PDA

View Full Version : Libs at it Again



kbsooner21
01-31-2007, 03:24 PM
California considers banning common light bulb


SACRAMENTO, Calif. California lawmakers are working to change a light bulb.

Assemblyman Lloyd Levine (leh-VYN') says the common light bulb is so inefficient it should be banned. The Los Angeles Democrat and others are working on legislation that would do just that.

Levine believes compact fluorescent light bulbs are so efficient that consumers should be forced to use them. He says the often spiral-shaped bulbs use a quarter of the energy of a conventional bulb. He says they'd save consumers money and keep some 13-hundred pounds of carbon dioxide from being pumped into the atmosphere by electric plants.

Levine also points out that the new bulbs are so efficient that electric utilities give them away.

The idea has annoyed some Republicans, who say people should be allowed to make their own choices about which bulbs to buy.

kbsooner21
01-31-2007, 03:26 PM
All these Libs, that want to tell everyone how to live, need to be packed up and sent to Cuba. There they can plan on how to overthrow Castro and set up there own little communist utopia and live happily ever after.

10DimeBry
01-31-2007, 03:39 PM
we have those light bulbs. and they are good. but they dont give off as much light. but no one should be forced to use them. and they cost like 10x as much per bulb. upside is they last for 5yrs. i got sick of changing light bulbs all the time so i went and bought like a doz of them and changed all of them. i still have a couple regular bulbs and they are brighter.

i think its totally foolish that they want to outlaw them. whats next are libs going to say you can only eat certain foods?

garth
02-03-2007, 09:58 AM
fucking Communists!:red: :dontknow:

10DimeBry
02-03-2007, 12:37 PM
i hate libs.

Meg30
02-03-2007, 01:30 PM
how can you possibly hate that idea

kbsooner21
02-03-2007, 01:31 PM
how can you possibly hate that idea
Cause United State was founded on each and every one of us being independent and able to make our own decisions. If you actually like this idea, send me your address and I'll be more than happy to send you a one way ticket to Cuba

10DimeBry
02-03-2007, 01:32 PM
how can you possibly hate that idea


easy, isnt this the land of the free??? if so then ppl should have the right to choose.

jordanrules23
02-03-2007, 01:33 PM
how can you possibly hate that idea
typical brainwashed demo

BUD GREGG
02-03-2007, 01:45 PM
how can you possibly hate that idea



ITS NOT THE IDEA, ITS THE FORCED CHOICE BY THE MINORITY IMPLICATION OF THE IDEA

Meg30
02-03-2007, 03:24 PM
please...if my government spent more time telling me how i could improve our environment..... instead of spending my tax dollars on a war i don't support and telling me i'm not intelligent enough to spend my own money wagering on sports online, I’d see them in a better light

BettorsChat
02-03-2007, 03:30 PM
California considers banning common light bulb


SACRAMENTO, Calif. California lawmakers are working to change a light bulb.

Assemblyman Lloyd Levine (leh-VYN') says the common light bulb is so inefficient it should be banned. The Los Angeles Democrat and others are working on legislation that would do just that.

Levine believes compact fluorescent light bulbs are so efficient that consumers should be forced to use them. He says the often spiral-shaped bulbs use a quarter of the energy of a conventional bulb. He says they'd save consumers money and keep some 13-hundred pounds of carbon dioxide from being pumped into the atmosphere by electric plants.

Levine also points out that the new bulbs are so efficient that electric utilities give them away.

The idea has annoyed some Republicans, who say people should be allowed to make their own choices about which bulbs to buy.

Maybe we should just let Republicans tell us what we can and can't do with our own money from now on while they take it.

BettorsChat
02-03-2007, 03:31 PM
easy, isnt this the land of the free??? if so then ppl should have the right to choose.

Doesn't seem like we can choose certain things now does it that have been passed by Republicans

Meg30
02-03-2007, 03:32 PM
Doesn't seem like we can choose certain things now does it that have been passed by Republicans


:clapping: :clapping:

BUD GREGG
02-03-2007, 05:38 PM
Maybe we should just let Republicans tell us what we can and can't do with our own money from now on while they take it.

ACCORDING TO YOUR NEXT PRESIDENTIAL HOPEFUL, SHE WILL TAKE ALL THE PROFITS OF THE BIG OIL CO'S AND PRODUCE BETTER ENERGY..............NOW THATS A FIRST TAKING OF PROFITS OF CO'S OF A FREE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM.........................OH!.....EXCUSE ME THAT COMMUNUSIM-

BettorsChat
02-03-2007, 05:58 PM
ACCORDING TO YOUR NEXT PRESIDENTIAL HOPEFUL, SHE WILL TAKE ALL THE PROFITS OF THE BIG OIL CO'S AND PRODUCE BETTER ENERGY..............NOW THATS A FIRST TAKING OF PROFITS OF CO'S OF A FREE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM.........................OH!.....EXCUSE ME THAT COMMUNUSIM-

Who said she will win? Or even get the nomination?

Communusim is what this Country is becoming more and more like now, because of both sides of the Government!

And she or any other President can say what they want, but that doesn't mean that they can get it passed through congress. Well, unless your George Bush whose ignored congress and the American public on Iraq.

By the way I know of 120+ people who just attended a seminar about getting new homes that lost theirs in Katrina. Do you think you can help them out? As insurance companies won't help them and of course Fema and Bush aren't doing shit.

gbell
02-04-2007, 12:26 AM
[QUOTE=BettorsChat] Well, unless your George Bush whose ignored congress and the American public on Iraq.
QUOTE]


Which Congressmen/women voted against the war again? Just curious who he "ignored"; outside of the Monday morning qb, election year rantings of course.

