"katy" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...

Capt. JG wrote:

"katy" wrote in message
...



And besides the World Trade Center, the capitol building, the US
Postal Service, the SuperDome, the Statue of Liberty, and Amtrak
would no longer exist and we'd all have anthrax or worse...



This was all on Bushco's watch... while he was on vacation probably.



N...it may have been tried on his watch but it didn't come to fruition,
except for the Trade Center...if Gore had been President we'd probably
all be bowing to the Mullah by now..



Huh? All this happened while Bush slept. But, feel free to blame Gore.
He did actually win the election.


No one won that election...



Gore won, and the Supremes voted him out. But, in any case, feel free to
blame Gore for Iraq if that makes your day.


You're really losing it, Jon. I didn't blame Gore for anything except
being an A hole...


How was he an asshole? He was VP for crissake. Bush on the other hand is our
fearlessly incompetent leader.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 09:19:22 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

Er.... Dave, Hillary didn't get away with anything. Her trial by fire in
the
public eye from the likes of the right-wing nuts was BY FAR more intense
than anything Steward went through. And, for all the noise and all the
smoke
and all the shouting, not one prosecution. Hillary didn't get away with
anything. Steward was a thief and a liar and not too bright.

Ah, so you too believe in immaculate generation. That explains a lot.

Who's Steward?


You're ranting Dave. You need to chill. You know who I meant despite the
typo.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"katy" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...

Dave wrote:

On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 22:50:43 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:



Oh, the old Whitewater thing... why don't you claim a Vince Foster
conspiracy again.


Hillary's fairy tale about the immaculate generation of the missing
billing
records in the WH library is a much better story.

Maybe you can find some scientific backing for the notion.

What I want to know is why did Martha Stewart have to serve time and
Hillary didn't for the same sort of thing?



Lying to the Federal Trade Commission?? Insider trading? Defrauding
investors? Get real. I'm sure if you say it enough, it'll be true.

I still won't buy Tyson Products....


Well good for you! That's certainly taking a stand.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 09:19:47 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

So Hillary didn't really tell that fairy tale about the immaculately
generated billing records showing up in the library?


Keep at it Dave. Eventually, you'll be able to blame her for sun spots.

So Hillary didn't really tell that fairy tale about the immaculately
generated billing records showing up in the library?


And this is important because? And, Bush lying is not important because?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
news

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"Maxprop" wrote in message
link.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message

Guess you didn't hear Bill say that he didn't need yet another tax
break. I don't hear Cheney saying that.

Cheney does--his investments earn him millions annually.
Bill doesn't--he doesn't work, and his investments are more in line with
Whitewater.

Max



Please show me where Cheney has said he doesn't deserve a tax break.

Why would he do that? He *does* deserve a tax break. We all ****ing do.


Because it would conclusively prove he has a deep sense of humor.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

In article , Capt. JG
says...

"katy" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...

Capt. JG wrote:

"katy" wrote in message
...



And besides the World Trade Center, the capitol building, the US
Postal Service, the SuperDome, the Statue of Liberty, and Amtrak
would no longer exist and we'd all have anthrax or worse...



This was all on Bushco's watch... while he was on vacation probably.



N...it may have been tried on his watch but it didn't come to fruition,
except for the Trade Center...if Gore had been President we'd probably
all be bowing to the Mullah by now..



Huh? All this happened while Bush slept. But, feel free to blame Gore.
He did actually win the election.


No one won that election...



Gore won, and the Supremes voted him out. But, in any case, feel free to
blame Gore for Iraq if that makes your day.


You're really losing it, Jon. I didn't blame Gore for anything except
being an A hole...


How was he an asshole? He was VP for crissake. Bush on the other hand is our
fearlessly incompetent leader.

algore was an asshole long before he was the VP

--

"Tis an ill wind that blows no minds"
....PK

Capt. JG wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...

Capt. JG wrote:

"katy" wrote in message
...


Capt. JG wrote:


"Maxprop" wrote in message
. earthlink.net...



"Capt. JG" wrote in message




So far, I haven't seen much in the way of facts from you.

(This from the guy who's been supporting his arguments with statements
like "science says it is so.")




You'll listen to big business, but not to scientists. Maybe you think
smoking doesn't cause cancer?

I listen to both sides. You don't. My only contention is that when
some scientists support the notion of GW, and others dispute it, the
issue is far from conclusive. You, of course, contend that any
scientist who disputes the notion of GW must be in the hip pockets of
big business. That is the hallmark of a closed mind.

Max




Really... you listen to both sides. So, what does science, real science

from scientists, actually say about GW? I contend that there are always

a couple of wackos who are unconvinced by the preponderance of evidence.
What do you believe in? So far, I have yet to see you cite any actual
facts on the subject.


YYou haven't got it yet...scince can look at thuings short term and draw
conclusions and science can lok at overall picutres and applyn the short
term and draw a conclusion. Your science is short-sighted...



Ummm... you're right. If science can look at the short term and draw
valid conclusion and science can look at the long term and draw valid
conclusions, then science is not short-sighted. Why don't you tell how
the earth is only 10,000 years old. You need to give it up. You're not
making any sense at this point.


No...it's you who don't make sense...over the long term...the millions of
years that one can look at, the tests, based on core samplings, tree
rings, etc etc etc say that this is a cyclical and historical event...I
suppose yur contention os that there must have been ancient civilisations
of man that cuased it to happen before..if you look at climate and weather
patterns over short term, you lose track of the previous cycles ..you
cannot make conclusions based on the short erm relative to earth climatic
change...I really don't think you understand this at all...



You don't know the facts. The facts are that the rate of climate warming has
increased dramatically in the last 100 years or so, far more than can be
explained by the normal cycle of hot/cold. In addition, the increase in
human population has prevented such things as normal relocation of plants
and animals through what would be normal migration patterns. This is not a
long term trend. This is a dramatic increase in the RATE of change, not
something that has been seen in the previous millions of years.


What you don't understand is geoglofical and climatical history...100
years is a nothing...better go study Jon...you know nothing about
geomorphology, climatology or global cuclical changes in weather...and
since you know nothing about it, and continue to argue in a cirtcular
path that goes nowhere, I end this discussion, too...you are not even
willing to go look at what I'm talking about...but that would require
deviating from your limiteed ideas on the subject..so for now, I'm done
in this thread...

"katy" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...

Capt. JG wrote:

"katy" wrote in message
...


Capt. JG wrote:


"Maxprop" wrote in message
.earthlink.net...



"Capt. JG" wrote in message




So far, I haven't seen much in the way of facts from you.

(This from the guy who's been supporting his arguments with
statements like "science says it is so.")




You'll listen to big business, but not to scientists. Maybe you
think smoking doesn't cause cancer?

I listen to both sides. You don't. My only contention is that when
some scientists support the notion of GW, and others dispute it, the
issue is far from conclusive. You, of course, contend that any
scientist who disputes the notion of GW must be in the hip pockets of
big business. That is the hallmark of a closed mind.

Max




Really... you listen to both sides. So, what does science, real
science

from scientists, actually say about GW? I contend that there are
always

a couple of wackos who are unconvinced by the preponderance of
evidence. What do you believe in? So far, I have yet to see you cite
any actual facts on the subject.


YYou haven't got it yet...scince can look at thuings short term and
draw conclusions and science can lok at overall picutres and applyn the
short term and draw a conclusion. Your science is short-sighted...



Ummm... you're right. If science can look at the short term and draw
valid conclusion and science can look at the long term and draw valid
conclusions, then science is not short-sighted. Why don't you tell how
the earth is only 10,000 years old. You need to give it up. You're not
making any sense at this point.


No...it's you who don't make sense...over the long term...the millions of
years that one can look at, the tests, based on core samplings, tree
rings, etc etc etc say that this is a cyclical and historical event...I
suppose yur contention os that there must have been ancient civilisations
of man that cuased it to happen before..if you look at climate and
weather patterns over short term, you lose track of the previous cycles
..you cannot make conclusions based on the short erm relative to earth
climatic change...I really don't think you understand this at all...



You don't know the facts. The facts are that the rate of climate warming
has increased dramatically in the last 100 years or so, far more than can
be explained by the normal cycle of hot/cold. In addition, the increase
in human population has prevented such things as normal relocation of
plants and animals through what would be normal migration patterns. This
is not a long term trend. This is a dramatic increase in the RATE of
change, not something that has been seen in the previous millions of
years.


What you don't understand is geoglofical and climatical history...100
years is a nothing...better go study Jon...you know nothing about
geomorphology, climatology or global cuclical changes in weather...and
since you know nothing about it, and continue to argue in a cirtcular path
that goes nowhere, I end this discussion, too...you are not even willing
to go look at what I'm talking about...but that would require deviating
from your limiteed ideas on the subject..so for now, I'm done in this
thread...


You can't be that dense. We've never, EVER, seen a rate of change like the
last 100 years. You're just not up on the facts, and claiming you are is
just foolish. I can make the same argument... look at the facts.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 18:29:24 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

Er.... Dave, Hillary didn't get away with anything. Her trial by fire in
the
public eye from the likes of the right-wing nuts was BY FAR more intense
than anything Steward went through. And, for all the noise and all the
smoke
and all the shouting, not one prosecution. Hillary didn't get away with
anything. Steward was a thief and a liar and not too bright.

Ah, so you too believe in immaculate generation. That explains a lot.

Who's Steward?


You're ranting Dave. You need to chill. You know who I meant despite the
typo.

Unusual to make the same typo twice in one short paragraph.


Well, I'm an usual guy.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 18:30:21 -0800, "Capt. JG"
attempted pathetically to bob and weave:

So Hillary didn't really tell that fairy tale about the immaculately
generated billing records showing up in the library?


And this is important because?

So Hillary didn't really tell that fairy tale about the immaculately
generated billing records showing up in the library?


Keep saying it Dave.. a couple of dozen more times should do it.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com