|
Cap and fraud...
On Dec 20, 9:23*am, Jack wrote:
On Dec 20, 8:53*am, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 20, 8:32*am, Jack wrote: On Dec 20, 8:16*am, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 19, 9:44*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re... Huh - how about that... It's amazing how your side can cherry pick people's thoughts and present just that as fact and expect everyone to eat it up. I know that many on the right will, afterall, they'll take some lie that Hannity or Rush tells them and run with it as the truth too. So instead of attacking the messenger, which is your side's MO, how about addressing the quotation. *Specifically, what part of it isn't true, and why?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Easy! First, if you read the whole article, not just the cherry picked parts, you'll see that they are discussing Europe's cap and trade problems saying that we will have the same problems. This without even knowing how we are going to model our system. Pretty audacious if the right wing thinks that their side can predict the future. You're movving the goalposts. *You stated that a thought was cherry- picked, presented as fact, and went on to try to smear it as a lie. The quote you attacked as a lie was: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." What *specifically* in that quote is not true. *C'mon, you attempted to smear it as a cherry-picked lie, so it should be easy to point out the falsehood in the quote.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Oh, and as for the credibility of Max Schulz? Do you remember his unhinged tyrade about the H1N1 virus and how the Obama administration was using it to push their agenda for health care? |
Cap and fraud...
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 21:44:35 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...%20Politics%29 Huh - how about that... And if they could look hard enough, I'm sure they'd find Algore, Obama, and lot's of other Dems raking their share out of there somewhere. -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H |
Cap and fraud...
On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 06:23:02 -0800 (PST), Jack
wrote: On Dec 20, 8:53*am, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 20, 8:32*am, Jack wrote: On Dec 20, 8:16*am, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 19, 9:44*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re... Huh - how about that... It's amazing how your side can cherry pick people's thoughts and present just that as fact and expect everyone to eat it up. I know that many on the right will, afterall, they'll take some lie that Hannity or Rush tells them and run with it as the truth too. So instead of attacking the messenger, which is your side's MO, how about addressing the quotation. *Specifically, what part of it isn't true, and why?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Easy! First, if you read the whole article, not just the cherry picked parts, you'll see that they are discussing Europe's cap and trade problems saying that we will have the same problems. This without even knowing how we are going to model our system. Pretty audacious if the right wing thinks that their side can predict the future. You're movving the goalposts. You stated that a thought was cherry- picked, presented as fact, and went on to try to smear it as a lie. The quote you attacked as a lie was: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." What *specifically* in that quote is not true. C'mon, you attempted to smear it as a cherry-picked lie, so it should be easy to point out the falsehood in the quote. Do I hear the chirping of crickets? Or is my tinnitis acting up again? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H |
Cap and fraud...
On Dec 20, 9:39*am, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 20, 9:23*am, Jack wrote: On Dec 20, 8:53*am, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 20, 8:32*am, Jack wrote: On Dec 20, 8:16*am, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 19, 9:44*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re... Huh - how about that... It's amazing how your side can cherry pick people's thoughts and present just that as fact and expect everyone to eat it up. I know that many on the right will, afterall, they'll take some lie that Hannity or Rush tells them and run with it as the truth too. So instead of attacking the messenger, which is your side's MO, how about addressing the quotation. *Specifically, what part of it isn't true, and why?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Easy! First, if you read the whole article, not just the cherry picked parts, you'll see that they are discussing Europe's cap and trade problems saying that we will have the same problems. This without even knowing how we are going to model our system. Pretty audacious if the right wing thinks that their side can predict the future. You're movving the goalposts. *You stated that a thought was cherry- picked, presented as fact, and went on to try to smear it as a lie. No I didn't. Show everyone where I said that the quote was a lie. The quote you attacked as a lie was: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." Again, no I didn't. Show me where I attacked the quote as a lie. What *specifically* in that quote is not true. *C'mon, you attempted to smear it as a cherry-picked lie, so it should be easy to point out the falsehood in the quote.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Again, show me where I said the quote was a lie. Where you wrote: "...run with it as the truth too." The word "too" indicates you also think this quote, to which you were responding, is a lie also... "too". Now, do you think the quote is the truth? Since you're now backpedalling from calling it a lie, it must be true. So why did you attack it, and it's messenger? |
Cap and fraud...
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 19, 9:44 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re... Huh - how about that... http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...-cbo-estimate/ http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...l-require-hom/ http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...earth-cooling/ http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...en-treaty-thr/ And here's a good one about the right's idea that more CO2 is actually good for the environment: http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...-not-pollutan/ The gist of Tom's post was the "cap and trade" fraud in Europe and the potential for the same here in the US. Do you disagree with that premise? |
Cap and fraud...