BettorsChat
02-04-2007, 02:30 AM
[QUOTE=BettorsChat] Well, unless your George Bush whose ignored congress and the American public on Iraq.
QUOTE]


Which Congressmen/women voted against the war again? Just curious who he "ignored"; outside of the Monday morning qb, election year rantings of course.

Whose he ignoring now? The 70+ % of the American Public as well as the Majority of Congressman and Senators.

He ignored his Cousin Colin Powell for one who said not to go into Iraq. Why did most of his personal committee quit on him? Why are republicans coming over to the Democrats side? I guess a 15% increase in troops will get the job done. You could always volunteer to go over there.

mike650
02-04-2007, 08:44 AM
please...if my government spent more time telling me how i could improve our environment..... instead of spending my tax dollars on a war i don't support and telling me i'm not intelligent enough to spend my own money wagering on sports online, Id see them in a better light
Is there something wrong with the Environment ??
Oh wait Global warming ..How cold is it in Chi. today?

gbell
02-04-2007, 11:47 PM
[QUOTE=gbell]

Whose he ignoring now? The 70+ % of the American Public as well as the Majority of Congressman and Senators.

He ignored his Cousin Colin Powell for one who said not to go into Iraq. Why did most of his personal committee quit on him? Why are republicans coming over to the Democrats side? I guess a 15% increase in troops will get the job done. You could always volunteer to go over there.

Not the public's call. We are a republic and put the people in to make the decisions. And of course a majority want to cut and run. That's how they were elected; duh.

What are your suggestions since you are in the 70%? What happens if we pull everyone out tomm? Easy to pull a Monday morning QB like all libs and Dems with no plan. By the way, what is the Dems plan?

BettorsChat
02-05-2007, 07:21 AM
[QUOTE=BettorsChat]

Not the public's call. We are a republic and put the people in to make the decisions. And of course a majority want to cut and run. That's how they were elected; duh.

What are your suggestions since you are in the 70%? What happens if we pull everyone out tomm? Easy to pull a Monday morning QB like all libs and Dems with no plan. By the way, what is the Dems plan?

It is our call as we voted the Republicans out and the Majority is now Democrats DUH.

And did you not read where Republicans are taking the stand with Democrats regarding this. Guess not.

:dontknow:

gbell
02-05-2007, 08:49 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

It is our call as we voted the Republicans out and the Majority is now Democrats DUH.

And did you not read where Republicans are taking the stand with Democrats regarding this. Guess not.

:dontknow:

Let me know when you get to vote to go to war or not. He is the Commander in Chief. Not Congress, not the public.


"What are your suggestions since you are in the 70%? What happens if we pull everyone out tomm? Easy to pull a Monday morning QB like all libs and Dems with no plan. By the way, what is the Dems plan?"


Since it's "your" call, an answer would be nice.:blah:

I guess cutting off funding to the troops will show em huh?

BettorsChat
02-05-2007, 07:45 PM
[QUOTE=BettorsChat]

Let me know when you get to vote to go to war or not. He is the Commander in Chief. Not Congress, not the public.


"What are your suggestions since you are in the 70%? What happens if we pull everyone out tomm? Easy to pull a Monday morning QB like all libs and Dems with no plan. By the way, what is the Dems plan?"


Since it's "your" call, an answer would be nice.:blah:

I guess cutting off funding to the troops will show em huh?

A President should learn to listen to the people and the Congressmen and Senators that the American people voted into office. That's why Democrats took control of both houses. :blah:

gbell
02-06-2007, 12:54 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

A President should learn to listen to the people and the Congressmen and Senators that the American people voted into office. That's why Democrats took control of both houses. :blah:

Still waiting for your answers as well as the Dems plan. Odd avoidance.

"What are your suggestions since you are in the 70%? What happens if we pull everyone out tomm? Easy to pull a Monday morning QB like all libs and Dems with no plan. By the way, what is the Dems plan?"

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:09 AM
I love the way you're asking what the Democrats should do now that the Republican's completely fucked this up. Bush has us so deep in shit, there's no right answer.

Typical right wing philosophy. Lock the barn door after the horses have gotten out....One thing is for sure. Kerry, love him or hate him, would have never gotten us into this mess. Too bad he was the real winner of the last election.....

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:17 AM
I love the way you're asking what the Democrats should do now that the Republican's completely fucked this up. Bush has us so deep in shit, there's no right answer.

Typical right wing philosophy. Lock the barn door after the horses have gotten out....One thing is for sure. Kerry, love him or hate him, would have never gotten us into this mess. Too bad he was the real winner of the last election.....


Kaz, I am asking BC what he suggests since he keeps throwing out that 70% figure and his belief that the majority rules. And since he said the people voted the Dems in, then they want to go with the Dem plan. So my question remains, where is the Dem plan and BC's suggestions as a Monday morning QB.

So according to you, since Bush "fucked it up", (not everyone who voted for it of course), and he is trying to do something else about it, then why do the Dems say "No, that won't work". How is it the Dems codemn the King/Czar (since they didn't vote for the war, right?) for getting us in the "mess", then according to you are supposed to just throw up their hands and say "you deal with it b/c you screwed it up" Then when he tries, it's no,no no. Does that make sense? Either the Dems who got got voted in step up to the plate and offer suggestions and less criticism, or maybe they should step down since that's what they won on.

