Is Ann coulter too extreme?

Originally posted by edsinger
Would you have preferred a enviro-facist?

what's with the right and the word FASCIST these days? fascism is extreme right wing politics, not extreme left.

You can lump those on the right however you like, but the right does stand for some things that I believe are truth.

i may lump but i don't NAME CALL, there's a line that you cross when you do that.

One big one is small government, the government can do nothing but screw something up.

yeah, just look at our crappy interstate system..

I believe in capitalism not socialism.

then why don't you open up the borders and go for full on free market capitalism?

I grew up in the south and know full well what government handouts lead to. We are a socialist nation whether you believe it or not. We have been since FDR.

and he's one of the greatest presidents we've ever had...

The one thing I deliberately left out of the definition was anti-Christian, and there was a reason for it.

you say anti-christian like it's such a bad thing.... well, anti-christian PEOPLE is bad, anti-christian religion not so much.

Some Christians can believe in some of these agendas and yet still hold their faith. Others can not.

christian socialism

Is the environment so bad? Well lets see, in the 1970's I would not have eaten a catfish out of the Mississippi river where I lived at the time. Now I would. Our rivers are cleaner than than have been for 100 years

you're honestly saying that, on average, the world's rivers are cleaner?
can you support this claim with evidence?

and yet it is not good enough for some, they want Nature to be first and not man.

that's because we are part of nature. without nature we're doomed to die.

That is not what I believe at all. One prime example is the Oregon Owl story, 25000 loggers lost their livelihood to save a damn spotted owl. That was wrong imho.

you obviously don't understand the implications of extinction. if we lose one species it makes it easier for us to lose another, and then another, until we have nothing but humans, pigeons, rats, and crabgrass. not a sustainable environment.

I also worked in a place where an endangered 'cricket' no less was spotted and has not been seen since and yet the land is off limits now just in case it appears again. This is taking environmentalism to the utmost in stupidity. We are to be good stewards to the land, but we are not to worship it!

again, if we lose one species in an ecosystem it could be a catastrophe.

Anti-Americanism - Its rampant here and has been for the 4 years I have been here.

like the last 4 years bush has been in office? i wonder why...

It makes me sick, the US can never do right in anyone's eyes no matter what.

really? well, name one thing that the USA has done right in the last 4 years.

Iraq is a prime example - the peacenicks will be anti-war no matter what until the Islamic cowards are beheading their uncles and by then it will be to late.

beheadings in iraq are as common as american soldiers raping little girls and slaughtering their families.

Ann Coulter calls it correct the majority of the time.

how about this, give me ONE EXAMPLE where ann coulter has been right.

Am I stupid for believing this? well its a matter of opinion I guess, but I stand by my statement.

it's not a matter of opinion if someone is right or wrong.

For those who think I am nuts, just keep on believing the AL Frankenists and Michael Moores of the world, its cool and vogue to do so till it starts effecting you personally.

how would believing a brilliant political commentator/comedian and an ok documentarian hurt me?

By then, you might be able to look back and be thankful that there were those that were willing to call it like they see it and to do something about it. History repeats itself and those that cry the rivers of Chameberlanism will never see the light till it bites them personally.

again: Chameberlanism?
i googled it and got ZERO results.

Originally posted by edsinger
Would you have preferred a enviro-facist?

I’m not sure if you are leveling this label at me, but I assume as much since it immediately follows my response.

Is that how you see me?

Originally posted by edsinger
You can lump those on the right however you like, but the right does stand for some things that I believe are truth.

I don’t recall ever using those labels… Moreover, they appear to be meaningless anyway…

Take for example your next point:

Originally posted by edsinger
One big one is small government,

That certainly wouldn’t describe our present condition in this country, now does it?

Originally posted by edsinger
…the government can do nothing but screw something up.

How is it you arrive at “nothing”?

It’s this brand of absolutes I object to most from the Ann Coulters of the world.

Originally posted by edsinger
I believe in capitalism not socialism.

Again, assuming those labels mean very much, so do I.

But take for example your first crack about environmentalism… How do you reconcile the notion that a system that ignores the true cost of resources in production is anything but a different form of welfare and entitlement? Sure, the beneficiaries may be different, but in the end, it is nothing more than a different kind of redistribution of wealth scheme.

Originally posted by edsinger
I grew up in the south and know full well what government handouts lead to. We are a socialist nation whether you believe it or not. We have been since FDR.

