Mr. T Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 look for the mid terms 2 years are short Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted November 7, 2008 Report Share Posted November 7, 2008 well, we get HALF of our electricity from burning COAL. Electricity may end up being so expensive no one can afford it. But, if you fink on those who don't heil Obama, you could get your electricity paid. Or, maybe Obama will actually get the left po'd and be Pres to ALL AMERICANS, even if they are not BLACK. We shall see. The pendulum has swung the other direction. You are right....let's see......no coal....no nukes...hmmm...what does that leave?? Wind?? Solar?? Geothermal?? Dams??...maybe in a few places. Somehow I don't think the lights are going out in Washington D.C.....at least until we call a constitutional convention...and I think Governors and states are getting ready to do that. Time to start using the real power....and it isn't in Washington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 7, 2008 Report Share Posted November 7, 2008 Now' date=' do I have any of my facts wrong? Or are you going to try to pass off some more of your opinions as facts? [b'] The fact is, honey, is that he said it. The opinion (of yours) is he lied, exaggerated or misspoke. Which is wrong? (answer neither.) WSS[/b] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 7, 2008 Report Share Posted November 7, 2008 Oh, brother. This gets dumber by the day. No one is disputing that he said it. No one is disputing the city in which he said it. No one is disputing that he meant it. That's not what we're arguing. Plus, if you think saying it aloud is "unsavory", that's what's called "an opinion." That's not a fact. When you say "your boy was pandering to the lunatic left and meant what he said" that's not what we're discussing. Once again, do I really have to explain this stuff to a grown man? Not unless you think you can further spin your boy's stupiud statement. Try and remember just because John McCain shares a f*cked up idea with Obama doesn't mean I like it. I do NOT wo4rship McCain. WSS The facts are that: 1. Obama is not describing his desire to bankrupt the coal industry; he's describing what happens under a cap and trade system, and how that uses market pressure to force coal companies to adopt clean coal technologies, or face the prospects of being outcompeted in the energy marketplace. Saying that he wants to "bankrupt the coal industry", as was alleged in this thread, on Fox, on Drudge, and by Sarah Palin -- those are political statements, not an accurate description of what he said, or what he's talking about. 2. John McCain believes in adopting the same cap and trade mechanisms that Barack Obama is talking about here. 3. John McCain has issued similar statements, like the one I quoted above, expressing his desire to use a cap and trade policy to force coal companies to adopt clean coal technologies. He's even offered amendments to bills in Congress to do so. 4. For years, both McCain and Obama have believed that a cap and trade system is the best/most politically feasible way to address global warming. Therefore, it's my opinion, based on those facts, that it's not exactly a fair critique to attack someone who holds the same position on cap and trade that you do, and on clean coal that you do, as having some wildly radical plan to bankrupt the coal companies in the final day of the election campaign. it doesn't make any sense in the real world. It's just politics. Come Wednesday and beyond, McCain and Obama will go back to working together for a cap and trade system that combats the effects of global warming and speeds the nation towards cleaner energy and energy independence. As for the idea that global warming is only about politics and not about science or the laws of nature, I don't know how you can get any more ignorant than that. But that's also not what we're arguing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 7, 2008 Report Share Posted November 7, 2008 Oh, brother. This gets dumber by the day. No one is disputing that he said it. No one is disputing the city in which he said it. No one is disputing that he meant it. That's not what we're arguing. Plus, if you think saying it aloud is "unsavory", that's what's called "an opinion." That's not a fact. When you say "your boy was pandering to the lunatic left and meant what he said" that's not what we're discussing. Once again, do I really have to explain this stuff to a grown man? Not unless you think you can further spin your boy's stupid statement. Try and remember just because John McCain shares a f*cked up idea with Obama doesn't mean I like it. I do NOT worship McCain. WSS The facts [Hecks spin] are that: 1. Obama is not describing his desire to bankrupt the coal industry; he's describing what happens under a cap and trade system, and how that uses market pressure to force coal companies to adopt clean coal technologies, or face the prospects of being outcompeted in the energy marketplace. Saying that he wants to "bankrupt the coal industry", as was alleged in this thread, on Fox, on Drudge, and by Sarah Palin -- those are political statements, not an accurate description of what he said, or what he's talking about. 2. John McCain believes in adopting the same cap and trade mechanisms that Barack Obama is talking about here. 3. John McCain has issued similar statements, like the one I quoted above, expressing his desire to use a cap and trade policy to force coal companies to adopt clean coal technologies. He's even offered amendments to bills in Congress to do so. 4. For years, both McCain and Obama have believed that a cap and trade system is the best/most politically feasible way to address global warming. Therefore, it's my opinion, based on those facts, that it's not exactly a fair critique to attack someone who holds the same position on cap and trade that you do, and on clean coal that you do, as having some wildly radical plan to bankrupt the coal companies in the final day of the election campaign. it doesn't make any sense in the real world. It's just politics. Come Wednesday and beyond, McCain and Obama will go back to working together for a cap and trade system that combats the effects of global warming and speeds the nation towards cleaner energy and energy independence. As for the idea that global warming is only about politics and not about science or the laws of nature, I don't know how you can get any more ignorant than that. But that's also not what we're arguing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.