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:18 AM
I love how you Republican's worry about Calif being told to use energy efficient light bulbs, saying that the we should have the freedom to choose what light bulb to use. But you completely ignore the fact that the Right wing Congress, specifically, R-Biil Frist gets legislation passed to stop us from spending our money as we please. There have been numerous laws passed to take away our civil liberties. Most of them sponsored by the Republican's.

Calif is absolutely right about using energy efficient bulbs. We already rely too heavily on the power companies in this state. It's would be like, if they came up with a device to put on your car's exhaust to stop all the carbon monoxide poisoning in the air. But we don't allow it to pass because we should have the right to pollute the air if we choose.....Ignorant thinking. Not surprised....

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:19 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]One thing is for sure. Kerry, love him or hate him, would have never gotten us into this mess. QUOTE]

You are probably right. Kerry wouldn't have sent us to war. He, along with all the other stupid, chicken-shit Dems would still be talking and hoping that the madmen of the Middle East as well as around the world all got together for a weekend and kissed and made nice-nice.

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:23 AM
Kaz, I am asking BC what he suggests since he keeps throwing out that 70% figure and his belief that the majority rules. And since he said the people voted the Dems in, then they want to go with the Dem plan. So my question remains, where is the Dem plan and BC's suggestions as a Monday morning QB.

So according to you, since Bush "fucked it up", (not everyone who voted for it of course), and he is trying to do something else about it, then why do the Dems say "No, that won't work". How is it the Dems codemn the King/Czar (since they didn't vote for the war, right?) for getting us in the "mess", then according to you are supposed to just throw up their hands and say "you deal with it b/c you screwed it up" Then when he tries, it's no,no no. Does that make sense? Either the Dems who got got voted in step up to the plate and offer suggestions and less criticism, or maybe they should step down since that's what they won on.

My guess is Gbell, they will step up and do something. But you have to give it time. This is a very complex situation. You know that. At this point, we are in so deep, there is no quick fix. I think we can all agree to that. I'm sure there were plenty of Dem's who voted for it. Most of the time, they go with the commander in chief. It was a bad idea from the start, and Bush knew. He had no real plan and has gotten much more resistance than he thought. He figured, since his father went through Iraq like shit through a tin horn, he could as well.....Problem is, there are just as many there that don't want this, and want us out, as there are who do want us to stay.....We are becoming very hated throughout the middle east.....that's a fact

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:24 AM
I love how you Republican's worry about Calif being told to use energy efficient light bulbs, saying that the we should have the freedom to choose what light bulb to use. But you completely ignore the fact that the Right wing Congress, specifically, R-Biil Frist gets legislation passed to stop us from spending our money as we please. There have been numerous laws passed to take away our civil liberties. Most of them sponsored by the Republican's.

Calif is absolutely right about using energy efficient bulbs. We already rely too heavily on the power companies in this state. It's would be like, if they came up with a device to put on your car's exhaust to stop all the carbon monoxide poisoning in the air. But we don't allow it to pass because we should have the right to pollute the air if we choose.....Ignorant thinking. Not surprised....

Kaz, please show me where the people on this board, especially the Rebs, agreed with the gambling ban.
And the light bulb article is just the start of a slippery slope. If you'e that concerned, I assume you support the Goverment tlling you what you can eat. Or maybe they should tell you that you HAVE to exercise since that will lower health care costs.
Personal responsibility is lost on the left. I don't know anyone who doesn't agree the gambling bill was a chicken-shit, last minute move that was political. Who was going to vote against the major part of the bill when it was tacked on last minute? But the Dems NEVER do stuff like that huh?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:25 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]One thing is for sure. Kerry, love him or hate him, would have never gotten us into this mess. QUOTE]

You are probably right. Kerry wouldn't have sent us to war. He, along with all the other stupid, chicken-shit Dems would still be talking and hoping that the madmen of the Middle East as well as around the world all got together for a weekend and kissed and made nice-nice.

Sure....whatever. What has this war done for us? Not a God Damn thing. It's costing billions and billions of tax payer money with NO END in sight.....Hope you enjoy your hard earned money being pissed away so Iraqi women have the right to vote....By the way, all your money is going to people who despise us.....

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:27 AM
I'm sure there were plenty of Dem's who voted for it.
.We are becoming very hated throughout the middle east.....that's a fact


Name who voted against the war. Plenty=all but one?
Islamic radicalism has preached hatred to the West a bit longer then this war. And I certainly don't want to hear the stupid brain-washed Dems who say "it's all about oil" as I would love for that to be explained.

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:27 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

Sure....whatever. What has this war done for us? Not a God Damn thing. It's costing billions and billions of tax payer money with NO END in sight.....Hope you enjoy your hard earned money being pissed away so Iraqi women have the right to vote....By the way, all your money is going to people who despise us.....

So is yours!!!:blah:

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:30 AM
Kaz, please show me where the people on this board, especially the Rebs, agreed with the gambling ban.
And the light bulb article is just the start of a slippery slope. If you'e that concerned, I assume you support the Goverment tlling you what you can eat. Or maybe they should tell you that you HAVE to exercise since that will lower health care costs.
Personal responsibility is lost on the left. I don't know anyone who doesn't agree the gambling bill was a chicken-shit, last minute move that was political. Who was going to vote against the major part of the bill when it was tacked on last minute? But the Dems NEVER do stuff like that huh?

