Pelosi turns out lights to save energy

SheepOfBlue · 08-01-2008, 02:51 PM

Not really but this is funny

Bourne · 08-01-2008, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Update 6 - Rep Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) just pretended to be a Democrat. He stood on the other side of the chaber and listed all of the GOP bills that the Dems killed.

He then said "I am a Democrat and here is my energy plan" and he held up a picture of an old VW Bug with a sail attached to it. He paraded around he house floor with the sign while the crowd cheered.

I LOVE it!!

The only downside is seeing, in bold relief, the fact that we don't have any adults running things on Capitol Hill anymore.

jose_jimenez · 08-01-2008, 06:17 PM

Sheep you got a hard on for that lady. almost every day with a comment...

Bourne · 08-01-2008, 06:43 PM

She was kind of hot when she was younger.

No Yulia Tymoshenko, mind you, but not bad.

seamus · 08-01-2008, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jose_jimenez

Sheep you got a hard on for that lady. almost every day with a comment...

You gotta admit though, she is making it pretty easy. She's practially writing her own jokes, as is everyone else in Washington. But, as the "leader", she is ultimately responsible.

I just wish I could get Congress to grant me some of that fine vacation time they get each year. What's it up to now, like 4 months a year?

Bourne · 08-01-2008, 06:46 PM

Wait a minute.

So, you're wanting us to believe they work 8 months out of the year?!

MotoVegas · 08-01-2008, 07:08 PM

If the procedural motion to adjourn was passed (regardless of who/what/why or which side of the isle it came from), that's it, the session is adjourned. Clearly, the side that kept talking can just as easily be seen as petty (or perhaps "counter-petty") for continuing on once the floor was formally shut down; what did their "counter-petty" stunt prove? That the Republicans can be just as childish and petty as the dems that shut down the lights in the first place?

/lame stunt... by BOTH sides

seamus · 08-01-2008, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bourne

Wait a minute.

So, you're wanting us to believe they work 8 months out of the year?!

Just cuz you show up doesn't mean you're working.

JohnnyDiablo · 08-01-2008, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bourne

She was kind of hot when she was younger.

No Yulia Tymoshenko, mind you, but not bad.

http://thepotvinreport.files.wordpre...ymoshenko2.jpg

Meow!

I think congress does not have enough vacation. Or does too much already.. take your pick.

Bourne · 08-01-2008, 09:05 PM

An even better one:

http://www.foodrevolution.info/yulia...ing%20goat.jpg

Bourne · 08-01-2008, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamus

Just cuz you show up doesn't mean you're working.

But that would be.........us.

seamus · 08-01-2008, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bourne

But that would be.........us.

I

because it's true.

SheepOfBlue · 08-01-2008, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jose_jimenez

Sheep you got a hard on for that lady. almost every day with a comment...

Not sure I have ever posted a link about her

might have though this was not really about her as much as the whole circus that is DC

TAZ · 08-02-2008, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MotoVegas

If the procedural motion to adjourn was passed (regardless of who/what/why or which side of the isle it came from), that's it, the session is adjourned. Clearly, the side that kept talking can just as easily be seen as petty (or perhaps "counter-petty") for continuing on once the floor was formally shut down; what did their "counter-petty" stunt prove? That the Republicans can be just as childish and petty as the dems that shut down the lights in the first place?

/lame stunt... by BOTH sides

The motion to adjourn was premature. Congress should NOT have adjourned before noon on a Friday with this important topic on the table. Not when you and I are spending $4 per gallon. Or even $3.89.

I agree the Republicans' stunt was as petty as turning out the lights and turning off the microphones. However, you have to admit that the Democrats - heading out for their five week vacation, while the average American family continues to struggle to pay the bills - come out of this one looking a lot worse to Joe Public.

Regardless of the perceived and realistic merits of drilling, the Dems' (wrong) position on this issue may bring a big impact this fall at the polls.

