|
|
Post by saunterelle on May 21, 2008 20:13:36 GMT -5
Since you asked, we will be lowering our quality of life in ways like Obama mentioned. For instance, we won't see Escalades driving down city streets chugging gas. We won't have the luxury of using plastic bags at grocery stores. We will have to reserve water and maybe our lawn won't be as green all summer. And *gasp* we might even have to use toilet tissue made from recyled paper!
You've got it backwards. Bush is the fantasist, Obama is a realist. Bush can't admit to the many mistakes he has made. He said God told him to go into Iraq. He lives to appease the evangelical nutjobs who got him elected. Obama on the other hand will look for a responsible way to bring our troops home safely so they can focus on our protection.
And the latest Reuters poll has Obama ahead of McCain by 8 points in the general election. I expect the spread to grow as the election approaches.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on May 21, 2008 20:47:14 GMT -5
you're right about the spread but i expect it to grow in president mccain's favor. the more people learn about who obama really is (a rookie with no experience, no real ideas except wacky marxist ideas, and an affiliate of some really crazy people) they will gravitate toward a sensible, security minded candidate like mccain. recent polls indicate there is a huuuuuge percentage of clinton supporters who will not vote for obama.
and if i wanted to have brown grass, carry my own shopping bag to the store, and drive a wuss car like the prius i would move to europe.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on May 21, 2008 21:19:40 GMT -5
"evangelical nutjobs' now that can describe AlGore and his supporters as they spread their gospel of Global Warming.
As for plastic bags - I seem to remember the rabid environmentalists pushing them as a sustainable alternative to paper bags (save a tree and all that) when they came out. Once again the law of unintended concequences rears up and bites the progressives (I forget what they called them selves then) right in the butt. In the rush to 'do something' about the devistations of the forestes caused by all those paper bags, they came up with a solution that was, long term, worse than the disease.
and, yes, I prefre paper bags because they ride better in the truck, I don't water the lawn all that often because it saves me money, I buy whichever TP is on special at the time. I'm not a liberal soccermom, so I don't drive a huge SUV. But I do have a well laden work truck that there isn't anything electric that can replace it. And we have one personal pick up that my wife uses. No, we don't often need all its capacity, but when we do, we have it. In about a month we are going to be taking a 6000 mile round trip for a vacation. The truck will be handy for that. The first long trip we have taken in over 18 years. It would be interesting to track the driving habits of the obama supporters - what they drive, how many unnecessary trips they make, etc. Given the demographics, I would bet that we would find lots of SUVs making lots of trips to ski resorts, beach get aways, and other frivolous trips.
|
|
|
|
Post by ferrous on May 22, 2008 8:43:51 GMT -5
Being environmentally responsible was never questioned.
This thread was started to question Sen. Obama's views of the United States compared to other countries of the world including the United Nations, to question his leadership role when or if he is elected President, and to question the possibility that he is an elitist appeaser willing to sacrifice the sovereignty of the United States to further promote his Socialist (Agenda 21) causes.
I voted for this guy back in January, not knowing who this guy really was. Now, as the June Primary is getting closer and the Democratic Party is about to choose a candidate to go against Sen. McCain in November, I am going to say something that I thought would never cross my lips. Given the chance again to vote for a Democratic candidate for President, I would choose Sen. Clinton over Sen. Obama in the primary.
|
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on May 22, 2008 12:08:48 GMT -5
Since you asked, we will be lowering our quality of life in ways like Obama mentioned. For instance, we won't see Escalades driving down city streets chugging gas. We won't have the luxury of using plastic bags at grocery stores. We will have to reserve water and maybe our lawn won't be as green all summer. And *gasp* we might even have to use toilet tissue made from recyled paper! You've got it backwards. Bush is the fantasist, Obama is a realist. Bush can't admit to the many mistakes he has made. He said God told him to go into Iraq. He lives to appease the evangelical nutjobs who got him elected. Obama on the other hand will look for a responsible way to bring our troops home safely so they can focus on our protection. And the latest Reuters poll has Obama ahead of McCain by 8 points in the general election. I expect the spread to grow as the election approaches. If someone is willing to pay the price to "chug" gas, what concern is it of yours? And don't say they are using up your resources, because they are not your resources until you actually pay for them. Then you can use as much or as little as you like. It is called a "Free Market." Plastic bags are bad? It is about time some liberal finally admitted that one, after all, your ilk foisted them on us to "keep paper out of landfills and help Butterfly save some trees." Now, as I said when the plastic bag non-sense began, paper is better. Your ilk should have listened then, but the constant prothletizing on the left caused us to change then, and now you find you were wrong. I believe toilet tissue is already made from recycled paper, depending on the brand. Strike three. |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on May 22, 2008 13:29:46 GMT -5
bolverk, I'll gladly answer your questions.
It IS my concern if someone chooses to chug gas unnecessarily for a few reasons: First, it contributes to greater pollution and, thus, climate change which affects me, my future children, grandchildren, etc. Second, America is viewed as a bully superpower, selfishly consuming the majority of the world's resources with blatant disregard for how it affects the rest of the world. It is important to me (and hopefully Obama) that we work to change this perception. Hummer owners are not helping the cause. And lastly, your giant vehicle is a danger to me on the road. In the case of a crash your bumper is up near my window and it is more likely to kill me.
The plastic bag thing is a result of advances in technology. Yes, plastic bags were better than paper but they use petroleum and are not biodegradable. Now we have plastic-like bags made from 100% corn that are biodegradable and recyclable. Or, people can reuse canvas bags.
As for toilet paper, you're right that there are recycled paper options available but they aren't sold at Costco where most people shop for TP. The TP sold there uses large amounts of virgin tree pulp and is bleached according to the Kimberly-Clark 2005 Sustainability Report (page 28).
|
|
|
|
Post by mrroqout on May 22, 2008 13:53:20 GMT -5
Your first concern as we have had several discourses on, is well null and void. As the case for Anthropogenic man made global warming/climate change whatever you wanna call it today is not proven either way. It would seem to those paying attention that in fact the idea is rubbish.
And your second point sure smells like "liberal guilt".
You call America "selfish" in our use of resources. So basically we are selfish for being the most succesfull nation ever in human history? And we should dumb ourselves down to third world levels? So we can use less resources? Right...This argument of our selfishness, is silly at best. We are succesful we are technologically advanced over much of the world, it is only natural for us to use more resources. Does that make it right? Not necessarily, not the rest of the world should catch up..but is that our job to mandate? As can be seen with the middle east and our neighbor to the south we cannot mandate diddly squat, to people who aren't ready to come tro the 21st century.
And it sure sounds like you would like the government to mandate car size? Are you kidding me?
|
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on May 22, 2008 14:26:32 GMT -5
bolverk, I'll gladly answer your questions. I have no questions to be answered. It IS my concern if someone chooses to chug gas unnecessarily for a few reasons: First, it contributes to greater pollution and, thus, climate change which affects me, my future children, grandchildren, etc. No, actually the pollution controls on California vehicles are the most efficient in the entire world, period. And we pay an exorbitant amount for our emission controls and testings already. Man made global warming does not exist. Second, America is viewed as a bully superpower, selfishly consuming the majority of the world's resources with blatant disregard for how it affects the rest of the world. It is important to me (and hopefully Obama) that we work to change this perception. Hummer owners are not helping the cause. America purchases all of its resources, especially oil. Regardless of how much we use, someone is willing to sell it. It is called a Free Market, and we are not the ones doing the selling. The rest of the world is angry at the wrong people. Hummer owners are definitely helping the cause of the countries who engage in Oil Production. In other words, they are contributing vastly to the economic engine that drives the world. And lastly, your giant vehicle is a danger to me on the road. In the case of a crash your bumper is up near my window and it is more likely to kill me. This is called a red herring. Would you force Big Rigs, Fire Trucks and Ambulances off the road as well? Learn to drive properly and stop fearing the road around you, then you won't mind who is driving. Besides, hummers are very expensive, so I am sure the drivers who own them have learned to drive with caution. The plastic bag thing is a result of advances in technology. Yes, plastic bags were better than paper but they use petroleum and are not biodegradable. Now we have plastic-like bags made from 100% corn that are biodegradable and recyclable. Or, people can reuse canvas bags. Why not just call it what it was, a faux pas on the part of your side of the isle. Or is the truth difficult? As for toilet paper, you're right that there are recycled paper options available but they aren't sold at Costco where most people shop for TP. The TP sold there uses large amounts of virgin tree pulp and is bleached according to the Kimberly-Clark 2005 Sustainability Report (page 28). I don't buy mine at Costco. Maybe you should consider shopping elsewhere, rather then expecting them to bend over backwards for you. |
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on May 22, 2008 15:34:15 GMT -5
your giant vehicle is a danger to me on the road. In the case of a crash your bumper is up near my window and it is more likely to kill me. no, your tin can on wheels is a danger to you. that is why i drive a full size truck and we have a full size SUV for the wife and kiddies. i wouldn't dream of putting them in a prius just to save a dime on gas! i happen to like plastic bags. they are convenient and work well for the little trash cans in my house (bathrooms) and also work well for other uses. ever tried putting the doggy droppings in a canvas bag? i like wiping with virgin tree pulp. having spent much time in the field (military) and being forced to wipe with all sorts of creative substitutes, i've decided that i prefer the TP! |
|
|
|
Post by mrroqout on May 27, 2008 16:01:50 GMT -5
Barack Hussein Obama, will magically "Fix" it all!
Coming soon
All Machinery to be powered by ----LOVE
All welfare checks to be -----Strawberry Scented
And Unicorn Factories throughout the land ----Machinery Powered by Love of Course.
|
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on May 27, 2008 16:25:11 GMT -5
Why is it that so many liberals - oops, I mean "progressives" - seem to forget a couple of important facts? - AlGore negotiated the Kyoto Accord during the 90's without any input from the Senate.
- The Senate voted 95-0 to not consider any climate treaty that did not include China and India. That's the current law of the land.
- AlGore, and his boss, Bill Clinton, never went back to the Kyoto nations to try to renegotiate the treaty.
- The treaty was never submitted for debate and approval by the Senate, so it is currently NOT the law of the land.
Like so many other issues (abortion springs to mind), why is it that the progs feel compelled to bypass the legislature with controversial issues? |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on May 27, 2008 17:43:47 GMT -5
jgaffney, because it's a situation where immediate action must be taken.
And mrroqout, I know you like to think that progressives live in fantasy land but the reality is that Obama will be elected because he will bring the war in Iraq to an end. Those other things you mentioned are just bonuses, paid for with your tax money of course. LOL.
|
|