The dems don't do it nearly as often....Taking away our freedom. My point on the gambling bill, is that it's the SAME people complaining that the dems are taking away our freedom by making us use energy efficient light bulbs. I'm sorry bud, BUT IT MAKES SENSE. Calif has been held hostage by the big energy companies. This is a good idea, period. All it means, is non energy efficient bulbs are not going to be sold here. Big deal. Someday, when all cars are going to operate on batteries and you won't be able to buy a gas hog anymore. Is that wrong too? No it's not, it makes perfect sense

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:32 AM
The dems don't do it nearly as often....Taking away our freedom. My point on the gambling bill, is that it's the SAME people complaining that the dems are taking away our freedom by making us use energy efficient light bulbs. I'm sorry bud, BUT IT MAKES SENSE. Calif has been held hostage by the big energy companies. This is a good idea, period. All it means, is non energy efficient bulbs are not going to be sold here. Big deal. Someday, when all cars are going to operate on batteries and you won't be able to buy a gas hog anymore. Is that wrong too? No it's not, it makes perfect sense

Slippery slope in my opinion. Do you think the govt should tell you what to eat since it's proven a healthier diet is better for you?
How about banning smoking all together? No upside there right?
Those 2 would save on health care costs.

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:33 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]

So is yours!!!:blah:

Exactly!.....Thanks to Bush.....

And you didn't get what I said....I said, plenty of Dems voted for the war. They backed the commander, tho most knew it was wrong. Now, we know for sure it was.....So this new Congress will hopefully figure a way out of this shit....WE'LL SEE

musclemann
02-06-2007, 02:35 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]

So is yours!!!:blah:


Hey Bell your intelligent guy. I dont understand your outright loyalty to a failed policy. This has nothing to do with who is right and wrong. It has to do with the fact that the middle east is 1,000,000 times worst than when bush entered the office and started his failed policy. I would take sadaam back in 5 seconds to bring back the 3800 dead soldiers, trillions lost, and stability back to IRAQ. yes it was stable under sadaam. Now iran is strong and we are even worst than when all of this started. Your response is whats the dems plan????Basically your saying is although this is fukked up the dems have no strategy. So that makes this good. Dude wake up stop following parties and coming up with your own intelligent ideas.

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:36 AM
Slippery slope in my opinion. Do you think the govt should tell you what to eat since it's proven a healthier diet is better for you?
How about banning smoking all together? No upside there right?
Those 2 would save on health care costs.

Honestly, I wouldn't have a problem with banning smoking all together. But it's just like cars that run on batteries. Big dollar gas companies, who fund their campaign's and big dollar cig companies would probably never allow it. It was up to Calif to come up with one of the first ban's on smoking in the work place and in restaurants....mostly indoors.....Everyone here is much better off and you rarely hear of anyone complaining....Why? because it made perfect sense....

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:36 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

Exactly!.....Thanks to Bush.....

And you didn't get what I said....I said, plenty of Dems voted for the war. They backed the commander, tho most knew it was wrong. Now, we know for sure it was.....So this new Congress will hopefully figure a way out of this shit....WE'LL SEE


So your point is that the only Dems with a backbone, knowing they were right WELL before the war started, STILL voted to send the troops to Iraq?
Wow, I would love to see the links to the articles to what Dems are saying they knew it was a horrible idea when the vote went down, yet STILL voted to put the troops in harms way.
Do you really think they knew it would be this bad yet still voted the way they did? Or do you think it's all Monday morning QB's, rattling the cages of the peeps to get elected?

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:38 AM
Honestly, I wouldn't have a problem with banning smoking all together. But it's just like cars that run on batteries. Big dollar gas companies, who fund their campaign's and big dollar cig companies would probably never allow it. It was up to Calif to come up with one of the first ban's on smoking in the work place and in restaurants....mostly indoors.....Everyone here is much better off and you rarely hear of anyone complaining....Why? because it made perfect sense....

I asked if you think the gov't should be allowed to tell you to not smoke, ANYWHERE, and to tell you not to eat poorly, EVER?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:39 AM
There were plenty who said this was a bad idea, but backed Bush regardless. I'm not saying it was right. They backed him so they wouldn't piss off their constituents. But plenty spoke out against this action.....Plenty

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:41 AM
I asked if you think the gov't should be allowed to tell you to not smoke, ANYWHERE, and to tell you not to eat poorly, EVER?

My answer is....Yes, I would NOT have a problem with them telling everyone in this country not to smoke.....But, to me, and this is my opinion, eating is different than getting rid of poor eneregy efficient light bulbs in place of energy efficient light bulbs. If you can't see the difference, you have a problem

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:47 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]


Hey Bell your intelligent guy. I dont understand your outright loyalty to a failed policy. This has nothing to do with who is right and wrong. It has to do with the fact that the middle east is 1,000,000 times worst than when bush entered the office and started his failed policy. I would take sadaam back in 5 seconds to bring back the 3800 dead soldiers, trillions lost, and stability back to IRAQ. yes it was stable under sadaam. Now iran is strong and we are even worst than when all of this started. Your response is whats the dems plan????Basically your saying is although this is fukked up the dems have no strategy. So that makes this good. Dude wake up stop following parties and coming up with your own intelligent ideas.

