Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#8155 Apr 29, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't make me humiliate you again, if for no other reason I don't feel like typing it all up.
...
Ironic post considering how many times, under different names, the poster has been humiliated...

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#8156 Apr 29, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Please - humiliate him - its entertaining- and pretty damn easy.
Don't be selfish. Think of the young, or deranged, that might not understand the gibberish he posts as if it was reasonable or factual.
Entertain the readers on TOPIX.
It's the least you can do for America.
And the irony of this post...

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#8157 Apr 29, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
The dinner has been going on since 1920, REPUBLICAN Calvin Coolidge was the first president to attend since 1924.
If Palin was in office, she'd have been at the dinner. Talk about jealous.
"working our assess off"??!!?? LOL! She quit her job and left the people of Alaska hanging.
She's right though, something is pathetic. It's her.
"The dinner has been going on since 1920, REPUBLICAN Calvin Coolidge was the first president to attend since 1924."

First President to attend since 1924?

And the poster is posting about humiliating someone else with posts like this???
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#8158 Apr 29, 2013
Bill in Dville wrote:
<quoted text>
Ironic post considering how many times, under different names, the poster has been humiliated...
You keep saying that. It never happened though. That's just you being arrogant and azzholish and frustrated that I've called you out for being such repeatedly.

How about you actually contributing something here besides snide remarks?

Do you wish to defend BigDave's sources on "the myth of global climate change"? Yes or No?

Is BigDave citing credible sources and a credible opinion? What's your take on his stance?

Got anything useful to say at all on the subject? Didn't think so.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#8159 Apr 29, 2013
Bill in Dville wrote:
<quoted text>
"The dinner has been going on since 1920, REPUBLICAN Calvin Coolidge was the first president to attend since 1924."
First President to attend since 1924?
And the poster is posting about humiliating someone else with posts like this???
Just a typo I made while editing the post. No big deal.

Do YOU think it's a big deal? Are you that big of an Aszhole?
The answer iiiiiissss: Yes. You are.
Informed Opinion

Lehigh Acres, FL

#8160 Apr 29, 2013
Bill in Dville wrote:
<quoted text>And the irony of this post...
.... exist only in the mind of a Right Wing Wacko.

Damn... Do we even have to help Right Wingers finish their sentences ?

Wait.. Of course we do, they despise education - like all other aspects of life, they are dependent on others.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#8161 Apr 29, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't you just LOVE how the liberal socialist commies "think" their sources are correct and anyone's sources that don't support their agenda are wrong? It's a complete waste of time. They have been completely liberal programmed and live in an alternate universe.
Synergy, certainly you aren't making the claim that all sources are created equal, are you?

For example:

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology says: "Global climate change is among the most pressing and important problem currently facing humanity. It is also unique by virtue of being a truly systemic problem of vast complexity: it affects every one of us, and is directly affected by every one of our actions. Like nothing else, dealing with climate change calls upon us to engage in effective collective decision making on a global scale."

Or, BigDave1's man Alex Jones says: "Imperial Probe Droids Are Real"

Which do you think is the more reliable source of information?
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#8162 Apr 29, 2013
Ok, I know I run the risk of making Big Dave hide under his bed in fear tonight, but this is the source of some of your right-wing "science".

http://www.youtube.com/watch... #!

Imperial Probe Droids! The end is here!!!

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8163 Apr 29, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's the summation of the article from your link:
"And as Andrew Revkin points out on Dot Earth, there were legitimate concerns raised in the original emails about the IPCC process—and how closed it could be to dissenting voices. But inquiry after inquiry showed that there was little more to the emails than that, and cleared scientists involved in the imbroglio like Michael Mann. The more balanced recent IPCC report on natural disasters had a wider variety of voices, and pleased even longtime critics. Ultimately, the emails are a sideshow—and the unhappy result that’s almost certainly to come at the UN climate summit in Durban, which begins next week, will have little to do with them. "
Did you read that? "Inquiry after Inquiry" showed there was little more to it than (discussions of a first draft).
Like shooting fish in a barrel.
So I would ask you, BigDummy1, why are you so hell-bent on believing something that is OBVIOUSLY propaganda and not a real issue? WHY must you grasp at every straw you can find before you'll believe the real science that is showing an unequivocal result?
Read through the following link. Obviously it's on the simple-side of things and just sums up the basics of what real science is saying about this. Consider it a primer to information that is out there to the NON-insane-crackpot world.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warmin...
There is nothing balanced about you IPCC report. It shows that 50% of the IPCC report of warming is fake.
There is no sense going on and on as you will just keep denying and I will just keep giving you the same information for you to deny or say that all the information is incorrect. So just continue on with your Obama st6yle lets call everybody a crackpot that says something we don't agree with or don't want them to say.
I guess you are one of those that thinks if you say something often enough that makes it true.
http://tucsoncitizen.com/wryheat/2012/07/18/n...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8164 Apr 29, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>

The First Christians
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows...
This FRONTLINE series is an intellectual and visual guide to the new and controversial historical evidence which challenges familiar assumptions about the life of Jesus and the epic rise of Christianity.
The Gospel of Mark
L. Michael White:
Professor of Classics and Director of the Religious Studies Program University of Texas at Austin
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows...

(deleted for space)
And also in response to your next post about Matthew.

I really fail to see the reason you posted from that same citation AGAIN. But, for the sake of clarification, while SOME of what you posted is largely not that controversial, some of it is very strained in supporting what it stresses. But to give a short answer:

The Gospel according to Matthew - Considered by some to be the first gospel written, possibly as early as 40 AD in Hebrew and later rewritten in Greek. Generally considered to have been written between 55-62 AD. There is now some question as to which came first, Matthew or Mark. Written by Matthew the apostle who was once a tax collector. A date of after 70 AD is hard to support. For one, it makes no mention of the destruction of the Temple in 70AD, an event which would have been a traumatic event for the early church and for Jewish Christians. Mention of it would have also validated Jesus' prediction of that same event.

The Gospel according to Mark - John Mark was a Jewish Christian living in Jerusalem who though not an apostle, MAY have been a witness to Jesus' preaching. He traveled with Peter on some of his missionary journeys and later traveled to Rome with Timothy. The gospel is believed to have been written in Rome and intended for Gentile Christians. It is now argued that this may have been the first gospel written, perhaps as early as 50 AD, but no later than 70 AD.

Sources: Bible Knowledge Commentary - Dallas Theological Seminary
Tectonics.org
William Lane's The Gospel of Mark, The Gospel of Matthew
Dr. J A T Robinson

Now can we PLEASE get off the subject of Bible authorship. This is a political thread. It is interesting how it continues to be those on the Left who keep bringing up Jesus, not those of us on the Right - we just respond. And then once their arguments about "Jesus is a liberal." get shot down, suddenly we get posts about the unreliability of the Bible.

I really don't care what you believe about this, please don't respond with another cut and paste job about the same thing. You think whatever you want to. Let's get back to the political - we have hijacked this thread enough with the topic of the Bible.

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8165 Apr 29, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
You keep saying that. It never happened though. That's just you being arrogant and azzholish and frustrated that I've called you out for being such repeatedly.
How about you actually contributing something here besides snide remarks?
Do you wish to defend BigDave's sources on "the myth of global climate change"? Yes or No?
Is BigDave citing credible sources and a credible opinion? What's your take on his stance?
Got anything useful to say at all on the subject? Didn't think so.
Nobody needs to stand up for me. I stand tall and strong by myself. Divide and conquer huh? Just because I don't fall for your socialist political agendas fake crisis. You and the government want the public to support high energy carbon taxes. The governments trying to shut this country down by eliminating most of this countries abundant energy sources. You liberals have almost stopped us from burning coal. You don't want us burning petroleum products. You don't want us using natural gas because of fracking. You don't want nuclear power because of its dangers and the problems disposing of nuclear waste. You don't want us burning wood in our fireplaces as they cause pollution and trees may be destroyed. It is obvious that there are no lengths that the EPA and the environmentalists will go to.
I know what you want. Some of you would like most of mankind to just die and leave the earth to itself. That is Bill Gates dream. He gave a speech on this subject not long ago. The government would let us use only a meager amount of energy. Even controlling our homes thermostats. Affording energy would be difficult because of the government closing useable energy sources down. We would end up paying a huge amount of money to the government in energy taxes and more to whatever company the government allows to sell it's energy. Sell less and make more money. Yeah, I think I have it pretty well figured out. It is very possible that I may be the only one on Forum with these views but that is what I think. I don't think you have to be a far out crackpot to see that is what is happening and that must be the socialist agendas goal. One only has to see what is going on. So just laugh your socialist ass off and see if I give a damn. If you pull this plan off than we all will know that I am right. It will not matter then as it will be to late then to do anything about it.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#8166 Apr 29, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
There is nothing balanced about you IPCC report. It shows that 50% of the IPCC report of warming is fake.
There is no sense going on and on as you will just keep denying and I will just keep giving you the same information for you to deny or say that all the information is incorrect. So just continue on with your Obama st6yle lets call everybody a crackpot that says something we don't agree with or don't want them to say.
I guess you are one of those that thinks if you say something often enough that makes it true.
http://tucsoncitizen.com/wryheat/2012/07/18/n...
BigDave - Really now!

