RE: The Paris Response Ad

RE: The Paris Response Ad (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

DomKen -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 9:05:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: I think a few members owe BP an apology Neither you or BP are in any position to demand anything from people who routinely back up their facts, and acknowledge their errors. And nobody should let any comment from you on the topic of honesty pass without pointing how many threads you are running away from because you can't back up your claims...care to go back to the claim that Bush signed the 1993 legislation allowing predatory lending? Or your assessment of the history books reporting on a certain era? Or shall we stay in the present and see how many times you've written 2.7 million instead of 2 million 700 thousand, as you just ridiculed others for when you were called on your erronious attacks? Once more, for the new folks, neither of you are liberals or progressives in any way shape or form... you are either so benighted that you actually think that liberalism is all about lying and hatemongering and bigotry against anyone you can't bully into accepting your whacky BS assertions... or you are plants trying to portray all liberals as acting the way you do. Speaking of acknowledging errors, what fiscal year starts October 1, 2008? Oh, that's OK, I know you said the federal fiscal year starts in September, but it's no biggie. [:D] Off by a month compared to off by a year and acting like you were right even when you were wrong. For someone living in a glass house you sure do throw a whole lot of rocks.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 10:33:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bipolarber Excepting, Thad, that Obama's speech there was a last minute switch of locales. There really aren't all that many places in Berlin which could hold that many people except that stretch of Straße des 17 Juni zwischen Brandenburger Tor und das Siegessäule, and are reasonably close to transport; S-bahn Teirgarten and Bellevue, U-bahn Hansaplatz. Anybody who pisses and moans about Obama speaking there is simply ignorant of the geography of Berlin or is being deliberately deceptive.

Vendaval -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 1:25:02 PM)
Why couldn't she be? Name recognition and money and all. Plus she could do a make-over on his wardrobe. quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius Unfortunately, Paris can't be his running mate. Although it would make for a very "interesting" campaign.

BitaTruble -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 1:50:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval Why couldn't she be? Name recognition and money and all. Plus she could do a make-over on his wardrobe. She's not old enough.

Vendaval -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 1:54:41 PM)
Good point, Celeste. I was joking around. [;)]

thornhappy -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 7:06:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius Let's try making this simple to understand. He claimed that FERMI II (2) had a MELTDOWN. I haven't mentioned anything about the hazzards or potential hazzards of a mishap. I asked for the information showing that Fermi 2 had a meltdown, since I live in the state that it supposedly happened, and happened to live alot closer to it just a couple of years ago. SO if you would like to provide the information on when Fermi 2 had a meltdown, I would be very appreciative. Perhaps he confused it with Fermi I, a liquid sodium cooled, fast-breeder reactor that did have a partial fuel meltdown. The core overheated due to a piece of zirconium blocking some cooling channels. The zirconium, used to line the reactor vessel, was an undocumented engineering change. thornhappy

Owner59 -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 7:20:38 PM)
That`s the problem with nukes,especially in this country. In France,one company has made all the plants.The uniformity of design and quality control are key to safe operation. In this country,there`ll be multiple companies using different designs with different results,depending. Who wants to live near the plant, who`s builder is a corrupt,inept but well connected crook? Someone has to live there.... Nukes-R-stupid....

bipolarber -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 7:37:13 PM)
I have lots of reasons to distrust nuclear plants. Everytime I hear that they've been "engineered with a 0 fault capacity" I keep thinking of the Titanic as being "unsinkable." Where do you put the waste? It's dangerously radioactive for the next 10,000 years... we're going to fund it's storage for that long? When you transport the waste, by railcar, thorugh god knows how many cities and small towns across America, can you be absolutly certain that nothing can happen to those cannisters? Like terrorisim to derail the train and deliberate attempts to crack them open? (It's often said that you can engineer against accidents, but never against deliberate malice.) Earthquakes, hurricanes... any sort of natural disaster that could rob a core of it's cooling would cause a metdown and the spread of radiactive steam and fallout. Did anyone else catch the TV special "The Earth Without People?" The producers of that show went to a russian town that was near Chernobyl. It had to be evacuated when that plant went supercritical, and the "unsinkable" containment dome leaked. They dis so, because it was the best example of how a city would decay after being abandoned for 20 years... if it repeats, try to catch it. It's really facinating TV, and as those scenes pan by, just keep repeating to yourself, "John McCain want 47 new plants put up on the fast track... John McCain says they'll be safe... John McCain wants 47 new plants put up on the fast track..."

