( Ot) BUSH APPROVAL RATING AT LOW POINT OF HIS TERM
 

NOYB wrote:


However, I really don't care if the World is at peace. I *do* care if
individuals like bin Laden have the ability to control as vital a portion of
the World as the Middle East...and it's oil.

Our country's only weakness is our huge dependence on oil. Without it, we
can be brought to our knees economically. The peace and survival of the
United States of America is all that really matters to me.

In some number of years (some estimates are as low as 20) The oil will
be GONE! Then what???

We've talked a good game about alternate energy since 1972. Might be
time to actually DO something!

( Ot) BUSH APPROVAL RATING AT LOW POINT OF HIS TERM
 

"Jim" wrote in message
...


NOYB wrote:


However, I really don't care if the World is at peace. I *do* care if
individuals like bin Laden have the ability to control as vital a
portion of
the World as the Middle East...and it's oil.

Our country's only weakness is our huge dependence on oil. Without it,
we
can be brought to our knees economically. The peace and survival of the
United States of America is all that really matters to me.

In some number of years (some estimates are as low as 20) The oil will
be GONE! Then what???

Is that with or without opening up ANWR?
Is that with or without opening up the Gulf of Mexico?
Is that with or without opening up the coast of California?

Should start building more nuke plants so that they won't have to burn coal
or oil?

We've talked a good game about alternate energy since 1972. Might be
time to actually DO something!

What do you propose we do?

( Ot) BUSH APPROVAL RATING AT LOW POINT OF HIS TERM
 

On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 19:37:55 -0500, Bert Robbins wrote:


In some number of years (some estimates are as low as 20) The oil will
be GONE! Then what???

Is that with or without opening up ANWR? Is that with or without opening
up the Gulf of Mexico? Is that with or without opening up the coast of
California?

You must have been asleep the past 20 years. US oil production peaked in
the 1970s. Jim is talking world production, which, by most estimates, is
peaking now.

http://www.oilcrash.com/running.htm

Should start building more nuke plants so that they won't have to burn
coal or oil?

We should be so lucky. If oil was only energy, but it is not.

http://www.oilcrash.com/petroleum.htm


We've talked a good game about alternate energy since 1972. Might be
time to actually DO something!

What do you propose we do?

There was a time:

http://www.faultline.org/news/2001/1...ependence.html

Interesting reading:

http://dieoff.com/

The good news is, we don't have to worry about global warming:

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994216

( Ot) BUSH APPROVAL RATING AT LOW POINT OF HIS TERM
 

"NOYB" wrote in message hlink.net...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:

You think this part is GOOD?

NOYB wrote:

How about the other parts, Jim?

"Bush's overall support, 50 percent, was unchanged from February and
equal
to the ***lowest of his presidency***; only the war on terrorism
continues to
garner him the support of more than six in 10 Americans."



The only issue that concerns Noybby is that we continue to bomb the crap
out of everyone, in order to assure what he thinks will be world peace.

Kinda ironic, no?

However, I really don't care if the World is at peace. I *do* care if
individuals like bin Laden have the ability to control as vital a portion of
the World as the Middle East...and it's oil.

Our country's only weakness is our huge dependence on oil. Without it, we
can be brought to our knees economically. The peace and survival of the
United States of America is all that really matters to me.

I think you should take a play from the conservative play book, if you
want to worry about the Mid East, it's oil, and it's rightful owner's
, move there.

( Ot) BUSH APPROVAL RATING AT LOW POINT OF HIS TERM
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message ...
"Jim" wrote in message
...


NOYB wrote:


However, I really don't care if the World is at peace. I *do* care if
individuals like bin Laden have the ability to control as vital a
portion of
the World as the Middle East...and it's oil.

Our country's only weakness is our huge dependence on oil. Without it,
we
can be brought to our knees economically. The peace and survival of the
United States of America is all that really matters to me.

In some number of years (some estimates are as low as 20) The oil will
be GONE! Then what???

