Sneaky Agenda...This is what is wrong with Congress
Below is a very interesting piece that I picked up on line. In parentheses are my comments. It illustrates what is wrong with Congress and how some people are just not picking up on what is really going on:
By MARTIN KADY II & PATRICK O'CONNOR
California Democrat Nancy Pelosi may be trying to save the planet — but the rank and file in her party increasingly are just trying to save their political hides when it comes to gas prices as Republicans apply more and more rhetorical muscle. (This is disingenuous and Americans need to be aware of this pandering. Their promises will be hollow)
But what looks like intraparty tension on the surface is part of an intentional strategy in which Pelosi takes the heat on energy policy, while behind the scenes she’s encouraging vulnerable Democrats to express their independence if it helps them politically, according to Democratic aides on and off Capitol Hill. (In other words a bait and switch, good cop....bad cop game of deception)
Pelosi’s gambit rests on one big assumption: that Democrats will own Washington after the election and will be able to craft a sweeping energy policy that is heavy on conservation and fuel alternatives while allowing for some new oil drilling. Democrats see no need to make major concessions on energy policy with a party poised to lose seats in both chambers in just three months — even if recess-averse Republicans continue to pound away on the issue. (This says it all...lie and then do whatever they want)
“The reality is we will have a new president in three months, and what Bush and the Republicans are trying to do amounts to a land grab for the oil companies,” said one senior House Democratic aide involved with party strategy. “I don’t think we have to give in at all pre-election — we have many more options postelection.” (Who falls for this kind of thing? This is really disturbing)!
It’s a reality that Rep. Nick J. Rahall (D-W.Va.) personally delivered to President Bush recently.
Rahall spent more than an hour last week talking to the president about energy. Bush spent the entire flight aboard Air Force One, and much of a subsequent limousine ride, grilling the West Virginia Democrat about legislative solutions to the high price of gasoline, Rahall said last week.
So, does the president think Congress can get anything done this year?
“No,” Rahall replied in a short interview with Politico. “He’s realistic about it.”
Asked if Congress will produce a comprehensive energy bill in September before Congress adjourns again for elections, Rahall replied, “This year? No.”
Instead, the chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources believes Democrats are all about 2009.
“We’ve laid the groundwork this year,” Rahall said. (Laid the groundwork, will lie to voters and then do whatever the Hell they want!)
Democratic House aides say the energy agenda has been carefully gamed out in strategy sessions, and Pelosi always intended to take heat on gas prices while tacitly encouraging more vulnerable Democrats to publicly disagree with her and show their independence. (This is just dirty politics and speaks to the character of Pelosi)
Freshman Democrats like Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania and Don Cazayoux of Louisiana have taken her up on the offer.
Altmire has said a drilling vote “will happen,” while Cazayoux, hoping to hang on to his seat in a conservative Baton Rouge-area district, on Friday sent a letter to Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) demanding a vote on more domestic oil exploration. (I hope the voters are awake down there!!!!!!!!!)
“There will be a vote,” said Altmire, who faces a rematch with former GOP Rep. Melissa Hart this fall in the Pittsburgh suburbs.
Indeed, Congress must vote before Sept. 30 to renew the annual moratorium; otherwise, it will lapse on its own, giving states the right to decide whether private companies can search for potential drilling sites three miles offshore.
“My view is that if we have a vote, let’s make it a rational policy,” said Altmire, whose district includes viable coal and nuclear industries. “We can’t let Republicans hold this issue hostage because of one vote.”
Cazayoux, in his letter, says “the current debate seems to be bogged down in partisan one-upmanship.” (no, Democrats are stonewalling and have no intention of fair play)
To some extent, House Republicans seem to be playing right along with the strategy, taking Pelosi’s name in vain dozens of times during their rebel House sessions over the past few days and making her the villain who won’t allow oil drilling votes. (Good, at least they have character and guts to speak the truth or for your progressives, "speak truth to power")
“It’s grossly unfair to the Democrats who want a vote,” said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). “[Pelosi] needs to cut that out.” (At least one Democrat gets it)
The Senate has also gone with a run-out-the-clock strategy, with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) calling for a bipartisan energy summit but promising no major energy votes. Reid embraced the drilling and conservation proposals of the bipartisan Senate “Gang of 10” last week, but he made further commitment on the energy debate.