Thanks for the compliment. "YOU'RE" an intelligent guy also!!:tongue3:
I am not defending the failed policy at all. I think something must be done. I am not qualified to say what though. So in my opinion, the President is making the effort by adding more troops. Will it work? Who knows. But he is doing SOMETHING. The reason I continually ask "where is the Dems plan" is b/c that is the platform they ran on, won on, and now it's their duty to follow up on. According to Kaz, it's all Bush's fault so he should deal with it. The he tries and is shot down before anything even happens.
In hindsight, would it have been better to not have gone? Most likely, yes. BUT, we are there and need to execute a better plan. The Dems promised one and everyone is still waiting. Or are they going to do nothing, bitch and complain, throw stones and drag feet until 2008 so they can hope to win the White House with the same anti-war, but no plan platform they just won on.
The Dems are smart enough to see that doing nothing but critiicze, offer nothing, and run with the anti-war, anti-Bush gameplan for 2 years gives them a better chance to win then to bring suggestions and solutions to the table since Rep's are off of the Bush bandwagon. If they offered something that might work, which is doubtful anyway, they are afraid that Rep's would share in the credit and would cost them the WH in 08.

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:49 AM
My answer is....Yes, I would NOT have a problem with them telling everyone in this country not to smoke.....But, to me, and this is my opinion, eating is different than getting rid of poor eneregy efficient light bulbs in place of energy efficient light bulbs. If you can't see the difference, you have a problem

You are saying the bulbs would lead to money savings as well as not being beholden to the energy special interest groups. Well to ban bad foods as well as smoking does the same thing right?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:53 AM
[QUOTE=musclemann]

According to Kaz, it's all Bush's fault so he should deal with it..

I said it's Bush's fault and YOU are asking what the Dems should do about it. Republican's got us into this shit and now YOU are blaming the Dem's for not doing something quickly to get us out. Sorry to tell you, nothing is going to happen there until Bush is out of office. He has the control, we ALL know that. No Dem in Congress can do a damn thing about that. That's why I said only time will tell. Bush wants more troops. Great, we'll see how well that works. Probably about as well as when he sent us there in the first place

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:53 AM
There were plenty who said this was a bad idea, but backed Bush regardless. I'm not saying it was right. They backed him so they wouldn't piss off their constituents. But plenty spoke out against this action.....Plenty

Who voted against it? And please show me who voted for it but knew at the time it was a bad idea and all these problems that we have were foreseen by these uber-wise people.
That's smart to align with people and a party that votes not with their conscience and what they feel is right, but with people who apparently say one thing and do another.
Who said when the vote came out "This is a bad idea. It's not going to work. We are poorly planned. But I am going to vote for it anyway"
Maybe there were people who knew the day of the vote. I am sure BC will find a link.

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:54 AM
You are saying the bulbs would lead to money savings as well as not being beholden to the energy special interest groups. Well to ban bad foods as well as smoking does the same thing right?

Gbell, you sometimes come off as a smart guy, but telling me there is a no difference between making me use an energy efficient light bulb and taking away food that I eat, is completely ignorant.....:dontknow:

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:55 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

I said it's Bush's fault and YOU are asking what the Dems should do about it. Republican's got us into this shit and now YOU are blaming the Dem's for not doing something quickly to get us out. Sorry to tell you, nothing is going to happen there until Bush is out of office. He has the control, we ALL know that. No Dem in Congress can do a damn thing about that. That's why I said only time will tell. Bush wants more troops. Great, we'll see how well that works. Probably about as well as when he sent us there in the first place


No Dem in Congress can do a damn thing about it?
Didn't they run and win on the platform that they were going to do just that? Other then the suggestion to cut off funding of course. But hey, what's putting the soilders in worse shape by cuttting off the funding going to do huh?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:57 AM
Who voted against it? And please show me who voted for it but knew at the time it was a bad idea and all these problems that we have were foreseen by these uber-wise people.
That's smart to align with people and a party that votes not with their conscience and what they feel is right, but with people who apparently say one thing and do another.
Who said when the vote came out "This is a bad idea. It's not going to work. We are poorly planned. But I am going to vote for it anyway"
Maybe there were people who knew the day of the vote. I am sure BC will find a link.

Answer your own questions. I don't need to. I know, there were Democrats who thought this was a bad idea from the start. They argued about it in congress. But when the vote came down, they backed him. Bush did NOT get full support of Congress, did he?

gbell
02-06-2007, 02:58 AM
Gbell, you sometimes come off as a smart guy, but telling me there is a no difference between making me use an energy efficient light bulb and taking away food that I eat, is completely ignorant.....:dontknow:

Aren't you the same one bitching about Rep's taking away your freedoms and choices? You say as long as the greater good is there, , it's ok,correct?
So why stop at energy efficient bulbs is my question? Why not require 1 hour of exercise a day? Outlaw smoking and high-fat diets (sorry Dimer!). If the gov't, according to you, should be give all power to know what is best for me, then why stop?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 02:59 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]


No Dem in Congress can do a damn thing about it?
Didn't they run and win on the platform that they were going to do just that? Other then the suggestion to cut off funding of course. But hey, what's putting the soilders in worse shape by cuttting off the funding going to do huh?

You like asking so many fucking questions....why don't you answer this.....What can the democrats that got voted in to congress do about this right now? Go fight with sticks? What can they do? Tell me please.....I'm waiting

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:02 AM
Aren't you the same one bitching about Rep's taking away your freedoms and choices? You say as long as the greater good is there, , it's ok,correct?
So why stop at energy efficient bulbs is my question? Why not require 1 hour of exercise a day? Outlaw smoking and high-fat diets (sorry Dimer!). If the gov't, according to you, should be give all power to know what is best for me, then why stop?

Sorry, but this thread was started by a Republican bitching about light bulbs and our 'freedom' being taken away. Not me. So who is bitching? Yeah, that's what I thought......

