digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at huffingtonpost.com

Jon Stewart Ponders Bush's Ignorance About $4 Gas

huffingtonpost.com — On Thursday night's episode of "The Daily Show," host Jon Stewart riffed on the fact that President Bush was unaware of the fact that analysts have predicted gas prices could soon reach four dollars a gallon.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • theNazz, on 03/08/2008, -6/+295What isn't Bush ignorant about?
    • Qtip42, on 03/08/2008, -5/+75It isn't ignorance. It's lying. He knows the economy has tanked. He knows the price of oil is going up. He knows the middle class is being sucked dry. He knows that him and his succubus vp cheney are incredibly rich....
      • theaceoffire, on 03/08/2008, -6/+29Just because he is lying, doesn't mean he isn't ignorant.
        • edwartica, on 03/08/2008, -2/+6Some would say that many ignorant people are actually just lying to themselves.
      • badqat, on 03/08/2008, -4/+25Uh...a succubus is a demon that takes the form of a beautiful woman to seduce men...I think you're confused, or you're fantasizing about Cheney...
        • MacEnvy, on 03/08/2008, -2/+51You've clearly never seen Cheney in a komono with his hair up. Irresistible.
        • cowsgoquack101, on 03/08/2008, -1/+6What hair?
        • nullx42, on 03/09/2008, -3/+2I.. uhh... *fap fap fap fap fap*
    • borez, on 03/08/2008, -4/+17His own bank balance
    • TheSwashbuckler, on 03/08/2008, -16/+1The real world...
    • LukasSmith, on 03/08/2008, -43/+5Wow Amazing how liberals switch between Bush is an idiot to Bush is lying. They claim he and his cronies are smart enough to concoct a scheme to get in Iraq and take over America. But then say he is an idiot when he says he didn't know that some people are projecting $4.00 gas a few months from now. This guy was elected twice by the American people. If you he is an idiot or a liar as you claim he is nothing but a reflection of America.
      • Ymeg, on 03/08/2008, -1/+32All liberals think the same way... I know, I was in the super secret liberal foundation to take over the world.
      • bruce86, on 03/08/2008, -0/+26Yes, because getting picky between horse ***** and dog *****, is liberals fatal flaw in reasoning.
      • LukasSmith, on 03/08/2008, -30/+2Liberal reasoning? Liberals have no reasoning. They are mindless sheep. White sheep are no different from black sheep.
        • BarleyWind, on 03/08/2008, -4/+11Well you have a massive number of irrational voters on both ends of the spectrum ex. the Religious right vs. the "omg Obama is so inspiring" folks. Generally speaking though liberal policies tend to be more 'reality based' and supported by data and factual analysis than right wing ones.
        • LukasSmith, on 03/08/2008, -11/+3Not really. Ill admit some Republican policies are not based in reality. But there are several liberal policies that are not based in reality either. I find facts and reality can both be the voice of reason. For example Liberals have many many facts about greenhouse gases and how pollution is destroying the earth, there are those who go from we need to act now to omg the world will end tommorow. But Republicans see reality. The reality is US can't afford to just magically transform into a green country. To maintain our economic dominance we cant afford financially either the cost of the transformation or the cost of the lost business in between. Personally I think the people who should be acting is not the government but the American people. Grassroot activity to curb greenhouse gases is something I approve of strongly. I believe corporations are only part of the bigger problem. I think the American people are the bigger problem. Americans have this vision of a bigger house then they need 2 or three big clunky vehicles per family aka suv's and never having to walk anywhere they cant just drive. Americans need to start caring. I live in a big city aka dallas and we have this amazing bus and rail system that few use. I ride it everyday to work. Nevertheless the system can barely afford to keep running. Its pathetic. I think if anything the congress's reaction to pollution is a true representation of America. Remember John F. Kennedy said "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." Start Walking America.
          • tatinthehat, on 03/08/2008, -1/+7Let's face it, it's not Conservatives, or Liberals, but PEOPLE who are sheeple. Let's not use labels, because all of us are equally at fault. I do not enjoy how the media labels everything one spectrum or the other, and it really skews the fact that there are many of us who sit in that middle grey area...

            That aside, I do agree with you, the people really need to change their minds about the way the system is run. Economically, I think the government should atleast support a shift towards greener technology, but not necessarily overhaul the system. And we're talking straight capitalistic economy, if the consumer dictates that they want greener products, then our economy should "magically" shift towards that direction. Admittingly, I'm no economist, so talk this with a grain of salt.
      • Fordi, on 03/08/2008, -3/+12"Amazing how liberals switch between Bush is an idiot to Bush is lying."

        On any given topic, it's one or the other. At least, that's the impression he puts out for anyone who can bother to check his work.

        Of course, neo-cons don't check the president's work; that would be unpatriotic. They just suck his teat.
      • rand0mm0nkey, on 03/08/2008, -1/+9"If you he is an idiot" Yup. Exactly.
    • macweirdo42, on 03/08/2008, -3/+36Hey, who's the bigger idiot, the idiot running the country, or the idiots who elected him TWICE (alright, I know I'm ignoring the whole Florida fiasco, but the fact that even after all that *****, he managed to win in 2004 is beyond insane)?
      • treefrog001, on 03/08/2008, -1/+17It gets worse. The same idiots who voted for bush in 2000 ... and compounded their crime by voting for him again in 2004 ... and still worship the ground he walks on ... will be voting again this November. The country is DOOMED!!!
        • blackb0x, on 03/08/2008, -2/+7they can vote for bush all they want come november.

          • bjornski, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1A vote for McCain is exactly that.

            Just more of the same failed policies.
      • BarleyWind, on 03/08/2008, -1/+4That's the problem with unfettered democracy with unscaled votes, if you let all the idiots vote you tend to end up with a terribly idiotic leader.
        • kevinmotel, on 03/08/2008, -1/+15Half the population is dumber than avg.
          • Elliuotatar, on 03/08/2008, -1/+6BZZT! Wrong!

            Half the population is dumber than the median.
      • Binto, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3Good thing the United States is a democratic republic. The peoples' votes *do not* matter. It's all about the delegates and who THEY choose. We can scream all day we went a certain person, but at the end of the day, the delegates will vote for who they want (which should be who the people they represent want--but doesn't always work out that way) democratic country, my ass.
      • Scaryclouds, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3Let's not act like Kerry was much of a choice either. Though in retrospect, I'm sure he could have only been better.
    • smokeymcdank, on 03/08/2008, -0/+25As we know,
      There are known knowns.
      There are things we know we know.
      We also know
      There are known unknowns.
      That is to say
      We know there are some things
      We do not know.
      But there are also unknown unknowns,
      The ones we don't know
      We don't know.

      — Don Rumsfeld Feb. 12, 2002, Department of Defense news briefing
      • bluenash, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6So that's what "it" means.
      • Elliuotatar, on 03/08/2008, -0/+7Are there are also unknown knowns!
        The things we don't know we know.
      • noangelcame, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3I think Rumsfield was doing some spoken word poetry there. If you think of it as poetry,. and not a serious answer to a policy question... that ***** is deep.
      • LordoftheFly, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3He's talking about the Jahari window, but it's a hed rerring of an answer..
    • Squires, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3I know, man.
    • tehAleksandrRox, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1ahh can't hold it in.
      your mum.
    • Dgen_X, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Sucking at his job?
    • xlar54, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2Tourism. He's always fighting to protect us from the tourists...
    • dfective, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1He is just playing ignorant.
    • GoBack2Europe, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Oil in 2001 was $31/barrel , beginning of 2008 $200/barrel. An increase of 645%

      Inflation percentages added up from 2001 to 2007 18.9%

      Obviously other economic factors come into play, just showing some stats, that's all....
    • probablyhigh, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Please. He's had a full education and graduated from Yale. He's not ignorant of much that's going on. If you think he's some harmless fool, then you're being played like one.
    • ATLien74, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Google Hydrogen Booster. Google Biodiesel. There are alternatives.
  • MarkusGarvey, on 03/08/2008, -8/+241hahaha..."were in the lead in global climate change"...what an idiot....
    • f3l1x, on 03/08/2008, -1/+75and "...we are the leaders in energy independence..." Tell that to Iceland. ...we've got a loooong way to go kids.
      • swicepick, on 03/08/2008, -3/+2Iceland is a very "green' country, but it certainly isn't energy independent. While it does use geothermal power very extensively, it uses oil for essentially all its transportation needs, just like we do. In addition, all the oil used in Iceland is imported. There is also about a car for every person above 18, which is similar to our transportation system. The saving grace is that they only have about 300,000 people in the whole country, so their level of total oil consumption is still relatively low on the global scale.
      • FasterGun, on 03/08/2008, -0/+12And Brazil, I believe, is kicking our ass: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
        How about we stop lying to ourselves about how great we supposedly are and actually get stuff done?
      • davidrools, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2Denmark FTW
    • 1timeuser, on 03/08/2008, -1/+41Well, we are in the lead in global climate change probably. We're turning up the heat!
    • LukasSmith, on 03/08/2008, -10/+20pff. Even the people who signed Kyoto didn't manage to meet their requirements. Saving the planet sounds nice in speeches and on paper. but in the end Americans just dont give a *****. They will keep driving their oil guzzling suv's trucks and cars. Every American family will have 2 or more cars and drive even when they could just walk or take a bus. Stop blaming Bush for your own laziness America. As John F Kennedy said,"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." Start walking lazy *****.
      • macweirdo42, on 03/08/2008, -1/+9I DO walk everywhere. Don't look at me.
      • digghasnoethics, on 03/08/2008, -1/+8I know it makes you feel better about the failure of the US to take responsibility for their pollution, but its not true.

