Skip to comments.
Democratic Senator [Stabenow] Calls For GOP To Alter Energy Policy
Yahoo! News ^
| May 10, 2008
| Will Lester, AP
Posted on 05/11/2008 1:10:37 PM PDT by an amused spectator
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 last
To: an amused spectator
“Sen. Debbie Stabenow said the rising price of oil, fostered by President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney’s close ties to the oil industry, is no longer just a burden.”
Debbie Stupidnow, ultra moron.
61
posted on
05/11/2008 7:34:16 PM PDT
by
headstamp 2
(Been here before)
To: an amused spectator
To: an amused spectator
You have trouble reading. I said if the taxes were to expensive then the business should close and let someone do it that could deliver the product cheaper without all the bitching. Any time you and ron paul want to run the country without a government let me know. I may decide that I like living in your house.
63
posted on
05/11/2008 7:37:32 PM PDT
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: headstamp 2
It must be tough being a Democrat sometimes.
"Oh, man - LOOK at the stupid s*it they want me to say for the cameras this week!?
64
posted on
05/11/2008 7:40:16 PM PDT
by
an amused spectator
(Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
To: an amused spectator
Stabenow's Husband Caught in Troy Prostitution StingTROY -- The co-founder and former CEO of the liberal-progressive Democracy Radio and husband of U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow was caught in February by a Troy police sting aimed at catching prostitutes, according to a police report.
Thomas L. Athans was stopped Feb. 26 by undercover officers investigating a possible prostitution ring in a room at the Residence Inn near Big Beaver and Interstate 75. Athans paid a 20-year-old prostitute $150 for sex in a Troy hotel...
To: org.whodat
You seem to think that Exxon is a crowd of black-hearted thieves, but the thugs who are taking 2-3 times as much from the taxpayers on the same transaction are shining angels.
The Constitutionalists who founded the country rebelled against excessive taxation.
They never considered the taxing authorities to be shining angels, even when they themselves were the taxing authorities. This is why they advocated an implemented limited government.
You, on the other hand, appear to be an unlimited government advocate. This is generally frowned upon on Free Republic.
66
posted on
05/11/2008 7:50:33 PM PDT
by
an amused spectator
(Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
To: Lancey Howard
67
posted on
05/11/2008 7:51:12 PM PDT
by
an amused spectator
(Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
To: an amused spectator
A free country does not have an “energy policy.”
That sounds like a Soviet five-year plan sort of thing.
If government would get out of the way, stop meddling with markets, and generally keep to itself, these things would work themselves out.
68
posted on
05/11/2008 7:55:35 PM PDT
by
B Knotts
(Calvin Coolidge Republican)
To: B Knotts
A free country does not have an energy policy. Good point. The media socialists may have gotten to me while I wasn't looking...
69
posted on
05/11/2008 7:57:13 PM PDT
by
an amused spectator
(Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
To: B Knotts
If government would get out of the way, stop meddling with markets, and generally keep to itself, these things would work themselves out. What he said.
70
posted on
05/11/2008 7:57:57 PM PDT
by
an amused spectator
(Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
To: an amused spectator
Good point. The media socialists may have gotten to me while I wasn't looking...WOW....a FReeper that admits to possibly being wrong.
CLAPPING MY HANDS OFF!!!!!
To: an amused spectator
I may be out of step with the new, improved GOP, but when I listen to Reagan’s radio commentaries, they are full of stuff like that, and they still make sense to me.
72
posted on
05/11/2008 8:01:13 PM PDT
by
B Knotts
(Calvin Coolidge Republican)
To: Osage Orange; an amused spectator
I don’t think an amused spectator was advocating an energy policy. That would be the incompetent senator from Michigan doing so.
73
posted on
05/11/2008 8:03:00 PM PDT
by
B Knotts
(Calvin Coolidge Republican)
To: B Knotts; Osage Orange
I dont think an amused spectator was advocating an energy policy. I didn't post it, but I fell for the media line about "we haven't had an energy policy for the last thirty (forty, insert decade number here, etc.) years.
B Knotts is right - government should get its nose out of the energy business. As we can see, they just mess it up.
After reflecting upon it last night, I realized that our government DOES have an energy policy, and as usual the socialist media is helping their government buddies cover their vile tracks.
The policy is to block many avenues of energy exploration in order to channel energy usage into a few easily controlled (and taxed, taxed, TAXED) resources. Then, the government sticks a PERCENTAGE tax on the resource. When the resource redlines, the government is raking in the dough, due to the percentage taxation.
The media is the dog that doesn't bark in this equation, as I discovered and posted earlier in the thread.
The New York Times had some "big splash" article about how Exxon made 40 billion last year, but nowhere in the article was how much they paid in taxes. That information turned out to be singularly hard to find, though there were a couple of thousand articles pillorying Exxon over its "profits".
But back to my point. The government's energy policy appears to be "gouge the taxpayer" as an alternate means of taxation as the government itself forces energy prices up. Then, Democrats AND Republicans pull the Stabenow Sad Sack routine while Congress is laughing all the way to the bank.
74
posted on
05/12/2008 4:25:57 AM PDT
by
an amused spectator
(Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
To: an amused spectator
You seem to think you are in charge of what I think as well as what you try to think. Attribute your own thoughts to your self.
75
posted on
05/12/2008 5:33:56 AM PDT
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: org.whodat
Well, you just continue on screaming in hatred about the fifty cents a gallon you're giving Exxon, and feel the warm inner glow as you fork over $1.25 for the same gallon to your beloved government thugs...
XXOOXX
76
posted on
05/12/2008 5:48:01 AM PDT
by
an amused spectator
(Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
To: an amused spectator
SOS, I never buy anything off of Exxon, stop attributing your thoughts to me. I drive a power stroke diesel.
77
posted on
05/12/2008 6:01:58 AM PDT
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: org.whodat
I never buy anything off of Exxon Brilliant!
The government doesn't tax diesel, or the other fuel suppliers!
Why didn't the rest of us think of it?
78
posted on
05/12/2008 6:07:19 AM PDT
by
an amused spectator
(Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
To: an amused spectator
Good post....I knew what you said.
FWIW, when the "people" of this Republic...start talking about "BIG GOVERNMENT" and the harm they do....is when I will get very excited.
FRegards,
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson