Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
A Black Boot in the Face for Christmas . . .




(7 votes) (report abuse)
|
Comment from a stupid liberal
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (7 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Even as a liberal, I can see the sense in a lot of what you say. And if fact I think I could even expand on some of the outrage of government assisted medical assistance. But because I am less intelligent and foolish according to you, what's the point of participating on this thread? | |
|
RE: Comment from a stupid liberal
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Only a fool would call himself a fool and then proceed to be one. Peace |
||
|
RE: Comment from a stupid liberal
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (0 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| I didn't use the word "stupid". I wrote "foolish" and "naive". Smart people can be both at times. If you want to call yourself stupid, so be it. Perhaps some self-examination is in order. Otherwise, please go back and re-read what I've written. | ||
|
Baloney for Christmas
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (8 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
What a load of baloney. I would agree with the statements you make if the subject were "Americans" and not just "liberals." If you think "conservatives" don't do exactly the same thing you're kidding yourself. And since when does the government mandating that citizens become a customer of huge corporations constitute SOCIALISM? Can you please share with us your definition of that word so that reasonable people who haven't drank the Repub or Dem Kool-Aid can understand what you're talking about, or at least so we can get you some help. Why don't you and your pals just stand up and scream: "I hate anybody who looks or thinks differently than me!" and get it over with. Then maybe we could move past all the ignorance and xenophobia toward some real help for our country, which it desperately needs. |
|
|
RE: Baloney for Christmas
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (1 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| "Help for our country" which in your opinion would be . . . ? Could it be the "hope and change" we've been promised? If so, where is it? I don't see more jobs (except maybe government jobs). I don't see our debt going down. I don't see our standard of living increasing. Oh, yeah - "It's all Bush's fault" - and we get to hear that for how much longer? As to your statement about government mandating that we buy from certain corporations - what the heck are you talking about? You think it's okay for government to order people to buy insurance, or face a fine? Since when do you like anyone forcing you to buy a particular product? Perhaps the government should now mandate what we buy at the grocery store. Or that we buy a certain type of car? Or clothing only made out of certain materials? Or houses that have been made "green" (or else we can't buy or sell them? Oh, wait a minute - I think they did propose that idea a while back). Sorry, but the only baloney being bought or sold is the baloney of healthcare and climate change - and I ain't buying it! | ||
|
Wrong side of bed...?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (9 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
Wow Ms. Kranky McKrankster. You sure showed those commie libs how the world really is..!! Which is...if you don't get your way, pout and shout. Merry Christmas Everybody...!!!!!!!!!!! :-) |
|
|
RE: Wrong side of bed...?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (1 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| If I don't get my way I "pout and shout"? Sounds more like Obama to me, buddy. As for getting up on the wrong side of the bed, that would be you - I get out of the right side of the bed, not the left. | ||
|
For the good of the American people
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (6 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
In case no one has noticed, the price of food is escalating rapidly these days at the same time the rest of the economy is flailing. It's the first sign we are headed to being leveled to the state of the rest of the world. And isn't that the intention of the well-meaning globalists anyway. Making us all equally needy. It won't be fun but it will be interesting. |
|
|
RE: For the good of the American people
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Sorry, but US Bureau of Labor Statistics disagrees with you. data for Nov 2009 suggests ex- actly the opposite of what you assert. "Foods -> Foods at Home" prices are DOWN -2.9% year-on-year. [ref link] I'm sure there are other signs that the econopocalypse is coming. But not grocery costs. |
||
|
For the good of the American people
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
I don't believe your statistics. I can see for myself when I buy crackers that what used to cost 99 cents, now costs $5.00! Dream on. Who does your shopping? |
||
|
RE: For the good of the American people
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (0 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| i do all the shopping for our household, thank you very much. if you'd like to see my excel spreadsheet where i track my expenses, whip up an email address and i'll forward you the data. | ||
|
RE: For the good of the American people
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
heck with the email address. put this in your pipe and smoke it. My Expense Chart - http://is.gd/5AzC4 it ain't perfect, but it's close enough for me and the wife to sort out expenses. where's the drastic increase you speak of? that month where i spent $100 on doc bronners soap cause it was on sale? edit: Who does YOUR shopping? and what is this item you speak of, that once cost $0.99 and now costs $5? exactly WHEN did this item cost $0.99? and exactly WHERE do you now purchase it for $5? i think you're full of crap, 'cuz you apparently don't know anything about buying groceries. or economic statistics. or rational arguments. or how to research crap you want to rail against. |
||
|
RE: For the good of the American people
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| Thank goodness there are people like cwrite who "get it". The rest of you fools will have to learn the hard way - too bad more intelligent people have to suffer along with you as well, though. | ||
|
RE: For the good of the American people
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| In other words, don't confuse the issue by resorting to facts. | ||
|
RE: For the good of the American people
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
False. A large part of my job is purchasing food, mostly staple items like flour, eggs, dairy & produce. Based on this experience I can say that you don't "get it." Our prices spiked through 2008 with the top being late summer or autumn of last year. Dairy is back up before the holidays, the way it always is, but still well below the price from last year at this time. Overall, through a combination of softer prices and smart shopping our food cost has fallen in over 90% of our recipes since then. If you are buying mostly packaged food you might be seeing an increase, but if that's the case you're already paying too much, and it less to do with Obama's political machine than Wal-Mart's or Albertsons'. |
||
|
7 days left in this decade
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (10 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Congratulations A/B, that is the stupidest thing posted here. Ever. | |