        The UK has already hit the target and the EU as a whole can meet the target with positive actions, or a global recession (which looks likely) See http://www.eea.europa.eu/pressroom/newsreleases/eu ...
      • LukasSmith, on 03/08/2008, -8/+2can might should possibly are not words I understand.
        • bjornski, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1There's a lot of things you don't understand.
      • uberdeutsch72, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3You obviously don't live in Los Angeles.
      • Elliuotatar, on 03/08/2008, -0/+11Walk? My commute is an hour, dirivng at 60mph. That's true for at least 30% of americans. The average walking speed is 3mph.

        It would take me 20 hours to walk to work.
        • nutsackninja, on 03/09/2008, -2/+2here is a hint live closer to work.........

          maybe find another job?
          • Elliuotatar, on 03/09/2008, -1/+3Oh find another job. Great suggestion. You think I WANT to commute an hour every day to work, and back, *****? Forget the gas. You think my time isn't important to me?
        • KongKNoob, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2Or take a ***** bus. Or carpull.
        • farboo, on 03/09/2008, -0/+4Carpull? That's even slower than walking. But it does get you in shape.
    • dsmx, on 03/08/2008, -1/+8So true america is definitely in the lead in causing global climate change.
    • L4WL3RS34L, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1HA, joke's on you! It's "we're," not "were," you idiot.
      /sarcasm
    • smrekar, on 03/10/2008, -0/+2sounds like a tom cruise quote.
      "we are the authorities on global climate change."
  • MookiBlaylock, on 03/08/2008, -11/+39We are *****!!
    • cowsgonemadd3, on 03/08/2008, -30/+2Stupid comment....STUPID STUPID STUPID Cusing is stupid.
      We are "have sex"..... is about what it translates too.
      • sephers83, on 03/08/2008, -2/+10***** is derived from the latin word for "thrust," so, essentially "*****" could also mean that we're are or are going to get hit hard. So, that's really about what it translates into.
      • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 03/08/2008, -2/+6***** no! That's not what it translates to.
        • kevinmotel, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1ORIGIN early 16th cent.: of Germanic origin (compare Swedish dialect focka and Dutch dialect fokkelen); possibly from an Indo-European root meaning [strike,] shared by Latin pugnus ‘fist.’
          USAGE Despite the wideness and proliferation of its use in many sections of society, the word ***** remains (and has been for centuries) one of the most taboo words in English. Until relatively recently, it rarely appeared in print; even today, there are a number of euphemistic ways of referring to it in speech and writing, e.g., the F-word, f***, or f—k.

          source is apple's built in dictionary
        • sephers83, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1I will stand corrected on the actual meaning of the word, but there are connections to it being derived from latin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/*****
      • damonic, on 03/08/2008, -2/+5Imagine how intelligent we would sound to the rest of the world if we all used the English language correctly.
      • dbsmoker, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6So you're telling me that you actually think this person's message was "We are have sex!"?
        You're an idiot. I hate it when people take things too literally.
        Oh, and because you're so sensitive to cussing, let me rephrase my earlier statement, "You're a ***** idiot!"
    • ganlet, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4mookiblaylock we've been screwed for years. 7 to be exact
      • rand0mm0nkey, on 03/08/2008, -3/+2Oh, come on.... You're saying Clinton or the other Bush was good? Seriously?
      • Elliuotatar, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6Bill Clinton? Yeah. He was good. He fixed the economy, reduced the deficit, and didn't get us into any unending wars.
    • kylere, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1I agree and the sad fact is that regardless of McCain, Obama, or Clinton's First Wife with no self respect none of that is going to change.
    • kubedawg, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1http://www.cafepress.com/thewhitehouse.101458211
    • acitcratnA, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1We're already ***** in San Francisco.

      Highest I've seen is $3.99 regular, and $4.19 premium from Shell yesterday.
    • baudbwoy, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1damn you ganlet thats my comment...damn you all
  • Homerr, on 03/08/2008, -6/+90Good reminder on how bad things have gotten under Bush.
    • MookiBlaylock, on 03/08/2008, -1/+5Where has Bush been even?
      • Elliuotatar, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1Texas, on his ranch.
        • animalfruit, on 03/08/2008, -1/+0He went to Africa a few times and donated billions of dollars to them.
    • LukasSmith, on 03/08/2008, -19/+2Democrats have believed that America has wanted a democrat president for the last 8 years. Ouch. They lost the presidency. TWICE. talk about dilluded.
      • ianzu, on 03/08/2008, -1/+13Well, once. And THAT was because nobody actually expected Bush to label a war hero as a coward and traitor. Class act all the way.

        When Bush took over, gas was less than half the price it is now. That's a fact. Call me "dilluded" if you like. (I'm not sure what it means. Like Bush, it seems like you make up your own words.)
      • LukasSmith, on 03/08/2008, -13/+1Actually I don't recall Bush ever being accused of making up his own words. In any case I guess thats the next great liberal conspiracy theory I guess. But for your benefit I replace dilluded with ignorant. I guess if you would rather be called ignorant then dilluded thats fine with me.
        • LukasSmith, on 03/08/2008, -4/+1Thanks. Apparently I have dilluded stuck in my head for some reason. Maybe its because I'm from Texas.
          • bjornski, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2Are you saying you're stupid because you're from Texas?
        • a6n28f, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6Then you haven't been paying attention for the better part of a decade. misundersetimated? irregardless? About a billion others? No, he's never made up words. In all seriousness, he's probably dyslexic and has a mild learning disability. My wife is a special ed teacher and claims he fits most if not all of the outward signs.
      • rand0mm0nkey, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3I don't care if its a Rep or a Dem. I would like one that works with the American people, with other countries, within his party, and with the other party to actually try to make things better. Oh yeah, and not being a total moron would help with that.
    • nphase, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2Reminder? You forgot?
    • GreenGrassyNoel, on 03/14/2008, -0/+1Every time I hear Bush speak, or hear something he has done I think "How the ***** is this guy president?" it really never ceases to amaze me. I'm so embarrassed when I think about him representing out country.
  • furbyboy, on 03/08/2008, -26/+87Hmmm.....some quick math..

    1 US gallon = 3.78541178 liters (according to all knowing God Google)

    Now in England, we pay for petrol (better than gas) by the liter, and at my nearest garage petrol is £1.08 per liter

    1.08 x 3.78541178 = £4.09 per gallon

    According to xe.com, £1 = $2.01290.....so £4.09 = $8.23 per gallon

    What's not fair??
    • korupture, on 03/08/2008, -8/+83but you don't live the 'MERICAN DREAM WITH UR BIG TRUCKS AND UR FAST CARZ
      • furbyboy, on 03/08/2008, -1/+19.....and an insane dictatorial leader!!
      • borez, on 03/08/2008, -2/+9Does that still exist?
        • 1timeuser, on 03/08/2008, -2/+4The part with big trucks and fast cars? yes.
        • Murdats, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4maybe the big trucks, but the fast cars? you cant claim that anymore
          • BarleyWind, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Who said they were American made?
          • Smiff2, on 03/08/2008, -3/+1as an English person driving in America, i can tell you your roads seem very slow.
            (speed limits are another thing that don't seem to translate too well.. even though we both use miles.)
        • a6n28f, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3Did it ever?
    • guardianzero, on 03/08/2008, -6/+68I don't know for sure, but in England arn't things closer together? Can't you bike to alot of places?