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:04 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

You like asking so many fucking questions....why don't you answer this.....What can the democrats that got voted in to congress do about this right now? Go fight with sticks? What can they do? Tell me please.....I'm waiting

Stick to their platform and come out with the plan/s that they won on. Never knew wht they were then as it was all bullshit to get elected. I have been asking the same questions you are about what are they going to do. They told the American public it was time for a new direction and plan during their campaigns. Now it's time to put up or shut up. You should be asking your own party leaders, shouldn't you?

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:07 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

A President should learn to listen to the people and the Congressmen and Senators that the American people voted into office. That's why Democrats took control of both houses. :blah:


There you go Kaz. From your own party leader on the board.
He says the President needs to listen. Tough to hear silence.

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:07 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]

Stick to their platform and come out with the plan/s that they won on. Never knew wht they were then as it was all bullshit to get elected. I have been asking the same questions you are about what are they going to do. They told the American public it was time for a new direction and plan during their campaigns. Now it's time to put up or shut up. You should be asking your own party leaders, shouldn't you?

No I shouldn't....They were just voted in. Any plan right now is only going to get a veto by Bush. This is his war until the next presidential elections. Congress has NO power right now to do much of anything. Their platform wasn't bullshit, the 'new' direction has to be whatever the new president comes up with, and is supported by his or her party in congress.....You know that man. You're not that dumb

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:10 AM
[QUOTE=BettorsChat]


There you go Kaz. From your own party leader on the board.
He says the President needs to listen. Tough to hear silence.

Sorry buddy.....But that supports exactly what I wrote above.....The president needs to listen to Congress. Monte was exactly right, and what I wrote, is that the new president will have the support and hopefully listen to whatever plan they come up with.....IT IS OBVIOUS BUSH IS NOT GOING TO LISTEN TO A DEMOCTRATIC CONGRESS.......

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:11 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

No I shouldn't....They were just voted in. Any plan right now is only going to get a veto by Bush. This is his war until the next presidential elections. Congress has NO power right now to do much of anything. Their platform wasn't bullshit, the 'new' direction has to be whatever the new president comes up with, and is supported by his or her party in congress.....You know that man. You're not that dumb

So you are saying everyone has to follow the Commander in Chief blindly? So please tell BC that nothing can and will be done in the next 2 years please. Other then the whining, finger pointing and normal Dem gameplans.

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:12 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

Sorry buddy.....But that supports exactly what I wrote above.....The president needs to listen to Congress. Monte was exactly right, and what I wrote, is that the new president will have the support and hopefully listen to whatever plan they come up with.....IT IS OBVIOUS BUSH IS NOT GOING TO LISTEN TO A DEMOCTRATIC CONGRESS.......

Reread thread Kaz. YOU aren't that dumb. His point is that BUSH is supposed to be listening to Congress now b/c the people have spoken. Nothing said about waiting 2 years.

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:13 AM
In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.
Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133



So I guess Bush DID listen to Congress huh?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:14 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]

So you are saying everyone has to follow the Commander in Chief blindly? So please tell BC that nothing can and will be done in the next 2 years please. Other then the whining, finger pointing and normal Dem gameplans.

I did NOT say they should follow him blindly....Where did I write that? Read what I wrote. The President needs to listen to members of his party in Congress and come up with a legitimate plan, rather than go half cocked on his own to avenge his father's war and protect our oil rights in the middle east under the disguise of protecting this country from weapons of mass destruction.... which he new were neverr there....

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:15 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]

Reread thread Kaz. YOU aren't that dumb. His point is that BUSH is supposed to be listening to Congress now b/c the people have spoken. Nothing said about waiting 2 years.

Yes he SHOULD listen to them....But he ISN'T! That's the point

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:15 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

I did NOT say they should follow him blindly....Where did I write that? Read what I wrote. The President needs to listen to members of his party in Congress and come up with a legitimate plan, rather than go half cocked on his own to avenge his father's war and protect our oil rights in the middle east under the disguise of protecting this country from weapons of mass destruction.... which he new were neverr there....


I guess Congess didn't "no" either huh?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:16 AM
In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.
Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133



So I guess Bush DID listen to Congress huh?

Yes....He DID listen to a Republican majority led Congress.....No brainer

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:17 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

Yes he SHOULD listen to them....But he ISN'T! That's the point

Kaz, you are talking in circles. First you say Congress can't do anything so they don't need to come up with a plan, then in the next breath you say Bush SHOULD be listening to Congress, but he isn't. Where is the plan he is SUPPOSED to be listening to?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:19 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]


I guess Congess didn't "no" either huh?

Wasn't the House and Senate ruled by Republican majority? Of course they backed him. And I'm NOT saying that some Democrats weren't wrong for going with him on this....I already wrote that once. They were wrong too. They voted for the damn thing because they didn't want to look bad. But it didn't matter, the Republican's were going to push this through no matter what.....Jesus, you love to spin things just like Rush

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:20 AM
#2


Kaz, you are talking in circles. First you say Congress can't do anything so they don't need to come up with a plan, then in the next breath you say Bush SHOULD be listening to Congress, but he isn't. Where is the plan he is SUPPOSED to be listening to?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:21 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]

Kaz, you are talking in circles. First you say Congress can't do anything so they don't need to come up with a plan, then in the next breath you say Bush SHOULD be listening to Congress, but he isn't. Where is the plan he is SUPPOSED to be listening to?

You can't expect a new Congress to come up with something walking in the door. Are you that stupid? Yes he should be listening to Congress. Let Me ask you, do you think he will do exactly what a Democratic Congress asks him to do?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:24 AM
I can't write fast enough for you......You ask every question and I answer it, yet you have little answers yourself.....

