PDA

View Full Version : Obama: Spike energy costs to make people go 'green'



mick silver
1st November 2008, 19:24
JOHNSTON, Iowa In a recently publicized video from the Democratic primaries, Sen. Barack Obama said the government should drive energy bills up though "price signals" in order to force Americans into more environmentally friendly choices.

In the Nov. 9, 2007, interview on Iowa Public Television's "Iowa Press," Obama said Americans like driving SUVs and leaving the lights on, but since "it is undisputable that the climate is getting warmer," consumers would have to change their habits.

When asked what would make consumers change, Obama said government-created "price signals" would make people more mindful of energy costs and compel them to start changing light bulbs and turning off light switches.

Tired of all the heat but no light? Read, "Global Warming or Global Governance? What the media refuse to tell you about so-called climate change"

Associated Press reporter Mike Glover asked, "How do you convince people to change their lifestyle, to live differently?"

Obama's answer, viewable in the video below, was, "I think it is important for us to send some price signals to change behavior. You know, if electricity goes up, people start becoming more mindful of their electricity bill."

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=79758

Tribal Warrior
1st November 2008, 19:34
Exactly, this guy is a nut case, how can anybody vote for him?
The polls we see on TV have to be rigged. Almost everybody I talk to, besides Union workers, tell me they are voting for Mccain.

garydrumm
1st November 2008, 19:37
Exactly, this guy is a nut case, how can anybody vote for him?
The polls we see on TV have to be rigged. Almost everybody I talk to, besides Union workers, tell me they are voting for Mccain.

God help us all.

mick silver
1st November 2008, 19:41
The next time you breathe you maybe tax , Is this what our contry coming to

garydrumm
1st November 2008, 19:46
The next time you breathe you maybe tax , Is this what our contry coming to

Yep. Obama is a savior all right, it's just that he's a savior of big government, eviro-terrorism, and, that tried and true economic system...socialism.

I'm sure his spies will track me down and send me to a re-education camp.

Trvlr45
1st November 2008, 19:52
I've said it for years. Environmentalism is communism/fascism. They will destroy our country and enslave us with it. They control EVERY industry as we speak with eco-terrorism.

They are controlling where you live in the future with it. Ever heard of them mentioning "urban sprawl"? That's what that is. You'll be labeled as destroying the environement in the future if you want to live out in a rural area.

They're corralling us with it. They want everyone living in a huge city like LA under surveillience and handing over your entire paycheck to them. That is what I think the future holds.

It is the biggest cities that do all the polluting because that is where all the pollution is concentrated. They don't care one wit about the environment. It's all about tax and control. They are already brainwashing the kids to believe that the environment is more important than the freedom to own property and live where you want. They'll tax us to breathe if they can get away with it.

Environmentalism is a particularly insidious form of communism.

MikeJ
1st November 2008, 19:57
I've said it for years. Environmentalism is communism/fascism. They will destroy our country and enslave us with it. They control EVERY industry as we speak with eco-terrorism.

They are controlling where you live in the future with it. Ever heard of them mentioning "urban sprawl"? That's what that is. You'll be labeled as destroying the environement in the future if you want to live out in a rural area.

They're corralling us with it. They want everyone living in a huge city like LA under surveillience and handing over your entire paycheck to them. That is what I think the future holds.

It is the biggest cities that do all the polluting because that is where all the pollution is concentrated. They don't care one with about the environment. It's all about tax and control. They are already brainwashing the kids to believe that the environment is more important than the freedom to own property and live where you want. They'll tax us to breathe if they can get away with it.

Environmentalism is a particularly insidious form of communism.

I agree with you. Al Gore is part of this movement-one of the biggest pieces of **** to ever run for office.

mick silver
1st November 2008, 19:58
ONLY ONE DAY , well be selling air tomorrow for 1 silver round

Trvlr45
1st November 2008, 20:07
Exactly, this guy is a nut case, how can anybody vote for him?
The polls we see on TV have to be rigged. Almost everybody I talk to, besides Union workers, tell me they are voting for Mccain.

McCain is a globalist and a pimp for "SAVING THE PLANET", too. But we will have more of a chance with him than Chairman MaoBama.

