Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
"The People's House, Not Pelosi's Politburo!"  
User currently offlineJCS17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 39
Posted (5 years 12 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2373 times:

-- Thaddeus McCotter (R - Michigan)

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecry..._but_GOP_keep_talking.html?showall

I have never been more proud of my GOP affiliation since 2004. Instead of allowing Pelosi to shut-up the chorus, both in Congress and nationwide, my party spoke out. They were heard by die-hards like myself, and will be heard in ads nationwide. Gas prices are hurting Americans. They can't be whisked away with mythical dreams of magic solar farms or water-powered cars in 2008. They need to be solved by shutting-up the speculators and OPEC -- letting them know that America is serious about drilling throughout the US and its waters. America in shale and offshore has twice the Middle East's potential in terms of oil fields. It's time the GOP exposed the fraud that the left has pulled over their eyes.

If Ms. Pelosi feels like this is a winning strategy in the fall. Fine. However, there will be huge consequences, whether the MSM reports on them or not.


America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
59 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (5 years 12 months 23 hours ago) and read 2355 times:



Quoting JCS17 (Thread starter):

If Ms. Pelosi feels like this is a winning strategy in the fall. Fine. However, there will be huge consequences, whether the MSM reports on them or not.

Though I'm not an expert of the history of Speakers - I did spend two summers interning up on the Hill. That being said, I can't think of a less effective, less respected Speaker of the House.

So much for her support of a fairness doctrine so that ideas can be debated - by her actions she's demonstrated that she has absolutely no desire to allow debate if it includes ideas contrary to her own.

She's a rich liberal hypocrite who has accomplished nothing outside of politics. Her own website lists no accomplishments from when she graduated college in 1964 to her election to the House of Representatives in 1989.

Under her leadership, Congress has become openly socialist in its legislative agenda. She uses the power of the state to persecute her enemies and now denies the minority the right to even speak their mind. Where are all our friends on the left who said that the GOP ruled Congress with an iron hand. Did they ever do anything like this?


User currently offlineDtwclipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (5 years 12 months 23 hours ago) and read 2350 times:

Quoting JCS17 (Thread starter):

-- Thaddeus McCotter (R - Michigan)



Quoting JCS17 (Thread starter):

I have never been more proud of my GOP affiliation since 2004

And I have never been more embarrassed by my representation in Congress. Thad McCotter is a jerk. His local office is in the same building as my office, and he's just real schmuck.
A political stunt, and not a great one.

[Edited 2008-08-02 04:56:01]

User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (5 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 2307 times:



Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 2):
And I have never been more embarrassed by my representation in Congress.

More embarrassed than a Speaker who proclaims she is "trying to save the planet!" or refuses to address a major issue that is impacting rich and poor alike? The 5 week August vacation was started in a time before there was air conditioning. There is no real reason for it now except the members like it. I'm all for reducing the number of days Congress is in session to help keep the pork down and hopefully, through lower pay, keep people from making it a career but if there is a major problem facing the country, they need to be there dealing with it.


User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 2302 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 3):
if there is a major problem facing the country, they need to be there dealing with it.

And what major problem is facing America that can't be dealt with in five weeks?


User currently offlineDtwclipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (5 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 2296 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 3):
More embarrassed than a Speaker who proclaims she is "trying to save the planet

No, you're right. They are both schmucks. But, of course I dislike Thad more because he represents our district and I just can't stand him.



But, hey...I'm one of the few folks who actually know who their congressman is!  Wink  Wink


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (5 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 2283 times:



Quoting AirCop (Reply 4):
And what major problem is facing America that can't be dealt with in five weeks?

How about the annual appropriations bills? Debate on them has largely been shut down by the democratic leadership for fear that republicans would try and attach riders to allow off shore drilling.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpol...p/dems_stop_approps_bills_to_blo_1

http://www.usatoday.com/news/topstories/2008-08-01-2936289071_x.htm

The battle over energy has also largely shuttered the annual appropriations process, the 12 bills funding Cabinet agency budgets that are supposed to be passed by the Oct. 1 start of the 2009 budget year. The House and Senate chairmen of the Appropriations committees shut down panel deliberations to avoid votes on lifting the offshore moratorium, which has been in place for about two decades.