I might agree, if I clearly understood with specificity what you were referring to. But I sense you’d probably miss my point about corporate welfare…which there is plenty of.

Originally posted by edsinger
As for the others in the definition, well lets just say that was created to lump the 'left' into a category for the many flags I wore with honer. I could be called anything and the minute I fought back another badge. So 3 years ago I started using this term to lump the like minded together.

The one thing I deliberately left out of the definition was anti-Christian, and there was a reason for it. Some Christians can believe in some of these agendas and yet still hold their faith. Others can not.

Is the environment so bad? Well lets see, in the 1970's I would not have eaten a catfish out of the Mississippi river where I lived at the time. Now I would. Our rivers are cleaner than than have been for 100 years and yet it is not good enough for some, they want Nature to be first and not man. That is not what I believe at all. One prime example is the Oregon Owl story, 25000 loggers lost their livelihood to save a damn spotted owl. That was wrong imho.

I also worked in a place where an endangered 'cricket' no less was spotted and has not been seen since and yet the land is off limits now just in case it appears again. This is taking environmentalism to the utmost in stupidity. We are to be good stewards to the land, but we are not to worship it!

Extremism, whether on the right or left, is still extremism.

We have our work cut out for us, don’t we?

Originally posted by edsinger
Anti-Americanism - Its rampant here and has been for the 4 years I have been here. It makes me sick, the US can never do right in anyone's eyes no matter what.

Public discourse and disagreement isn’t anti-American, on the contrary, it is VERY American. It’s what makes us special.

Originally posted by edsinger
Iraq is a prime example - the peacenicks will be anti-war no matter what until the Islamic cowards are beheading their uncles and by then it will be to late.

I’m not antiwar, though I’m antiwar in Iraq.

Does that make me a “peacnick”?

Originally posted by edsinger
Ann Coulter calls it correct the majority of the time.

No she doesn’t. She speaks in divisive absolutes like you appear to.

Very little in the universe is as black and white as you and she would have us believe.

Originally posted by edsinger
Am I stupid for believing this?

No. But it does strike me as overly emotional and unproductive.

Originally posted by edsinger
…well its a matter of opinion I guess, but I stand by my statement.

It is.

Originally posted by edsinger
For those who think I am nuts, just keep on believing the AL Frankenists and Michael Moores of the world, its cool and vogue to do so till it starts effecting you personally. By then, you might be able to look back and be thankful that there were those that were willing to call it like they see it and to do something about it.

Like I said earlier, extremism from any direction is still extremism. Read = bad.

Originally posted by edsinger
History repeats itself

It does. Let’s hope we can overcome that.

EDIT: I just read madnessinmysoul's response and realized you must have been responding to him directly. My bad... I should have read all of the responses in this thread. I apologize for my confusion, but many of my points still stand.



[edit on 11-5-2007 by loam]

(1) fascist? well again I like the word Nazi better in this case, better shock value. As an adder, I am so far right that I make a right winger look left to even see the right.

(2) Name call - Its a descriptive noun.

(3) Interstates? funny, that was not the US's idea at all, it was a copy of the German system because they moved them damn panzer divisions so quickly. Government builds it at over 1Million a mile? Yeah that's efficient and when you see the government workers maintaining it they are always getting after aren't they?

(4) As I said, we are not Capitalist anymore, its a milder form of socialism.

(5) FDR Great? I will let that one speak for itself. (Uncle Joe sure liked him)

(6) Christian socialism - I would agree

(7) ON Average the worlds rivers are cleaner? Read again what I said. The US rivers are cleaner than they were 30 years ago for sure, some cleaner than they were 100 years ago. The US has some of he most stringent laws in the world already, so lets cripple industry even more and make them stricter yet. Hogwash.

(8) Nature will take care of itself, the Human life is more valuable than ANY animals life , well at least in theory as far as some humans go, but that is only me being an ass.

(9) We loose one species and that is not the end of the world. Hey I like to see success stories such as the Black Footed Ferret, but again I do not think it would have been worth some of the leftist dictum's on how to save it either.

(10) catastrophe to lose one species , hardly. Sad maybe but not the end, they have been going extinct long before we got here.

(11) I have only been here 4 or so years, I bet they hated America before that even.

(12) Good Economy that is well on the way to having a balanced budget without raising taxes and enlarging the government handouts. The war against Islamicism has been changed from the defense to the offense, Supreme court judges that banned partial birth abortions, shall I go on?

