Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,117 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#24896 May 13, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think they are What if they aren't?? What if they aren't? Can we fiscally afford that at this point and time? With all of the lies or incorrect predictions from the science community can you with 100% certainty and confidence pour all of the financial resources into the "green" movement that it's going to take to make it work? I can't. Heck, they can't even predict the temperature more than a day out. How accurate do you think they will be in their predictions of today about our climate in 50 years? Believe what you see and not what you hear.
What if they aren't correct, OMG I have not thought about that!

Do you really think nature needs continued pollutants released into the air we breath. Do the lands that provide as aquifers for drinking water for millions need more oil pipe lines run over them, does earth need more hydraulic fracking fluid pump into its Bowles more deep water Horizon oil spills.........


Really what if they were wrong?

People are only a parasite, an earth is our host. When the host says the party is over, the parasite is pretty much screwed don't you think?

Moral of the story, you do not second guest the host, you might get it wright, but if you don't there is no second chance........

Damn sure could not "fiscally afford" that, could we?

Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#24897 May 13, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you should also question the validity of those who profit by denyeing global warming, the Koch Brothers and big oil readily come to mind.
The Koch Brothers and big oil make products we use everyday with or without "global warming". Al Gore's ideas, and products that came from his ideas, were specifically tied to the political agenda known as global warming. No global warming, no green movement. There is a subtle yet huge difference between the two.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#24898 May 13, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
What if they aren't correct, OMG I have not thought about that!
Do you really think nature needs continued pollutants released into the air we breath. Do the lands that provide as aquifers for drinking water for millions need more oil pipe lines run over them, does earth need more hydraulic fracking fluid pump into its Bowles more deep water Horizon oil spills.........
Really what if they were wrong?
People are only a parasite, an earth is our host. When the host says the party is over, the parasite is pretty much screwed don't you think?
Moral of the story, you do not second guest the host, you might get it wright, but if you don't there is no second chance........
Damn sure could not "fiscally afford" that, could we?
The earth isn't as helpless as liberals would want everyone to believe. You are treating earth in the same manner as liberals treat welfare recipients. Thinking the earth is incapable of taking care of itself. Thinking that the liberals need to come to the rescue to save mother earth from the evil conservatives that are destroying her. Just like the welfare recipients that liberals think can't support themselves. That they are too far gone and it's all the wealthy people's fault. There's simply no hope for them without the concerned, proactive liberal agenda and it's members. You and your agenda are wrong on both cases.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#24899 May 13, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
The Koch Brothers and big oil make products we use everyday with or without "global warming". Al Gore's ideas, and products that came from his ideas, were specifically tied to the political agenda known as global warming. No global warming, no green movement. There is a subtle yet huge difference between the two.
Yes there is,

His best-selling climate books,“Earth in the Balance,”“An Inconvenient Truth” and “The Assault on Reason,” haven’t contributed to his wealth. Gore has long pledged any book and film money to his nonprofit, the Climate Reality Project, created in 2011 from two advocacy groups Gore founded a year earlier.

Gore also had his share of flubs, most of them in his efforts at green-tech investing. An investment firm he helped to start took stakes in two carbon-trading firms that fizzled and also racked up tens of millions in losses in a solar-module maker.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-06/gore...

Now tell me again how much of Mr. Gores' wealth is specifically tied to the political agenda known as global warming.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#24900 May 13, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
The earth isn't as helpless as liberals would want everyone to believe. You are treating earth in the same manner as liberals treat welfare recipients. Thinking the earth is incapable of taking care of itself. Thinking that the liberals need to come to the rescue to save mother earth from the evil conservatives that are destroying her. Just like the welfare recipients that liberals think can't support themselves. That they are too far gone and it's all the wealthy people's fault. There's simply no hope for them without the concerned, proactive liberal agenda and it's members. You and your agenda are wrong on both cases.
That was absolutely my point sir, the earth is by no means "helpless" to say that I implied it was shows you have a complete lack of understanding of what I posted, as elementary as it was.

Tell the victims of Hurricane Sandy, and Joplin Mo. that Mother Nature is helpless.
itshouldbe

Voorhees, NJ

#24901 May 13, 2013
dude i play enough chess to realize what is going on here..
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#24902 May 14, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes there is,
His best-selling climate books,“Earth in the Balance,”“An Inconvenient Truth” and “The Assault on Reason,” haven’t contributed to his wealth. Gore has long pledged any book and film money to his nonprofit, the Climate Reality Project, created in 2011 from two advocacy groups Gore founded a year earlier.
Gore also had his share of flubs, most of them in his efforts at green-tech investing. An investment firm he helped to start took stakes in two carbon-trading firms that fizzled and also racked up tens of millions in losses in a solar-module maker.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-06/gore...
Now tell me again how much of Mr. Gores' wealth is specifically tied to the political agenda known as global warming.
Of course we know that all 5013c's are legitimate and all their money goes back into the organization and not into the pockets of the board members. Thank goodness for the one American example of truth and honesty, the 5013c. As for Mr. Gore's wealth being tied to his political agenda, I would say all but his oil holdings, which is hypocritical given Mr. Gore's political stance on oil. The article you refrenced even said as much.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#24903 May 14, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
That was absolutely my point sir, the earth is by no means "helpless" to say that I implied it was shows you have a complete lack of understanding of what I posted, as elementary as it was.
Tell the victims of Hurricane Sandy, and Joplin Mo. that Mother Nature is helpless.
Are you saying that Hurricane Sandy and the tornado in Joplin were responses by Earth as a result of us running oil pipelines over our drinking aquifers and offshore drilling? Do you believe that extrordinary natural disasters are a result of our activity on earth? Interesting. Well I don't. As a Christian I have expected this since the Bible has foretold of these things for thousands of years. Along with wars and rumors of wars, famine, pestilence, sexual immorality, crooked governments, and the list goes on and on. The Bible hasn't missed one prediction yet and I don't suspect it will. The same certainly can't be said for the scientific and political world. Maybe you should consider changing teams.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#24904 May 14, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course we know that all 5013c's are legitimate and all their money goes back into the organization and not into the pockets of the board members. Thank goodness for the one American example of truth and honesty, the 5013c. As for Mr. Gore's wealth being tied to his political agenda, I would say all but his oil holdings, which is hypocritical given Mr. Gore's political stance on oil. The article you refrenced even said as much.
"
Most of the rest had been recently inherited, including an undisclosed number of shares of Occidental Petroleum Corp. left to him by his late father, Senator Albert Gore Sr., and valued at between $500,000 and $1 million, according to disclosure forms"

And his investment group sold Current TV to a company funded in part by oil-rich Qatar.


In all fairness, an as bad as I hate to defend it.

The article I referenced is a Right Wing leaning organization and to say, "even said as much" , is an incorrect statement.

The way it was written it is easy to imagine that was the intention of the author to insinuate it, and not say it.

You hear what you want to hear, you heard just what he/she wanted you to hear.


Oeo

Dallas, TX

#24905 May 14, 2013
You opened it. Good luck. Tonight at midnight your true love will realize they miss you. Something good will happen to you between 1:00 pm and 4:40 pm tomorrow, it could be anywhere. Tonight at midnight they will remember how much they loved you. You will get a shock of a lifetime tomorrow, a good one. If you break the chain you will be cursed with relationship problems for the next 2 years. Karma. If there is someone you loved, or still do, and can't get them out of your mind, re-post this in another city within the next 5 minutes. Its amazing how it works.If you truly miss someone, a past love, and can't seem to get them off your mind....then re-post this titled as " I Still Love You" Whoever you are missing will surprise you. Don't break this, for tonight at midnight, your true love will realize they love you and something great will happen to you tomorrow. Karma. You will get the shock of your life tomorrow

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#24906 May 14, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you saying that Hurricane Sandy and the tornado in Joplin were responses by Earth as a result of us running oil pipelines over our drinking aquifers and offshore drilling? Do you believe that extrordinary natural disasters are a result of our activity on earth? Interesting. Well I don't. As a Christian I have expected this since the Bible has foretold of these things for thousands of years. Along with wars and rumors of wars, famine, pestilence, sexual immorality, crooked governments, and the list goes on and on. The Bible hasn't missed one prediction yet and I don't suspect it will. The same certainly can't be said for the scientific and political world. Maybe you should consider changing teams.
"natural disasters are a result of"

YES, of Global Warming.

I find it amusing how you can use the bible to reinforce your argument that G.W. is a hoax then in the same post accuses me of not being a Christian, the Bible contains numerous verses about judging and the perils of doing so.

Perhaps you do not find that hypocritical, I do, maybe you should consider which team you want to be on.