Reid, like Pelosi, is expecting to have a much stronger governing majority in the Senate next year, so he has little incentive to give in to Republicans on energy policy as long as he thinks it won’t hurt Democrats.(Let's wait and screw out constituents)
Even as they face heat from constituents during the August break, Democrats say they aren’t going to cave in to popular pressure. (Why should they. They are agenda based not constituent based and not representative of their voters)
“We feel pretty comfortable with where we are,” said Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D-Mass.), who is close to the Democratic leadership. “This is a not a new issue. This just didn’t happen today. We’ve been working on this for months.” (Yes you are at a point of waiting it out and then ruling like the Neocons that you villify)
Democratic insiders said that Pelosi and other party leaders were “not rattled” by the GOP floor rebellion, and at this point, it’s not clear if the Democrats will even pay a price on energy. State-level polling conducted by Democrats suggests that voters still view President Bush and the GOP as the incumbent power in Washington, and Democratic strategists believe any anti-incumbent wave would hurt Republicans more than Democrats.
Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, one of the leaders of the rogue GOP House session, said he realizes that Democrats are “in a four-corners stall right now,” and admits that “it gets more challenging” for Republicans if they lose more seats in Congress.
Democrats are also comforted somewhat by the fact that crude oil prices have gone down more than 10 percent from their summer highs, and if the U.S. economy enters a recession, prices may fall further due to slackening demand. (This means we are in for tough times ahead folks as they will move quickly to end debate or not allow it at all)
“There is no crisis on our side of the aisle,” a top House Democratic leadership aide said. “We have a plan, and we will stick to it.” (Yes the plan is to fool the voters, put on a show that will fool those who do not know any better, pander to the radical Left and then finish the job on the economy!)
All we hear are crickets and true believers who find this kind of thing distasteful if the other party does it but at the end of the day it is all about progressive values.......sneaky, empty and dirty......Hey Dems! You are supposed to be representing the people, not special interests and your own personal politics!
Vote for change, Vote them out..
To Quote my Friend Andy:
"If the Democrats’ “solutions” were enforced, we’d soon be paying $6 a gallon for gasoline, our strategic reserve would be depleted, the stock market would be in chaos, and the Democrats would be calling for the nationalization of oil companies. What they desire is power and control, and yet not one of them could run a lemonade stand, much less a multi-national corporation." Love it..
You hit it on the head, Bill. The Dems have no intention of solving the problem, they are simply stonewalling. They've managed to do that until summer break, now nothing will happen for the next 5 or 6 weeks.. (or even months for that matter).
They are ignoring 75% of the voters.. but that's OK. Being a Democratic politician (with the exception of a few); means lie, play dirty, whatever to reach your agenda. Their intentions are "good", so why should they ever have to say they are sorry?
They don't and won't and will destroy this economy completely in the next year.
The Dems are rattled.. why else would Pelosi shut off the lights and run? Cowardly tactics.
Judy
Vote with your feet and wallets
Judy, Bill, Scott -
So we vote the current bumbs out, but then what? Who do we vote in? Do we stay in this perpetual loop of voting in the lesser-of-two-evils, thereby insuring evil perpetuates? Lest you forgot, but I haven't, when the Republicrats controlled all three branches of elected office, we were not appreciably closer to freedom than we are now. Ya, we can argue over the relative merits of 1% milk vs. 2%, but so what? It's much ado about virtually nothing.