(13) "as common as American soldiers raping little girls and slaughtering their families. " That is just plain sick, you have over 150k troops and yet bring up a few isolated cases. One difference that stands out though, these soldiers you speak of with such love didn't broadcast what they did on TV now did they. All troops from all countries have had bad apples, its part of life. That statement just made your colors obvious.

(14) One example? Hmmm how about 25?
25

(15) Good commentator? Hell he could even make a go of it on Radio. I knew he was 'off' when on Saturday Night Live. Again, you make it obvious.

(16) Chameberlanism and no Google results - Its called a confabulation and a liberal should be able to figure it out I would think.

Originally posted by loam

I’m not sure if you are leveling this label at me, but I assume as much since it immediately follows my response.

Is that how you see me?

Not at all.....

Originally posted by loam

Originally posted by edsinger
One big one is small government,

That certainly wouldn’t describe our present condition in this country, now does it?

No Bush spends too much money and is not a fiscal conservative at all.

Originally posted by loam
Again, assuming those labels mean very much, so do I.

But take for example your first crack about environmentalism… How do you reconcile the notion that a system that ignores the true cost of resources in production is anything but a different form of welfare and entitlement? Sure, the beneficiaries may be different, but in the end, it is nothing more than a different kind of redistribution of wealth scheme.

Ignores true costs? Well give me an example of a better system? We are not perfect at all, but the resources are there to use. You drive a car right?

Originally posted by loam

Originally posted by edsinger
I grew up in the south and know full well what government handouts lead to. We are a socialist nation whether you believe it or not. We have been since FDR.

I might agree, if I clearly understood with specificity what you were referring to. But I sense you’d probably miss my point about corporate welfare…which there is plenty of.

Hey we agree on that one. That is one of the crooked drawbacks to our system, the politicians can be paid off. I like term limits for that exact reason. Companies don't pay taxes if they play the game right, neither do Farmers (some). I like a flat tax - alleviates all that crap.

Originally posted by loam
Extremism, whether on the right or left, is still extremism.

We have our work cut out for us, don’t we?

I agree somewhat, I am beyond an extremist in some senses and yes much work remains.

Originally posted by loam

Public discourse and disagreement isn’t anti-American, on the contrary, it is VERY American. It’s what makes us special.

Agreed, but that has limits - troops are dieing to protect the rights of some to unnecesarily put the soldiers life at risk.

Originally posted by loam
I’m not antiwar, though I’m antiwar in Iraq.

Does that make me a “peacnick”?

That's a hard one to gauge, see I do not like the way the war is going. Again Washington is trying to manage a war. We should have declared WAR on Sept 12, but we didn't. You can not fight a politically correct war, especially against this enemy. I think we needed to go into Iraq for many reasons, and history will show that to be the correct course of action. I just wish the politicians would let us win it.

Originally posted by loam
No she doesn’t. She speaks in divisive absolutes like you appear to.

Very little in the universe is as black and white as you and she would have us believe.

Actually I take that as a complement

Originally posted by loam
EDIT: I just read madnessinmysoul's response and realized you must have been responding to him directly. My bad... I should have read all of the responses in this thread. I apologize for my confusion, but many of my points still stand.

Not a problem and I hope I answered your questions as well.

Originally posted by edsinger
(1) fascist? well again I like the word Nazi better in this case, better shock value. As an adder, I am so far right that I make a right winger look left to even see the right.

so you're much closer to a nazi and a fascist than i am...

(2) Name call - Its a descriptive noun.

it's still name calling, which has NO place in civil discourse.

(3) Interstates? funny, that was not the US's idea at all, it was a copy of the German system because they moved them damn panzer divisions so quickly.

so? it still works.

Government builds it at over 1Million a mile?

well, do you think private industry would've done a better job? we'd have toll roads from sea to shining sea, what a beautiful paradise....

Yeah that's efficient and when you see the government workers maintaining it they are always getting after aren't they?

the problem is that states have too much control of maintenance.

(4) As I said, we are not Capitalist anymore, its a milder form of socialism.

and that's a good thing.

(5) FDR Great? I will let that one speak for itself. (Uncle Joe sure liked him)

FDR is far better than ron "let's just wait for the apocalypse" reagan

(7) ON Average the worlds rivers are cleaner? Read again what I said. The US rivers are cleaner than they were 30 years ago for sure, some cleaner than they were 100 years ago.

again, CITATION

The US has some of he most stringent laws in the world already, so lets cripple industry even more and make them stricter yet. Hogwash.

what's more important to you, long term health of the earth or a few dollars?

(8) Nature will take care of itself,

what the...
ok, nature only takes care of itself when we stop f'ing with it. sure, it can heal itself, but only when we're not polluting it.

the Human life is more valuable than ANY animals life ,

hmmm, that's a statement. but WHY? i wonder if you can answer that one. why is your life more important than a kodiak bear?

(9) We loose one species and that is not the end of the world. Hey I like to see success stories such as the Black Footed Ferret, but again I do not think it would have been worth some of the leftist dictum's on how to save it either.

if we don't set up stringent laws it'll lead to more than the loss of one species. we've already lost far more than 1.

(10) catastrophe to lose one species , hardly. Sad maybe but not the end, they have been going extinct long before we got here.

well, obviously species have gone extinct before we got here through natural selection. but the problem is that we're removing perfectly healthy members of an ecosystem which is a catastrophe on its on.

(11) I have only been here 4 or so years, I bet they hated America before that even.

well, bush was in office for another 4 years before that...

The war against Islamicism has been changed from the defense to the offense,

so why are we in iraq? last time i checked they were ruled by a secular dictatorship before we got there.

(13) "as common as American soldiers raping little girls and slaughtering their families. " That is just plain sick, you have over 150k troops and yet bring up a few isolated cases.

just like you have just a few isolated cases of beheadings. that's why i brought up the comparison.

One difference that stands out though, these soldiers you speak of with such love didn't broadcast what they did on TV now did they.

i doubt the sadists that did that wouldn't have minded broadcasting it if they wouldn't get caught.

All troops from all countries have had bad apples, its part of life. That statement just made your colors obvious.

yeah, i'm someone that prefers peace over war.

(14) One example? Hmmm how about 25?
25

all 25 are wrong.

(15) Good commentator? Hell he could even make a go of it on Radio.

that wasn't his failure, it was the failure of the network.

[quote[
I knew he was 'off' when on Saturday Night Live. Again, you make it obvious.


make WHAT obvious? that i think for myself instead of letting partisan hate cloud my vision? i'm not a liberal, for the record. i'm a leftist radical because we need radical change.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulso you're much closer to a nazi and a fascist than i am...

I am neither a Nazi nor a Fascist -- just a "non-Tulipwalker"

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulit's still name calling, which has NO place in civil discourse.

Like I said, you should understand the origin - it just stuck, and as long as I do not call a 'specific' person that, then its just a descriptive noun.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
so? it still works.

True - so when doing things is getting it right 20% of the time acceptable?

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
well, do you think private industry would've done a better job? we'd have toll roads from sea to shining sea, what a beautiful paradise....

Oh heck yes they would have done better. At the time, the government was the only way it could be funded, through taxes of course. Toll roads? Hell, they are everywhere anyway so whats your point?

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulthe problem is that states have too much control of maintenance.

As well they should, states such as Mississippi do not have highway debt, at least they operated in that fashion for years, not sure now. When the money ran out, they stopped work. We don't need more federal workers PERIOD.

Originally posted by madnessinmysouland that's a good thing.

It is? Take a look at Europe and its economy, the socialist nations, and their growth rate. Even the poor in the United States have a somewhat better standard of living than some in these other nations. Is some socialism good? Well I can see the argument in the case of a safety net, but once you start something it grows into an entity all its own, see the unions for a correlation.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulFDR is far better than ron "let's just wait for the apocalypse" reagan

I am laughing so hard I feel I am going to piss my pants!!!!!!!

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulagain, CITATION

Well I don't have time to research it for that kind of detail, but I would suggest you take a walk to the river in Pittsburgh, or say St.Louis and ask the people of age to remember. It is not one that I need to prove, its common knowledge.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulwhat's more important to you, long term health of the earth or a few dollars?

Well if I am starving because I can get no job, then 200 years in the future doesnt mean much to me. We are becoming better stewards as time goes on. The folks that are crying "The sky is falling" all the time will not answer the tough questions. Why do they not even consider that Global Warming could be a natural event? Why are the Martian Ice caps melting also? Are all the earths power plants so damn polluting that they are ruining Mars also? Its a perspective, I am an engineer so I learn to look at facts and analyze all the data, not just the politically correct stuff. That's why I refuse to even sip a Starbucks Coffee. Its an agenda that I want no part of.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulwhat the...
ok, nature only takes care of itself when we stop f'ing with it. sure, it can heal itself, but only when we're not polluting it.

