|
They just don't get it...
On Dec 18, 8:44*pm, I am Tosk wrote:
In article 9447f5fd-78c4-4463-a85f- , says... On Dec 18, 12:50*pm, thunder wrote: On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:07:07 -0500, John H wrote: From the second article: "...the United States backed what amounts to the single biggest transfer of wealth from rich to poor nations for any one cause -- in a sense offering compensation for decades of warming the Earth. There are lots of weasel words in the above, but by far, the largest transfer of wealth is our purchase of foreign oil. *Or, did you think Saudi Arabia was always a wealthy country? But that's okay, because as a whole, the democrats want to lessen our need for oil, and pollutants so that MUST be a bad thing. What makes your thinking narrow is your assumption that we don't or couldn't, just because we don't see the same solution you do... Yeah, I know. Raping the landscape for oil shale, more refineries, more coal, same old same old. |
They just don't get it...
On Dec 18, 10:07*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"I am Tosk" wrote in ... In article 9447f5fd-78c4-4463-a85f- , says... On Dec 18, 12:50 pm, thunder wrote: On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:07:07 -0500, John H wrote: From the second article: "...the United States backed what amounts to the single biggest transfer of wealth from rich to poor nations for any one cause -- in a sense offering compensation for decades of warming the Earth. There are lots of weasel words in the above, but by far, the largest transfer of wealth is our purchase of foreign oil. Or, did you think Saudi Arabia was always a wealthy country? But that's okay, because as a whole, the democrats want to lessen our need for oil, and pollutants so that MUST be a bad thing. What makes your thinking narrow is your assumption that we don't or couldn't, just because we don't see the same solution you do... We've all been waiting for the right-wing solution to the damage that we're doing to the Earth... drum roll please..... -- Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hell, that's easy. Most of them claim that we aren't doing anything negative to the earth. |
They just don't get it...
|
They just don't get it...
In article 8fff69e2-7531-426d-b8a6-
, says... On Dec 18, 10:07*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "I am Tosk" wrote in ... In article 9447f5fd-78c4-4463-a85f- , says... On Dec 18, 12:50 pm, thunder wrote: On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:07:07 -0500, John H wrote: From the second article: "...the United States backed what amounts to the single biggest transfer of wealth from rich to poor nations for any one cause -- in a sense offering compensation for decades of warming the Earth. There are lots of weasel words in the above, but by far, the largest transfer of wealth is our purchase of foreign oil. Or, did you think Saudi Arabia was always a wealthy country? But that's okay, because as a whole, the democrats want to lessen our need for oil, and pollutants so that MUST be a bad thing. What makes your thinking narrow is your assumption that we don't or couldn't, just because we don't see the same solution you do... We've all been waiting for the right-wing solution to the damage that we're doing to the Earth... drum roll please..... -- Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hell, that's easy. Most of them claim that we aren't doing anything negative to the earth. Man, you are completely unhinged here. |
They just don't get it...
On Dec 19, 12:33*pm, I am Tosk
wrote: In article 8fff69e2-7531-426d-b8a6- , says... On Dec 18, 10:07 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "I am Tosk" wrote in ... In article 9447f5fd-78c4-4463-a85f- , says... On Dec 18, 12:50 pm, thunder wrote: On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:07:07 -0500, John H wrote: From the second article: "...the United States backed what amounts to the single biggest transfer of wealth from rich to poor nations for any one cause -- in a sense offering compensation for decades of warming the Earth. There are lots of weasel words in the above, but by far, the largest transfer of wealth is our purchase of foreign oil. Or, did you think Saudi Arabia was always a wealthy country? But that's okay, because as a whole, the democrats want to lessen our need for oil, and pollutants so that MUST be a bad thing. What makes your thinking narrow is your assumption that we don't or couldn't, just because we don't see the same solution you do... We've all been waiting for the right-wing solution to the damage that we're doing to the Earth... drum roll please..... -- Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hell, that's easy. Most of them claim that we aren't doing anything negative to the earth. Man, you are completely unhinged here.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Oh, really? How many examples of republican politicians statements that spewing millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere does NO HARM to the earth would you like me to post? http://mediamatters.org/research/200905210011 http://www.infowars.com/top-house-re...ul-is-comical/ Want more, just ask! |
They just don't get it...