Did you hear that sound bite of Obama saying that instead of drilling, we should simply inflate our tires properly? What a frickin' dumbass. That comment is going to grow legs...you just watch.

Bourne · 08-02-2008, 01:23 AM

What can our Congress do about oil prices, Taz?

Nothing.

It isn't as though WE set the prices. We play on the world market just like everyone else.

We could nationalize our oil and set our own prices. But you may as well plan your weekends around waiting in line for gas at that point.

jose_jimenez · 08-02-2008, 02:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SheepOfBlue

Not sure I have ever posted a link about her

might have though this was not really about her as much as the whole circus that is DC

No yo flip a comment her way almost everyday. I don't care, call her a dumb cunt...I just find your fascination with her humorous. Whomever said that both sides are childish is right. Both parties can get fucked. Makes me laugh, this party siding, like either party gives a shit about anyone but themselves. Bunch of infants in Washington, especially our dumbass president. Can't wait to see Oliver Stone's film about W, should be a hoot!

TAZ · 08-02-2008, 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bourne

What can our Congress do about oil prices, Taz?

Nothing.

It isn't as though WE set the prices. We play on the world market just like everyone else.

We could nationalize our oil and set our own prices. But you may as well plan your weekends around waiting in line for gas at that point.

You increase the world's SUPPLY of oil, and the price of oil will fall. Allowing drilling for oil is something our Congress can do which would have a positive impact on the price of oil. As I understand it, the price of oil at the moment has little to do with the ACTUAL supply of oil, but rather the speculation about future supplies, which are projected to get tighter as world consumption increases. The mere knowledge that the US would be producing millions of barrels of crude would change the game.

Here's another thing: Everyone else BUT the US is drilling for oil in our coastal waters. We need to get in on that action.

We should also be talking about building some new refineries.

SheepOfBlue · 08-02-2008, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jose_jimenez

No yo flip a comment her way almost everyday. I don't care, call her a dumb cunt...I just find your fascination with her humorous. Whomever said that both sides are childish is right. Both parties can get fucked. Makes me laugh, this party siding, like either party gives a shit about anyone but themselves. Bunch of infants in Washington, especially our dumbass president. Can't wait to see Oliver Stone's film about W, should be a hoot!

Now I can 100000% guarantee you have me confused with someone else. I very much disagree with her politics but would not ever call her that. If I am doing it every day I you should be able to find 5 links by me with her name it them (you won't). The funny part was I was as amused by the elephants on this as I was by the donkey leadership if not more and the original post was a poke at Green Madness™ more than Ms Pelosi herself.

MotoVegas · 08-02-2008, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAZ

The motion to adjourn was premature. Congress should NOT have adjourned before noon on a Friday with this important topic on the table. Not when you and I are spending $4 per gallon. Or even $3.89.

While perhaps true, it is procedurally (and legally) irrelevant. Adjourned is adjourned; it doesn't mean "kinda adjourned". And therefore those actions were nothing more than a stunt. Hence, my post calling their reaction to the petty move of the dems (shutting out the lights), a "counter-petty" move by the Repubs (continuing to argue/debate after the session is formally closed).

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAZ

However, you have to admit that the Democrats - heading out for their five week vacation, while the average American family continues to struggle to pay the bills - come out of this one looking a lot worse to Joe Public.

Also true. However, that is a different issue than getting our panties in a bunch over "lights being shut off and debating after adjournment motion passes". Both sides pandering for political capital in the pre-election season rather than working on a compromise solution. Shame on them all.

Bourne · 08-03-2008, 04:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAZ

You increase the world's SUPPLY of oil, and the price of oil will fall. Allowing drilling for oil is something our Congress can do which would have a positive impact on the price of oil. As I understand it, the price of oil at the moment has little to do with the ACTUAL supply of oil, but rather the speculation about future supplies, which are projected to get tighter as world consumption increases. The mere knowledge that the US would be producing millions of barrels of crude would change the game.

