First, they came for our 100-watt bulbs

By CLAUDIA ROSETT
Last Updated: 3:38 AM, December 1, 2011
Posted: 10:26 PM, November 30, 2011

Include me among those crazed Americans who can’t walk into Home Depot, Target or my local grocery store right now without wanting to grab a king-sized shopping cart and stuff it to the gunwales with 100-watt incandescent light bulbs."................

"If our leaders in Washington are serious about saving us all from our self-imposed energy inefficiencies, they’re shirking their duties if they limit themselves to banning the light bulbs that most Americans prefer. They should be banning morning coffee and toast. Water and bread would be more energy-efficient.

There should be soup police — no, make that kitchen police — to ensure that no one spends too much energy heating up food that’s already been cooked. There should be federal laws to minimize energy-guzzling travel for such frivolous individual purposes as seeing friends or visiting family."

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/op ... P8n9UO152I

And now hes gonna make you eat horse meat, and soon fishing, apple pie and baseball will be outlawed

I'm so scared!

Vice Lord wrote: And now hes gonna make you eat horse meat, and soon fishing, apple pie and baseball will be outlawed

I'm so scared!

Sad that a independent guy like you wants to see an increase in the nanny state.

One more reason to overthrow Obama and Reid. Bringing freedom back!

You mean that bill signed into law by George W Bush in December, 2007? Yes I remember that. That was pretty outrageous, wasn't it...

He should have been booted out of office... Oh, wait, he was...

LadyJazzer wrote: You mean that bill signed into law by George W Bush in December, 2007? Yes I remember that. That was pretty outrageous, wasn't it...

He should have been booted out of office... Oh, wait, he was...

Uh No, he wasn't. He served two terms and was done.
But back to the topic, low watt lightbulbs

I know he was... But it just felt good to say it... If you want to get back to the topic of light bulbs you can quit deflecting from the fact that it was BUSH that signed it into law. Too much to ask I know.

Oh wait... It was probably those mean old' Dems that held a gun to his head and made him sign it. Yeah, that's it...he was forced...

LadyJazzer wrote: You mean that bill signed into law by George W Bush in December, 2007? Yes I remember that. That was pretty outrageous, wasn't it...

He should have been booted out of office... Oh, wait, he was...

Deflectors on Maximum, Scotty!

<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href=" 285bound.com/Forums/search.php?keywords=...00&t=0&submit=Search " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">search.php?keywords=deflectors&terms=all&author=LadyJazzer&sc=1&sf=all&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search<!-- l -->

rofllol

LadyJazzer wrote: I know he was... But it just felt good to say it... If you want to get back to the topic of light bulbs you can quit deflecting from the fact that it was BUSH that signed it into law. Too much to ask I know.

Oh wait... It was probably those mean old' Dems that held a gun to his head and made him sign it. Yeah, that's it...he was forced...

Are you referring to the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007? I also assume that you understand that legislative procedures within a written bill contains more than just one line item and the legislative body can pass a bill without the need for a signature from the executvie office, right?

Icandascent technology is not going away and there is no ban, at least according to the EIA (Energy Information Administration). This should, at the end, come down to demand, supply, manufacturing and the public. For me it is still a "wait and see" and will not be fully realized until the end of 2014. Will it be good from an ideological perspective concerning our energy policies? Or that realistically it will only serve special interest? Regardless the bill does have many other line items that should benefit the public and it did have great support from both the house and senate which included both major sides of the legislative body.

LadyJazzer wrote: You mean that bill signed into law by George W Bush in December, 2007? Yes I remember that. That was pretty outrageous, wasn't it...

He should have been booted out of office... Oh, wait, he was...

There you go... making s**te up again. I've never seen a more public lier than you are... oh wait... I listened to Obama's weekly address this morning... he wins. You know how stupid you sound?

Y'know...I don't care if it's not going away or not. I'm not the one that got hysterical and tried to blame Obama for a bill that was passed before he was president...

But perhaps you can also blame him for your ingrown toenails, while you're at it...