Does anyone know if Ethanol is available around Corbin?

Anonymous wrote:

---

Abramhoff, Delay, Cunningham, Libby, Rove, Cheney, Bush and team. Gasoline and medical costs, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Lebanon, export of US jobs, budget deficit, global warming, stem cell research to help suffering people. I can't think of anything that is better since 2001. Can you?

---

Not to mention Bin Laden, Guantonamo, Katrina relief, Blastfamy, eavsdropping, the phone record database, tracking financial transactions of American citizens, greatly increased poverty, subsidies for luxury SUVs, Carlyle, Halliburton, Ann Coulter, prescription drugs, and Social Security.

The list goes on and on.

 

I can't believe it has been nine years since the miinimum wage was increased. Are you sure this is correct? I thought Bush got that increased last year.

They might hate Democrats and Republicans equally, but they hate Bush, like the rest of the world does, even more. The worst President in U.S. History, bar none.

Anonymous wrote:

---

Abramhoff, Delay, Cunningham, Libby, Rove, Cheney, Bush and team. Gasoline and medical costs, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Lebanon, export of US jobs, budget deficit, global warming, stem cell research to help suffering people. I can't think of anything that is better since 2001. Can you?

---

Hey, now just wait just a doggone minute. I don't like this type of slanderous assault on our President, the leader of the greatest and most powerful nation in the world. He's a Christian for gosh sakes - I know he is because he says he is. 

I have read financials on several companies, such as Halliburton, and their employee bonuses, 401K and stock options have done wonders during this robust economy we have enjoyed - I know it's robust because the President says it is.

I also read somewhere about a guy who has a relative that works for Exxon/Mobile, and stating that because of this strong economy, that Exxon/Mobile has enjoyed the greatest profits in U.S. History. Now he and his wife get to visit his relative in Tahiti, St. Lucia or any of his 5 resort homes. How can you question this administration?

In fact, the economy is so good for everybody, just look at the top most profitable companies: 

Exxon Mobil was at the top with 36 Billion in profits, followed by Royal Dutch Shell (25.3 billion dollars); Citigroup (24.6 billion dollars); BP (22.3 billion dollars); Bank of America (16.5 billion); General Electric (16.4 billion) and HSBC Holdings (15.9 billion). Trailing close behind are the Drug Companies. 

See, it just goes to show what happens when you strongly support this administration. All of these industries strongly supported this president in the past elections by giving huge campaign contributions, and look at them today. In fact, their Billions in profits can more than make up for the thousands of failing business and millions of people thrown into poverty - just look at the economic figures - everything is great. I know it's great because the President says it is.

It's a free economic system we enjoy, and those that take advantage of others can prosper under this administration - I know this because the President not only says it, he follows through on it.

 

No matter how slimy members from both sides are, it all starts at the top. McCain would have been a much better choice for Republicans in 2000.

Here's another one for the archives.



Specter prepping bill to sue Bush

By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer Mon Jul 24, 7:20 PM ET

WASHINGTON - A powerful Republican committee chairman who has led the fight against President Bush's signing statements said Monday he would have a bill ready by the end of the week allowing Congress to sue him in federal court.

"We will submit legislation to the United States Senate which will...authorize the Congress to undertake judicial review of those signing statements with the view to having the president's acts declared unconstitutional," Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said on the Senate floor.

Specter's announcement came the same day that an American Bar Association task force concluded that by attaching conditions to legislation, the president has sidestepped his constitutional duty to either sign a bill, veto it, or take no action.

Bush has issued at least 750 signing statements during his presidency, reserving the right to revise, interpret or disregard laws on national security and constitutional grounds.

"That non-veto hamstrings Congress because Congress cannot respond to a signing statement," said ABA president Michael Greco. The practice, he added "is harming the separation of powers."

Bush has challenged about 750 statutes passed by Congress, according to numbers compiled by Specter's committee. The ABA estimated Bush has issued signing statements on more than 800 statutes, more than all other presidents combined.

Signing statements have been used by presidents, typically for such purposes as instructing agencies how to execute new laws.

But many of Bush's signing statements serve notice that he believes parts of bills he is signing are unconstitutional or might violate national security.

Still, the White House said signing statements are not intended to allow the administration to ignore the law.

"A great many of those signing statements may have little statements about questions about constitutionality," said White House spokesman Tony Snow. "It never says, 'We're not going to enact the law.'"

Specter's announcement intensifies his challenge of the administration's use of executive power on a number of policy matters. Of particular interest to him are two signing statements challenging the provisions of the USA Patriot Act renewal, which he wrote, and legislation banning the use of torture on detainees.

That was the article I read online - I believe from the Atlanta Constitution's website. I did not see the other two paragraphs you are referring to, I either missed a 2nd page or it was omitted on their website story.

Two points: First, if you want to apply some significance to the simple number of signing statements a president has used such as in the statement, “President Clinton did this Hundreds of times”, I would point out that George W. Bush has already exceeded Clinton’s number of signing statements and still has 2 1/2 years of his presidency left in which to use even more. Also, I would point out that simply counting the number of signing statements used by a president does not indicate the number of them that were used to circumvent the law being signed, as with George W Bush’s signing statement about the McCain Anti-Torture bill. The US Department of Justice’s web site has a very thorough document analyzing the different ways that signing statements have been and are used. Available Here, http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/signing.htm

 

Anonymous wrote:

---

We got what we got because WE the Democrats put him in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

---

I agree, Democrats did, along with Women, African-American and College Student voters. These individuals were some of the most vocal and had the most to lose with this administration, and their voter turnout numbers were poor.

Not voting was practically as bad as voting for Bush.

Also, I would point out that simply counting the number of signing statements used by a president does not indicate the number of them that were used to circumvent the law being signed, as with George W Bush’s signing statement about the McCain Anti-Torture bill. The US Department of Justice’s web site has a very thorough document analyzing the different ways that signing statements have been and are used.

Wow--Some Two Dollar words. Let's break down this Paragraph:

How many were used to Circumvent the Law?, tell me the exact number and what Constitutional Laws were Violated? If Laws are being Violated then why hasn't the Justice Department, House, Senate acted for the past 6 Years. Probably the same reason they did not act when the other 50 presidents or so did the same thing.

Your making Statements that in fact say that you are POSITVE US Constitutional Law has been broken, are you an attorney? I have read your web link and it clearly states as Senator Cornyn (R-Texas) did that these things are in a very grey area. It's true Bush has signed more than Clinton but Clinton signed several that did almost these same things, Bush has just did it a little more.

Let's face it Bush is conducting Business his own way, no question we all Dis-Agree!!!!!!!! Tell our Democratic friends to STOP voting for these guys!!!

"the number of them that were used to circumvent the law"  You know this for a fact or did you just read it somewhere, just a question.

 

Anonymous wrote:

---

I can't believe it has been nine years since the miinimum wage was increased. Are you sure this is correct? I thought Bush got that increased last year.

---

The only thing Bush has increased is the deficit. The minimum wage is $5.15 an hour, or $10,712 annually based on a 40-hour work week.

Here is the latest on our "More for the Rich, less for the average person" congress.

Democrats cry foul on minimum wage 'trick'

Failed bill for hourly wage hike was tied to estate tax cut

Saturday, August 5, 2006; Posted: 11:07 a.m. EDT (15:07 GMT) Saturday, August 5, 2006; Posted: 11:07 a.m. EDT (15:07 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A failed Republican attempt to tie an estate-tax cut to the first federal minimum wage increase in nearly a decade was "political blackmail" and the result of "cynical politics," Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colorado, said Saturday.

"Working Americans deserve a raise, but congressional Republicans keep giving them political tricks," Salazar said in the Democrats' weekly radio address. "We need a new direction for America, and a new Congress that works for our common good."

The Senate on Thursday rejected, 56-42, legislation that would have cut estate taxes and raised the hourly minimum wage to $7.25 from $5.15 over three years. Senators needed 60 votes to advance the bill, which passed the House last week.

Democrats, who generally supported increasing the minimum wage but opposed the cost of the bill's estate tax package, criticized Republicans for using the minimum wage to push a tax break for the wealthy.

Salazar said the bill was an example of tactics Republicans have used for the last six years.
"I came to Washington to focus on America's great challenges, but that has not been possible in the 'do-nothing Congress' we have today," he said.

"Washington Republicans have done little to address the real problems facing our country. And when they have taken action, the results have made America less safe, and the middle class of America has been forgotten."

As lawmakers headed home for the August recess -- many to campaign for the November elections -- Salazar argued that voters need to oust the Republican-controlled Congress.

Democrats are committed to improving national security and finding solutions to "shared challenges" by reducing reliance on foreign oil, raising the minimum wage and finding a solution to the broken health care system, Salazar said.

"Together, Democrats will change the current course of America and take our great nation in a new direction of peace, hope and prosperity," he said.

 

Anonymous wrote:

---

Democrats are committed to improving national security and finding solutions to "shared challenges" by reducing reliance on foreign oil,

MMMM---Clinton & Gore had 8 Years to do this, what happened? Did we all of a sudden become dependent on Foreign Oil 6.5 years ago when Bush took office.

---

Bush came into office and in 2001 slashed federal spending on energy efficiency and renewable energy by 40%. At the same time, he gave big oil billions in tax breaks.

You tell me.

The term "Conservative" seems to be taking quite a hit these days - Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Abramhoff, Delay, Cunningham, Libby, Rove, and now Mark Foley, the next candidate to buy the Neverland Ranch. It is a good thing that Foley is a Conservative - otherwise he would be a sinner. According to most Conservatives such as Ann Coulter, George Bush, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and FOX news (and a few high profile people around Corbin), conservatives are on the "Moral High Road" and don't screw around on their spouses, cheat their companies (or communities), don't hate or kill, and are not greedy, and because they "say" they are "Conservatives" they are on an unblocked road to heaven.

You know what they say about those that "talk the talk" but don't "walk the walk", or don't practice what they preach. I've learned that people of faith live it, they don't just blab it.

Ann Coulter's follow up book to "Godless Liberals" is due out soon and should be entitled "Hypocritical, Blasphemous Conservatives".