Here's another thing: Everyone else BUT the US is drilling for oil in our coastal waters. We need to get in on that action.

We should also be talking about building some new refineries.

I don't buy the ANWAR argument. If there were really as much oil there as some would have you believe the oil lobby would steamroll that shit through Congress so fast it would make your head spin.Let's look at this in a sober light. Who is more powerful, here or anyplace else on this planet? Big Oil or some environmentalists?

Green Peace weenies drive around in dingy's shining spotlights on whaling boats, or chain themselves to trees. Do you honestly believe they have the power to really stop the oil industry? Do you think they really have enough pull in Washington to rival the oil industry?

Besides, what you're saying is that we should put a bandaid on this and hope it never happens again. I say fuck that.

I say we need to invest in rail infrastructure a la Denver's 119 mile project they're currently working on, build more interstate rail, have auto makers voluntarily increase gas mileage, increase mass transit even in smaller towns, figure out a way to sell nuclear power to the American public, and encourage more investment in alternative energy like wind and solar.

Check out the numbers for China and India. Their fuel consumption is rising far more quickly than anything we could bring online in 5-10 years would make a dent in.

You seem more interested in making the problem hurt a little less.

I'm more interested in actually solving the problem.

SheepOfBlue · 08-03-2008, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bourne

I don't buy the ANWAR argument. If there were really as much oil there as some would have you believe the oil lobby would steamroll that shit through Congress so fast it would make your head spin.Let's look at this in a sober light. Who is more powerful, here or anyplace else on this planet? Big Oil or some environmentalists?

Green Peace weenies drive around in dingy's shining spotlights on whaling boats, or chain themselves to trees. Do you honestly believe they have the power to really stop the oil industry? Do you think they really have enough pull in Washington to rival the oil industry?

Besides, what you're saying is that we should put a bandaid on this and hope it never happens again. I say fuck that.

I say we need to invest in rail infrastructure a la Denver's 119 mile project they're currently working on, build more interstate rail, have auto makers voluntarily increase gas mileage, increase mass transit even in smaller towns, figure out a way to sell nuclear power to the American public, and encourage more investment in alternative energy like wind and solar.

Check out the numbers for China and India. Their fuel consumption is rising far more quickly than anything we could bring online in 5-10 years would make a dent in.

You seem more interested in making the problem hurt a little less.

I'm more interested in actually solving the problem.

Why does it have to be either or? If India/China is rising as fast as you predict would not the problem be FAR worse in 10 years?

Don't under estimate the green madness crowd there is more to them than tree huggers. There is people making money on it other than oil. There is a number of Dems that are representing that crowd including the speaker who has a lot of power to control legistlation. Further there is foriegn interests that are lobbying to stop us from expanding the supply.

As far as the immediate impact.... it is like going to school. The whiner will say but it will be 4 years to get there. I tell them wait a year to start and it will be 5 years to get there.

Your other ideas are valid and will happen due to market demand just check the buying SUV thread or count the increase of bikes at work. Government mandate of technology has a crap record though, for a recent example check ethanol. Centralized control works great ask any soviet.... no need to change government the people will do what is best if the government just stays the heck out of the way.

Now off to the track

JohnnyDiablo · 08-03-2008, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SheepOfBlue

.....
Don't under estimate the green madness crowd there is more to them than tree huggers. There is people making money on it other than oil. There is a number of Dems that are representing that crowd including the speaker who has a lot of power to control legistlation. .....

More than a few threads ago I posted a link to where you could donate to Al Gores save the planet cause. There are many folks that are making money on the green movement. Lets see Al's tax return. Lets see the books on these green organizations. Lets see how much energy in all forms they burn trying to save the planet.

Like I tell all the save the planet folks... the best they or anyone can do for the planet is die, stop making heat, eating, consuming resources, etc and start pushing up daisies.

Bourne · 08-03-2008, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheeply

If India/China is rising as fast as you predict

As I predict?

