Talking out one's ass.. Same Shit

Y2K · Post by **Y2K** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 11:36 pm

Different day..........
Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan said "gas prices keep skyrocketing, and in Washington, Republicans continue to turn a blind eye to the oil industry's activities."

"From this Republican-controlled Congress, we hear more of the same: 'Let's just drill our way to energy independence, sacrifice our environment and provide big tax breaks to Big Oil.'"

"We realize that in crafting a new energy policy that breaks America's oil addiction, we must be bold," Stupak said. "Democrats stand ready to implement bold, aggressive policy changes that will alleviate today's energy crisis and answer tomorrow's challenges."

OK........
What is it? We American's would sure like to hear it. Since we don't get a free taxpayer ride to work everyday and since WE are actually paying high gas prices it would be nice to hear this big amazing plan. Grab a Snickers Bar this should be interesting.......

DiT · Post by **DiT** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:15 am

there continues to be no shortage of democrats I'd like to sock in the mouth.

Spinach Genie · Post by **Spinach Genie** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:43 am

That's the democrat way...tear down any and all ideas, hint at better ones but give absolutely no details. I'm sure you can expect something like:

Very low emissions! Completely non-reliant on ANY foreign sources of fuel! Very economical, and rates suprisingly well in crash safety tests!

They'll have one with a sail on it any day now.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:01 am

DAMMIT! When will Democrats relinquish their death-grip on Congress?

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:23 am

what's the price of gas in say Canada from whom we import the greatest % of foreign oil ???

just a wild guess here-----

+$4 a gallon ??

and it is President Bush's fault ??

fix · Post by **fix** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:57 am

Wolfman wrote:what's the price of gas in say Canada from whom we import the greatest % of foreign oil ???

just a wild guess here-----

+$4 a gallon ??

and it is President Bush's fault ??

Paid $.93 per litre last night.

On average this past week it's been about $.99 per litre which works out to around $3.15/ gallon U.S.

And that includes our high taxes which go to pay for our government paid for health care.

http://www.torontogasprices.com/index.aspx

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:34 am

As far as I'm concerned gas they should tax the fuck out of gas until it's at least $5.00/gallon. Use the extra revenue to develop and fix the highway system and mitigate some of the environmental damage that use of oil causes, and develop efficient public mass transit.

At that price maybe people would get the idea that they should start demanding more fuel efficient vehicles and mass transit that actually works.

Spinach Genie · Post by **Spinach Genie** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:43 am

Those that have the money to spend on gas guzzlers aren't going to be swayed by gas prices...and mass transit is only a workable idea in larger metro areas which aren't the attractive residential option they used to be. Plus, that's just more money the government won't be good stewards of.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:51 am

We live in the San Diego area, but about 45 miles north of the city. All north-south routes in this part of the county are gridlocked every weekday, and most of the major east-west routes are too. There's one light rail line going up and down the coast and it's always filled to capacity. I used to use it twice a week and I was lucky enough to get on at the originating station so I always had a seat. They could expand that line and put in a few more it would go a long way toward easing congestion.

You don't just give the money to the government and say here, develop mass transit. You form mass transit districts whose only madate is to make this happen. It has worked in the past and it still can. You just have to show people that it's cost effective and can save them time and effort.

Spinach Genie · Post by **Spinach Genie** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:12 am

No arguments...but the money is pushing out of the urban areas and the bill for mass tran gets higher that side. I was impressed with Chicago's mass tran system, but for the bulk of the country it's hard to see it. The infrastructure just isn't there.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:21 am

You're right, it wouldn't make sense everywhere. But the majority of the drivers and almost all of the congestion is in the major metro areas. You make the taxes local, that way you get the results where they are needed and the people who are using the infrastructure and causing the congestion in those areas are the ones paying.

If somebody from LA wants to drive out to Baker for a tank of cheap gas, well I guess you can't really stop them.

Husker4ever · Post by **Husker4ever** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:18 am

5 bucks a gallon might encourage people to drive less and purchase more efficient vehicles....I agree. But how in hell are you going to improve the efficiency of an 18 wheel truck toting a 20 ton load of goods cross-country? When your bag of dog chow costs 50 bucks, you can thank 6 dollar a gallon diesel prices.

This country is too expansive to have European fuel prices.

XXXL · Post by **XXXL** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:25 am

I drive 4.8 miles, to and from the office, each way.

Used to drive 25 each way. So it pays to practice close to home.......

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:25 am

Martyred wrote:DAMMIT! When will Democrats relinquish their death-grip on Congress?

On the Senate?

When the GOP gets a filibuster proof majority (or a leadership with the balls to toss the RINOs over the side and let the party of deadlock go through a REAL filibuster).

The house is okay.

When will the Sierra Club relinquish tgheir death-grip on the Dems and let us actually look for oil where we think it is, drill for it where we know it is and refine what we've got?

Carneliat · Post by **Carneliat** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 7:51 am

Speaking for those of us who live in Alberta (that province in Canada that produces all the oil) I say "Keep it up!! My house value has doubled in the last 2 years and my salary has gone through the roof. Yah i'm paying an extra 30 cents a litre more than i was a year and a half ago but i'm also making an extra 15K a year. Thank you Dubya!

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 8:24 am

Diogenes wrote:
Martyred wrote:DAMMIT! When will Democrats relinquish their death-grip on Congress?
On the Senate?

When the GOP gets a filibuster proof majority (or a leadership with the balls to toss the RINOs over the side and let the party of deadlock go through a REAL filibuster).

The house is okay.

When will the Sierra Club relinquish tgheir death-grip on the Dems and let us actually look for oil where we think it is, drill for it where we know it is and refine what we've got?

Yeah, if we could just drill in ANWR it would solve all our problems forever.

Carneliat · Post by **Carneliat** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 8:34 am

e wrote:sounds good on the surface, carneliat. but think about this......its still canada. nice to have you as a neighbor, but i like my house better.

Don't know what your house is like, but from what i've been told I can sell my place here and buy 2 1/2 of a similar house most places in the states. Not that I'd ever want to.

The Seer · Post by **The Seer** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:27 am

diT wrote:there continues to be no shortage of democrats I'd like to sock in the mouth.

"I have a plan for ending the war."

What is it? Can you tell us?

"Visit my website and find out."

Sincerely,

JFK

Just Fucking Kidding...

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:24 pm

Politicians trying to make political hay out of a controversial issue? Big fucking S H O C K E R .

sin,
Gay marriage, immigration reform, flag-burning, nigerian yellowcake, etc. etc. etc. etc.

Jerkovich · Post by **Jerkovich** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:15 pm

Mikey wrote:We live in the San Diego area, but about 45 miles north of the city. All north-south routes in this part of the county are gridlocked every weekday, and most of the major east-west routes are too. There's one light rail line going up and down the coast and it's always filled to capacity. I used to use it twice a week and I was lucky enough to get on at the originating station so I always had a seat. They could expand that line and put in a few more it would go a long way toward easing congestion.

You don't just give the money to the government and say here, develop mass transit. You form mass transit districts whose only madate is to make this happen. It has worked in the past and it still can. You just have to show people that it's cost effective and can save them time and effort.

Just bitchen, throw more money at empty buses.

You just have to show people that it's cost effective and can save them time and effort

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:42 pm

Jerkovich wrote:
Mikey wrote:We live in the San Diego area, but about 45 miles north of the city. All north-south routes in this part of the county are gridlocked every weekday, and most of the major east-west routes are too. There's one light rail line going up and down the coast and it's always filled to capacity. I used to use it twice a week and I was lucky enough to get on at the originating station so I always had a seat. They could expand that line and put in a few more it would go a long way toward easing congestion.

You don't just give the money to the government and say here, develop mass transit. You form mass transit districts whose only madate is to make this happen. It has worked in the past and it still can. You just have to show people that it's cost effective and can save them time and effort.
Just bitchen, throw more money at empty buses.
You just have to show people that it's cost effective and can save them time and effort

Nice comeback. Too bad you have no idea WTF you're talking about.

Jerkovich · Post by **Jerkovich** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 6:02 pm

Mike, I can appreciate that you're still stuck in SoCal and the traffic sucks. I've also noticed that over the 7 years down there is got exponentially worst every year. It is amazing the on May 5th the traffic is much faster; go figure. After a few years of putting up with it, I bailed to a little slower life style and faster pace traffic.