|
RE: 7 days left in this decade
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| Thank you. I'll remember that when we're all poorer - or perhaps working on some government farm somewhere digging ditches, wearing those square little commie caps you all seem to be so fond of wearing. | ||
|
Wee three trees
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
The danger of a New World Order is far greater than the danger from the farce that is Global Warming. For it is by this lie that the afore mentioned will be achieved. Al Gore should start smoking hash again, grow his beard and stand at the corner of Haight and Ashbury holding a sign that says the "End is Near." because for him it is. The farce of Global warming is daily being exposed to the chilly winds of truth. Peace |
|
|
RE: Wee three trees
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| Liberal Doses also gets it. That's the trouble - if you look back on how evil people come into power, it is always by the same means. The gullible masses are fed lies and promises, which they take to be true and sincere on the surface, instead of examining things more deeply. (We have our public schools to thank for indoctrinating our children not to think). By the time the people wake up, it is usually too late. There are always those few, however, that see what's coming and attempt to alert people, but they are usually met with derision, as we (LD,me,cwrite and others) are on this blog. If things continue as they have been, and you find yourselves living as I've described above, remember all of those who tried to warn you. | ||
|
Take your tea and stuff it in your liberal pipe, Denny Rehberg.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| AB, you make Denny Rehberg look like a limp-wristed note-taker at a staff meeting for the New York Times' Arts/Culture department. You should run to unseat that pseudo-conservative punk. I mean who DOES he think that he's representing, if it's not the decent, caring conservatives like yourself who rightfully fear for our nation? | |
|
RE: Take your tea and stuff it in your liberal pipe, Denny Rehberg.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Xfool, You confuse nation with administration. Peace |
||
|
RE: Take your tea and stuff it in your liberal pipe, Denny Rehberg.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (6 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| Really? name-calling? is that what it's come to for you now? No other possibilities of advancing your beliefs? | ||
|
Tolerant haters
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
Environmentalists railed against drilling for oil here. They protested, shouted and waved banners. They championed the environment. Despite the evidence that drilling on land and off-shore was very safe.(Low incidents of oil spills, containment of spills effective, and reclamation of drill sites successful) they achieved their goal, wildcatters were shut down and oil that would have been drilled for here was then acquired from overseas. Towns in the oil belt suffered disastrous economic collapse. When the mega environmental disasters of Exxon Valdez and others where millions of gallons of oil were spilled into the ocean. There were no protesting, banner waiving, shouting environmentalists calling for the end of tanking oil. SILENCE is all we had. The real motive was made clear by the perpetuation of a lie and the lie was used to achieve the motive. To weaken America by making her dependent upon foreign oil sources. The zippered mouths of the environmentalists during the big spills shouted loudly that the environment was a sacrificial means to a political end. Under Bush during the wars, Code stink took to the steps every weekend protesting the wars. Under Obama, the steps have been bare. Bozemanista, attempts to quell other opinions by trying to transfer a false premise of hate on the part of the person with whom they disagree. This is the stuff of tolerant hate, of fascism. It appears Bozemanista, you are in no need of a definition as you live it. Peace |
|
|
Uh what?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
When the mega environmental disasters of Exxon Valdez and others where millions of gallons of oil were spilled into the ocean. There were no protesting, banner waiving, shouting environmentalists calling for the end of tanking oil. SILENCE is all we had. http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-8119136.html More delusions |
|
|
RE: Uh what?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| UH, WHAT? Are you kidding me? The media went on for months about the Exxon Valdez. Environmentalists have been calling for the end of oil use PERIOD. | ||
|
RE: Uh what?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
ROL, I guess you got me there. A pittance of proof. You can also find articles in the early eighties about how the world was going to end due to global cooling. So much for truth. There were, as Alpha says far more E-wackos supporting the bad idea of ending drilling here. Peace |
||
|
Thank You, xfile 1069
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Considering that many (if not most) Republicans are, and have been, (for quite some time) limp-wristed, milk-toast "conservatives", I'll take that as a compliment. If you think I like what the Republicans have been and are lately, you don't get me. I don't like either side. | |
|
Umm...Duh...!! ?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
The reason oil rigs aren't drilling is because the price is below $100 a barrel. That is a cold hard fact. Deal with it. If the oil companies wanted to drill...you'd be hearing the retarded "Drill Baby Drill" mantra everywhere...again. Don't worry...whether manufactured or real...a pseudo-crisis will emerge where oil will skyrocket once again. The oil companies still have the previous administration to thank for the ridiculous $160 a barrel 16 months ago. |
|
|
RE: Umm...Duh...!! ?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Well . . . a deep subject. You might be surprised to know that I agree with your statement "Don't worry...whether manufactured or real...a pseudo-crisis will emerge where oil will skyrocket once again." We saw that clear back in the 70's - a real farce. However, through crisis or no crisis, the enviros would like to see us off oil completely. Not necessarily a bad thing, if there is something to replace it in a timely fashion. I believe we ought to be drilling for oil AND working on the technology/sources to replace it. But let's not put the cart before the horse. Right now, we need oil, and it ought to come from our own country as much as possible. As for your original response to Liberal Doses, you veered off course and missed his point entirely. Did you not read WHY there was silence on the part of the enviros as he pointed out in his response? You must have missed his line, "The real motive was made clear by the perpetuation of a lie and the lie was used to acheive the motive. To weaken America by making her dependent upon foreign oil sources. The zippered mouths of the environmentalists during the big spills shouted loudly that the environment was a sacrificial means to a political end." In other words, the environmentalists' agenda certainly is about more than the environment. Please think about it carefully. |
||
|
RE: Umm...Duh...!! ?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Alamator, Is global warming a cold hard fact too? LOL!!! Peace |
||
|