Regarding tactics, I suspect, and somewhat recall the Republicans have been guilty of similar tactics in the past. In fact, I think Newt Gingrich made a name for himself stalling the Stalinist at the gates of DC. My conclusion is the system is flawed because it allows these sort of things: not voting on bills, ladling pork onto measures completely unrelated in order to bribe Congressional misanthropes (Ted Kennedy, Ted Stevens, KKK Bird), passing laws that are in direct violation of the Constitution, ad nauseum.
For those with an interest in freedom some time during our life time, what we need are big steps forward, not tiny steps back and forth. Given the unlikelihood of this happening through government action through inaction, considering our nation is heavily populated with sheople looking for their Nanny to tell them what to do next, I conclude our only real hope for something better is to distance ourselves as far from Nanny McFanny's lap as quickly as possible. Unfortunately the West is gone as an outlet for those seeking freedom, so now we must take to the mountains or go underground. The hard part is, like the monkey with his hand full of candy in the candy jar, we have to let go - easier said than done, I know.
But remember, the beast only lives if we all cower and feed it. Go Underground, young man, go Underground!
-Livin' in my concealed bunker somewhere in the White Mtns,
C. dog e. doG
I hear you, Doggie!
Dog,
I hear you loud and clear - and even agree with you on most points.. It's been a long, slow progression to the mess we're in now.
Yes, to some degree, they're all bums.. but there's the lesser of group and the more pork group so to speak.. so it helps a bit. BUT I digress.
So how do you suggest the average neophyte "go underground?"
Trying the basics, of course.. driving less, spending less, growing one's own food, burning wood to save oil, etc. I will NOT eat road kill. Ha ha..
What say you?
Judy
You have a point, but...
Hi All,
They are bums and even if they weren't we are quickly running out of time to get our house in order. If we do not find a cost effective way to meet our energy needs the resultant price increases will cripple our economy.
If we do not find a way to secure our borders terrorism will visit us again and I fear it will be in a scale almost unfathomable to most of our fellow countrymen. In addition the demographics of the United States in the next twenty years will be altered so dramatically as to make our country unrecognizable.
If we do not get our fiscal house in order the great depression will pale in comparison to what is approaching. The next President and legislative elected officials have a very narrow window to address these issues. I am not optimistic at this point and time that enough people of goodwill will be in our nations Capital to make these critical decisions. Dog may indeed be right...we might be just postponing the inevitable...Make room in the bunker!
PS. I am usually the one asked to contain my optimism...
Scott
E-mail buddies.
Basically just another opinion piece with additional biased commentary from our own Mr. Bunker. Hardly worth the time to scan. Same old, same old right wing rhetoric But Mr. Bunker would feel neglected if I didn't recognize his effort.
Tactics they learned from
Tactics they learned from neocon Republicans, hey Jud?
Road from Perdition!
Judy -
You dare challenge the all powerful wizard, C. dog e. doG?!
It's a tough slog for this sled dog too, "and miles to go before I sleep". Admittedly, Lebo is way ahead, but I'm gaining on him. Here's some ideas on ways to extricate yourself from Nanny McFanny's leashes and lashes:
I. Income Tax Ax
I think the biggest impact one can make is to work for yourself, not some mechanistic corporation, or worse yet, g-o-v-e-r-n-m-e-n-t. This allows you to do lots of expense and income reclassifications that shift incomes to lower tax rates and add to your expense base with such things as house deductions, guard dogs, decor upgrades, etc.. Take advantage of every – e-v-e-r-y – deduction you can for Sch. C vs. Sch. A. But be able to explain all such deductions. In other words, don't be another Leona Helmsley and try to deduct your swimming pool. Don't worry, this is not the method used by the Browns that triggered the shiny-booted boys in brown uniforms to steal their property and throw them in jail. Remember, cash is king for a reason! Nod, nod, wink, wink, know what I mean, know what I mean?
If you think you still must work for the Man, ask him/her if you can become a subcontractor. Remember to bring with you the income equivalent of benefits if he/she would no longer offer these to you as a subcontractor. It's likely better to keep these with the Man if you can, but that may cause some ticky-tacky-taffy with your friends at the IRS in terms of retaining your government allowed status as a subcontractor.
The ultimate goal in this still government-allowed-but-not-promoted approach is to get to the point where you don't generate wages which the IRS thugs automatically confiscate ~ 15% for your social insecurities. (Isn't Nanny McFanny just the greatest the way she anticipates and looks out for your insecurities during your twilight years?) The more and quicker you can switch your income to capital gains, the better. First, it's at a much lower tax rate (remember, its 15% less right off the bat because you eliminated the S.S.I. smash & grab), and second, you decide when to show a gain by when you sell the asset.
Once you reach a capital gain tax of significance, you then start switching to low-gain, no-gain assets vis-a-vis the IRS. These include whole-life insurance policies, ironically government bonds, and real-estate you plan on holding a long time (like, until you're dead). Remember, your house is an asset, as well as where you live, and it carries some hefty tax advantages ... and liabilities. And if you need cash for frivolous, or not-so-frivolous expenses, just go ask the bank for some which they can secure, or not, with your assets. These are just some of the secrets of the rich and kimo-savvy, but you don't have to be a millionaire to take advantage.
If you get real good at this, you can move to a country/area that doesn't tax: Isle of Mann, Monté Carlo, ??.
II. Expense Sense
Sounds like you are already started down this path with your garden. I also recommend taking up hunting if you're a PETA person (People who Eat Tasty Animals). For the less violently inclined, I still recommend road-kill ... it's gooood eatin'! I once had a fresh-killed ruffed grouse that I tossed into the back of my pick-up – boy did it taste great – and no lead pellets!
Avoid the "secret" NH sales tax. Ya, it's our dirty little secret, NH government does tax stuff at time of sale: prepared meals & drink, lodging, auto fuel, tolls, beer, cigs, ??. Here's some of what I've done so far:
• Tolls – avoid them like the plague. Ya, it might take me an extra 5 minutes, but at the now inflated $1 or more per toll, that equates to at least $12/hr, and that's one easy $12/hr saved, never mind the principal of the thing.
• Switch ASAP to high MPG/low cost vehicle, preferably manual shift. You might not have the Paris Hilton swagger of conspicuous consumption going for you, but at least I'll respect you in the morning. And dare I say Bill Bunker, and maybe Scott will too? (poor Mikey, he's so confused by now, he doesn't know which end is up: "they're doing everything I want to make them do, but they're paying less/no taxes to the thing I love most!") This becomes more complicated if you already own a costly fuel pig with many miles left to go. If you have two cars, max your miles on the high MPG car. Hybrids aren't worth it yet, though they may soon be as more and more hit the used car market. Remember, Uncle Lynch-the-taxpayer hits you twice with cars, once at the fuel pump and annually for "registration" fees. So, the lower He values your car, the lower your "registration" fees.
• Drive differently – If you have or will buy that manual high MPG car, hyper-mile it by coasting whenever you can (but make sure no one bumps you from behind because you're coasting slowly). I average about 45 MPG in my 30 MPG rated vehicle by turning it off on longer downhills. Don't worry, just put it back in gear if you want to reengage your power steering or brakes (both still work but are manual when motor is off). When you want to restart it, just do the standard jump start. Don't drag race off the green light, or slam the brakes for the red; it's all about momentum (Physics: M X V = Momentum)
• Take a hike – and even bike, despite my recent disparaging remarks about the recently passed 3' biker berthing canal. Remember two things:
1) You're mileage cost is more than just the gas. That's not to say it's the IRS mileage rate of 58.5¢ either, but it's something between the two bookends. While were on this topic, remember to count e-v-e-r-y mile you use for business when filling out Sch. C.
2) You pay Nanny McFanny 18.4¢/gallon and Uncle Lynch-the-taxpayer 19.6¢/gallon. For reasons I will not explain in public – they're listening to us – it's much better to use diesel, and if you're particularly mechanically handy you can convert to bio-fuel to avoid all fuel taxes and receive your Lysander Spooner Award.