If it gives you hope, Warrior, I just heard that they already know MaoBama lost Indiana and the "Poll" there had MaoBama winning by 9 points.

I think the polls are BS as well. Nevada is a swing state with communists flooding in there from California for the last ten years and bringing their big government/police state mentality with them while artificailly inflating the housing market and destroying the Nevada economy with their dumb ideas.

I'll be making my last vote there for McCain. I'm out of Nevada after the first. Communists have completely taken over Vegas and Reno is about 50/50. I recieved an e-mail from Senator Ensign about a year ago and he said that Nevada was going to be #1 when it came to taking care of the environment so I knew it was time to leave. Here comes eco-terrorism I thought with a big fat tax bill attached.

I may be forced into Wyoming or Nebraska eventually. Communists have taken over Montana thanks to the communist governor that lied to get elected and all the hollyweird crowd. Then there is Ted Turner who owns half the state and I think Idaho will probably be next.

They'll be on a crusade that can't be stopped if MaoBama gets in there.

garydrumm
1st November 2008, 20:08
I'm seriously afraid of an Obama presidency. Especially with a Pelosi House and Reid Senate. Very scary stuff. We're about to hand the economy over to socialists, our national defense over to pacifists, and our justice system over people who believe that courts should be used to re-define law.

If Obama doesn't win, I'm seriously afraid of a "blood in the streets" scenario. The media is doing everything to effectively declare a winner and if he doesn't win, I think his supporters will turn violent. This will not end well for our country.

Trvlr45
1st November 2008, 20:12
ONLY ONE DAY , well be selling air tomorrow for 1 silver round

Believe it or not Mick,

I actually heard a real quick news story a while back where there is an eco-terrorist group that wants to tax the C02 that you exhale once you get to a certain age. It would be a great way to steal any savings you have managed to keep them from stealing when you were working. Don't you think?

It amazes me that the people who support this eco-terrorist garbage really believe it all. They think it really is about "SAVING THE PLANET".

garydrumm
1st November 2008, 20:17
McCain is a globalist and a pimp for "SAVING THE PLANET", too. But we will have more of a chance with him than Chairman MaoBama.

If it gives you hope, Warrior, I just heard that they already know MaoBama lost Indiana and the "Poll" there had MaoBama winning by 9 points.

I think the polls are BS as well. Nevada is a swing state with communists flooding in there from California for the last ten years and bringing their big government/police state mentality with them while artificailly inflating the housing market and destroying the Nevada economy with their dumb ideas.

I'll be making my last vote there for McCain. I'm out of Nevada after the first. Communists have completely taken over Vegas and Reno is about 50/50. I recieved an e-mail from Senator Ensign about a year ago and he said that Nevada was going to be #1 when it came to taking care of the environment so I knew it was time to leave. Here comes eco-terrorism I thought with a big fat tax bill attached.

I may be forced into Wyoming or Nebraska eventually. Communists have taken over Montana thanks to the communist governor that lied to get elected and all the hollyweird crowd. Then there is Ted Turner who owns half the state and I think Idaho will probably be next.

They'll be on a crusade that can't be stopped if MaoBama gets in there.

Come to Texas. We're the only ones with a Legal right to secede, our economy is very healthy, and we actually believe in family values. ;)

mick silver
1st November 2008, 20:20
MAYBE i am wrong but i see government lowering the number of people , could be war or somthing , but some thing up and i just can not put a finger on it

garydrumm
1st November 2008, 20:23
MAYBE i am wrong but i see government lowering the number of people , could be war or somthing , but some thing up and i just can not put a finger on it

Starvation. Abortion. Euthanasia. Disease. That should thin out the herds a bit...

hiyosilver
1st November 2008, 21:14
I figure the prices of guns will begin to increase considerably and shortages will occur beginning next Wednesday...

cdavport
1st November 2008, 23:25
I figure the prices of guns will begin to increase considerably and shortages will occur beginning next Wednesday...

Our gun sales have increased drastically. I had our department manager load up on AR15 & M4 type rifles while we could still get them. They are moving briskly. Automatic handguns such as Glocks are flying out the door. I remember an sales increase when Clinton won, but it wasn't this dramatic. People know what's in store for us, and are trying to get a jump before the restrictions (or worse) begin.