We have dominion over the Earth, it is here FOR us. We are to be good stewards as best we can, but when it comes to killing humans to save an animal, that crosses the line. The liberals surely understand this but do not care. One prime example is DDT. Ban its use to save a bird species, yet kill millions of humans in the process. Ever wonder why its not banned globally? Its because it WORKS and nations that need it could give a # less what the EnviroNazi's of the world think, they are trying to protect their populations.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
hmmm, that's a statement. but WHY? i wonder if you can answer that one. why is your life more important than a kodiak bear?

Ah, digging for it aren't ya? Well I will just spell it out for you then. Because the Creator says so.......

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulif we don't set up stringent laws it'll lead to more than the loss of one species. we've already lost far more than 1.

And yet we are discovering more new ones all the time. Species have been going extinct long before man decided to build power plants. I would like to save them also, could be a good thing, but the difference between you and I is what price we are willing to pay.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulwell, obviously species have gone extinct before we got here through natural selection. but the problem is that we're removing perfectly healthy members of an ecosystem which is a catastrophe on its on.

Ah the Darwinism comment, I knew it was coming and as you well can guess I think its horse #. The most simple of life forms has multiple parts that are necessary for it to function, and yet it could not have evolved in that form, all the parts must have been there at once for it to live and work. (Darwin falls on his face with this very simple fact) Darwin is now a religious figure to some, its a religion in itself, so beware of the trap it can cause.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulwell, bush was in office for another 4 years before that...

And I had not found ATS at that point, the reason I stayed was the blatant liberalism here and it needed another viewpoint. I learn a lot about my fellow man here, it reminds me of my college days when you see the young that are so impressionable. You know burn some incense and save the world by Marxism.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulso why are we in iraq? last time i checked they were ruled by a secular dictatorship before we got there.

Some will never get it, Saddam and his cronies were not exactly loved by the Islamists, but the enemy of your enemy is your friend remember? He gave refuge to Islamists and that is enough. Notice the war that Osama wanted is now going on, as usual the West's populations are growing tired of trying to control this issue. But we now have a decent military presence in the area and when the next attack comes maybe the pussyfarts will back away and let the scourge of this hatred be wiped out once and for all. It will require the political correct crowd to keep their mouth shut and that just can not happen at this time because to be quite frank about it, the American public in general is too ignorant to understand the threat in the first place.

Originally posted by madnessinmysouljust like you have just a few isolated cases of beheadings. that's why i brought up the comparison.

hmm fair point I guess, so I will retract that and state suicide bombers, same # different a**holes.

Originally posted by madnessinmysouli doubt the sadists that did that wouldn't have minded broadcasting it if they wouldn't get caught.

For once we partially agree -- but the difference is these criminal soldiers are not doing it deliberately to get publicity. BIG DIFFERENCE

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulyeah, i'm someone that prefers peace over war.

Would it surprise you to know that I too favor peace over war? But I am willing to fight when all other routes lead to capitulation or defeat.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulall 25 are wrong.

Your view doesn't surprise me.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulthat wasn't his failure, it was the failure of the network.

Not at all, it was a failure of content, there are not enough people out there that have the 'tulipwalker' beliefs that could make it profitable. The American people don't buy into that Hollywood elitist bull crap. It failed because NOBODY listened!

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulmake WHAT obvious? that i think for myself instead of letting partisan hate cloud my vision? i'm not a liberal, for the record. i'm a leftist radical because we need radical change.

Fair enough - I am at the other end of the spectrum and we can agree on one thing for sure - change is needed, we just have complete opposite views on what they need to be.

Hmmm...here's a link to a fascinating piece about Coulter's ongoing adventures in Palm Beach.
www.bradblog.com...
I really don't follow her rhetoric too much because she is just too over-the-top for me...but I figure I know enough to harbour an opinion. Still, a few bits in this report alone, stand out, and I quote from the blog.

"...where the rightwing idealogue had called for the repression of free speech --- for Democrats --- adding that she was "not a big fan of the First Amendment."

'Death is sexier than Lydia Cornell...wait until I tell her about the death camps I have planned for liberals!'

I gotta say, if this woman speaks for you, that's worrisome.

Originally posted by edsinger
I am neither a Nazi nor a Fascist -- just a "non-Tulipwalker"

i never said you were. i just said politically, by being on the right, you're CLOSER than i am on the left.

