|
|
Post by Mink on Aug 23, 2008 21:50:59 GMT -5
Have you noticed that the bush admin. has a history in oil? Everyone doing fine right now are cronies, those that would help bush get to where he is and oil mongerers are one of the cronies.
Now, if Pelosi has history in oil, then she is likewise as guilty. If you didn't read the WashPost article I linked to in my discussion with Saunterelle, I'll just point out that, when the Energy Bill was being debated in Congress in 2005, oil was at $55 a barrel. Bush's proposal was for more alternative energy tax credits, but the House bill was for oil, natural gas and electricity tax credits, with a little thrown in for residential retrofits. Please explain how that fits with your current argument. Knowing, as you must by now, that Nancy Pelosi has a bundle invested in T Boone Pickens' company Clear Energy, how does that make you feel about her current support for his plans to transfer vast amounts of energy usage from petroleum to natural gas and wind power? We're outside her district, unless you live in Marin or SF, but, as a concerned Democrat, will you campaign against her? Does the word "cronyism" apply on both sides of the aisle, or just on the right? So, who was in charge back then, in Congress? Bush is still in office and no one else is to blame. Enough said! |
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Aug 23, 2008 22:06:03 GMT -5
Mink: 1. So, you have shifted your argument from blaming "bush and his cronies" to the Republican Congress? Am I reading you correctly? According to Thomas, a service brought to you by ex-Speaker Gingrich, the final vote in the House was 249-183, with 41 Democrats voting in favor of the bill and 22 Republicans voting against it. Does that make those 41 Democrat representitives charter members of your "crony" club? 2. You are dodging my question about Pelosi and her apparent cronyism in her support of the Pickens energy proposal. |
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Aug 23, 2008 22:11:23 GMT -5
I haven't changed anything gaffney.....you are "cherry picking", another ploy to avoid the real issue here.
If you guys can veer the conversation to blame in order to keep the focus off of bush, the right, his crony neocons......there is a target and her name is Pelosi.
If, she is indeed guilty, can one woman cause this crisis? I think not.
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Aug 24, 2008 1:35:48 GMT -5
The point is not that she caused this crisis singlehandedly, but rather that her actions now lead one to wonder as to Madame Speaker's real agenda.
(Notice the skillful return to the original conversation!)
As I said, one is defined (politically) by one's actions. Mrs. Pelosi is holding fast, with some cracks, to the traditional doctrinaire position of her party, i.e. No Drilling Anywhere Ever.
It is a position supported by a decreasing # of potential voters, which again brings us to question her agenda. If a strongly defended position shows signs of repelling voters in a BIG election year, why is she doing it?
I don't expect you to call her & get the answer for us here at Norcal Debate Club, but since you seem to agree with her actions, I thought you might take a stab at it.
And, every session of Congress, all of those lazy self-centered mutts avoid addressing dozens of gigantic issues, each with massive consequences, in order to avoid alienating voters. Who deals with the consequences of this bipartisan dereliction of duty?
You and me both, friend. You and me both.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Aug 24, 2008 2:04:39 GMT -5
If, she is indeed guilty, can one woman cause this crisis? I think not. but in your previous post you said clearly that ONE MAN (bush) is to blame for everything. why can't ONE WOMAN be capable of the same? are you a sexist? |
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Aug 24, 2008 13:53:45 GMT -5
He is the president and she is only the speaker...no sexism here  |
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Aug 24, 2008 14:02:18 GMT -5
He did all he can do at this point in time. He lifted the Executive Drilling Ban.
It's her turn now.
The ball is in her court, and it seems she is losing support for her position.
Again, in a huge election year, what is her real agenda?
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Aug 24, 2008 14:45:57 GMT -5
are you SOS today or what?
are you saying that she is powerless in her position as speaker of the house? you've got a lot of learning to do. it wouldn't hurt for you to take a crash course on government.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Aug 24, 2008 14:56:28 GMT -5
He lifted the ban to drill on our coasts. There is allocated land for drilling, but they want more land. Why haven't they drilled on the allotted land?
Since 9/11, our economy has taken a downturn regardless of the cic's brain washing lies that we are doing fine.
The speaker isn't losing support, because since 2006, she never had it. Although the Republicans lost some seats and their majority inCongress, none of them supported the speaker, so what's new?
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Aug 24, 2008 15:10:23 GMT -5
I guess it would be silly to ask you the same question for the third time today, so I'll assume there will be no actual reply to the actual question.
Too bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Aug 24, 2008 15:13:40 GMT -5
I think the answer is obvious, and I know you won't accept it. I have mentioned that the Republicans will cover up their blunders by pointing the finger/s elsewhere....target Pelosi.
Anyway, no more money for bush's bad policies is her agenda-duh!
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Aug 24, 2008 15:15:19 GMT -5
Bush
Bush
Bush
Never mind.
|
|
