(03-24-2010 08:52 AM)HuskieFan84 Wrote: Psuedoscience.. I guess you did only read the first sentence. Or you just didn't understand it. A lack of comprehension on your part doesn't make it a psuedoscience.
Again, I'll stick with Lindsey Graham on this one. The guy who should be leading the Republican party (although a bit too conservative on social views for me). If he was in charge they'd have a much better chance of getting middle America back on their side instead of embracing the insane tea party types, scaring off moderates. Has the right ideas on energy independence, climate change and immigration.
Why do liberals insist on giving Republicans advice, or even worse, why would Republicans listen to them. It is obvious that even if the Republicans did everything that HF84 suggests, he still would not vote for them himself, so why take any of those suggestions?
The left-leaning media lauded John McCain as the sensible and electable Republican, until he won the primary. Then he suddenly became "as bad as Bush".
Lindsey Grahamnesty is the type of wishy-washy moderate that is bringing the party down. If the Republicans had stuck to their conservative principles in the first place, there would be no need for TEA parties. The TEA parties came about precisely because the Republicans had caved to the Democrats so much, that people no longer felt that there was any fiscally conservative representatives, and they had to take to the streets.
Republicans just do the exact opposite of what democrats suggest.
I would suggest that the St Louis Cardinals cut Albert Pujols.
Quote:As he says, we're falling behind.. again. Time to embrace the new technology and move forward, it's embarrassing how stuck people are in their ways. It's time to become energy independent.
The liberal vision of energy independance, involves restricting the available energy, and hoping that we learn to live without it. Its like banning lunch to disgourage obesity. Increase government and decrease the market - the free market.
Quote:The fact that means saving the environment in the process is only a bonus.
Not bonus. Bogus
Quote:Even if you think climate control isn't real, you should still be supporting the ideas of going green anyways, it's common sense.
Hitler used to claim that the farmer was growing his crops to support the "common good". The truth is that the farmer is just trying to make a profit and a living, which is a much more noble cause than some vague concept of "common good".
If you happen to buy a low milage car because you want to save a few bucks in gasoline, that is common sense. As for doing something just for the sake of "going green", you might as well just ask yourself "what would Jesus drive?"
Quote:It's unacceptable for us to not be at the cutting edge of energy technology.
Restricting the market will restrict the incentive to create any new technology. The cutting edge of energy technology created the gasoline powered engine.