Message for today lets all try to save fuel. Look for small ways we all can help. Mr Pres start by looking in the mirror. Stop running around like your a news organization.
Pres said save fuel?
- Thread starter djv
- Start date
A news organization? What are you talking about?
Yeah shame on you Mr. President. How dare you urge conservation. BAD MAN!! How dare you use so much fuel too. 5 or 6 trips to the gulf is driving up my gas prices!! Shame on you for Air Force One too. It's time you started using sailboats to get around.
The president encourages people to save fuel after the hurricanes and the liberals are upset about it??
excellent post...this one's a classic :clap:
Yeah shame on you Mr. President. How dare you urge conservation. BAD MAN!! How dare you use so much fuel too. 5 or 6 trips to the gulf is driving up my gas prices!! Shame on you for Air Force One too. It's time you started using sailboats to get around.
The president encourages people to save fuel after the hurricanes and the liberals are upset about it??
excellent post...this one's a classic :clap:
7 trips to make up for looking like he didn't give a chit in the beginning. He wants everyone to look for small ways to save. Heres one stay in DC. CNN and Fox will handle the news. Leave that gas hungry jet and helicopters on the ground. And those 6 SUV's you haul where every you go in the garage. There's not a dam thing he can do at these sites anymore but get in the way. Well look for photo ops I guess.
Sounds like you are all of the sudden an authority on emergency management. So.....
Take the president and the secret service vehicles and put them in a garage to save gas???
Stick Air Force 1 in a hangar??
Maybe the president can stock up on extra blankets too so he won;t have to run the White house heater this winter.
Yeah, that's real logical lol. And to aimlessly say "the president didn't give a shit" about the hurricane destruction just goes to show how seriously we should be taking your statements. This is nothing but liberal spew and you know it. You seriously need to get ahold of Cindy Sheehan I heard she is no longer married.
This has gotta be the most desperate attempt to slam the president that I have seen in a loooooooong time. The president said we should try and economize fuel and you object to it. Classic.
Take the president and the secret service vehicles and put them in a garage to save gas???
Stick Air Force 1 in a hangar??
Maybe the president can stock up on extra blankets too so he won;t have to run the White house heater this winter.
Yeah, that's real logical lol. And to aimlessly say "the president didn't give a shit" about the hurricane destruction just goes to show how seriously we should be taking your statements. This is nothing but liberal spew and you know it. You seriously need to get ahold of Cindy Sheehan I heard she is no longer married.
This has gotta be the most desperate attempt to slam the president that I have seen in a loooooooong time. The president said we should try and economize fuel and you object to it. Classic.
Just a suggestion that seems to go over your head. He could lead by example. Skip a few trips save gas.
The President needs to be mobile. He gets criticized for staying in Crawford where he uses little fuel. Now he gets criticized for traveling too much and using fuel. And just think about all the fuel that Chaney saves by seldom leaving his underground bunker. This is a non issue. If every President had to actually practice what they preached, we would probably have many Presidents impeached for lying.
The buck stops where we are told. Hey if you think he's getting things done by traveling down there every few days and walking around BS-ing. OK. If they have not got leader ship and other necessary things in place by now. Well then any trip he makes won't help anyway. Save gas big guy like you want us to.
Get serious. The ONLY reason he has taken all those trips to the gulf is BECAUSE of his lack of response in the early stages of the situation. He names unqualified cronies (there can be NO argument there) to run vital emergency management organizations and take heat for it. His approval rate takes a hit and publicly he is embarrassed for both who he put in positions of responsibility and his personal attention to the matters. Therefore he has to pretend to be in charge now and make seven trips. He will not assume the responsibility and is engaging in political damage control. Taking trips for public image, using valuable resources while asking us not to, to repair damage he was responsible for.
Again, preaching one thing and doing another. Because of his decisions and delegating. He CAN be criticized for this, although his apologists will call it bogus. It can get quite embarrassing trying to defend someone ALL THE TIME, can't it?
He is a delegator, and that is fine. Admirable at times. Put people in positions to make decisions. But then to follow up afterwards in the manner he is doing is laughable. In a VERY sad way for many Americans.
Again, preaching one thing and doing another. Because of his decisions and delegating. He CAN be criticized for this, although his apologists will call it bogus. It can get quite embarrassing trying to defend someone ALL THE TIME, can't it?
He is a delegator, and that is fine. Admirable at times. Put people in positions to make decisions. But then to follow up afterwards in the manner he is doing is laughable. In a VERY sad way for many Americans.
wow, and the democrats can't figure out why they keep loosing elections? They do not have a message! If you think that criticizing the president over making an extra flight and having a few suvs is going to make people vote democrat you are an absolute idiot. When it comes to an election, if the democrats are bitching about something like this, they will loose. Their message is to contradict whatever Bush does, and that will not get them the power back in the congress or the white house.