RE: Umm...Duh...!! ?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (1 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Since the topic has veered totally off course...maybe I could use your tactic of changing direction completely. Tens of thousands of scientists say there is evidence of man caused global warming/climate change. That is a fact. Much more of the "fact" of WMD's in Iraq or how we should have put all our Social Security $$ in the stock market. How's that for mis-direction? Kinda stupid...isn't it? |
||
|
Weakness
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (7 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
I notice you really have no evidence to support this idiotic fantasy of yours. Which would be required by anyone with a modicum of integrity, before you go out and slander a group of people. You carry a lot of hatred and anger. You slander a group of people for attributes and opinions that you make up. You know who else did that? Hitler. |
|
|
RE: Weakness
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Belgrade, Janet Napolitano is another. Peace |
||
|
RE: Weakness
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
You'd better study Hitler a little more thoroughly. The same ideas and techniques employed by Hitler are being utilized to program YOU for acceptance of a New World Order. And just where are the facts on YOUR side regarding "climate change", by the way? Still awaiting proof. As far as name-calling, you're not exactly as pure as the driven snow, sweetie. I suggest you go to Wikipedia and read "Nazi Propaganda". At the top is a note from the Wikipedia founder himself urging people to read it. Two things struck me as funny and relevant to today. The Christians in this country, like the Jews in Germany, are being more and more marginalized and blamed. The propaganda posters remind me of current posters of Obama, wherein both Hitler and Obama are portrayed as "Messiah-like" figures. Funny how propaganda ideas and techniques back then still work today to deceive the gullible masses. |
||
|
RE: Weakness
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
You certainly do espouse a lot of hatred, mainly because you fail totally in trying to understand their argument. There are reasonable arguments on the liberal side, the conservative side seems to abandon reason lately and go for the hysterical statements, of which you are one of the biggest hysterical people I have seen. I have a good knowledge of history, including the propaganda of Germany during that era, you are of the personality type that did Hitler's bidding. Every significant scientific organization in the entire world believes mankind is responsible for global climate change, so pull your head out and make your case why they are all wrong and you are right. |
||
|
approval
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| AB, Baby Jesus approves of your hatred of liberals, teachers, limp wrists, environmentalists, etc, etc, etc... | |
|
RE: approval
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Germx, One who invokes the name of Jesus facetiously to ridicule another should take great pause to consider just whom they are offending. Peace |
||
|
RE: approval
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| I've never said I hate liberals, or homosexuals or anybody. YOU have said that, because you have a different definition of love and hate than I do. Real love speaks the truth to people. Hate offers up lies and deceit. I do not hate PEOPLE, I hate the lies they fall for. | ||
|
RE: approval
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| Merry XXXXX-mas to you too LD. | ||
|
RE: approval
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| AB, if you don't "hate" then what they hell do you call this original post? And the thing is, I am going to challenge you on that, whatever you are talking about, it certainly comes from a deep seated hatred of people. Half of Obama's critics are so consumed in hatred they can make no coherent or rational argument. It gets really tiresome, especially from a people who a few years ago were attacking everyone who did not support the President as un American. Either you are a hypocrite or unAmerican, which one is it? | ||
|
a
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| AB is LOL funny. Happy holidays, or should I say merry x-mas ? | |
|
RE: a
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| Please do not say "merry x-mas." It is offensive to me as a Christian, as Christ is not an "x". But, in this "tolerant", liberal environment, it has been okay to offend, degrade and otherwise belittle Christians, so I don't expect any forthcoming apology. | ||
|
RE: a
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
But, in this "tolerant", liberal environment, it has been okay to offend, degrade and otherwise belittle Christians, so I don't expect any forthcoming apology. When is the last time you ever apologized for offending? This entire stupid thread and your incredibly stupid premise are offensive to the nth degree. Merry XXXXX-mas |
||
|
RE: a
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| yeah, it may not be christianity they are offending, AB, it may be your perversion of it | ||
|
HEGEL
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
1)Libs> Thesis 2)Cons> Antithesis 3)Agenda> Synthesis 1 and 2 are interchangeable, 3 is a given. The major triumph of modern technology is that humans are now easier to program than lab rats. |
|
|
RE: HEGEL
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| You ever heard of something called a "slide" in psychology? The people on this blog are regularly susceptible to it. | ||
|
RightofLeft
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
I consider the source. As usual, you delivered. Merry Christmas! (P.S. - It is clear that you hate me and all that I stand for, therefore I expect your lack of tolerance towards me. What about other Christians out there that you may have offended with your "Merry xxxxmas"? Are they to be the brunt of your hatred as well, although they have done you no harm, not even name calling? Just a thought - once again, "Merry Christmas"). IN REPLY TO ROL BELOW: Jesus did come to town once. He did nothing but preach love and peace - and the truth! And they crucified him for it. The same thing would happen today - if God let it. |
|
|
RE: RightofLeft
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
A/B do you really want to know what I think? O.K. A man or woman is a frame made bone and sinew covered with muscle and skin and filled with blood and a brain. A human or a person is created when you fill that brain with ideas or thoughts or beliefs. Hate the ideas, thoughts or beliefs and you pretty much hate the person. If Jesus came to town next week and began preaching his message of tolerance, respect and peace you would label him a socialist and run him out of town or worse. Your discussion here exhibits the worst aspects of humanity. The sad thing is you are too dull witted to even recognize that. I do not hate you or your ideas but I feel sorry for you. Peace. |
||
|
RE: RightofLeft
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Great points, ROL. Alphabeagle is exactly the reason why I choose to stay as far away from religion, particularly Christianity, as possible. If s/he represents faith I want nothing of it. |
||
|
RE: RightofLeft
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (1 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| And you would be the one handing the nails and hammer to the Roman soldiers | ||
|
P.S. . . .
