During the first quarter of his second term in 2004, oil companies and refineries reported record profits for operations in the US. Earnings for domestic refining and marketing operations increased by 294% for Chevron-Texaco, 165% for British Petroleum, 125% for ExxonMobil, and 44% for ConocoPhillips.
On May 12, 2004, the International Energy Agency released a study warning that higher oil prices had hurt the global economy and would further depress economic growth, fuel inflation, and increase unemployment over the next two years if prices stayed near the current levels at that time.
Five months later, on September 24, 2004, oil topped a record level of $50 a barrel, and CBS News noted that, "Mr. Bush has shown no propensity to personally pressure, or "jawbone," Mideast oil producers to increase output."
Ten months after the start of his second term, ExxonMobil posted a quarterly profit of $9.9 billion, "the largest in U.S. corporate history, as it raked in a bonanza from soaring oil and gas prices," Reuters reported on October 27, 2005.
On October 28, 2005, the Wall Street Journal noted that Exxon's quarterly profits "amounted to a per-minute profit of $74,879.23 during the quarter." The Journal also reported that Shell said its third-quarter net income rose 68% to $9.03 billion.
The same week, Energy Information Administration data showed the price of a gallon of gas was up 28% from the year before.
A month ago, on February 2, 2008, the Washington Post reported that, "Exxon broke the record it previously had set for profits by a U.S. corporation, earning $40.6 billion last year."
"Exxon's profit for the year came to $4.6 million an hour," the Post calculated.
Twenty-five days later, crude oil prices hit a record high of $103 a barrel. On February 27, 2008, Nigel Gault, an economist at Global Insight, told the New York Times, "You're adding an oil shock on top of a crunch on credit and a housing collapse."
"Even the U.S. economy cannot withstand all of that at the same time," he stated.
The skyrocketing energy costs have a trickle down effect on everything that happens in the US. On average, every time oil prices go up 10%, an estimated 150,000 Americans lose their jobs, according to calculations based on data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Federal Reserve Board.
In a survey conducted in June 2006, 75% of small businesses said increasing energy costs had impacted their businesses. Twenty-eight percent of those surveyed had to increase the prices they charged customers, and others coped by limiting production.
If the price of energy goes up, it costs more to turn on the power to run equipment and machinery in offices and manufacturing businesses alike. If prices go up, it costs more to heat and cool the buildings for businesses, schools, and government agencies.
The majority of products purchased in the US are transported by trucks, trains and ships that burn diesel fuel. A rise in the cost of diesel fuel can increase the price of nearly every product sold to consumers across the board.
Higher fuel prices increase the costs for every kind of service depended on by Americans in daily life, from school buses to taxi cabs to emergency vehicles to pizza delivery cars.
Lower grades and not being president of law review - like her opponent was.
Not passing the bar like her opponent did.
Riding on your husband's record and his political machine, or building your own, like her opponent did.
Claiming her husband’s years in office to appear to have more "experience" than your opponent who actually has more years as an elected official than you.
Lacking the character to congratulate your opponent when he wins
Lying about NAFTA to dodge responsibility for the fact that you championed it and turning it around to create the false impression that your opponent supports NAFTA
Disloyally identifying with the opposing party’s candidate as having "a lifetime of experience," in common with you and mis-characterizing the 20 years of experience of your fellow Democrat as "a speech."
Casting yourself as the feminine victim: they call on me first, the press is coddling my opponent, placing people in the audience to ask if you prefer diamonds or pearls, surrounding yourself with sympathetic women who want to know "how you do it," and then getting "victimized" by men who tell you to "iron their shirts," just in time for the New Hampshire primary . . . Characterizing your opponent as getting a free pass from the press when the press reported everything they even guessed about him, and the wrongs of everyone who came into contact with him, multiple times. while never mentioning the skeletons in your closet like: travel gate; renting out the Lincoln bedroom; removing papers from Vince Edwards’ residence after his suicide; non-disclosed tax returns; undisclosed donors to Bill’s foundation; undisclosed donors to Bill’s presidential library, besides Saudi royal family $10 million donation; undisclosed earmarks; cattle futures scandal; Whitewater . . .
Not encouraging your supporters - like your opponent did, when you loose. Instead running out of town, leaving your supporters to fend for themselves when you loose, but showing up to bask in glory when you win. Kind of like George Bush making his appearance on a naval ship to announce the victory, that never was . . .
Not taking responsibility for your actions - "I voted for it but I hoped it wouldn't pass . . ." Give me credit for my husband’s administration, but not the things that go wrong, like NAFTA.
If you want a woman in the White House who perpetuates every stereotype about women who want to run with the big dogs, but who don’t want to take the responsibility that goes with that status, then Hillary's the one.
by
Hargrove (8 articles, 3 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 1:38:14 PM
Gloria Steinem once said, "There won't be true equality until there are incompetent women in high places." Condolezza Rice comes to mind, and Hillary. Neither has accomplished anything of note in public life, let alone anything worthy of their lofty ambitions. All one need do for confirmation is examine the trail of utterly useless legislation Hillary has sponsored since taking her Senate seat. It's exactly the sort of chaff one might expect of a Junior Senator. It is not the sort of legislation one might expect from a presidential candidate.
There are any number of brilliant, dedicated women qualified to assume the presidency. Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton is not one of them.
JP
by
JonmarkP (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 64 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 3:21:37 PM
