Instead of cars.
2007-03-24 13:20:44 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
you mean the same ones that prevented us from drilling in alaska because it would "scare" the polar bears and penguins? and the same ones who gave away the panama canal?
too many of them ride bikes as it is! they actually take up whole lanes and some even have wussy little blinkers on their bikes!...if they start riding horses, it'll be alot harder to clean my windshield :\
edit : are the bleeding heart liberals going to continue to pretend to care "so deeply" about the average joe while nancy polosi and her flying monkies continue to line their pockets? (yes, she did give her and her fellow liberal house members a nice little bonus...oh! and also demanded to have her own "air force one-type" plane, because she's second after the president...someone failed 1st grade social studies...) oh! i think the libs also forgot that...oh i dont know...we didnt start this war!
and before the whole "oh you rich conservative @#^@#^@" stereotype gets thrown in the air , i've been working since i was 13, i'm 20 now.
2007-03-24 13:26:08 · answer #1 · answered by Lucky Furby 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No, because they think they can do that because they're doing all the stuff they criticize because it's for "the greater good".
I try to live more healthy lifestyle, but leftists approach the topic very irrationally. There's not really any good alternatives to gas-run cars right now, but that doesn't mean life has to stand still until then.
Ethanol is not better than gas; in ways, it's worse. Plus, most cars aren't built to run on it. We got rid leaded gas, which was step up, but it totally changed the infrastructure of vehicles' bodies, making them weaker against impact accidents.
I'll invest in something when it's NOT there merely to monger fear in the populace.
2007-03-24 20:32:58 · answer #2 · answered by Jennifer Z 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only if the Anti-Smokers will Quit using all the generated revenue for infrastructure
2007-03-30 18:55:54 · answer #3 · answered by tarakootenay 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Right on Mr. Bello- They (Gore) use more energy to fuel his
MANSION in a week then we do in a year. But don' t forget
to make up for this, he drove a dweeb car to the Oscars! HA!
2007-04-01 15:43:03 · answer #4 · answered by war~horse 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No that would be counterproductive but we can reduce our use of them. We'll be forced to anyway as the prices will just keep rising.
2007-03-31 14:51:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, back to the good old days, are you looking for a job tending my garden, it comes with free room and board.
2007-03-25 05:29:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's actually ironic that it's people like you who live in the past..
2007-03-31 13:22:29 · answer #7 · answered by Basil 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Are the boarderline retarded conservatives going to continue to sacrifice the lives of US servicemen in order to ensure a steady oil supply?
2007-03-24 20:26:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
no,but they would have all of us doing just that while they sit in their perches(or 28,000 sq ft mansions)and live their do as we say not as we do doctrine!!!!(Al Gore,John Edwards)
2007-03-24 20:47:03 · answer #9 · answered by Mr Bellows 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
GREAT!!!!!! I'd like to see that.....BUT.......is it nuturing? or served on a silver platter? I don't know.....no platter? no deal...LOL!
2007-03-30 14:10:41 · answer #10 · answered by carol c 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