On Dec 19, 12:32*pm, I am Tosk
wrote: In article cb366de3-10b3-498f-abcf-c0b88715c8b4 @h9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 18, 8:44*pm, I am Tosk wrote: In article 9447f5fd-78c4-4463-a85f- , says... On Dec 18, 12:50*pm, thunder wrote: On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:07:07 -0500, John H wrote: From the second article: "...the United States backed what amounts to the single biggest transfer of wealth from rich to poor nations for any one cause -- in a sense offering compensation for decades of warming the Earth. There are lots of weasel words in the above, but by far, the largest transfer of wealth is our purchase of foreign oil. *Or, did you think Saudi Arabia was always a wealthy country? But that's okay, because as a whole, the democrats want to lessen our need for oil, and pollutants so that MUST be a bad thing. What makes your thinking narrow is your assumption that we don't or couldn't, just because we don't see the same solution you do... Yeah, I know. Raping the landscape for oil shale, more refineries, more coal, same old same old. Again, you generalize and cherry pick what you would want to be our point of view, and dismiss it at the same time... Same old, same old..- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Really, how many examples of the above do you need? |
They just don't get it...
In article d57483c4-1482-47a5-a4c3-
, says... On Dec 19, 12:33*pm, I am Tosk wrote: In article 8fff69e2-7531-426d-b8a6- , says... On Dec 18, 10:07 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "I am Tosk" wrote in ... In article 9447f5fd-78c4-4463-a85f- , says... On Dec 18, 12:50 pm, thunder wrote: On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:07:07 -0500, John H wrote: From the second article: "...the United States backed what amounts to the single biggest transfer of wealth from rich to poor nations for any one cause -- in a sense offering compensation for decades of warming the Earth. There are lots of weasel words in the above, but by far, the largest transfer of wealth is our purchase of foreign oil. Or, did you think Saudi Arabia was always a wealthy country? But that's okay, because as a whole, the democrats want to lessen our need for oil, and pollutants so that MUST be a bad thing. What makes your thinking narrow is your assumption that we don't or couldn't, just because we don't see the same solution you do... We've all been waiting for the right-wing solution to the damage that we're doing to the Earth... drum roll please..... -- Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hell, that's easy. Most of them claim that we aren't doing anything negative to the earth. Man, you are completely unhinged here.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Oh, really? How many examples of republican politicians statements that spewing millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere does NO HARM to the earth would you like me to post? http://mediamatters.org/research/200905210011 http://www.infowars.com/top-house-re...ul-is-comical/ Want more, just ask! Post one time when I said that;) |
They just don't get it...
"I am Tosk" wrote in message
... In article 8fff69e2-7531-426d-b8a6- , says... On Dec 18, 10:07 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "I am Tosk" wrote in ... In article 9447f5fd-78c4-4463-a85f- , says... On Dec 18, 12:50 pm, thunder wrote: On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:07:07 -0500, John H wrote: From the second article: "...the United States backed what amounts to the single biggest transfer of wealth from rich to poor nations for any one cause -- in a sense offering compensation for decades of warming the Earth. There are lots of weasel words in the above, but by far, the largest transfer of wealth is our purchase of foreign oil. Or, did you think Saudi Arabia was always a wealthy country? But that's okay, because as a whole, the democrats want to lessen our need for oil, and pollutants so that MUST be a bad thing. What makes your thinking narrow is your assumption that we don't or couldn't, just because we don't see the same solution you do... We've all been waiting for the right-wing solution to the damage that we're doing to the Earth... drum roll please..... -- Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hell, that's easy. Most of them claim that we aren't doing anything negative to the earth. Man, you are completely unhinged here. Well, what's your solution to the problem????? -- Nom=de=Plume |
They just don't get it...
In article 3d7c8dbb-f6d2-400e-a303-
, says... On Dec 19, 12:32*pm, I am Tosk wrote: In article cb366de3-10b3-498f-abcf-c0b88715c8b4 @h9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 18, 8:44*pm, I am Tosk wrote: In article 9447f5fd-78c4-4463-a85f- , says... On Dec 18, 12:50*pm, thunder wrote: On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:07:07 -0500, John H wrote: From the second article: "...the United States backed what amounts to the single biggest transfer of wealth from rich to poor nations for any one cause -- in a sense offering compensation for decades of warming the Earth. There are lots of weasel words in the above, but by far, the largest transfer of wealth is our purchase of foreign oil. *Or, did you think Saudi Arabia was always a wealthy country? But that's okay, because as a whole, the democrats want to lessen our need for oil, and pollutants so that MUST be a bad thing. What makes your thinking narrow is your assumption that we don't or couldn't, just because we don't see the same solution you do... Yeah, I know. Raping the landscape for oil shale, more refineries, more coal, same old same old. Again, you generalize and cherry pick what you would want to be our point of view, and dismiss it at the same time... Same old, same old..- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Really, how many examples of the above do you need? Well, show me where I said it... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:47 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com