This time your TucsonCitizen blog points directly to "C3 Headlines" as the source of the article. C3 Headlines is a died in the wool funded by big-oil and coal Climate Change Denial site. THAT site references a "peer reviewed new study" with no sources. THAT study has already been torn apart by real scientists as absolute fraud. Here you go:

http://thesnufkin.blogspot.com/2011/03/how-to...

I've already completely dismantled your "TucsonCitizen" source just a few short posts ago. And now you're throwing it out there again claiming it as truth?!?

That's just sad, dude. What's wrong with you? Why do you insist on holding onto a blatant lie so strongly?

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#8167 Apr 29, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Synergy, certainly you aren't making the claim that all sources are created equal, are you?
For example:
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology says: "Global climate change is among the most pressing and important problem currently facing humanity. It is also unique by virtue of being a truly systemic problem of vast complexity: it affects every one of us, and is directly affected by every one of our actions. Like nothing else, dealing with climate change calls upon us to engage in effective collective decision making on a global scale."
Or, BigDave1's man Alex Jones says: "Imperial Probe Droids Are Real"
Which do you think is the more reliable source of information?
I'm simply stating what is always the case on this forum. Conservatives don't accept the lib sources and the libs don't accept the conservative sources. It's a waste of time. As far as certain sources being more reliable? Perhaps that's true, but it all boils down to the political leanings of the the people AT the source AND the political leanings of the person(people) PROVIDING the source. Is MIT more reliable than some other source? IF their findings support YOUR(or anyone's) political agenda. There is ALWAYS a political agenda. Does MIT stand for Scholars in Climate Change? No.

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8168 Apr 29, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
Ok, I know I run the risk of making Big Dave hide under his bed in fear tonight, but this is the source of some of your right-wing "science".
http://www.youtube.com/watch... #!
Imperial Probe Droids! The end is here!!!
Very funny. There you go again trying to use the liberal ha,ha,ha, to belittle me and try to make others believe what you say. It doesn't even work that well for Obama anymore, and you really suck at it.

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8169 Apr 29, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
BigDave - Really now!
This time your TucsonCitizen blog points directly to "C3 Headlines" as the source of the article. C3 Headlines is a died in the wool funded by big-oil and coal Climate Change Denial site. THAT site references a "peer reviewed new study" with no sources. THAT study has already been torn apart by real scientists as absolute fraud. Here you go:
http://thesnufkin.blogspot.com/2011/03/how-to...
I've already completely dismantled your "TucsonCitizen" source just a few short posts ago. And now you're throwing it out there again claiming it as truth?!?
That's just sad, dude. What's wrong with you? Why do you insist on holding onto a blatant lie so strongly?
No lie. Just to see how long you can go on with your crap.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#8170 Apr 29, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Synergy, certainly you aren't making the claim that all sources are created equal, are you?
For example:
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology says: "Global climate change is among the most pressing and important problem currently facing humanity. It is also unique by virtue of being a truly systemic problem of vast complexity: it affects every one of us, and is directly affected by every one of our actions. Like nothing else, dealing with climate change calls upon us to engage in effective collective decision making on a global scale."
Or, BigDave1's man Alex Jones says: "Imperial Probe Droids Are Real"
Which do you think is the more reliable source of information?
I have asked you this several times. What IF you are wrong? Just as I can't say that I am 100% correct, you can't say that you are 100% correct. As I have said, If I am wrong, it's going to be great. If you are wrong....

So, what IF you are wrong? Have you even considered that possibility?
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#8171 Apr 29, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because I don't fall for your socialist political agendas fake crisis. You and the government want the public to support high energy carbon taxes.
Ok, you're having a real problem with logic. You don't like the solution so you claim the problem doesn't exist. It doesn't work like that. At this point the problem clearly exists. If you want to talk about different solutions, fine. Claiming the facts aren't there is insane.
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The governments trying to shut this country down by eliminating most of this countries abundant energy sources. You liberals have almost stopped us from burning coal. You don't want us burning petroleum products. You don't want us using natural gas because of fracking. You don't want nuclear power because of its dangers and the problems disposing of nuclear waste. You don't want us burning wood in our fireplaces as they cause pollution and trees may be destroyed. It is obvious that there are no lengths that the EPA and the environmentalists will go to.
That's what's going on is it? Did Alex Jones tell you that? Show me the smoking gun that shows that "The government is trying to shut the country down." Was a bill passed? Or was this the result of a supreme court decision? Was a memo passed around? Which agencies are involved and when did they decide that? Forget the smoking gun, give me one sliver or real evidence? There is none because it's not happening. You're just making this crap up as you go along.
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I know what you want. Some of you would like most of mankind to just die and leave the earth to itself. That is Bill Gates dream. He gave a speech on this subject not long ago.
Are you talking about Bill Gates, the former CEO of Microsoft that has recently donated $6 billion to fight measles, hepatitis B, rotavirus and AIDS, among others—is part of the largest, most human-driven philanthropy in the history of mankind? That Bill Gates? It doesn't sound like he wants most of mankind to die. I'd be really interested in you producing a source for this speech.
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Affording energy would be difficult because of the government closing useable energy sources down. We would end up paying a huge amount of money to the government in energy taxes and more to whatever company the government allows to sell it's energy. Sell less and make more money. Yeah, I think I have it pretty well figured out.
Yeah. You've got it all figured out. All on your own there.
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is very possible that I may be the only one on Forum with these views but that is what I think. I don't think you have to be a far out crackpot to see that is what is happening and that must be the socialist agendas goal. One only has to see what is going on. So just laugh your socialist ass off and see if I give a damn. If you pull this plan off than we all will know that I am right. It will not matter then as it will be to late then to do anything about it.
Yep. It's every other person on the planet, not you, that is crazy.

