Beware of Chrysler vehicles

[BJJ-Blue]

"Dozens of autoworkers in Detroit were caught on camera drinking beer and smoking marijuana before heading to work at the Chrysler plant that President Obama praised in a speech just two months ago.

An exclusive investigation by MyFoxDetroit showed workers at Chrysler's Jefferson North Assembly Plant in Detroit, Mich., drinking beer and smoking joints while on a half-hour lunch break at a nearby park.

The investigation -- conducted over several weeks and based on tips from workers at the plant -- outraged the auto giant's top executives who reportedly called the behavior "totally unacceptable.""

Full article w/video:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/09/23/chrysler-auto-workers-caught-camera-drinking-beer-smoking-pot-lunch-break/?test=latestnews

I actually considered buying a Dodge Challenger last year, but I read that they have alot of problems with build quality. I think I now know why.

[Drake]

You'd be naive to think this isn't going on elsewhere. America has lost its work discipline, and developed a sense of entitlement. India and China, however, are working hard and being socially responsible when it comes to their economic prosperity as a whole.

Why they turned this into an anti-Obama story is beyond me. Unless, of course, they think he should check up on what appears to be a very small section of plant workers.

The American worker is the problem, not Obama. If you have a job, work at it.


Another thing that seems odd. I have worked in manufacturing, and there are mandatory drug tests. Something doesn't smell right here.

[Syn7]

Why they turned this into an anti-Obama story is beyond me.

its fox news, thats why... everything is an obama issue in that house...


also in india, they have some SERIOUS SERIOUS quality control issues aswell as a workforce of whom the majority is, for PC reasons lets say alot more relaxed in their work standards all around... i never thought much about it until an indian friend of mine pointed out that indias major problem with their workforce is a lack of extra effort negligence as far as safety and quality is concerned...

i know its a little old now, but the Bhopal disaster is a great example... like four safety backups failed or werent in place for whatever reason(cheap lazy) and half the town died or was very very ill from the resulting gas leak...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_tragedy


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/Bhopal-Union_Carbide_1_crop_memorial.jpg/290px-Bhopal-Union_Carbide_1_crop_memorial.jpg

Factors leading to the magnitude of the gas leak include:

Storing MIC in large tanks and filling beyond recommended levels
~ Poor maintenance after the plant ceased MIC production at the end of 1984
~ Failure of several safety systems (due to poor maintenance)
~ Safety systems being switched off to save money—including the MIC tank refrigeration system which could have mitigated the disaster severity
~ The problem was made worse by the mushrooming of slums in the vicinity of the plant, non-existent catastrophe plans, and shortcomings in health care and socio-economic rehabilitation



SO SAD... so unecessary... so negligent... these things are common in societies where there is a 0.2% wealthy ruling regime and a 99.8% disgustingly poor, uneducated and severely underfunded polulace... alot of them litterally live in sh!t... dudes will squat on the side of the road in public and drop a duece... its brutal in the more rural areas and smaller towns...


sorry for the highjacking... but its relevant in the whole outsourcing argument... it seems that if the bigwigs have their way then soon most jobs will be in places like india... from auto worker to telemarketer... if it werent for union contracts i bet it would already be that way...

[YouKnowWho]

Anti autoworkers in Detroit -> Anti-American -> Tea party members attitude.

[Syn7]

Anti autoworkers in Detroit -> Anti-American -> Tea party members attitude.

it means you hate america!!! maybe even a terrorist sympathizer... better put you on the no fly and watch lists... just incase...

[BJJ-Blue]

Why they turned this into an anti-Obama story is beyond me. Unless, of course, they think he should check up on what appears to be a very small section of plant workers.

I admit the story brought Obama into it a bit much. But it did have the responsibility to remind us that those very workers were bailed out by the US taxpayers.


Another thing that seems odd. I have worked in manufacturing, and there are mandatory drug tests. Something doesn't smell right here.

They are union workers.

[BJJ-Blue]

Syn,

Something the pro-regulation crowd needs to accept is that if they keep overregulating here in the US, more jobs will offshore themselves to India or China where there are pretty much zero regulations. So the pro-regulation people are actually shooting themselves in the foot by demanding more and more regulations here in the US.

[Syn7]

Syn,

Something the pro-regulation crowd needs to accept is that if they keep overregulating here in the US, more jobs will offshore themselves to India or China where there are pretty much zero regulations. So the pro-regulation people are actually shooting themselves in the foot by demanding more and more regulations here in the US.

ok but heres the problem... if you completely deregulate, companies will take advantage, pay less, create less quality and safety standards go down... if we let that happen to compete with other nations who underbid us because they scrimp on safety and quality we find ourselves spiralling into a big mess that runs contrary to everything our founding fathers in north america stood for and wanted to create for us and our future children...

so do we A: not allow outsourcing or B: recognize we have a global community now and put all our collective resources together in a bid to get the nations with less quaility and safety standrds up to par with everyone at the forefront of these things???


i say both... heres why... we do a bit of A in order to buy time to do plan B... it wont be easy but i dont see us having any other choice??? a global community means we are gonna have to spread the wealth better in order to create a well oiled global machine... but there are major hurdles... over-population being number one on that list... in places like china and india the population is too large to do much about these problems... almost all the worlds major problems can be traced back to overpopulation... overconsumption of non renewable or long time renewable resources and an economy driven by todays dollar value and not quality and an overall well balanced future for everyone...

its tough... its hard to get into this too deep on a forum like this... i'll stop here and expand any of this at anyones request... im sure as time goes by i'll think of add ons and side notes galore... but thats it for now:D

retards!!!!!!!!!!!:mad:

j/k

[Drake]

The only way you'll outcompete sweatshops is by either making your own, or doing the right thing, and refusing to trade with any nation that allows such things to exist.

[BJJ-Blue]

Good points Syn, except for this part:


a global community means we are gonna have to spread the wealth better in order to create a well oiled global machine...

Socialism has failed every time it's been tried, and so I feel introducing it will just make the problem(s) worse.

[BJJ-Blue]

The only way you'll outcompete sweatshops is by either making your own, or doing the right thing, and refusing to trade with any nation that allows such things to exist.

We also have the 3rd choice, consumers making their voices heard with their wallets. I myself look for the Made in the USA label and always buy American made over Chinese made when there is a choice. For example, we spend alot of time outdoors during the summer months. We buy Igloo products over Coleman products because Igloo products are made here, while Coleman products are Chinese made. I've also stopped shopping at Wal-Mart and shop at other stores instead, especially local businesses. Even if it costs a few dollars more, I do try and do my part to help American industry and workers.

[Syn7]

Good points Syn, except for this part:



Socialism has failed every time it's been tried, and so I feel introducing it will just make the problem(s) worse.

the trick is to find the right combination of socialist ideals and capitalist ideals... both systems fail in the most extreme forms...


even a library is a socialist ideal... dont throw the baby out with the bathwater... we need to find the right combos for the times and we need to create a system that alows us to easilly change with the times and change that combination and balance as is needed, as is dictated by the current state of affairs and reasonable future projections...

[Drake]

We also have the 3rd choice, consumers making their voices heard with their wallets. I myself look for the Made in the USA label and always buy American made over Chinese made when there is a choice. For example, we spend alot of time outdoors during the summer months. We buy Igloo products over Coleman products because Igloo products are made here, while Coleman products are Chinese made. I've also stopped shopping at Wal-Mart and shop at other stores instead, especially local businesses. Even if it costs a few dollars more, I do try and do my part to help American industry and workers.

Yeah, we saw how THAT worked.

[sanjuro_ronin]

We need more CHARACTER and less selfish wants.
We need to stop blaming globolization and "slave labour" for the fact that many people gets paid far too much to do far too little because they cost of living is artificially, far too high.

You can whine about reality all you want, it won't stop it from being any less real.

[BJJ-Blue]

Yeah, we saw how THAT worked.

Can you please expand on that? I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

[Drake]

Can you please expand on that? I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

Americans buy cheap, and most don't care or even bother checking where it came from.

[BJJ-Blue]

the trick is to find the right combination of socialist ideals and capitalist ideals... both systems fail in the most extreme forms...

True. But to me socialism is worse if you are FORCED to choose. As I've said before; if faced with big government or big business, go with big business. Big business never threw people in gas chambers, while big government has.

Knowing you need the right combination and that extremes are bad, how do you feel about the system now? I myself feel it's way too tilted toward socialism IMO, we are in a recession right now that started because we tried to 'spread the home ownership around' to people who quite honestly could not afford to own them. And when the whole house of cards came crashing down, millions of hard working, fiscally responsible Americans have suffered as a result, and through no fault of their own.

[Syn7]

True. But to me socialism is worse if you are FORCED to choose. As I've said before; if faced with big government or big business, go with big business. Big business never threw people in gas chambers, while big government has.



oh i soooo disagree...
i submit that big biz has committed countless attrocities throughout history in order to profit...

[BJJ-Blue]

Americans buy cheap, and most don't care or even bother checking where it came from.

But if we all took the extra effort, it would really help this country and it's workers. Face it, we've been buying (and voting) for too long without really thinking.

And in the 80s the Buy American campaign did make a big difference. But it takes some effort to make that difference. People have gave their lives for this country. Asking people to look for a label and maybe pay a little more for the greater good is not some monumental sacrifice.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I've seen a few bumber stickers with that silliness, " Out of a job yet? Keep buying foreign".
I don't think must people truly understand HOW MUCH foreign good they do buy and that made in america means more like assembled in america or labeled in america.

[BJJ-Blue]

oh i soooo disagree...
i submit that big biz has committed countless attrocities throughout history in order to profit...

Come on Syn, be honest here. You can't compare big businesses evils vs the evils of Government throughout history. How many people did Mao murder? Hitler? Stalin? Pol Pot? Castro? I'm not giving big business a free pass here, but let's keep it in perspective.