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Are scientists a different species? In other words, are they not subject to temptations - greed, lust, deceit, etc., like other human beings? Are they all honest and totally objective? Perhaps someone should do some research in this area. | |
|
The Secretive Copenhagen Treaty
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Belgrade - Science is not a popularity contest. Apparently you believe it is, simply because a group of scientists say mankind is causing climate change. Other scientists, (some who have been threatened for speaking out) disagree. "Scientists" concluded at one time that the earth was flat, too. That idea, too, was "popular" and considered "fact" until one scientist came along and proved the rest of them wrong. Lone scientists have been met with derision and laughter in every era, only to provide proof that their ideas were right. Again, where is the "proof" that mankind is causing climate change and the ensuing destruction of the planet? Who is "hysterical"? People like you who run around like henny-penny, yelling "The Sky is Falling!" when in fact it is you who are "falling" for an agenda? If what I say you take to be "hatred" of you by me, so be it. Like I said earlier, I have a different definition of love and hate, apparently, for I cannot consider something to be love if it is apart from truth. I urge you and others to read what Lord Monckton has to say about the secretive Copenhagen treaty. Type in "Monckton: Secretive Copenhagen Treaty Creates Larcenous Global Government Tax". Only idiots would fall for this evil and greedily conceived agenda. Read it and think, please. | |
|
The Secretive Copenhagen Treaty
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (6 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Thank you A-B for reminding the locals that there are agendas bigger than theirs. |
||
|
RE: The Secretive Copenhagen Treaty
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
AB, the idea that the world was flat was not based on scientific study. In fact, I believe the idea that the earth was the center of the universe, and the world was flat was actually pushed by religious officials. It isn't that it is a popular belief, it is that nearly everyone in the scientific community has arrived at the conclusion. Just because you and Lord Monckton (a policy analyst) think you have a bunch of words that sounds sciency doesn't mean it is science. The fact that EVERY scientific organization in the world (not the fake ones sponsored by exxon, maybe they are subject to temptation) has come out saying that mankind is contributing to global climate change and they present their case should at the very least force you to come out with a better response than temptation or corruption. I am far more willing to believe you are some paranoid delusionist than to believe that all of science is corrupt and covering up this giant conspiracy, because they want the grant money. I mean, it is up to YOU to present a coherent argument and give evidence supporting your deranged attack on the scientific community. You are not looking at the evidence, you are dogmatically believing in a conspiracy you want desperately to believe. That is why you never present a case, you only present accusations. And, because your accusations are so far off, there is nothing holding you back from making vitriolic, unhinged accusations about people you don't like. It isn't the Chicken Little analogy, it is the head-in-the-sand analogy. People like you are holding this world back from wise progress. |
||
|
Speaking of Popularity Contests . . .
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Belgrade will like this. It became "popular" to blame the Jews for the problems Germans were facing prior to World War II. Hitler and his propaganda machine saw to that. I don't consider myself to be in a popularity contest, but judging by the "1-stars" given to me here, I believe that some may think that will discourage me from continuing to post the truth. It won't. | |
|
RE: Speaking of Popularity Contests . . .
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| I'd sure like you to try to post the truth. At least something close to it. Ye should know the truth, then maybe you won't be so worried about your freedoms. | ||
|
Answer me this . . .
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| You seem to be conveniently ignoring the intercepted e-mails and the "mysteriously vanished" scientific data that came to light recently. And again, there are many scientists that are not being heard regarding "global climate change". These e-mails suggest corruption not only in the political community, but the scientific community as well. And did you read what Lord Monckton said? Were you there at the Copenhagen summit, as he was? I would suggest that he knows far more what's happening than you do, even though he is "just" a "policy analyst". (I have to go - more later). | |
|
RE: Answer me this . . .
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
"You seem to be conveniently ignoring the intercepted e-mails and the "mysteriously vanished" scientific data that came to light recently." No, you seem to be focused on the stolen, illegally obtained E-mails that when analyzed have show only one thing. That although these scientists were acting in a manner that is poor and venal, their findings were not changed. Add that to the Myth that the data was destroyed or "mysteriously vanished". It was not, it did not. You need to read sources besides those that support what you have already decided to be fact. Pfffft. Whats the point, believe what you want. I don't care. |
||
|
On Sources
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| What hypocrites! You accuse others of things you blatantly do yourselves. Whatever sources I've offered up, you've refuted with simple name-calling, calls of "paranoid conspiracies" and so on. Even a slap in the face with the obvious wouldn't wake you up! Continue accepting like sheep whatever those in power, or those "experts", want you to hear and believe. Believe everything (from the government, especially). Question nothing. See where that gets you. | |
|
Poor AB...
