I got your point , you missed mine.
I'll go backwards....
3) My employment was not a safety arguement. My statement was meant to reinforce the fact; that I support minimizing fuel consumption. To the point, it would even cost me my job. If, everything were done, exactly in the most "green "way.
2) Not a political cheap shot. I did not mention a sitting anyone. The bureaucracy goes on no matter who it is, fills the seats. And the question remains, why is anyone paying for them to do what is so dangerous.
The mere mention of the name of someone who is so deeply entwined with the ideals of bigger, stronger government does not change the question.
...EX-IM is the official credit agency of the U.S. .....
1) The easy oil available, by regulation, to be drilled for ....OK, maybe so. You are closer to that than most.
I do not take any of this so lightly as to take cheap shots. Friends of family are being hurt. People are being shoved aside , in what comes over the air waves as cheap political theater.
No, I will not play the red vs blue, cops and robbers game; Both sides of the heirarchy are at fault. The only side I take is those who stand against big, far away, and in the middle of everything government.
I'll say it this way, I think that on most things..
It depends on which cover of the magazine you look at first. It's either an advertisement for something .... or a really pretty face .
Same magazine, same content; different facade.