Trvlr45
2nd November 2008, 01:22
Come to Texas. We're the only ones with a Legal right to secede, our economy is very healthy, and we actually believe in family values.

That thought has crossed my mind but I would be way too far away from my dad. If he wasn't around anymore I be seriously considering it. The other problem is whoever gets in is going to completely remove that southern border.

Trvlr45
2nd November 2008, 01:26
Our gun sales have increased drastically. I had our department manager load up on AR15 & M4 type rifles while we could still get them. They are moving briskly. Automatic handguns such as Glocks are flying out the door. I remember an sales increase when Clinton won, but it wasn't this dramatic. People know what's in store for us, and are trying to get a jump before the restrictions (or worse) begin.

Obama wants to increase the excise taxes on guns and ammo by 500%. He won't take them away. He'll make them unaffordable to use or buy. His judges and his treaties will take them away. After he's not in office anymore.

Trvlr45
2nd November 2008, 01:40
MAYBE i am wrong but i see government lowering the number of people , could be war or somthing , but some thing up and i just can not put a finger on it

You're right Mick. Of course it is just a conspiracy theory but the who's who around the world of microbiologists and other specialists in research circles HAVE been being murdered or are just dying at an alarming rate over the last five or so years.

Try googling "Dead Scientists" and peruse the various links. Steve Quale also has a section on "Dead Scientists" on his website. Form your own opinion.

There has been a theory put forward by the real far out conspiracy seekers that a mass killing by the elites is being planned. It is said the elites realize that there are too many people on this planet and I agree. I just don't think releasing a bug that will kill off 100's of millions is a good idea. Silly me.

I just think that America should stop paying countries around the world to breed since THAT is what is causing pollution. Not plant food. It is too many people, not too many cars and coal fired power plants and both parties in this country want to make US the overflow valave for the world.

Trvlr45
2nd November 2008, 01:54
I'm seriously afraid of an Obama presidency. Especially with a Pelosi House and Reid Senate. Very scary stuff. We're about to hand the economy over to socialists, our national defense over to pacifists, and our justice system over people who believe that courts should be used to re-define law.

If Obama doesn't win, I'm seriously afraid of a "blood in the streets" scenario. The media is doing everything to effectively declare a winner and if he doesn't win, I think his supporters will turn violent. This will not end well for our country.

It will end better if he loses than if he wins. The anarchists and deadbeats that make up most of the MaoBama supporters always riot when they don't get their way. They are like little children stomping their feet when they don't get their way.

I'd rather deal with a few of the countries biggest sewers getting torn up with overgrown children than MaoBama for the next 4 years supported by a communist house and senate. Also, the anarchists can't appoint judges.

I'll just refuse to go to any big city for a while if MaoBama wins.

and(EU)
2nd November 2008, 09:50
What Obama was saying is a cure for your disease. 5% of poeple can't use 25% of energy (oil and it's derivatives). If you wanna have solid economy you must have balanced import/export. Since you don't produce much useful export stuff (except inflated dollar) you must decrease import (oil). How do you do it? By lifting price of imports. Then you get revenue for budget and you owe Saudis or Chavez less. Plus you get lower CO2 emisions.
Obama didn't say he wants you to live in a big city. He told just he wanna US citizens to SAVE. If I recall correctly Ron Paul said somethig about saving too?
Of course that alone won't cure US economy. There are lots of measures(cures) you'll have to take.

Kelly
2nd November 2008, 14:31
5% of poeple can't use 25% of energy (oil and it's derivatives). If you wanna have solid economy you must have balanced import/export. Since you don't produce much useful export stuff (except inflated dollar) you must decrease import (oil). How do you do it? By lifting price of imports. Then you get revenue for budget and you owe Saudis or Chavez less. Plus you get lower CO2 emisions.


AndEU, have you ever been to the United States of America? About 75% of the people here live in suburban housing developments that are located at least 2 miles, (if not further) from the nearest grocery store. Unless that suburban development is attached to a city of some size, the people don't usually have the option of using a mass transit system and they actually HAVE to drive to get to work.

