KaskadskyjKozak

is that directed outward or inward? you need a refresher course in anatomy

that guy needs to listen to his Skynyrd CD's more closely: Hand guns are made for killin Aint no good for nothin else And if you like your whiskey You might even shoot yourself

such language, young lady!

Famous last words: "don't worry, it's not loaded"

just in time for the ruling, breaking news

hey, now

must... resist... temptation

There's a sucker born every minute

after it plays hover your mouse pointer over some of the othe videos that appear underneath linky

it took you this long? did you just sober up or something?

Sure. Weather is awesome - watcha climbing this w/e?

after it plays hover your mouse pointer over some of the othe videos that appear underneath

Don't kill them all. The M's need some players for next year.

EXCEPT IN GLACIER

I don't see why you feel compelled to respond to every one of my posts, GGK. I'm not interested in talking with you.

VP candidates have not even been picked yet. I find it hard to comment on trial-balloon ideas about cabinet positions - or even take them seriously for that matter. McCain disagreed with the way the war and occupation was executed from the beginning. He would have done it differently, and he will change the way its done now. BUt that is NOT the topic we are discussing.

we should seriously consider nuclear power. it's good enough for Europe. yes, the byproducts are horribly toxic, but if that gets us cleaner emissions it should be on the table.

Bush is not running for president. What are Obama and McCain actually proposing? What will they actually do? In this case w/r/t energy policy. As for the war (your obvious reference), well neither candidate will have us out of Iraq any time soon, so forget that pipe dream. That "waste" will be a part of the budget either way. We're talking about energy policy in general, not the war.

Let's not change the subject. We're not discussing socialism versus pure capitalism, or whether energy policy is in the role of government or is socialism. We are discussing energy policy itself and possible proposals to reduce our current problems.

Obama more likely? Not necessarily. Tax and spend socialism? This is not a social program. As for taxes, who says they have to be increased? You can simply alter the line items in your budget, changing priorities and cutting waste. Nice try at a tangent and back-handed attack. Didn't work.

This also appeared in the news, Matt: In his speech in Fresno, Mr. McCain called for automakers to act more quickly to build so-called flex-fuel vehicles than can run on alternative fuel. He approvingly cited the example of Brazil, which he said had moved to building 70 percent of all new vehicles that way in just three years, and he issued a not-so-veiled threat to automakers. “Whether it takes a meeting with automakers during my first month in office, or my signature on an act of Congress,” he said, “we will meet the goal of a swift conversion of American vehicles away from oil.”

I've already stated my point. I favor increased funding for research into more efficient energy technologies - first and foremost for our automobiles. Secondly, I favor economic incentives for innovation. Hardly a "gimmick".

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

we've had to hold our noses when voting for quite some time. this time around is marginally better than the last two elections, you have to admit