So rather than debate the issues before Congress, the democratic leadership has decided to punt until after the election when they might not have to deal with a pesky republican in the White House.

Unfortunately they did find the time to pass plenty of earmark (read pork barrel) spending.

But the GOP battle against earmarks was a distant memory Friday as the House voted 350-63 against an amendment by Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., to kill the 103 projects that were sought by lawmakers only, including readiness centers, parking garages, fitness centers and chapels.


User currently offlineAirStairs From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 487 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 2279 times:

I think that a lot of Representatives are slimy in general, maybe because there are so many that we don't pay too close attention until sexy internet conversations are posted online. I am a bit cynical of all the legislators and their motives but I have to commend them on not just doing it for press at least; cameras weren't allowed in the chambers when this took place and the only people present were those that happened to be at the Capitol.

User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (5 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 2277 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 6):
How about the annual appropriations bills?

1) it's not October yet
2) the house under the Republican leadership got to know the term "continuing resolutions" quite well.
3) Thanks for giving my Congressman a mention. Although how it can be label a GOP battle when only 63 members of the GOP voted for it, is beyond me.


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (5 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 2273 times:



Quoting AirCop (Reply 8):
1) it's not October yet

And according to Obey, it will be past October before all the legislation can be passed. So rather than stay and work on it they head for the hills. Now that's responsibility.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 8):
2) the house under the Republican leadership got to know the term "continuing resolutions" quite well.

I did not say it was right for either party to walk away.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 8):
3) Thanks for giving my Congressman a mention. Although how it can be label a GOP battle when only 63 members of the GOP voted for it, is beyond me.

I didn't label it that way, the article did. No matter who voted for it they were wrong. The big difference would be that the democratic party made a point of running on the issue in 2006 and as we see, nothing has changed.


User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (5 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 2262 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 9):
And according to Obey, it will be past October before all the legislation can be passed. So rather than stay and work on it they head for the hills. Now that's responsibility.

And I doubt anyone will notice the difference that the appropriations bills aren't passed by October 1st.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 9):
No matter who voted for it they were wrong.

That should be those that voted against it were wrong..


User currently offlineSKYSERVICE_330 From Canada, joined Sep 2000, 1412 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (5 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 2245 times:

We had a similar occurrence here in Ontario once...sort of...in the late 90's. The majority government tried to push through an omnibus bill and a member of the opposition stayed in his seat for, I think overnight, in order to delay the house and protest the move by the government, which he saw as undemocratic.

As for the OP...a pretty lowbrow move...you may not agree with reps. across the aisle, but turning the lights and mics off to shut them up is just plain insulting and disrespectful. Good on the members who stayed and refused to be bullied.


User currently offlinePlatypus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (5 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 2230 times:

From the article:

Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and other GOP leaders opposed the motion to adjourn the House, arguing that Pelosi's refusal to schedule a vote allowing offshore drilling is hurting the American economy. They have refused to leave the floor after the adjournment motion passed at 11:23 a.m., and they are busy bashing Pelosi and her fellow Democrats for leaving town for the August recess.

There is speculation that Pelosi and friends pulled this stunt, so Obama would not have to vote on this Bill. Which could have exposed Obama's hypocrisy and shollow reasoning for not wanting to drill.

Cheerio


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (5 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 2219 times:



Quoting AirCop (Reply 10):
And I doubt anyone will notice the difference that the appropriations bills aren't passed by October 1st.

Not the point.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 10):
That should be those that voted against it were wrong..

So you are for earmark pork barrel projects?


User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (5 years 12 months 15 hours ago) and read 2200 times:

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 13):

So you are for earmark pork barrel projects?

First of all memories of a fiscally responsible Congress are a little fuzzy and a very distance memory. So it really depends what the project is. Projects for the greater good such as mass transit, medical care etc, I don't have a problem with. Specific projects such as Rep. Rogers (R-Ky) road to nowhere (I-66) or $3,600,000 for Nanotechnology Fuze-on-a-Chip in Eau Claire, Wisconsin (Rep. Obey R-WI) then yes we have a problem. Disclaimer: I used two examples from the Republicans, just to stop people from inferring that this is strictly a Democrat issue.

Quoting Platypus (Reply 12):
From the article:

Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and other GOP leaders opposed the motion to adjourn the House, arguing that Pelosi's refusal to schedule a vote allowing offshore drilling is hurting the American economy. They have refused to leave the floor after the adjournment motion passed at 11:23 a.m., and they are busy bashing Pelosi and her fellow Democrats for leaving town for the August recess.

There is speculation that Pelosi and friends pulled this stunt, so Obama would not have to vote on this Bill. Which could have exposed Obama's hypocrisy and shollow reasoning for not wanting to drill.

Dear OU812, please remember that Congress and the White House has been under the Republican control had since 2001, yet they failed to pass energy/oil drilling measures while they were in charge.

Additional: RJ here is the link for $141million of defense earmarks for the State of Texas.
http://earmarkwatch.org/2008-house-defense/search/?state=TX

[Edited 2008-08-02 12:50:10]

User currently offlinePlatypus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (5 years 12 months 14 hours ago) and read 2189 times:



Quoting AirCop (Reply 14):
Dear OU812, please remember that Congress and the White House has been under the Republican control had since 2001, yet they failed to pass energy/oil drilling measures while they were in charge.

The Republicans were being proactive and tried pushing legislation to drill in Anwar, but didn't get enough votes. Looks like the Republicans were ahead of the curve and had the right idea. If Pelosi would allow a vote, it just may pass now. But, we all know she can't let that happen and help middle America for purely politically expedient reasons!!!

Gotta love this new Democrat controlled congress. It's no wonder why they have the lowest approval ratings in history. Their numbers are even lower than Bush's.

 rotfl 

Cheerio


User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (5 years 12 months 14 hours ago) and read 2187 times:



Quoting Platypus (Reply 15):
The Republicans were being proactive and tried pushing legislation to drill in Anwar, but didn't get enough votes.

A significant number of Republicans (but McCain in that group) voted against the drilling in ANWAR. Even if they did vote for drilling, I will be long retired before any of the oil make it to the market in the US if the estimate of 10 years is correct.


User currently offlineSeb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (5 years 12 months 14 hours ago) and read 2174 times:

First, Pelosi called a vote, it passed, house in recess. What's to argue? I notice no Republicans up in arms when Democrats were holding a get-together and (I believe) Sensenbrenner came and shut it down, even though he had no reason to. Democrats were not in the majority, no one was sworn in. It was just a bunch of people (headed by Democrats) meeting in a basement room of the Capital.

Second: Why is everyone so gung-ho on oil? Why can we not find ways to run cars on something besides oil? Doesn't anyone realize that if the United States starts putting oil on the market, OPEC will decrease production and the oil the US puts on the market will probably go to China and India and not help anyone in the Untied States except ExxonMobil? I think that is a very good reason to vote down any more drilling.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineJCS17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 39
Reply 18, posted (5 years 12 months 13 hours ago) and read 2165 times:



Quoting AirCop (Reply 16):

A significant number of Republicans (but McCain in that group) voted against the drilling in ANWAR. Even if they did vote for drilling, I will be long retired before any of the oil make it to the market in the US if the estimate of 10 years is correct.

That's not the point at all. If the US announced they were drilling offshore, in ANWR, in the shale of the Rockies, or wherever, the price would come down significantly. The US has as much potential oil as the Middle East. With the prospect of a vastly improved supply, there would be little to justify huge increases in price as we have seen recently. In fact, oil could go back to around $50 a barrel. Furthermore, the US would be less reliant on OPEC, Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela in the future which is fantastic for national security, but also adds to American jobs.

The sad thing is that we would be a lot closer to energy security and prices would be vastly lower right now if Clinton hadn't signed an EO banning offshore/ANWR drilling -- as those "10 years" would've culminated today.

It's the Democrats who believe that America can somehow live off a European model of $8.00 per gas, where the country takes motorscooters, smartcars, and mass transit to work. It's simply asinine since America is infrastructure outside huge cities was not built that way.

Again, Pelosi pulled this shit at the Democrats own peril. It's going to look very bad to John Q. Public.



America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
User currently offlinePlatypus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (5 years 12 months 13 hours ago) and read 2164 times:



Quoting AirCop (Reply 16):
A significant number of Republicans (but McCain in that group) voted against the drilling in ANWAR

However, McCain changed his tune when he saw the necessity to do so, when a gallon of gas exceeded $4.00 per gallon, and was not for high gas prices as was Obama, who literally endorsed high fuel prices.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 16):
Even if they did vote for drilling, I will be long retired before any of the oil make it to the market in the US if the estimate of 10 years is correct.

So it's all about you now , hah! Screw the younger people, like your son who's in College! If the bill passed back when the rep. held congress, we could be benefiting from domestic oil drilling at this very moment. So, in essence, you and Obama want to continue making the same mistake over and over again, while over nations ie China gobble up our oil in the Gulf.

Cheerio


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (5 years 12 months 13 hours ago) and read 2157 times:



Quoting AirCop (Reply 14):
First of all memories of a fiscally responsible Congress are a little fuzzy and a very distance memory.

Perhaps I was not clear. It doesn't make any difference who is in charge or who tries to attach ear marks. The majority are attached to bills and never ever debated on the floor as to their merit.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 14):
So it really depends what the project is. Projects for the greater good such as mass transit, medical care etc, I don't have a problem with.

Of which those earmarks should be able to be passed as part of a regular budget or they should be debated on the merits of each. Not tucked in as a rider on some other bill.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 14):
Disclaimer: I used two examples from the Republicans, just to stop people from inferring that this is strictly a Democrat issue.

Sure you did.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 14):
yet they failed to pass energy/oil drilling measures while they were in charge.

A 2/3rds majority is needed to get the legislation forward in the Senate by ending debate. The GOP never had that so just being in charge does not automatically mean you get what you want. What it does mean is that you get to set the legislative agenda for which Obey and Pelosi have done so, by making sure a vote on offshore drilling never comes up.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 17):
Why can we not find ways to run cars on something besides oil?

Lets hear it. What is the miracle power source/lubricant that is going to replace oil/coal/gas in all their varied forms in the next 10 years. While we are waiting for your answer you don't mind if those of us who don't want to wait go ahead and drill for more of what we know works do you?


User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (5 years 12 months 12 hours ago) and read 2135 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 20):
A 2/3rds majority is needed to get the legislation forward in the Senate by ending debate

Sixty votes is all it requires, not 2/3rds.

Quoting Platypus (Reply 19):
Screw the younger people, like your son who's in College! I

So now you're lowering yourself to attacking family members. You're just a class act. Actually, he's the future, already working on research projects to new sources of power..I have recall, when you were OU812 you stated you work at a minimum wage job in New Jersey, so the US needs individuals that actually willing to study science etc.to help develop new technology.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 20):
Sure you did.

So you're calling me a liar?

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 20):
Of which those earmarks should be able to be passed as part of a regular budget or they should be debated on the merits of each. Not tucked in as a rider on some other bill.

Then why don't you run for Congress, if you hate the present process so much.


User currently offlineT773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 277 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 12 months 12 hours ago) and read 2124 times:



Quoting Seb146 (Reply 17):
Second: Why is everyone so gung-ho on oil? Why can we not find ways to run cars on something besides oil? Doesn't anyone realize that if the United States starts putting oil on the market, OPEC will decrease production and the oil the US puts on the market will probably go to China and India and not help anyone in the Untied States except ExxonMobil? I think that is a very good reason to vote down any more drilling.

How our we going to convert tens of millions of cars to run on something not even created yet in anytime kind of reasonable time line to ruduce our current demand for oil. Not to mention all the infrastructure needed to produce and store this magical cure-all. This is such a naive and ignorant comment many liberals like yourself like to argue.

If the United States were just to state that we were intent on drilling and searching for more oil, many people believe that 30-40 dollars would be knocked of the price of light crude overnight due to all the speculators jumping ship.



"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man."
User currently offlineDc863 From Denmark, joined Jun 1999, 1558 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (5 years 12 months 11 hours ago) and read 2123 times:

I see a huge backlash against the Dems in the next 2 years. This take into account an Obama victory in Nov. The Dems and Obama are in for a quite a fall from grace.

User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (5 years 12 months 10 hours ago) and read 2101 times:



Quoting AirCop (Reply 21):
Sixty votes is all it requires, not 2/3rds.

I stand corrected, but a super majority just the same and not something the GOP had in the Senate in the past 20 years.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 21):
So you're calling me a liar?

You said that not me. I just question your pointing out 2 GOP members instead of splitting. I never inferred that it was just a democratic party issue other than they are in charge and as such set the legislative agenda. They also ran on a plank of doing away with ear mark legislation and yet when the time comes to put up or shut up, regardless of what the GOP members do, they sat down and shut up. Take it as you will but those are the facts as the vote tally shows.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 21):
Then why don't you run for Congress, if you hate the present process so much.

So I could be 1 out of 435? I'd rather find someone else who believes in my views who wants to go there and tilt at windmills.