If the US is using 25% of the energy, it isn't because the people necessarily want to; it's because the society here is controlled by dickheads like Rockefeller and Bush who are making a fortune off of pushing fossile fuels.

mapletree
2nd November 2008, 18:41
andEU,

Yes the U.S.A. might only have 305 million of the worlds 6.5 billion, but much of the world is dependent on our populace. Just one example...


Demand Changes in US Food Aid Policies

"Each year, millions of tons of food are shipped around the world from the United States to respond to crises caused by droughts, conflicts and severe poverty." http://www.actionaidusa.org/what/climate_change/foodaid_policies/index.html

Kelly
2nd November 2008, 20:42
In my opinion, that article completely misses the point. America doesn't "give" food aide to anybody. Countries in need of food end up having to borrow the money to purchase it from the World Bank. Starvation around the world would be far less prevalent if it wasn't for America's predatory food control policies. Under-developed nations need to grow their own food, not have to buy it from us.

Our farm subsidy program is designed to DESTROY the agriculture systems in third world nations. Because of those damn subsidies, America can go in and dump millions of tons of grain (etc.) into the market at less than what it actually costs to produce the crop. It wipes out all competition from third world nations because their farmers don't get subsidized and farmers there have to sell their product at a price that at least makes cost and some little bit of profit.

Most folks have absolutely no idea what America's world trade policy on agriculture is doing to promote starvation in third-world nations. It's an abomination. The EU nations that also have subsidy programs do precisely the same thing.

"Food is power. You can use it to control nations." - Henry Kissinger

mick silver
2nd November 2008, 21:28
http://newsbusters.org/node/25829?q=blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

and(EU)
3rd November 2008, 04:36
AndEU, have you ever been to the United States of America? About 75% of the people here live in suburban housing developments that are located at least 2 miles, (if not further) from the nearest grocery store. Unless that suburban development is attached to a city of some size, the people don't usually have the option of using a mass transit system and they actually HAVE to drive to get to work.

If the US is using 25% of the energy, it isn't because the people necessarily want to; it's because the society here is controlled by dickheads like Rockefeller and Bush who are making a fortune off of pushing fossile fuels.

US is using so much energy cause you've got bad taxation system. It's a big problem. Do you know you're using 700 billion per year on oil imports? Now there's a great chance your car industry pick up - but only if they choose to produce more efficient cars (cars are using 25+% of all oil consumed). More efficient means smaller, less power, cheaper,... If they choose to do so, you could very quickly export them in large quantities.
I'm living in a suburban area too. That doesen't mean I use a lot more oil than those in cities. Here in EU we have stimulations for homeowners who want to switch to alternative sources of energy. You can get credit (fixed rate 3,9%) or you can take subvention (up to 25% of all invsetment). Usualy investment in alternative source of energy costs about 10-15 k (biomass, solar, heating pumps...). I know it's a lot but think... what if oil will become to expensive for heating your house? (anyway IT WILL, only matter of time).
I've never been to US yet, I might come and travel through but only when I wont be treated as terrorist (fingerprints,..). Recently I read bout 3 young boys from my state who were traveling to US to compete in triathlon. They were arested caous they took photos of a yellow scholl bus. Altogh they were released quickly I think right now US is no destination to travel.

Trvlr45
3rd November 2008, 18:09
US is using so much energy cause you've got bad taxation system. It's a big problem. Do you know you're using 700 billion per year on oil imports? Now there's a great chance your car industry pick up - but only if they choose to produce more efficient cars (cars are using 25+% of all oil consumed). More efficient means smaller, less power, cheaper,... If they choose to do so, you could very quickly export them in large quantities.
I'm living in a suburban area too. That doesen't mean I use a lot more oil than those in cities. Here in EU we have stimulations for homeowners who want to switch to alternative sources of energy. You can get credit (fixed rate 3,9%) or you can take subvention (up to 25% of all invsetment). Usualy investment in alternative source of energy costs about 10-15 k (biomass, solar, heating pumps...). I know it's a lot but think... what if oil will become to expensive for heating your house? (anyway IT WILL, only matter of time).
I've never been to US yet, I might come and travel through but only when I wont be treated as terrorist (fingerprints,..). Recently I read bout 3 young boys from my state who were traveling to US to compete in triathlon. They were arested caous they took photos of a yellow scholl bus. Altogh they were released quickly I think right now US is no destination to travel.

andEU,

You have been brainwashed and enslaved over there. I'm not going to load 600lbs of gun, ammo and luggage in a "go-kart" and drive 600 miles each way to go visit my dad.