      Cars are pretty much required in the USA because everything is spread out. Public transportation is only found in extremely crowded areas. So it's kind of a lose lose. No one can cut back on gas unless the 'combine trips' which my family has started doing.
      • devin_mm, on 03/08/2008, -2/+15In Canada we (alberta anyway) pay $4.35/gal (and that's not even for the good stuff).
        • elint6, on 03/08/2008, -8/+2Isn't the British gallon larger than the American gallon? I'm pretty sure Canada uses the British measurement.
        • thebusdriver, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3We pay by the liter in Canada, Im in Alberta too and Gas here is like $1.05/L or so right now. That works out to roughly $4 per gallon.
      • linxeh, on 03/08/2008, -3/+5Things are closer together in the UK sure, but I don't like biking 2 miles to the supermarket and back several times to get my shopping home. Most people can't afford to live near their place of work so have to commute just as in the US. Public transport is expensive - it cost me £2.40 (almost $5) to go less than 5 miles (single) on the bus last week to get to work. Plus it is not accessible - I'm lucky, I live in a town. Move out to the sticks a bit, or want to get to anywhere non mainstream, and it is nearly impossible. As for combining trips, we've had to do that here for years because of congestion, the high price of fuel (this has been going on decades), and the huge costs of running a car over here.
        • Elliuotatar, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3He's not saying you can bike. He's saying you use less gas, so in the end your costs are still less.

          In America, it's not unusual to have a commute of an hour to work, and back from work, at highway speeds. 1 hour at 60mph = 60 miles. 60mi at 30mpg = 2 gallons of gas to work, and 2 gallons from work, every day. At $3.20 a gallon, that's $12.80 you'd be spending every day, just to commute to and from work. An additional $384 a month in expense, just for fuel. $4,600 a year.
          • nutsackninja, on 03/09/2008, -3/+2you could find another job or find a place closer to work? Heck a crazy idea maybe you can use public transportation....

            its called thinking outside the box....
      • Waaaaaaaaaaaaah, on 03/08/2008, -15/+9Things probably are "closer together" here, but biking 15 miles to work in England is still the same as biking 15 miles to work in the US. It might look small on a map but that doesn't map speed up traveling times. I'm sure American's don't really understand what living in England is really like. I met an American once who couldn't understand how I hadn't "bumped in to" the queen, and couldn't fathom how I didn't know "Bill" who lived in England -- he didn't seem to understand that me and "Bill lived nearly 300 miles apart.
        • Yesplease, on 03/08/2008, -2/+13I sort of think you made up that story.
          • bitterbug, on 03/08/2008, -5/+3I don't think they did.
            Some American tourists come up to Canada and are shocked that we 1) speak english 2) sound a lot like their newscasters.
            Obviously this is not a majority, and would be restricted to first time visitors, but it's pretty surprising from a country that is located next door. When you look at the visitors geographically though, I doubt you'll find any of them coming from Washington, Ohio, Michigan, or any northern states. So it wouldn't really be any different than someone from the middle of Africa being surprised about life in Birmingham, England.
        • hendo1769, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3I have English friends who tell similarly ridiculous stories about Americans. I think this is a case of seeing what you expect you should see. Everyone does it; I went to Germany last year and of course ate tons of Brauts. Since the carts selling them were everywhere, I just assumed that that was what Germans ate for fast food. This perception wasn't corrected until a recent conversation with a German who pointed out for me that since I had expected to see Germans and Brauts going hand and hand, I had, but in reality it's not as big a deal as the stereotype would suggest. It has to be the same thing here.

          That said, the first time I was in Britain I only just missed running into the queen at her church in the highlands of Scotland.
      • MrSkills, on 03/08/2008, -6/+4That's one of the most hilarious comments I've ever read on Digg! Sounds like something Bush might say...
        • Smiff2, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2actually, people could bike a lot more than they do here (in the UK). something crazy like: 90% of car journeys here are under 2 miles. yes, some poeple need the luggage space but too much is laziness. our obesity problem is almost as bad as America's - related much I think?
          /me gets off horse
        • MrSkills, on 03/09/2008, -0/+0I quite agree, and I haven't had a car for 5 years. It's funny because we have this cliche about Americans all thinking that the whole UK is just London and a couple of villages just outside.... and this guys comment fitted the stereotype!
      • Myonosken, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1It's 25 miles to my nearest city and workplace. Closer, yes, but not really accessible without a car.
        • Efilnikufesin, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2But since it is closer, you don't have to use quite as much gas, and so save some more money.
          • Myonosken, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1It's not half the distance though...
    • paintpro, on 03/08/2008, -4/+92Thats all taxes. Please see your government about the issue.
      • thebusdriver, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4true, taxes are a big chunk of English prices, just as they are here in Canada
      • danandre, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2What issue? We pay for our pollution through taxes.
        Not our fault your lame government decides it wants to rank #1 on CO2 emissions pr capita every year.
    • lilricky, on 03/08/2008, -11/+2Yes, but if the figure of $4 is verified correct(which it hasnt yet, even though people are calling it a fact) Then you'll be paying about £6.50 a gallon.
    • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -14/+3I'm going to digg you up even though you used England in an inappropriate context. What you really meant was the UK.
      • jj101, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1Why is it inappropriate?
        • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -5/+1There's no difference in fuel suppliers throughout the UK. If you buy from Shell in Wales, you're buying from the same company who sells petrol in England. You've used England as if it's relevant to those outside the UK. It isn't. We live in the United Kingdom and I really don't see why people can't say that.
          • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -2/+1Oops, you were not the OP, but whatever :D
    • IceJelly, on 03/08/2008, -4/+12I was in England over the summer and when I did the calculation the gas prices were WAY HIGH. Of course... you guys have your cute little smart cars :)
      • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -0/+5Smart cars are German and are made in France. There are very, very few British car manufacturers left.
      • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 03/08/2008, -4/+2They just started selling Smart cars in my town in south Florida. I predict they'll fail within 2 years. They are totally wrong for the US market.
        • Jeffler, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6They seem to be selling well in snowy ol' Canada so who knows...
        • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -2/+7This sounds a lot like the attitude of someone who has not driven or even sat in one of these vehicles. Once you get inside you'll find them to be incredibly spacious. I can fit about $200 worth of groceries into my Smart.
          • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1No, this is the attitude of someone who could buy a Yaris or a Scion for about the same price and get a decent sized car with room for five, similar fuel economy and higher safety and quality.
        • Murdats, on 03/08/2008, -3/+3@neiltc
          hence why they will fail in america.
          actually trying a product before forming an opinion, how the hell would so many crappy companies survive in america if people did that?
          we shall just talk crap about things like smart cars and electric cars and brag about how those giant american cars are so great despite their inferiour build, efficiency and performance.
        • Waaaaaaaaaaaaah, on 03/08/2008, -1/+8When you are paying closer to $10/gallon to fill up your Hummer, SMART Cars will all of a sudden become an interesting prospect.
        • caoimhinn, on 03/08/2008, -1/+5I have nothing against the Smart car--I like the look, and could definitely live with the cargo space. What concerns me is the safety. In a country where so many people drive massive vehicles, I feel like I have to drive something substantial just to keep myself from getting killed!
      • smartmlp, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2Plus, Smart cars have been officially for sale in the US since January of this year. They even extended it by 2 inches or something for US roadways since we like them larger. Whats your excuse now?
        • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1They've been selling in my town since January. I have yet to see even one on the road.
    • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -4/+28Hmm, some quick math.

      Your taxes are higher. Add our price to your tax rate and see who is higher.
      • mikesbaker, on 03/08/2008, -5/+3our price includes a chunk of tax too dude
        • atron3030, on 03/08/2008, -2/+8yeah, but it's not as high as their tax, which i think was his point.... DUDE
        • GreenGrassyNoel, on 03/14/2008, -1/+1A DUDE IS A GUY ON A RANCH!!!
      • elint6, on 03/08/2008, -1/+9They're both the same. Global oil prices are standard. That's why OPEC cartel-ized in the first place.
      • scy1192, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1a 100% tax increase? I find that hard to believe
    • olenick, on 03/08/2008, -12/+10What's unfair? US gas prices, even at $4/gal, are still too low it sounds like. Once prices go up we'll magically figure out a way to make cars run without burning dinosaur juice. That'll solve a large number of both political and environmental problems. I'm glad that the OPEC countries are providing a great incentive to build technology that marginalizes their countries sole export.
      • NotOptium, on 03/08/2008, -0/+11Mmmmmmm. Dinosaur juice.
      • GreenGrassyNoel, on 03/14/2008, -0/+1totally, I'm so sick of people complaining about gas prices. Gas goes up $0.50 and people freak out. They need to actually realize how much more they are spending and be like "oh, if I buy one less ___ a month then it'll even out. And there are options despite the "oh i can't do that because blah blah blah blah" attitude.
    • mydigga, on 03/08/2008, -4/+20You said petrol is better than gas, so you may have answered your own question.
      • scy1192, on 03/09/2008, -0/+3petrol and gasoline are, in actuality, the exact same thing. He was probably saying the name is better.
    • Mr.Gone, on 03/08/2008, -1/+52Yeah, you guys should rise up against your oppressive government, maybe find a new land where you can be free to live the way you want, to become independent, if you will. When you succeed you can declare your independence, with a document of some sort. Then after a couple hundred years you can put up with the constant barbs from the citizens of the bitter country you escaped. It'll be great!
      • furbyboy, on 03/08/2008, -10/+7lol, i think its funny how you guys always say that you should 'rise up' or have a 'revolution'......... for the past 8 years the majority of u guys have been pissed off with ur leader, and had ur rights taken away from you from right under ur nose and all u do is sit back and accept it like good little doggies!!
        • zaco, on 03/08/2008, -5/+12nope, you missed it.
        • metalwolf, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4Just a random quote:
          "Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind.