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
your unfortunate situation as a shut-in, unable to go outside and take a look at how the rest of the world operates, is showing. Paranoid conspiracies are the dirty products of small minds. Get ahold of yourself. |
|
|
RE: Poor AB...
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Don't pity me - pity yourself for being so blind. You want a list of scientists and their findings that are contrary to the henny-penny scientists running around crying that man is destroying the earth through "climate change"? How about starting with the "List of Scientists Opposing the Mainstream Scientific Assessment of Global Warming"? (Whoops - first it was "global cooling" (the 70's) then "global warming", and now "climate change" (just in case one or the other, or both, happen to occur, they've now got it covered). Just type in this article title. Like I said, none of this is a popularity contest, particularly when we don't like to face an unpopular truth, or the fact that a bunch of evil, greedy elite have figured out a vehicle through which they can promote one-world government while increasing their power and riches at the expense of the rest of us, "We the Sheeple". I also suggest you read "The Climate-Change Fraud" by John Magnun. This whole thing is the biggest scandal science has seen in a long time. Worry about a few "stolen" e-mails if you will (remember taxpayers paid for a lot of the equipment, including computers, and "studies", etc.), but this is a much bigger "crime", if you will, in my book. (Whenever someone uncovers such a scandal, I don't consider them criminals, particularly if it involves the spending of taxpayer's money. Taxpayers paid for and "own" these things. They have a right to the information and to know what's being done with it. Those who uncovered the Acorn scandal are also not criminals, in my book). |
||
|
RE: Poor AB...
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| You should up the dosage on your meds. You appear to be in "ranting and raving" mode. | ||
|
RE: Poor AB...
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (6 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
So says danie from his bunker, huffing the fumes of his Sterling generator and calling those who disagree with the notion of global name change, haters. Peace |
||
|
For that matter . . .
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Read these specific articles I mentioned above. Then go back and simply type "climate change fraud" and you'll bring up a whole plethora of articles and research to back what I'm saying - for they all say basically the same thing - that it's a fraud, that data has been manipulated, and the goal is what it has been for a long time - to create a one-world government which will put the power, money and the management of the world's resources into the hands of an elite, evil and greedy few. And you fools welcome that with open arms! | |
|
RE: For that matter . . .
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
A zillion hits on "climate change fraud" doesn't affect where the actual truth may lie. I can say that gravity is 4.9m/s2, and you can say that it's 9.8m/s2. It doesn't mean that the force of gravity then falls somewhere in the middle. It means that i'm wrong, and you're right. Which i know you've been wanting to hear all along, ever since you called me a fool and pointed out how poorly i am living, how expensive my food and rent are, how i'm vaguely fearful of some unknown, how i can't seem to get ahead, and how "When you liberals wake up one day [...] What you might see is a fool with a boot crushed into his face." I guess we should all say "Thanks, AlphaBeagle, for trying to help those of us who just don't get it." |
||
|
Hear this
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
You could sure use a healthy dose of "Believe none of what you read and half of what you see", AB. It is funny that you condemn name calling, yet you are one of the biggest participants of it on this forum. |
|
|
RE: Hear this
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Yes, Chicken Dena, and I am sure that is something you practice regularly, along with your own name-calling (LOL). How unfortunate that you skip over the fact that I've also called liberals well-meaning. I truly believe most of you do mean well - that you have very idealistic standards, and would like to see a world in which everyone gets along. Wouldn't we all? Unfortunately, not everyone wants the best for this world. They want the best for themselves - at any cost. And sometimes that cost has been millions upon millions of people murdered (re - Stalin, Moa, etc.). Unfortunately, many of these types of people end up in power - not neccessarily out in front of everyone, but behind the scenes, manipulating. I urge you once again to read up on Maurice Strong - one of the powerful men behind Al Gore and this climate change fraud. If only liberals could recognize the evils in the world while maintaining their idealism, maybe we'd see more eye-to-eye. |
||
|
RE: Hear this
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| you cast serious aspersions at liberals, going so far as to basically blame us in advance for "A boot of socialist (or communist) 'ideals' forever pressed into the face of humanity." - but then you want to have all of that neutralized by saying "...I've also called liberals well-meaning"? | ||
|
RE: Hear this
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
I do keep that saying in mind, as should you, AB. I rarely admonish name-calling. It needs to be done in a more cerebral way to entertain me though. Many of your "go-to" insults are incredibly passé and trite. PS: don't lump me in with Liberals just because I think you have harebrained ideas. |
||
|
This stupid discussion
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
Xfile, thanks for bringing this back to its original point. AB you post that crap on Christmas Eve and blame the worlds ills on liberals. That is the story. |
|
|
Shoot the messenger
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (5 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
As so frequently happens on this forum, the “discussion” has devolved into vilifying the poster rather than presenting one's own opinion and take on the issue. [*sigh*] While I don't completely agree with where AlphaBeagle goes with her argument, I understand the concern about creeping socialism, and share it to some degree. “Climategate” and activities at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference raise some serious questions that need to be thoroughly answered — not merely deflected — before we consider signing on to an agreement that makes us subject to global regulation. In the words of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, I believe that “Sunlight is the best disinfectant”. Here's some additional food for thought: Across the Atlantic, as the northern hemisphere was plunged into its third freezing winter in succession, violent snowstorms left more than two thirds of the US and almost the whole of Canada under December snow for the first time in decades. In the wake of that acrimonious shambles in Copenhagen, ever more questions are now being asked not only over the validity of the science behind the belief that man-made CO2 is causing runaway global warming but about the methods being used to meet that supposed threat. |
