OT- $3 gas doesn't look bad (by comparison)

Yes China and India are adding to the problem, but those are things that we have no control over. Bush had control over the things I mentioned. And I am so looking forward to

2008. And even more so to November this year. The Repubs are going to get their asses kicked big time. Lincoln said it best, "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time." Looks like the still fooled percent is now down to the low thirties.

Richard Lawler

'57 1/2 ton Transtar '51 2dr Champion

No it didn't happen within the last 6 years but you are glossing over history. The Republicans have been in control of the house since 1994 and have prevented an increase in mileage standards. my pasted info at the bottom of this message.

Nice try but the simplistic Rushbo thinking doesn't cut it. They voted for it because they believed the lies of Bush. The head of the CIA in Europe says that we were fed false information by Bush and that Bush knew it at the time. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a longtime Powell adviser who served as his chief of staff from 2002 through 2005, and was his aide in the military for 10 years said Powell was fed faulty intelligence by the Bush White house and that they knew it was faulty at the time.

We have lost 2400 soldiers and 17000 wounded and what will amount to about 1 trillion dollars on an unnecessary war and I can't throw a tantrum. Glad you can take it so cavalierly. I wouldn't if I were responsible for it.

The Clinton Administration supported greater fuel efficiency, but indicated in 1993 that an increase in the CAFE standards was not the option likeliest to be embraced first. In September 1993, the Administration announced the Partnership for a New Genera-tion of Vehicles (PNGV), an alliance between federal labs and agencies, and the domestic automotive industry to develop a new gen-eration of vehicles that, among other goals, would seek to triple fuel efficiency. In 1994, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to explore raising the CAFE standard for light-duty trucks. Congress included language in the FY1996-FY2001 DOT Authorizations (P.L. 104-50, P.L. 104-205, P.L. 105-66, P.L. 106- 69, and P.L. 106-346). However, the Senate instructed their conferees to accept the House language in the FY2001 appropriations subject to agreement to authorize a study of CAFE by the National Academy of Science (NAS). That study, released on July 30, 2001, con-cluded that it was possible to achieve a more than 40% improvement in light truck and SUV fuel economy over a 10-15 year period at costs that would be recoverable over the lifetime of ownership.

On May 1, 2001, Senator Diane Feinstein, joined by three co-sponsors, intro-duced legislation (S. 804) that would raise the CAFE standard for light duty trucks and SUVs to 27.5 mpg - the same standard as for pas-senger automobiles - by MY (model year) 2007. On July 12, 2001, the House Subcom-mittee on Energy and Air Quality adopted an amendment in markup to H.R. 2587 that called for a reduction of 5 billion gallons in light-duty truck fuel consumption over the period of MYs 2004-2010. This proposal came to the House floor on August 1, 2001, as part of H.R. 4, the Securing America's Future Energy Act. An amendment to establish a combined passenger car and truck CAFE of 27.5 mpg by MY2007 was defeated 160-269. The NAS study, released two days earlier, figured prom-inently in the debate, on both sides..

MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

On July 12, 2001, the House Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality adopted an amendment in markup on an energy conservation bill that calls for a reduction of 5 billion gallons in light-duty truck fuel consumption over the period of MYs 2004-2010. The provision would also require NHTSA to develop a weight-based system for establishing fuel-efficiency standards. The amendment (to H.R. 2587), introduced by Chairman Joe Barton (R-Texas) and Representative Richard Burr (R-N.C.), passed by a vote of 29-3, and the language was included in H.R. 4, the Securing America's Future Energy Act, debated by the House on August 1, 2001. An amendment to establish a combined passenger car and truck CAFE of 27.5 mpg by MY2007 was defeated 160-269.

The conclusions of a CAFE study by the National Academy of Science (NAS), required by the FY2001 Department of Transportation Appropriations (P.L.

106-346) and released on July 30, 2001, figured in the debate. That study concludes that it is possible to achieve a more than 40% improvement in light truck and SUV fuel economy over a 10-15 year period at costs that would be recoverable over the lifetime of ownership. The NAS study also recommends dropping the separate CAFE calculations made for both domestic and imported vehicles, and also recommend elimination of the CAFE credits that accrue to manufacturers of dual-fueled vehicles. These vehicles are rarely operated on anything but conventional gasoline, but allow their manufacturers to sell less efficient vehicles overall while still remaining in compliance with the CAFE requirements. Some estimate that the dual-fueled vehicle credit has resulted in an overall reduction of five-tenths to nine-tenths of a gallon in the average efficiency of vehicles sold.