          And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.

          How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar. "
        • atticus8, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2Furbyboy, I've just gotten urgent word from the American president! He says, and I quote, "If your new elected guy, whatever his name is, can't give me as good a blowjob as the ones I've gotten from Tony Blair since at least 2003, I'm gonna kick you folks out of my Coalition of the Willing to do as I command."
          http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/ate0141l.jpg
    • vertinox, on 03/08/2008, -0/+7The key issue is that in the states we have to ship a lot of products on truck hundreds if not thousands of miles which means the prices of everything else goes through the roof. Also our public transportation system sucks.
    • dddavid, on 03/08/2008, -3/+11So in the US, the price of gas plus taxes is about $3, in the UK, the price of gas plus taxes is about $8. The price of gas is probably about the same, just more taxes. Go UK.
      • Waaaaaaaaaaaaah, on 03/08/2008, -5/+4I think you missed the point. Part of the reason that tax on petrol is so high is to encourage people to use their cars less, there-by reducing global warming.
        • ganlet, on 03/08/2008, -2/+4You've obviously never tried to live in Southern California, driving is a way of life. Things are very spread out. It is completely normal for someone to compute 40+ miles to work. People are going to drive, its how they get to work; I prefer us looking into alternative energy sources than dream of a day where people don't drive.
        • Myonosken, on 03/08/2008, -2/+2@ganlet: 40+ miles is common in the UK. We may be smaller, but people still treck far to workplaces.
      • spider-man, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3I doubt that this is really any significant part of the reason that the tax on UK gas is so much higher. UK gas has always been much higher as far as I remember (which is farther back than I would like to admit). Maybe, just maybe that since most of Europe is a socialist cradle to grave haven, they really do charge that much more in taxes to support that kind of society.
      • scy1192, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1there's no way the taxes would end up adding $5 to the price of a $3 item.
    • linxeh, on 03/08/2008, -0/+11Unless you were refering to the low octane rating of US fuels, in the US 'gas' means 'petrol'.
    • crzdmn, on 03/08/2008, -8/+3We Americans love our SUV's, sports cars, and minivans. For that matter the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) uses Ford Excursions for their standard issue vehicle, because it versatile and good a protecting the environment i would guess :)
    • Stennie, on 03/08/2008, -2/+4As others have pointed out, your places of interest are mostly closer together and your public transit is in a much healthier state. More amenities seem to be made for bike travel as well. Those taxes spent on gas more than likely fund that public transit that is much more affordable than high monthly car payments, forced insurance, and 5 to 10 gallons a week of gas. Not to mention paying for parking in some areas or tolls on certain roads, nor the inevitable repairs that once begun never seem to stop. I'd pay $8 a gallon for gas if it meant that the daily drive in to work could be taken via bus or rail instead.
      • AliV, on 03/08/2008, -1/+4Whoh whoh, public transport in the UK is good? You have obviously never been to the UK.
        I am not sure about how insurance works in the US but here I pay £2400 a year for a 1.8 and if I want to park I have to pay 3.60 a day for an unattended car park. In London the parking charges are closer to £10.
      • Myonosken, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1Public transport was good....about 30 years ago. It's now £4.50 for a day pass, or £2.60 for a basic one way trip.
      • darlingt, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1@AliV and Myonosken: The only public transportation that 90% of the US has is school buses... and that's not for the general public, obviously. Compared to nothing, the UK's public transport system is excellent.
    • mcrumley, on 03/08/2008, -3/+15Petrol in the UK is the same thing as gasoline in the US.
      • blackjack75, on 03/08/2008, -0/+5Yes but it costs money to transport it from one place to another, all that to change the name.
    • alphex, on 03/08/2008, -4/+251. *sigh* Petrol is the same thing as Gas.
      2. taxes are different.
      3. learn about supply & demand economics
      • Squires, on 03/08/2008, -0/+5 Learn about the Federal Reserve. If you account for all the money that has been created, gas has not risen in price. The dollar has fallen in purchasing power. Crude went from around $20 to $100 in a decade. Using supply and demand the argument would follow that ether supply fell by 4/5 or demand increased to 500% of previous levels. A combination of both can't explain it because most years the supply increases. Peak oil is a theory that has been tossed around since the 19th century, it hasn't happened so it has no bearing on this. With new technologies making previously unusable sources of hydro-carbons now economically viable, peak production gets pushed farther back. Peak production will happen when a competing energy source becomes more cost effective than the current system.
        A new refinery has not been built in the US since the 70's. This is a limiting factor supply of gas, not oil, in this country. You can thank the government for that. Coupled with the increase in number of dollars (thus the declining purchasing power), the rise in the price at the pump can be explained.
    • protodon, on 03/08/2008, -12/+2You're not paying in dollars, you're paying in pounds! That's like me buying a coke here and going, oh it's 1 dollar but it's only 50 pence! What a deal!
      • trevdawg5, on 03/08/2008, -1/+5Actually he did the calculation back to our USD so its not how you described
      • coyoteblue, on 03/08/2008, -1/+4Fail.
    • kds405, on 03/08/2008, -3/+7This is an American story about what Americans are paying for gas. Why should it matter how much the British pay?
      • cyranthus, on 03/08/2008, -4/+3its called perspective. almost everybody in america bitches and moans about gas prices being so high when we're really being spoiled. gas prices in america are CHEAP compared to prices in Europe. so before you go to the gas station next time and start bitching about gas prices... why dont you try moving to England or France for a while.
        • pmrx, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3Because this is America, not England or France! With all due respect, you gents have no right to "put us in our place" as it were, because your high taxation on petro subsidizes a public transportation system which is worth a damn. There will always be someone who comes out and proclaims "but I commute just as far to work as the Yanks," however, that is their problem, not ours. They have access to a public transit; they choose to live away from it. I live in Michigan. What public transport do we have? The Rapid, with an effective radius of "immediate downtown," which is great if you work at the hospital. Not so much for every place else.

          We have reduced taxes in exchange for less public service. We are a capitalist society dealing with a monopoly we are powerless against. A lazy populace has allowed facism to take hold, and reduced the value of our fiat currency to nil. We have every right to complain; to look over our shoulders at the Brits and say "we want Universal Healthcare, pensions worth a damn, and job protection." With a devaluation in the dollar, a rise in basic commodities such as food, rent, and utility, along with a high unemployment rate, raises -- if any -- which do not keep pace with inflation, effectively doing the same job for less each year, PREDATORY health care costs.... perhaps we pay a lot more than Europeans think.
        • moush, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2We're complaining because the price is rising, and oil is supposedly costing so much money to make gas. But despite all that, every oil company has had record profits this year.
        • kds405, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1The only "perspective" I need on this story is how much it is going to cost me. This is the way things are in the US, it doesn't matter.
    • H1tchh1k3r, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1the rising price of socks
    • Homerr, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1Furbyboy - our cars in the US probably only get half the mileage of European cars so the cost per mile is still about the same. =/
    • hypermog, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1Why don't you ask British Petroleum?
    • hades8408, on 03/09/2008, -1/+6That is great math. You only forgot one thing. The average salary in the UK is 32602 gross per year. Convert that to Dollars at 1.08 x 3.78541178. That give you an average salary of an employee in the UK at 123,411.99 Dollars per year. The average salary of a US employee is about a quarter of that. $36,764 to be exact.
      Earn $36,000 and pay $4 a gallon
      or
      Earn $123,000 and pay $8 a gallon.

      I think its pretty obvious who has the better deal

      Don't think of price as an amount of money. Its much easier to understand economics when you think of it in term of how many hours you have to work to buy something.
      • bah7t4, on 03/09/2008, -1/+0IMF says you don't know how to do math and the average Brit salary a year is 37,328 USD vs American 44,765 USD.
        • moush, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1american's make 45k a year? wow, i want to live in that country
    • PURPLEDRINK, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Because......... trade, like robbery, is based on the law of the strong hand.
  • jstohler, on 03/08/2008, -4/+135This quote sums up the entire Bush Administration: "Wait... wait... Whut'dju just say?"
    • PolishLogic, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3To be fair though, when is the last time Bush had to fill a car up? He's probably been rather clueless about gas prices for 10 years or so. It's not like he runs errands around DC and stops at the local Chevron.

