J-150 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 (edited) just saw it on CNN friggin' hypocrites nice message Hillary and Obama send. edit: sorry about the typos... doing this in the dark with a baby in my arms Edited December 13, 2007 by J-150 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bored of Pisteon Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Ahh, yes... The scum of the earth Democrats are being exposed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laserred02 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I agree what scum! Trying to raise fuel efficiency standards and all. God forbid we use less oil, or make manufacturers build more fuel efficient cars. I hope they rot in hell with their good intentions and trying to do things that make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 I agree what scum! Trying to raise fuel efficiency standards and all. God forbid we use less oil, or make manufacturers build more fuel efficient cars. I hope they rot in hell with their good intentions and trying to do things that make sense. I think you're missing the point. They are all at the same place travelling by private jets to the same place to vote on the same bill. Why are they voting on a bill to curb our fuel usage and yet they can't even plane-pool together? Oh, and when the GOPs do something similar, I will post that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
focus05 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I think you're missing the point. They are all at the same place travelling by private jets to the same place to vote on the same bill. Why are they voting on a bill to curb our fuel usage and yet they can't even plane-pool together? Oh, and when the GOPs do something similar, I will post that too. Well, they have done that (not to vote on energy bills), but none of the candidates take the same plane. Ever. Would you take a plane with your rival? Doubt it. Ultimately, the energy bill is a bit of a disaster. Gas tax. That's how you efficiently curb the markets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman100 Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 I think you're missing the point. They are all at the same place travelling by private jets to the same place to vote on the same bill. Why are they voting on a bill to curb our fuel usage and yet they can't even plane-pool together? Oh, and when the GOPs do something similar, I will post that too. Because all the Nanny-State laws are for the little people. The ruling class lives by their own set of rules, only you get to pay for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaZor Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 J150, think about it for a couple of minutes. When a person makes a commitment to run for national office, they line up (contract for) transportation for what they perceive will be the duration of their campaign (like the primaries). They do not "share" transportation with their rivals to attend events. These events, and such things as voting sessions back in DC, are not known about (as to time/day occurrence) in advance. So sometimes you have, like the other day in Iowa, the candidates are all are there at one time for a specific caucus/debate event. Sometimes/oftentimes they go to different locations after that event - depending on their campaign plan. Then there is a vote called for back in DC. Just what do you suppose they are going to do with their contracted transportation (like a chartered plane sitting at the near-by airport)? Leave it there? - and pool a ride with another candidate to fly to DC? So what happens to the chartered plane sitting there at the airport back in Iowa? Have it fly later on to DC to pick them up to take them to the next event? Now that makes sense, doesn't it? How much fuel would be saved doing that? Come on, this is not rocket science, it's logistics This is just people trying to stir you up. . . and you fell for it. Now if you changed campaign laws and required all candidates to travel on the same means of transportation to all events AND abolish the president making any campaigning/PR/photo op flights. How many times did Geo W get in AF One and fly to Florida and New Orleans after hurricanes, sometimes only fly-overs (only to turn around and fly back to DC), just to look at the damage. What, he can't get a very good idea from all the hundreds hours of coverage on TV news? Or to fly down to SoFla to attend a $20,000/plate fund raising dinner -- and then fly right back to DC. Got any idea how much fuel that 747 uses to do one of the fore mentioned? Yes, it is true that we are going to have to get a whole lot smarter on how we do things. The Brits campaign in a manner of weeks (in duration) and probably are able to speak to a much larger percentage of the people even with that limitation (even though ours encompasses more than a year in time). But that is a little island in comparison to the U.S., isn't it? But we do have to get smarter and eliminate waste where we can. But taxman is right. . . in regards the class structure and for whom the laws are for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted December 14, 2007 Author Share Posted December 14, 2007 RaZor, I understand completely the logistics of it. What I'm saying is that they could have made one single flight together on the eve of their vote to send a message. THAT is what people remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.