Sorry I couldn't resist this:- Why did he have to be so obvious as to rent the house next door? Why didn't he just rent a place in Russia? Because you know "You can see ........... "
You DO realize she never said this, right?
You DO realise Australia is not near Germany right? Don't patronise me and I won't patronise you. BTW capitals are a bit like LOL's - it creates loss of credibility
Sorry I couldn't resist this:- Why did he have to be so obvious as to rent the house next door? Why didn't he just rent a place in Russia? Because you know "You can see ........... "
You DO realize she never said this, right?
You DO realise Australia is not near Germany right? Don't patronise me and I won't patronise you. BTW capitals are a bit like LOL's - it creates loss of credibility
I am sorry, my friend, but...huh?
Bruce I don't think this was directed at you............and no I can't see Germany out of my window either :)
Sorry I couldn't resist this:- Why did he have to be so obvious as to rent the house next door? Why didn't he just rent a place in Russia? Because you know "You can see ........... "
You DO realize she never said this, right?
You DO realise Australia is not near Germany right? Don't patronise me and I won't patronise you. BTW capitals are a bit like LOL's - it creates loss of credibility
That story of her seeing Russia from her back yard is very often repeated as fact, when in actuality she didn't say it. Would you enjoy having an assanine quote attributed to you as fact? I saw nothing in your post that indicated to me you knew it was an urban myth.
My my, you seem to have quite a chip on your shoulder. And a laundry list of issues too. No caps, no lol's, I'm sure there are plenty more. Why don't you list them all here so no one else steps in it with you.
Tony, good post. If you want to go a step farther, take a look at
two documentaries, Why We Fight and Inside Job. In Why We Fight, we
hear from Eisenhower and his famous warning of the Military-Industrial
complex and why he saw it as a threat to democracy. We are shown how
that industry, in the beginning, by-passed Congress by dealing directly
with the Pentagon. In Inside Job, we can put together how Wall Street
learned from that industry, and then took it farther by simply buying
Congress and the executive office and apparently now, through the
executive branch, the judiciary as well.
Once at this point, you will recognize that we are all being
herded along, with our prejudices dictating which news show we watch to
support our biases. We are distracted, debating which of the bought
candidates are the better choice for some political office. All the
while, the underlying problem, financial and political corruption, goes
on unhindered.
It leads some to argue that in the war, capitalism v. democracy, capitalism is going to win, if it hasn't already. That this outcome will have a profound impact on individual freedom and opportunity, goes on unappreciated.
If we look for an example, we need look no further than our own
history, say 1875 to 1934, and what unregulated capitalism did to the
individual worker. It is a fascinating and scary study.
My apologies DanandJanette, I will try to explain as best I can without using the quote on quote function, I am sure people can go back if they are interested.
By you capitalising (we use s's not z's) the word do it gave the impression you were making a supercilious statement rather than asking a question.
I found this a little patronising. I then drew a very long bow to suggest that, like is often joked about regarding North Americans, that they are so wrapped up in their own continent that they have been known to mistake Australia (where I come from) with Austria. Obviously suggesting someone thinking this way is a very patronising statement. In hindsight it was too obscure and not very well thought out, I apologise.
I do know Tina Fey is responsible for the infamous "from my house" quote and I should of made you aware of this.
Just for 100% clarity, Sarah Palin's actual quote was "They're our next-door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." she made this quote whilst highlighting her foreign policy credentials - just in case you didn't think I knew. There was nothing asinine in that one.
I hope this removes some confusion.
Now let's get back on topic, my apologies to everyone for steering us of course
Sorry I couldn't resist this:- Why did he have to be so obvious as to rent the house next door? Why didn't he just rent a place in Russia? Because you know "You can see ........... "
lol.
Very clever Bruce
My apologies DanandJanette, I will try to explain as best I can without using the quote on quote function, I am sure people can go back if they are interested.By you capitalising (we use s's not z's) the word do it gave the impression you were making a supercilious statement rather than asking a question.I found this a little patronising. I then drew a very long bow to suggest that, like is often joked about regarding North Americans, that they are so wrapped up in their own continent that they have been known to mistake Australia (where I come from) with Austria. Obviously suggesting someone thinking this way is a very patronising statement. In hindsight it was too obscure and not very well thought out, I apologise.I do know Tina Fey is responsible for the infamous "from my house" quote and I should of made you aware of this.Just for 100% clarity, Sarah Palin's actual quote was "They're our next-door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." she made this quote whilst highlighting her foreign policy credentials - just in case you didn't think I knew. There was nothing asinine in that one.I hope this removes some confusion.Now let's get back on topic, my apologies to everyone for steering us of course
Apologies and explaination accepted. Peace.
yada yada yada...