What does that mean? I'm not predicting anything, just echoing every report in existence. Is China not the fastest growing nation in history?

Quote:

There is a number of Dems that are representing that crowd including the speaker who has a lot of power to control legistlation.

Republicans had both the White House and Congress for 6 years. Somehow laying this at the Dems feet in disengenuous at best.

Again, the oil industry has the strongest loibby in D.C. next to the Israeli lobby. If ANWAR was really as profitable as some say, we'd already be drilling there. Environmetalists win small fights against local governments. The oil industry does what they want worldwide.

Quote:

Further there is foriegn interests that are lobbying to stop us from expanding the supply.

Good.

What we need to do is decrease demand. Period. Increasing supply may create a temporary lull in pain at the pump/grocery store/etc...

Reducing demand not only helps in the short term, but also pushes us that much closer to solving this problem permanently. Reducing demand facilitates so many solutions, whereas increasing supply solves only one, and probably not for very long.

And before you give me the "why not do both" argument, save it. You know as well as I do that lowered gas prices will throw lower demand right out of the window.

Quote:

Government mandate of technology has a crap record though, for a recent example check ethanol.

I am completely against govenrment mandating any of this. I'm with you when it comes to letting the market dictate it. And with gas prices where they are, that's exactly what's happening.

Keep 'em high, I say.

And yes, ethanol has turned out to be a complete disaster for a multitude of reasons.

Quote:

Centralized control works great ask any soviet.... no need to change government the people will do what is best if the government just stays the heck out of the way.

In some cases yes, in some cases no.

The Fannie and Freddie debacle could have stood more efficient regulation. And it should now since we bailed their sorry asses out.

seamus · 08-03-2008, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bourne

08-01-2008, 02:51 PM	#1
SheepOfBlue SRA President Join Date: 12-18-2006 Location: Huntsville, AL Age: 46 Bike(s): CBR1000RR, RC51, VT500FT Posts: 6,393	Pelosi turns out lights to save energy Not really but this is funny __________________ A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

08-01-2008, 07:08 PM	#7
MotoVegas Join Date: 01-03-2007 Location: Las Vegas Age: 38 Bike(s): ZX-10R & HD Ultra Classic Posts: 891	If the procedural motion to adjourn was passed (regardless of who/what/why or which side of the isle it came from), that's it, the session is adjourned. Clearly, the side that kept talking can just as easily be seen as petty (or perhaps "counter-petty") for continuing on once the floor was formally shut down; what did their "counter-petty" stunt prove? That the Republicans can be just as childish and petty as the dems that shut down the lights in the first place? /lame stunt... by BOTH sides __________________ Enjoy my pics Enjoy my crash Enjoy riding with Whip and I at SMMR

08-01-2008, 06:17 PM	#3
jose_jimenez Not Sure's Legal Representation Join Date: 01-05-2007 Bike(s): Hurricane Posts: 1,977	Sheep you got a hard on for that lady. almost every day with a comment...

08-01-2008, 06:43 PM	#4
Bourne Join Date: 01-03-2007 Bike(s): mine Posts: 1,993	She was kind of hot when she was younger. No Yulia Tymoshenko, mind you, but not bad.

08-01-2008, 06:46 PM	#6
Bourne Join Date: 01-03-2007 Bike(s): mine Posts: 1,993	Wait a minute. So, you're wanting us to believe they work 8 months out of the year?!

08-01-2008, 09:05 PM	#10
Bourne Join Date: 01-03-2007 Bike(s): mine Posts: 1,993	An even better one: http://www.foodrevolution.info/yulia...ing%20goat.jpg

08-02-2008, 01:23 AM	#15
Bourne Join Date: 01-03-2007 Bike(s): mine Posts: 1,993	What can our Congress do about oil prices, Taz? Nothing. It isn't as though WE set the prices. We play on the world market just like everyone else. We could nationalize our oil and set our own prices. But you may as well plan your weekends around waiting in line for gas at that point.