Bush is not Reagan. Not many conservatives will defend the expansion of the bureacracy, the explosion in federal education spending, the embracing the man made global warming theology, or the open borders policies of the Bush administration.

 

Bush is conservative compared to McCain but neither give conservatives a warm and fuzzy feeling.

 

I believe that you are falling into the liberal trap of equating Republicans to conservatives. There has never been a conservative majority in the US Senate.

Very good points! I totally agree that Bush is not even on the same page with Reagan, no where close. Neither is McCain. Another Reagan is exactly what this country needs, if there is one anymore.

Very good points! I totally agree that Bush is not even on the same page with Reagan, no where close. Neither is McCain. Another Reagan is exactly what this country needs, if there is one anymore.

Bush's energy policy has been sound but he has done a very bad job selling it. McCain sounds a lot like Obama when he talks about our current energy crisis and both of them sound like fools on the subject.

I don't consider Bush an idiot either and would take him over Obama in a New York minute. I disagree about Obama, IMO, he's an idiot.

 

And I wouldn't expect you to say anything else.

Bush's energy policy has been sound but he has done a very bad job selling it. McCain sounds a lot like Obama when he talks about our current energy crisis and both of them sound like fools on the subject.

This is one of many of my problems with McCain, he's just not sound on issues of importance, leans far to left for my taste.

Please do not threadjack this thread into another Bush bashing exercise. Thanks.

 

But it is okay to turn it into a Obama bashing exercise?

 

Or maybe it would be okay if we turn it into an Al Gore bashing exercise like every other thread? I'm sure that would be okay.

And I wouldn't expect you to say anything else.

And I should care about that, why?

And I should care about that, why?

 

Did I say you should? I must have missed that post that I made...

Did I say you should? I must have missed that post that I made...

HB, I'm not going to stoop the typical level you take these arguments to, so lets just agree to the fact that you hate Bush, I merely dislike him and you respect Obama and I can't stand him. Let's just leave it at that. :thumb:

But it is okay to turn it into a Obama bashing exercise?

 

Or maybe it would be okay if we turn it into an Al Gore bashing exercise like every other thread? I'm sure that would be okay.

If you can discuss Obama or Gore as they relate to our energy policy and/or McCain's candidacy, then go for it. I just don't see how spontaneous, "George Bush is an idiot." insults fit the thread - but that is just my opinion.

If you can discuss Obama or Gore as they relate to our energy policy and/or McCain's candidacy, then go for it. I just don't see how spontaneous, "George Bush is an idiot." insults fit the thread - but that is just my opinion.

 

Well their was talk about being led by an idiot, easy to see how Bush fits that part of the thread...

The topic of this thead is McCain's understanding of the energy crisis, so let's leave the discussion to that and everything else to other threads, please.

Well their was talk about being led by an idiot, easy to see how Bush fits that part of the thread...

As far as energy policies goes, Bush's plan is heads and shoulders above the two candidates' plans. If you want to argue that Bush has done a poor job of getting his plan implemented, then I would agree with you.

 

McCain's bashing of corporations is beginning to sound a lot like the rants of Obama and Hillary. If it reaches the level of John Edwards, I will not vote for him.

Bush's energy policy has been sound but he has done a very bad job selling it.

What exactly is "sound" about it?

This simple question posed by the author is one that should be asked more often.

 

 

I agree that it would be good business for oil companies to diversify by transforming themselves into energy companies but should the federal government be forcing an oil company to morph into something different?

 

Oil company researchers are predisposed to find oil-based solutions to problems. Alternative fuel breakthroughs are more likely to come from entrepreneurs competing with oil companies. It is easier to think outside the box if you are already outside of the box.

 

 

The other night, I saw an advertisement by Exxon essentially advertising their committment to finding alternative energy sources. While I don't think that they should be forced to do so, I do think they (oil companies) are probably in the best position to find and invest in those alternative sources. It will serve to ensure that they stay profitable if and when the US is able to reduce it's dependence on foreign oil by utilizing those alternative sources. IMO, while the money is rolling in is the time for them to grab the best and brightest of those entrepreneurs and get them under their umbrella. I'm not saying I think that competition by the little guy is bad, but I think that the solutions would be found more quickly and marketed more quickly if the giants put their power behind them.

What exactly is "sound" about it?

Global demand is increasing and domestic production has been delining for years. The Bush administration has proposed placing additional acreage of oil reserves into production, which would result in increased oil production. The McCain and Obama plans will result in domestic production continuing to decline as they continue to scapegoat the oil companies.