• Home-cooked – I know, for those who love the restaurant experience, this is a doozy. If you're lucky to know a local restaurant owner, perhaps you can do some bartering?
• Home brew – Tastes great! No Tax! And I like hard cider, too. Just store some fresh pressed for a few weeks, and voilà – fizzy, tax-free alcoholic beverages! Add some extra sugar and alcohol-tolerant yeast and you'll get kicked by a mule, if you're into that sort of thing.
• Cigs too – Don't know much about tobacco, but I heard rolling your own is way less taxed, and if you know someone from N. Carolina ...
• Lodging – maybe do some house swaps, camping, bartering?
• Gambling – if you must, find a local bookie and bet on the Patriots every time to win.
Then there's those pesky federal taxes on electric power (along with the NH Seabrook bail-out) and communication taxes. You can go off-grid with electricity, but it will cost you, and cost you again when your local liberati look to tax it as real estate (... but they care so much about the environment that they make you pay for the privilege of generating green power. How duplicitous of them). About all I got here is converting to those mercury infused CFL bulbs. Warning: read up on what you're supposed to do if you break one!
Good luck on avoiding the communication taxes, but at least they're small. Just don't have more lines than you really need: consolidate and simplify.
Heating fuels don't get taxed much, yet, but they sure are becoming expensive. This is a topic onto itself, but suffice it to say my earlier posts apply here in steering you in the right direction. Start with sealing all leaks you can find, then add insulation where it makes sense, then try to increase your house's solar intake. If you don't mind doing this yourself, you can save a bundle of $ (at ROI's higher than Wall Street), wood, trees, and pollution. If you hire someone, you likely save less $, but probably increase the other stuff if they know what they are doing. And yes, your conversion to wood is a great idea ~ half the cost of oil/electricity/gas, maybe less.
III. Real Property Tax
I don't have a good clue what to do with this god-awful goo. That's why I promoted the Crawford Compromise with income-tax option. Other than joining a religious organization with lodging benefits, cult or otherwise, this one's more about minimizing: smaller house, current-use land designation, lower-tax town, lower-tax state, ??. I know many who have, or are planning to move south, way south, upon or before retirement for this reason alone. I don't blame them. I will likely follow the migration one day, though my destination remains open – I'm more a free-bird than a sea-bird.
So there you have it. If you have any ideas for improvement, I'm all ears.
– Conjuring more and more to do with less and less like the Great Lebo himself so that I may one day emulate the even Greater Lysander Spooner,
C. dog e. doG
Mike, Mike, Mike..
Wow, I think you're almost becoming endearing. You say our stuff is not worth taking the time to read... Yet, you keep coming back. Are we your prodigal children? You don't like us supposedly, yet like moth to flame, you keep coming back.
No, I think your friends march to the beat of their own drummer (not us "neocons").
I'm starting to think you really do like us. ;) You even called me "Jud" - or was that "Jude" - which many of my dearest friends refer to me as? Hmm.. Why not just agree to disagree and be at peace?
Face it Michael. You must be hooked, and more than a tiny bit interested. If you weren't, you wouldn't waste your energy.
Dog, I'll have to digest your interesting response, without the tasty road kill. Eeee... Whatever I do, I won't do that. Married to a hunter though, and all for enjoying that venison when possible. People eating tasty animals. Mmm... Hoping to get my hunting license this year.
Have a good night!
Judy
Yes Indeed.......
Judy, Scott and Dog,
Michael is interested in the debate. It would be nice if there was a factual back and forth and I would really enjoy that.
In the end it is all good fun, but let's be nice to Michael......he is not a bad guy at all and seems to be the only progressive who is interested in debate, albeit not always reasoned on this blog. The rest are dismissive.........crickets are elusive you know.
Thanks and bring your friends along for the ride..........others may not reply for many reasons but they do read the entries.
I know this from several threatening letters that I have received. If they were interested in consensus and working together, they would reply in person. Says something about guts and something else about how sure they are about their positions.
