Obama is doing ......
Started by AstroMart, 04/07/2018 10:51PM
Posted 02/23/2009 10:44PM
Opening Post
Posted 02/24/2009 01:05AM
| Edited 02/24/2009 01:07AM
#1
Actually, this guy is better than I thought.
In the warm up act, he got away with telling the American public we could avert dependance on foreign oil by inflating our tires and getting regular tune-ups. I never did see the the factual basis for that claim.
Now, in Act 1, he's promoted passage of a monsterous government spending package claiming that we are facing the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, and that failure to pass it could be "catastrophic" for the future of America. Once again. no basis in fact. We aren't anywhere near "Great Depression" unemployment or homeless figures.
And yet no one dares question his motives? The agenda is clear...promote dependence on big government at all costs.
In the warm up act, he got away with telling the American public we could avert dependance on foreign oil by inflating our tires and getting regular tune-ups. I never did see the the factual basis for that claim.
Now, in Act 1, he's promoted passage of a monsterous government spending package claiming that we are facing the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, and that failure to pass it could be "catastrophic" for the future of America. Once again. no basis in fact. We aren't anywhere near "Great Depression" unemployment or homeless figures.
And yet no one dares question his motives? The agenda is clear...promote dependence on big government at all costs.
Posted 02/24/2009 01:31AM
#2
Bob:
Not to get bogged down in semantics, but Obama said we could "reduce" our dependence by proper inflation of tires and tune ups. You don't have to be a physicist to know that is true. Also, the original meeting at the White House, with members of congress present, where the imminent collapse of the economic system was presented, was during the waning days of the Bush administration.
George
Not to get bogged down in semantics, but Obama said we could "reduce" our dependence by proper inflation of tires and tune ups. You don't have to be a physicist to know that is true. Also, the original meeting at the White House, with members of congress present, where the imminent collapse of the economic system was presented, was during the waning days of the Bush administration.
George
Posted 02/24/2009 01:43AM
#4
He never said we could avert oil dependence by inflating our tires...only a moron would try and say that he did. What he did say was that one way to lesson our oil usage is to inflate our tires by a couple of pounds. And being an engineer, I can tell you that it is an irrefutable fact that you can increase gas milage by a mile or two to the gallon by increasing the tire preasure a couple of pounds. Your car will run a bit rougher but it will be more efficient.
You really make yourself look stupid when you make these kinds of statements. But the fact that you are trying to detract from what decent people who care about reducing our dependence on foreign oil are trying to accomplish simply points out what kind of a person you really are.
You really make yourself look stupid when you make these kinds of statements. But the fact that you are trying to detract from what decent people who care about reducing our dependence on foreign oil are trying to accomplish simply points out what kind of a person you really are.
Posted 02/24/2009 01:53AM
| Edited 02/24/2009 02:00AM
#5
Thank you for your observation, Lynden. I obviously disagree with your evaluation of my intellectual status as a moron. Furthermore, I was not insinuating that the the measures Mr. Obama suggested would indeed reduce overall fuel consumption. Please see my previous post in reply which adds additional information regarding the context of Mr. Obama's claim with regard to the capacity available from the North Slope.
A final note. My dad used to have a sign above his work bench. It read "I always wanted to be an injuneer. Now I are one." Did he get that sign from you?
A final note. My dad used to have a sign above his work bench. It read "I always wanted to be an injuneer. Now I are one." Did he get that sign from you?
Posted 02/24/2009 02:15AM
| Edited 02/24/2009 02:24AM
#6
Bob:
To be candid, I don't recall the statement as you wrote it. When it comes to calculating things like the way you presented the statement, there is a lot of guesswork involved in coming up with numbers to support any position. We don't really know for certain how much oil and when it would come. On the other hand it is difficult to know how many vehicles could benefit and by how much. This is admittedly anecdotal, but most of the people I know, do not check the air pressure in their tires. I check mine once a month and know for certain I gain or lose 2 to 3 miles a gallon over a 4 psi range depending on the ambient temperature and type of driving I do. That comes out to about 3% to 4%, which is to me significant.
George
To be candid, I don't recall the statement as you wrote it. When it comes to calculating things like the way you presented the statement, there is a lot of guesswork involved in coming up with numbers to support any position. We don't really know for certain how much oil and when it would come. On the other hand it is difficult to know how many vehicles could benefit and by how much. This is admittedly anecdotal, but most of the people I know, do not check the air pressure in their tires. I check mine once a month and know for certain I gain or lose 2 to 3 miles a gallon over a 4 psi range depending on the ambient temperature and type of driving I do. That comes out to about 3% to 4%, which is to me significant.