Alumbrado -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 7:50:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Off by a month compared to off by a year and acting like you were right even when you were wrong. For someone living in a glass house you sure do throw a whole lot of rocks. I asked how it was possible for Bush to have signed a budget in 1993, a month after he left office.. a question you are straining mightily to avoid answering... So, speaking of glass houses? Let's see...aren't you the one who denied there was a broken windshield in the Critical Mass video, and went to the lengths of saying it was a different video when proven wrong? And then when you were called on that, and on the arrest issue by someone else, you ran away from the thread, accusing me of lying, when I pointed out that you were fabricating stuff again? Weren't you the one who just called anyone who carries a gun to defend our nation, a coward? quote: I am perfectly and fully prepared to defend my family, my friends, my neighbors and my nation and I don't need to carry a gun to make that so. If you need a gun to be able to say that then you need to figure out why you're so afraid. Isn't this pretty much a non-stop occurence with you? A better way to not be laughed at when pontificating on honesty and integrity, might be choosing to exhibit a different standard of posting behavior than you've set forth up until now.

Owner59 -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 8:01:58 PM)
[sm=beatdeadhorse.gif]

Alumbrado -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 8:21:56 PM)
I quite agree... that horse stands a better chance of coming back to life, than certain reputations do.

MissSCD -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 8:25:07 PM)
*Other than the fact she refers to herself as hot, and I generally think of her as a snob, this ad blew me away. Totally blew me away.* *She has every right to defend herself against the White Headed dude, but to come up with an energy plan that congress is listening to now is a true accomplishment on her part.* *Maybe the White Headed dued will quick attacking people before he becomes the laughing stock of Washington.* *Regards, MissSCD*

DomKen -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 9:00:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Off by a month compared to off by a year and acting like you were right even when you were wrong. For someone living in a glass house you sure do throw a whole lot of rocks. I asked how it was possible for Bush to have signed a budget in 1993, a month after he left office.. a question you are straining mightily to avoid answering... I never said Bush signed anything in 2003. You never asked when he signed it in 1993. You asked when he submitted it and I answered sometime in 1992 as is definitely true and you made fun. So as usual you are trying to twist things to make yourself right even though you are absolutely wrong. To the rest you're full of it and any response would get me in more trouble with Mod XI. Why don't you do us both a favor, don't respond to my posts and I won't point out your lies and evasions.

Thadius -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 9:09:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius Let's try making this simple to understand. He claimed that FERMI II (2) had a MELTDOWN. I haven't mentioned anything about the hazzards or potential hazzards of a mishap. I asked for the information showing that Fermi 2 had a meltdown, since I live in the state that it supposedly happened, and happened to live alot closer to it just a couple of years ago. SO if you would like to provide the information on when Fermi 2 had a meltdown, I would be very appreciative. Perhaps he confused it with Fermi I, a liquid sodium cooled, fast-breeder reactor that did have a partial fuel meltdown. The core overheated due to a piece of zirconium blocking some cooling channels. The zirconium, used to line the reactor vessel, was an undocumented engineering change. thornhappy That is what I assumed, if you look at my response (#22 in this thread) about the reactors... until it got brought back up as being fact.