Thanks for keeping the string going and get some more people over here to the 'dark side' (progressive view) or the'light' (conservative view). Thanks guys.
Respect
Mike,
Yes I will respect you! I might even call in the morning, flowers are out of the question, very high floral taxes!
Scott
Question about Progressives
If they call themselves progressives, why do they still promote the same 60 year old policies from the 30's and 1940's? I mean since the root word is progress shouldn't they be talking about new ideas? Just saying.
Scott
Good Questions, Scott..
Progressivism (If that's a word) seemed to start out from people wishing to make goverment and the working world better (and better managed)? for all people.
The New Deal, Power to the People, yadda, yadda. Like secular liberalism, and the decline of the "People's Party" - it seems the progressive movement has slowly moved into something that still sounds good on the surface, but has morphed into something much more sinister underneath. I bet Bill has more insight on this.
I feel the character and approach has changed sharply.
In my limited political experience, I'd always leaned Republican since Ronald Reagan (There we go again..) - but I used to consider myself much more liberal, or at least I thought I did. Both of my parents were Democrats when I was growing up. My Dad has become a hard-core conservative in the past 10 years or so. (Phwew). My sister's an all out liberal. Makes holiday discussion interesting and downright dangerous at times. Ha ha..
The 9-11 attacks for me personally, were a HUGE wake up call that made me see things much differently.
Judy
Growing up with Reagan
I worked for Reagan on three campaigns, I cast my first presidential vote for him and we could sure use the Gipper now!
Scott
So exactly what did Reagan
So exactly what did Reagan do for the country? He raised taxes, began the bankrupting of America, and fell asleep during cabinet meetings. Oh, he also ate a lot of jelly beans. Beyond that, I can't see that the man did that much. I know you right wingers loved the senile old bird. He certainly wasn't a standard bearer of "family values" IMHO. His dear wife, who rumor says slept her way to the top of the movie studies, used an astrologer to make decisions. LOL. Then there was the corrupt Iran-Contra affair. At least the Reagan administration wasn't as corrupt as the Bush Crime Family.
Corruption starts in Hearts of Scarecrows
Gee Mikey -
If all this were true, sounds like your kind of hero. Maybe he was a third-term abortion "Dr." too! Be still, your heart.
Perhaps age is catching up to you as you think it is to McCain. Rememba' that little jumble of brick, mortar, and barbed wire that used to surround Berlin? Rememba' stagflation - an odd mixture of near-hyper inflation coupled with substantial unemployment? Rememba' that? And rememba' marginal tax rates were substantially higher upon Ronnie entering office than when he left? By the way, how's your revisionist histoire noire progressing on Ronnie's presidency? I bet the "public" school apparatchik can't wait to use it as their history text book for the 80's.
- Just rememba'ing Reagan was only half bad, which is twice as good as the rest,
C. dog e. doG
Contrasts
You be the judge...
Reagan: "I, in my own mind, have always thought of America as a place in the divine scheme of things that was set aside as a promised land. It was set here and the price of admission was very simple: the means of selection was very simple as to how this land should be populated. Any place in the world and any person from those places; any person with the courage, with the desire to tear up their roots, to strive for freedom, to attempt and dare to live in a strange and foreign place, to travel halfway across the world was welcome here."
OR
Obama: It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Reagan: Mr Gorbachev...Tear down that wall!
OR
Obama: Have you seen the price of Arugula?
Query, if Ronald Reagan was a senile old man why do so many from the left rush to compare Obama to Reagan??? Hmmmmmmm...
Obama for President in Germany
Obama: People of Berlin - people of the world - this is our moment. This is our time.
They love him I say he should go for it. President Merkel....Beware!
Reagan was an imbecile,
Reagan was an imbecile, nothing more, IMHO. But you're certainly entitled to worship him if you want. Like a friend once said, it's always best to say something good about the dead. Reagan is dead. Good.
Mikey the Marm
Remember Mikey -
The ninny nanny state whose apron strings you tie everyday requires the imbecility of its subjects, as you so well know being a former government schoolmarm.