Like I said, you should understand the origin - it just stuck, and as long as I do not call a 'specific' person that, then its just a descriptive noun.

it's still name calling.
example: "southerners are hicks."
i'm not calling a specific person a hick, but it's still name calling.

Oh heck yes they would have done better.

how?

At the time, the government was the only way it could be funded, through taxes of course. Toll roads? Hell, they are everywhere anyway so whats your point?

i meant that EVERY highway would end up a toll road. they aren't everywhere. hell, i haven't seen a single toll road in the state of missouri and i've spent my whole life here and have covered most of the state.

As well they should, states such as Mississippi do not have highway debt, at least they operated in that fashion for years, not sure now. When the money ran out, they stopped work. We don't need more federal workers PERIOD.

this country is too big, we're too modern, and certain things are beyond states for them to be state regulated. we NEED federal workers because we really don't need state governments to do that much. federalism had its time, a time when communication and transportation were far more limited

It is? Take a look at Europe and its economy, the socialist nations, and their growth rate. Even the poor in the United States have a somewhat better standard of living than some in these other nations.

example?

Is some socialism good? Well I can see the argument in the case of a safety net, but once you start something it grows into an entity all its own, see the unions for a correlation.

correlation does NOT equal causation.

I am laughing so hard I feel I am going to piss my pants!!!!!!!

see, you can't defend my assertion. reagan was a horrible president who hurt the poor for the benefit of the rich. he thought that we were going to see the end of the world before his first term was up... then before his second term was up... then before his life was up. see, he was a delusional fool, not a good president.

Well I don't have time to research it for that kind of detail, but I would suggest you take a walk to the river in Pittsburgh, or say St.Louis and ask the people of age to remember.

well... i live in st. louis. i know that in terms of raw sewage in the waters things were worse less than 2 decades ago, but look at parts of missouri. the lake of the ozarks is still a dump for human waste.... and people swim in it which is the worst part. though i doubt anyone really is arguing for further environmental regulation on river pollution because under the current laws there really isn't much need for more... except for maybe thermal pollution.

It is not one that I need to prove, its common knowledge.

it isn't common knowledge. pollutant levels are a very specific type of knowledge. things may actually seem okay when they aren't/

Well if I am starving because I can get no job,

hyperbole. i doubt anyone is going to starve because of environmental laws. especially in the USA where jobs abound.

then 200 years in the future doesnt mean much to me.

that's the difference. i see the future as just as important as the present.

We are becoming better stewards as time goes on.

but not fast enough. we're still pumping billions of tons of CO2 in the air every year.

The folks that are crying "The sky is falling" all the time will not answer the tough questions. Why do they not even consider that Global Warming could be a natural event?

science? oh... you're from the right, science tends to not matter to the right.

Why are the Martian Ice caps melting also?

i don't know. i'm not an exoclimatologist. but mars it's obvious it's natural because the only things that have happened to it that aren't natural are our doing and highly insignificant.

Are all the earths power plants

and cars, lawn mowers (they make up a suprisingly staggering amount of pollution in the USA), individual unit generators, trucks, buses


i'm going to have to split this in half... too much

so damn polluting that they are ruining Mars also? Its a perspective, I am an engineer so I learn to look at facts and analyze all the data, not just the politically correct stuff.

well, you're not a climatologist... it's not your expertise. and the majority of the scientific community, people who look at facts and analyze data for a living, say that there is global warming. sure, there may be 1 or 2 dissenting opinions BUT it's just 1 or 2.

That's why I refuse to even sip a Starbucks Coffee. Its an agenda that I want no part of.

capitalism at its worse? hello comrade!

We have dominion over the Earth, it is here FOR us.

says your ignorant and backwards bronze age myth crafted by men.

We are to be good stewards as best we can, but when it comes to killing humans to save an animal, that crosses the line.

and when have we done so? when has someone shot a person to save an endagered species?

The liberals surely understand this but do not care. One prime example is DDT. Ban its use to save a bird species, yet kill millions of humans in the process.

DDT was bad for us too! and who the F did we kill by ending the use of DDT?

Ever wonder why its not banned globally?

because chemical companies learned their lesson in america...

Its because it WORKS and nations that need it could give a # less what the EnviroNazi's of the world think,

godwin'd this thread just there. the nations that use it could also care less about the health of their own people

they are trying to protect their populations.

just like the USA was doing when they stopped using it.

