JerrySeinfeld

I have continuously mopped the floor with BD - unless of course your definition of "bitch-sapped" means being bored to death by mundane one-line left-wing soundbites.

You know what makes this extra super bonus funny? It's that ol' Jerry here started this thread to whine about conservative views getting stifled by evil liberals and their media with the ad hominems. So here I am, trying to give the guy a chance to elucidate his position and what do I get? Evasion, obfustication, subject-changing and ad hominems. And it's not like I'm asking him to calculate the value of pi to a hundred billion digits here. It's a pretty simple question: how will nuking Iran contribute to the cause of democracy in the Middle East? A golden opportunity to show a bit of substance, to indicate there's more to his views than mere slogans. But alas: it is not to be. For in his responses (such as they are)we see the truth about Jerry: he's a Cadbury Creme Egg sans delicious, creamy filling. A Kinder with no Surprise. Chapeau'd, but bovineless. You get the idea. BWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA You think you pathetic position is somehow strengthened with "creme-egg" name calling?

On the IPCC: has anyone ever seen or attended international conferences like these? There was a major urban planning one in Vancouver last summer. Holy shit. Talk about groupthink! I had the pleasure of engaging a few of the delegates from various countries around the world over some beers. My goodness. It was like talking to zombies. The amount of rhetoric and lack of questioning that was around me was unbelievable. I do remember specifically putting forth some common sense, "uneducated" (read: non-indoctrinated) ideas as in "why don't they...." or "have you ever considered..." and most of my "outside suggestions" were met with astonished looks and silence. In my experience, people who spend their lives studying and solving the world's problems at the expense of taxpayers are far removed from reality and overly consumed with the self-imposed "importance" of their task. I woudn't trust these types at all. It is healthy to question them - despite what you may be sold by them.

My feelings towards the current PUSA (whatever they may be) have no bearing on your obvious inability to articulate a rational and defensible position or to conduct an actual debate without descending into playground logic. So spare me the amateur psychiatrics. Rationalizing your defense of a nuke-pursuing armageddon loving jew hating asshole isn't debate, it's pathetic.

Ah: so it's not that your obtuse. You just have no idea what you're talking about. I guess that's to be expected, gioven that your "plan" merely a jumbled set of talking points gathered from God knows where. You haven't actually given it any thought at all. If you had, there's simply no way you'd be implying that being attacked with nuclear weapons is what turned Japan into a functioning democracy. There's certainly no other way to interpret the above comment, Give it up, buddy. You're just mad that the polar opposite of your irrational hatred for GW Bush happens to be a jew-hating nuke-pursuing nutjob which makes it very difficult for you to rationaize your position.

The explanation came right out of your a$$. If you come here and clean my toilet I will re read the post. Polynewbie you are one wierd mofo. Money is convenience. People used to barter goods. If I was a tailor and you were a blacksmith, the only way that I could get any blacksmithing done was to offer you my services as a tailor in trade. Money eliminates that inconvenience and provides a liquid, universally accepted and tradable symbol of value. What exactly is the point of this post anyway?

That wasn't the question. Try arguing in good faith for once. Here: I'll even ask it again and in bold this time: It certainly appears I have seeing as how you can't or won't answer it. One word: Japan.

Is your inability to answer a question a chronic problem, or deliberate? Honestly, your almost as bad as PolyNewbie, but at least he/she/it has enough conviction to stand up for his/her/its beliefs. How is taking out a ruthless jew-hating armageddonist with a nuclear program going to help the world? Good question: you've stumped me.

To a lesser degree than Muslims, conservatives..... - also accept "traditional" gender roles. - also reject a woman having complete and unquestioned control over her body. - also reject homosexuality. - also hyper-emphasize the importance of a nuclear-family. - also believe that foreigners are a threat to their way of life. - also believe that war is the answer for most conflicts. - also believe in catering to the nation's powerful. - also reject a Charter of Human Rights and believe the marginalised do not need protection in the eyes of the law. - also believe (many do anyway) in capital punishment. - also do not believe in state-sponsored programs for the poor, preferring to leave it to religious and non-government organizations. That's just off the top of my head. I'm sure I could go on if I wanted to think another 20 seconds about it, but you get the gist of it. There is some merit there. BUT...conservative fanatics get pissed off. However, Muslim fanatics MEAN it. Try a remake of Brokeback mountain, but make it about two AL Qaeda dudes. Then count the days before a violent attack on the studio / director / writer.

ahhh - doggon it you're right! it's the "slaughtering of millions" part he's more focussed upon

I love this quote from Steyn - as usual he naisl it:

Holy shit - the perfect commie storm of David Suzuki and a Trudeau setting the national agenda is coming true. God help us.

You mean like WMD in Iraq? HUNDREDS of WMD have been found. Unfortunately, the only ones that matter enough for the left are the ones that have already been used.

HEAR HEAR! I totally agree - the oddity of the left is it's obsession with far off, distant, unproven problems and their complete lack of interest in immediate, REAL issues of the day.

I dunno - ask Mahmooud Ahmedinejad

And they have done so for decaders and centuries. You think the world has remained at a constant temperature for the past 1,000,000 years?

One of the most common errors of the enviro-alarmists (other than being so damned alarmist about everything) is the exclusion of HUMAN ADAPTATION in their dire predictions. Humans have adapted to changes in their climate and environment for thousands of years, yet Al Gore and David Suzuki would have us believe that if the sea levels start rising, all the people who live near the sea will be suddenly under water. Save for the fact that even the most dire prediction of a 2 foot rise in sea level would probably result in Vancouverites simply building a higherer seawall. Of course, the 2 foot scenario wouldn't happen in one day - as Al gore's famous pictures of South Florida shows the water sweeping over the everglades and Miami in a matter of seconds. No. If it does happen, it will take decades or a century or longer. Even the republicans of Palm Beach aren't ideological enough to let the Atlantic eat away at their oceanfront villas without building a 5 foot retaining wall. Sensible solutions to simple problems, friends. And don't even get me started on the benefits of climate change. Everyone seems to think ther eowuld be so many calamities resultnig from climate change, with no benefits. There could easily be as many or MORE benefits from changing temperatures. Remember: it's called climate CHANGE, not climate DETERIORATION (although I wouldn't put it past the enviroloonies to rename the phenomenon to get more attention and research dollars).

I'm glad you agree. My guess is that billions more have been spent and contributed to scientists who perpetuate the THEORY that humans cause global warming, than to those who question the absoluteness of the conclusions and suggest a more prudent approach to both our assessment and tackling of an potential challenges. For example in Canada alone, according to the environment commissioner, the Federal Government has spent roughly $6 Billion on various climate change papers, reports, etc. That's alot of incentive on the "human-cause" side. Now let's measure dicks. Where is your $6 Billion (in Canada Alone) that has been spent on the "anti-human-cause-side"??? It seems pretty obvious which side is really raking in the cash.

It is not the fact that they are denying climate change, but how they do it. The trotting out of faux-experts, the selectivitity, the conspiracy allegations that are part of the anti-climate change brigades bag-o-tricks are also hallmarks of Holocaust denialists, Creationists etc. Were they not using the same playbook as so many other cranks, the comparisons would not be so inviting. By all means, let there be a debate among peers, but let's keep the Exxon-funded essayists out of it (and yeah: there's a reason why bought and paid for pamphleteers are not to be trusted. As a self-proclaimed fan of the scientific method, wI would think the problems would be obvious to you.) You make it sound like people who question the "direct-human-cause" theorists aren't scientific when in fact questionning and falsifiability are core tenets of the scientific method. Furthermore you only tell one side of the "bias" story. To suggest that the conclusions of scientists is influenced by the source and reasons behing the funding of research corrupts conclusinos on both sides of the argument, making your "point" a wash.

Dont forget uneducated ignorant right wingers who have a hard time seeing the truth. Speaking of Hockey Night In Canada and Little Mosque on the Prairie - I have to say I laughed out loud on Saturday night watching the Calgary / Vancouver game. The commentators were reading the promo for upcoming programming. I actually heard Jim Huson (play-by-play man - CBC Hockey) say: "Catch the upcoming episode of Little Mosque on the prairie with (Haziz) and (Abdullah) get in a tizzy over the prospect of co-ed swimming" BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I laughed so fricken hard when I heard that. Poor Jim had to keep a straight face in between the action while readin such drivel. What a clear juxtaposition between traditional Canadian society (Hockey Night In Canada) and the imported multi-culti version that we're all being told makes us so much better. Since when is going back to the dark ages a positive excercise in diversity? I think the most hilarious part about this show is how it trivializes things like women's rights into a comedic muslim rah-rah session.

I read in a column today that non a single Muslim on the show is actually played by a Muslim: they're all Indian or Italian etc. Doesn't this seem striking? Why is this important? Well, for those of us who agree that there are Moderate muslims out there, but also argue that these moderates tend to acquiesce to the militants out of fear - this certainly lends support that fact.

Off topic??? Die??? The SuperBowl is coming. The SuperBowl is coming. After Monday or Turesday it can die. Until then, go study a political book. Peyton is going to mop the floor with the Chi D. He is on a mission - he know's he's got one chance to get it done. There is no way Rex Grossman outshines Peyton in this one. Indy 23 Chi 13 My two cents.

Um... dude, I hate to break it to you, but I'm not the one peddling the manichean "we're fighting them there so we don't have to do it here" construct. You are. Indeed, I'll even give you credit for having acknowledged that the phenomenon of terrorism and the peretuation of radical ideals has gone global; the problem is that acknowledgement undermines your "there/not here" theory. The genie is out of the bottle and throwing the ME into a state of total chaos and bloodshed is not going to achive the ends you think. As well, these arrests and others like it show that law enforcement, detective work and good intel are the best weapons against terrorism (something we lefties have long advocated), not messanic projects to project western values through military force. Only time will tell....personally I think bush is diong a great job and history will be much kinder to him - as with Reagan.

Glad to see law enforcement is working. If these cats were up to soemthing, they should be prosecuted accordingly. If this is an actual terrorist plot, it clearly indicates that not everyone got the "we're fighting them there so we don't have to do it here" memo. Yes, because as we know everything in the world is black and white.

Another terror plot was foiled in England. Hold your breath - it's only seconds before the obligatory "this isn't a trend" and "no jihad to see hear" apologists start screaming about how we need to start thinking about caving to terrorism.