In the Senate, on May 1, 2001, Senator Diane Feinstein introduced legislation (S. 804) to raise the CAFE standard for light duty trucks and SUVs to 27.5 mpg - the same standard as for passenger automobiles - by MY2007. Applicability of the standards would also be raised from 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW) to include vehicles up to 10,000 GVW.

If Bush wasn't kissing the ass of the Cuban exiles, we could have been the ones helping Cuba drill. We would have more control and some profit for our companies.

> Sheesh...

My points are many and you appear to be missing them all. One point is, Bill Clinton got 43% of the vote and was treated by the media as if he was anointed By God. However, when GWB didn't win the popular vote against Gore the news stories were filled with how the Electoral college was an anachronism in the modern world and how he was governing without a majorirty. I venture a guess that tonight is the first time you ever heard that Billy didn't get a majority. Does that give you even a slight pause to how you are being manipulated by the main stream media? Another point that I was making was that instead of trying to figure out who the 32% of the morons that still support this smirking monkey is, he might want to give some thought to why the voters keep rejecting the dems, and how they are going to win a national election without having to rely on someone on the ballot that is percieved as MORE conservative than the GOP candidate splitting the Republican vote to get them in office. Of course it's not their fault they are losing, GWB just keeps stealing the elections.

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:14:04 -0400, John Poulos wrote:

Richard Lawler

'57 1/2 ton Transtar '51 2dr Champion

Damn! When I started this thread it was about comparing gas prices in several industrialized nations... It is now up to 69 posts (+ or -) with only a half dozen pertaining to the subject. Paul Johnson

That'll teach you.....or it ought to! Jeff (OT thread starters should be charged extra...Repliers whipped...) Rice

"Paul Johns> Damn! When I started this thread it was about comparing gas prices in

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from ***

" Bush had control over the things I mentioned. And I am so looking forward to

2008. And even more so to November this year. The Repubs are going to get their asses kicked big time."

Alex's version of "wait 'til next year".

Who are the Republicans going to get their ass kicked by... the Hillary Clinton/Barack Obama ticket? The Democrats can't even guarantee the black or Hispanic vote this round... there was an article in the USA Today this week about the increase in minorities running under the Republican ticket.

Lee

Pat responds with well researched facts and you fall right back into mindless Carter bashing. What action would you have taken that would not have led to the deaths of all the hostages/ I will remind you that every one of them survived, mostly due to the cooling off period when the nuts in Iran realized they could not hold them forever. Carter was stuck dealing with the blowback from several previous Republican f*ckups. It was Eisenhower who had the CIA overthrow a freely elected president in Iran and who put the Shaw's father back on the throne. The Iranians did not want to challenge us for supremacy, they wanted us to leave them the hell alone and mind our own business. He and his son after him were brutal dictators and the people hated us for that. It was Henry Kissinger who suggested to the Shaw that he raise oil prices to be able to afford the planes and weapons that our military industrial complex wanted to sell to him. That is what eventually led to the Arab oil embargo which led to the Stagflation that everyone blamed on Carter. Carter's leadership was the thing that led to and saved the peace conference between Egypt and Israel, a peace that has held for three decades now. Carter torched no houses of Americans. It was proven that the religious idiots inside lit multiple fires and it was proven they did not allow the children to be moved to the safe underground refuge.

"Richard Lawler" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Richard Lawler

'57 1/2 ton Transtar '51 2dr Champion

I don't know, I usually lay off the OT threads, but this one is kind of fun!

'57 1/2 ton Transtar '51 2dr Champion

Mindless Carter bashing?? That's just oxymoronic!! Nuts in Iran realized they couldn't hold them forever? That's just because they realized Carter wasn't going to be prez forever!! They did hold them for 444 days and there was two ridiculous military attempts to rescue them. As far as my plan to get them out safely. Well, I'll just take a page out of the current Democratic play book and say, "It's not my job to have a plan, I'm not in power." If he was such a brilliant diplomat why did he attempt (feeble as it was) a military rescue. Gosh, wouldn't it be great if we just had someone like Carter in the white house to fix all the world's problems. OY!