If you can pick and choose the parts you like why can I not do the same and be a Christian like you?
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#24907 May 14, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
"
Most of the rest had been recently inherited, including an undisclosed number of shares of Occidental Petroleum Corp. left to him by his late father, Senator Albert Gore Sr., and valued at between $500,000 and $1 million, according to disclosure forms"
And his investment group sold Current TV to a company funded in part by oil-rich Qatar.
In all fairness, an as bad as I hate to defend it.
The article I referenced is a Right Wing leaning organization and to say, "even said as much" , is an incorrect statement.
The way it was written it is easy to imagine that was the intention of the author to insinuate it, and not say it.
You hear what you want to hear, you heard just what he/she wanted you to hear.
"The way it was written it is easy to imagine that was the intention of the author to insinuate it, and not say it." If that were the case, it would be just as easy to interpret the way you do and that's why you referenced it. Wouldn't you agree?
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#24908 May 14, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
"natural disasters are a result of"
YES, of Global Warming.
I find it amusing how you can use the bible to reinforce your argument that G.W. is a hoax then in the same post accuses me of not being a Christian, the Bible contains numerous verses about judging and the perils of doing so.
Perhaps you do not find that hypocritical, I do, maybe you should consider which team you want to be on.
If you can pick and choose the parts you like why can I not do the same and be a Christian like you?
I don't use the Bible to reinforce my argument. I simply said the Bible has long ago predicted what is happening today and it has. I said that the Bible has never been wrong in one single prediction and it hasn't. As for you being a Christian, we can settle this once and for all. Are you or aren't you a Christian? Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior by professing your sins and asking Him to come into your heart and been Biblically baptized? If you have then I must ask you for forgiveness and offer you an apology for which I will be glad to do. If not, then my observations were correct and I will pray that you accept Jesus as Lord and Savior of your life before it's too late.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#24909 May 14, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
"The way it was written it is easy to imagine that was the intention of the author to insinuate it, and not say it." If that were the case, it would be just as easy to interpret the way you do and that's why you referenced it. Wouldn't you agree?
I agree 100% on both parts of your question. You see when someone calls him out on what he insinuated, not what he said, he has his ass and the publisher covered, and says that is not what I wrote, reread the article.

In the mean time you people who know damn well what he meant by it says he is correct.

Pathetic- it sounds like professional wrestling and you people are eating it up.


Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#24910 May 14, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't use the Bible to reinforce my argument. I simply said the Bible has long ago predicted what is happening today and it has. I said that the Bible has never been wrong in one single prediction and it hasn't. As for you being a Christian, we can settle this once and for all. Are you or aren't you a Christian? Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior by professing your sins and asking Him to come into your heart and been Biblically baptized? If you have then I must ask you for forgiveness and offer you an apology for which I will be glad to do. If not, then my observations were correct and I will pray that you accept Jesus as Lord and Savior of your life before it's too late.
You don't, you could have fooled me. I read what you wrote, content of the Bible was not the topic was it?

What was the purpose of that information being injected?

"As for you being a Christian"

Whether I am or I am not is a moot point and your fail safe exit from that rant is just more of your self righteous bullshit.

You really remind me of one who got his theology credentials while being a guest of the penal system.

Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#24911 May 14, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't, you could have fooled me. I read what you wrote, content of the Bible was not the topic was it?
What was the purpose of that information being injected?
"As for you being a Christian"
Whether I am or I am not is a moot point and your fail safe exit from that rant is just more of your self righteous bullshit.
You really remind me of one who got his theology credentials while being a guest of the penal system.
Thanks for the answer albeit indirect. Whether you are or not is NOT a moot point. You will find that out one way or another.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#24912 May 14, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree 100% on both parts of your question. You see when someone calls him out on what he insinuated, not what he said, he has his ass and the publisher covered, and says that is not what I wrote, reread the article.
In the mean time you people who know damn well what he meant by it says he is correct.
Pathetic- it sounds like professional wrestling and you people are eating it up.
I would agree with your assessment that he has his backside covered. I'm glad to know that you believe only one side practices this style of journalism. This coming from someone who's side and the media that covers them is the most "transparent" in history. There are many examples of "transparency" with this administration. Benghazi, IRS probes, passing of Obamacare, and Solyndra just to name a few.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#24913 May 14, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
I would agree with your assessment that he has his backside covered. I'm glad to know that you believe only one side practices this style of journalism. This coming from someone who's side and the media that covers them is the most "transparent" in history. There are many examples of "transparency" with this administration. Benghazi, IRS probes, passing of Obamacare, and Solyndra just to name a few.
Where on earth would you get the idea, I think, that "only one side practices this style of journalism"

I think a journalist will use this style of journalism regardless of party to sell news papers, or get his name in lights.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#24914 May 14, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the answer albeit indirect. Whether you are or not is NOT a moot point. You will find that out one way or another.

Whether I am or not is a moot point in regard to the conversation we were having at the time. Seems to me when you know you are on the losing end of a conversation you have the uncanny ability to change subjects faster than a cat can lick its ass.

Did you developed that skill in penal theology 101?

Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#24915 May 15, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Whether I am or not is a moot point in regard to the conversation we were having at the time. Seems to me when you know you are on the losing end of a conversation you have the uncanny ability to change subjects faster than a cat can lick its ass.
Did you developed that skill in penal theology 101?
I have yet to be at the losing end of anything where you are concerned.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Arkansas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 17 hr RayOne 2,621
Clinton School sets Puzzle Day in LR (Mar '14) Fri ALI DARI MALAYSIA 4
skype fun? Dec 24 jenniferisawesome4 1
Who's got your vote in the Arkansas Senate race? Dec 22 You Damn Fool 101
hot white girl on skype Dec 18 xxxbadgirlsexxx 1
Convention and Visitors Bureau digital campaign... Dec 12 TriCounty Player 1
Former Arkansas Legislator Hudson Hallum Senten... (Jul '13) Dec 5 Race 52
More from around the web