I found this quite interesting. Always gotta love when the government tells us what we can and cannot do

No votes yet

He voted against,

"The U.S. Congress Votes Database
110th Congress / Bills / H R 6

To reduce our Nation's dependency on foreign oil by investing in clean, renewable, and alternative energy resources, promoting new emerging energy technologies, developing greater efficiency, and creating a Strategic Energy Efficiency and Renewables Reserve to invest in alternative energy, and for other purposes."

But he voted for,

The Bush administration said this bill's $14.5 billion in tax breaks and incentives would spur oil and gas companies to find innovative ways to reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil, conserve resources and reduce pollution. Supporters also said the bill would lead to the creation of more oil refineries, new oil drilling projects and new nuclear power plants -- arguing that all were necessary to meet the nation's energy needs and reduce importation of foreign oil.

Personally I am looking forward to the day, when halogen or LED lighting costs are lowered. LED lighting fixtures would last for decades.

Oratorial skill....Nice ending...Although weak on creativity...
I mean, anti-american non-energy bill? I third grader could come up witha better insult...

If I were one of his constituents, I'd begin to lead a campaign on whoever opposes him in the next election (although, my hunch is that his lobbyists are involved in the burgeoning oil/gas reclamation from formerly unviable areas in Texas). Seriously, we pay him to steal five minutes of the House's time, and pay him how much money for that drivel? CFLs may not be the long-term answer, but apparently digging deeper into coal and natural gas is? His lil' ditty makes me want to choke down my lucky charms...

While you researched his voting record, did you research the facts he pointed out in the clip?

What facts, did he point?

The Constitution says nothing about a lot of things, I guess that is the point.

It doesn't say anything about health insurance and retirement for elected officials of all parties.

It doesn't say any thing about a GI Bill or retirement for people in the Armed Forces, nor does it mention an Air Force.

It also doesn't mention clean water or air.

It does say that the Congress has the duty to enact legislation, which is what I thought Congress was doing, enacting legislation.

Why would our current day Presidential contenders be promoting nuclear energy and the expenditure of 300+ million dollars on research to be done by the private sector with our tax money, if the constitution did not give the President and Congress the right to legislate and put forth laws and regulations on our behalf.

Is there any thing in the Constitution that says that our tax monies can be used for research into energy alternatives?

While you researched his voting record, did you research the facts he pointed out in the clip?
Why deal with facts? Don't you know that anything a Republican says is automatically dismissed by libs?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.