I prefer a 5000 lb Cadillac with a 500 cubic inch gas guzzling V-8 to go places in at 80 mph not some tin can with a 3 cylinder electric motor and a back seat a child has to become a contortionist to fit into so the elites can drive around in 10,000 lb limos and jets. I'll be damned if I'm going to let communists and fascist force me to be enslaved by some mass transit sytem. I'll let the sheeple do that.

We do have a bad tax system. It's called a progressive tax system and it is communistic. In addition to that our gas tax should be abolished. How many places in the EU do you have where the nearest gas station is 50 or 100 miles down the road?

Do you people ever really travel longh distances on a regular basis? I make 2600 mile drives to deliver produce to NY from California and southern Arizona. I doubt the people in the Northeast here want to do without their strwberries because someone over in the EU thinks we use too much fuel.

Our government has sold us out by buying 700 billion in oil from our enemies, It is a shame since we have hundreds of years worth of oil right here in our own country to use at our present rate of consumption. There is no global warming, C02 is harmless to the atmosphere and YOU are being lied to so your government over there can steal you blind.

Trvlr45
3rd November 2008, 18:27
What Obama was saying is a cure for your disease

The only disease we have over here is the same one that has brought Europe to the dictatorship it is. We are about 50 years behind you and we don't want YOUR disease. At least the smart people over here don't.

You people need to take up arms and take your freedom back from the liars that have stolen it from you.

Trvlr45
3rd November 2008, 18:30
Obama didn't say he wants you to live in a big city. He told just he wanna US citizens to SAVE.

Of course Obama and his fellow communists don't SAY they want us all living in big cities they just want to force us to do it by taxing our gas and energy under the guise of saving the planet thereby forcing us closer to work.

The Obama campaign spent $430,000 on food alone! HE'S the one that needs to be saving.

fansubs_ca
4th November 2008, 02:03
The polls we see on TV have to be rigged. Almost everybody I talk to, besides Union workers, tell me they are voting for Mccain.

As someone that works in polling I can tell you there are a lot of things that
can unintentionally bias a poll. (Haven't done anything political lately, mostly
products and TV, but a lot of the same principles apply.) We actually have
all kinds ruiles that us interviewers have to follow to try to avoid bias but
sometimes they can backfire. For instance we have to read questions
exactly and can't help people who have trouble understanding the
question because we could then influence their answer by how we ask it.
As well there will be cases where we have to read a full list and aren't
allowed to take any answer until we've read the full list. Only problem
some people are too impatient to listen to the full list and we can't make
an exception because then they won't be answering the exact same
question as others are so there is a risk of that altering their answer.
The downside to this is that it results in participation bias because we end
up with aborted incompete surveys we can't use so poll results will exclude
people on the basis of how impatient they are.

I even sometimes get people that make a one sentence statement and seem
to expect me to answer all the questions from my own interpretation based
on what I can extract from that statement. Um, yet annother person who's
opinions can't be used because of their inability to communicate their
thoughts in a way that can be used. *_*

So it's the people that won't participate or who don't have the ability to
participate due to lack of language skills or simply being impatient that can
throw off the results of a pole.

There are also other issues with just poling people you know, there may
be factors that influence who you associate with whcih will cause them
to be different than the average of everyone that is eligable to vote.

Maybe in the population at large Obama and the other socialists are more
effective at brainwashing people than within the group of people you have
the most interaction with.

My experience in talking about politics with most people around where I live
(in Canada) is that generally they are brainwashed, so many people either
can't see or don't care about the negative impact the socialists have.

