Democratic Senator [Stabenow] Calls For GOP To Alter Energy Policy

Yahoo! News ^ | May 10, 2008 | Will Lester, AP

[headstamp 2]

“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.

[Lancey Howard]

[org.whodat]

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.

[an amused spectator]

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!?

[Lancey Howard]

Stabenow's Husband Caught in Troy Prostitution Sting

TROY -- 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...

[an amused spectator]

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.

[an amused spectator]

Oops! ;-)

[B Knotts]

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.

[an amused spectator]

A free country does not have an “energy policy.”

Good point. The media socialists may have gotten to me while I wasn't looking...

[an amused spectator]

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.

[Osage Orange]

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!!!!!

[B Knotts]

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.

[B Knotts]

I don’t think an amused spectator was advocating an energy policy. That would be the incompetent senator from Michigan doing so.

[an amused spectator]

I don’t 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.

[org.whodat]

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.

[an amused spectator]

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

[org.whodat]

SOS, I never buy anything off of Exxon, stop attributing your thoughts to me. I drive a power stroke diesel.

[an amused spectator]

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?

[Osage Orange]

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,