|
|
RE: Shoot the messenger
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
The referenced article is surely worth the read. But as for shooting the messenger - there was never a messenger. Messengers carry a message, not a slew of childish insults and baseless presumptions about the intended audience (based on the closing paragraph: "When YOU liberals wake up one day..."). If the poster was honestly intending to forge a better understanding of the issues we face, is that really the best way to go about it - by attacking the intended audience with the assertion that they live in a world of fear, are unknowingly unable to get ahead, are "not getting it", and that they'll one day awaken to the commie-pocalypse that their beliefs will surely result in? There was never a messenger. There was only a rude diatribe against people who hold opposing beliefs. |
||
|
RE: Shoot the messenger
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Again ad nauseum I would like to point out that Climate and Weather are two completely different subjects. "Across the Atlantic, as the northern hemisphere was plunged into its third freezing winter in succession, violent snowstorms left more than two thirds of the US and almost the whole of Canada under December snow for the first time in decades. What?????????????? That's why it is called winter! In Decades??? Total and complete bullfeathers! "In the wake of that acrimonious shambles in Copenhagen, ever more questions are now being asked not only over the validity of the science behind the belief that man-made CO2 is causing runaway global warming but about the methods being used to meet that supposed threat." In the above article again a pundit confuses the two. “Climategate” and activities at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference raise some serious questions that need to be thoroughly answered — not merely deflected — before we consider signing on to an agreement that makes us subject to global regulation. I agreed with that sentiment, but only as long as those who doubt the threat of climate change are honest and quit attempting to portray a cold snap as proof that this planet is not warming. Climate change means strange and wild swings in weather. This winters already strange weather patterns are most likely attributable to an ENSO pattern (El Nino) not proof that climate change a fact or is bogus. |
||
|
RE: Shoot the messenger
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Thank you gixa. Perhaps I state things in a poor way at times. And I do use some really nasty names like "fool" (ouch) and "naive" (ooch) at times. But I don't HATE anybody - sorry if people take it that way. If I hated people, I wouldn't say what I believe is the truth. I'd just sit back, smile benignly, tell myself I have no right to speak out, and watch everything crumble apart. Anyway, it is nice to have you come in and contribute. People like you help get the message out on many things. Whether others "get" it or not - oh well, we try, don't we? |
||
|
This
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| can not be serious. Fascism, Hitler, Lord Monckton, Christ, Global Warming--all in one discussion? There must be some sort of contest. Is there extra credit if I mention the Bildaberger group? Are they associated with the Build- A- Bear company? It could be as it ia a given that the Build-A-Bear people are promoting the liberal concept of global warming. | |
|
RE: This
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| Interesting, huh? Thanks for helping take it in those directions. As for the "Build-A-Bear" company - love their poster which shows several children and a polar bear under the caption "Climate Police". Doing a good job of indoctrinating young minds to report on parents, neighbors and others who might be committing "climate crimes". | ||
|
RE: This
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Well......... since this has turned into such a freewheeling discussion. Just for you AB. The Myth of the Copenhagen Conspiracy Unfiltered By Nick Gier, Unfiltered 12-18-09 THE MYTH OF THE COPENHAGEN CLIMATE CONSPIRACY By Nick Gier, Professor Emeritus, University of Idaho In the first of his two alarmist, hyperbolic, and scatological columns on the “Copenhagen Conspiracy” (Nov. 28 & Dec. 12), Idaho State Journal columnist Richard Larsen calls on the authority of the Lord Christopher Monckton, a journalist and adviser to former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Larsen must be referring to Monckton’s October 14 speech to the Minnesota Free Market Institute in which he declared that man-made global warming is a hoax. In this address Monckton revealed the Copenhagen Conspiracy, which predicts that in Copenhagen Obama and other world leaders will set up a Communist world government under the guise of flawed climate studies. Earlier in the year scientists from RealClimate.org studied some of Monckton’s graphs, and they decided that the Third Viscount of Brenchley misrepresented data from the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and manipulated other evidence to conclude that there has been substantial cooling since 2002. The World Meteorological Institute, that left-wing organization that feeds lies to your weather reporter every evening, just released a report indicating that the first years of the 21st Century (except for 1998) were the warmest on record. After pointing all of the errors and deceptions in one of Monckton’s graphs on CO2 emissions, NASA’s Gavin Schmidt asks “How can this be described except as fake?” Larsen’s failure to check out Monckton’s credibility seriously undermines his own. Larsen joins other global warming deniers in capitalizing on illegally obtained e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University. At least seven experts in science ethics have read the e-mails and they have concluded that, while there was intemperate language about climate skeptics, there was neither fabrication nor manipulation of data. A very recent study done by two University of Washington scientists, posted on RealClimate.org, compared the CRU weather data against independent variables and demonstrated that there was no cheating on their part. An Italian scientist did a check using a different method and also vindicated the embattled researchers. Much hay has been made of East Anglia researcher Phil Jones’ use of a “trick” in one of his papers, but in this context it simply means an ingenious way of presenting data. One e-mail indicated that two papers by climate skeptics might be withheld from the 2007 IPCC report, but in the end both papers were included and discussed. Larsen calls on the authority of three other climate skeptics. The first one is Tim Ball, who lied that he was the first Ph.D. in climatology in Canada. Ball has had no peer-reviewed papers in the field for 13 years, and the Calgary Herald states that he is a “paid promoter of the oil and gas industry rather than a practicing scientist.” Larsen’s second reference is Patrick Michaels, a fellow at the free market CATO Institute, about whom climate scientist Tom Wigley states: “Michaels’ statements on the subject of computer models are a catalogue of misrepresentations and misinterpretation. Many of the supposedly factual statements made in his testimony are either inaccurate or are seriously misleading.” Larsen’s third witness is John Theon, who has not done any science for thirty years, and therefore has no expertise to comment on sophisticated computer climate modeling. As a former NASA official, Theon falsely claims to have been James Hansen’s boss, and he is the source of Larsen’s libelous claim that Hansen, one of the nation’s top climate scientists, manipulated data. With regard to Lord Monckton’s visions of Communist world government, legal experts say that this is completely unfounded and paranoid. On this issue the Truth-O-Meter at Pultizer-winning, fact-checking Politifact.com points to “Britches on Fire” for Monckton’s McCarthy-like pronouncements. In Copenhagen Monckton confronted young protesters and called them “Hitler Youth.” Even when one of the students identified himself as Jewish and said that his grandparents died in the Holocaust, Monckton continued to insult the protesters. This certainly is not a proper way for a British peer to conduct himself. His lordship behaves far worse in public than the East Anglia researchers did in private e-mails. When Richard Larsen calls climate scientists’ independently validated work “execrable man-made concoctions,” one could also say that this is certainly not good form for an award-winning columnist. Nick Gier taught philosophy at the University of Idaho for 31 years. Read or listen to all of his columns at www.NickGier.com |
||
|
AB, don't you have someting better to do....
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (6 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
like taking care of your kids throughout the day instead of hawking over this forum? Are they in front of the TV playing XBox while you fabricate hatred? I look back through the posts and it's like you're commenting 24/7. Stop being such a neglectful parent. You rail against this kind thing with you're righteous, Christian rantings on a regular basis. Practice what you preach, for God's, Christ's and Pete's sake. |
|
|
RE: AB, don't you have someting better to do....
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
The kids are grown. My life is quite busy, and if you've really been paying attention, you'd realize I haven't commented for quite a while. This is the first posting I've done for some time. If you knew what I'm really dealing with, and doing, you might be surprised. But I won't go there as I wish to remain anonymous. By the way, I notice that almost every time I'm on here, so are you. So who's calling the kettle black? I may call names such as "fool", not singling any particular person out, and really referring to their ideas as a whole, but where do you get off calling me a "neglectful parent" without ANY facts at your disposal? My children are grown and great - hard workers, wonderful parents. I'm very close to them and they to me, as I am to my grandchildren. The hatred is free-flowing from your side. I say that because I am concentrating on the issues - you seem to be concentrating on ME personally, as have others in this posting. No one has answered my questions. As for RightofLeft, he quotes one article here and there and seems to think that, once again, the facts are settled. I tell people to type in "Climate Change Fraud" in order to peruse a plethora of articles quoting scientists that support the other side of things. In the end, this is an issue that is not settled. And as far as I can see, it is an issue that is being exploited for power and money. Al Gore has already enriched himself beyond the average Joe's wildest dreams, as have others. This is why I call people, mainly liberals who believe in all this, "foolish" and "naive". Sorry if I hurt your feelings, but what else is it, if not foolish and naive to go along with something that is clearly being exploitative of the masses for the gain of a few? |
||
|
Type in Climate Change Fraud
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
Good god but you really are dense. Any idea how a search engine works? Try typing in Climate Change Truth and tell me what you get. You are embarrassing yourself. |
|
|
RE: Type in Climate Change Fraud
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
Thanks for name calling - re: "dense". Tit for tat. At least I'm not the hypocrite you seem to be, for I've freely admitted, on more than one occasion, to name-calling. As for being "dense" - did you truly read what I said above? If I'm "dense", so are millions of others, including scientists, who disagree with you. It takes one to feel embarassed to embarass oneself, and I do not feel embarassed. I feel quite good to state my beliefs and back them up with as many articles as you do on your side. You see, the issue is NOT settled. The facts are NOT settled. Your argument above only supports that. From where I sit, this is an issue being exploited for power and money. And if you type in, "climate change being exploited for money" (or gain), you will also find a plethora of articles regarding that. Now go embarass yourself. P.S. - did as you said and typed in "climate change truth". How about going and reading, "The Climate Change "Truth" is Out There" by James Hrynyshyn. Oh, wait a minute - he's one of the millions of "dense" people. |
||
|
O.K. not dense, willfully stupid.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
AB search engines only give you what you give them. Of course if you type in "climate change being exploited for money" you will get articles, a plethora of them that cover "climate change being exploited for money". If you type in Climate change linked to male pattern baldness what do you think you will get? http://www.google.com/search?q=Climate+change+linked+to+male:en-US:official&client=firefox-a I have never said that this issue is settled, that is you that seems to believe so. |
|
|
RE: O.K. not dense, willfully stupid.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| Hmmm. Climate change and male pattern baldness? Creative. I think I will type it in just to see. The point is, the opinions are out there, the data is out there, on both sides, and the issue is NOT settled. It is clear from your last sentence that you DO NOT read or understand what I've said, for we're in agreement. The issue is NOT settled. However, just because the issue is not settled, does not mean that there aren't those out there trying to push the propaganda that it IS settled, and it doesn't mean that there aren't those out there trying to use it for their own agendas, involving the gain of money and power. You claim a belief in science - isn't science about probing, questioning, etc., not just blindly accepting what one person, one group or the government says as "gospel truth"? Shouldn't we all try to be "scientists" in our own little way, by questioning things? This is not believing in "conspiracies" (although to simply state they do not exist is "foolish") but believing that we should all question everything and everyone. This is all I'm doing, and you all seem to have a problem with it. | ||
|
RE: O.K. not dense, willfully stupid.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
AB, either stop calling it propaganda or call your own claims propaganda too. The science weighs pretty heavy on truth in many of the main climate change principles, but no, there is very little absolute proof in science. (There is no proof in religion) There are still many questions, but there are very clear indications that things are getting out of control, and that mankind is influencing that change beyond the natural cycle. People who apply scientific principles to their questions, are scientists. People who question widely held assumptions are skeptics. People who continue to doubt widely held assumptions despite strong evidence to and because they want those assumptions to be incorrect, are not skeptics. They are delusional. You have provided no evidence of the giant conspiracy that you claim. Don't cast yourself as someone who is weighing both sides, you are accusing one side of a massive, global con job. You need a little bit more than 1 freakin email that doesn't even say what you want it to say, for that to be debatable evidence. Haven't heard much from you about Obama's birth certificate, lately. What other whacky conspiracies are you holding on to still? |
||
|
Funny!
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (2 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| ROL - I did as you said, typing in "male pattern baldness and climate change" and got a very funny, tongue-in-cheek article: "On Male Pattern Balness and Global Warming" by Dr. William M. Briggs (the doctor must be one of the "dense" people). Do you suppose there is an article on "women's armpit hair and global warming"? Hmmm. Nah - too gross to think about. | |
|
Belgrade
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (3 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| I see you have your own definitions of what science is and is not. Many would disagree with your definitions and parameters besides me - including scientists. The only "fact" remaining is that there are scientists who, as I've said before, totally disagree with the global climate change theories. But you believe in popularity contests - I don't. You seem to believe whatever the government tells you - I don't. You aren't a skeptic - I am. I won't take what someone says - individual or organization - at face value when it comes to important issues, particularly those that affect my pocketbook and my freedom. I am particularly skeptical when I see the likes of Al Gore, jet-setting around the globe, riding in Limousines,crying about people destroying the planet through climate change, calling for all of us (the masses) to lower our standard of living, while Mr. Gore and other elites buy the perverse right to pollute through the purchase of "carbon points" and live in their 20-room mansions. Something is rotten in Denmark (particularly Copenhagen). Maybe you don't have a problem with hypocrites like Gore, but I and many others do. | |
|
RE: Belgrade
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (4 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
You are a hypocrite, so, of course you have a problem with Gore. It isn't a popularity contest, it is a conclusion most scientists have arrived at. The only people I hear debating the point are people who are not scientists. Lord Monckton, and Al Gore are not scientists, they are only advocates presenting science that support their conclusion. It is a fact that there is not one scientific organization of any significance that believes mankind is not responsible for some of the dramatic climate changes that are happening now. You can keep telling everyone about this stupid conspiracy of which you have no evidence for, but the fact remains that, in general, there is scientific consensus on this subject. This is America, we can find ways to maintain our standard of living, build our manufacturing base back, and decrease our dependence on hostile nations for our energy. I don't think government or private industry is going to do it by themselves, but there is enough evidence to suggest that we had better start working on something. |
||
|
On Hypocrites
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() (6 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
Seems the solution you've alluded to above involves the few getting richer and the rest of us getting poorer. And how am I a hyprocrite when it comes to Al Gore? I'm not the one running around like him, telling others to "cut back" while I enrich myself and buy phony carbon points. If you don't see that as hypocrisy, your head is in the sand. And that's either incredible denial or incredible stupidity, or both. Many things in this world have been decided by "consensus" that turn out to be wrong (not just in the scientific field, but in politics and other important areas as well). Many an expert has led the world astray. Many a scientist disagrees with the "consensus" on global warming - and they are not being heard, thanks to government media. It's the same with health care - just because the AMA supports this lousy bill does not mean the majority of doctors do. The AMA represents only about 10% of doctors. So a consensus of "organizations" needs to be looked at in the same way. The internet is one of a few places where you can read what scientists who disagree with climate change have to say - but apparently you do not want to read anything other than what the "consensus" is. If you want to believe it, and are ready to sacrifice in the name of "going green" (really a marketing ploy, in my opinion) - that's fine. Go ahead. I doubt that you or anyone else will make any pittance of a difference as far as "impacting" the earth. The biggest "impact" you will have will be on yourself and your own family - living more poorly. I do not wish to participate. You go ahead - I hope it gives you a warm, fuzzy feeling to believe you're doing a meaningful part. |
|