It's ironic that I'm already about as "green" as I can comfortably get. I
honestly can't justify driving because not only is fuel expensive the cost
of insurance is insane because so many people drive without paying any
attention causing accidents and 12 year olds seem to like stealing cars
around here because the justice system won't do anything to them. So
I bike or walk when I can and use the bus when it gets too damn cold to
walk. I recycle because I figure why waste materials when somebody out
there can use it. Though there is no way I'd tolerate a government trying
to freeze me in the winter (it gets down to -40 here) or cram me into
overcrowded conditions. (Sure we'll save energy squeezing 57 people
into one house. Unfortunately you'll have more people trying to kill their
roommates when they get on each others nerves or some idiot messes
with somebody else's stuff. I really need my space. ^_-)

I think part of the problem occurs when the people making decisions that
affect the amount of energy used are not the ones paying for it. Taxing
energy more will not fix that because the cost of those taxes will in those
cases still not fall directly on those making the bad decisions. For example
I know of one local retailer where an employee of their's that I know told
me they force rotate all their staff throughout all 3 of their stores. This
means that no matter where you live if you work for them 2 out of 3 days
on average you'll be working far from home! Gain to the company from
this is zero but cost to the workers is very real. I can see having to go
to other locations to cover shortages but to have a guy that lives next
to store A working at store B during the same hours as a guy who lives
next to store B is working at store A is absolutely retarded and wastefull.
Then there are jobs like mine that could be done by telecommuting but
just aren't, if I had the option to telecommute I do even do away with
the bus entirely. (I can do the shopping I need in my own neighborhood
so I don't need the bus for that.) At least I'm still better off than the
people who get shuffled around. I actually originally chose my house to
be close to work but I've changed jobs 5 times since then. Fortunately all
have fallen within an hour and a half walk for the most part, I really dread if
jobs get scarce enough that I have to cross the entire city. *_*

Perhaps it would be better to tax stupidity, there is definately a lot of it
out there and it's something I'd like to see discouraged... *_*

Trvlr45
4th November 2008, 02:41
As someone that works in polling I can tell you there are a lot of things that
can unintentionally bias a poll. (Haven't done anything political lately, mostly
products and TV, but a lot of the same principles apply.) We actually have
all kinds ruiles that us interviewers have to follow to try to avoid bias but
sometimes they can backfire. For instance we have to read questions
exactly and can't help people who have trouble understanding the
question because we could then influence their answer by how we ask it.
As well there will be cases where we have to read a full list and aren't
allowed to take any answer until we've read the full list. Only problem
some people are too impatient to listen to the full list and we can't make
an exception because then they won't be answering the exact same
question as others are so there is a risk of that altering their answer.
The downside to this is that it results in participation bias because we end
up with aborted incompete surveys we can't use so poll results will exclude
people on the basis of how impatient they are.

I even sometimes get people that make a one sentence statement and seem
to expect me to answer all the questions from my own interpretation based
on what I can extract from that statement. Um, yet annother person who's
opinions can't be used because of their inability to communicate their
thoughts in a way that can be used. *_*

So it's the people that won't participate or who don't have the ability to
participate due to lack of language skills or simply being impatient that can
throw off the results of a pole.

There are also other issues with just poling people you know, there may
be factors that influence who you associate with whcih will cause them
to be different than the average of everyone that is eligable to vote.

Maybe in the population at large Obama and the other socialists are more
effective at brainwashing people than within the group of people you have
the most interaction with.

My experience in talking about politics with most people around where I live
(in Canada) is that generally they are brainwashed, so many people either
can't see or don't care about the negative impact the socialists have.

It's ironic that I'm already about as "green" as I can comfortably get. I
honestly can't justify driving because not only is fuel expensive the cost
of insurance is insane because so many people drive without paying any
attention causing accidents and 12 year olds seem to like stealing cars
around here because the justice system won't do anything to them. So
I bike or walk when I can and use the bus when it gets too damn cold to
walk. I recycle because I figure why waste materials when somebody out
there can use it. Though there is no way I'd tolerate a government trying
to freeze me in the winter (it gets down to -40 here) or cram me into
overcrowded conditions. (Sure we'll save energy squeezing 57 people
into one house. Unfortunately you'll have more people trying to kill their
roommates when they get on each others nerves or some idiot messes
with somebody else's stuff. I really need my space. ^_-)

