Lost In The Iran Noise: American Energy Leadership Still Matters 68%

By David Blackmon85%

8/1/2026, 9:08:26 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, False Dilemma, and Negativity Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 26.3% saturation with 207 hits. Analysis detected 1,493 faulty-reasoning hits from 786 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.1% and a BS Rank of 68% (8,961 of 27,323 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 67.20% of the article peer group.

Lost in the breathless media coverage of Iran and the Strait of Hormuz is a critical reality that too many politicians, activists and talking heads prefer to ignore: Record U.S. oil and natural gas production has helped keep a historic supply disruption from becoming a far worse price shock. 
American energy leadership still matters. 
And if we want it to keep mattering, we need to stop shooting ourselves in the foot. 
Oil prices can move in seconds on a tweet or a missile launch. 
Tankers, refineries, pipelines, and the trucks that deliver fuel to your local station move in weeks. 
That is why lower crude prices do not instantly appear at the pump. 
A functioning physical market is not “price gouging.” 
That’s just reality. 
Anyone who has spent five minutes around the actual logistics of the energy business understands this. 
The rest are either willfully ignorant or busy manufacturing outrage for the next election cycle. 
Producing more energy is only part of the job  the process of getting that production to market is incredibly complex and capital intensive. 
Despite its current record production levels, the U.S. industry still faces myriad challenges amid government roadblocks and supply chain challenges. 
New England still lacks adequate pipeline capacity to move natural gas when it is needed most, thanks largely to roadblocks set up by New York’s government. 
Both West Texas and Appalachia continue to struggle with takeaway constraints even as the Permian and Marcellus basins keep setting production records. 
California is steadily losing refining capacity thanks to a regulatory climate from Democratic Gov. 
Gavin Newsom’s government that treats energy infrastructure like a public enemy. 
(RELATED: BLACKMON: California’s Loss Is Texas’ Gain  Again) 
Without serious infrastructure investment and genuine permitting reform, all the abundance in the world cannot reach consumers efficiently. 
You can have the greatest oil or natural gas field on Earth, but if you cannot move the product, the consumer still pays the price. 
And yet some politicians in Washington and various state capitals are once again dusting off the same tired “solutions” that have failed every time they have been tried: windfall profits taxes and export bans. 
These are the policy equivalent of pouring sand in the gearbox. 
They would deliver exactly the opposite of what the politicians promise. 
Less investment. 
Less production. 
More volatility. 
Higher prices. 
Capital is not patriotic. 
It goes where it is welcomed and stays where it is treated with a modicum of respect. 
Punish producers for success and they will simply invest less, produce less, and leave more of the market to Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and other less friendly suppliers. 
We have seen this activist/politician collaboration many times in the past. 
Every time global supply is threatened, the same chorus rises demanding that America “do something,” and that “something” invariably revolves around kneecapping its own industry. 
The lesson is simple and it has also been proven many times before: More American energy, stronger infrastructure, and continued access to global markets deliver lower prices and greater security than any combination of taxes, bans or industrial-policy fantasies. 
The United States is the world’s leading producer of both oil and natural gas for a reason. 
That leadership did not appear by accident of geology or the benevolence of central planners. 
It is the product of free enterprise, technological innovation, risk-taking capital and  whenever policy allows it  a regulatory environment that does not treat every new pipeline or export terminal as an existential threat. 
The shale revolution was not designed in a committee room in Washington. 
It was built by engineers, roughnecks and investors who figured out how to unlock resources others said were uneconomic. 
That same system is what is currently buffering American consumers and businesses from the full force of Middle East turmoil. 
American energy leadership still matters, perhaps now more than ever. 
The only question is whether our policymakers will treat it as the national asset it is or keep using it as a political piñata every time the Middle East flares up. 
The physical market does not care about virtue signaling or campaign rhetoric. 
It only cares about supply, infrastructure and the ability to move molecules from where they are produced to where they are needed. 
Everything else is noise that only serves to impede progress towards human flourishing. 
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. 
He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications. 
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 19.2%David Blackmon: 16.4%The Daily Caller: 4.7%Confirmation Bias19.2%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 3.8%David Blackmon: 1.3%The Daily Caller: 2.5%Availability Heuristic3.8%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 7.5%David Blackmon: 5.4%The Daily Caller: 2.8%Overconfidence Bias7.5%This article: 10.3%David Blackmon: 11.0%The Daily Caller: 8.9%Framing Effect10.3%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 4.3%David Blackmon: 1.1%The Daily Caller: 0.7%Status Quo Bias4.3%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 2.3%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 2.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 14.6%David Blackmon: 3.7%The Daily Caller: 7.5%Negativity Bias14.6%This article: 4.5%David Blackmon: 1.1%The Daily Caller: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 2.0%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 5.1%David Blackmon: 1.7%The Daily Caller: 1.8%In-Group Bias5.1%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 1.9%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 1.0%The Daily Caller: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.0%David Blackmon: 2.1%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Recency Bias7.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%David Blackmon: 1.9%The Daily Caller: 1.4%Ad Hominem1.9%This article: 7.5%David Blackmon: 3.9%The Daily Caller: 1.1%Straw Man7.5%This article: 4.3%David Blackmon: 2.7%The Daily Caller: 4.1%Appeal to Authority4.3%This article: 15.3%David Blackmon: 7.8%The Daily Caller: 2.6%False Dilemma15.3%This article: 6.2%David Blackmon: 3.8%The Daily Caller: 2.0%Slippery Slope6.2%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.9%David Blackmon: 9.5%The Daily Caller: 5.7%Hasty Generalization6.9%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.2%David Blackmon: 0.8%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Bandwagon3.2%This article: 1.4%David Blackmon: 2.1%The Daily Caller: 5.4%Appeal to Emotion1.4%This article: 0.6%David Blackmon: 1.6%The Daily Caller: 1.7%Begging the Question0.6%This article: 9.5%David Blackmon: 2.4%The Daily Caller: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)9.5%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 6.2%David Blackmon: 1.6%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Burden of Proof6.2%This article: 4.5%David Blackmon: 1.1%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Appeal to Nature4.5%This article: 3.2%David Blackmon: 0.8%The Daily Caller: 0.3%Composition/Division3.2%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 1.5%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 1.7%David Blackmon: 0.4%The Daily Caller: 0.1%No True Scotsman1.7%This article: 5.6%David Blackmon: 1.4%The Daily Caller: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.6%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 1.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 1.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 26.3%David Blackmon: 14.0%The Daily Caller: 7.1%Biased Writer Voice26.3%This article: 1.7%David Blackmon: 3.1%The Daily Caller: 2.9%Indoctrination1.7%This article: 3.2%David Blackmon: 0.8%The Daily Caller: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias3.2%This article: 4.5%David Blackmon: 19.2%The Daily Caller: 4.7%Politically Right Leaning Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%David Blackmon: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

786 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.