Repulsive Monkey

"Why is it on one hand you say that the Kyoto Protocl is useless c'os it'll make millions..."

I didn't say it was useless. I said it would have a severe and direct cost to the working class of America.

"c'os it'll make millions (and what an exaggeration that is!!) unemployed"

Is that an exaggeration? Maybe you can quote a figure you're more comfortable with. I admit to estimating this figure, but this is how I did it:

The estimate for Canada was 400,000 unemployed. Proportionally, that would make 3.6 million unemployed for America. I admit, a clumsy estimate. But if I went 3x overboard, it's still over a million jobs.

"and then you follow on by saying that Green poloyics is a monkey maker."

I said it could make people money. Do you dispute this?

"Which is it to be?? Environmentalism is profitable or not??"

a) "The Kyoto Accord" isn't synonymous with "Environmentalism."

b) The Kyoto accord would both make some people money and cost alot of people jobs. The two aren't contrary.

"As Shaolin says Gore did get more votes and Bush's election (and an insult to say that it was!!) was the dubious process in history presidential history."

What was dubious about it? It worked exactly the way it was supposed to work.

Like I told Shaolin: Claim you don't like the American electoral process if you want, but don't claim Bush wasn't elected by it - that is simply incorrect.

"We supplied him with arms regardless of what his intentions were as long as they weren't going to be pointed back at us."

Wrong. We supplied him with arms for a very specific intention. You don't honestly think we just randomly gave him weapons, do you?

"As ever politicians with friends or their own hands in distributions et al of arms are interested in one thing only MONEY."

I couldn't make any sense of this sentance.

"True you Braden can say that Bush is not a crook and what a stylishly mature answer it was of you to give as opposed to being honest and openly admitting that your President is far from virginal."

a) He's not my president.

b) Since when was his virginity being discussed?

c) You're the one who asked the question. If it's worthy of being mocked as 'stylishly mature', remember you're the one who brought started that line of questioning.

"No he shouldn't initiate self-defeating policies at all, but what he should do is initiate policies that will work for his people and not for his own benefit."

And that's what he (and many others) believe he is doing.

You could well disagree with him. You could well be right. That doesn't change his (or others) beliefs though.

"I will ignore this quote because i cannot believe that this is meant to be the childish playground infant humour that it purposts to be."

Maybe you shouldn't ignore it. It was brought up to challenge your claim that he isn't compassionate.

"Do you seriously expect an individual to match the head of a country's charity from a financial level?"

No, I expect you to provide a basis for your comment. You haven't.

"Going on holiday for manoths and the commencement of one's primary term of office to the white house presidency is totally innapropriate especially as there were so many pressing issues at hand."

Actually, it's fairly common. The 'regime' doesn't shift immediately, so there is often little to do until it does. The leaving 'regime' tends to vote against anything you try to do until they are shifted out, just wasting tax payer money.

"All he could do was hide away, wheres the stealth in that?"

Again, I couldn't make any sense of this sentance.

"The Christian fundamentalism that wreaks in the American education system of creationism and the denial of Dwarwinist theories that science has long held to be the origins of life, and certain fundamentalists that are curbing it in schools in the US."

You're incorrect on a number of accounts.

a) Christian fundamenalism isn't opposed to Darwinism.

b) Darwinism is taught in the American education system.

c) Just as an aside, Darwinism isn't about the origin of life.

"The same fundamentalists that are supported by the Republican government."

People with certain religious beliefs aren't allowed to participate in democracy?

"Your views are nearly as poor and blinkered as Sapphyre's, maybe even worse... When you direct the 'Ignorant people' quote to me without effort it seems to bounce back into your court."

So you claim. It would be a more effective claim if you backed it up though.

P.S. Please refrain from ad hominems, it's really not very classy.