Her Democrat buddies just voted against building new refineries in the U.S.. That is a national security issue. Currently the U.S. has to import gasoline because there are not enough refineries.
And, in 2006 they voted against the "House refinery revitalization bill" (HR 5254)
"Nor are American companies allowed to build refineries. Twelve years ago, President Clinton vetoed a bill that would have opened oil drilling at home ..."
Environmental lobby keeps us mired in oil crisis
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071124/OPINION01/711240393/-1/LOCAL17
2007-11-24 19:46:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by a bush family member 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
She didn't promise the plan would work, only that they have one they'll institute. Stupid joke.
I think she overpromised a lot. She thought that the Republicans losing Congress would be enough to convince George Bush he has lost the support of the American people and that he would be scared into allowing the Democrats to do something. George Bush didn't pick it up, however. He still has not put together he is rather hated.
But it seems to have worked in his favor. Congress is even more hated than he is, mostly because they have done almost nothing of note. George Bush is the main problem, with his veto; so it isn't really the fault of the Democrats. But that is a fairly moot discussion, because image matters much more in politics than actual reality. Everyone sees this as the fault of the Congress and blames them.
2007-11-24 19:45:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
confident, thousands and thousands in subsidies have been allotted to help farmers who suffered losses by using climate, and to help with the Katrina alleviation and rebuilding attempt. in simple terms as comparable quantities have been spent on comparable tasks a 0.5-dozen cases a 300 and sixty 5 days through each and every Congress for the previous quite a few many years. you're able to examine Article I area 8 of the form, which additionally supplies Congress: # 11. To declare conflict, supply letters of marque and reprisal, and make policies concerning captures on land and water: # 12. to advance and help armies, yet no appropriation of funds to that use would be for a protracted-term than 2 years: # 13. to supply and look after a army: # 14. To make policies for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces: So, Congress making policies and rules for the way the defense force could be equipped, and how long they may be deployed distant places, is easily interior of their Constitutional authority. because it is been because nicely in the previous WW1. Micro-administration is telling guy or woman unit commanders the thank you to achive their tactical targets. administration is telling the generals what their targets are and what techniques to pursue. Congress isn't doing the two of those. they are in simple terms asserting that in spite of Bush needs to do, the troops could be abode no later than 2008. and that they are allowed to do.
2016-10-18 01:30:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Erika 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
She lied, since when do politicians get to set gas prices?
The only politician that can set gas prices is the simultaneously omnipotent and idiotic George w Bush.
She had to know the chicken in every pot promises she made was a lie, either that or she is the moron that most of the Presidents opponents make him out to be.
2007-11-24 19:46:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Definitely over promised. They may be working on it, but if it's not in line with GW Bush's interests, it will not pass. Unfortunately even though there are more Dems in Congress, they still need some support from Repubs to get anything done. GW will not sign anything. He's being a jerk right now. He's sitting back laughing, making jokes about the "Bully Pulpit" and really not caring about the American people. I guess he knows we're a resilient people and we can last another 13 months of his crazy reign.
We will survive!!!
2007-11-24 19:47:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by alurt_rekoob 4
·
2⤊
3⤋
As usual, the Democraps are caught in thier own BS. Pelosi can't deliver, the president is using his Constitutional powers to prevent absurd left wing policies being perpetrated, and the whole of Congress is made to look stupid {justly deserved} !
The Japanese have a tradition called harikiri...Pelosi and her ilk should be encouraged to adopt it just to save face...and the country would be better off !
2007-11-24 19:57:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by commanderbuck383 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
She's worthless. I can count on one hand the decent people in all of congress. So she fits right in.
but... she wasn't the one running around in 2002-2003 screaming, "Saddam tried to buy uranium from Africa!"
That was the losercons Chevron Rice, Harken Bush, Halliburton Cheney... you know the crew.
2007-11-24 19:48:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by doug4jets 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
She may have had a plan, but it might have gotten shot down in Congress...unless you watch C-Span every hour of every day, there's no real way to know everything that goes through. Who knows.
2007-11-24 19:48:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by Lauren 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
Actually you could do both
You see...you can promise and know you are going to lie.
Nancy Pelosi...has been a big disappointment.
2007-11-24 21:31:15
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Promise or lie? Both -- she is a politician and that seems to be the only thing they do well.
2007-11-24 19:42:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by DaveNCUSA 7
·
5⤊
0⤋