Obama and Sacrifices

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: Vic
I expect that, because of the fiscal irresponsibility of GW Bush, my taxes are going up regardless, I just don't intend to pay them to the people who fscking lied to me. Is this confusing? Or should I draw a diagram?

They all lie so get over it. Were is my cheap gas Pelosi and the democrats promised in 2006? Where is the withdrawl of Iraq the democrats ran on in 2006?

Instead of raising taxes it is time for good old fasion spending cuts. Start with the war in Iraq and work your way down. The government has plenty of revinue they just need to spend it better.

Want my diagram 10 dollar a gallon fuel bankrupts 75% of the working class. Plain and simple for me energy is by far my biggest issue this election. McCain has a real complete energy policy Obama got his from the Sierra. That is what the democrats really want anyways the country in such a shit hole they can start hundreds of new programs and take control of peoples lives.

That's a nice conspiracy theory... except that the party in control of this country during these dramatic fuel price increases has been McCain's.
Just like the party in control of this country during the largest spending increases in its history has also been McCain's.

So you can continue to be an idiot and believe the lies, or you can start doing something about punishing the politicians who lie to you.

McCain's party has been in control since the Dems took control of Congress? :confused:
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: TechAZ
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: Vic
I expect that, because of the fiscal irresponsibility of GW Bush, my taxes are going up regardless, I just don't intend to pay them to the people who fscking lied to me. Is this confusing? Or should I draw a diagram?

They all lie so get over it. Were is my cheap gas Pelosi and the democrats promised in 2006? Where is the withdrawl of Iraq the democrats ran on in 2006?

Instead of raising taxes it is time for good old fasion spending cuts. Start with the war in Iraq and work your way down. The government has plenty of revinue they just need to spend it better.

Want my diagram 10 dollar a gallon fuel bankrupts 75% of the working class. Plain and simple for me energy is by far my biggest issue this election. McCain has a real complete energy policy Obama got his from the Sierra. That is what the democrats really want anyways the country in such a shit hole they can start hundreds of new programs and take control of peoples lives.

That's a nice conspiracy theory... except that the party in control of this country during these dramatic fuel price increases has been McCain's.
Just like the party in control of this country during the largest spending increases in its history has also been McCain's.

So you can continue to be an idiot and believe the lies, or you can start doing something about punishing the politicians who lie to you.

McCain's party has been in control since the Dems took control of Congress? :confused:

The legislative branch controls the operations of this country's government? :confused:

:roll:

It's a pretty spin to claim that a tiny majority in the house constitutes control of the entire govt, but it's only believable if you're a fscking idiot. Seriously... don't insult me with this stupidity again.
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: Vic
I expect that, because of the fiscal irresponsibility of GW Bush, my taxes are going up regardless, I just don't intend to pay them to the people who fscking lied to me. Is this confusing? Or should I draw a diagram?

They all lie so get over it. Were is my cheap gas Pelosi and the democrats promised in 2006? Where is the withdrawl of Iraq the democrats ran on in 2006?

Instead of raising taxes it is time for good old fasion spending cuts. Start with the war in Iraq and work your way down. The government has plenty of revinue they just need to spend it better.

Want my diagram 10 dollar a gallon fuel bankrupts 75% of the working class. Plain and simple for me energy is by far my biggest issue this election. McCain has a real complete energy policy Obama got his from the Sierra. That is what the democrats really want anyways the country in such a shit hole they can start hundreds of new programs and take control of peoples lives.

That's a nice conspiracy theory... except that the party in control of this country during these dramatic fuel price increases has been McCain's.
Just like the party in control of this country during the largest spending increases in its history has also been McCain's.

So you can continue to be an idiot and believe the lies, or you can start doing something about punishing the politicians who lie to you.

McCain's party has been in control since the Dems took control of Congress? :confused:

The legislative branch controls the operations of this country's government? :confused:

:roll:

It's a pretty spin to claim that a tiny majority in the house constitutes control of the entire govt, but it's only believable if you're a fscking idiot. Seriously... don't insult me with this stupidity again.

I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: TechAZ
I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.

I don't care about Pelosi, and I opposed her becoming Speaker. What does this have to do with our discussion here? Oh... nothing. GW Bush is still President of the United States, is still in control of our country's policy, and not Nancy Pelosi.
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.