Let's face it, there will never be mass transit that will appeal to the masses. It is not feasible in the political and social climate set up in SoCal by the socialist liberals. They want their cake.....

In my profession, there will never be an adequate solution, so not driving myself to the customer isn't an option.

Ya, I've seen full busses in LA.....full of stinky illegals. I'd rather walk.

ADAM · Post by **ADAM** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 6:06 pm

XXXL wrote:I drive 4.8 miles, to and from the office, each way.

Used to drive 25 each way. So it pays to practice close to home.......

If slinging dope in your own 'hood saves you on gas, Go for it!

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 6:22 pm

Kev, in your line of work (assuming you're still doing what you used to do) I realize that getting off the road is not an option. But I would think that any solution that would get other people off the road would appeal to you. I'm not just talking about busses here, but more in terms of light rail (like the San Diego Trolley and the lines they have in LA) and, even moreso, commuter trains that bring people from the burbs into the city.

Here they have a train that runs from Oceanside to San Diego down the coast called the "Coaster" (imagine that). Believe it or not it's full to capacity every day with nicely dressed, sweet smelling white people who don't want to fight the I5 parking lot. They could do more of this and it would help ease some of the congestion as well as reduce fuel consumption and air pollution. A lot of smog is created by cars that are running but no going anywhere.

In fact, they are already putting in an east-west line from Escondido to Oceanside and supposedly planning some kind of north-south service down the I15 corridor. Given past experience both of these will probably be immediately inadequate but at least a start. Believe it or not even socialist liberals might be inclined to use public transportation if it's made convenient and cost effective. It's the whacko conservatives who will stay tied to their gas guzzlers long after everybody with a functioning brain has moved on.

As for me, it doesn't really affect me as much a most. I'm lucky to live in probably the one remaining pocket of clean air between VC and the Mexican border, buffered from the teeming masses by Camp Pendelton to the west, mountains to the north and east and the San Luis Rey River valley to the south. And I work from home most of the time so I don't venture into the gridlock all that often. It bugs the fuck outta me, though, when it takes all morning just to drive to the airport.

BTW...May 5 isn't really that big of a holiday for the Mexicans. It's mostly an excuse for anglos to drink Coronas and tequila and think they're doing some thing authentic.

Jerkovich · Post by **Jerkovich** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 7:14 pm

ev, in your line of work (assuming you're still doing what you used to do) I realize that getting off the road is not an option.

Mike, have some respect. I said, "Profession", Dickhead.

:P

Y2K · Post by **Y2K** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 7:25 pm

Kev should really be using a bicycle.

Terry in Crapchester · Sun Apr 30, 2006 8:25 pm

Jays Fan wrote:Paid $.93 per litre last night.

On average this past week it's been about $.99 per litre which works out to around $3.15/ gallon U.S.

And that includes our high taxes which go to pay for our government paid for health care.

That's only about $.10-$.15 per gallon more than I pay on the other side of Lake Ontario. So maybe high taxes aren't the reason gas prices are where they are.

Mikey wrote:As far as I'm concerned gas they should tax the fuck out of gas until it's at least $5.00/gallon. Use the extra revenue to develop and fix the highway system and mitigate some of the environmental damage that use of oil causes, and develop efficient public mass transit.

At that price maybe people would get the idea that they should start demanding more fuel efficient vehicles and mass transit that actually works.

I tend to agree with this -- in theory. In practice, for me, however, it wouldn't do anything.

I live in a small county, only about 60,000 people total live here. As you can imagine, job opportunities in this county are somewhat scarce, so I work in the next county to the west. It's about a 40-45 mile commute each way to/from work. Given the small population where I live, we'd be pretty far down the totem pole for federal funds for a mass transit system, so barring a change, I'll still need to drive to work. Also throw in the fact that I frequently appear in courts which are not centrally located to one another, and I definitely need a car at my disposal. I probably need to get about 2 more years out of my current car before I can afford a new one, and right now, given the costs of hybrid vehicles, there really are no savings in buying one.