Also, david Gregory originally criticized bush for not going to the coast quick enough, and a few days ago he was criticizing him for going to much? What am I missing here? If you want to vent about the fema response, I will bitch right along with you. My hometown in Texas is still without power from Rita, and I am not exactly the biggest fan of all of the red tape right now. A good majority of my friends at Ole Miss are from Gulfport/Pascagula, and just seeing Bush there gives their families confidence that the govt will not forget about them.
Also the reason that bush was not their the day after the storm was because he did not want to get in the way of rescue and recovery (much like waiting to go to New York till 9/14.
Get a message that people will actually listen to instead of bitching about every small detail while contradicting yourselves all of the time.
Also, david Gregory originally criticized bush for not going to the coast quick enough, and a few days ago he was criticizing him for going to much? What am I missing here? If you want to vent about the fema response, I will bitch right along with you. My hometown in Texas is still without power from Rita, and I am not exactly the biggest fan of all of the red tape right now. A good majority of my friends at Ole Miss are from Gulfport/Pascagula, and just seeing Bush there gives their families confidence that the govt will not forget about them.
Also the reason that bush was not their the day after the storm was because he did not want to get in the way of rescue and recovery (much like waiting to go to New York till 9/14.
Get a message that people will actually listen to instead of bitching about every small detail while contradicting yourselves all of the time.
There are plenty of messages in the democratic platform. Not that any devout conservatives would bother to entertain them as having any value. What is your point? If a democrat said anything that did not fall in line with your way of thinking, I would assume it would be summarily dismissed as being wacko-left-wing-bigger-government hooey. There just is no credence in dismissing half of our political system, that obviously has some ideas that were in place during the previous decade that had our country essentially at peace and more prosperous than at ANY time in our history. No ideas?!? Peace and prosperity are bad ideas?!! Whatever.
This is the biggest problem I have with this administration and its supporters. Of course there are some good ideas in the conservative message. Both platforms have good, common sense items that benefit Americans. Both platforms have bad items as well. When you completely dismiss half of this country - that simply does not agree with you personally - as being wackos with no ideas, then you have zero credibility.
Bush CAN be criticized for not having put people in place to handle the Katrina emergency. Thank God Rita diminished in intensity, or I assume Bush's fourth or fifth favorite crony would have tried to figure out what to do about that one. The problem with you guys and your administration is that you want to be beyond reproach. You don't want him blamed for a thing. Just another form of pretectionism. Fine, how about this, then, if you don't want him blamed for not going down to the Gulf immediately (or two days later, or whatever...)? He appointed OBVIOUSLY incompetent people to deal with the most devastating real problem our country has had to face during his administration. He has taken steps to weaken the very organization that is in charge of dealing with these things, so he is responsible there, too. He only had to take his seven trips, which he can also be criticized for, because of his initial decisions and failures.
Now, you won't admit it, but that's fine. How about these for ideas...from the democrats. Establish FEMA in the first place. Fully fund it and put qualified people in positions to direct it, and actually react to hurricanes and natural disasters quickly and effectively, saving countless lives?
How about this for an idea? Like you promised, use oil from Iraq to fund the war you wanted to engage in. We were told that this was your plan - it's partially why we should all get in line and back it. How about not sending 70% of Louisiana's National Guard machinery and technology to Iraq, so that you could handle a real problem at home? 50-60% of the troops certainly could have helped contain the violence and made it possible to distribute needed items to people that needed it.
Bush's decision to go to Iraq will be felt here at home indefinitely. If you want to back the decisions, and say that at least he has a plan when the other side doesn't have one, then at least stand up like a man and accept the ramifications OF the plan.
Although this administration and its supporters seem to think that you can do what you want and not face up to what happens after, it simply is not right. And then, to finally say anyone who doesn't agree with that is inconsequential - well, that pretty much sums up extreme conservatism. You're with us, or you're an idiot.
Must be nice to be so damn smart. I remember always feeling a little smarter when I'm drunk, too, right George?
This is the biggest problem I have with this administration and its supporters. Of course there are some good ideas in the conservative message. Both platforms have good, common sense items that benefit Americans. Both platforms have bad items as well. When you completely dismiss half of this country - that simply does not agree with you personally - as being wackos with no ideas, then you have zero credibility.
Bush CAN be criticized for not having put people in place to handle the Katrina emergency. Thank God Rita diminished in intensity, or I assume Bush's fourth or fifth favorite crony would have tried to figure out what to do about that one. The problem with you guys and your administration is that you want to be beyond reproach. You don't want him blamed for a thing. Just another form of pretectionism. Fine, how about this, then, if you don't want him blamed for not going down to the Gulf immediately (or two days later, or whatever...)? He appointed OBVIOUSLY incompetent people to deal with the most devastating real problem our country has had to face during his administration. He has taken steps to weaken the very organization that is in charge of dealing with these things, so he is responsible there, too. He only had to take his seven trips, which he can also be criticized for, because of his initial decisions and failures.
Now, you won't admit it, but that's fine. How about these for ideas...from the democrats. Establish FEMA in the first place. Fully fund it and put qualified people in positions to direct it, and actually react to hurricanes and natural disasters quickly and effectively, saving countless lives?
How about this for an idea? Like you promised, use oil from Iraq to fund the war you wanted to engage in. We were told that this was your plan - it's partially why we should all get in line and back it. How about not sending 70% of Louisiana's National Guard machinery and technology to Iraq, so that you could handle a real problem at home? 50-60% of the troops certainly could have helped contain the violence and made it possible to distribute needed items to people that needed it.
Bush's decision to go to Iraq will be felt here at home indefinitely. If you want to back the decisions, and say that at least he has a plan when the other side doesn't have one, then at least stand up like a man and accept the ramifications OF the plan.
Although this administration and its supporters seem to think that you can do what you want and not face up to what happens after, it simply is not right. And then, to finally say anyone who doesn't agree with that is inconsequential - well, that pretty much sums up extreme conservatism. You're with us, or you're an idiot.
Must be nice to be so damn smart. I remember always feeling a little smarter when I'm drunk, too, right George?
You want to see steps to save fuel and help prices get in line faster. Have a true energy policy. Not just drill and drill. Get you big three or may be it's four now auto makers and tell them. The USA auto market in 5 to 8 years has to have half hi-breds produces every year. Put a real gallon per miles goal for all autos of 35 miles to the gallon. by 2010. Don't just always say it cant be done. They said we could not move 15 miles to the gallon up to 22 in the early 70's. And of course that was BS because they did by mid 80's. Now it's upto 25. Problem they didn't go far enough. At 35 miles to the gallon. We cut 25% of the gas we need everyday.
"There just is no credence in dismissing half of our political system, that obviously has some ideas that were in place during the previous decade that had our country essentially at peace and more prosperous than at ANY time in our history"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yep you can have peace for short period of time if you want to ignore all the killing of our troops (embassey bombings-Cole-failed attempt on trade center) and when you do try(Somolia) fail and run and let them drag our troops through street on fire. You might call that peace--I call it an invitation to disaster which did occur.
Prosperity--True dot com was was of largest boost but conversly bust was just as big--you might note market when he left and months to follow-Economy was in recession day he left office.
In addition our economy will have greater production and tax revenue this year during anytime in Clintons admin--and that is AFTER 911--2 wars and greatest naural disater in our history.Poverty at lower level-employment #'s better.
Out of curiosity were you finacially better off then than now--if so why?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yep you can have peace for short period of time if you want to ignore all the killing of our troops (embassey bombings-Cole-failed attempt on trade center) and when you do try(Somolia) fail and run and let them drag our troops through street on fire. You might call that peace--I call it an invitation to disaster which did occur.
Prosperity--True dot com was was of largest boost but conversly bust was just as big--you might note market when he left and months to follow-Economy was in recession day he left office.
In addition our economy will have greater production and tax revenue this year during anytime in Clintons admin--and that is AFTER 911--2 wars and greatest naural disater in our history.Poverty at lower level-employment #'s better.
Out of curiosity were you finacially better off then than now--if so why?
DOGS THAT BARK said:
You do make some interesting points. I am not a one-sided person, and there are usually no absolutes when it comes to policy and economics. There are ways to deal with issues that usually will have positive and negative ramifications. There were plenty in the last decade, and plenty here.
You ask about me financially. Personally, it's plus and minus. It's hard to judge. I am making less than I made in the 90's and my wife is making more. She is an attorney - just became a partner in a law firm. During the early 90's, she was a single mother who was receiving financial aid, and also aid from the government. Personally, I had a bit of a problem with that, but I did see the other side of the coin and learned a lot from it. She was raising a child, using help from the Government, worked really hard, got a great job making pretty good money, and is aggressive in paying back her student loans. She is a shining light as far as what Governmental help can do for those in need. There are many that would say she shouldn't have received that help, but I know first-hand that it did good in this instance. She is a good citizen, paying plenty of taxes, active in the community, a great parent, etc. Me, personally? I make $10,000 less per year than I did in the 90's, but I can't point to anything economically that I can blame that on, for or against. It had more to do with the family, moving, travel, etc. I know I'm making quite a bit less thanks to the price of gas, as I drive over an hour to work and back, but that's about the only economic indicator that has much bearing. I'm not sure what your point is...I'm guessing that most people make more in each subsequent decade than the one before it due to everything going up in price, salary keeping pace, cost of living, etc., so to judge that, I don't know.
I've already typed a lot here, so I'll cut it back a little. You are talking about these economic issues:
>> our economy will have greater production and tax revenue this year during anytime in Clintons admin--and that is AFTER 911--2 wars and greatest naural disater in our history.Poverty at lower level-employment #'s better. <<
I have not studied these numbers, but I know I can find plenty of numbers that can show negativity in this economy. I know our debt will eventually gobble up any kind of "recovery" we may be experiencing. Of course the economic problems we experienced - and experience - due to Bush will be blamed on Clinton. Typical. Take credit for the positivity, and blame the negativity on the previous administration. I know tax revenues fell far short of promised levels when Bush was preaching his tax cuts. Far short. You are asking me to understand that there is greater production due to 2 wars and natural disasters? I would sure hope so...war has always been a spur to the economy, manufacturing, producing products for it, etc. Natural disasters, terrorism? Hmm, a lot of building going on after those, products, services, etc. I would expect that.
Our country and Americans in general are in debt at record levels. This "recovery" has been purely done on credit. People have not used cash for purchases...they are borrowing in record numbers. Bankrupcies, both individual and businesses, are at all time highs. Not to mention our national debt is growing at an incredible pace, with no letup in sight. In fact, it looks worse, with the problems we face - DUE to this administration.
I'm not sure what your last economic good thing was. >> Poverty at lower level-employment #'s better.<< Are you saying that more poverty level people are now employed than in the 90's? I don't know, maybe they are. But they are certainly not making it...as the numbers of people now living below the poverty level are at all time highs, and growing. I don't think that a growing number of people living in poverty is a good thing for any country, but maybe that's just me.
Not that this administration cares. That's one thing we can know for sure.
- Feb 12, 2000
- 10,652
- 39
- 48
- 50
Remember that consumer spending on credit is not always (probalby not usually) due to not being able to keep up with the economy. It usually is more dependent of one's need to keep up with the Jones's.
Until someone makes the real sacrifices that are referred to by people such as Dave Ramsey, then they will NEVER be out of debt. I don't care if they go from making $20K per year to $150K per year. It is a mind set to always spend more than you have because people have the credit to do so.
This factor is not dependent on what party is in office. This is just a problem with our country's attitude and can also be blamed on our education system not teaching kids about how money (and unfortunately, credit) works. This problem also exists across just about every segmentation that can be brought up: white/black, lower-class/middle-class (the upper echalon of this country can be spared but in most cases those individuals were not always in those ranks); religious/non-religious; etc.
In my opinion, everyone who has any debt outside of their primary residence can benefit greatly from reading/listening to Dave Ramsey
Until someone makes the real sacrifices that are referred to by people such as Dave Ramsey, then they will NEVER be out of debt. I don't care if they go from making $20K per year to $150K per year. It is a mind set to always spend more than you have because people have the credit to do so.
This factor is not dependent on what party is in office. This is just a problem with our country's attitude and can also be blamed on our education system not teaching kids about how money (and unfortunately, credit) works. This problem also exists across just about every segmentation that can be brought up: white/black, lower-class/middle-class (the upper echalon of this country can be spared but in most cases those individuals were not always in those ranks); religious/non-religious; etc.
In my opinion, everyone who has any debt outside of their primary residence can benefit greatly from reading/listening to Dave Ramsey
- Feb 12, 2000
- 10,652
- 39
- 48
- 50
As a follow-up note, the rapid increase in gas prices will cause more spending to be done with credit. The big "but" to this, though, should be that someone should not have made the decisions to be so "hand to mouth" to have to rely immediately on credit to get by.
I, for one, am worried about my heating bills this winter due to increased natural gas prices. Hopefully, my wife and I will be able to set some extra money aside between now and then to help soften the blow. Our local gas company is projecting the bills to be 45-65% more this winter. OUCH!
I, for one, am worried about my heating bills this winter due to increased natural gas prices. Hopefully, my wife and I will be able to set some extra money aside between now and then to help soften the blow. Our local gas company is projecting the bills to be 45-65% more this winter. OUCH!
Yes Dawg up here there already telling us 60/70% more for heat. I would guess if gas stays as it is. Heating oil and gas keep going up.
Throw in high cost of insurance. Were going to see lots more hurting folks. It's a good thing they changed the bankruptcies laws because they got more coming there way soon.
And of course interest rates just keep going up to help pay off national dept. And that hits everyones pocket book.
Throw in high cost of insurance. Were going to see lots more hurting folks. It's a good thing they changed the bankruptcies laws because they got more coming there way soon.
And of course interest rates just keep going up to help pay off national dept. And that hits everyones pocket book.