Is that with or without opening up ANWR?
Is that with or without opening up the Gulf of Mexico?
Is that with or without opening up the coast of California?

Should start building more nuke plants so that they won't have to burn coal
or oil?

We've talked a good game about alternate energy since 1972. Might be
time to actually DO something!

What do you propose we do?


If you ask Jim or Kerry for that matter they will tell you... (opens
the can)... "Change, that's what we propose, and oh yeah, Bush is bad,
and of course, I served in Vietnam for four months...

( Ot) BUSH APPROVAL RATING AT LOW POINT OF HIS TERM
 

"Backyard Renegade" wrote in message
m...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote in message
...


NOYB wrote:


However, I really don't care if the World is at peace. I *do* care
if
individuals like bin Laden have the ability to control as vital a
portion of
the World as the Middle East...and it's oil.

Our country's only weakness is our huge dependence on oil. Without
it,
we
can be brought to our knees economically. The peace and survival of
the
United States of America is all that really matters to me.

In some number of years (some estimates are as low as 20) The oil will
be GONE! Then what???

Is that with or without opening up ANWR?
Is that with or without opening up the Gulf of Mexico?
Is that with or without opening up the coast of California?

Should start building more nuke plants so that they won't have to burn
coal
or oil?

We've talked a good game about alternate energy since 1972. Might be
time to actually DO something!

What do you propose we do?


If you ask Jim or Kerry for that matter they will tell you... (opens
the can)... "Change, that's what we propose, and oh yeah, Bush is bad,
and of course, I served in Vietnam for four months...

....and got three purple hearts...one for a minor hand injury, one a minor
thigh injury, and a third one that caused me to be out of action for a
whopping two days. Oh yeah...and I was the commander on the boat...so *I
NOMINATED MYSELF FOR THOSE MEDALS*.

( Ot) BUSH APPROVAL RATING AT LOW POINT OF HIS TERM
 

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:53:57 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

[snip]

...and got three purple hearts...one for a minor hand injury, one a minor
thigh injury, and a third one that caused me to be out of action for a
whopping two days. Oh yeah...and I was the commander on the boat...so *I
NOMINATED MYSELF FOR THOSE MEDALS*.

The Purple Heart is not "nominated" or recommended. It is awarded automatically
when an individual meets the criteria.

Joe Parsons

( Ot) BUSH APPROVAL RATING AT LOW POINT OF HIS TERM
 

Joe Parsons wrote:
The Purple Heart is not "nominated" or recommended. It is awarded automatically
when an individual meets the criteria.

You can't expect these chickenhawks to know about stuff like that.

Besides, why let the facts get in the way of a smear campaign?

DSK

( Ot) BUSH APPROVAL RATING AT LOW POINT OF HIS TERM
 

"Joe Parsons" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:53:57 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

[snip]

...and got three purple hearts...one for a minor hand injury, one a minor
thigh injury, and a third one that caused me to be out of action for a
whopping two days. Oh yeah...and I was the commander on the boat...so *I
NOMINATED MYSELF FOR THOSE MEDALS*.

The Purple Heart is not "nominated" or recommended. It is awarded
automatically
when an individual meets the criteria.

And it is determined by the commander, whether the circumstances of the
injury "fit" those criteria. Guess what? Kerry was the commander who
determined if his injuries fit the criteria. He OK'd his own Purple Hearts.

( Ot) BUSH APPROVAL RATING AT LOW POINT OF HIS TERM
 

On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 02:39:15 +0000, NOYB wrote:


And it is determined by the commander, whether the circumstances of the
injury "fit" those criteria. Guess what? Kerry was the commander who
determined if his injuries fit the criteria. He OK'd his own Purple
Hearts.

LOL, in November, Kerry may become the Commander in Chief, but in Vietnam
his commander was George Elliot. Elliot approved Kerry's medals. NOYB,
I'm a little surprised you buy into this BS. Picking apart Kerry's war
record seems more than a little petty. The underlying fact remains, Kerry
did what his country asked of him, no more, no less.