Ask New Hampshire Democrats...About Gas Prices - Granite Grok

Ask New Hampshire Democrats…About Gas Prices

Nothing says ‘we have no principles whatsoever’ like a crowd of screeching banshees gone silent when the shoe is on the other foot. If you’ve failed to notice, this happens to Democrats often, and no example is more prominent than gas prices.

Back when it was politically expedient, Democrats in New Hampshire were wailing like the mothers of lepers over the offense of high gas prices.  The thoughtless Republican President was punishing the middle class to enrich their own oil industry buddies.

Fast forward to 2012….. /silence.

After six years controlling the US Senate, four years controlling the US House, and four years controlling the Presidency, exerting significant influence over their holier-than-thou government at its national energy policy since at least 2006,  now all of a sudden, four-dollar-a-gallon gas is….what, patriotic?  A necessary burden to move forward past fossil fuels?  What’s so different now?

Democrats blamed Republican politicians in previous election years, right or wrong, but now that it’s them, that can no longer be the case, and their compliant media is happy to play along.  And the real issue here is not just the Democrats failed energy policy, wasted investments in failed technology (with your money), ignoring cheap and abundant domestic resources, or the war on affordable energy, it is the culture of hypocrisy that pervades everything Democrats do or say.

They never cared about how the policy affected the cost of gasoline or energy; they only care about how they could spin it to advance their agenda.  An agenda that, if you had not noticed, they expect you to pay for whether you agree with it or not.

So ask a New Hampshire Democrat.  Where is the media blitz on the crushing effect of high gas and oil prices?  Why aren’t you writing letters to the editor anymore about how current energy policy is crushing the middle class?  When will you challenge your candidates on past policy decisions or bi-polar rhetoric?

 

 

>