I'm roughly centre.
Forgive me my friend, for my blunt approach- it is late; but you have just expressed a blindly socialist mentality.
Ok, I'm going to just completely sidestep the patronising (that's how we spell it before you start on me for that again) tone of this response and tackle what you've said.
The "patronizing" tone-the terrible sin of calling you my friend-is intended to keep the thread from getting out of hand; it's a writing technique designed to keep the tone polite. Liberals tend to go ballistic very easily-especially when their socialists tendencies are exposed. You have said that you are a j major; I thought you would recognize this. Being a j major is also why I pick on you for misspelling. You gotta keep the standard.....my friend.
Regarding your other items, I'll get back to you in due time-lot's to do here in the land of slave labor. Meanwhile, moving back to the topic-here is what GEMSNBC puts up to compete against Greta Van Susteren. Matthews, Olbermann(now booted), and the others on primetime there are not much better-just slightly more subtle. Enjoy :
https://www.mrctv.org/videos/indefinitely-ed
*facepalm*
I said patronising tone of the response, not sentence. The whole post was patronising. Regarding your attempts to keep my spelling flawless, perhaps you could do it in a manner that doesn't resemble childish ribbing? I know my spelling isn't one hundered percent. That doesn't matter much to me in casual conversation. If I was writing for publication or academic paper I would care but I don't really feel an uncontrolable need to proof read a statement reflecting what I would say in common speach were we discussing this face to face.
And why are you still trying to convince me that MSNBC is biased? I've said it's biased already. I know it is. That's not the point. My point is that FOX is too.
Why is it that I have to keep repeating myself?
Because he naively believes that Fox is fair and balanced the cartoon above illustrates the true solution they are in a league out on the extreme all by themselves, so young Sarah is enjoying a ride lovely. I ordered my copy of Blind Allegiance will let you know later.
... climate change deniers ...
And we were doing so well, guy. Jeez Leweez.
One must look with utter contempt at any person who equates citing solid scientific evidence against anthropogenic global warming with denying the Nazi holocaust. That IS what the word "denier" is implying. It is a sign of utter desperation when the Gorebots are forced to resort to vicious, loathsome slanders to try to silence their opponents and censor the facts.
Based on the diameter of Earth plus the atmosphere, 8526 miles, the sun is blasting our planet 24/7/365 with 207,017,158 gigawatts of continuous energy.
Solar activity is the primary, if not the only, driver of climate change on Earth (and on Mars, where there are no SUVs, barbecues and incandescent bulbs).
Earth's climate has been changing since climate began on Earth.
Earth's climate has been both hotter and colder than it is now.
Mankind's contribution to all those historical climate changes was exactly zero.
Greenland, now largely covered by ice, was named because at the time of the Norse explorers, it was a lush, fertile land, ideal for farming.
Based on that fact, Earth was considerably warmer then than it is now.
The Medieval Warm Period (~ 800-1300) described above was not caused by humans.
The Little Ice Age (~ 1400-1900) that followed it also was not caused by humans.
There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Earth's present climate is ideal.
Far from being a dangerous gas, carbon dioxide is totally natural, and is absolutely necessary for plant life.
CO2 levels on Earth have been much higher than they are now, with the concomitant abundance of plant life.
There is absolutely no evidence to support the frivolous notion that humans CAN affect global climate.
Rather than spending trillions of dollars on an utterly quixotic quest to stop global climate change, just spend 1% as much to prepare for it.
Burn AlBore in effigy.
https://www.newscorp.com/energy/index.html
It is unfortunate, Gore. Due to his being a former Presidential Candidate, the issue of Global Warming became a popular press issue. That is, Global Warming became a politcal issue. Not being an expert in this field of science, though, I listen to the experts in those fields of science who can share educated opinions. The vast majority support the two-fold issue: Global warming is real (greater than 90%), and that it is product of industry (greater than 80%). That the industrial world has listened as well and has accepted the principal of global warming (that it is a man-made, and therefore, correctable) and is trying to find ways to correct it, that is pretty persuasive.
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!