Barack Obama is the Antichrist

[SlayerDragon]

There is only one Antichrist...

Really? I mean I thought there were a lot of them.

 

[[VaLkyR]Anubis]

Really? I mean I thought there were a lot of them.

Ok,if there are a lot of them,who says they are really antichrists.Just keep in mind,very often people can't accept other people's opinions and so on and what is the result,intolerance,they have no idea what they are talking at the end.

 

[SlayerDragon]

Ok,if there are a lot of them,who says they are really antichrists.Just keep in mind,very often people can't accept other people's opinions and so on and what is the result,intolerance,they have no idea what they are talking at the end.

True. True.

 

[Luv_Studd]

The gang of 10 is a complete sham in my opinion. First you have to convince Pelosi to bring the bill to the floor in the first place. Then you have to battle parties on both sides doing everything they can to sabotage the bill. Based on what I've read about what is in the bill, it's destined to fail.

No different from when the Repubs controlled the House. Compromise is the nature of the beast - sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.

The area of offshore drilling off Flordia will be a particularly contentious issue. Some will fight to make certain that Flordia has the final say as to if the drilling is actually allowed. Any drilling provisions gained in the bill would be nullified by Flordia, and since California and ANWAR aren't on the bill it won't lead to any new drilling. Republicans will be forced to vote no, and the Democrats will then try to use it to say "see Republicans are voting against energy reform!"

In my opinion, it is a state issue and they should decide.

Repubs are staging a publicity stunt so they can say "see Democrats are against energy reform".

Offshore drilling is not the solution to the problem.

 

[Iron Archer]

Lol, I'm sorry but one could argue that Jesus of all people was not the most tolerant person to ever exist. And Luv Studd, what is the solution? Offshore drilling could and would happen off the shore of Florida, TWD is just kidding himself.

 

[Luv_Studd]

Lol, I'm sorry but one could argue that Jesus of all people was not the most tolerant person to ever exist. And Luv Studd, what is the solution? Offshore drilling could and would happen off the shore of Florida, TWD is just kidding himself.

Make SUV's obsolete; they are a dinosaur that needs to die. Need to address the consumption problem, primarily. Incentives to move us towards using less. [Our company does this already: the offer monthly gas cards to those who car pool, as an example.] Alternative fuels have already been mentioned...there needs to be much more support nationally towards this path of greener technology.

 

[hal]

Make SUV's obsolete; they are a dinosaur that needs to die.

The market already has done this in large part. But what about a family of five or six? What kind of transportation are they going to use?

 

[BillyBadAss]

The market already has done this in large part. But what about a family of five or six? What kind of transportation are they going to use?

My question to that is what did families of that size do before these were huge in the 90s? Gas prices were cheaper, but yet they didn't drive SUVs. I know some had vans of some sorts etc. Mini-vans were popular in the late 80's and early 90's, but had this "Man Hood Is Not Intact" stigma to them, hence the reason they compensated their ego short comings with buying such a stupidly huge car.

 

[TWD]

Perhaps I should clarify myself a little. In the current bill offered by the gang of ten the state of Flordia has no say on whether or not drilling occurs there. That's why I think it's going to be a problem. There's going to be a lot of people that will say lift the moratorium, but Flordia should still has it's rights to say no.

If a straight up or down vote was offered right now drilling would win. That's why there's never going to be a straight up or down vote. Pelosi is going to do what she can to prevent anything like that from going to the floor until after the elections when she has more power.

 

[hal]

My question to that is what did families of that size do before these were huge in the 90s? Gas prices were cheaper, but yet they didn't drive SUVs. I know some had vans of some sorts etc. Mini-vans were popular in the late 80's and early 90's, ....

The answer to that is simple:

- almost all cars were GINORMOUS, easily seating that many people.
- car seats were not required by law meaning more kids can be stuffed into less car.
- bigger vehicles were still available (i.e. station wagons and vans)

 

[DeeperShade]

My question to that is what did families of that size do before these were huge in the 90s?

They rolled.

 

[BillyBadAss]

The answer to that is simple:

- almost all cars were GINORMOUS, easily seating that many people.
- car seats were not required by law meaning more kids can be stuffed into less car.
- bigger vehicles were still available (i.e. station wagons and vans)

I am sure station wagons use less gas than large SUVs. Full size vans I am sure are the same as an SUV, but a mini-van surely uses less since most are V6s.

 

[hal]

Pre-SUV era:

1977 Chevrolet Impala Station Wagon
http://www.carsurvey.org/review_110565.html
15-16 miles per gallon city, and 19-20 miles per gallon highway at 60-65 miles per hour.

1973 Chrysler New Yorker Station Wagon
http://users.penn.com/~mweimer/chrysler.html
15 to 16 mpg on the highway, and about 10 mpg in the city.

vs modern.

2008 Ford Explorer SUV
http://www.mpgbuddy.com/vehicle-profile/27021/2008-ford-explorer-2wd.html
City MPG: 14 Highway MPG: 20

or you could go Hybrid!

