Perhaps because they just passed this...?

Now man up and answer the question: why should Bush veto this bill?

__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas

Did i say they have anything in common? But i can see why you would make the comparison, with them being two of the greatest leaders we've ever had.

The prospect of Clinton being eaten after death is only more pleasureable at the prospect of him being eaten alive.

As for being comprable with Jesus...well err Clinton did marry satan so i don't think you're quite on the mark there.

So they help pass a big oil bill that goes into law...which you think means that they're not in the pocket of big oil because later they help pass a bill that gets veto'd and not signed into law. So their incompetance and inability to get a bill into law now makes up for their being in the pocket of big oil then?

What?? Where did i say it "should" get veto'd? All i said is it will and that's because of what WH press secratary Tony Snow said.

So you are of the opinion that it should not be vetoed?

__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas

Don't know enough about it yet, i'll see what ammendments are added and what other pork is slapped in and look through the whole bill after that. I'll probably not like most of it.

No wiggling. The current version, as it looks right now, prior to the senate getting its filthy paws on it. Should it be vetoed?

__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas

The question is, Will Bush veto the bill because he is against taxing the outrageous profits of Big Oil, or will he veto it because he is against Clean Energy, and which reason will cause more people to vote Democratic in 2008?

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

I don't mind getting rid of the tax breaks for the oil companies; let them go offshore which works out best for everyone.

I am appossed to forcing U.S. companies to have 15% or so of their energy come from renewable sources, that's totally ridiculous!

The other side of the coin here is the amount of money the federal government brings in because of energy consumption.

The federal gasoline tax produced around 40 Billion dollars in 2004.

The federal government actually has a vested interested in keeping energy consumption up.

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

Uh huh so taking away the tax breaks and letting the companies go offshore would all but cripple the energy industry un the U.S.

Fossil fuel technology is a mature industry. Investing in renewable energy sources can also help produce newer technologies and enabling more modern economic development.

I doubt this nonsense is gonna pass the Senate. If it does Bush will veto.

So Bush didn't veto the previous pork addled bills because of sheer laziness? Gotcha. Yet he's more than happy to veto other bills because there is pork in them.

I expected you to be comfortable with such hypocrisy.

__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

Can you read? I said he didn't veto the previous bills because he didn't have the votes to sustain the veto. Where's the correlation to lazyness?