Ah, digging for it aren't ya? Well I will just spell it out for you then. Because the Creator says so.......

yep, just what i wanted, i wasn't looking for you to actually prove me wrong at all and use a logical argument (saracasm).

for once i thought someone on ATS would use LOGIC to defend the protection of humans above bears..

what you gave me is not a reason why, it's a delusional belief why. you could actually defend your point with some LOGIC

And yet we are discovering more new ones all the time.

that doesn't matter, it's still a net loss. just because we didn't know about it doesn't mean we GAINED a species.

Species have been going extinct long before man decided to build power plants.

you're right, we were hunting them into extinction back then... it took a hell of a lot longer too.

I would like to save them also, could be a good thing, but the difference between you and I is what price we are willing to pay.

but there isn't a choice between us and the animals! we can coexist, we might have to make a few creative solutions, but we can coexist.

Ah the Darwinism comment, I knew it was coming and as you well can guess I think its horse [poo].

watch your language!

The most simple of life forms has multiple parts that are necessary for it to function, and yet it could not have evolved in that form,

well, darwinism talks about the evolution of species starting from the very first functioning independent organism. you're confusing evolution and chemical abiogensis.

all the parts must have been there at once for it to live and work. (Darwin falls on his face with this very simple fact)

again, you are confusing the origin of life with the origin of species.

Darwin is now a religious figure to some, its a religion in itself, so beware of the trap it can cause.

which shows how much you know about science.

well, i really didn't want to talk about this here because we have a whole forum devoted to this discussion. care to take this over to O&C and get your butt whooped by science?

And I had not found ATS at that point, the reason I stayed was the blatant liberalism here

and the obvious amount of fairly intelligent people... which tends to be a correlation. there seems to be a correlation between higher intelligence and more liberalism.

You know burn some incense and save the world by Marxism.

very few people hold this view. again with the stereotypes.

Some will never get it, Saddam and his cronies were not exactly loved by the Islamists, but the enemy of your enemy is your friend remember?

but saddam was their enemy too. by that logic we were also their allies. he fought off islamic fundamentalism because of IRAN.

He gave refuge to Islamists and that is enough. Notice the war that Osama wanted is now going on,

because we played right into his hand and won't admit that we made a mistake because we're proud and arrogant.

But we now have a decent military presence in the area and when the next attack comes maybe the pussyfarts

name calling AGAIN! i'll respond to the decent military presence as saying... why are we being attacked in the green zone of baghdad?

will back away and let the scourge of this hatred be wiped out once and for all.

yes, respond to hatred with murder. that's the moral highground we're taking. what about the terrorists that live within our own shores? the white supremacists scare me a hell of a lot more than the muslim extremists in the middle east do. why? well... for one they can vote. they also live in a country where it's insanely easy to get ahold of armaments... not much different from the mid-east there, actually. and finally, they're actually planning an all out race war. PLANNING AN ALL OUT RACE WAR, and they're not a threat.

you completely ignored my points about american grown terrorism, that's showing your own ignorance.

It will require the political correct crowd to keep their mouth shut and that just can not happen at this time because to be quite frank about it,

bad people win when good people keep their mouths shut.

the American public in general is too ignorant to understand the threat in the first place.

the threat? in iraq we have what.. 200 members of al-qaeda. the rest are all iraqis. we're being attacked by people that wouldnt' attakc us if we'd just get the F out of their country.

it seems like you're the ignorant one.

hmm fair point I guess, so I will retract that and state suicide bombers, same # different a**holes.

now, suicide bombing is a tactic of desperation. so i wouldn't call them a-holes, i' feel pity for them. that they're driven to the point where they think blowing themselves up and taking others with them is the best decision... the psychology behind suicide bombing is actually quite intriguing.

Would it surprise you to know that I too favor peace over war? But I am willing to fight when all other routes lead to capitulation or defeat.

that's the problem, there war isn't just about victory or defeat. that's not how it works anymore. we don't utterly destroy nations when we're done with our wars.

Not at all, it was a failure of content,

you're right, we liberals have better places like NPR to go for intelligent news.

there are not enough people out there that have the 'tulipwalker' beliefs that could make it profitable.

again with the name calling! you're right though, but not enough people share YOUR extreme beliefs either.

The American people don't buy into that Hollywood elitist bull crap.

HOLLYWOOD ELITIST? HYPOCRITE! you support the right! the side funded by the ECONOMIC ELITE. the problem is that the right hates the INTELLECTUAL elite. the people that point out your bull#.