George
Posted 02/24/2009 03:36AM
#7
Only a moron would advocate to over inflate his tires and put not only his safety in jeopardy, but others who might be in the way when your tire fails. Under inflating also causes tires to fail. So we're supposed to disregard public safety to save a measly 1 or maybe 2 mpg? Then have the tow truck, ambulances, fire trucks, police cruisers, etc., come out to save your but, and the bystander you mowed over and use their 5 or 6 mpg vehicles to do what? Waste more fuel because a moron told another moron to over inflate their tires? Boy, that's looking ahead.. Why do you think the tire pressure on the sides of the tires? Just for looks or what? Idiots...
Posted 02/24/2009 03:38AM
| Edited 02/24/2009 03:40AM
#8
Just to footnote my message, (and refute my newly aquired moron status; q.v. additional threads), I did some homework. Here is the quote verbatim, August 1 speech in Springfield, MO:
"There are things you can do individually, though, to save energy. ... Making sure your tires are properly inflated - simple thing. But we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling - if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You'd actually save just as much." - Aug. 1 speech in Springfield, Mo.
I beleive that using that kind of hyperbole without a clear factual basis is irresponsible. Perhaps had Mr. Obama stated that a 3-4% reduction in consumption is possible by these measures accorting to the Automobile Dealers Association or some such reputable source, and then reported that the gain from the North Slope would be about 5% according to the DOE, I would accept his "opinion". My main point however is that there was no clear factual basis for his prior statement, and the same is true of the recent claims of impending catastophe and the severity of the current economic downturn. IMHO, these are political ploys that, like the claim of replacing the North Slope, are planted to propegate the self fulfilling prophecy of the recession we are facing. As the White House and media report these sensational claims, the general public (i.e. morons) become scared and artifcially reduce consumption. The reduced consumption in turn shows up in a receding economy and reinforces the political agenda.
I simply believe the Obama administration knows it can benefit from a deeper recession brought about by their alarmist statements. They will then claim an even larger victory in the inevitible recovery, a recovery that will eventually occur due to the laws of supply and demand. It does not need the government to assume control of our banks and businesses in the process. But that is what we see happening before our eyes.
It is that of which we should be afraid. I fear that is a fundamental change to our society which, to borrow a phrase, may be catastrophic.
Why can't we hear more about what we can be doing, and less about "the crisis"? I just belive an ounce of encouragement might go a little further than a pound of fear. I suspect that the reason is that encouragement does less to promote the political aganda. That's all.
"There are things you can do individually, though, to save energy. ... Making sure your tires are properly inflated - simple thing. But we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling - if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You'd actually save just as much." - Aug. 1 speech in Springfield, Mo.
I beleive that using that kind of hyperbole without a clear factual basis is irresponsible. Perhaps had Mr. Obama stated that a 3-4% reduction in consumption is possible by these measures accorting to the Automobile Dealers Association or some such reputable source, and then reported that the gain from the North Slope would be about 5% according to the DOE, I would accept his "opinion". My main point however is that there was no clear factual basis for his prior statement, and the same is true of the recent claims of impending catastophe and the severity of the current economic downturn. IMHO, these are political ploys that, like the claim of replacing the North Slope, are planted to propegate the self fulfilling prophecy of the recession we are facing. As the White House and media report these sensational claims, the general public (i.e. morons) become scared and artifcially reduce consumption. The reduced consumption in turn shows up in a receding economy and reinforces the political agenda.
I simply believe the Obama administration knows it can benefit from a deeper recession brought about by their alarmist statements. They will then claim an even larger victory in the inevitible recovery, a recovery that will eventually occur due to the laws of supply and demand. It does not need the government to assume control of our banks and businesses in the process. But that is what we see happening before our eyes.
It is that of which we should be afraid. I fear that is a fundamental change to our society which, to borrow a phrase, may be catastrophic.
Why can't we hear more about what we can be doing, and less about "the crisis"? I just belive an ounce of encouragement might go a little further than a pound of fear. I suspect that the reason is that encouragement does less to promote the political aganda. That's all.
Funding Member