[BJJ-Blue]

"Thirteen plant workers at the Chrysler Jefferson North Assembly plant in Detroit have lost their jobs after a video showing some of them drinking during their lunch break was aired on the Detroit Fox affiliate.

"It has been determined that 13 employees engaged in behavior that violated the company's Standards of Conduct and these 13 employees were discharged today," the company said in a written statement, MyFoxDetroit.com reported. "Two remaining employees will receive a one month disciplinary layoff without pay.""

Complete article:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,601545,00.html

[Syn7]

Come on Syn, be honest here. You can't compare big businesses evils vs the evils of Government throughout history. How many people did Mao murder? Hitler? Stalin? Pol Pot? Castro? I'm not giving big business a free pass here, but let's keep it in perspective.

yeah it botherss me that you put castro on the same list as hitler... thats right offensive...

you show me one thing he's done that is so bad... and back it up... cia docs and other US gov. rhettoric isnt proof... so show me what he's done that was so bad....???



companies do horrible things everyday... we cant realistically have this convo in a web forum, so i'll just let it go... a kingdom or government is just a giant corporation... usually run by the people who own the most...

[Syn7]

"Thirteen plant workers at the Chrysler Jefferson North Assembly plant in Detroit have lost their jobs after a video showing some of them drinking during their lunch break was aired on the Detroit Fox affiliate.

"It has been determined that 13 employees engaged in behavior that violated the company's Standards of Conduct and these 13 employees were discharged today," the company said in a written statement, MyFoxDetroit.com reported. "Two remaining employees will receive a one month disciplinary layoff without pay.""

Complete article:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,601545,00.html

good... lazy and irresponsible union workers are a large part of those to blame for the crisis we see today... unrealistic pay for labour that people elsewhere do for pennies...

[sanjuro_ronin]

Well, Bjj-blue's clear bias against Castro aside, his point is valid.
Big business is in the business of making money and anything that goes against that is bad buisness.
Look at Microsoft, it was always the target because it was huge, a monoply, typical of all that is bad with big business, people said that all the time but with what proof?
None, Gates and company have always gone far beyond the norm to help even their competitiors, why?
Because it is GOOD business to be good.
Sure there are some major *******s like those Enron ****s, but those were individuals doing crap not "business".

[Drake]

Well, Bjj-blue's clear bias against Castro aside, his point is valid.
Big business is in the business of making money and anything that goes against that is bad buisness.
Look at Microsoft, it was always the target because it was huge, a monoply, typical of all that is bad with big business, people said that all the time but with what proof?
None, Gates and company have always gone far beyond the norm to help even their competitiors, why?
Because it is GOOD business to be good.
Sure there are some major *******s like those Enron ****s, but those were individuals doing crap not "business".

A lot of our anti-monopoly laws came about due to big oil and, later down the line, big telecoms not playing fair with their competitors. Running the smaller ones out of business, controlling markets to a point where fresh ideas were either absorbed or destroyed, etc etc.

Microsoft isn't innocent either. Remember the IE debacle? A lot of software developers floundered because MS already had a browser added to their OS. A low blow, if you ask me.

[sanjuro_ronin]

A lot of our anti-monopoly laws came about due to big oil and, later down the line, big telecoms not playing fair with their competitors. Running the smaller ones out of business, controlling markets to a point where fresh ideas were either absorbed or destroyed, etc etc.

Microsoft isn't innocent either. Remember the IE debacle? A lot of software developers floundered because MS already had a browser added to their OS. A low blow, if you ask me.

Saints? no, but evil? not even close.
Business can and are controlled by consumers and shareholders.
While some can, for a short period, try to manipulate and control the consumer, it doesn't last very long.
That said, regulations tend to be the needed because character is NOT a requirment for a CEO, LOL !

[Drake]

Saints? no, but evil? not even close.
Business can and are controlled by consumers and shareholders.
While some can, for a short period, try to manipulate and control the consumer, it doesn't last very long.
That said, regulations tend to be the needed because character is NOT a requirment for a CEO, LOL !

With all Bill Gates has donated to charity, I would never call him evil. However, monopoly laws are in place for a reason.

And for the record... I'm no fan of Castro, myself. A puppet for the USSR, if you ask me. And now he's alone, unless you count Venezuela.

[MasterKiller]

Business can and are controlled by consumers and shareholders..
No. Consumers are controlled by businesses and their shareholders.

[Drake]

No. Consumers are controlled by businesses and their shareholders.

You bought an iPad, didn't you? Admit it.

[sanjuro_ronin]

No. Consumers are controlled by businesses and their shareholders.

And an Iphone, right?
LOL !

[BJJ-Blue]

yeah it botherss me that you put castro on the same list as hitler... thats right offensive...

Why is it offensive to put one tyrant who murders inocent people in with another tyrant who did the same things?


you show me one thing he's done that is so bad... and back it up... cia docs and other US gov. rhettoric isnt proof... so show me what he's done that was so bad....???

LMAO at you trying to say you want sources but CIA and Gov't docs don't count. ok, how about eywitness accounts?

http://picard.montclair.edu/witness/LaCabana.html
http://www.cubaarchive.org/downloads/CA08.pdf
Anderson, Jon Lee. Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life, New York: 1997, Grove Press, p. 372 - p. 425


companies do horrible things everyday... we cant realistically have this convo in a web forum, so i'll just let it go... a kingdom or government is just a giant corporation... usually run by the people who own the most...

Get real. When you see big business running gas chambers, political prisons, ovens, digging mass graves, and executing their rivals, you be sure and post those examples. Until then, lets be rational here like Sanjuro and admit that there really is no comparison here.

[BJJ-Blue]

No. Consumers are controlled by businesses and their shareholders.

And those very consumers are the shareholders.

Actually over 50% of Americans own stocks now days. Were you aware of that?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Why is it offensive to put one tyrant who murders inocent people in with another tyrant who did the same things?
Hey apples and oranges are both fruits, both have a peel, pits and can make juice, but no one will ever call an apple and orange and vice-versa.

Salazar and Franco were worse than Castro.

[BJJ-Blue]

Salazar and Franco were worse than Castro.

When comparing dictators who murder innocent people, I don't really compare them like that. They are all evil in my book. Of course the body counts vary, but evil is evil.

[MasterKiller]

When comparing dictators who murder innocent people, I don't really compare them like that. They are all evil in my book. Of course the body counts vary, but evil is evil.

As compared to presidents and prime ministers that murder innocent people?

[David Jamieson]

As compared to presidents and prime ministers that murder innocent people?

just to source that up for you... http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

[BJJ-Blue]

just to source that up for you... http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

Look guys, I do not compare collateral damage in war with gas chambers, firing squads, and political prisons. If you do, we are honestly just not going to see eye to eye.

To me the big difference is the collateral damage is accidental, while gas chambers, etc are intentionally done. Do you not agree?

[sanjuro_ronin]

When comparing dictators who murder innocent people, I don't really compare them like that. They are all evil in my book. Of course the body counts vary, but evil is evil.

I despise dictatorships in ANY form, so I agree, evil is evil.
I have spent time in Cuba, spoken with the people, my spanish is quite good.
There is a love-hate relationship with Castro and to be honest, in many ways the US is Castro's best friend, it it wasn't for the US embargo and political silliness, Castro would have been out ages ago.

[Drake]

Look guys, I do not compare collateral damage in war with gas chambers, firing squads, and political prisons. If you do, we are honestly just not going to see eye to eye.

To me the big difference is the collateral damage is accidental, while gas chambers, etc are intentionally done. Do you not agree?

Abu Ghraib, GITMO, the recent "rogue platoon", and the things that happened at Fallulah come to mind, along with numerous other incidents where I personally believe civilian safety wasn't a terribly important consideration.

We can't hide stuff like Mai Lai, and all we can do is try to fix the present and future to avoid stuff like this, such as the detainee camps for Japanese-Americans during WWII and the systematic genocide of Native Americans.

We are far from saints, and to accuse Castro of the same crap we pulled is pure hypocrasy. The biggest difference is that we at least accept blame for what we've done.

[BJJ-Blue]

This is true Drake. But if I may add this, when someone in our military murders innocents in war and is caught, we charge them with crimes. When someone murders innocents under orders from a dictator, they are rewarded.

Whether you agree or disagree with GW Bush's policies is one thing, but calling the man a dictator, murderer, etc is just ridiculous. If he is so bad, his detractors should be able to show that without resorting to ridiculous name calling like that.

[David Jamieson]

This is true Drake. But if I may add this, when someone in our military murders innocents in war and is caught, we charge them with crimes. When someone murders innocents under orders from a dictator, they are rewarded.

Whether you agree or disagree with GW Bush's policies is one thing, but calling the man a dictator, murderer, etc is just ridiculous. If he is so bad, his detractors should be able to show that without resorting to ridiculous name calling like that.

..and is caught?

You mean when someone lets someone else know.

Here's how it is. If you got a guy in your company who is a murdering psycho, you don't want him to have your back, because really, he doesn't, he's a frickin psycho.

There are hundreds of criminal actions that go on in fog of war.

G.W BUSH operated a dictatorship of the majority and never acted in the capacity of a democratically elected president. His actions in the view o many were criminal. In my view, his entire administration was criminal in intention and in actions carried out.

You better believe I'm not the only one that thinks this.

He'll pay eventually, as soon as America grows a pair.

[Syn7]

Look guys, I do not compare collateral damage in war with gas chambers, firing squads, and political prisons. If you do, we are honestly just not going to see eye to eye.

To me the big difference is the collateral damage is accidental, while gas chambers, etc are intentionally done. Do you not agree?

not all of it is coincidental... they target an apartment building with a living target inside, they know very well that the whole area is densely populated...

also, colleteral damages, in a war that we have no buisness being involved in, is alot different than, say, ww2... look at all the attrocities that came to light over the decades proceeding vietnam... do you think that wont happen with iraq and afghanistan???

look at what we found out after desert storm... uranium tipped munitions creating mutant babies and all sorts of absolutely horrifying consequences... acceptable collateral damages??? decades after the shellings, we still see people suffering because of it??? cant heap all that on saddam... besides, your scapegoat is dead... bush declared the war won... people are still dying for no other reason than being born there and living there... most muslims are normal day to day people... not guerilla opium freaks reading a koran then shooting anyone that looks disagreeable... they are a small percentage... yet they are armed to the teeth and freakin nuttz... obviously the citizens are caught in the middle and when forced to choose, they lose no matter what... choose jihad nuttcases, your a terrorist... choose the allies? your whole family is shot dead and left to rot in a pit because the US forced you to choose and then pulled back leaving them exposed and vulnerable... how many times have the US said they would back some insurgency against the enemy and then backed off and left them flapping in the wind, cut off and soon to be dead... like, oh i dunno, the kurds... saddam isnt the only reason they died, they mobilized and went offensive under the immpression they had help comming, and once they were fully committed some politicians decided it wouldnt look good in the next election and backed off and left them all to die...


i'll adress the castro thing later...

[Drake]

Syn,
It's really much more complex than that, at all levels, from day to day conflict to strategic level planning. Wouldn't it make more sense to blame George Tenet, who told Fmr Pres. Bush that SH was developing WMDs? Or would it make more sense to blame SH, who admitted he was bluffing us because of pressure from not just us, but also Iran? Maybe it would make more sense to blame the ground level analysts, who dtermined that building X, with it's activity and past history as a WMD site, was reactivated?
They weren't "uranium tipped" rounds. It's depleted uranium, which is mostly harmless unless continually exposed to it. I would attribute much more of the health problems over there to the massive oil field fires set by SH. The common citizenry of Iraq is also not completely innocent. They have sheltered and covered for the militants on several occasions, one of which led to an unacceptable level of brutality by our ground forces. There are unarmed spotters, unarmed fighters who only can be PID'd once they grab the AK-47 and start firing. There are militants who spur us into attacking one of their enemies. There are those who fire and hide in mosques, knowing either they'll be safe or we'll do something to get us on CNN.
The level of tribal and sectarian chess-playing is mind-boggling, and that's small change compared to what we're dealing with in Afghanistan.

[BJJ-Blue]

..and is caught?

You mean when someone lets someone else know.

I don't care how they are caught. My point is that if they are caught, they face punishment, not rewards.


G.W BUSH operated a dictatorship of the majority and never acted in the capacity of a democratically elected president. His actions in the view o many were criminal. In my view, his entire administration was criminal in intention and in actions carried out.

Just stop. The man was not a dictator, he was elected TWICE by the people of this country in the manner prescribed by our laws. Period.

And this may come as news to you, but in our country we don't bring people to trial because their actions are viewed by many as criminal. We bring them to trial when there is a crime committed and there is enough evidence to charge someone with the crime in question. Again, you may hate the man, but calling him a dictator, etc is ridiculous and uncalled for.


He'll pay eventually, as soon as America grows a pair.

Actually the next group to pay the piper is going to be Congressional Democrats on November 2nd.

[Drake]

Just stop. The man was not a dictator, he was elected TWICE by the people of this country in the manner prescribed by our laws. Period.



Second time was more of an appointment than an election.

[BJJ-Blue]

Or would it make more sense to blame SH, who admitted he was bluffing us because of pressure from not just us, but also Iran?

Of course that makes sense, because that's the truth. Saddam signed a treaty saying he would allow UN weapons inspectors unfettered access inside Iraq, and if he did not, force could be used against him. He threw them out, and thus GW Bush did what the treaty Saddam signed allowed/called for. And don't forget, Bush even gave Saddam time to reconsider as well.

All the talk about the CIA, WMDs, terrorism, etc really is moot when you look at the simple fact that Saddam broke his word and by doing so his country could be 'legally' invaded.

Is this pretty much correct Drake?

[Syn7]

Syn,
It's really much more complex than that, at all levels, from day to day conflict to strategic level planning. Wouldn't it make more sense to blame George Tenet, who told Fmr Pres. Bush that SH was developing WMDs? Or would it make more sense to blame SH, who admitted he was bluffing us because of pressure from not just us, but also Iran? Maybe it would make more sense to blame the ground level analysts, who dtermined that building X, with it's activity and past history as a WMD site, was reactivated?
They weren't "uranium tipped" rounds. It's depleted uranium, which is mostly harmless unless continually exposed to it. I would attribute much more of the health problems over there to the massive oil field fires set by SH. The common citizenry of Iraq is also not completely innocent. They have sheltered and covered for the militants on several occasions, one of which led to an unacceptable level of brutality by our ground forces. There are unarmed spotters, unarmed fighters who only can be PID'd once they grab the AK-47 and start firing. There are militants who spur us into attacking one of their enemies. There are those who fire and hide in mosques, knowing either they'll be safe or we'll do something to get us on CNN.
The level of tribal and sectarian chess-playing is mind-boggling, and that's small change compared to what we're dealing with in Afghanistan.

regardless, they would be better off without the munitions having been there at all...

i know ive generalized... i feel i have to gloss over alot of points because it would just be soooo much typing to get into the finer details of everything... i dont heap it on bush the man, i heap it on bush the administration... and his dad... and clinton.... and reagan... and alot more...

some citizens are sympathetic... alot dont even know the truths, they just fight with the people they are familiar with against the people they are unfamiliar with... but alot are caught in the middle... not everyone who harbours fighters and weapons does it by choice... not everyone recruited to fight does it by choice... there is alot of pressure from all directions... and many many reasons why any iraqi would choose any of the paths available to them...

and afgahnistan is different than iraq... alot of people see them as the same wars but they arent...

i was watching a news show today and there was supposedly this video showing militantys stoning a woman for being seen with a man... a large part regular citizenry of pakistan is outraged and are being very vocal about their outrage at this type of treatement... things are changing over there fast... people are seeing options they didnt believe they would ever have even 10 years ago... alot of youth is quite moderate... i watched a show on bin ladens old #1 security guy who left bin laden but still believes in jihad, just a different way... his kids watch tom and jerry... he doesnt like it but he tolerates it and realises that with globalization will come outside influence... the trick isnt to resist outright like fundamentalists feel, the trick is to find ways to apply your beliefs and principles to the changing modern world... and more and more people are waking up to that fact...

[BJJ-Blue]

Second time was more of an appointment than an election.

Lets not go there. He was elected as called for by the US Constitution, and this was backed up by the Judicial Branch of our Government.

And the second election was quite clear cut anyway.

[Drake]

Lets not go there. He was elected as called for by the US Constitution, and this was backed up by the Judicial Branch of our Government.

And the second election was quite clear cut anyway.

No, we absolutely should go there. The election was questionable. Would I put it past a democrat to have done the same thing were the tables reversed? Not at all.

[Syn7]

Lets not go there. He was elected as called for by the US Constitution, and this was backed up by the Judicial Branch of our Government.

was it the first or second election where the republican judge ruled in bush favor??? man that was awhile ago, i guess i could look it up... my memory is fading... fukcin weed...:o

[Drake]

Of course that makes sense, because that's the truth. Saddam signed a treaty saying he would allow UN weapons inspectors unfettered access inside Iraq, and if he did not, force could be used against him. He threw them out, and thus GW Bush did what the treaty Saddam signed allowed/called for. And don't forget, Bush even gave Saddam time to reconsider as well.

All the talk about the CIA, WMDs, terrorism, etc really is moot when you look at the simple fact that Saddam broke his word and by doing so his country could be 'legally' invaded.

Is this pretty much correct Drake?

Yes, but as the only remaining superpower in the world, we had other options available. We chose in haste, and now we repent in leisure. In the end, the war was not worth it. At all.

[Drake]

And what REALLY ticks me off is that while engaged in a pretty much pointless conflict, we ended up ignoring the war that DID count, and WAS working. Instead, we directed everything to Iraq, and because of that, and because of the limited support to Afghanistan, crap like Wanat had to go down.

[Syn7]

No, we absolutely should go there. The election was questionable. Would I put it past a democrat to have done the same thing were the tables reversed? Not at all.

no doubt... to say there was no bias there is just rediculous... i cant believe how some people have been getting away with lying so often so much that they sometimes expect people to believe things that is basically insulting everyones intelligence...


clearly a democrat would have done the same and it would be just as rediculous and insulting... but a democrat didnt do it, a republican did... yall gotta live with that stain...

[Reality_Check]

e threw them out, and thus GW Bush did what the treaty Saddam signed allowed/called for. And don't forget, Bush even gave Saddam time to reconsider as well.

All the talk about the CIA, WMDs, terrorism, etc really is moot when you look at the simple fact that Saddam broke his word and by doing so his country could be 'legally' invaded.

Is this pretty much correct Drake?

I'm not Drake, but...no.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/17/iraq/main544280.shtml


U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Monday ordered all U.N. inspectors and support staff, humanitarian workers and U.N. observers along the Iraq-Kuwait border to evacuate Iraq after U.S. threats to launch war.

So, the inspectors were withdrawn due to US threats, not thrown out. As I've pointed out to you before.

https://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showpost.php?p=901399&postcount=520



That option was not on the table. Saddam had thrown the inspectors out. Bush said either the inspectors came back or we were going in. Saddam gambled that Bush was bluffing (like Clinton always did) and he was wrong.

The inspectors were withdrawn by the UN, as the US was about to commence bombing.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/iraqchron


But Saddam made a last-minute bid to avert war, admitting that Iraq had once possessed weapons of mass destruction to defend itself from Iran and Israel - but insisting that it no longer has them.

Which, of course, was true.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/blix-f15.shtml


The Bush administration reacted bitterly to the second report delivered Friday by the chief weapons inspectors, Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei, in which they declared that no evidence had been found that Iraq currently possesses nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.

US Secretary of State Colin Powell listened stone-faced as the reports of Blix and ElBaradei explicitly contradicted the basic premises upon which the Bush administration’s drive to war is based.

Their report was immediately cited by diplomats from France, Russia, China and Germany as the basis for rejecting a US demand for the UN Security Council to authorize military action against Iraq.

Blix cited improved cooperation on the part of Iraq in recent weeks, including the first private interviews with Iraqi weapons scientists and permission for the UN to operate U-2 spy plane flights across Iraq’s territory. Iraq was continuing to give full access to UN inspectors to visit whatever site in the country they chose, he said.

[David Jamieson]

I don't care how they are caught. My point is that if they are caught, they face punishment, not rewards.




Just stop. The man was not a dictator, he was elected TWICE by the people of this country in the manner prescribed by our laws. Period.
he was placed into office twice by the electoral college. The people didn't elect him. He really enjoyed his inaugeral egging too I bet. Lol at blind guy here.


And this may come as news to you, but in our country we don't bring people to trial because their actions are viewed by many as criminal. We bring them to trial when there is a crime committed and there is enough evidence to charge someone with the crime in question. Again, you may hate the man, but calling him a dictator, etc is ridiculous and uncalled for. Dude, grab a brain, they're over there on the table. We're talking about people who put themselves above the law and don't answer to anybody, not even to the american peolpe and to this day do not do so.




Actually the next group to pay the piper is going to be Congressional Democrats on November 2nd. yeah you figure thirty teabaggers are gonna make a difference?

Your country is a mess because the right refuses to do things within the framework of a democracy. The entire right has been usurped by fascists and morons for the most part and all they have is rants that are either racists, exclusionary or over the top with references to imaginary sky gods.

the whole country is a joke at this point and it's the right wing goofs like palin and teabaggers and beck and their ilk taht have made america this strange curiosity of babbling fools on tv 24/7.

why do you give in to this superficial crap? lol ridiculous. almost as ridiculous as my givernment.

modern democracy is a joke. It doesn't exist. It is absolutely nothing more than a dictatorship of the majority and there is no more representative democracy in North America.

get used to it, because as long as there is no unity there's no real nation. just a bunch of states hanging around doing their own thing getting poorer and poorer, languishing in how it use to be.

[Drake]

Nice. Now we have two completely opposite, yet completely wrong, opinions on what happened. I say I give one of you a chainsaw, the other a katana, and just let the left and right have at it.

Kool-aid is bad, regardless of what color it is.

[Syn7]

Nice. Now we have two completely opposite, yet completely wrong, opinions on what happened. I say I give one of you a chainsaw, the other a katana, and just let the left and right have at it.

Kool-aid is bad, regardless of what color it is.

i get the katana...

[BJJ-Blue]

no doubt... to say there was no bias there is just rediculous... i cant believe how some people have been getting away with lying so often so much that they sometimes expect people to believe things that is basically insulting everyones intelligence...


clearly a democrat would have done the same and it would be just as rediculous and insulting... but a democrat didnt do it, a republican did... yall gotta live with that stain...

Bush won EVERY recount in Florida in 2000, and every recount done in Ohio in 2004. It's not a case of a judge annointing or picking the winner. The judge simply confirmed that the repeated counts were ligitimate. And in every State I believe it's the Secretary of State who signs off on the results, not a judge. The judge(s) simply agreed that the Sec of States of those States had the right to sign off on the results.

[BJJ-Blue]

You want to read about an election that was corrupt, look up Al Franken's victory in Minnesota in 2008.

[BJJ-Blue]

I'm not Drake, but...no.

I asked Drake, and not you, for a reason. You're a borderline conspriracy theorist in regards to everything Bush, so I knew what your answer would be.

And nowhere in your reply did you refute my point, that Saddam threw out the inspectors that he agreed to allow by signing the treaty ending the 1st Gulf War.

[BJJ-Blue]

Dude, grab a brain, they're over there on the table. We're talking about people who put themselves above the law and don't answer to anybody, not even to the american peolpe and to this day do not do so.

Oh Jeez, not this again. :rolleyes:

How is Bush above the law? He served as the Constitution allowed. Despite having a VERY liberal Speaker of the House and Senate Majority leader who were constantly being begged by people like you to impeach him, they did not. Again, you may not like the man, but calling him a dictator/above the law/etc is ridiculous. And I hope everyone sees who is being rational, and who is once again throwing out incendiary rhetoric.


yeah you figure thirty teabaggers are gonna make a difference?

If you believe that, November is gonna be like a ton of bricks raining down on your head. Most polls agree now the GOP will very likely gain control of the House, and they have a legitimate shot at taking control of the Senate as well.

More people voted in GOP primaries this year then Democrat primaries. Obama has lost the independant voters that propelled him to office. The young 'educated' people who voted for him are abandoning him because they are now seeing firsthand that under him they cannot find jobs despite having college degrees. His approval rating has fallen from ~70% to ~40%. You just wait and see. :D


Your country is a mess because the right refuses to do things within the framework of a democracy. The entire right has been usurped by fascists and morons for the most part and all they have is rants that are either racists, exclusionary or over the top with references to imaginary sky gods.

the whole country is a joke at this point and it's the right wing goofs like palin and teabaggers and beck and their ilk taht have made america this strange curiosity of babbling fools on tv 24/7.

We are in a mess because liberals like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd thought they could mandate home ownership for all Americans, regardless of people's ability to actually pay for those houses. We are in debt deeper now than ever before and we have only HIGHER unemployment to show for that debt. You people with children should have the pitchforks and torches out. After all, it's your kids who are gonna have to pay these bills.


get used to it, because as long as there is no unity there's no real nation. just a bunch of states hanging around doing their own thing getting poorer and poorer, languishing in how it use to be.

No, not all States are getting poorer and poorer. Texas is doing ok, but it's liberal States like Michigan, California, and New York that are facing bankruptcy/bailouts. Doesn't it seem odd to you that 'rich' states like New York and California are facing bankruptcy, yet 'poor, backwards redneck' States like Mississippi and Alabama are not facing bankruptcy.

Actually now that I mention that fact, can you explain why that is?

[Reality_Check]

I asked Drake, and not you, for a reason. You're a borderline conspriracy theorist in regards to everything Bush, so I knew what your answer would be.

And nowhere in your reply did you refute my point, that Saddam threw out the inspectors that he agreed to allow by signing the treaty ending the 1st Gulf War.

Nowhere did I refute your point? Really? And I'm not surprised you knew what my answer would be. I do tend to traffic in facts, unlike people of your ilk.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/17/iraq/main544280.shtml


U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Monday ordered all U.N. inspectors and support staff, humanitarian workers and U.N. observers along the Iraq-Kuwait border to evacuate Iraq after U.S. threats to launch war.

So, the inspectors were withdrawn due to US threats, not thrown out. As I've pointed out to you before.

https://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showpost.php?p=901399&postcount=520



That option was not on the table. Saddam had thrown the inspectors out. Bush said either the inspectors came back or we were going in. Saddam gambled that Bush was bluffing (like Clinton always did) and he was wrong.

The inspectors were withdrawn by the UN, as the US was about to commence bombing.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/iraqchron

Now he did throw them out in 1998 (long before George W. Bush was President), but he allowed them back in. Also, Bill Clinton did bomb Iraq in December of 1998, (after they were thrown out). And he was accused of wagging the dog. The inspectors were withdrawn in 2003 by the U.N. as the U.S. was about to start bombing. Saddam's regime also publicly stated that they did not have WMDs. Which was backed up by the inspectors. Both of which I noted in my previous post.

So, once again, what didn't I refute?

It's also rather amusing to be called a conspiracy theorist by a birther.

[Drake]

Pointing out that inspectors were withdrawn on the brink of the US invasion does not negate the fact that they had been stifled by Saddam's refusal to comply for years before this. I commend the inspectors for staying as long as they did. If it were my call, the second they refused my inspectors access to a suspected WMD site, I'd leave the same day and have my report ready for the UN by the end of the week.

Are you going to deny that Saddam was playing a dangerous bluffing game with the US?

[David Jamieson]

Pointing out that inspectors were withdrawn on the brink of the US invasion does not negate the fact that they had been stifled by Saddam's refusal to comply for years before this. I commend the inspectors for staying as long as they did. If it were my call, the second they refused my inspectors access to a suspected WMD site, I'd leave the same day and have my report ready for the UN by the end of the week.

Are you going to deny that Saddam was playing a dangerous bluffing game with the US?

The game he played with the US had to do with dumping their dollar and switching to a euro based model.

He was simply too weak to get through the backlash on that one and forfeited his life and power for it. All in all though, the US put Saddam in power through backroom support and supplied him with all the goodies he needed to oppress Iraq and even to commit genocide with American made products such as he did with the Kurds in the north back in the 80s.

there was nothing righteous about the Iraq invasion and the whole wmd thing was a play up and a sham. hindsight makes that quite clear. It was about money, regional power and oil and that's all it has ever been about.

Terrorists are NOTHING. They can be crushed with relative ease one by one or in a group. Right now, the war on terror is a convenient way to keep the military industrial complex ( that outfit that sucks up 50% of every tax dollar in America) going due to a lack of wars.

Americas economy is dependent on continual warfare.

The middle east will never stabilize if America wants to continue being a strong economy. Israel is the immediate patsy and policeman all in the same go and America strong arms the rest into compliance with their agenda. Britain sticks her nose in because she started the whole ball rolling and the Ruskies keep a hand in because they control most of the petro-wealth in Eurasia.

The Chinese decided to prop up the American dollar for the simple fact that the Americans owe them a heck of a lot of money and there is no return in dumping the American currency. Also, they likely have trust issues with the real power on the continent that is Russia.

