If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
GOP favorability: Lowest ever
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:35:01 -0400, Governor Swill
wrote: This is nobody's brain on drugs: While you're at it, tell us what percent of a gallon of gas goes to oil company profits. How does this compare to other products. I don't have any problems with their profits or margins, but I do have a problem with tax breaks and subsidies for a healthy, vibrant and thriving industry. I'm not arguing about for breaks for healthy industries. In fact, I agree with you. They should be eliminated just as the farm subsides the Dems just pushed through. I bring up the point to address the loons who keep claiming the oil companies are gouging the public with excessive profit. I'm not one of them. Didn't say you were. |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
GOP favorability: Lowest ever
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:34:11 -0400, Governor Swill
wrote: This is nobody's brain on drugs: Both Bush and McCain have been pushing for increased domestic oil production. And that's all they've done which entirely misses the point. Not really given the prohibition of offshore drilling and the refusal to open up Anwar. That is the place to start. You can then move forth into developing alternatives. To do as the Dems (and Obama) have been doing --- talk, talk, talk with no specific proposals guarantees no improvement in cost or real alternatives. You must not have read Obama's page. He has many proposals there. He has little in the way of specific proposals there. There is little that he offers in the way of alternatives that will happen in even ten years. In fact, some of his proposals will actually *increase* the cost of energy. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
GOP favorability: Lowest ever
On Jun 29, 10:24*am, Governor Swill wrote:
This is MuttonJeff's brain on drugs: Eat the rich wrote: Unfortunately, the neocons have amongst their members most of the wealthiest people in America. *These wealthy people have over the years learned how to manipulate the masses into voting against their own best interest. *Remember how union members voted for Reagan? Remember how many of the poor vote for Republicans? *The wealthy will gain control of the masses one way or another. Remember how the kool-aid drinkers voted for Gore, Kerry and all the other wealthy hypocrites? No, but I do remember all the kool aid drinkers who voted for "wealthy hypocrite" Bush and the money grubbing GOP. *Please note the current make up of Congress and the further losses sustained there by the party in special elections since 2006. *Note how many Republicans, including the party's presumptive nominee, are struggling to distance themselves from George Bush. *Even more telling, Republicans are linking themselves to Obama in their re-election bids or refusing to endorse the Republican nominee. *It's starting to look like your kool aid pitcher has run dry and your party is in eclipse. Swill -- Gobama! *Gobama! *Gobama! *Gobama! Please go into detail what your liberal run congress has accomplished since taking power almost 2 years ago and why their approval rating stays around 12%. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
GOP favorability: Lowest ever
On Jun 29, 2:22*pm, nobody wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:17:25 -0700, "Mike Laight" wrote: "nobody" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:52:26 -0700, "Mike Laight" wrote: (Snip) Senator Obama has repeatedly called for spending those tax breaks and subsidies on the next generations of energy sources and not on dumping more money down the oil wells. So, in other words, he has no plans whatsoever to help people who are losing ground financially *right now* due to the high cost of energy. All he seems to talk about are things that will happen some day yet we can't drill in Anwar because it would supposedly take ten yers to get the oil. president Bush this last week said that there is no way to lower prices in gthe short term. *Senator McCain said the same in May, 2008. *What is Senator McCainsJune, 2008 plan for what he said couldnot happen one month ago? Both Bush and McCain have been pushing for increased domestic oil production. *That is the place to start. *You can then move forth into developing alternatives. *To do as the Dems (and Obama) have been doing --- talk, talk, talk with no specific proposals guarantees no improvement in cost or real alternatives.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - It's "talk,talk,talk" and "tax,taxtax". |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
GOP favorability: Lowest ever
On Jun 29, 3:55*pm, "robw" wrote:
Screw off, you can't even get a few illegals out from in front of a hardware store. "MuttonJeff" wrote in message ... On Jun 28, 8:17 pm, "Mike Laight" wrote: "nobody" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:52:26 -0700, "Mike Laight" wrote: (Snip) Senator Obama has repeatedly called for spending those tax breaks and subsidies on the next generations of energy sources and not on dumping more money down the oil wells. So, in other words, he has no plans whatsoever to help people who are losing ground financially *right now* due to the high cost of energy. All he seems to talk about are things that will happen some day yet we can't drill in Anwar because it would supposedly take ten yers to get the oil. president Bush this last week said that there is no way to lower prices in gthe short term. Senator McCain said the same in May, 2008. What is Senator McCainsJune, 2008 plan for what he said couldnot happen one month ago? Mike If Bush announced that the U.S was starting a "Manhattan Project" to drill for domestic oil, build refineries, build nuclear power plants and develop clean coal technology the price of oil would drop like a rock overnight. The world knows we have done it and can do anything if the american people put their minds to it.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Perhaps the reason is I don't wear the badge and carry the gun. We hire people to do that job but thanks to the whining bedwetters on the left it's next to impossible to get ICE to do it's job. After a small raid in Houston last week the kooks on the news have done nothing but cry and **** about "families being torn apart". ****ing idiots. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