In article 8ab39275-4f53-4342-be57-97ae507a3f19
@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 20, 8:32*am, Jack wrote: On Dec 20, 8:16*am, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 19, 9:44*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re... Huh - how about that... It's amazing how your side can cherry pick people's thoughts and present just that as fact and expect everyone to eat it up. I know that many on the right will, afterall, they'll take some lie that Hannity or Rush tells them and run with it as the truth too. So instead of attacking the messenger, which is your side's MO, how about addressing the quotation. *Specifically, what part of it isn't true, and why?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Easy! First, if you read the whole article, not just the cherry picked parts, you'll see that they are discussing Europe's cap and trade problems saying that we will have the same problems. This without even knowing how we are going to model our system. Pretty audacious if the right wing thinks that their side can predict the future. If you look at the Czars and others President Obama has put in charge of such policy, you can get a pretty good idea, it's not rocket science... |
Cap and fraud...
On 12/20/09 9:29 AM, BAR wrote:
In article5bd39d8f-627c-43cd-8b8b-5928ec4765a5 @j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 20, 8:53 am, wrote: On Dec 20, 8:32 am, wrote: On Dec 20, 8:16 am, wrote: On Dec 19, 9:44 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re... Huh - how about that... It's amazing how your side can cherry pick people's thoughts and present just that as fact and expect everyone to eat it up. I know that many on the right will, afterall, they'll take some lie that Hannity or Rush tells them and run with it as the truth too. So instead of attacking the messenger, which is your side's MO, how about addressing the quotation. Specifically, what part of it isn't true, and why?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Easy! First, if you read the whole article, not just the cherry picked parts, you'll see that they are discussing Europe's cap and trade problems saying that we will have the same problems. This without even knowing how we are going to model our system. Pretty audacious if the right wing thinks that their side can predict the future. You're movving the goalposts. You stated that a thought was cherry- picked, presented as fact, and went on to try to smear it as a lie. The quote you attacked as a lie was: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." What *specifically* in that quote is not true. C'mon, you attempted to smear it as a cherry-picked lie, so it should be easy to point out the falsehood in the quote. "Pretty audacious if the right wing thinks that their side can predict the future." It appears that the left is trying to do predict the future with Global Warming, Anthropogenic Global Warming and finally Climate Change. Politics co-opted the science before the science was understood. How would you know that? You barely got out of high school. |
Cap and fraud...
On 12/20/09 10:43 AM, D.Duck wrote:
Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 19, 9:44 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re... Huh - how about that... http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...-cbo-estimate/ http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...l-require-hom/ http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...earth-cooling/ http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...en-treaty-thr/ And here's a good one about the right's idea that more CO2 is actually good for the environment: http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...-not-pollutan/ The gist of Tom's post was the "cap and trade" fraud in Europe and the potential for the same here in the US. Do you disagree with that premise? Tom has devolved into a political pseudo-scientist who goes shopping for crap he thinks proves his points. |
Cap and fraud...
On Dec 20, 11:11*am, I am Tosk
wrote: In article 8ab39275-4f53-4342-be57-97ae507a3f19 @m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 20, 8:32*am, Jack wrote: On Dec 20, 8:16*am, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 19, 9:44*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: "This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said. "An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created market...." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re... Huh - how about that... It's amazing how your side can cherry pick people's thoughts and present just that as fact and expect everyone to eat it up. I know that many on the right will, afterall, they'll take some lie that Hannity or Rush tells them and run with it as the truth too. So instead of attacking the messenger, which is your side's MO, how about addressing the quotation. *Specifically, what part of it isn't true, and why?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Easy! First, if you read the whole article, not just the cherry picked parts, you'll see that they are discussing Europe's cap and trade problems saying that we will have the same problems. This without even knowing how we are going to model our system. Pretty audacious if the right wing thinks that their side can predict the future. If you look at the Czars and others President Obama has put in charge of such policy, you can get a pretty good idea, it's not rocket science...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - What in HELL does that have to do with the right acting like they have the ability to predict the future? They've done it before too. Look at healthcare. For some stupid reason, they think it will be like the UK's plan. They'll bring up the failed systems and say, "see, that's what it will be like for us". You NEVER see them point to a well though out system that works very well and say "see, that's what it will be like for us"...... Why? PURE politics. They would rather play politics than do what's right for the country. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:33 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com