I think part of the problem occurs when the people making decisions that
affect the amount of energy used are not the ones paying for it. Taxing
energy more will not fix that because the cost of those taxes will in those
cases still not fall directly on those making the bad decisions. For example
I know of one local retailer where an employee of their's that I know told
me they force rotate all their staff throughout all 3 of their stores. This
means that no matter where you live if you work for them 2 out of 3 days
on average you'll be working far from home! Gain to the company from
this is zero but cost to the workers is very real. I can see having to go
to other locations to cover shortages but to have a guy that lives next
to store A working at store B during the same hours as a guy who lives
next to store B is working at store A is absolutely retarded and wastefull.
Then there are jobs like mine that could be done by telecommuting but
just aren't, if I had the option to telecommute I do even do away with
the bus entirely. (I can do the shopping I need in my own neighborhood
so I don't need the bus for that.) At least I'm still better off than the
people who get shuffled around. I actually originally chose my house to
be close to work but I've changed jobs 5 times since then. Fortunately all
have fallen within an hour and a half walk for the most part, I really dread if
jobs get scarce enough that I have to cross the entire city. *_*

Perhaps it would be better to tax stupidity, there is definately a lot of it
out there and it's something I'd like to see discouraged... *_*

Bingo, Fansubs,

Take up arms and take your country back. There will be BIG problems for the elites down here after the election. Especially if Mao Bama wins. Most people I have talked to are about at their limit with this big government crap and there isn't anything scarier than 100 million gun owners that have nothing left to lose because their government stole it from them.

Rest assured, if Mao Bama wins this election it was stolen. Liberals (communists) are getting caught red-handed on this one. The FBI is investigating Obama's favorite "community group" again. I think the $825,000 he "donated" to ACORN just might put him in there. Unfortunately. Liberals were just caught the other day in Florida throwing republican absentee ballots in the garbage. Florida prints "republican" or "democrat" on the envelope.

In Ohio, the secratary of state, who is a communist said that it was too close to the election to do anything about the 200,000 ballots that were cast knowing FULL WELL they are fraudulant. Gee, I wonder who THOSE voted will go to?

and(EU)
4th November 2008, 08:48
@Trvlr45: I'm sorry, just keep using your big car - hey, do you know the sound of V12 is much better than "ordinary" V8? Here in EU every "tin can" car with 3 cylinders goes beyond 100 mph, 4 cylinders go 120 and more...
Not to mention 6 cylinders diesel engines which are using the same as gasoline 4 cyl. (BMW or MB, Audi,...). Not to mention their torque (your Chevy-caddy engine is like the one from Flinstones, only Fred&Co are very thirsty in your case).
Please don't mix communism and being green. You don't know what communism is. I know, casuse I lived 15 years under it. Being green means you love your children and their children an so on. I call it investment in the future. It's like taking some short term loss when you know on the long term you'll profit.
What I was trying to say is:
1. Asians are getting richer
2. Americans (and EU also) are getting poorer
3. Oil will be bougt by the highest bidder
4. Average chinese uses 100l of oil, EU citizen some 3200l an average American some 10 000l (3.75l=1gallon)
5. Only 3% of chinese do have a car (rapidly growing market)
6. Oil is in decline.
Above mentioned facts are just plain facts.No red propaganda. I don't want to argue with anybody, don't want to wash your brain. But if someone expresses an opinion with which I agree, I think I've right to support that opinion.

P.S.: Yesterday I watched documentary from BBC about energy....Just fact: If everbody used that much as average american we'd need 3 more planets.
Is BBC communist media?

fansubs_ca
4th November 2008, 11:32
Please don't mix communism and being green. You don't know what communism is. I know, casuse I lived 15 years under it.

There doesn't have to be any conflict between beeing "green" and being
for freedom of the individual. Unfortunately the green movement (at least
in North America) has been widely infultrated and used as a cover by
socialist and communists to try and slip into control under the radar.
Thus the term "watermellon green" (green on the outside, red on the
inside) that I've seen used to describe the phenomenon. Ultimately once
you realize this it does make anyone with a "green" agenda look suspicious,
unfortunately most people don't catch onto this and the cover all too
often works.

I remember in 1995 when I was helping a Libertarian candidate in a
provincial election distribute flyers, he had some left over from the
previous election but since of course his stand on issues obvious hadn't
changed we just had to cross out and re-write the election date to use
them for the current election and he made the comment "we recycle"
to me. ^_^