GOP favorability: Lowest ever
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:18:48 -0700, "Mike Laight"
wrote: "nobody" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:17:25 -0700, "Mike Laight" wrote: "nobody" wrote in message ... On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:52:26 -0700, "Mike Laight" wrote: (Snip) Senator Obama has repeatedly called for spending those tax breaks and subsidies on the next generations of energy sources and not on dumping more money down the oil wells. So, in other words, he has no plans whatsoever to help people who are losing ground financially *right now* due to the high cost of energy. All he seems to talk about are things that will happen some day yet we can't drill in Anwar because it would supposedly take ten yers to get the oil. president Bush this last week said that there is no way to lower prices in gthe short term. Senator McCain said the same in May, 2008. What is Senator McCainsJune, 2008 plan for what he said couldnot happen one month ago? Both Bush and McCain have been pushing for increased domestic oil production. Yes, this week Senator McCain flip-flopped on domestic drilling, while president Bush is now pushing it harder than he had been. Does it seem reasonable to you that Senator McCain has voted against every type of renewable energy and that he and President Bush agree that what we should do right now to get us off our oil addiction is to drill for more oil? While I have no enthusiasm for McCain. at least he appears to be open now to the option. That is the place to start. You can then move forth into developing alternatives. To do as the Dems (and Obama) have been doing --- talk, talk, talk with no specific proposals guarantees no improvement in cost or real alternatives. You may not like or agree with Senator Obama's proposals but I am not an expert and I have seen several reports from reputable and somewhat objective "experts" that are in complete agreement with Senator Obama's energy proposals and other equally reputable and somewhat objective "experts" that are in complete agreement with the Bush/McCain proposals. Which experts agree with Obama and what specific alternatives are they agreeing with? There are two things that seem axiomatic to me: 1 - At some point in time we will not have an option of using oil as an energy source. 2 - At some point in time we have to decide that it is in the best interest of this country to stop spending public funds and public resources to scrape along further using oil as an energy source. The disagreement is about when and what to do now. No argument there. I don't think of oil as the long term option. But to provide no relief for a suffering public while we talk about alterntives that are not even on the horizon borders on criminal. The Japanese seem to be putting a lot more resources into solving this problem than we are. The Chinese, Indians, and South and Central America's desire for oil is growing at a faster pace than is ours. In fact,our use has pretty much plateaued at a level that is below our peak usage. (This could be out of date data and I am too lazy to look up more recent data but at the very least this was true a couple years ago.) My point is that I want the US to spend a huge amount of money to at least catch up with the Japanese and then spend another huge amount to move ahead of them. I want to let oil companies stop getting subsidies and tax breaks for at least the next ten years. I want the US to spend huge amounts of money developing safe nuclear power systems and waste handling and perhaps settle our deficit by selling, building, and installing renewable power systems and safe nuclear power systems to every country in the world. Which Democrat has introduced a bill with proposals for new nuclear plants? This is the future, eventually, and Senator Obama talks about a very similar vision. I don't see anything about nuclear power on his web site. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/ *BTW* visiting his web site prevents you from using the "back" arrow to exit his site. You must close your browser. Poor design - although I suspect done on purpose. When I listen to Senator McCain I think about something written by Robert Heinlein. He wrote about what it must have been like in the buggy whip business as cars started to become common and affordable. Heinlein wrote that it is likely that only the best buggy whip manufacturers were likely to survive as the market for buggy whips was shrinking. The last buggy whip companies probably took a great deal of pride in making the best buggy whips they could make. It used to be taught that one of the worst places for a business to be is in gaining market share in a shrinking market. I believe that Senator McCain is treating the energy problem in the same way as the buggy whip manufacturers. He is looking for the very best way he can find to address the problem of oil prices while not addressing that oil is going to be replaced as a source of energy. I only hope that we have the time to solve this problem before we have to start burning down the house for warmth. I don't think that's a fair analysis of McCain's position. He appears to be for oil to transition to alternatives -- the only realistic approach. http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/...f1468e96f4.htm Gee, "back" works correctly there. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
GOP favorability: Lowest ever
On Jun 29, 11:34*pm, Governor Swill wrote:
This is nobody's brain on drugs: Both Bush and McCain have been pushing for increased domestic oil production. And that's all they've done which entirely misses the point. *That is the place to start. *You can then move forth into developing alternatives. *To do as the Dems (and Obama) have been doing --- talk, talk, talk with no specific proposals guarantees no improvement in cost or real alternatives. You must not have read Obama's page. *He has many proposals there. Swill -- Gobama! *Gobama! *Gobama! *Gobama! Congress with majority of dems also have lower ratings than Bush....If democrats were held to the same standards as Republicans were I believe there favorability ratings would also be in the tank....but they the dems have CBS, CNN, Useless NBC and the rest to do their bidding....constant blaming of Bush for the economy when we all know one person doesn't control the ebb and flow and everyday events. But let them take control for awhile. It will switch because the American people are fickle, impatient and always go with what seems the better deal at the time. It is funny to hear libs say that Republicans have more money than dems when we know dems indeed are more wealthy...the only way dems stay in power is because of the minority vote. Figure they got the hispanics, blacks, gays and white liberals....now I see why dems give everything away to minorities. If they didnt R's would be in power. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
GOP favorability: Lowest ever
This is nobody's brain on drugs:
He has little in the way of specific proposals there. There is little that he offers in the way of alternatives that will happen in even ten years. In fact, some of his proposals will actually *increase* the cost of energy. His proposals shown here seem specific enough. As for increasing the cost of energy, doing nothing will increase it even faster. If you don't think so, consider the increase in gas prices since Bush came to office. Perhaps the best news here is the job creation that will result from shifting to domestic energy production. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/ McCain otoh, offers crap like this: "John McCain's Clean Car Challenge. John McCain will issue a Clean Car Challenge to the automakers of America, in the form of a single and substantial tax credit for the consumer based on the reduction of carbon emissions. He will commit a $5,000 tax credit for each and every customer who buys a zero carbon emission t car, encouraging automakers to be first on the market with these cars in order to capitalize on the consumer incentives. For other vehicles, a graduated tax credit will apply so that the lower the carbon emissions, the higher the tax credit. " In other words, he intends to do nothing until the markets have already accomplished the goal of zero emissions, then he's going to cut a tax. What about investing in the research and technology that's going to be needed to arrive at that zero emissions car? Swill -- Gobama! Gobama! Gobama! Gobama! |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
GOP favorability: Lowest ever
This is charley's brain on drugs:
Congress with majority of dems also have lower ratings than Bush....If democrats were held to the same standards as Republicans were I believe there favorability ratings would also be in the tank....but they the dems have CBS, CNN, Useless NBC and the rest Like FOX? They've become firmly identified with conservative politics and more power to them. It balances out the news available to the public. Note, however, that their viewership is down. CNN is now number one in prime time and former FOX viewers who have voted right for a decade and a half have noticed that O'Reilly, Hannity, et. al. have no clothes. to do their bidding....constant blaming of Bush for the economy when we all know one person doesn't control the ebb and flow and everyday events. Bush personally? The economy is a direct result of this administration's flawed economic policies and the connivance of Republican Congresses to effect them. Somebody in here recently complained that the Dems have done nothing since getting into Congress but I note that since they were sworn in last year, the deficit has already dropped considerably. Sounds to me like it's Democrats who are making good on old fashioned fiscal responsibility. But let them take control for awhile. It will switch because the American people are fickle, impatient and always go with what seems the better deal at the time. Which we did in 1994 and again in 2000. We let the GOP have power for a while and look what they did with it. Two expensive wars with no end in sight for either. Education and health care initiatives that aside from costing as much as a small war have proven ineffective and made both problems even worse. By the time Bush's last budget is done the national debt will have nearly doubled. Oil is up 500% and gasoline has more than doubled yet all the GOP candidate has to offer is a six week gas price cut of 18 cents a gallon and a promise to cut taxes once our transportation fuel issues are resolved. It is funny to hear libs say that Republicans have more money than dems when we know dems indeed are more wealthy...the only way dems stay in power is because of the minority vote. Figure they got the hispanics, blacks, gays and white liberals....now I see why dems give everything away to minorities. If they didnt R's would be in power. The Republicans just WERE in power and got thrown out by white voters. They've even managed to alienate evangelicals! The GOP hasn't lost power because of some vast minority coalition and media conspiracy, they lost power because they supported a corrupt and incompetent President and his failed policies. Swill -- Gobama! Gobama! Gobama! Gobama! |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
GOP favorability: Lowest ever
This is nobody's brain on drugs:
No argument there. I don't think of oil as the long term option. But to provide no relief for a suffering public while we talk about alterntives that are not even on the horizon borders on criminal. The People get what they deserve. We were warned in 1973 and again in 1979 but still the People did not demand long term programs to get us off imported oil. Now we're stuck. We can't drill our way out of our energy problems, we have to seek other means of dealing with the issue. Too bad the only energy vision the GOP can come up with expired in the eighties. The Grand Old Party: Building a bridge to the twentieth century. Swill -- Gobama! Gobama! Gobama! Gobama! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Your Lowest Mintage US Coin? | Sibirskmoneta | Coins | 17 | October 27th 06 04:03 AM |
Lowest grade, ever? | note.boy | Coins | 1 | January 12th 06 04:04 AM |
What's your lowest mintage coin? | LM5403 | Coins | 18 | September 13th 05 06:32 AM |
Your lowest mintage? | Alan & Erin Williams | Coins | 57 | April 8th 04 08:50 AM |