The alternatives are relatively limited. I could try to get my wife to move closer to where I work, but that would require her to find another job, and even if that weren't an issue, it's unlikely she'd agree to do that. Not to mention that any savings at the pump likely would be eaten up by increased childcare costs (her mother lives about a mile away from us and watches the kids for free) and increased housing costs (admittedly, this expense would pay off in the long term due to increased equity, but it does nothing for the present budget). Another alternative, I suppose, would be to quit my job and go out on my own. It probably wouldn't change the amount of my driving, but it would render almost all of that mileage tax deductible, as opposed to my current situation, in which most of the mileage is not tax deductible. OTOH, my wife likes the security of me having a weekly paycheck and probably wouldn't agree to this option unless it were forced upon me.

fix · Post by **fix** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:20 pm

Terry in Crapchester wrote:
Jays Fan wrote:Paid $.93 per litre last night.

On average this past week it's been about $.99 per litre which works out to around $3.15/ gallon U.S.

And that includes our high taxes which go to pay for our government paid for health care.
That's only about $.10-$.15 per gallon more than I pay on the other side of Lake Ontario. So maybe high taxes aren't the reason gas prices are where they are.

Are taxes to high for all of us on both sides?

Absolutely. It's what governments use to help pay for their pork projects.

Funny enough though, the guy we have in power now (Harper) only 6 months ago was railing on the previous government to slash gas taxes saying they were way to high. Promising that if he were elected, he'd remove the GST (7% tax which is a tax added to the total costs after all other taxes have been included) if the price per litre were to rise above $.85.

Now that he's in power... he's refusing to do it and flip flopping his position on what he promised only 6 months ago.

Why? Because he wants that revenue to fund his own agenda of pork barrel projects.

So whether it be right wing vs left wing or left wing vs right wing... it doesn't matter.. both sides will demand the others reduce taxes but put them on the hot seat and they'll ladepkcab from it.

Terry in Crapchester · Sun Apr 30, 2006 11:27 pm

JaysFan wrote:Are taxes to high for all of us on both sides?

Absolutely. It's what governments use to help pay for their pork projects.

Not disputing this point at all. Just wanted to point out the relative similarity of gas prices on both sides of Lake Ontario, when we know that your side is paying much more in taxes than our side is.

Fact is, if you were to remove taxes from the equation entirely, we'd be paying more for gas than you are. So taxes alone aren't the issue viz. high gas prices.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Mon May 01, 2006 12:02 am

Mikey wrote:As far as I'm concerned gas they should tax the fuck out of gas until it's at least $5.00/gallon. Use the extra revenue to develop and fix the highway system and mitigate some of the environmental damage that use of oil causes, and develop efficient public mass transit.

At that price maybe people would get the idea that they should start demanding more fuel efficient vehicles and mass transit that actually works.

says the v-10 3/4 ton driving suburbanite.

practice what you preach, fatboy. oh yeah, I forgot, the spa's solar powered.

I actually agree with you mikey. Hope that doesn't get me kicked out of the neanderthal xtra chromosome right wing neo con club.

the marketplace will determine when alternate fuels/conservation happens, just like we facist republicaqns have been saying. Unfortunately, some folks think they have a constitutional guarantee to cheap plentiful gas. A neighbor of mine just bought a new murano. nice rig, I told her. have fun filling it with 4 dollar a gallon gas this summer, I added. Oh, it gets "about 21" she came back with. sure it does honey. a big fat AWD faggoty looking pseudo SUV may get 21, down hill with a tail wind.

She told my wife that she needed this thing since her perfectly good toyota minivan always got stuck in the snow. Yeah, sure. I live further up the hill than she does and got by just fine with plain old fwd. Makes about as much sense as a middle aged work from home lo-cal engineer buying a 3/4 ton 4x4 pick'em up truck.

Maybe she's got a little dick, too.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Mon May 01, 2006 1:41 am

smackaholic wrote:
Mikey wrote:As far as I'm concerned gas they should tax the fuck out of gas until it's at least $5.00/gallon. Use the extra revenue to develop and fix the highway system and mitigate some of the environmental damage that use of oil causes, and develop efficient public mass transit.

At that price maybe people would get the idea that they should start demanding more fuel efficient vehicles and mass transit that actually works.
says the v-10 3/4 ton driving suburbanite.

practice what you preach, fatboy. oh yeah, I forgot, the spa's solar powered.

Yeah, I see your point ya fat pile of goo. As long as you consider living on an acre of land in an agricultural area a suburbanite. At least I don't drive a 3/4 ton rig and bitch about gas prices.

I actually agree with you mikey. Hope that doesn't get me kicked out of the neanderthal xtra chromosome right wing neo con club.

I always knew you were a closet fag.
:P

the marketplace will determine when alternate fuels/conservation happens, just like we facist republicaqns have been saying. Unfortunately, some folks think they have a constitutional guarantee to cheap plentiful gas. A neighbor of mine just bought a new murano. nice rig, I told her. have fun filling it with 4 dollar a gallon gas this summer, I added. Oh, it gets "about 21" she came back with. sure it does honey. a big fat AWD faggoty looking pseudo SUV may get 21, down hill with a tail wind.

She told my wife that she needed this thing since her perfectly good toyota minivan always got stuck in the snow. Yeah, sure. I live further up the hill than she does and got by just fine with plain old fwd.

Makes about as much sense as a middle aged work from home lo-cal engineer buying a 3/4 ton 4x4 pick'em up truck.

I guess the gas guzzler would make more sense if I commuted every day?

You know I do actually use the boat for stuff like hauling Scouts and camping gear around, as well as a trailer full of equipment, family camping stuff, loads of firewood, a new bed for one of the kids last week. Stuff like that. But....I guess I could do that shit just as well with a Prius or something. If I was commuting every day you can be damn sure I'd be driving something a little more...well...efficient.

Maybe she's got a little dick, too.

Something you're intimately familiar with?

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Mon May 01, 2006 1:52 am

Mikey wrote:
Diogenes wrote:
Martyred wrote:DAMMIT! When will Democrats relinquish their death-grip on Congress?
On the Senate?

When the GOP gets a filibuster proof majority (or a leadership with the balls to toss the RINOs over the side and let the party of deadlock go through a REAL filibuster).

The house is okay.

When will the Sierra Club relinquish their death-grip on the Dems and let us actually look for oil where we think it is, drill for it where we know it is and refine what we've got?
Yeah, if we could just drill in ANWR it would solve all our problems forever.

If ANWR drilling hadn't been blocked in the 90s, gas probably wouldn't be quite so expensive right now.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Mon May 01, 2006 1:55 am

It's Hard Out Here for a Pump
by Ann Coulter
Posted Apr 26, 2006

I would be more interested in what the Democrats had to say about high gas prices if these were not the same people who refused to let us drill for oil in Alaska, imposed massive restrictions on building new refineries, and who shut down the development of nuclear power in this country decades ago.

But it's too much having to watch Democrats wail about the awful calamity to poor working families of having to pay high gas prices.

Imposing punitive taxation on gasoline to force people to ride bicycles has been one of the left's main policy goals for years.

For decades Democrats have been trying to raise the price of gasoline so that the working class will stop their infernal car-driving and start riding on buses where they belong, while liberals ride in Gulfstream jets.

The last time the Democrats controlled the House, the Senate and the presidency was in 1993. Immediately after trying to put gays in the military and socialize all health care, Clinton's next order of business was to propose an energy tax on all fuels, including a 26-cent tax on gas. I think the bill was called "putting people first in line at the bus station." This is the Democratic Party. That's their program.

Al Gore defended the gas tax, vowing that it was "absolutely not coming out" of the energy bill regardless of "how much trouble it causes the entire package."

And mind you, this was before we knew Gore was clinically insane. Back then we thought he was just a double-talking stuffed shirt who seemed kind of gay. The important thing was to force Americans to stop their infernal car-driving, no matter how much it cost.

Democrats in Congress promptly introduced an "energy bill" that would put an additional 25-cent-a-gallon tax on gasoline to stop "global warming," an atmospheric phenomenon supposedly aggravated by frivolous human activities such as commerce, travel and food production.

Democratic House Speaker Tom Foley endorsed the proposal on "Charlie Rose," saying: "I'd have a five-cent increase every year for five years. ... But that's not going to happen ... because we've got people who fret and worry that one- or two-tenths of a cent of a gasoline tax is going to cause some revolution at home." So in Tom Foley's universe, two-tenths of a cent is the same as a quarter -- another testimonial to the American public educational system.