Religious idiots? It's always the people with the views that are different than yours that are the idiots aren't they. Which is also another page out of the Democratic play book. Don't like what someone is saying? Call them an idiot! Brilliant. First they came for the Branch Davidians, and you didn't say anything because you were not a Branch Davidian. I'm so sure that if agents from the BATF busted into your house firing weapons you would greet them with a cup of tea and say, "Why hello good sirs, how may I be of help to you today?" Maybe they should have brought in Carter to negotiate with the Davidians.

I know the mantras. Bush is a moron. Cheney is Satan. If I was a Democrat, and thank God I am not, I'd be trying to figure out why my party is so inept they couldn't put together a ticket that could beat a moron and a monster. Ronald Reagan once said, "It's not that Liberals are bad people, it's just that how much they think they know is wrong." Ronald Reagan, now more than ever!!

Richard Lawler

'57 1/2 ton Transtar '51 2dr Champion

Talking points parroted nicely, conveniently ignoring the aforementioned facts.

Time will tell, and the November elections are right around the corner. Rove wasn't demoted, he's busy stirring up anger about illegal immigration as the next smokescreen - anybody remember Germany in the

1930s?

And for the next trick - what were those secret energy policy meetings about and why did Cheney stonewall the question of who was there and what was discussed? Not a far reach to imagine that they had enough foresight to envision trouble down the road. Cheney tells the oil guys "go ahead and rape the country, pile up profits as fast as you can. If and when we get in trouble, we're gonna nail you with a windfall profits tax, drive the price of gas back down to a mere double what it was when you started, that should get us re-elected".

My prediction is we'll see gas prices fall in September or October, ostensibly as the result of stern Republicans acting 'in our interests'. Exxon-Mobil et al will have to survive on the billions they milked out of us and the Bush white house will have avoided their worst nightmare - a Democrat controlled house and senate that would surely impeach both and try them for their crimes.

The sad truth is that it will probably work.

Richard Lawler wrote:

"My prediction is we'll see gas prices fall in September or October, ostensibly as the result of stern Republicans acting 'in our interests'. Exxon-Mobil et al will have to survive on the billions they milked out of us and the Bush white house will have avoided their worst nightmare

- a Democrat controlled house and senate that would surely impeach both and try them for their crimes.

The sad truth is that it will probably work. "

--------------

It will only work if the Democrats can get 2/3 majority in both the House and Senate. What are the chances of that happening in our lifetime?

Lee

Talk about talking points!!!! Illegal immigration smokescreen? The Democrats are trying to lock up the illegal non-citizen immigrant, and convicted felon vote so they'll have a better chance. Wow, that's a group I want to identify with. The only people that Democrats are appealing to are people that see themselves as victims ("Why don't the Gubment do sumthin'??"), and people that feel guilty for having more than someone else, (or more precisely feel guilty that someone else has more than someone they think should be helped by the gubment, think Hollywood liberals), and people (sheeple) that have been duped by a constant barage of baseless Bush bashing from the media (think a "W" bumper sticker with a slash through it.) And as far as the evil oil companies, just to put this back on the topic of this thread, they are at least getting the gas to the pumps! And at a price cheaper than they are paying elsewhere in the world. Which is more than Carter ever did. And I didn't avoid the facts, I just didn't see any. I remember Germany in the 1930's, and it looked alot like what happened in Miami (Elian Gonzales).

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:45:23 GMT, Pat Drnec wrote:

Richard Lawler

'57 1/2 ton Transtar '51 2dr Champion

begin 644 fed_gun.jpg M_]C_X``02D9)1@`!`@``9`!D``#_[``11'5C:WD``0`$````'@``_^X`#D%D M;V)E`&3``````?_;`(0`$`L+"PP+$`P,$!

BACK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD

My 2003 Ford F-150 Super Crew (surely that's an SUV, right?) consistently averages 15MPG combined and 18MPG on the highway. It has the 5.4L V8, AOD and 3.55 rear gears (towing package standard ratio).

The 24 gal tank makes it a real PITA to fillup when regular unleaded gas just hit $2.89/gal here...but I love the truck so much that Trish bought a 2005 just like it (only red, of course!)

Bob (comfy, safe and 1/2-broke after each fillup!)

snipped-for-privacy@notanywhere.net wrote: