Im running for President again

Hollow- what took you so long to see that? I didn't think it would get by....

Dang Kismet- a post so long I'll have to return to read it.

Steely- here in MT there's people who drive 5 to 10 under the speed limit on the highway, but 5 to 10 miles OVER the speed limit when they reach town limits. Sheeesh.





munk
 
OK Munk- declaring yourself President, you had fun with a lot of truth and lot of high handed nonsense. Saying do the opposite of whatever hair brained leftest stuff Hollow had was one of these.

Except now I'm afraid Hollow has taken it to heart because he's pasted a peice of left Iraq garbage in another thread.

I won't bother teasing you or trying to have fun if you're going to run too hard with it Hollow. Still respect the Man, Hollow, just not that pasted post.

But if I offended you here I apologize.


munk
 
munk said:
Steely- here in MT there's people who drive 5 to 10 under the speed limit on the highway, but 5 to 10 miles OVER the speed limit when they reach town limits. Sheeesh.



munk
Click to expand...

When I was visiting in Colorado 10 years ago, I saw a number of people doing that. In town or in a passing zone, they would always drive faster, then slow down out side town or in a non passing zone. What gives??

As for the Presidency.. Vote for me! :D:D:D I'll umm.. umm.... Yeah! :p

Heber
 
Yep, Heber, they do it, don't know why.

I like the Salt Lake driving style. They run like hell to catch that extra 20 feet ahead of you, then have to slam on the brakes to make their exit. I laugh and laugh when I drive the freeways between Salt Lake and the entire ubanized area in Utah.

Portland Drivers scare me. The highways are too small and an element of desperation has set in. I was pulling a trailer in the rain, and an idiot pulled right in front of me and slowed. The rain was pouring down. I missed him by that much. We were at one of those freeway crossroads; I was trying to get on another freeway. I was going 45, he pulled out at about 5.


munk
 
munk said:
Here's three more:
Drill off the coast of Calif, and if they whine about it, cut off the supply of oil, or at the very least, put in an extra platform for every extra whine. Drill in Anwar, and put in the wind machines off Martha's Vineyard coast the Elite refuse.

End useless enviornmental restrictions and implement reasonable protection and use of materials.
munk
Click to expand...

Ah Munk, I was with you on your entire platform until this one. Trust Exxon to not mangle the last pristine bit of coast after Prince Edward Island which they already ruined, when they're too cheap to even invest in safe existing double-hulled tanker technology? I don't think so.

If you had ever had the opportunity to fly over the Monterey Marine sanctuary and see how incredibly beautiful it is you would never be for this one.

How about we tell the Saudi's to drink their friggin' oil, and Exxon to price gas at .49 cents per gallon, and go with safe nuclear power instead?

Works for me!

Norm
 
Norm, I used to live in Santa Cruz Ca.

Just because Exon screwed it in the past, is no reason to cut it off- give the contract under tight controls to someonelse.

But the real problem isn't drilling, it's refining. No one will build a new refinery under the existing regs- too expensive. We need a solution to this which establishes reasonable controls, not the environmental whacko extreme ones.

Oil is not our answer for the long term.
Whether nuclear power is I just don't know. An oil spill is a lot easier to live with than a nuke accident. Oil spills have occured naturally off the coast of Calif forever.

I'm tired of reality being loggerheaded between two extreme points of view. There is no reason to save a bloody snail in Montana and stop logging, and no reason for roadless conditions and no logging which lead to catostrophic forest fires. But neither should there be clearcutting (in most areas) or another Exon debacle, as you mentioned. Is there no way to pick a path between these two doomsday positions? I'm tired of being offerred either or. Either or is not reality. I don't believe for a second we either get a pristine coastline or a huge oil environmental disaster. That is our choice? I believer we can do better, and hope I get your vote.

I will not increase the size of the DEA. I will probably either abandon it or aborb it into other agencies.


munk
 
Actively go after and punish any politician that abuses the public trust or coffers.
Repeal most all drug laws.
Pull out of the UN.
Close any federal agency that refuses to do it's job.
Abolish Social Security.
That would be a very good start.
 
???????? BAN THE IRISH ??????????? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Damn, that's draconian!


But if that's the way you feel, I'll go. (Bushmills and Guiness goes with us. :grumpy: )

And those beautiful, blue-eyed, red-haired, milk-complected colleens...


so THERE! :p


(Oh, munk? You don't have read the whole post. The first paragraph covers it. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top