On 12/20/2011 11:26 AM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On 12/20/2011 10:00 AM, Ernie wrote:
PUH-LEEZE don't use ANYTHING Bush did as any argument "in-favor." I
could list you MANY reasons if freedom of speech existed anymore.

Only reason I mentioned Bush is that many people here have been blaming
the "CFL law" on Obama, patently un-true. Just wanted to place credit
(or blame) where it is due -- on W.

If you are even able to see that much of a difference on your electric
bill YOU ARE LEAVING TOO DAMN MANY LIGHTS ON in your house. Why don't
you turn a light off when you leave the room?

First of all, I DO turn off lights when I leave the room. And the bottom
line is that CFLs use ONE QUARTER of the power that incandescent uses.
So, no matter how many or how few lights you use or turn off, your
lighting bill will STILL be one quarter.

You get the leaders talking out of both sides of their mouths about
"going green" to cut down on THEIR OWN usage and then we'll debate.

Huh? What's to "debate"? Why should what a "leader's" electric bill is
have anything at all to do with ME using one fourth of the electricity
on MY bill.

Congratulations! You're still doing a fine job of dodging and tap
dancing -- but still avoiding the undisputable fact that, for the same
light output, CFLs use ONE FOURTH the electricity (no matter what anyone
else does) and puts one fourth of the mercury into the air at the power
plant.

Any of them proposing, passing or supporting illegal laws such as the
one on incandescent lighting should face a firing squad ... that is not
their jobs. They are public servants of the people ... from the
president right on down to your local dog catcher ...

Regards,
JS