The Democrats' proposed gas tax did cause a revolution at home, and consequently the Democrats were able to sneak through only an additional 4.3-cent federal tax on gasoline. After tut-tutting the idea that voters would object if the Democrats attempted a huge gas tax increase, Speaker Tom Foley soon became former speaker, and indeed former Congressman Tom Foley.

Gary Hart, another whimsical demonstration of what Democrats think a president should be like, said at the time, "I certainly favor consumption taxes, particularly on energy." Then there's John Kerry, who favored a 50-cent increase in the gas tax in 1994. If he were a rap artist, Kerry's stage name would be "Fifty Cent a Gallon."

Last year, a couple of green "climatologists" at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign were back at it in the journal Science, wheeling out their proposal for a 25-cent-a-gallon tax on gasoline as an "insurance policy" against global warming.

Just two months ago, we were being confidently told -- on the basis of a New York Times/CBS News poll, so it must be true -- that "Americans might OK a gasoline tax hike if it reduced global warming or lessened U.S. dependence on foreign oil." (This poll was wedged in among the 29 polls claiming Americans think we're losing the war in Iraq.) Other results from the Times' "meaningless polls" section: Americans might "OK" a Dennis Kucinich presidency if it meant free ice cream every Tuesday.

How many times do Democrats have to tell us they want to raise the price of gas for the average American before the average American believes them? Is it more or less than the number of times Democrats tell us they want to surrender in the war on terrorism?

It's as if a switch goes off in people's brains telling them: The Democrats can't be saying they want to destroy the lives of people who drive cars because my father was a Democrat, and the Democrats can't be this stupid!

The Democrats' only objection to current gas prices is that the federal government's cut is a mere 18.4 cents a gallon. States like New York get another 44 cents per gallon in taxes. The Democratic brain processes the fact that "big oil companies" get nearly 9 cents a gallon and thinks: WE SHOULD HAVE ALL THAT MONEY!

When the free market does the exact thing liberals have been itching to do through taxation, they pretend to be appalled by high gas prices, hoping the public will forget that high gas prices are part of their agenda.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon May 01, 2006 6:46 am

smackaholic wrote: I actually agree with you mikey. Hope that doesn't get me kicked out of the neanderthal xtra chromosome right wing neo con club.

You agree with comrade Mikey that gas should be artificially taxed to $5.00 a gallon?

Please turn in your membership card.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Mon May 01, 2006 2:07 pm

Who said anything about "artificially taxed".
I'm talking about a real tax here.

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Mon May 01, 2006 2:20 pm

Diogenes wrote:When the GOP gets a filibuster proof majority...

You'll have to wait a couple decades on that one. Got to go through the current cycle where it seems the Dems are coming back. After they fuck it up, it'll be time for y'all to take over.

Ann Coulter would like you to believe that every municipality in the the US would love to have a refinery on their doorstep.

If this is so horrible, why don't the GOP and their control of every single branch change it? Did the Dems do irrevocable harm to the country that the GOP and their control can't change? Coulter, whether it be her thoughts or her chest, has nothing to offer.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Mon May 01, 2006 2:31 pm

Whacko Bitch channeled through Board Moron wrote:I would be more interested in what the Democrats had to say about high gas prices if these were not the same people who refused to let us drill for oil in Alaska, imposed massive restrictions on building new refineries, and who shut down the development of nuclear power in this country decades ago.

You can tell that the bulemic one is talking out dio's ass with this opening salvo right here.

1. We're alreaedy pumping oil in Alaska.
2. ANWR would make about zero difference in the price of gas.
3. Oil companies have closed hundreds of their own refineries in the past 20 years with the specific purpose of driving up gas prices. Then they try to blame it on environmentalists. Nice try. At least she's got you believing it.

4. What, exactly, does nuclear power or the lack thereof have to do with the price of gasoline?

Pretty gullible there, aren't you boy?

But then I never really expected an ounce of actual intelligence or even an original take from the likes of you.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Mon May 01, 2006 3:31 pm

mvscal wrote:
Bizzarofelice wrote:Ann Coulter would like you to believe that every municipality in the the US would love to have a refinery on their doorstep.
It doesn't really matter what they want if the oil companies don't want to build them in the first place.

Who stole mvscal's password?

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Mon May 01, 2006 3:50 pm

I guess its the fact that you offered it without expletives that puzzles us.