If America can keep up the charade that they will actually pay the Chinese what they owe them, they will temporarily keep this game going.

What's unfortunate is that this is temporary and without a doubt the winds of big war will be blowing as soon as the Russians seize control and the Chinese realize they've been consistently lied to about getting their money back.

America cannot possibly get out of her debt of 12 Trillion dollars! Quite a good chunk of which, she owes to China.

It will get a whole lot darker before the light comes I think. I am thankful to be a Canadian in all this. America has some hard days, even harder than what has already happened ahead and the trigger for the whole snowball was 9/11.

Just hindsight and documented stuff there. no conspiracy involved. Listen between the words, read between the lines. that's where the message is because as Jack Nicholson said: "You can't handle the truth" and you know what? People really can't! They go hysterical when the truth is given to them. People want their big dumb comfy lie surrounding them all warm and cozy.

sad isn't it.

[Drake]

Actually, terrorists are more dangerous than standing armies.

[BJJ-Blue]

Pointing out that inspectors were withdrawn on the brink of the US invasion does not negate the fact that they had been stifled by Saddam's refusal to comply for years before this. I commend the inspectors for staying as long as they did. If it were my call, the second they refused my inspectors access to a suspected WMD site, I'd leave the same day and have my report ready for the UN by the end of the week.

Are you going to deny that Saddam was playing a dangerous bluffing game with the US?


Actually, terrorists are more dangerous than standing armies.

You're using logic and facts against someone who is arguing on pure emotion, ie hatred of one man. No matter what facts or even your own personal experiences you show him, he will not change his mind.

[BJJ-Blue]

Terrorists are NOTHING. They can be crushed with relative ease one by one or in a group.

And to think all the minds at the Mossad, the CIA, the FBI, and the Pentagon have not figured this out, yet you have.


America cannot possibly get out of her debt of 12 Trillion dollars! Quite a good chunk of which, she owes to China.

And yet you have been repeatedly defending our President for adding record amounts to that debt because you say thats the way out of our mess. :confused:

[David Jamieson]

You're using logic and facts against someone who is arguing on pure emotion, ie hatred of one man. No matter what facts or even your own personal experiences you show him, he will not change his mind.

what are you talking about?

There's no hatred, it's an observation of an American political executive administration that behaved like a criminal enterprise.

I think you're the over emotional one here 1bad. I mean you're constantly lying and spreading misinformation and disinformation to cover your precious republican/fascist ideals. For whatever reason, you are unable to see how transparent and false your overall shpiel is.

every now and then, you can be credited with a fact or two, but for the most part, you;re a snow job. Not hard to read through and start punching huge holes in your ideas.

but as is the nature of a troll, you will never ever answer a straight question and constantly duck duck duck.

meh, it's to be expected by now. old song. lol

[David Jamieson]

And to think all the minds at the Mossad, the CIA, the FBI, and the Pentagon have not figured this out, yet you have.



And yet you have been repeatedly defending our President for adding record amounts to that debt because you say thats the way out of our mess. :confused:

I think you need remedial reading classes.

tell me 1bad, where was that debt when clinton left office?
where was it when Bush left?

thanks and good night. lol

also, please explain why a us journalist can walk into a cave and interview OBL but for some reason the people you refer to cannot?

You are so incredibly naive. I can hear Israeli mossad agents laughing at you from here. :p

[BJJ-Blue]

what are you talking about?

There's no hatred, it's an observation of an American political executive administration that behaved like a criminal enterprise.

Calling a President a war criminal and above the law when he broke no laws and ordered/committed ZERO war crimes is simply name-calling out of anger and nothing more.

I dislike Obama's policies immensely, but I have stopped the name-calling and simply stick to the facts.


I think you're the over emotional one here 1bad. I mean you're constantly lying and spreading misinformation and disinformation to cover your precious republican/fascist ideals. For whatever reason, you are unable to see how transparent and false your overall shpiel is.

Get out of here with that garbage. I've sourced CBO figures, IRS figures, polling sources, etc. And just because you do not like them and cannot refute them, you simply say I'm lying. The truth must really hurt.


every now and then, you can be credited with a fact or two, but for the most part, you;re a snow job. Not hard to read through and start punching huge holes in your ideas.

Thanks for at least giving me that. :rolleyes:


but as is the nature of a troll, you will never ever answer a straight question and constantly duck duck duck.

You're lying. Plain and simple.

Speaking of duck, duck duck; I just asked a question you have not answered. So here it goes again. Please answer it, then feel free to ask me any question ON THIS TOPIC, and I'll answer it for all to see.

Here is my question again:

Doesn't it seem odd to you that 'rich' states like New York and California are facing bankruptcy, yet 'poor, backwards redneck' States like Mississippi and Alabama are not facing bankruptcy.

Actually now that I mention that fact, can you explain why that is?


meh, it's to be expected by now. old song. lol

Let's just see who is right. My question is on the table. We shall see if you answer it. ;) Once you do, it's your turn to ask me an on topic question.

[BJJ-Blue]

tell me 1bad, where was that debt when clinton left office?
where was it when Bush left?

thanks and good night. lol

Without giving the exact numbers, I'll give you a quick answer. Should you need the real numbers, I'll dig them up, but once I post I bet your satified with my answer.

US Debt:
Under Clinton < Under GW Bush

Agreed?

[Syn7]

also, please explain why a us journalist can walk into a cave and interview OBL but for some reason the people you refer to cannot?

i forgot about that... :rolleyes:


not to mention who trained him and why... he's an unforseen consequence of questionable actions taken by the c.i.a., and the like, during the cold war...


and saddam for that matter... when iran was enemy #1 the US had no problem arming the baathists and giving them $3 billion... they also threw their weight and support behind saddam when it came time for him to take over the party...


and saudi arabian and pakistani muslims ok, iranian, palestinian, iraqi, not so good??? after all the bullsh!t they say to make afghans and iraqis look bad, it all applies to US key allies... so is it oportunistic? or is it an upright moral responsibility??? shady or hypocrite... pick one...:(


i choose both... democrats and republicans alike... all guilty... ofcourse its not a crime tho, its a fukcing time honored tradition to **** on somebody and get rich doing it... things havent changed that much since somebody like crassus can grab an army and rape the east to fill a war chest to go rape the parthians... unfortunatey for him he died shortly thereafter at the hands of parthian archers... but how many survived and brought home the loot? cut the treasury in and keptr the slave sales free and clear... this model is how alot of blue bloods became the wealthy establishements they are... then the invested it and created business... things havent changed that much...

for 5000 years of recorded history we've been *******s to eachother and then somehow in the last 150 years the western world figured out how to be super awesome people???

alot of it has always been down low... and still is... just because, with the global cummunity we have now, the world is litterally watching now, doesnt mean they cant still get away with it... please, that would be naive... for every inspired leader, there are 2000 that are selfish and manipulative... and what, we just happened to have a whoe bunch of good ones all in the last few hundred years???

[SoCo KungFu]

for 5000 years of recorded history we've been *******s to eachother and then somehow in the last 150 years the western world figured out how to be super awesome people???


About time someone got to the point. Democrats, Republicans, Socialist, Communist, Capitalist...it doesn't matter. Here's the truth. The world has been taken to a point of ultra intensification. There are simply not enough resources to go around. I'm not talking about money. Currency is an artificial construct to represent an arrangement of physical, material necessities. At least it used to be. Now its just magic numbers that don't represent anything and someone decided to call it economics. But the real things, food, shelter ect. There's not enough to sustain global society at the rate we are going. The truth is, we need a war. A big one. Because for all the idiotic religions, unnecessary sentimentality, rules, morals, social norms, it all comes down to the fact that we despite what some may think, are just a pack of animals like all the birds in the air and all the fish in the sea. We are a bunch of apes, nothing more. And as such we are every bit as bound to the laws of nature as any other creature. And mother nature is the master of warfare. Mother nature had WMD's before humans were taking craps in caves (seriously, look up how penicillin was discovered). We've long since left the log phase, we're now stationary. Soon enough, death. The only thing that's going to save this planet is for a couple billion people to disappear, a few civilizations to be erased. Right/wrong? Doesn't matter, those are artificial terms just like good/evil heaven/hell. Its just the natural way. The ability to survive and reproduce, that's what is ultimately important. Survival of the fittest. Why people seem to think we've somehow removed ourselves from the natural cycle....

[Syn7]

yeah... we need to cut our global population by about 70%.... 30% leftover could do some great things and not do nonreversable damage...


simple fact is this, no matter what we do, unless we lose a whole chunk of our population or find another planet to colonate, we're dead... mama nature has a way of gettin hers tho... however, natural disaster, plagues, whatever... if we dont do it she probably will... and if she doesnt, and we dont, we're done... and now i hear china is seriously considering lifting the one child policy... chinese and indians need to slow down... i know its not pc to say this, but they are growing too large and are become more of a burden to the globe than any nation should be...

[Reality_Check]

I found this to be very interesting. It seems to perfectly encapsulate a certain poster on this board.

Tea Partier description (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/210904?RS_show_page=1)


The individuals in the Tea Party may come from very different walks of life, but most of them have a few things in common. After nearly a year of talking with Tea Party members from Nevada to New Jersey, I can count on one hand the key elements I expect to hear in nearly every interview. One: Every single one of them was that exceptional Republican who did protest the spending in the Bush years, and not one of them is the hypocrite who only took to the streets when a black Democratic president launched an emergency stimulus program. ("Not me — I was protesting!" is a common exclamation.) Two: Each and every one of them is the only person in America who has ever read the Constitution or watched Schoolhouse Rock. (Here they have guidance from Armey, who explains that the problem with "people who do not cherish America the way we do" is that "they did not read the Federalist Papers.") Three: They are all furious at the implication that race is a factor in their political views — despite the fact that they blame the financial crisis on poor black homeowners, spend months on end engrossed by reports about how the New Black Panthers want to kill "cracker babies," support politicians who think the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was an overreach of government power, tried to enact South African-style immigration laws in Arizona and obsess over Charlie Rangel, ACORN and Barack Obama's birth certificate. Four: In fact, some of their best friends are black! (Reporters in Kentucky invented a game called "White Male Liberty Patriot Bingo," checking off a box every time a Tea Partier mentions a black friend.) And five: Everyone who disagrees with them is a radical leftist who hates America.