- Recalling Imus's great line about the Grateful Dead: "we will be when they are",
C. dog e. doG
Do you want to have a conversation???
Michael,
Is it your preference to continue with outrageous and inflammatory statements that really lead nowhere... Tell me what you believe and the reasons why you believe what you do. Present the facts that support your belief, and we can have a great conversation. I might even agree with you from time to time.
At a minimum I will respect your ability to frame an intelligent defense of your beliefs. Continue on your current path and we are only left with who is able to disarm the other with the most aplomb and whether mercy should be shown in the dispatch.
I look forward to seeing you at your intellectual best.
Scott
Hey
Hey guys, I have been out of the loop all week but good conversation and Mike seems to illustrate the lack of willingness to debate with facts, point to point from some on the left.
The rest are just ignoring this back and forth because they dismiss it. It used to be that liberals wanted the debate and discussion and conservatives took the other approach.
It is humorous see that the tables have turned. I guess the question begs, do we want people who are ready to discuss and debate, striving for consensus running the country or people who just want to finger point and chant slogans and talking points.
I hope all Americans are aware of the differences. I agree with progressives that Bush has done a pretty poor job, but that is no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater and stereotype all conservatives, painting them with the same brush.
I would go point to point with any progressive, anywhere and anytime. I would not win every point but they would not either. That is called compromise and building consensus, however, it seems that some citizens are not interested in that.
Scott, Dog and Judy, let's keep it logical and factual....let others express their points with emotion......we need to keep embracing the need for debate and try (although it is nearly impossible) to get some discussion going on....point by point discussion!
That is the only way that we will unite as a country. And..........at least one side is uninterested.
Bill -
Delete this if you
Bill -
Delete this if you can.
Bush is not a conservative!
Bill -
No conservative am I, and neither do I think W. Bush is. His track record is long and liberal on many a legislative and enforcement front. He and Billy-Bob Clinton have more in common than not. This thread is nearing (has already attained) its useful live, but this may be a worthy topic for another post-fest.
- Contemplating the intricacies of Conservatism from my crag in the rocks,
C. dog e. doG
The non energy crisis.
If you people think you are angry now you should listen to what Lindsey Williams has to say. He worked as a Chaplin on the Alaskan pipeline. He lived and worked with the people who built the pipeline and he rubbed shoulders with the executives and sat in on board meeting. He has an amazing story to tell and you should all head to u-tube and search him out. I promise you, you will be some angry when you are done listening to what he has to say.
The oil companies in Prudhoe Bay found an oil field with enough crude and gas to supply our country for the next 200 years, the reports were ordered classified, the rig ordered removed and the well capped. Our country can be energy independent in no time if only they were allowed to pump it out of the ground and pipe it to us. Next year gas could cost as little as a dollar a gallon and we would be free of the Middle East and all the hate, death and bloodshed that goes with it. Wake up people, pressure your representatives, we don’t need more drilling; we just need to pump out what we have already found and become a free country once again.
Welcome Don G. to the Blog!
Welcome Don, and we hope to hear more of your thoughts.
Has everyone seen this article?
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3952
I'll insert one paragraph. I've been chewing on this for a bit:
"The current US energy strategy, driven by the erroneous beliefs that oil is a fossil fuel and that its supply will soon be exhausted, and that burning coal causes global warming, is illogical. Given the fact that oil is abiotic and is in continuous production deep down in the earth’s crust, at rates far in excess of what mankind could ever conceivably consume, it makes absolutely no sense for any nation to buy it from foreign sources if it is cheaper to drill for and pump its own – and that is precisely what the US should be doing immediately, without ever needing to go near the wildlife reserves in Alaska. "
A penny for all of your thoughts!? (I'm not sure why this post says August 11th, yet I'm just seeing it now? )
Judy
The presumptive leader of the Democrat party is for a change...a new kind of politics. I don't know why but it seems a lot like the same old kind of politics.