Alumbrado -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 9:30:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen I never said Bush signed anything in 2003. You never asked when he signed it in 1993. You asked when he submitted it and I answered sometime in 1992 as is definitely true and you made fun. So as usual you are trying to twist things to make yourself right even though you are absolutely wrong. To the rest you're full of it and any response would get me in more trouble with Mod XI. Why don't you do us both a favor, don't respond to my posts and I won't point out your lies and evasions. 2003? So far, your 'pointing out' isn't going so well..... If you have any evidence to back up your assertions, or to prove that you never said the things I've quoted, then posting it would be the logical thing to do... hiding behind the claim that the mods won't let you is pretty sad.... I can see why you are eager to keep me from responding to your posts, though... I have this habit of laughing at things that should properly be treated with sympathy... a trait that I will work on changing forthwith, in your case.

Owner59 -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 9:41:42 PM)
The comparison to and shot of the "crept keeper",was precious. The fuck`n cript keeper! lol ewwww! lol I`m not sure if the McCainiots realize that they are the butt of the joke. Can someone be so clueless that they don`t know they`re being laughed at? This never would have happened if McCain had engaged Obama`s policy ideas/positions w/ some dignity,rather than demeaning himself and the campaign by mocking Obama personally. I think we need someone a little quicker in office of president. This has been an entertaining week.

DomKen -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 9:42:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen I never said Bush signed anything in 2003. You never asked when he signed it in 1993. You asked when he submitted it and I answered sometime in 1992 as is definitely true and you made fun. So as usual you are trying to twist things to make yourself right even though you are absolutely wrong. To the rest you're full of it and any response would get me in more trouble with Mod XI. Why don't you do us both a favor, don't respond to my posts and I won't point out your lies and evasions. 2003? So far, your 'pointing out' isn't going so well..... If you have any evidence to back up your assertions, or to prove that you never said the things I've quoted, then posting it would be the logical thing to do... hiding behind the claim that the mods won't let you is pretty sad.... I can see why you are eager to keep me from responding to your posts, though... I have this habit of laughing at things that should properly be treated with sympathy... a trait that I will work on changing forthwith, in your case. So I made a typo that's your big point? Why not admit that you claimed Bush I didn't submit or sign the FY93 budget and were wrong? As to the rest, you quoted me and still misinterpreted what I said. I can't imagine anyway to make that clear to you except to point out that the folks I was actually debating would certainly have called me on it if they thought I meant what you claim I meant. You do that a lot BTW. A lot of these arguments you get into here are because you, apparently intentionally, misinterpret what someone wrote. It's tiresome and boring. You did it to Thadius 10 days ago or so and even while he and I may disagree it was abundantly clear you had decided to put words in his mouth and nothing he could do would change that. Every time you're caught in the wrong, this is the third time I've done it, you squirm and complain but never take what you so eagerly dish out.

Owner59 -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 9:44:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen I never said Bush signed anything in 2003. You never asked when he signed it in 1993. You asked when he submitted it and I answered sometime in 1992 as is definitely true and you made fun. So as usual you are trying to twist things to make yourself right even though you are absolutely wrong. To the rest you're full of it and any response would get me in more trouble with Mod XI. Why don't you do us both a favor, don't respond to my posts and I won't point out your lies and evasions. 2003? So far, your 'pointing out' isn't going so well..... If you have any evidence to back up your assertions, or to prove that you never said the things I've quoted, then posting it would be the logical thing to do... hiding behind the claim that the mods won't let you is pretty sad.... I can see why you are eager to keep me from responding to your posts, though... I have this habit of laughing at things that should properly be treated with sympathy... a trait that I will work on changing forthwith, in your case. <sounds of crickets chirping>

Alumbrado -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 10:20:09 PM)
It is understandable that you would wish for a set of rules that says anything you post which is ridiculed, you get to hide from, while fabricating things other people never said and holding them accountable for it scores points for you. You have my sympathies that there is no such set of rules.

Thadius -> RE: The Paris Response Ad (8/7/2008 10:27:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado It is understandable that you would wish for a set of rules that says anything you post which is ridiculed, you get to hide from, while fabricating things other people never said and holding them accountable for it scores points for you. You have my sympathies that there is no such set of rules. Alumbrado, Owner doesn't make mistakes, he makes "perceived mis-statements", it is the fault of the folks that like facts for insisting on him backing up his statements with facts, not his. Who knew?

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125