Question....When will Bush have us out?
Question....Why doesn't the Republican's in Congress have a plan?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:24 AM
#2

I can't write fast enough for you......You ask every question and I answer it, yet you have little answers yourself.....

Question....When will Bush have us out?
Question....Why doesn't the Republican's in Congress have a plan?


Waiting.....

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:25 AM
#3

I can't write fast enough for you......You ask every question and I answer it, yet you have little answers yourself.....

Question....When will Bush have us out?
Question....Why doesn't the Republican's in Congress have a plan?

Still waiting

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:25 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

You can't expect a new Congress to come up with something walking in the door. Are you that stupid? Yes he should be listening to Congress. Let Me ask you, do you think he will do exactly what a Democratic Congress asks him to do?

Why can't I expect that? Wasn't that what they ran on? You can't be that stupid can you? So they just know what's going on now that they are "walking in the door?" Didn't they know anything when they were campaigning or were they all just rattling cages and taking advantage of the public momentum? I don't know what he would do with a Dem plan as I haven't seen anything. So how can I answer that? Maybe he could incorporate some ideas. Maybe he can blow them all off. Maybe his party will turn the screws a bit and tell him to play nice so there's some shot at the WH in 08. Who knows. But without a plan, stupid question I think.

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:27 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]

Why can't I expect that? Wasn't that what they ran on? You can't be that stupid can you? So they just know what's going on now that they are "walking in the door?" Didn't they know anything when they were campaigning or were they all just rattling cages and taking advantage of the public momentum? I don't know what he would do with a Dem plan as I haven't seen anything. So how can I answer that? Maybe he could incorporate some ideas. Maybe he can blow them all off. Maybe his party will turn the screws a bit and tell him to play nice so there's some shot at the WH in 08. Who knows. But without a plan, stupid question I think.

#4

You still haven't answered my questions above....And, you still didn't answer my question as to what power does the new Congress have in this war


I'm waiting.......

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:27 AM
#3

I can't write fast enough for you......You ask every question and I answer it, yet you have little answers yourself.....

Question....When will Bush have us out?
Question....Why doesn't the Republican's in Congress have a plan?

Still waiting

Maybe he, along with the rest of the public, is waiting for that promised Dem plan from the fall of 06. Not the fall of 08.
I believe the most recent plan of troop additions is in the works. But as opposed to bringing something to the table, typical Dems will wait and see and play the Monday QB.

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:30 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

#4

You still haven't answered my questions above....And, you still didn't answer my question as to what power does the new Congress have in this war


I'm waiting.......

They have the power to cut funding, which they have already threatened.
They have the power to live up to their campaign promises which apparently were either lies or hollow bullshit.
They have the power to offer suggestions, implemented or not, to show the people who elected them that they are doing what they promised.

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:30 AM
Maybe he, along with the rest of the public, is waiting for that promised Dem plan from the fall of 06. Not the fall of 08.
I believe the most recent plan of troop additions is in the works. But as opposed to bringing something to the table, typical Dems will wait and see and play the Monday QB.

Yeah I know....Same answer you've had all along. Blame the Democrats for not getting us out of this war that Bush started, in three months that the new Congress has been in office....That's all you got

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:31 AM
[QUOTE=KazDog]

They have the power to cut funding, which they have already threatened.
They have the power to live up to their campaign promises which apparently were either lies or hollow bullshit.
They have the power to offer suggestions, implemented or not, to show the people who elected them that they are doing what they promised.

None of this gets us out of Iraq....Only Bush can....Bad answer

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:32 AM
Yeah I know....Same answer you've had all along. Blame the Democrats for not getting us out of this war that Bush started, in three months that the new Congress has been in office....That's all you got

I didn't ask them to "get us out". I asked where there plan they promised is. Look at all the accomplishments in the first 100 hours. Surely they are capable of at least offering suggestions to better the situation right?

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:32 AM
Doesn't feel too good to have the screws put back on you....does it?

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:34 AM
[QUOTE=gbell]

None of this gets us out of Iraq....Only Bush can....Bad answer

Kaz, it's time for me to call it a night. Sometimes you sound bright, other times like a typical Dem with NO answers. I never claimed to know the answers like the Dems did. I never claimed to have a plan like the Dems did. Where's the "new direction?" I didn't know back in the fall all these promises were to start in 08.

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:35 AM
I didn't ask them to "get us out". I asked where there plan they promised is. Look at all the accomplishments in the first 100 hours. Surely they are capable of at least offering suggestions to better the situation right?

Sorry, Rome wasn't built overnight. It's not an easy answer. This is a complex war which that asshole buried us into....Just hope somehow, a new plan will be devised by the next president and congress....time will tell. Just like we had to deal with him getting us into this mess, we'll just have to see if more troops is the answer. My guess is it is not. And yet, billions are veing wasted daily, including countless lives.....

gbell
02-06-2007, 03:35 AM
Doesn't feel too good to have the screws put back on you....does it?

Screws? I feel sorry for you Kaz. If Pelosi allows me to, I will say a prayer for you before I go to bed. Turning off my energy efficient light bulb of course!