2008 GMC Yukon Hybrid SUV
http://www.mpgbuddy.com/vehicle-profile/27030/2008-gmc-c1500-yukon-hybrid-2wd.html
City MPG: 21 Highway MPG: 22

2008 Toyota Highlander Hybrid SUV 4WD
http://www.hybridsuv.com/toyota-highlander/2008-toyota-highlander-hybrid-reviews
City MPG: 27
Highway MPG: 25

2008 Dodge Caravan Minivan
http://www.mpgbuddy.com/vehicle-profile/26944/2008-dodge-caravan-2wd.html
City MPG: 16
Highway MPG: 23

 

[TWD]

Sorry for bringing this up again, but I feel a little ahead of the curve on the whole gang of 10 issue. An article poped up in the wall street journal that sums up exactly what I've been talking about with the gang of 10. I'm surprised that it took the media a whole week to figure it out.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121815293390922431.html

This bill will simply be used as a ploy by Democrats to appear like they're actually doing something about energy. It's an easy excuse to stall the senate until the elections. At that point Democrat majorities will be large enough that the oil drilling issue can be put on the shelf for good.

That's because the plan is a Democratic giveaway. New production on offshore federal lands is left to state legislatures, and then in only four coastal states. The regulatory hurdles are huge. And the bill bars drilling within 50 miles of the coast -- putting off limits some of the most productive areas. Alaska's oil-rich Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is still a no-go.

The highlight is instead $84 billion in tax credits, subsidies and federal handouts for alternative fuels and renewables. The Gang of 10 intends to pay for all this in part by raising taxes on . . . oil companies! The Sierra Club couldn't have penned it better. And so the Republican Five has potentially given antidrilling Democrats the political cover they need to neutralize energy through November.

 

[SlayerDragon]

Maybe all of these idiots should be less concerned with appearances and more concerned with getting **** done. That would be p. awesome.

 

[BillyBadAss]

Pre-SUV era:

1977 Chevrolet Impala Station Wagon
http://www.carsurvey.org/review_110565.html
15-16 miles per gallon city, and 19-20 miles per gallon highway at 60-65 miles per hour.

1973 Chrysler New Yorker Station Wagon
http://users.penn.com/~mweimer/chrysler.html
15 to 16 mpg on the highway, and about 10 mpg in the city.

vs modern.

2008 Ford Explorer SUV
http://www.mpgbuddy.com/vehicle-profile/27021/2008-ford-explorer-2wd.html
City MPG: 14 Highway MPG: 20

or you could go Hybrid!

2008 GMC Yukon Hybrid SUV
http://www.mpgbuddy.com/vehicle-profile/27030/2008-gmc-c1500-yukon-hybrid-2wd.html
City MPG: 21 Highway MPG: 22

2008 Toyota Highlander Hybrid SUV 4WD
http://www.hybridsuv.com/toyota-highlander/2008-toyota-highlander-hybrid-reviews
City MPG: 27
Highway MPG: 25

2008 Dodge Caravan Minivan
http://www.mpgbuddy.com/vehicle-profile/26944/2008-dodge-caravan-2wd.html
City MPG: 16
Highway MPG: 23

You don't have to go that far back to find station wagons. Why not just compare modern minivans and SUVs of today? That way it is a more real comparison.

 

[hal]

You don't have to go that far back to find station wagons. Why not just compare modern minivans and SUVs of today? That way it is a more real comparison.

Because you asked what families did before SUV's (see below). The 1980's Broncos were the real beginning of the modern SUV (though larger versions existed back into the 60's).

My question to that is what did families of that size do before these were huge in the 90s? Gas prices were cheaper, but yet they didn't drive SUVs. I know some had vans of some sorts etc. Mini-vans were popular in the late 80's and early 90's, but had this "Man Hood Is Not Intact" stigma to them, hence the reason they compensated their ego short comings with buying such a stupidly huge car.

Anyhow, towing three kids around requires quite a bit of room and not even minvans always suffice. Four small children is almost an impossibility in anything that size or smaller, particularly if you want to retain any kind of storage space (luggage, groceries, etc). My original response was to point out why the SUV size of vehicle is needed by the modern family.

 

[Luv_Studd]

The market already has done this in large part. But what about a family of five or six? What kind of transportation are they going to use?

Simple - STAY HOME!

Wouldn't we be better off planning for alternatives to what is obviously a finite source of energy?

Drilling for oil offshore is not the solution and saying that we could be independent oil producers to sustain ourselves one day is ludicrous. It's all a scam, man. The pinheads of America will follow goose step to big oil and Republicans thinking that it's the answer.

Read on - follow the money:

http://ourfuture.org/blog-entry/who-coastal-drilling-really-follow-money

 

[hal]

Simple - STAY HOME!

Tell that to my wife and three kids!

Wouldn't we be better off planning for alternatives to what is obviously a finite source of energy?

Drilling for oil offshore is not the solution and saying that we could be independent oil producers to sustain ourselves one day is ludicrous. It's all a scam, man. The pinheads of America will follow goose step to big oil and Republicans thinking that it's the answer.

I can't say that I've heard any Republican say that drilling for oil is the single solution to becoming energy independant.

The answer to the energy question seems obvious: Do all of the above.

• Drill for our oil (+ side benefit of putting our people to work)
• Research new technology
• Build nuclear power plants
• Check the air pressure in your tires

Then, and only then, we might have a shot at not having to rely on others so much for energy. We use oil for a WHOLE lot more than just gas anyway, so that demand is highly unlikely to go away in even the lifetimes of our great grandkids.

 

[das_ben]

My original response was to point out why the SUV size of vehicle is needed by the modern family.

Because the modern family consists of four, five, six, no wait... seven thousand children. In the bad old times they all had to fit into small cars - what a disgrace.