an increase in gasoline prices, Brookings said.

This mindset is misplaced since the US has not seen a physical scarcity of oil after 1973, but shortages causes by “price and allocation controls that created a false and self-inflicted sense of vulnerability,” it said.

“With such a mindset, which has been ingrained over 40 years, it is exceedingly difficult for the public to grasp the possibility that the United States can export crude oil without endangering national security or economic prosperity,” Brookings said.

Now here is a separate editorial on the subject of terrorism:

Obama Dithers on Striking Terrorists

Barack Obama appears to be preparing to begin US bombing attacks on the ISIS terrorists in Syria, and many Americans are relieved. But this is all too little too late. We should have been targeting these terrorist for years except that Obama’s Middle East policy would not allow it.

Nikitas3.com believes that Obama is resisting attacking Muslims because Obama was raised a Muslim, has pro-Muslim sympathies, and has a pro-Muslim policy in the Middle East like cheering on the ‘Arab Spring’ uprising in Egypt which we conservatives knew was just a steppingstone for the rise of radical Islam.

Even as we have seen these terrorists doing the most gruesome things, Obama has dragged his feet. This is classic Democrat party thinking – to give bad people, by policy neglect, room to breathe. This comports with the liberal worldview that America is the big problem in the world, that merciless communism was not so bad, that violent Muslims have a good reason to hate the US, that sadistic gang members immigrating from El Salvador pose no threat to the United States, etc., etc.

We conservatives have warned about Obama repeatedly, that he is a radical who has pursued policies that are harmful to our nation, like pulling US troops out of Iraq – where we had a victory in our pocket – but leaving them in Afghanistan – where we will never win, and will withdraw from anyway, and where we have continued to experience big losses in both military personnel and treasure. Here is what president George W. Bush said in 2007 about prematurely withdrawing troops from Iraq:

“To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States… It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to Al Qaeda… It would mean that we’d be risking mass killings on a horrific scale… It would mean we allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. … It would mean we’d be increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.”

Obama ignored every word and the results have been disastrous. ISIS flourished in Iraq and now is spreading. Look at this from foxnews.com about the plan to attack ISIS:

There was also concern from lawmakers on both sides that Obama has not asked for a congressional vote to authorize military force against the militants. Obama did call in his address for Congress to authorize and fund a mission to “train and equip” the moderate Syrian rebels. (end of foxnews.com excerpt)

So even if Obama finally does act on the side of decency he still will likely use his executive powers to skirt the Constitutional protocol that most American presidents have followed. This is just another way for this “president” to show his contempt for our historic American brand of liberty which he never has believed in.

(Please bookmark this website. And please recommend this site to all of your friends via Facebook and any other means. Let’s make Nikitas3.com the #1 conservative site by word of mouth. And if you would like to contribute to Nikitas3.com, please click the link at the upper right where it says “support this site”. Thank you, Nikitas)

This entry was posted in Current Events (More than 1,500 previous editorials!) and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.