      Yes, he's a douche, but still...
      • pmrx, on 03/08/2008, -1/+0I see your point and upvote for it. That was my immediate thought as well, when I heard him say it on NPR. However, I think it simply illustrates how out of touch our Representatives are.
      • GreenGrassyNoel, on 03/14/2008, -0/+1umm, to be fair he is the president of a very oil dependent country and he started a war over oil. He should know how the price at the pump is going.
    • 2bees, on 03/08/2008, -3/+1Come on, how many of you people responding can honestly say that YOU know what the price of gas is all over the U.S.A.? Lame duck reporting. IMO
  • topper2t, on 03/08/2008, -18/+1Well, Mr. Furboy, you forgot to add your tax to the price of gas. With more tax, the USA could meet or beat your price anytime!!!
  • lilricky, on 03/08/2008, -11/+15Unfortunately, none of these news agencies have told us which "analysts" have came up with the $4 figure. Doesn't anyone else find that odd? Or are we that divided that we can't look at facts rationally?
    • mydigga, on 03/08/2008, -1/+18I have paid anywhere from $3.09 to $3.88 for gas in the past six months, so with gas hitting a record high on an almost daily basis $4 gas is not irrational. I'm in Ohio, which tends to be pretty close to the national average per gallon. I know some states have already exceeded $4/ gallon.
    • itdood, on 03/08/2008, -6/+3^^^ exactly. Bush just can't think on his feet. Poor answer to a loaded question. Can anyone be aware of what every analyst in the country is predicting? 1 week before this $4 prediction, I heard $0.5 reduction because inventories were so high and demand was down. WTF man, the info is all over the place.
      • lilricky, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1Name one analyst, please! and Jon Stewart is not an analyst.
    • Syric, on 03/08/2008, -2/+11So you need a source to believe a 10-cent rise in gas prices?
      • Syric, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3Actually my mistake. Call it a 10-cent DROP.
      • lilricky, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Syric, what I'm talking about is, the news media claims "analysts" have told them that in this year gas prices will hit $4 and gullible people take it as gospel without questioning them. Thats idiotic. You need to question them on everything. Or why even bother thinking anymore if the news outlets will do your thinking for you? WAKE UP PEOPLE!
    • juliankauai, on 03/08/2008, -1/+7here in hawaii gas is $4+ already.
      • siszam, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1In one place here in Cali it's around $4.50. I heard it on the news last night but was busy doing other things and didn't catch the city.
      • GreenGrassyNoel, on 03/14/2008, -0/+1you know us here on the mainland are subsidizing your so-called "interstate highways".
    • pmrx, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1What I find really odd is that the increase in fuel is blamed on a lame dollar, but the increases never happen until a major holiday ramps up, or a weekend approaches. Shouldn't prices be reflective of the dollar's value of the same day, using their logic?
    • SuperCUBE, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4Who needs an analyst when you can just look at the price fluctuation yourself?
  • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -19/+5The rest of the world ponders everyone in the USA's idiocy at thinking that $4 per gallon is expensive.

    Just paid around $7 per gallon to fill up my car. Stop crying until you're paying what we are.
    • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -5/+7You have a ton of taxes, we don't.

      I'm going to keep crying foul, and I will never support 2 or 3 dollars/gallon in taxes.
      • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -2/+4This is irrelevant. No political party in the United Kingdom stands for reducing the tax we currently pay on fuel. Short of starting our own political party and gaining a majority in the house of commons (646 members!) there is absolutely nothing we can do about it.

        So yeah, we pay a LOT more than you guys and the money may go to a different place but there is damn well nothing we can do about it. There is however something you guys can do about it - buy cars with better fuel efficiency.
    • cowsgonemadd3, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Being we drive more it is more expensive....
      • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2I'd love to see any research which actually shows that average American people drive more than those in the UK. Sure, there might be people in big lorries or transit companies which go right across the country, but in terms of the average family etc I don't think there would be much difference.

        The amount of time anyone is going to drive on a regular basis, whether it be to work or somewhere else, is going to be about the same. I wouldn't drive over an hour to work just like many Americans wouldn't drive over an hour to work.

        Certainly the US's roads are far easier to drive on than those in the UK. Roads in the UK tend to be twistier, have more junctions and points where you're required to stop. That uses fuel, constantly stopping and starting the car.
        • pell, on 03/08/2008, -1/+7I don't know about the States, but here in Canada our public transit system is absolutely terrible so there isn't always an option to take it. THe country is HUGE so riding your bike around isn't really an option either. Only major cities such as Toronto or Vancouver have half decent transit, but the majority of the population lives outside of those cities.
        • darlingt, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1"Certainly the US's roads are far easier to drive on than those in the UK. Roads in the UK tend to be twistier..."
          You've obviously never driven in Appalachia. It takes you 3 hours to go 5 miles horizontally because you go UP the mountain and DOWN the mountain and UP the next mountain and DOWN the next mountain and... you get the point.
      • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4I drive 45mins to work and if there is traffic, an hour.

        I don't work or live in a city.
        • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1Sounds a lot like someone who lives in the UK. Indeed, I drive 45 minutes to University and if there is traffic, it takes an hour.

          Most of the driving is on rural single carriageways.
          • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1My 45min drive is is about 20 mins getting to the interstate, then 70mph the rest of the way there.
          • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1Mine is about 15 minutes getting to the dual carriageway part of the road, which lasts for another 10 minutes (70mph) and the rest of the way is 60mph single carriageway.

            It's a nice road, I get about 50mpg out of my Smart on it.
    • itdood, on 03/08/2008, -2/+1May be idiocy to you, but energy is the cornerstone to any economic machine. Cheap energy drives a stronger economy. It's like a throttle. I submit to you, that $7 gas in the EU contributes to its double digit unemployment rate.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Unemployment_ra ...
      • neiltc13, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2I guess the cheap energy is what allows me to get two dollars for one of my pounds when before it was closer to 1.6?
    • NotOptium, on 03/08/2008, -0/+7You said you'd love to see studies showing that Americans drive more than Brits. Well I'd love to show you the stats, so I looked them up.

      In 2005, the average Brit drove 6,800 miles. The average American drove 13,657 miles.

      So people in the US do drive further than people in the UK. In fact, twice as far. So while you're criticizing people in America for complaining, and saying that people in the UK are the ones who should be complaining, on average people in the UK spend the exact same amount (double the price, half the gas).

      (sources: http://www.localbroker.co.uk/news/britishdrivers01 ...
      http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15969480/ )
  • paintpro, on 03/08/2008, -1/+77I want a solar powered cat!
    • Hincapie, on 03/08/2008, -0/+19that doesn't make sense, but i'll go with it
    • Recidivus, on 03/08/2008, -0/+43They already are solar powered, why do you think they lie in the sunshine all day?
    • sh04, on 03/08/2008, -0/+8Caturday already?
    • dacjames, on 03/08/2008, -0/+22Wind powered cat... with solar powered pants.
    • kutateli, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Best typo ever?
  • dupswapdrop, on 03/08/2008, -2/+17Bush doesn't buy gas you buy the gas for him, that's why he don't care! We should start deducting the cost of flying is lazy butt back and forth to Texas from his pay.
    • badqat, on 03/08/2008, -5/+1Oh, so you think Obama, Clinton or McCain have pumped their own gas recently?
      • dupswapdrop, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1But I bet they both know the price of a gallon of gas at the pump!
    • damonic, on 03/08/2008, -1/+5He doesn't care because he is an oil man. He's been enjoying record profits for more than a year...
  • lilricky, on 03/08/2008, -15/+7How does the president make the gas prices go up or down? Does he sit on the board of OPEC?
    • wayzup, on 03/08/2008, -1/+23No, he destabilizes the region the oil comes from.
      • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -8/+3Actually that has nothing to do with. The price of gas here is almost directly (inversely if you want to mathematically correct) related to the value of the dollar. The dollar goes down, oil goes up.

        That may still be bush's fault, but it's not because of destabilization.
        • exomni, on 03/08/2008, -1/+10People say there are two big issues: The War and The Economy.

          There is only one issue: The War.

          The War is directly responsible for the miserable economic situation today, and Bush is directly responsible for the war.

          And besides that, Bush's terrible economic policy inflates the problem, along with his failure to prevent lenders from driving us to a housing crisis.
        • bah7t4, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1lower taxes inflates what problem how? Recessions happen in capitalist economies, and we aren't technically even in one yet. Recession implys back to back quarters of negative growth. Last quarter was a ***** 0.6% growth but not negative growth. Go back to your cave, its safer there than the real world.
          • wayzup, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1AH yes but military spending is figured in as part of the GDP so if we weren't spending over $275 million PER DAY, I'd say we've most likely had 4 years of consecutive negative growth. Bush & Co. HAVE TO keep the war going and breaking their own records of over-spending to cover up exactly how FUBAR'd we are economically.
    • chall2001, on 03/08/2008, -2/+9Candidate Bush said that President Clinton was responsible so maybe you should ask him.
    • diggrific, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1Sure, OPEC sets a price. There are costs to refine the crude. Then seasonal demand comes into play. And let's not forget the taxes that vary across the country, but are a sizable amount per gallon.

      What is happening NOW that is causing the increase?

      Currently, demand is down and supply is up. This would lead you to believe prices would be low. Oil is traded every day, just like gold and pork bellies. Investors are buying oil as a hedge against inflation and some market instability. This is driving the oil price up.
  • tzisc, on 03/08/2008, -3/+35"Without Bush, the terrorists would have to work second jobs at Bennigan's. Or the Middle Eastern equivalent, Applebee's."
  • TheVirus13, on 03/08/2008, -2/+16I can't wait for him to be out of office.
    • thedogfatherx, on 03/08/2008, -6/+0You think everything is going to magically be good if there were someone else in office? Everything isn't bush's fault. I do agree with you however, I can't wait for him to be out of office.
    • Tyler25, on 03/08/2008, -0/+11-20-09
  • ligyron, on 03/08/2008, -1/+28Unfortunately I'm from Canada so have no access to the videos
    • smafty, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3http://broadband.thecomedynetwork.ca/comedy/
      • teh_techie, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6Doesn't look like Thursday's show is up there on thecomedynetwork yet for us Canadians...
        Guess that's what torrents are for...
      • Rekzai, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3The required ActiveX Firefox plugin is not yet compatible with your version of the browser. Please use the latest version of Firefox.
    • elliam, on 03/08/2008, -4/+1In fact if you try to go to comedycentral.com it redirects you to the comedy network web site...

      How do some of these people manage to get to digg in the first place?
      • Poetheunclothed, on 03/08/2008, -0/+7 Ignorant Jackass, Your just as big a fag as comedy central for supporting this *****. Its not like the video link TELLS you where to go, all it tells you is "Content not available! ***** off non-american! were tracking your IPz!". On top of that comedynetwork.ca is a cheap piece of ***** that loads slow and is buggy as hell, if i want to watch dailyshow or colbert It sometimes takes 2 or 3 reload before it even comes through. I say ***** this elitist, isolationist american web content, this is bad for the net.
    • EricPeters, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3I'm just curious. I've seen comments like this a lot on here. Why exactly can't you guys see the videos?
      • WakeRider, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4Because a lot of the sites basically tell you to ***** off if you're not an American. I tried to watch The Moment of Truth on Fox on Demand, but thats for US residents only, I just recently tried to go on Hula, after seeing it on Digg, GUESS ***** WHAT: This service is only available to US residents. Why can't the rest of us visit your sites too?
        • Jadey, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Because Comedy Network has paid big bucks to re-broadcast the shows up in Canada. They have agreements going both ways to geo-fence videos online. There are also videos geo-fenced to show only in Canada. The whole system is utterly lame and needs to be discarded.
    • voxel, on 03/09/2008, -0/+3Unfortunately I also live in Canada.... and use Linux.
      "Sorry, your OS is not supported!
      We recommend Windows 2000, Windows XP, or Mac OS X."
      hahaha
  • chubbybunny, on 03/08/2008, -12/+6I thought when the democrats were attempting to take over congress a few years back they promised us lower gas prices... What happened?
    • charlie55, on 03/08/2008, -7/+4maybe they realized the government cannot and should not be in charge of managing prices.
      • chubbybunny, on 03/08/2008, -6/+5I totally agree with you. But they promised us lower gas prices.. nobody seems to pin that on "them".
      • chubbybunny, on 03/08/2008, -4/+1And in the interest of "full disclosure", I dislike both parties.
    • elbergel, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3they said the same thing about iraq...
    • Acewrap, on 03/08/2008, -3/+5Republican obstruction.
      • chubbybunny, on 03/08/2008, -3/+3Can you source that for me? I'd be interested to read about it.
  • mrzack, on 03/08/2008, -18/+4John Stjewart should ponder more about 9/11 being an inside neocon job
    • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -4/+3You should ponder that if was an inside job, all 100 senators were a part of it, along with the house.

      A truly inside job of that magnitude would be have to covered by everybody in the government, not just one group.
      • exomni, on 03/08/2008, -4/+2What? Are you stupid? The more people that are involved in a conspiracy, the more likely it will leak. There is no way in hell all 100 senators could have been involved in such a conspiracy, whereas the theories of Bush's complicity are at least plausible, if crazy and unlikely.
        • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -2/+2You made my point exactly. Thats why it wasn't a conspiracy, because it would have leaked by now.

          It's not and never was any type of conspiracy.
        • insomn3ak, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1FAIL
        • SquigglyP, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1well, to be honest, it WAS a conspiracy. Doesn't matter what side you're on, there was a conspiracy involved no matter what. Either it was the president and his henchmen or it was several middle eastern males. Take your pick.
    • mrzack, on 03/08/2008, -3/+3the senators that do know are afraid. whoever said the US senators had anything to do with 9/11? you retards make stuff up.
      • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3No more retarded that your assumption that 9/11 was any sort of inside job.
    • tabularosa, on 03/08/2008, -2/+0O.I.L. = Operation Iraqi Liberation = Oleaginous Isreali Loophole = Occupational Ithyphalic Libido = Viagra + P. N .A. C. + False Flag Operation = $4.00/gal. Testing 1. 2. 3. testing . . . Fair & unbalanced equation
    • siszam, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3Isn't that cute. Even as you people bash Bush and admit how bad he is, you defend the governments integrity. Just like an abused wife. The government really loves you only abuses you to teach you, right?
  • NelsonR, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3What can anyone say about our great and glorious and all knowing leader. He is a shining beacon of Republicanism and what it stands for. My suggestion stands, with his twin Iraqi John now running for office do the right thing, donate Republican campaign money to the poor and elderly. God doesn't condone waste.
  • charlie55, on 03/08/2008, -14/+3i dont expect bush to manage oil prices. it isnt his responsibility.

    if oil is too expensive. move to the city and ride a bike. it is fun.
    • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -0/+8Nope, the city sucks. It's dirty, it's cramped, it's loud, it's never truly dark and it just too far removed from nature.

      If I can't piss off my back porch in peace, on my own property, it's not not worth living there.
      • thedogfatherx, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6Man I totally agree with you.
      • charlie55, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1well, to each his own. buying gas is just a choice you will make i guess, and we shouldnt expect our leaders to provide it for us at a price we think is fair.
    • oblivinated, on 03/08/2008, -1/+4Higher gas prices is a good thing. It'll discourage all the SUV owners to move to better fuel efficient cars.
      • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1Yep, and it'll ***** everybody else in the process. I don't want to spend $4, 5 or 6 dollars a gallon for my car that gets 30mpg anymore than somebody who gets 20mpg. You don't screw everybody else over to prove a point.

        With higher fuel prices, food goes up, electricity goes up, everything goes up. Moving things around is not free.
  • roflbrothel, on 03/08/2008, -3/+26BREAKING NEWS: BUSH FOUND TO BE IGNORANT! TURN ON CNN!
  • chubbymidget, on 03/08/2008, -2/+18Our President ladies and gentlemen. And nearly half of voted for him...
    • stafa786, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1TWICE!
    • Sarevok9, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1*insert wit lacking neocon response here about 9/11, terrorism, and further justification to rape from sea to shining sea and beyond*

      //sarcasm
  • Teckla, on 03/08/2008, -7/+18I generally believe in democracy but I don't think anyone who voted for Bush in 2004 should be allowed to vote in the next two presidential elections....
  • diceau, on 03/08/2008, -14/+4I respect Bush.

    Wow, that felt dirtier than I anticipated.
  • john2kx, on 03/08/2008, -5/+7It's well-known that Bush has a small dial in his office that he can turn to immediately change the price of oil. His supposed ignorance of the matter is a farce.
    • 2bees, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1Anyone who believes that statement needs to have their head examined. The president doesn't have the power to lower and rise oil prices at his command. Idiots believe that kind of rhetoric not rational people.
      • john2kx, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1I should have known some dumbass would miss the sarcasm completely.
  • HiDef, on 03/08/2008, -9/+12Most in this digg need a lesson in economics. And we are spoiled with $3-$4 gas as compared to $8 in Europe. Gas prices have been blown out of proportion. Most of us could make better long term choices and save 30% on our expenses and not bitch so much about gas. It's getting very boring. Take control of your lives people. You sound like a bunch of barking dogs. One barks and then you all bark.
    • roberts1111, on 03/08/2008, -5/+2couldn't agree with you more
    • withincontext, on 03/08/2008, -0/+7I'm an American technologist in my late 20's. I have a wife and young daughter. Our second car will be sold in a matter of weeks. I've been taking the Metro (bus-subway-bus) to work and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

      Some of us ARE making sacrifices to promote change.
    • sutherbj, on 03/08/2008, -2/+5Kind of hard to take you serious when exxon makes 40 billion PROFIT in one year (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/business/01cnd-e ... the highest of any company ever. and yeah, it's cheaper here compared to there, but compare our social services as to theirs. universal healthcare? OOOooooooohhhHHH RUN! Socialized Medicine!
      • elint6, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3Please check out the Exxon-Mobil's financial statements (Balance sheet, Cash Flow, Shareholder's Equity, etc.) and you'll see that about 10-12% of their income is actual profit. So, in crude terms, they have a 10% markup. Other -- indeed most companies -- have much higher profit ratios because their external cost of capital is probably at 9%. Cisco, for example, has profit margins of over 35%. MS, Cisco, Apple, hell, even Toyota and Honda are ripping us off a lot more than Exxon-Mobil ever did.
        • a6n28f, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3No, he's correct. See for yourself: http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/earnings/2 ... ... or read his link.

          2005 data has their PROFITS are on the order of 10 billion per quarter for an annual profit of roughtly 40 billion. Their annual revenue is over 100 billion - more than the GDP of all but 3 countries. And it's only increased since then.

          I know it's hard to believe, but look at the facts before condemning somebody who tries to educate you.
          • elint6, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3You just proved my point. The article's headline states a profit of $10 billion while your comment claims the annual revenue of over $100 billion. So, the margin is roughly 10% (I said 10-12%). Cisco margin is over 35%.
            Just looking at aggregate revenue is pointless. I could buy $10million computers for $600 each and sell them for $50 . My gross revenue is now an astonishing $500 million!
            Next, time please check out the actual statements (like I suggested) and not some Usatoday article. Like: http://www.prars.com/
          • elint6, on 03/08/2008, -2/+2UPDATE: Their 4Q revenue was over $100 billion with a profit of $10 billion. This does not change my argument or the fact that they only have about ~10% margin (calculated as net income/gross revenue) i.e., profit as a percentage of earnings.

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...

            (Citing popular source because the primary financial statement is
          • jaxcs, on 03/10/2008, -1/+1Tried looking at your first link but it asked me too many personal questions. Your second link is just another article. If what you say is true it's very interesting but it's also very confusing. Every article I've looked at have stated an in increase in net profits, some going as high as 75 percent. yet you say that they only have a 10 percent net profit. So how can I make sense of your claim? Assuming your statement is true, some combination of the following also must be true. Exxon's other businesses all tanked except for it's core oil business, the company as a whole earned less than 10 percent profit the previous year and oil is now contributing more to the bottom line, the company has recently invested heavily in the infrastructure of the company.
      • Nosnevets02, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2Considering that Exxon had revenue of 370 billion dollars in 2007, that is only a profit of 10 cents for every dollar. They also paid over 30 billion dollars in taxes, more than the entire lower 50% of tax payers in the U.S...... by a single company.

        http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ci&cid=66 ...

        http://seekingalpha.com/article/63131-exxon-s-2007 ...
    • jaxcs, on 03/08/2008, -1/+5You have no understanding of the role gas and oil plays in everyday life. A tripling of oil prices affects everyone, not just people who own cars. In manufacturing, it's used to make plastics, rubber and a host of common chemicals. Processed into a fuel, it affects nearly every mode of transport and machinery. It affects the price of food since fields are ploughed, seeded, harvested and transported on farm machinery. Cattle and particularly fish are raised or caught and transported to your local market via ships, plane and truck. It will even affect how, where, and how often you take a vacation since pleasure craft of all kinds run on fuel. In the short term, industry can absorb the higher cost of fuel since they don't want to alienate consumers but no industry can long endure a 5-10 percent increase to the bottom line. If you think you can weather the upcoming energy crisis, simply by carpooling to work or by walking to the local market, you are in for a surprise. Don't think this is ***** either, the prevalence of gas driven machinery affects everyone globally in sometimes unexpected ways. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/19/business/worldbu ...
    • elint6, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1Agreed to some extent. Crude oil is priced the SAME everywhere in USD. When the USD value drops, that makes oil even cheaper in European countries (in the short term at least). The $8 markup is basically all taxes (which, in theory, subsidize health care, public transportation, or reduce income taxes, etc.) so people can afford the gasoline/petrol because other things are taken care of, or public transportation is affordable.
    • SammyJr, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Europe's high gas prices are mostly tax - taxes that go to fund public transportation, health care, and Universities. We have lower gas prices but pay out the nose for everything else. Who's really getting the better deal?
  • dddavid, on 03/08/2008, -1/+16I'm glad we solved that problem of $31 a barrel oil. Just one more Bush "accomplishment" (*****) he can add to his "legacy" (rap sheet).
    • newauraxx, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1It's not a ***** up my friend. Bush has done a great job at making his friends and his family rich. His presidency will be looked at as a total failure for the masses. But its the few that have benefit, and its the few that bush care about. He has been the best president for the elite.
  • NelsonR, on 03/08/2008, -7/+3Well your ignorance is showing about Europe's high gas prices compared to ours. Now please factor in the price of America's worthless wall paper currency and wallah your argument doesn't hold piss. Wow, the Fed is going to lower interest rates again. Watch the price of gas this summer. Would you accept monopoly money for a barrel of oil?
  • electronicchina, on 03/08/2008, -4/+1good.
  • 2timer, on 03/08/2008, -7/+0I see bush made himself look even more dumn.. If thats even possible.. Bush is a human bobble head.. But this allpolitics.ws will help.
  • tabularosa, on 03/08/2008, -7/+1What a dork.
  • ElChapusero, on 03/08/2008, -14/+2If anyone has done something to lower gas prices is Bush.

    Isn't it what that whole Iraq thing is about?

    Oh and, by the way, changing the president won't lower gas prices
    • eddie72, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3Really? You think? Did you not realize that after we started bombing one of the most prosperous fuel countries in the world that our gas prices went through the roof? That didn't set any bells off in your head?
      • crazydigger, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3I agree with eddie72 whole heartedly.
    • sysop073, on 03/08/2008, -1/+4I sit here and wonder how we could have possibly elected Bush twice. And then I see comments like this
    • PoonGnarfler, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1Wow you are pretty damn amazing. I keep being optimistic and thinking that people understand basic things like WHERE WE IMPORT OIL FROM. Big #1: Canada. Then Saudi Arabia, then Venezuela, then Mexico... need I go on? Iraq has never and still does not even make it in the top 15 of our oil imports. Next time, before you comment, you might want to do this thing called reading or researching, they are actually kind of useful sometimes.
  • facelessmanchs, on 03/08/2008, -1/+37There isn't a nice way to say this, but we have a ***** idiot as a president....
    • pennvneff, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3You just figured that out?
    • valkries, on 03/08/2008, -1/+8Welcome to 7 years ago
    • crazydigger, on 03/08/2008, -1/+4I could have done a better job.
    • EricPeters, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2All hail President Homer.

