Mickey Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 I haven't seen the footage. Only parroting what I heard this morning and didn't think these guys would make it up. Anyone else think that there might be a stunt to improve ratings for such a dismal show? 399669[/snapback] They aren't that smart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted August 5, 2005 Author Share Posted August 5, 2005 I'm sorry, nothing personal. I didn't mean to be politically incorrect or disrespectful. My faith carries no prohibition against such an utterance which, given the standards of the board, is neither obscene nor racist. Since "libertard" and "Ass Clown" is perfectly acceptable around here, I don't see why "Jesus freaking Christ" would be a problem. Maybe these things aren't so yukkity yuk funny when it is your ox being gored, or in this case, disrespected. Maybe someone would explain to me why calling all liberals retarded or a reference to sodomy is not offensive but "Jesus freaking Christ" is? I'm in the mood for some inspiringly tortured sophistry today. 399712[/snapback] i see your point...and i don't disagree with you. although i think offending liberals by calling names although is indeed very imature...at times can be fun. Sort of like making fun of people with a rubber crutch. On the other hand offending God by using His name in vain may not be the best way to get on His good side...but i suppose since your faith carries no such prohibition, i will leave that one alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 i see your point...and i don't disagree with you.although i think offending liberals by calling names although is indeed very imature...at times can be fun. Sort of like making fun of people with a rubber crutch. On the other hand offending God by using His name in vain may not be the best way to get on His good side...but i suppose since your faith carries no such prohibition, i will leave that one alone. 399733[/snapback] It is way too late for me to get on his good side. I know because the last time I prayed he interrupted me and said, "I'm going to save us a lot of time here, don't bother." It seems that when I jokingly said "I'd sell my soul if we could come back and beat these @#$!@$@#$'s" during half time of the play off game against Houston so many years ago, somebody heard me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted August 5, 2005 Author Share Posted August 5, 2005 It is way too late for me to get on his good side. I know because the last time I prayed he interrupted me and said, "I'm going to save us a lot of time here, don't bother." It seems that when I jokingly said "I'd sell my soul if we could come back and beat these @#$!@$@#$'s" during half time of the play off game against Houston so many years ago, somebody heard me. 399739[/snapback] that explains an awful lot Mickey! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 that explains an awful lot Mickey! 399761[/snapback] He left out the "I'll even have allow a common sense lobotomy for the rest of my time on earth..." part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckey Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 You'll forgive me for preferring scientists to environmentalists and the candidates they support who each derive huge dollar benefits from being in bed together. I guess it's perfectly acceptable to ignore the big business/special interest component when it suites YOUR side of the argument (I don't even have a side in this argument - I think both sides of the aisle absolutely suck ass in protecting the environment). I've been reading up on Cantor Fitzgerald's new "environmental credits" program and to be quite honest I believe that's going to do a hell of alot more for the environment in the long term than any of the panacea's that any Administration/enviromentalist wacko group is likely to accomplish. The conclusions of that "study" are pedantic - regardless of what think tank/group of spoiled Ivy Leaguers accomplished it. 399547[/snapback] The facts are the facts... I don't care who you ask (go ask a scientist to read you the same facts), What Clinton did to better our environmental future is fully documented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckey Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 I thought the question was, what did Bill Clinton do for the environment? THAT'S WHAT HE DOES... CHANGE THE SUBJECT, ATTACK THE MESSENGER, TWIST THE DISCUSSION INTO SOMETHING ELSE. IT'S GOTTEN SO OLD. I am not sure a scientist in a lab is going to have a good grip on Clinton's policies, executive orders, speeches, etc, etc. with regard to the environment. MAYBE IF A SCIENTIST READS THE INFORMATION TO HIM HE'LL ACCEPT THAT IS REALLY HAPPENED. The study I linked contains exhaustive information on what he did, what he tried to do and what he was not able to do with regard to the environment over the course of his whole Presidency. It is basically a list of achievments and failures. The information contained in the study as to the effect of those policies is a whole different issue. MUCH OF THE SAME THINGS I STATED, JUST A DIFFERENT SOURCE What bothers me about credits is that it sounds like a free ride. We can solve pollution problems and it won't cost us a cent economically through the magic of credits. Besides, overall pollution in the country isn't what matters, pollution where people live is what matters. If you have unbreathable air in Chicago, I don't think it will do us much good to average their garbage with the lack of it in Death Valley and then conclude that the average pollution is acceptable. You can spread credits around but you can't spread the actual pollution, it lands where it is dumped. It just seems gimmicky to me. CREDITS ARE BOGUS... IT'S ANOTHER WAY TO AVERAGE THINGS OUT AND SPIN THE NUMBERS BUT DOES NOTHING TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM. Are you talking about Cantor Fitzgerald the bond traders? I thought you wanted to listen to scientists? Wouldn't Cantor be involved in and profiting from emissions credit trading? I can see why they love the idea of pollution credits. 399680[/snapback] Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 7, 2005 Share Posted August 7, 2005 Because he is a kitty and can't take a little good ole fashioned razzing! Same reason why people resort to name calling and other tactics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 7, 2005 Share Posted August 7, 2005 Also... It was a perfect set-up to dodge the interview and questions (which was told to him in advance) about the CIA leak. Remember fight or flight? The razzing came by way of Carville... Novak split worried about the questions that were gonna be asked. Seems reasonable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobblehead Posted August 8, 2005 Share Posted August 8, 2005 Why didn't he climb on top of the desk and drop a Hulk Hogan pile driver down on that weasel Carville before he walked off the set? 399363[/snapback] Just on appearance alone, I'm fairly certain that Carville would win in a fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts