Domestic US oil production has a liberal bias!

Oil. Black gold. Liquid prosperity. Conservatives know that oil is better than anything else in the earth, including water. As a result, Republicans have been working tirelessly to convince the world’s weakest iron-fisted dictator, Barack Obama, to authorize the Keystone XL pipeline and allow that sweet Canadian happiness to flow to the Gulf of Mexico, leaking jobs, tax cuts and world peace along its way.

Which is why we can’t have graphs like the one below getting out, especially this close to a midterm election which is on November 18 (minus the number of tracks on Ted Nugent’s newest album). (HA HA SEE WHAT I DID THERE? THAT WAS TO CONFUSE ST00PID LIBERALS.)

Domestic US oil production has a liberal bias!

This graph is just… misleading. For one thing, the economy stinks. Sarah Palin told us that if she were elected and we went forward with “Drill, Baby, Drill” it would bring about an Eden-like utopia of bliss and universal wealth.

But we don’t live in an Eden-like utopia, which means the factual data that oil production is up by 50% since 2008 must be incorrect.

The economy is so bad that Americans in many parts of the country are even resorting to making stuff for consumers in other countries. And employers, already beaten down by Obama’s enviro-socialist shock troops, are now suffering under more unfilled job openings than they have in 13 years.

Dreadful.  Clearly, one of the things must be true:

Either A, Obama has happily been increasing domestic oil production, resulting in the lowest gas prices in 4 years and a booming economy.

Or B, Obama is an evil socialist dictator who can’t possibly do anything right, and the economy is terrible no matter what statistics say, and the above graph is just wrong, and your facts are stupid you dumb stupid-head.


Clearly, if you’re a good conservative, you have to go with B….

SHOCKING: Weird climate change poll suggests that money matters to people.

Liberals have been trumpeting a recent poll result that suggests people are willing to pay more for their energy bills in order to fight global warming a.k.a. climate change.

“By an almost two-to-one margin, 62 percent to 33 percent, Americans say they would pay more for energy if it would mean a reduction in pollution from carbon emissions,” says the Bloomberg National Poll website.

This goes against the headlines from 2012, where a Huffington Post poll said that 54% would be unwilling to pay more to fight climate change, compared to only 20% who said they would be willing.

Has the American population shifted its opinion THAT DRAMATICALLY in less than two years?

(the answer is below the image… can you guess it before you scroll down?)

Climate change poll results depend on exactly what the question asks.
Climate change poll results depend on exactly what the question asks.

No, it hasn’t. In fact, there is no evidence that the American people have changed their opinions on this issue at all. This is something that gets us really, really mad here at Liberal Bias because it involves biased reporting about NUMBERS AND STATISTICS, and unfortunately in this case it is not tied to one side of the partisan divide or the other. Both liberals and conservatives have mis-reported this result.

The difference is in the details of the questions on the surveys.

The 2012 survey asked: “If it meant we could stop climate change, would you personally be willing to pay 50 percent more on your gas and electricity bills?” (emphasis added).

The 2014 survey asked: “What if that significantly lowered greenhouse gases but raised your monthly energy expenses by 20 dollars a month – in that case do you think the government should or should not limit the release of greenhouse gases?” (emphasis added).


So the first survey did not find “people unwilling to pay more”; it found “people unwilling to pay 50% more.”

The second survey did not find “people willing to pay more”; it found “people willing to pay $20 more.”

These two survey results, together, do not show that people’s opinions about climate change are “evolving”.  They merely show that the amount of money that people are asked to pay to fight climate change matters.

Shocking result, right?



Now, let’s talk about liberal bias.  For dedicated Tea Partiers and Conservatives, who live in a world where “unbiased” means “not liberal” and “fair and balanced” actually describes what Fox News does, the 2012 poll result represents the real truth, because “OMG FIGHTING GLOBAL WARMING WILL BE SO EXPENSIVE IT WILL CAUSE TOTAL ECONOMIC COLLAPSE!!!!1”

Obviously, asking people to pay a mere $20 more for climate change is unrealistic, right? We have to make the number big enough to seem scary.  If we don’t make regulation seem scary, well then that is just LIBERAL BIAS.

Do you agree?


Robert Murray recognized as America’s MPP!

Robert Murray wins the Most Patriotic Patriot who loves Freedom and Liberty Award!

We at LiberalBias.Com are proud to announce the first ever recipient of the brand new and prestigious Most Patriotic Patriot who loves Freedom and Liberty Award: Robert Murray!

We have noticed that most awards in America today suffer horribly from Liberal Bias: the Academy Awards, the Tony Awards, the Oscar Awards, the Darwin Awards… and so many more.  All of these slant horribly and disgustingly toward a liberal agenda.

So, in order to unskew this bias, we have decided to start our own award:

The Most Patriotic Patriot who loves Freedom and Liberty Award

…brought to you by

This award will be granted, periodically, to someone who displays a truly outstanding manifestation of patriotism and conservative values. The recipient of the award will be presented with the above beautiful, elegant and artistic trophy in digital form.

The honor of being the first recipient of this award goes to: Robert Murray.

Robert Murray is the  head of Ohio coal company Murray Energy. Murray has shared his prayers to let everyone know how doomed we would be if we re-elected Obama. Murray has forced his employees to donate to Romney’s campaign. Murray forced his employees to attend a Romney rally. And now, just days after Obama is reelected, in a fit of righteous rage and religious inspiration, he has fired 156 coal employees in order to show his displeasure with the election result.

What a gigantic, enormous… patriot!

We tip our tri-corn hat to you, Murray.

Congratulations on being America’s very first ever recognized Most Patriotic Patriot who loves Freedom and Liberty!

Changes in gas prices have a liberal bias!

Oil Production does not reduce gas prices.

This graph has been taken from a statistical analysis performed by the Associated Press on the relationship between domestic gas production and the price of gasoline since 1976.  As you can clearly see in this graph, there is no apparent relationship between the two. In other words, this graph would have you believe that increasing domestic gas production does not cause a decrease in prices at the pump. In other words, drilling more doesn’t reduce gas prices.


How do we know?  Consider the following irrefutable facts:

1) The Palin-Bolling plan to reduce gas prices is a very serious plan that includes several points and multiple facets. One of the facets is to increase drilling and open up lands in Anwar. Sarah Palin said this,

It is a huge unit 20 million acres was set aside for wilderness for refuge and in mid-1980 it was expanded for oil and gas development in the coastal plain the tippy top of ANWAR so we have these huge swaths of land 20 million acres in one unit and 19 million acres in another unit reservoirs that have proven to hold oil and gas that have not been tapped yet also too in addition.

Obviously this means that gas prices would decrease if we could drill more in Anwar.

2) John Boehner has patiently explained that the reason gas prices are so high is that drilling on federal lands is down. He says that if we increased federal drilling to “where it needs to be” then gas prices would drop. The news report specifically says,

Boehner will call on Obama to throw his support behind GOP-backed legislation to expand domestic oil-and-gas production, among other things. House Republicans assert that the bills will help rein in high gas prices, which are averaging $3.92 per gallon nationally.

This is very obvious: more drilling means lower gas prices.

3) Rush Limbaugh said this:

Oil is the fuel of the engine of freedom, and that’s dead-on accurate right between your eyes. That’s not spin; that’s not deception; that’s not in any way painting pictures. Oil is the fuel of the engine of freedom, and there is no replacement for it. There is no substitute for it.

That’s not really related, but gosh, isn’t it inspirational?

4) When Newt Gingrich, a true conservative, was running for President, he explained that he could easily lower gas prices by increasing drilling. He said:

$2.50 gasoline is achievable and drilling here, drilling now so we can pay less and be independent of Middle East oil is just common sense.

5) Mitt Romney spoke very clearly on the middle-of-the-road news program, Fox and Friends, where he said:

The best thing we can do to get the price of gas to be more moderate and not have to be dependent upon the cartel is: drill in the gulf, drill in the outer continent shelf, drill in ANWR, drill in North Dakota, South Dakota, drill in Oklahoma and Texas

What could be more clear? Mitt Romney is telling us that drilling more will reduce the price of gasoline at the pump.
Now I ask you this: can all of these smart, accomplished people be WRONG?

Clearly not.

The problem is, instead, with the above graph… and it’s liberal bias!!!


graph source: AP Gas Production And Price Analysis
data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

Obama forces conservatives to pay more than liberals for gasoline!

Liberal Gas Prices

Sean Hannity, who is never wrong, has been telling us for weeks that Obama wants gasoline prices to be higher because he is an eco-terrorist. This is obviously true… but there is an even deeper, more insidious plan!

Some liberals will lie to you and say that Liberals are actually paying more for gasoline because they tend to live in more expensive areas. For example, drivers in Wyoming pay $3.21 per gallon and in California they pay as much as $4.34.This would seem to be a bias that gives conservatives a break.

But no! When you look at the amount of money spent on gas as a percentage of household income, and you also take into account that conservatives drive more because they live in less densely populated areas, you can actually see that conservatives are paying more of their total income on gasoline than liberals are.

Now let me ask you this….


Or is it more likely to be a LIBERAL BIAS PLOT!?

I’m just asking the question. You decide.

source: AAA, Charlie Cook, Gallup, EIA, Rhodium Group
: Washington Post

Electricity has a liberal bias!

Liberal Electricity

Regulation destroys the free market and inflates costs by adding unneeded costs to business. This is just good conservative sense. Any conservative economist will tell you that removing regulation and allowing competition to reign supreme will result in lower prices.

However, data from the deregulation of electricity providers in Texas seems to contradict this fact: the prices in deregulated areas are actually inexplicably higher than the prices in regulated areas!

It is clear that electricity has must have a liberal bias!!!!!

Source: US EIA
Via: Fuel Fix Blog