It would be inaccurate to say the Tea Partiers are racists. What they are, in truth, are narcissists. They're completely blind to how offensive the very nature of their rhetoric is to the rest of the country.

[BJJ-Blue]

I see RC has once again managed to play the race card. :rolleyes:

Look, I've been called the resident "Teabagger" on this site and I've repeatedly blamed the subprime issue for the mess we are in. And not once have I blamed it on "poor BLACK homeowners". I've repeatedly said that people were put in houses regardless of the ability to pay for said houses, but not once have I brought race into the equation. Once again it was a liberal on this site who brought race up. Yet the people I identify with politically, as well as myself, have been repeatedly called the racists.

[BJJ-Blue]

RC, your racist article also said this:

Tea Party people "support politicians who think the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was an overreach of government power". Can you please show me one candidate supported and/or endorsed by the Tea Party who said that he/she feels the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is an overreach of Gov't power?

I bet you cannot. And just like I told Jamieson that he wouldn't answer my question about bankrupt States, I'm betting you can't answer my question to you.

[MasterKiller]

RC, your racist article also said this:

Tea Party people "support politicians who think the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was an overreach of government power". Can you please show me one candidate supported and/or endorsed by the Tea Party who said that he/she feels the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is an overreach of Gov't power?.

Your hero Ron Paul believes that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty."


The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.

This expansion of federal power was based on an erroneous interpretation of the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The framers of the Constitution intended the interstate commerce clause to create a free trade zone among the states, not to give the federal government regulatory power over every business that has any connection with interstate commerce.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business’s workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge’s defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife.

Of course, America has made great strides in race relations over the past forty years. However, this progress is due to changes in public attitudes and private efforts. Relations between the races have improved despite, not because of, the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while I join the sponsors of H.Res. 676 in promoting racial harmony and individual liberty, the fact is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not accomplish these goals. Instead, this law unconstitutionally expanded federal power, thus reducing liberty. Furthermore, by prompting raced-based quotas, this law undermined efforts to achieve a color-blind society and increased racial strife. Therefore, I must oppose H.Res. 676.

[Dragonzbane76]

Your hero Ron Paul believes that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty."

is that the cross dressing dude?

oh different .... thought it was this guy/it.

http://image52.webshots.com/452/0/28/99/2909028990044785100zLtkKq_ph.jpg

[Reality_Check]

RC, your racist article also said this:

Tea Party people "support politicians who think the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was an overreach of government power". Can you please show me one candidate supported and/or endorsed by the Tea Party who said that he/she feels the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is an overreach of Gov't power?

I bet you cannot. And just like I told Jamieson that he wouldn't answer my question about bankrupt States, I'm betting you can't answer my question to you.

LMAO at your comment that the article is racist!

Two words...Rand Paul.

[BJJ-Blue]

Your hero Ron Paul believes that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty."

I was not aware the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had hiring quotas in it. If it indeed does, THAT PART of it is an overreach of Gov't.

[BJJ-Blue]

LMAO at your comment that the article is racist!

It is racist. And you should not be laughing at racism. It's also chock full of lies, like this one:

"..tried to enact South African-style immigration laws in Arizona.."

Get real. Nowhere does any Tea Party canididate call for anything remotely like the Apartheid Laws of South Africa. All it calls for in a nutshell is that people here ILLEGALLY are to be deported. It doesn't even bring race into the equation. As a matter of fact when the Obama regime sued Arizona, they did not cite racial grounds. They sued under separtion of powers laws, not civil rights laws.

[Reality_Check]

I was not aware the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had hiring quotas in it. If it indeed does, THAT PART of it is an overreach of Gov't.

Then I guess you lost your bet, by your own admission. So, what do I win? ;)

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126985068


SIEGEL: But it's been one of the major developments in American history in the course of your life. I mean, do you think the '64 Civil Rights Act or the ADA for that matter were just overreaches and that business shouldn't be bothered by people with a basis in law to sue them for redress?

Dr. PAUL: Right. I think a lot of things could be handled locally. For example, I think that we should try to do everything we can to allow for people with disabilities and handicaps. You know, we do it in our office with wheelchair ramps and things like that. I think if you have a two-story office and you hire someone who's handicapped, it might be reasonable to let him have an office on the first floor rather than the government saying you have to have a $100,000 elevator. And I think when you get to solutions like that, the more local the better, and the more common sense the decisions are, rather than having a federal government make those decisions.

[BJJ-Blue]

I will grant you this, this part is true:

"...reports about how the New Black Panthers want to kill "cracker babies, ..."

There is actually video of this incident. And it happened at a polling place in Philadelphia and the racial epitaphs were uttered by an ARMED man standing outside said polling place. That is in violation of all sorts of the very open voting laws called for in legislation like the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And yet the Justice Dept did nothing.

I'll guarantee if an armed Klansman had been standing outside a voting place shouting racial slurs at people he would be facing all sorts of charges and lots of prison time.

[BJJ-Blue]

Then I guess you lost your bet, by your own admission. So, what do I win? ;)

Well technically I was right as YOU didn't cite any. MK did. But notice I did say I was unaware of something and I openly admitted I learned something I previously was unaware of.

I can't see how you can say a certain law that aims to make society colorblind is good when that very law has quotas BASED ON ENTIRELY RACE. :confused:

[SoCo KungFu]

yeah... we need to cut our global population by about 70%.... 30% leftover could do some great things and not do nonreversable damage...


simple fact is this, no matter what we do, unless we lose a whole chunk of our population or find another planet to colonate, we're dead... mama nature has a way of gettin hers tho... however, natural disaster, plagues, whatever... if we dont do it she probably will... and if she doesnt, and we dont, we're done... and now i hear china is seriously considering lifting the one child policy... chinese and indians need to slow down... i know its not pc to say this, but they are growing too large and are become more of a burden to the globe than any nation should be...

Yep, and we have idiots still bickering over whether global climate change is real or not cuz they don't have the capacity to understand 8th grade science. The truth is, its real, its happening. Its a natural progression. Only so much CO2 is eliminated per year (around 14%). It builds up and builds up and then we have a super heated climate, organisms die. Then after a few hundred million years the oxygen generating bacteria and remaining plants reconstitute the atmosphere with O2 and the temps come down and life starts up again. The only thing is, we've accelerated that cycle by a ridiculous rate. We are deforesting our O2 sources. We are adding more and more pollutants. By the end time we (well I, dunno how old everyone here is) die, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere will have doubled from the time I was born.

Then there's all the crap about organic food and all that mess. Guess what, our food is crap cuz we have to make lots of it. Would you rather die of cancer or starvation? North America (well US) is the breadbasket of the world because 10,000 years ago the middle easterners over intensified their land and turned it to crap cuz they didn't know what they were doing. And if you REALLY wanna get technical that's the origin of the global inequality today. All this mess started thousands of years ago, we just now figuring it out though. Everyone now is getting all sentimental about trying to save the world, but really its what they get for being first. Oh well, we already live twice a long as evolution intended anyways. Speaking of which, all the hating on this site for "western" medicine...why do you think we are living as long as we are? **** that polio is some serious business, and that flu....oh wait...yeah that's right. Unfortunately evolution is going to kick us in the ass there too though.

Its not just the Asians that need to do something about reproductive rates. I think we should start shutting down fertility clinics. People wanna have a kid but can't, they need to adopt one of the thousands we got waiting around already...

[Drake]

Then there's all the crap about organic food and all that mess. Guess what, our food is crap cuz we have to make lots of it. Would you rather die of cancer or starvation? North America (well US) is the breadbasket of the world because 10,000 years ago the middle easterners over intensified their land and turned it to crap cuz they didn't know what they were doing. And if you REALLY wanna get technical that's the origin of the global inequality today. All this mess started thousands of years ago, we just now figuring it out though.

Actually, organic, sustainable farming IS our only option. Our current method of providing food is actually inefficient and will not survive the long term due to soil damage and erosion. It costs more in terms of resources and land value to continue the way we are going now. You should check to see if you are posting a logical fallacy before saying something like that. I usually read scientific journals and farming documents... it's a hobby of mine.

In other words...your statement is based on untrue facts, and reflects a lack of knowledge in the field. In brighter news, you are part of most of America in that you think this is true.

[BJJ-Blue]

Yep, and we have idiots still bickering over whether global climate change is real or not cuz they don't have the capacity to understand 8th grade science.

I actually learned well before 8th grade that when you alter data, the results mean nothing.

[MasterKiller]

I actually learned well before 8th grade that when you alter data, the results mean nothing.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bc/Courthousesteps.jpg

[Drake]

I actually learned well before 8th grade that when you alter data, the results mean nothing.

WTF is wrong with you? Do you even know what was altered? Did you bother reading the headline? We effing discussed this already, and 1, the guy was already exonerated, and 2, it made NO DIFFERENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT. NONE.

[BJJ-Blue]

WTF is wrong with you? Do you even know what was altered? Did you bother reading the headline? We effing discussed this already, and 1, the guy was already exonerated, and 2, it made NO DIFFERENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT. NONE.