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:38 AM
Well, good night Gbell....No hard feelings. I appreciate your opinions, tho I may not agree with them. To end this, at this point, my opinion is, there is no real answer. It's going to take a lot of time for this mess to end. Many smart people in politics have said the same thing. But for sure, Bush has done enough damage. So I don't care what his plan is right now....And I think the voters in the last election felt the same way

KazDog
02-06-2007, 03:40 AM
I said screws, because you have been trying to put the screws to me all night....Just thought I'd turn them on you for a bit. Hard to come up with all the answers......Later

BettorsChat
02-06-2007, 12:47 PM
[QUOTE=KazDog]

They have the power to cut funding, which they have already threatened.
They have the power to live up to their campaign promises which apparently were either lies or hollow bullshit.
They have the power to offer suggestions, implemented or not, to show the people who elected them that they are doing what they promised.

Democrats are trying to do the things that they said they were going to do. You have to get a certain % of the vote in order to pass something :dontknow:

BettorsChat
02-06-2007, 12:48 PM
I didn't ask them to "get us out". I asked where there plan they promised is. Look at all the accomplishments in the first 100 hours. Surely they are capable of at least offering suggestions to better the situation right?

Finally got a minimum wage increase passed which they said they would do, but that was after Republicans put in a big tax break for small companies.

longnex
02-06-2007, 12:55 PM
Kaz and Gbell get a room. :sexmiss: :sexmiss: :sexmiss:

gbell
02-06-2007, 12:56 PM
Finally got a minimum wage increase passed which they said they would do, but that was after Republicans put in a big tax break for small companies.

And don't forget your queen exempting Del Monte in San Francisco.:dontknow:

kbsooner21
02-06-2007, 01:39 PM
Turning off my energy efficient light bulb of course!
bwahahahahahahahahahah that's good stuff right there :red: :red: :red: :red:

zittiboy
02-06-2007, 04:49 PM
my big question to you replicans is...what did saddam ever do to america? it has and always been, and was personal with the bush family(inregards to saddam. ) what ever happened to g-w's #1 enemy? ben laden oh yea mr veitnam coward said " i'm not concerned with ben laden('05) a fact your man said those words all we can wish for is a swift impeachment of the fool

gbell
02-06-2007, 06:38 PM
my big question to you replicans is...what did saddam ever do to america? it has and always been, and was personal with the bush family(inregards to saddam. ) what ever happened to g-w's #1 enemy? ben laden oh yea mr veitnam coward said " i'm not concerned with ben laden('05) a fact your man said those words all we can wish for is a swift impeachment of the fool

I will ask other "replicans" what they think, but I believe the comment about "Ben Laden" was in reference to his lack of concern for one person, and moreso concerned with Al-Qaeda (sp) and terror as a whole. If "Ben Laden" walked into the US right now, the war on terror wouldn't end. As far as "veitnam?" coward, I assume you are talking about President Bush, who isn't "my man".

gbell
02-07-2007, 01:08 AM
WASHINGTON - Democratic critics of the Iraq war seized the offensive at both ends of the Capitol on Tuesday, disclosing plans for a symbolic rejection by the House of President Bush's...

musclemann
02-07-2007, 01:50 AM
And don't forget your queen exempting Del Monte in San Francisco.:dontknow:


Like I said earlier Bell It would help all of americans if we didnt just line up and vote for parties. I believe you like most american males line themselves up with a political party and stick to them like the stickumm that lester hayes used paste all over him before games. Your argument is "well whats the democrats plan"?But unlike you im not letting them off the hook either. THE MAIN POINT HERE IS, GEORGE BUSH WAS THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF WHEN 2 AIRILINES CRASHED INTO THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. HIS CIA, HIS FBI, HIS NSA DIDNT STOP IT. YOU CAN SAY CLINTON HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH ALL YOU WANT BUT THE FACT REMAINS HE WAS IN OFFICE!!! LETS BLAME DICK JAURON FOR THE BEARS NOT WINNING THE SUPERBOWL THIS YEAR, I MEAN HE WAS THE HEAD COACH OF THE BEARS BEFORE LOVIE. IF BILL CLINTON WOULDVE BEEN IN OFFICE WHEN THIS HAPPENED HE WOULDVE BEEN TARRED AND FEATHERED LIKE JIMMY CARTER.BUT SINCE HE(BUSH) WAS A (CONSERVATIVE?)REPUBLICAN AMERICANS GAVE HIM A WINK AND NOD AND MORONS STILL WENT TO THE POLLS AND VOTED FOR HIM. I BELIEVE HE IS INEPT AT BEST, I MEAN LISTEN TO THIS GUY TALK. I THOUGHT CARTER AND CLINTON WAS WEAK AT BEST SO IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME RUNNING TO THE POLLS EVERY 4 YEARS AND PULLING A DEMOCRATIC PUNCH. JUDGE ON MERIT AND PAST PERFORMANCE AND STOP WITH THE STRAIGHT PARTY STUFF MAN.....TAKE CARE AND HAVE A GOOD REST OF YOUR WEEK.:feedback:

BettorsChat
02-07-2007, 06:33 AM
Bush reduced security around the world trade centers even though he was warned of a possible terrorist attack.

Maybe Jeb Bush should run next and then gbell could have a private moment :red:

gbell
02-08-2007, 11:36 PM
Bush reduced security around the world trade centers even though he was warned of a possible terrorist attack.

Maybe Jeb Bush should run next and then gbell could have a private moment :red:


Bush did cause 9/11 according to the nimrods. Don't you have Pelosi's dick to suck?:red:

BettorsChat
02-09-2007, 10:06 AM
Bush did cause 9/11 according to the nimrods. Don't you have Pelosi's dick to suck?:red:

No I'm too busy watching bush fuck you in the ass