Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#25956 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Now let's see, what administration was it that phased out the good light bulbs in this country?
That would be the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
woo-boy wrote:
<quoted text>What administration was still in charge in 2007?
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
George Walker Bush (born July 6, 1946) is an American politician and businessman who served as the 43rd President of the United States of America from 2001 to 2009[4]
Need the link????
No, you are quite correct.

"The revised Senate bill passed 86-8 on December 13. The House approved this final version 314-100 on December 18, and President Bush signed it the following day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Independe...
Helen Roper

Columbus, OH

#25957 Feb 23, 2014
A monkey could do better than Obama. He's probably one of the least qualified presidents this country will ever see. However, the electorate of the country has become pretty stupid as well. Union members. Teachers. All liberal hacks. I miss Reagan. He had class. He was presidential. Obama is just a complete idiot.
Canton

Canton, OH

#25958 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahh. So nothing happened with amnesty under Bush is what you're saying. I see. He wanted Social Security reform too and didn't get that either.
But getting back to the present, who is it that's pushing for amnesty now? Who is resisting amnesty now?
Uhhhh... you mean John Boehner?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/...

Too stupid to know your baseless crap don't cut it any more, I see. Now if only the argument was over whether Bush PASSED an amnesty bill. Hey Rubber Ducky...it wasn't. FAIL
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#25959 Feb 23, 2014
"December 19, 2007
Bush Signs Broad Energy Bill
By JOHN M. BRODER

WASHINGTON — Legislation that will slowly but fundamentally change the cars Americans drive, the fuel they burn, the way they light their homes and the price they pay for food was signed by President Bush Wednesday after having been adopted by the House on Tuesday by a large margin.

“Today, we make a major step with the Energy Independence and Security Act,” the president said after signing the bill at the Department of Energy.“We make a major step toward reducing our dependence on oil, confronting global climate change, expanding production of renewable fuels and giving future generations a nation that is stronger, cleaner and more secure.

The bill, which passed on a bipartisan vote of 314 to 100, sets higher fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks by law for the first time in 32 years and requires the production of 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels by 2022, a nearly fivefold increase from current ethanol production levels.

The measure also establishes new efficiency requirements for household appliances and government buildings and sets a goal of phasing out the incandescent light bulb within 10 years."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/washington/...
Canton

Canton, OH

#25960 Feb 23, 2014
Helen Roper wrote:
A monkey could do better than Obama. He's probably one of the least qualified presidents this country will ever see. However, the electorate of the country has become pretty stupid as well. Union members. Teachers. All liberal hacks. I miss Reagan. He had class. He was presidential. Obama is just a complete idiot.
So it's the color of his skin and nothing more. Thanks for clearing that up. Bet you're just another trust fund hand me down success story crying about teachers and poor people. Get your lazy @ss back down in your Doomsday Bible bunker. We'll let you know if we need any Tea Bagger crazy.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Lodi, OH

#25961 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
My point of taxpayers being the only Americans allowed to vote is that it's their money they are voting on--not somebody else's. With our current system, politicians promise lowlifes all kinds of goodies, and they vote for that candidate because they are getting something for nothing. They are voting money out of my pocket into theirs.
This is what shocked Americans with Commie Care. They thought it was the standard taking from the wealthy and working and giving it to the non-working or low income people. Now they find out that they are paying for this insanity either directly or indirectly, and the polls are showing their dissatisfaction.
Just because one pays taxes and contributes some money to the government, no matter how small, doesn't qualify them to make good decisions about government. Garbage men and truck drivers pay taxes after all. That's why my proposal is better. Those with advanced degrees are "voting on their money" and have the added benefit of being smarter and more learned than those without. See? I have just taken your half baked idea and made it even better!
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Lodi, OH

#25962 Feb 23, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
"December 19, 2007
Bush Signs Broad Energy Bill
By JOHN M. BRODER
WASHINGTON — Legislation that will slowly but fundamentally change the cars Americans drive, the fuel they burn, the way they light their homes and the price they pay for food was signed by President Bush Wednesday after having been adopted by the House on Tuesday by a large margin.
“Today, we make a major step with the Energy Independence and Security Act,” the president said after signing the bill at the Department of Energy.“We make a major step toward reducing our dependence on oil, confronting global climate change, expanding production of renewable fuels and giving future generations a nation that is stronger, cleaner and more secure.
The bill, which passed on a bipartisan vote of 314 to 100, sets higher fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks by law for the first time in 32 years and requires the production of 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels by 2022, a nearly fivefold increase from current ethanol production levels.
The measure also establishes new efficiency requirements for household appliances and government buildings and sets a goal of phasing out the incandescent light bulb within 10 years."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/washington/...
It's amazing that the Teabaggers are so out of their minds stupid that they can make Reagan and W. seem moderate and sane.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Lodi, OH

#25966 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
That would be great if anybody could get an advanced degree. But the truth of the matter is most can't either because they don't have the proper education, they had no interest because their desire was to be blue collar, or most of all, people don't have the money.
On the other hand, with the restrictions that I laid out, anybody can get a job and pay taxes. Anybody can educate themselves on policy and politics. We do it all the time here. To say only those having an advanced degree should vote is just as silly as saying only the top 10% of wage earners in this country be allowed to vote. Most people don't have the ability to be in that top 10%
The only difference between my scenario and yours (other than my restrictions make more sense than yours) is that mine excludes you and yours doesn't. That is the only reason you object to mine.

The lesson to you should be that there exists in this country a great deal of people smarter and more qualified than you when it comes to making decisions of government so you should be very careful before you start deciding to disenfranchise people.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Lodi, OH

#25969 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
The difference between our restrictions is that mine are directly related to voting and yours isn't.
How does an advanced college degree give somebody the upper hand when it comes to understanding policies or politics? I bet there are all kinds of college graduates that don't know anything more about politics than the street sweeper. If you have no interest in politics (and there are many people that don't) then you just have no interest in it. My niece is a college graduate, and she couldn't tell you who the Speaker of the House is. Same goes with her boyfriend. It's not their thing.
I know what you were "trying" to do but it doesn't wash. You were trying to show me what it would be like if somebody stopped me from voting. But like I said earlier, it's apples and oranges.
Really? How does having a minimum wage job give someone the upper hand when it comes to understanding policies or politics? I bet there are all kinds of truck drivers that don't know anything more about politics than the guy on Social Security Disability.

Here is another problem with your proposal. Under your plan, your niece who couldn't tell us who the Speaker is would get to vote, and the SSD guy who does nothing but study politics and history all day wouldn't. That seems kind of stupid, doesn't it?

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#25971 Feb 23, 2014
Helen Roper wrote:
A monkey could do better than Obama. He's probably one of the least qualified presidents this country will ever see. However, the electorate of the country has become pretty stupid as well. Union members. Teachers. All liberal hacks. I miss Reagan. He had class. He was presidential. Obama is just a complete idiot.
Then you should run....
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Lodi, OH

#25974 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Not at all. To be honest, I don't know if my niece does vote. Probably not because we usually discuss quite a bit of politics at family doings and she really has nothing to say.
You further my point about an advanced degree having anything to do with voting or politics. I'm sure many of us here could run circles around some of these college graduates when it comes to politics. We could probably do the same with your average Joe. Here are my points:
A person voting should know WTF they are voting on. If they do vote and don't know what they are voting on, then it neutralizes the vote of somebody that does know what's going on that's voting somewhat the opposite way.
If you and I go to the polls and you vote one way and I vote another. That's fine because we both know the issues and what's at stake for our country. It's just we have different views of the best way to aim our country, so your vote offsets mine and it's a wash. But it would be unfair to you if you understand the issues and policies, and somebody gets to the voting table and just starts punching "Rs" without knowing why.
Secondly, since politics is about money, how to spend money, and who to take money from, it's unfair to a taxpaying voter when a non-taxpaying voter votes to take that taxpayers money so he can get a government goodie of some kind.
Your money is meaningless in the scope of the federal budget. Only people who pay $50,000.00 a year in tax should get to vote. How's that?
Canton

Canton, OH

#25976 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you too stupid to detect a dog and pony show when you see one?
http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/14845/...
Neat that when you are backed into a corner and want to sound like you know what you are talking about, you SUDDENLY agree with the Democrats. I detect a dog and pony show, all right. I just can't tell if you are the dog's @ss or the pony's.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Lodi, OH

#25977 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
No because I still pay money and a politician can still increase my taxes. A person not paying taxes should not be allowed to vote for that politician--I should. He has no stake in the game.
This is exactly what took place in my city a few years ago. They wanted to build all new school buildings. We have a lot of rental properties and some Section 8 residents. Why should they care if they tax me as a property owner so they can build their kids a new school? They didn't care because it wasn't their money building that school. The levy was voted down several times, but eventually it got passed, and now I'm paying an extra $500.00 per year so somebody else has a new school they can send their kids to. I just don't see how that's fair.
That politician can limit the non-taxpayer's civil rights and liberties. You value your civil rights and liberties less than you value $500?
Lefty

Newark, OH

#25978 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
No because I still pay money and a politician can still increase my taxes. A person not paying taxes should not be allowed to vote for that politician--I should. He has no stake in the game.
This is exactly what took place in my city a few years ago. They wanted to build all new school buildings. We have a lot of rental properties and some Section 8 residents. Why should they care if they tax me as a property owner so they can build their kids a new school? They didn't care because it wasn't their money building that school. The levy was voted down several times, but eventually it got passed, and now I'm paying an extra $500.00 per year so somebody else has a new school they can send their kids to. I just don't see how that's fair.
Disgusting, elitist ReTHUGlican crapola. Ohio's reTHUGlicans are already restricting voting in the hopes, combined with their gerrymandering, of holding onto power.

You should be paying a lot more in taxes.

Since: Jan 13

Lexington, KY

#25981 Feb 23, 2014
Our vote doesn't count anyway so what's the point.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Lodi, OH

#25982 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Are civil rights defined as having the ability to take money from others for your benefit?
No. Do you intend to continue to avoid the question?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#25984 Feb 23, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong.
"James Strom Thurmond (December 5, 1902 – June 26, 2003) was an American politician who served for 48 years as a United States Senator....Thurmond represented South Carolina in the United States Senate from 1954 until 2003, at first as a Democrat and, after 1964, as a Republican. He switched because of his opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, disaffection with the liberalism of the national party..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strom_Thurmond
"The Democratic dominance of the South originated in many white Southerners' animosity towards the Republican Party's stance in favor of political rights for blacks during Reconstruction and Republican economic policies such as the high tariff and the support for continuing the gold standard, both of which were seen as benefiting Northern industrial interests at the expense of the agrarian South in the 19th century....
Beginning in about 1948, the national Democratic Party's support of the civil rights movement significantly reduced Southern support for the Democratic Party and allowed the Republican Party to make gains in the South."
"The Democratic candidate, Johnson, who had become president after Kennedy's assassination, spared no effort to win passage of a strong Civil Rights Act. After signing the landmark legislation, Johnson said to his aide, Bill Moyers; "I think we just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time to come."[4] In contrast, Johnson's Republican opponent, Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, believing it enhanced the federal government and infringed on the private property rights of businessmen."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South
The nice thing is that bigots used to be quite proud of their bigotry. Now they try to conceal what they still believe, and distort their shared history. I consider that progress!
Not wrong at all the Links provided tell the truth about the Democrats and their postion when it came to Civil Rights like LBJ said & Confirmed where him and the Liberals Democrats stood about Black America.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#25985 Feb 23, 2014
Helen Roper wrote:
You worthless liberals are gonna get a big wake up call in November.
That is no doubt even the Liberals in California are turning on Obama and his Obamacare.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#25986 Feb 23, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>Be prepared to eat those words in December, basketcase...
Liberal Democrats in California have made it very clear have no use for Obama's version of Liberalism and his Obamacare he pushed hard for and there is going to be alot of basketcases leaving Washington DC and heading back to where they came from come this November.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#25987 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
My point of taxpayers being the only Americans allowed to vote is that it's their money they are voting on--not somebody else's. With our current system, politicians promise lowlifes all kinds of goodies, and they vote for that candidate because they are getting something for nothing. They are voting money out of my pocket into theirs.
This is what shocked Americans with Commie Care. They thought it was the standard taking from the wealthy and working and giving it to the non-working or low income people. Now they find out that they are paying for this insanity either directly or indirectly, and the polls are showing their dissatisfaction.
So True.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Findlay Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Cassity Green (Aug '11) Nov '14 FcukABitchDotNet 3
Review: Vapor Emporia Nov '14 dustin boes 1
adult breast feeding Oct '14 bighoss 1
A to z variety opening monday 10-17-14 Oct '14 A to z variety 2
School Fees Aug '14 Parent 1
State Patrol opens sub-post in Kenton (Aug '13) Jul '14 Fancy 10
Cheri Lynn Brooks (Feb '12) Jul '14 Jumpa 5
Findlay Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Findlay People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Findlay News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Findlay

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 3:52 pm PST

ESPN 3:52PM
Newton: 'Classless' to cheer Manziel injury
Bleacher Report 3:56 PM
Cam Returns to Superman Status When It Matters Most
Yahoo! Sports 4:08 PM
Browns lose Manziel in 17-13 loss to Panthers
NBC Sports 5:30 PM
Manziel leaves Browns' loss with hamstring injury - NBC Sports
Bleacher Report 5:51 PM
Source: Browns Think Manziel Has Grade 2 Hamstring Strain