When you are doing studies on global warming and you change temperatures, you cannot convince me that the results are legitimate no matter what anyone says. Now if you use the the ACTUAL temps and draw a conclusion, I'd trust those results. Oh wait, those guys destoyed that data, so we can't do that. :rolleyes:

[BJJ-Blue]

If the guy in charge of that research facility was exonerated, why in the world did he resign? :confused:

[BJJ-Blue]

Again, notice I'm answering all the questions posed to me, yet David Jamieson has still not answered mine.

[SoCo KungFu]

The cost of organic food is higher than that of conventional food because the organic price tag more closely reflects the true cost of growing the food: substituting labor and intensive management for chemicals, the health and environmental costs of which are borne by society. These costs include cleanup of polluted water and remediation of pesticide contamination. Prices for organic foods include costs of growing, harvesting, transportation and storage. In the case of processed foods, processing and packaging costs are also included. Organically produced foods must meet stricter regulations governing all these steps than conventional foods. The intensive management and labor used in organic production are frequently (though not always) more expensive than the chemicals routinely used on conventional farms.


Q: Why does organic food cost more than conventionally grown food?
A: There are a bushel of reasons why organic food costs more than conventional food. Some of them:
-- Organic produce, meat and dairy simply cost more to produce than their conventional counterparts.
Limits on pesticides, for instance, mean more hand-weeding. They also mean farmers run a higher risk of losing all or part of a year's crop.
"There aren't as many tools in the toolbox to deal with pest outbreaks or diseases," said Nancy Creamer, director of the Center for Environmental Farming Systems at North Carolina State University.
Some of the things organic farmers can't use that conventional farmers can: Sewage sludge, which is cheap to buy, and chemical fertilizers, which are both cheap to buy and cheap to transport. Instead, organic farmers fertilize their land with compost and animal manure, which is bulkier and more expensive to ship, Creamer said.
While conventional farmers can use every acre to grow the crops that fetch the highest prices, organic farmers use crop rotation to keep their soil healthy. Instead of planting a cash crop on every acre every year, they rotate fields and plant "cover crops" that are plowed to improve the soil's nutrients for the long term.
"When you're rotating crops, you're not necessarily growing all your highest value crops all the time, which is different than a conventional system," said Catherine Greene, an agricultural economist at the USDA.
Organic feed for cattle and other livestock can cost twice as much as conventional feed, said George Siemon, CEO of the Organic Valley co-op, the largest organic farmers' co-op in the country. A ton of organic cattle feed can cost from $350 to $400 a ton versus $220 or less for a ton of conventional feed, he said.
Certifying food as organic also involves additional administrative costs.


Why does it cost us more to produce organic vegetables than it costs large factory farms to produce vegetables sold in stores as “conventional” or “commercial”? I believe it is in the economy of scale.
We grow 25 different vegetables on 40 acres. Most commercial farms operate like a factory, growing just one or two types of vegetables. Each occupies 25 or maybe 1000 acres.
Growing many different vegetables increases our biological diversity. This biological diversity deters insects, weeds and disease. (See “Balance of Nature,” “Holes In Our Leaves” and “The Battle of the Beetles” on this web site for more information).
Our main weed killers are a hoe and a person to use it. Simple and effective but somewhat more costly than spraying herbicides.
On a factory farm, the picking crew specializes in one vegetable. They pick only one vegetable all day and often times they pick the same vegetable for many weeks on end. The machine-like pickers become quite efficient at what they do. On our farm the pickers pick many different vegetables everyday. They are not as efficient. One day I observed the workers at a factory farm and timed how long it took them to pick and tie one bunch of parsley. It took about nine seconds. Back on our farm, I timed our pickers at twelve seconds. All those seconds add up – 30 bunches in a box, 50 boxes a day.
We also lose economic efficiency by the size and type of equipment we use. Our fields are smaller, therefore we use smaller tractors and farm implements. It takes us two or times three longer to accomplish the same task as a factory farm. We plant two rows at a time. Large farms plant four, six, sometimes twelve rows at a time. Because, we do not specialize in one or two vegetables, we can not afford the specialized, labor-saving, harvest equipment for each of our 25 vegetables. All of this adds to our costs.
We rely on the fertility of the soil to produce our vegetables instead of chemical fertilizers. To maintain the fertility, we grow green manure crops, such as oat, vetch and bell beans, which we turn back into the soil. This process feeds the microorganism in the soil, which release nutrients to the subsequent vegetable cash crop. (See “The Original World Wide Web” and “green manure” in the Photo Tour on this web site for more information). The green manure crop is not not sold. There are costs in growing the green manure crop and income is lost from not growing a cash-producing crop. Growing green manure crops is well worth the expense; it allows us to produce healthy vegetables which do not need chemical pesticides.
Organic farmers who do not choose to utilize green manure crops in their rotation, use organic fertilizers such as guano, soybean meal, feather meal and chicken manure. These organic fertilizers cost two to ten times more than chemical fertilizers.


Organic farming is beneficial in that it has higher organic matter content which produces a thicker topsoil and higher nutritional quality in the soil. However, that's also taking into consideration the methods of organic farming, which rely heavily on a carefully planned crop rotation and soil management. The same issues which when compared to conventional farming, lower the yield during harvest. Furthermore, it doesn't take a chem degree, though I suppose it would help, to see that unless exposed to stupid temperatures that would spoil any food, preservatives you know, make food last longer. Meaning they can be shipped from here to Somalia and you know, still be edible. Soooo, lower yield is going to feed more stomachs than higher yield?

[Drake]

Organic farming is beneficial in that it has higher organic matter content which produces a thicker topsoil and higher nutritional quality in the soil. However, that's also taking into consideration the methods of organic farming, which rely heavily on a carefully planned crop rotation and soil management. The same issues which when compared to conventional farming, lower the yield during harvest. Furthermore, it doesn't take a chem degree, though I suppose it would help, to see that unless exposed to stupid temperatures that would spoil any food, preservatives you know, make food last longer. Meaning they can be shipped from here to Somalia and you know, still be edible. Soooo, lower yield is going to feed more stomachs than higher yield?

Yes, because the high yield plan isn't sustainable.

[Drake]

When you are doing studies on global warming and you change temperatures, you cannot convince me that the results are legitimate no matter what anyone says. Now if you use the the ACTUAL temps and draw a conclusion, I'd trust those results. Oh wait, those guys destoyed that data, so we can't do that. :rolleyes:

They did use actual temps. We discussed this already. I'm not typing the (expletive)'ing thing again. Either know what you are talking about or STFU. It's obnoxious and underhanded that you bring this up again, especially considering the previous discussion. Your other post was ALSO covered.

[BJJ-Blue]

They did use actual temps. We discussed this already. I'm not typing the (expletive)'ing thing again. Either know what you are talking about or STFU. It's obnoxious and underhanded that you bring this up again, especially considering the previous discussion. Your other post was ALSO covered.

I do know what I'm talking about when I say its a hoax of enormous proportions. Remember, many of the very people screaming "Global Warming!" were the very same people screaming "Coming Ice Age!" in the 1970s. And in the 1980s they were screaming "Ozone Hole!". Everytime in the past the radical environmentalists have told us the sky was falling they've been shown to have either over-reacted or been flat-out wrong. I don't trust people with decades long records of false alarms. You may fall for it over and over, but I myself learned long ago they are full of it.

[MasterKiller]

Remember, many of the very people screaming "Global Warming!" were the very same people screaming "Coming Ice Age!" in the 1970s. And in the 1980s they were screaming "Ozone Hole!".

Really? Who?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Has anyone here seen the documentary "who killed the electrical car" ?

[BJJ-Blue]

Really? Who?

"Stanford University's noted global warming alarmist and Al Gore advisor Stephen Schneider appeared in a 1978 television program warning Americans of a coming Ice Age.

For those that have forgotten, "In Search of..." was a televised documentary series from 1976 to 1982 that was normally narrated by Leonard Nimoy.

In the May 1978 episode "The Coming Ice Age," Nimoy presented to viewers facts about the previous Ice Age, and discussed how the bitterly cold winters of 1976 and 1977 might be a harbinger of a new one: "Climate experts believe the next one is on its way. According to recent evidence, it could come sooner than anyone had expected."

One climate expert cited was Stephen Schneider, a climatologist working for the National Center for Atmospheric Research at the time who was asked to address some of the possible solutions being discussed to stop the coming Ice Age such as using nuclear energy to loosen the polar icecaps (video embedded below the fold, relevant section at 6:04, h/t Minnesotans for Global Warming via Bob Ferguson):

DR. STEPHEN SCHNEIDER: Can we do these things? Yes. But will they make things better? I'm not sure. We can't predict with any certainty what's happening to our own climatic future. How can we come along and intervene then in that ignorance? You could melt the icecaps. What would that do to the coastal cities? The cure could be worse than the disease. Would that be better or worse than the risk of an ice age?

Imagine that. In 1978, one of today's leading global warming alarmists not only appeared in a television program warning the world of a coming Ice Age, but he also said: "We can't predict with any certainty what's happening to our own climatic future. How can we come along and intervene then in that ignorance?"

Now, thirty years later, Schneider is INDEED predicting what's happening to our climatic future by using models, and advocates government intervention to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to prevent global warming.

Yet, thirty years ago when he was concerned about a new Ice Age, he worried that the proposed cure could be worse than the disease.

Such concerns have clearly abated, as Schneider is now a member of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well a close advisor to Gore.

In fact, as this video created by Phelim McAleer (the man whose microphone was recently turned off when he had the nerve to ask Gore a question) demonstrates, Schneider was actually with Gore when he acknowledged winning the Nobel Peace Prize:

Now that Schneider's appearance on "In Search of..." has been uncovered, will journalists always concerned about presenting all sides of the story report this video and its implications or bury it for fear that it might impact pending legislation to cap and tax carbon dioxide emissions?

Stay tuned."

Source: (Includes two imbedded videos as well)
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/10/13/global-warming-alarmist-appeared-1978s-coming-ice-age

[BJJ-Blue]

This video is also quite interesting. It shows a model of Earth with temps superimposed on it as different colors indicating hot vs cold areas. One was taken in 1977 and the other in 2010. They look almost identical. Yet the 1977 model was used by 'scientists' as data to prove a coming Ice Age. Then the 2010 model was used by current 'scientists' to prove Global Warming. Watch it and see for yourself.

http://www.accuweather.com/video/60571000001/worldwide-cold-not-seen-since-70s-ice-age-scare.asp?channel=vblog_*******i

[MasterKiller]

One guy doesn't make a movement. You said MANY of the same people. I'd like to see the list.

[BJJ-Blue]

One guy doesn't make a movement. You said MANY of the same people. I'd like to see the list.

This is ridiculous. I'm repeatedly told/asked to source and when I do it's almost always "wrong" or "not enough". You asked who, and I posted someone. And not just anyone, a noted climate expert and an advisor to Al Gore, a Nobel Prize winner! What more do you want? :rolleyes:

[BJJ-Blue]

I'm not here for you MK. I can't convince you. If I listed 500, you would say I need 501. I'm doing this for those 'on the fence'. They are not like you, incapable of admitting they might actually be mistaken/misinformed/etc. I'm hoping to sway them with real data, sources, and proof. Not someone like you who absolutely would never admit anyone with different views than you might actually be right on something.

[BJJ-Blue]

Here is some more info on the noted 'scientist' Stephen Schneider:

"So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."

http://algorelied.com/?tag=stephen-scheider

You guys go ahead and follow admitted hoaxsters like that. I choose to believe real data. I really think it's hilarious that MK laughs at religious nuts who say that 'faith healing' is real despite evidence of their scheming, yet he totally swallow the bs that environmentalist nuts spew who say global warming is real despite evidence of their scheming. Why the double standard MK? :confused:

[MasterKiller]

This is ridiculous. I'm repeatedly told/asked to source and when I do it's almost always "wrong" or "not enough". You asked who, and I posted someone. And not just anyone, a noted climate expert and an advisor to Al Gore, a Nobel Prize winner! What more do you want? :rolleyes:

You emphatically stated there were MANY.

Where did you get this "MANY" from? Did you just make it up?

[MasterKiller]

See, I'll show you.


MANY Christian women get abortions.


one in five women having abortions are born-again or Evangelical Christians;
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ufl71SU2j_8J:www.guttmacher.org/pubs/archives/prabort2.html


"Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as 'Born-again/Evangelical'."
http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html

[BJJ-Blue]

You emphatically stated there were MANY.

Where did you get this "MANY" from? Did you just make it up?

How many will suffice? :rolleyes:

[BJJ-Blue]

MANY Christian women get abortions.

I would hope that number is bigger since the sheer number of pregnant women is much, much larger than the sheer number of scientists involved in the global warming issue/hoax. It's basic math.

[MasterKiller]

How many will suffice? :rolleyes:

All the ones who currently scream "Global Warming!" and also were the very same people screaming "Coming Ice Age!" in the 1970s and in the 1980s also screamed "Ozone Hole!"

Show me the list.

[MasterKiller]

I would hope that number is bigger since the sheer number of pregnant women is much, much larger than the sheer number of scientists involved in the global warming issue/hoax. It's basic math.

But shouldn't the number of Christian women getting abortions be zero?

[BJJ-Blue]

You are a liar. A blatant liar.

I posted this:


Remember, many of the very people screaming "Global Warming!" were the very same people screaming "Coming Ice Age!" in the 1970s. And in the 1980s they were screaming "Ozone Hole!".

You said I posted this:


All the ones who currently scream "Global Warming!" and also were the very same people screaming "Coming Ice Age!" in the 1970s and in the 1980s also screamed "Ozone Hole!"

Show me the list.

You are a liar. You can't even debate/dicuss issues without LYING. Why do you have to change my words if I'm so wrong on the subject? Can't you defeat me in the arena of ideas without lying about what I said?

[BJJ-Blue]

I wonder if this thread will be locked and/or I get banned now that you are being forced to lie to defend your position....

[MasterKiller]

You are a liar. A blatant liar.[/quotes]
You are a liar. You can't even debate/dicuss issues without LYING. Why do you have to change my words if I'm so wrong on the subject? Can't you defeat me in the arena of ideas without lying about what I said?

I never said you said that. That isn't quotes.

Reading for comprehension not taught in HomeSchool™?

I was asking for the list. If you can't provide a complete one, an abridged one showing MANY of those individuals will suffice.

I mean, of course, unless you were just making it up....

[BJJ-Blue]

I'm done with you. You are altering my quotes to suit your needs. Period.

[MasterKiller]

I'm done with you. You are altering my quotes to suit your needs. Period.

LOL. I didn't quote you!

Typical 1Bad.

You said MANY. Who are these "Many?"

Did you just make it up?

[BJJ-Blue]

Reading for comprehension not taught in HomeSchool™?

And I graduated from a public High School, fyi. And then went to a State University. Of course you can alter this quote if you want to suit your needs though. :rolleyes:

[BJJ-Blue]

You altered my quote. Period.

[MasterKiller]

You altered my quote. Period.


I get mad when I'm called out.

That is altering a quote, which is clearly not what I did. Not only did I not attribute that phrase to you, I even altered the sentence structure.

You asked me how many people I wanted names for. I said ALL of them. If you can't even provide a list of "many," just admit you made it up.

[BJJ-Blue]

You took my quote and altered it.

No, you didn't put it in quotes, but you took my EXACT quote and changed a few words. Your playing semantics and trying to be crafty. Why not debate on the up-and-up?

[MasterKiller]

You took my quote and altered it.

No, you didn't put it in quotes, but you took my EXACT quote and changed a few words. Your playing semantics and trying to be crafty. Why not debate on the up-and-up?

Who are these "Many"?

[BJJ-Blue]

You asked me how many people I wanted names for. I said ALL of them. If you can't even provide a list of "many," just admit you made it up.

I gave an example. How in the world is that making it up? :rolleyes:

Face it, your side (the global warming side) is full of liars who openly admit they have to play fast and loose with the truth to get people behind them. That's not science, that's playing politics. You follow people like that if you want to. It's your choice. But I'll be there to point out that the people behind it have been wrong in the past.

[MasterKiller]

I gave an example. How in the world is that making it up? :rolleyes:

Face it, your side (the global warming side) is full of liars who openly admit they have to play fast and loose with the truth to get people behind them. That's not science, that's playing politics. You follow people like that if you want to. It's your choice. But I'll be there to point out that the people behind it have been wrong in the past.

So then point them out. You said "Many." One does not equal "Many."

Did you make it up?

[BJJ-Blue]

Did you make it up?

Just stop. Ive asked BEFORE you did how many will suffice. You have not answered. I also asked you why you rail on conmen who use faith healing to scam people, but you follow people who use global warming to scam people. You also have not answered that one either. You just keep asking me the same question over and over. It's your tried and true modus operandi. :rolleyes:

[MasterKiller]

Just stop. Ive asked BEFORE you did how many will suffice. You have not answered. I also asked you why you rail on conmen who use faith healing to scam people, but you follow people who use global warming to scam people. You also have not answered that one either. You just keep asking me the same question over and over. It's your tried and true modus operandi. :rolleyes:

Show me your source list. That's all I'm asking for.

[BJJ-Blue]

Here is another good question for you:

Why did you take 30 words that I typed and then you typed an identical word -for-word post, but changed 6 of those words?

Please explain why you did that. I'm very curious. ;)

[MasterKiller]

Why did you take 30 words that I typed and then you typed out 30 words, but you changed 6 of those words?

Please explain why you did that. I'm very curious. ;) Are you off meds today!? I was answering your question by using your own terminology. :rolleyes:


Again, notice I'm answering all the questions posed to me, yet David Jamieson has still not answered mine.

Hold yourself to the same standard as you hold us...Show me your source list from which "MANY" of these people can be identified.

Or just admit you made it up.

[BJJ-Blue]

Show me your source list. That's all I'm asking for.

I asked first, and Iv'e already answered you once. It's your turn now. Do you need those questions repeated?

And once you answer mine, I'll answer yours.

[BJJ-Blue]

Are you off meds today!? I was answering your question by using your own terminology. :rolleyes:

So changing "many" to "all" is just using different terminology? You've NEVER done it in the past, and I've been here several years.

[MasterKiller]

So changing "many" to "all" is just using different terminology? You've NEVER done it in the past, and I've been here several years.

Christ. I was asking for a list of ALL the names of the MANY you claim currently scream "Global Warming!" and also were the very same people screaming "Coming Ice Age!" in the 1970s and in the 1980s also screamed "Ozone Hole!"


ALL the names of those MANY you seem to know about.

Get it?

[BJJ-Blue]

LMAO at your excuses! You're making Rudy look good.

Look, you got caught. You could have simply asked for ALL the names. Type "List all the names" and that's it. But instead you re-typed my quote word-for-word, but changed a few words.

And you still have refused to answer the questions I asked you first. We just went through this last week :rolleyes: Once you answer mine, I'll answer yours. It's simple, and fair.

[MasterKiller]

LMAO at your excuses! You're making Rudy look good.

Look, you got caught. You could have simply asked for ALL the names. Type "List all the names" and that's it. But instead you re-typed my quote word-for-word, but changed a few words.

And you still have refused to answer the questions I asked you first. We just went through this last week :rolleyes: Once you answer mine, I'll answer yours. It's simple, and fair.

LMAO at you trying to dodge the fact that you made up "MANY" by derailing the thread. You even tried to get the thread locked by just flat out calling me a name rather than manning up. What a piece of work.

You made a claim yet cannot prove it.

[MasterKiller]

I do know what I'm talking about when I say its a hoax of enormous proportions.

If you know...prove it. Who are these many???