I don't care about Pelosi, and I opposed her becoming Speaker. What does this have to do with our discussion here? Oh... nothing. GW Bush is still President of the United States, is still in control of our country's policy, and not Nancy Pelosi.

I know it's late so I'll just brush this one off as "too late for Vic to follow along from point A to B to C". Surely you can't be that dense to be confused following along here.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: TechAZ
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.

I don't care about Pelosi, and I opposed her becoming Speaker. What does this have to do with our discussion here? Oh... nothing. GW Bush is still President of the United States, is still in control of our country's policy, and not Nancy Pelosi.

I know it's late so I'll just brush this one off as "too late for Vic to follow along from point A to B to C". Surely you can't be that dense to be confused following along here.

Okay, you don't know how our government is organized but want to be a dipshit about it in defense of partisanship.. got it.
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.

I don't care about Pelosi, and I opposed her becoming Speaker. What does this have to do with our discussion here? Oh... nothing. GW Bush is still President of the United States, is still in control of our country's policy, and not Nancy Pelosi.

I know it's late so I'll just brush this one off as "too late for Vic to follow along from point A to B to C". Surely you can't be that dense to be confused following along here.

Okay, you don't know how our government is organized but want to be a dipshit about it in defense of partisanship.. got it.

Don't get pissy with me...I'm not the one who promised lower gas prices and troops out of Iraq, only to fail miserably.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: TechAZ
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.

I don't care about Pelosi, and I opposed her becoming Speaker. What does this have to do with our discussion here? Oh... nothing. GW Bush is still President of the United States, is still in control of our country's policy, and not Nancy Pelosi.

I know it's late so I'll just brush this one off as "too late for Vic to follow along from point A to B to C". Surely you can't be that dense to be confused following along here.

Okay, you don't know how our government is organized but want to be a dipshit about it in defense of partisanship.. got it.

Don't get pissy with me...I'm not the one who promised lower gas prices and troops out of Iraq, only to fail miserably.

Sorry, the Republicans told me in 2003 that Iraq was Operation Unleaded 99 cents.

Obviously, you're too young to remember that.
 

quest55720

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,339
0
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.

I don't care about Pelosi, and I opposed her becoming Speaker. What does this have to do with our discussion here? Oh... nothing. GW Bush is still President of the United States, is still in control of our country's policy, and not Nancy Pelosi.

It is Pelosi who sent the government off to vacation while people suffer. I don't recall GWB calling for a vacation I must of missed that. It is Pelosi holding this country hostage with refusal to vote on a real energy policy. Pelosi/Reid/Obama hold all the cards right now Bush can't sign anything into law unless the unholy get back to work and send a bill to him. Bush did as much as he could by lifting the executive ban on off shore drilling.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.

I don't care about Pelosi, and I opposed her becoming Speaker. What does this have to do with our discussion here? Oh... nothing. GW Bush is still President of the United States, is still in control of our country's policy, and not Nancy Pelosi.

It is Pelosi who sent the government off to vacation while people suffer. I don't recall GWB calling for a vacation I must of missed that. It is Pelosi holding this country hostage with refusal to vote on a real energy policy. Pelosi/Reid/Obama hold all the cards right now Bush can't sign anything into law unless the unholy get back to work and send a bill to him. Bush did as much as he could by lifting the executive ban on off shore drilling.

To suffer for what? A couple weeks of inaction for the GOP's 7 whole years of inaction on this issue? And OMG for something that expires on its own by next month anyway while oil prices are already down 25% since Pelosi went on vacation to OMG make people suffer...

There's stupid, pal, and then there's you, the hack troll who spinning a nonsense agenda he doesn't care about who thinks the rest of us are stupid. Kindly don't insult me with this shit again.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
The sad bit here is that I already sacrificed when GW Bush ran $3 trillion+ in deficits and increased spending more than any other President in US history, but hacks here gotta pretend he cut their tax burden instead. It'd be comical... if it weren't tragic. My own wallet... ain't laughing.
 

quest55720

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,339
0
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.

I don't care about Pelosi, and I opposed her becoming Speaker. What does this have to do with our discussion here? Oh... nothing. GW Bush is still President of the United States, is still in control of our country's policy, and not Nancy Pelosi.

It is Pelosi who sent the government off to vacation while people suffer. I don't recall GWB calling for a vacation I must of missed that. It is Pelosi holding this country hostage with refusal to vote on a real energy policy. Pelosi/Reid/Obama hold all the cards right now Bush can't sign anything into law unless the unholy get back to work and send a bill to him. Bush did as much as he could by lifting the executive ban on off shore drilling.

To suffer for what? A couple weeks of inaction for the GOP's 7 whole years of inaction on this issue? And OMG for something that expires on its own by next month anyway while oil prices are already down 25% since Pelosi went on vacation to OMG make people suffer...

There's stupid, pal, and then there's you, the hack troll who spinning a nonsense agenda he doesn't care about who thinks the rest of us are stupid. Kindly don't insult me with this shit again.

I don't care about the 7 years of in action can't change the past. All I care about now is swift action. Thanks to that vacation nothing will get done till next spring. That means a winter of extremely high priced fuel oil for many in the north. I know you don't care about a some people freezing or starving to death as long as your boy is elected right?

 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.

I don't care about Pelosi, and I opposed her becoming Speaker. What does this have to do with our discussion here? Oh... nothing. GW Bush is still President of the United States, is still in control of our country's policy, and not Nancy Pelosi.

It is Pelosi who sent the government off to vacation while people suffer. I don't recall GWB calling for a vacation I must of missed that. It is Pelosi holding this country hostage with refusal to vote on a real energy policy. Pelosi/Reid/Obama hold all the cards right now Bush can't sign anything into law unless the unholy get back to work and send a bill to him. Bush did as much as he could by lifting the executive ban on off shore drilling.

To suffer for what? A couple weeks of inaction for the GOP's 7 whole years of inaction on this issue? And OMG for something that expires on its own by next month anyway while oil prices are already down 25% since Pelosi went on vacation to OMG make people suffer...

There's stupid, pal, and then there's you, the hack troll who spinning a nonsense agenda he doesn't care about who thinks the rest of us are stupid. Kindly don't insult me with this shit again.

I don't care about the 7 years of in action can't change the past. All I care about now is swift action. Thanks to that vacation nothing will get done till next spring. That means a winter of extremely high priced fuel oil for many in the north. I know you don't care about a some people freezing or starving to death as long as your boy is elected right?


That's unbelievably lame- Swift action? Like what? this coming winter's fuel oil prices won't be affected by anything congress does, unless they vote to subsidize, borrow more money to do it. Anywhere other than rightwing fantasyland, more borrowing inevitably means higher taxes down the road, not to mention that subsidies support prices rather than depressing them...

If Congress voted to "do something", I'm sure you'd be against that, too...
 

quest55720

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,339
0
0
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: TechAZ
I wasn't the one who made promises....maybe you need to direct your misplaced intellectual superiority towards Pelosi.

I don't care about Pelosi, and I opposed her becoming Speaker. What does this have to do with our discussion here? Oh... nothing. GW Bush is still President of the United States, is still in control of our country's policy, and not Nancy Pelosi.

It is Pelosi who sent the government off to vacation while people suffer. I don't recall GWB calling for a vacation I must of missed that. It is Pelosi holding this country hostage with refusal to vote on a real energy policy. Pelosi/Reid/Obama hold all the cards right now Bush can't sign anything into law unless the unholy get back to work and send a bill to him. Bush did as much as he could by lifting the executive ban on off shore drilling.

To suffer for what? A couple weeks of inaction for the GOP's 7 whole years of inaction on this issue? And OMG for something that expires on its own by next month anyway while oil prices are already down 25% since Pelosi went on vacation to OMG make people suffer...

There's stupid, pal, and then there's you, the hack troll who spinning a nonsense agenda he doesn't care about who thinks the rest of us are stupid. Kindly don't insult me with this shit again.

I don't care about the 7 years of in action can't change the past. All I care about now is swift action. Thanks to that vacation nothing will get done till next spring. That means a winter of extremely high priced fuel oil for many in the north. I know you don't care about a some people freezing or starving to death as long as your boy is elected right?


That's unbelievably lame- Swift action? Like what? this coming winter's fuel oil prices won't be affected by anything congress does, unless they vote to subsidize, borrow more money to do it. Anywhere other than rightwing fantasyland, more borrowing inevitably means higher taxes down the road, not to mention that subsidies support prices rather than depressing them...

If Congress voted to "do something", I'm sure you'd be against that, too...

If it is the Obama plan I would be against it any plan with out real drilling is worthless. If it is a complete energy plan that includes drilling, nuclear, alternatives ect then I will be for it.

They are called oil futures if congress would of gotten off its ass in june and passed an energy bill that included drilling that could of help lower prices this winter. This should of been in the states hands already being voted on. Instead Pelosi/Obama/Reid have delayed any vote till next spring when they hope to have complete control. The only way a real energy plan gets passed is if McCain wins and the republicans can keep 41 seats. That way they can filibuster or veto everything till a real energy plan is passed.

Not really keep taxes low help the economy grow and cut spending will do the job. This government gets plenty of money the way it is. There is no reason to raise taxes when the economy is struggling. Raising taxes now would just lower tax revinue because the economy will go further into the toilet. They blow it on wastefull crap like the war in Iraq. I think the american people can decide much better what to do with their money than this crappy corrupt government we have.

 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
They are called oil futures if congress would of gotten off its ass in june and passed an energy bill that included drilling that could of help lower prices this winter.

Oil futures don't set prices. That's like claiming the betting on a horserace determines the winner. It's ignorant.

Iraq?

It wasn't Dems who "sexed up" the intelligence, conflated Iraq, Osama, Wmd's, Terrar!, Nukes, Al Qaeda, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11!, and the Evil Saddam in a masterful blend of fearmongering and false pride- it was the Bushistas and their acolytes, including John McCain.

It wasn't Dems who made every possible wrong turn in the occupation so as to create quagmire and a gigantic war profiteer porkbarrel- it was the Bush Admin.

It isn't Dems who are holding our troops hostage in Iraq with the stubborn refusal to set a withdrawal schedule, extorting the money from congress to keep 'em there- It's GWB, and his pals, among them John McCain.

It's not Dems who really "control" much of anything at this point- not when the have to depend on Joe Lieberman to have a Senate majority, and not when Sen Tim Johnson missed the entire 2007 assembly recovering from a stroke...

Energy plan? McCain and the repubs have no plan beyond pie in the sky promises and concessions to Big Oil. More drilling is like putting a bandaid on a sucking chest wound, and anybody having enough sense to pour piss out of a boot, whose thinking processes haven't been poisoned by rightwing talk radio drivel should realize that.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,068
55,585
136
How would have a bill passed in June lowered oil prices in winter because of drilling? Are we talking about the winter of 2020 or something?
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
They are called oil futures if congress would of gotten off its ass in june and passed an energy bill that included drilling that could of help lower prices this winter.

Oil futures don't set prices. That's like claiming the betting on a horserace determines the winner. It's ignorant.

Iraq?

It wasn't Dems who "sexed up" the intelligence, conflated Iraq, Osama, Wmd's, Terrar!, Nukes, Al Qaeda, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11!, and the Evil Saddam in a masterful blend of fearmongering and false pride- it was the Bushistas and their acolytes, including John McCain.

It wasn't Dems who made every possible wrong turn in the occupation so as to create quagmire and a gigantic war profiteer porkbarrel- it was the Bush Admin.

It isn't Dems who are holding our troops hostage in Iraq with the stubborn refusal to set a withdrawal schedule, extorting the money from congress to keep 'em there- It's GWB, and his pals, among them John McCain.

It's not Dems who really "control" much of anything at this point- not when the have to depend on Joe Lieberman to have a Senate majority, and not when Sen Tim Johnson missed the entire 2007 assembly recovering from a stroke...

Energy plan? McCain and the repubs have no plan beyond pie in the sky promises and concessions to Big Oil. More drilling is like putting a bandaid on a sucking chest wound, and anybody having enough sense to pour piss out of a boot, whose thinking processes haven't been poisoned by rightwing talk radio drivel should realize that.

lol, every single thing Bush has done is horribly wrong! Damn those Republicans, and damn Joe Lieberman for supporting the war! Is there anything you aren't a hack about?

Obama's energy plan is a far far far more "pie in the sky" promise. Maybe you should actually read it. It's quite funny, even funnier that people defend it as if it even sounds remotely achievable. Punish oil companies (when they get less profit than the gov't currently steals from them) and hope and pray for alternative energy. Yeah, that's some rock solid shit right there :roll:
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: TechAZ
Every single thing Bush has done is horribly wrong!
Yet that doesn't stop you from supporting 4 more years of it by voting for McSame.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
Your dismissive derision is expected, TechAZ- it's all you've got, other than nothin'...Rush gets away with it because it's his show, and O'Reilly cuts the microphone when he hears something he wants not to hear...

You just rave and close your eyes and ears all the more tightly.

Two energy plans, similar in many ways, except that one is devoid of the fearmongering and chest thumping of the other, also lacking this really cutesy pie in the sky "you could win the lottery!" bamboozle-

"John McCain Will Propose A $300 Million Prize To Improve Battery Technology For Full Commercial Development Of Plug-In Hybrid And Fully Electric Automobiles. A $300 million prize should be awarded for the development of a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars. That battery should deliver a power source at 30 percent of the current costs. At $300 million, the prize is one dollar for every man, woman and child in this country - and a small price to pay for breaking our dependence on oil. "

Magical batteries! Yeh, that's what our future depends on!

http://www.johnmccain.com/Info...sid=google&t=lexington

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy




 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Your dismissive derision is expected, TechAZ- it's all you've got, other than nothin'...Rush gets away with it because it's his show, and O'Reilly cuts the microphone when he hears something he wants not to hear...

You just rave and close your eyes and ears all the more tightly.

Two energy plans, similar in many ways, except that one is devoid of the fearmongering and chest thumping of the other, also lacking this really cutesy pie in the sky "you could win the lottery!" bamboozle-

"John McCain Will Propose A $300 Million Prize To Improve Battery Technology For Full Commercial Development Of Plug-In Hybrid And Fully Electric Automobiles. A $300 million prize should be awarded for the development of a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars. That battery should deliver a power source at 30 percent of the current costs. At $300 million, the prize is one dollar for every man, woman and child in this country - and a small price to pay for breaking our dependence on oil. "

Magical batteries! Yeh, that's what our future depends on!

http://www.johnmccain.com/Info...sid=google&t=lexington

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy

I've read both plans already. I'm not sure where you are going with this. You called McCain's proposal "pie in the sky". While I don't necessarily disagree completely....I find it ironic that you would make such a point of that while Obama's energy policy is even MORE unbelievable.

From Obama:
? Increase Fuel Economy Standards.
Pretty sure these companies are already doing what they can technologically increase.

? Get 1 Million Plug-In Hybrid Cars on the Road by 2015.
lol, too funny. Guess they'll need those batteries McCain is talking about

? Create a New $7,000 Tax Credit for Purchasing Advanced Vehicles.
To help offset the increase in cost to buying these "magic cars" that aren't here yet, but Obama promises they will be soon!

? Promote the Responsible Domestic Production of Oil and Natural Gas.
Key word Responsible, almost put in there as protection from saying "no" to everything that's put forward.
 

Jmman

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 1999
5,302
0
76
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Your dismissive derision is expected, TechAZ- it's all you've got, other than nothin'...Rush gets away with it because it's his show, and O'Reilly cuts the microphone when he hears something he wants not to hear...

You just rave and close your eyes and ears all the more tightly.

Two energy plans, similar in many ways, except that one is devoid of the fearmongering and chest thumping of the other, also lacking this really cutesy pie in the sky "you could win the lottery!" bamboozle-

"John McCain Will Propose A $300 Million Prize To Improve Battery Technology For Full Commercial Development Of Plug-In Hybrid And Fully Electric Automobiles. A $300 million prize should be awarded for the development of a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars. That battery should deliver a power source at 30 percent of the current costs. At $300 million, the prize is one dollar for every man, woman and child in this country - and a small price to pay for breaking our dependence on oil. "

Magical batteries! Yeh, that's what our future depends on!

http://www.johnmccain.com/Info...sid=google&t=lexington

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy

To be honest, the Xprize got a private craft into space, so maybe this might help spur new battery development......
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,068
55,585
136
Originally posted by: TechAZ

I've read both plans already. I'm not sure where you are going with this. You called McCain's proposal "pie in the sky". While I don't necessarily disagree completely....I find it ironic that you would make such a point of that while Obama's energy policy is even MORE unbelievable.

