Gaf The Horse With Tears

I would not vote for Einstien even if her were eligable and runnnig against Jimmy Carter. Eistien is a horrible choice ... his super IQ made him unfit to lead anything. We get the joke about going to work without your pants because he did that.. for real. REally really smart people are usually only good at one thing... in his case it was thinking about really really small things. The man could barely tie his shoes.

Troy, both things are correct. The #1 and #2 factor affecting gas price is Speculators and Capacity. You guys are looking at skued data on imports though. It's not reflecting how much refinded Gas is brought into the US from refinerys in other countrys. We keep closing them down and not building new ones. There is a illusion out there too... not all refinerys make Gasoline and Diesel fuel. Some make plastic... we use a shit load of plastic and it's made from oil. I also want to point out that people need to look at the break down of the oil companys profit statements. Exxon for example, the majority of thier income is from transporting Oil from say Iraq to France. They are a petroleum transport company that happens to own some gas stations and refinerys. If memorys serves, they only get about 10% of thier income from refined fuels.

So... as we watch the hard left governments in the EU are moving farther and farther to the Right. Canada suddenly has a Right leaning government... infact the Left went from majority to only getting 1/3 of the vote... Perhaps... with this change we might actually see someone try to fix the economy...

This...

This all could have been avoided if Obama had just shown the document when asked to. It's a Constitutional requirment and as Citizens everyone has a Right to demand to see it.

Thanks phee.. and a I hope you had a good birthday too. also, thanks to everyone else. I check in.. I just dont log in all the time. One can only take beating thier head against a brick wall so much.

I don't know... whats it like parroting George Soros?

He has a legally binding contract that says he can't unless he wants to find himself fined, fired or suspended. darknight1 - Give a real life example of someone attacking someone else because of political speech. No one else has been able to do that. No one. It is nice to see Darknight and EFG embracing the Bush doctrine of Preemptive strikes though,

OMG! I can't beleive it hasn't dawned on us all before. I know why this guy started shooting people! He was listening to the damned Rock Music! or maybe he was watching too many action films... or played video games...

Give an example. and please... read the article I posted.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/opinion/15blow.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss "Immediately after the news broke, the air became thick with conjecture, speculation and innuendo. There was a giddy, almost punch-drunk excitement on the left. The prophecy had been fulfilled: “words have consequences.” And now, the right’s rhetorical chickens had finally come home to roost. The dots were too close and the temptation to connect them too strong. The target was a Democratic congresswoman. There was the map of her district in the cross hairs. There were her own prescient worries about overheated rhetoric. Within hours of the shooting, there was a full-fledged witch hunt to link the shooter to the right. “I saw Goody Proctor with the devil! Oh, I mean Jared Lee Loughner! Yes him. With the devil!” The only problem is that there was no evidence then, and even now, that overheated rhetoric from the right had anything to do with the shooting. (In fact, a couple of people who said they knew him have described him as either apolitical or “quite liberal.”) The picture emerging is of a sad and lonely soul slowly, and publicly, slipping into insanity. I have written about violent rhetoric before, and I’m convinced that it’s poisonous to our politics, that the preponderance of it comes from the right, and that it has the potential to manifest in massacres like the one in Tucson. But I also know that potential, possibility and even plausibility are not proof. The American people know it, too. According to a USA Today/Gallup poll released Wednesday, 42 percent of those asked said that political rhetoric was not a factor at all in the shooting, 22 percent said that it was a minor factor and 20 percent said that it was a major factor. Furthermore, most agreed that focusing on conservative rhetoric as a link in the shooting was “not a legitimate point but mostly an attempt to use the tragedy to make conservatives look bad.” And nearly an equal number of people said that Republicans, the Tea Party and Democrats had all “gone too far in using inflammatory language” to criticize their opponents. Great. So the left overreacts and overreaches and it only accomplishes two things: fostering sympathy for its opponents and nurturing a false equivalence within the body politic. Well done, Democrats. Now we’ve settled into the by-any-means-necessary argument: anything that gets us to focus on the rhetoric and tamp it down is a good thing. But a wrong in the service of righteousness is no less wrong, no less corrosive, no less a menace to the very righteousness it’s meant to support. You can’t claim the higher ground in a pit of quicksand. Concocting connections to advance an argument actually weakens it. The argument for tonal moderation has been done a tremendous disservice by those who sought to score political points in the absence of proof. " Emphasis added by me. BTW... The author... before you start trying to call him a racists gun loving violent white republican... is a black liberal democrat.

That would be a fine and dandy speech... if it was based in a reality where political speech of any kind had anything to do with the shooting. The reality is that the shooter was bat shit crazy. He had a beef with his local politician. He felt slighted by her. His problem with her started in 2007... before Sarah Palin ever hit the national scene and before the Tea party rose from the ashes of our Freedoms. This isn't about guns. Or gun rights. This isn't about even about freedom of speech. The left is trying to tell us how to think. btw.. the open calls on Twitter for Sarah Palin to be shot and killed really need to stop.

This guy's obsession with the Congresswoman started in 2007. Palin was not on the national political map in 2007. When Kennedy was killed, the left immediatly blamed the assassination on the right... then it turned out that Oswald was a communist that supportted Castro. When the next Kennedy was killed, the left again blamed the right... and it turned out that Sirhan Sirhan was an Islamic extremist. History does in fact repeat itself.

That was mostly aimed at someone else. Someone who said that anyone with a 7th grade education knows that symbol is a cross hair. http://www.scribd.com/doc/11113687/USGS-Topographic-Map-Symbols Scroll down to Control Data and Monuments... look at the first symbol for.. the one for Principal Point. It's the exact same symbol as on the Palin map. It's used by the US Geological Survey... They must want to kill all Democrats too...