Libs at it Again

[gbell]

There were plenty who said this was a bad idea, but backed Bush regardless. I'm not saying it was right. They backed him so they wouldn't piss off their constituents. But plenty spoke out against this action.....Plenty

Who voted against it? And please show me who voted for it but knew at the time it was a bad idea and all these problems that we have were foreseen by these uber-wise people.
That's smart to align with people and a party that votes not with their conscience and what they feel is right, but with people who apparently say one thing and do another.
Who said when the vote came out "This is a bad idea. It's not going to work. We are poorly planned. But I am going to vote for it anyway"
Maybe there were people who knew the day of the vote. I am sure BC will find a link.

[KazDog]

You are saying the bulbs would lead to money savings as well as not being beholden to the energy special interest groups. Well to ban bad foods as well as smoking does the same thing right?

Gbell, you sometimes come off as a smart guy, but telling me there is a no difference between making me use an energy efficient light bulb and taking away food that I eat, is completely ignorant.....

[gbell]

[QUOTE=KazDog]

I said it's Bush's fault and YOU are asking what the Dems should do about it. Republican's got us into this shit and now YOU are blaming the Dem's for not doing something quickly to get us out. Sorry to tell you, nothing is going to happen there until Bush is out of office. He has the control, we ALL know that. No Dem in Congress can do a damn thing about that. That's why I said only time will tell. Bush wants more troops. Great, we'll see how well that works. Probably about as well as when he sent us there in the first place

No Dem in Congress can do a damn thing about it?
Didn't they run and win on the platform that they were going to do just that? Other then the suggestion to cut off funding of course. But hey, what's putting the soilders in worse shape by cuttting off the funding going to do huh?

[KazDog]

Who voted against it? And please show me who voted for it but knew at the time it was a bad idea and all these problems that we have were foreseen by these uber-wise people.
That's smart to align with people and a party that votes not with their conscience and what they feel is right, but with people who apparently say one thing and do another.
Who said when the vote came out "This is a bad idea. It's not going to work. We are poorly planned. But I am going to vote for it anyway"
Maybe there were people who knew the day of the vote. I am sure BC will find a link.

Answer your own questions. I don't need to. I know, there were Democrats who thought this was a bad idea from the start. They argued about it in congress. But when the vote came down, they backed him. Bush did NOT get full support of Congress, did he?

[gbell]

Gbell, you sometimes come off as a smart guy, but telling me there is a no difference between making me use an energy efficient light bulb and taking away food that I eat, is completely ignorant.....

Aren't you the same one bitching about Rep's taking away your freedoms and choices? You say as long as the greater good is there, , it's ok,correct?
So why stop at energy efficient bulbs is my question? Why not require 1 hour of exercise a day? Outlaw smoking and high-fat diets (sorry Dimer!). If the gov't, according to you, should be give all power to know what is best for me, then why stop?

[KazDog]

[QUOTE=gbell]

No Dem in Congress can do a damn thing about it?
Didn't they run and win on the platform that they were going to do just that? Other then the suggestion to cut off funding of course. But hey, what's putting the soilders in worse shape by cuttting off the funding going to do huh?

You like asking so many fucking questions....why don't you answer this.....What can the democrats that got voted in to congress do about this right now? Go fight with sticks? What can they do? Tell me please.....I'm waiting

[KazDog]

Aren't you the same one bitching about Rep's taking away your freedoms and choices? You say as long as the greater good is there, , it's ok,correct?
So why stop at energy efficient bulbs is my question? Why not require 1 hour of exercise a day? Outlaw smoking and high-fat diets (sorry Dimer!). If the gov't, according to you, should be give all power to know what is best for me, then why stop?

Sorry, but this thread was started by a Republican bitching about light bulbs and our 'freedom' being taken away. Not me. So who is bitching? Yeah, that's what I thought......

[gbell]

[QUOTE=KazDog]

You like asking so many fucking questions....why don't you answer this.....What can the democrats that got voted in to congress do about this right now? Go fight with sticks? What can they do? Tell me please.....I'm waiting

Stick to their platform and come out with the plan/s that they won on. Never knew wht they were then as it was all bullshit to get elected. I have been asking the same questions you are about what are they going to do. They told the American public it was time for a new direction and plan during their campaigns. Now it's time to put up or shut up. You should be asking your own party leaders, shouldn't you?

[gbell]

[QUOTE=BettorsChat]

A President should learn to listen to the people and the Congressmen and Senators that the American people voted into office. That's why Democrats took control of both houses.

There you go Kaz. From your own party leader on the board.
He says the President needs to listen. Tough to hear silence.

[KazDog]

[QUOTE=gbell]

Stick to their platform and come out with the plan/s that they won on. Never knew wht they were then as it was all bullshit to get elected. I have been asking the same questions you are about what are they going to do. They told the American public it was time for a new direction and plan during their campaigns. Now it's time to put up or shut up. You should be asking your own party leaders, shouldn't you?

No I shouldn't....They were just voted in. Any plan right now is only going to get a veto by Bush. This is his war until the next presidential elections. Congress has NO power right now to do much of anything. Their platform wasn't bullshit, the 'new' direction has to be whatever the new president comes up with, and is supported by his or her party in congress.....You know that man. You're not that dumb

[KazDog]

[QUOTE=gbell]

There you go Kaz. From your own party leader on the board.
He says the President needs to listen. Tough to hear silence.

Sorry buddy.....But that supports exactly what I wrote above.....The president needs to listen to Congress. Monte was exactly right, and what I wrote, is that the new president will have the support and hopefully listen to whatever plan they come up with.....IT IS OBVIOUS BUSH IS NOT GOING TO LISTEN TO A DEMOCTRATIC CONGRESS.......

[gbell]

[QUOTE=KazDog]

No I shouldn't....They were just voted in. Any plan right now is only going to get a veto by Bush. This is his war until the next presidential elections. Congress has NO power right now to do much of anything. Their platform wasn't bullshit, the 'new' direction has to be whatever the new president comes up with, and is supported by his or her party in congress.....You know that man. You're not that dumb

So you are saying everyone has to follow the Commander in Chief blindly? So please tell BC that nothing can and will be done in the next 2 years please. Other then the whining, finger pointing and normal Dem gameplans.

[gbell]

[QUOTE=KazDog]

Sorry buddy.....But that supports exactly what I wrote above.....The president needs to listen to Congress. Monte was exactly right, and what I wrote, is that the new president will have the support and hopefully listen to whatever plan they come up with.....IT IS OBVIOUS BUSH IS NOT GOING TO LISTEN TO A DEMOCTRATIC CONGRESS.......

Reread thread Kaz. YOU aren't that dumb. His point is that BUSH is supposed to be listening to Congress now b/c the people have spoken. Nothing said about waiting 2 years.

[gbell]

In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.
Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133



So I guess Bush DID listen to Congress huh?

[KazDog]

[QUOTE=gbell]

So you are saying everyone has to follow the Commander in Chief blindly? So please tell BC that nothing can and will be done in the next 2 years please. Other then the whining, finger pointing and normal Dem gameplans.

I did NOT say they should follow him blindly....Where did I write that? Read what I wrote. The President needs to listen to members of his party in Congress and come up with a legitimate plan, rather than go half cocked on his own to avenge his father's war and protect our oil rights in the middle east under the disguise of protecting this country from weapons of mass destruction.... which he new were neverr there....