25 Doug_Or : Strange that the only response to this has been the faint chirping of crickets. Oh well, another day another grandstanding political stunt.
26 Blackbird : I'd have to agree that the solution to this problem is not green-energy but to stop the oil-speculators -- they're the ones driving up the prices of o
27 AirCop : The Senate is 49-49 with two independents aligning themselves with the Democrats, therefore it's 51-49. The House is 236-199 in favor of the Democrat
28 Seb146 : How about, along with drilling for oil, there be a law that states companies must be active in looking for alternatives? How about giving bigger ince
29 Falcon84 : Sounds like nothing has changes since 1994, when the GOP took over the Congress. You had the GOP doing exactly the same thing you critsize Pelosi for
30 T773ER : I agree, but in the meantime we need to start exploring for more oil. It maybe a temporary fix, but one that will last for atleast 10-20 years.
31 Falcon84 : It's not unreasonable to go after some domestic oil, but it cannot be the ba-all and end-all, or the lynchpin of a comprehensive energy polcy. And, l
32 T773ER : Again I agree, oil will not and cannot be the "end-all" energy solution for the US. However, as previously mentioned by you, going after some domesti
33 Post contains links RJdxer : Neither can you evidently. Yep, forget about his sinking federal funds into hydrogen cell research. Pay no attention to what he is making available t
34 StarAC17 : OPEC wants the prices lower and the high prices actually hurt them as conservation increases, they want the price at around $85 per barrel. They basi
35 Pope : Please tell us when the GOP turned off the lights on House Democrats. Your nearsightedness when it comes to history is laughable. The GOP controlled
36 Post contains links Mir : Then let's be proactive and build it that way instead of placing temporary patches on the problem like increased drilling. It will cost more at the o
37 Falcon84 : Happy, Pope? But I'm sure that was all justified, eh?
38 MaidensGator : Ya think maybe????? You must be older than me, because I've never seen a fiscally responsible Congress. That's almost an oxymoron... Even if all newl
39 Mir : The federal government is entirely within its boundaries to require that companies conduct research into alternative energy in order to recieve permi
40 Pope : Once again you show your ignorance. Let's read what the very next paragraph of the cited article says: So here we have a couple of things to point ou
41 MaidensGator : That's not what the post I responded to suggested. Either way, it probably wouldn't work for achieving the desired goal. Alternative energy sources w
42 StarAC17 : Most times yes but it supply and demand can and is trumped by consumers willing to overbid for a specific thing and China will do that in a heartbeat
43 AirStairs : Okay, but when the first company develops a new, proprietary process and patents it you will be up in arms about corporate greed and profiteering. Or
44 MaidensGator : China can't do that for long, and if you think China is even close to controlling US oil reserves, you should check your facts. China is already feel
45 Post contains links Dougloid : True, Whether your government is fucking you or not is your business. But please don't make the mistake that some of our colleagues do of saying how
46 StarAC17 : Right now they can't but there is 1.3 billion people in China and and another 1 billion people in India compared to 300 million in the US. Also add o
47 Falcon84 : And you can put your name in big letter; "POPE" right next to hers, because you're blasting Pelosi and not Sensenbrenner! Welcome to the club, my fri
48 Seb146 : What part of the constitution mandates that corporations MUST drill for oil? Not exactly. To keep prices at this level or higher, supplies must be lo
49 AirStairs : But this exact "striving to the Chinese market" is what makes prices lower. Everyone wants the market share but it is undebatable that OPEC has astro
50 Seb146 : I see this as two questions of the same coin, so to speak. It may be bad for OPEC, but I fail to see how it would depress futures. All that oil going
51 Pope : No genius. I very clearly said that the GOP behavior was in no way justified as you can see below. So who's the hypocrite - me who pointed out the fa
52 Dougloid : Did you get the part where the blogger called it a "stunt"?
53 Post contains links Seb146 : I found a report about the Judiciary Comittee meeting Sensenbrenner closed here: http://blondesense.blogspot.com/2005...t-unusual-event-sensenbrenner
54 Pope : I think we're talking about different things. When I say, it happend on the floor of the House, I'm referring to last week's action. I see that you'r
55 Falcon84 : I thnk it's the usual, self-denying hypocrisy that always seems to leap forth from your mouth. Then again, someone so perfect like yourself, can't be
56 Blackbird : My major issue with Pelosi is predominantly is because she's obstructing justice by preventing any attempts to impeach Bush and Cheney for the crimes
57 StasisLAX : True. Government over-regulation is at the heart of this matter. Regarding the debate over the Congressional August recess, I actually prefer that th
58 AirStairs : Eh in my mind they are absolutely different. The Constitution enumerates the powers of government, not of the people. Certainly Congress has the abil
59 Seb146 : There is another point I would like to bring up. I heard yesterday the oil companies simply want the land opened to drilling, not that they will be d
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Pelosi: "Dems Not Out For Revenge" posted Thu Nov 9 2006 14:17:29 by LHMARK
"We The People..." posted Fri Apr 30 2004 22:45:34 by Espion007
"Doom House 2000" The Movie posted Tue Aug 26 2003 01:05:04 by C172Akula
The Return Of "What Are You Listening To?" posted Sat Jan 19 2008 19:46:54 by WestJetYQQ
The Official "What Did Santa Bring You?" Thread posted Tue Dec 25 2007 07:46:53 by FighterPilot
U.S. Not Convinced "Democracy" Will Take In Iraq posted Thu Aug 23 2007 05:02:58 by Falcon84
The Return Of "What You're Listening To"! posted Mon Apr 23 2007 18:07:35 by Carmenlu15
Not Only "Klaus" Loves Apple Macs! posted Sun Dec 10 2006 23:08:32 by ThePRGuy
"The Last King Of Scotland" posted Sat Oct 7 2006 14:15:10 by Thomasphoto60
The "Drunkest You've Ever Been" Self Pic Thread #1 posted Wed Sep 20 2006 01:57:40 by YWG