Got it.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#8172 Apr 29, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Very funny. There you go again trying to use the liberal ha,ha,ha, to belittle me and try to make others believe what you say. It doesn't even work that well for Obama anymore, and you really suck at it.
You're the one that used him as a source. It's not my fault you don't have very good judgement. Blame yourself.

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8173 Apr 29, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Synergy, certainly you aren't making the claim that all sources are created equal, are you?
For example:
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology says: "Global climate change is among the most pressing and important problem currently facing humanity. It is also unique by virtue of being a truly systemic problem of vast complexity: it affects every one of us, and is directly affected by every one of our actions. Like nothing else, dealing with climate change calls upon us to engage in effective collective decision making on a global scale."
Or, BigDave1's man Alex Jones says: "Imperial Probe Droids Are Real"
Which do you think is the more reliable source of information?
I used to work in a university and I bet you don't realize how much money in grants these professors and scientist get from Uncle Sam for certain studies and projects. Don't you think that these scientist want to keep getting their grant money? I could say all the studies in various university's are rigged and the results are all phoney to please the government so that these people can keep their jobs from year to year. That has been done before. I could say all studies are done this way just as you point to my articles and information. Think about that. Your MIT information might very well be false so a person or persons can keep getting their grants renewed. No results no money.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8174 Apr 29, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Timothy McVeigh - Right Wing Wacko Terrorist.
Don't forget to buy your Timothy McVeigh baseball hat on you favorite Right Wing Website.
Born April 23, 1968
Lockport, New York, U.S.
Died June 11, 2001
Cause of death Execution by lethal injection.
Location(s) Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, U.S.
Target(s) Federal government
Killed 168
Injured 600+
Weapon(s) Fertilizer truck bomb
Motive Retaliation for the Waco Siege, Ruby Ridge, other government raids, the Turner Diaries, as well as general U.S. foreign policy.
Timothy James "Tim" McVeigh (April 23, 1968 – June 11, 2001) was an American terrorist who detonated a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995.
Commonly referred to as the Oklahoma City Bombing, the attack killed 168 people and injured over 800.[3] It was the deadliest act of terrorism within the United States prior to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks,[3] and remains the deadliest act of domestic terrorism in United States history.
McVeigh, a militia movement sympathizer sought revenge against the federal government for their handling of the Waco Siege, which ended in the deaths of 76 people exactly two years prior to the bombing, as well as for the Ruby Ridge incident in 1992.
McVeigh hoped to inspire a revolt against what he considered to be a tyrannical federal government. He was convicted of eleven federal offenses and sentenced to death
His execution took place on June 11, 2001 at the Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana.
Timothy McVeigh - he actually believed this Right Wing Wacko nonsense - and over 968 Americans paid the price.
This really is a new low, even for you, but I guess you would also agree that the unabomber and Al Gore have a lot in common.

http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2010/... http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/al_gor...

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.

Citizen Sound-Off Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Election Who do you support for Governor in Texas in 2010? (Oct '10) 8 min Musical farts 19,905
Election Who's got your vote in the Tennessee Senate rac... (Oct '14) 22 min Stray- Dog 18,395
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 46 min LeDuped 190,686
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Missouri ... (Oct '10) 53 min TRUMPOCALYPSE 102,181
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in West Virg... (Oct '10) 7 hr Dalai Lama 80,285
Election Who do you support for Attorney General in Texa... (Oct '10) 8 hr Pray farts 730
Election Who do you support for State Board of Education... (Oct '10) 9 hr Deserve farts 776
More from around the web