Icon I agree with the first half of your statement but there's something about the second half that once
G
Green Mtn (view)

again makes me a bit uneasy. I'd bet money you would support force feeding mass transit on the population. Among other things that the especially enlightened thought were for our own good. And thus justified despite the Constitution.

> Well I think it's pretty ridiculous that we're fighting over ever-scarcer, ever more expensive fossil fuels (and making the OPEC nations richer in the process) so that some suburban housefrau can drive a quasi-military vehicle to the mini-mart for cigarettes and tampons. Well I think it's pretty ridiculous that we're fighting over ever-scarcer, ever more expensive fossil fuels (and making the OPEC nations richer in the process) so that some suburban housefrau can drive a quasi-military vehicle to the mini-mart for cigarettes and tampons. Well I think it's pretty ridiculous that we're fighting over ever-scarcer, ever more expensive fossil fuels (and making the OPEC nations richer in the process) so that some suburban housefrau can drive a quasi-military vehicle to the mini-mart for cigarettes and tampons.

Nonetheless, even though it's entirely impractical short of what I accuse you of, I believe our nation should be energy sufficient by now. 30 years should have been enough to get us somewhere near there. But once again I come back to the notion that the oligarchy that runs this nation didn't want that or it would be.

The war is stupid. Apart from politics and of course Jesus, we'd probably find each other quite agreeable. Sorry if it seem like I was sniping.
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
[login] | [register]

you need to be logged in to post and reply to message board posts