From Obama:
? Increase Fuel Economy Standards.
Pretty sure these companies are already doing what they can technologically increase.

? Get 1 Million Plug-In Hybrid Cars on the Road by 2015.
lol, too funny. Guess they'll need those batteries McCain is talking about

? Create a New $7,000 Tax Credit for Purchasing Advanced Vehicles.
To help offset the increase in cost to buying these "magic cars" that aren't here yet, but Obama promises they will be soon!

? Promote the Responsible Domestic Production of Oil and Natural Gas.
Key word Responsible, almost put in there as protection from saying "no" to everything that's put forward.

I guess you've read his plan, but haven't read anything else?

1.) Obama is talking about federal fuel economy standards, the companies are certainly not doing all that they can to increase mileage. They have only slightly shifted towards improving this recently when everyone went batshit about gas prices. To think that the companies are just taking care of this on their own is hopelessly naive.

2.) They won't need those batteries McCain is talking about, as both Toyota and GM have plug in hybrids coming out in 2010 without any magical McCain batteries.

3.) Obama doesn't promise these 'magic cars' will be here soon, GM and Toyota do. Oh, and they've already built some. Guess they are magical car manufacturers, huh?

4.) You're not really saying anything meaningful here to shoot down.
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: TechAZ

I've read both plans already. I'm not sure where you are going with this. You called McCain's proposal "pie in the sky". While I don't necessarily disagree completely....I find it ironic that you would make such a point of that while Obama's energy policy is even MORE unbelievable.

From Obama:
? Increase Fuel Economy Standards.
Pretty sure these companies are already doing what they can technologically increase.

? Get 1 Million Plug-In Hybrid Cars on the Road by 2015.
lol, too funny. Guess they'll need those batteries McCain is talking about

? Create a New $7,000 Tax Credit for Purchasing Advanced Vehicles.
To help offset the increase in cost to buying these "magic cars" that aren't here yet, but Obama promises they will be soon!

? Promote the Responsible Domestic Production of Oil and Natural Gas.
Key word Responsible, almost put in there as protection from saying "no" to everything that's put forward.

I guess you've read his plan, but haven't read anything else?

1.) Obama is talking about federal fuel economy standards, the companies are certainly not doing all that they can to increase mileage. They have only slightly shifted towards improving this recently when everyone went batshit about gas prices. To think that the companies are just taking care of this on their own is hopelessly naive.

2.) They won't need those batteries McCain is talking about, as both Toyota and GM have plug in hybrids coming out in 2010 without any magical McCain batteries.

3.) Obama doesn't promise these 'magic cars' will be here soon, GM and Toyota do. Oh, and they've already built some. Guess they are magical car manufacturers, huh?

4.) You're not really saying anything meaningful here to shoot down.


So you're saying that companies aren't doing all they can to increase mileage, yet GM and Toyota are coming out with plug in hybrids in 2010. Obama promised these cars will be here, quite a promise since evidently they have already been in the works....quite a bold statement for him to make there. I was actually unaware of 150mpg vehicles in the works tbh.

Looks like any actual impact from 150+mpg vehicles is going to take a lot longer than getting oil out of the ground in 10.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,277
0
0
In the repug's frantic scramble up to the election, they're stepping on their tails. The burning brain cells are causing faulty logic. I expect to see many other very low post count knuckle dragger trolls. This is going to be quite a show - sad but funny.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: Dari
After 9/11 America should've been in war mode. Instead, the President told us to go shopping. It isn't right for Americans to pretend everything is the same when one of our great cities is burning and our soldiers are about to go fight.
IMO the response to 911 was already over the top, although the US was spending like it was in a war and yet cut taxes, a critical error and responsible for the sky rocketed deficit and related to other poor policies like toilet-paper dollar.