      Just kidding. People actually like Homer.
    • facelessmanchs, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2No...I realized it a long time ago, but this kind of stuff just makes you shake your head...
  • prleet, on 03/08/2008, -7/+2In United States of Mexico, companies grows you.
  • pennvneff, on 03/08/2008, -3/+20***** $4 dollars a gallon, it's already $5 dollars a gallon in California.
  • valkries, on 03/08/2008, -2/+6The videos are down now. Anyone have a mirror?
  • pandaboy99, on 03/08/2008, -4/+2Oil being so expensive will only spur innovation in technlogies through necessity.. there was a time when people thought trees were being cut down too fast but the advent of email eliminated millions of tons of wasteful paper products.. bring on the hydrogen powered cars!
    • Stratochief66, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3You provide cheap and compact hydrogen, and we'll provide the cars...
      • elint6, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2Not to mention SAFELY CONTAINED hydrogen.
    • PoonGnarfler, on 03/08/2008, -0/+0Yeah, I didn't realize that a 1 million dollar hydrogen car would be made available for the average consumer soon! The fact that Bush pretends to support hydrogen cars (he does) should tell you everything, an Oil Man supporting a car that fore goes oil... sounds a little trite, don't you think?
    • GreenGrassyNoel, on 03/14/2008, -0/+1I can't find the source right now, but I heard that despite email, the amount of paper we use has kept increasing.
  • kcornwell, on 03/08/2008, -3/+1I want a wind powered car!
    • crazydigger, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2I still want a Wind Powered Cat!
  • oblivinated, on 03/08/2008, -6/+1Higher gas prices is a good thing. It'll discourage all the SUV owners to move to better fuel efficient cars.
    • RevToTheRedline, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1My truck gets better fuel economy than most average drivers get in their Civics, it's all in how you drive.
  • exronin, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6The price in europe is higher (atleast in London) because the invest a lot of that money into research for renewable fuel sources. In U.S. it is higher because the Saudi Sheiks wanted a pay raise.
    • blackjack75, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3In Europe we just have a lot of taxes on everything they can make us feel guilty for: tobacco, cars, alcohol. If everybody stopped smoking in their car while drunk most our governments would file for bankruptcy
  • futureisours, on 03/08/2008, -8/+1I think it's laughable that you fools blame Bush for everything, like he has much control over the free market. Now, if you moonbats were correct in that the war in Iraq was about oil, you'd have drastically lower market prices for oil.
    • jwillis11, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2We'd have lower prices? Or would it be that the extra money is going in someone's pocket? Why lower prices when you can post record profits like Exxon is doing? I'm sure Bush (an oil man) isn't quite hurting from this either. It doesn't mean the price for consumers will ever lower. It just means more profit for those making it. Plus, I think (not sure, but my best guess) that those "moonbats" are suggesting that the war is being used to drive UP prices on oil. Again, who sells oil? Bush. Who then profits along with his Saudi cohorts? Bush.
    • bxblox, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1"Moonbats," something fans of rush and o'reilly say when they want to complain about "lefties" and "liberals"
  • Leomarth, on 03/08/2008, -2/+13Remember when gas was pushing $2.00 a gallon late 2000? Bush said that if it reached that point, he would push to drop the Federal gas tax. I guess it was forgotten when the public forgot about it too.

    Oil prices would also be lower except for a lot of retirement fund and investment fund managers investing in oil to try to beat inflation. Some people are speculating oil will settle around $150 a barrel, or there will be an oil bubble that will burst and settle at $30 a barrel.
    • captaindigger, on 03/09/2008, -2/+2Yes your right and supply and demand mean nothing and oil will flow forever. Someday you will pull your head out of the sand.
      • Leomarth, on 03/09/2008, -2/+1Wow. You just don't read do you? What part of "prices would be lower" didn't you see? The "LOWER" part? Let me fill you in... "LOWER", in this context, means instead of oil being $106 per barrel, it may be around the $80 or $60 that supply/demand calls for.
  • shoopdawoop, on 03/08/2008, -6/+14 MORE YEARS IM SERIUS
  • Maverick0420, on 03/08/2008, -4/+2Unfortunately Bush has nothing to do with the gas prices as of late. Theres nothing any president can do on controlling the price of gas. Current oil prices are being pushed skyward due to inflation and market problems not to mention that douche bag down in Venezuela. When Venezuela privatized its oil it cut off 30% of the US oil flow. Now we have to get oil from other places and the oil companies lost millions in the plants it had their that Chavez stole from them. 3.09 dollars per gallon is really not that high when u calculate the drilling refining and transport of oil/gas. So stop bitching about the cost if you are so adverse to paying so much stop buying gas and get a hybrid. No matter what you tards think gas is not going back down to 2.00 per gallon and theres nothing any President can do about it. Prices are not controlled by the government. Gasoline is a business and the primary reason behind every business is to make money.
    • CSHYDRASHOK, on 03/08/2008, -4/+0I believe that you calling Hugo Chavez a douche bag proves how ignorant your really are. Here watch this video. And pull your head out of your ass. Dont believe what you see on TV.




      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-373950057 ...
      • schnikies79, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1And don't believe what you see on google videos or digg either.

        Anyone, I don't care what they, who wants to pass what his people recently voted down is a douchebag.
    • Binto, on 03/08/2008, -4/+3I see you have been hanging around with sheeple.
      There is a reason why Bush has been so hell-bent on being in Iraq. Can anyone here state why we are in Iraq? Anyone? Anyone. No one can. Because we have been told so many different things. All of it is to hide the real reason, for stock in oil. Bush doesnt want to lose his own moneys from his investment in big oil. He may not be able to establish gas prices, but he CAN directly influence anyone who has connections with big oil.

      In conclusion, your statement of Bush having nothing to do with gas prices as of late, is wrong.
    • elint6, on 03/08/2008, -2/+2The President has destabilized the region, and since crude oil costs around < $30 a barrel to produce (I use this figure because OPEC countries were obviously profitable prior to 2000) the majority of the price hike is due to destabilization of the Middle East. Also, considering that Iraq is the only one of two countries (other being Russia) where oil production HAS NOT peaked, the massive reduction in Iraqi oil supply (due to political destabilization) means demand has consistently outstripped supply, increasing price. Please stop bitching about people bitching and do some homework.
    • PoonGnarfler, on 03/08/2008, -4/+2Oil is not a business. Oil is a Oligopoly that Bush managed to upset while invading Iraq. Not to mention that Venezuela cutting off 30% of our oil flow is rediculous, because they only supplied 13% in the first place. Canada is our largest importer, with 20%. As admonished as I am that you called everyone on Digg "tards" when you don't even have correct information, I'm going to have to go ahead and say that you are a retard.
      • Maverick0420, on 03/10/2008, -2/+1gonna have to say u are the retard as I work in the oil business and I know how much we are supplied or "were" supplied by Venezuela so u my friend are the retard and not knowlageble of the subject. Oil is a business there are other ways of getting energy in our world today besides oil, Hybrid cars, soon to be hydrogen fuel cell cars later this year. If you are so adversed to the prices and cant get your head out of your ass to understand oil is a business then throw down the money for one of those cars. I do have the correct information and you sir are completely ***** up in your reasoning and knowledge on economics and supply of oil. Why dont you try working in the business to really understand it?
        • PoonGnarfler, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1I'm glad you're in the oil business and not an economist because then you might have to realize that an Oligopoly is a type of business (like monopoly, perfect competition, or monopolistic competition) The whole reason that gasoline can be such a high price and oil companies can see their highest profit margin ever is due to the fact that the oil business is an oligopoly. (Even if you took a basic economics class in college you would know that) I was simply remarking that they are not a business in the competitive sense of the word (because they have none) Not to mention I really don't care if you work in the oil business, the FACTS still show that Venezuela does not supply even close to 30% of our oil. Continuing, hybrid cars still require oil, and if you think that an affordable hydrogen fuel cell is going to be available in a year, you must be living about 25 years in the future. Toyota, in all of their optimism, thinks that in 10 Years a hydrogen cars cost will be cut by 95%, which is down from $1,000,000 to $50,000. Thats a CAR COMPANY telling you that, not even an unbiased research company. http://www.autoblog.com/2005/06/20/toyota-aims-to- ...
          FTW I wouldn't work for a company that seems to take pleasure in raping the environment or ripping off millions of people so that they can see their highest profit margin ever, as I have the mental capacity to make money in a business that doesn't need to do that, but I guess I'm just not an ***** like you
          • Stevanoski, on 03/16/2008, -2/+1Obviously you are not an economist either as the only true Oligopolies we have in the US are power companies where the state finds it advantageous to allow them to exist while heavily regulating them.
    • satanatnmtedu, on 03/09/2008, -3/+2No, prices are not controlled by the government. But, price controls are not the point of the article/video. The pint is that the President is so divorced from reality that he is surprised by $4/gal gas.
    • xlar54, on 03/09/2008, -3/+3I agree with PoonGnarfler. Oil isnt a business - its the center of our energy system. Our society requires oil, almost as much as our bodies require water. To allow prices to triple in just 8 years is pathetic at best, and a danger to our national security at worst. Bush is not 100% responsible, but he does carry a heaven burden of the responsibility. Then to ignore it as this video clearly shows, in my opinion shows dereliction of duty as Commander in Chief. Any CEO that allowed his business to be as negatively affected as we are would be fired on the spot. And the democrats in Congress are not much better. The entire government needs an enema.
  • dukeeeey, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3americans complain 'gas' or petrol is expensive
    then you see them driving around in trucks and giant SUVs which guzzle fuel.
    • elint6, on 03/08/2008, -3/+1Most Americans don't have much choice for public transportation. Post-WWII housing planning has created vast suburban landscapes.
      On the issue of buying trucks, many professions require this. On the issue of SUV, agreed, but many of these SUVs were bought before Bush's idiotic policies dr