It failed because NOBODY listened!

and again, not al franken's fault

Not much time but a couple of points,

(1) When DDT was banned the amount of malaria deaths skyrocketed. Last I read (Long time ago) a it was in the 10's of millions maybe more. There are those that are for population control and that ban fit right in with their agenda.


(2) Yea I am right, but also do not follow the economic elitist agenda very much, some yes but not always. Definitely in my mind socialism is a failure. When can not have a utopia here on earth, well until.....

(3) Ah my faith, because I do NOT believe in evolution, and I believe in God as transmitted through the Bible, then I must be an idiot. I must be ignorant to believe that myth right? Hmm very interesting indeed. It amazes me how some Christians can be liberal in some sense but I believe it is mostly on the social side.

(4) War - well sticking your head in the sand saying that Islamicism is no threat, or at least not a large one, is in my opinion ignorant, but as you said we have other forums to argue this topic. I believe it is a VERY large threat, as it was 400 years ago. Iraq although not working as well as we would like, IS a front in the war. IT is just sad that we have to fight it with our arms tied behind our backs like we do.

ed, do you have a source for the malaria deaths?

Originally posted by edsinger
(3) Ah my faith, because I do NOT believe in evolution,

thankfully SCIENCE isn't about what one believes, it's about what the facts show.

and I believe in God as transmitted through the Bible, then I must be an idiot.

no, atheists just think theists are misguided. christians who believe in the bible would say we're fools (as the bible does). the hate is all on your side, not ours.

I must be ignorant to believe that myth right?

again, misguided. though the myth is ignorant, you're just misguided.

Hmm very interesting indeed. It amazes me how some Christians can be liberal in some sense but I believe it is mostly on the social side.

it amazes me how christianity can survive...

Iraq although not working as well as we would like, IS a front in the war. IT is just sad that we have to fight it with our arms tied behind our backs like we do.

it's not a front in the war on terror. the problem is that we define every attack against our forces as terrorist BUT most people wouldn't be attacking us if we weren't in their country. the real terrorists, al qaeda, make up maybe 400 people in iraq.

Originally posted by madnessinmysouled, do you have a source for the malaria deaths?

Quick Google reveals

THE PERIL OF MALARIA AND THE PROMISE OF DDT

There are some 300 to 500 million reported cases of malaria each year, 90% occurring in Africa. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), about two and a half million people die of the disease each year, again, mostly in Africa, the majority of them poor children. Indeed, malaria is the second leading cause of death in Africa (after AIDS) and the number one killer of children there (with about one child being lost to malaria every thirty seconds). Many medical historians believe malaria has killed more people than any other disease in history, including the Black Plague, and may have contributed to the collapse of the Roman Empire. Malaria was common in places as far north as Boston and England until the twentieth century. Two thirds of the world lived in malaria-ridden areas prior to the 1940s.

That devastation all but stopped during the time that DDT use was widespread, around 1950-1970. Indeed, the discovery that DDT could kill malarial mosquitoes earned Dr. Paul MŸller the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 1948. DDT, a chemical pesticide synthesized by MŸller in the late 1930s, was initially used against houseflies, beetles, various farm pests, and typhus-carrying lice on the bodies of World War II soldiers and civilians. America and England soon became the major producers of the chemical, using it to fight malaria-carrying mosquitoes, especially in tropical regions.

In all, DDT has been conservatively credited with saving some 100 million lives.

DDT Ban


And this quote says it all, just as I have been saying all along, they want population control at all costs, even murder..

Around the time of the DDT ban, Dr. Charles Wurster, chief scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund, may have revealed how some environmentalists really feel about human beings when he was asked if people might die as a result of the DDT ban: "Probably...so what? People are the causes of all the problems; we have too many of them. We need to get rid of some of them, and this is as good a way as any."

Just as Abortion has cost 30 million lives in the US since RVW, the liberals have only one viewpoint.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulthankfully SCIENCE isn't about what one believes, it's about what the facts show.

And the facts are that it is not called the THEORY of evolution for nothing. This is the wrong thread for this, but until its a law like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, your point is moot. There are many scientists that do not believe in it.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
no, atheists just think theists are misguided. christians who believe in the bible would say we're fools (as the bible does). the hate is all on your side, not ours.

Its not hate, Christians want to share the Gospel with those who don't know it or have not heard it, as for those that have heard it and yet reject it...well I guess they will know at some point....

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulagain, misguided. though the myth is ignorant, you're just misguided.

the myth (as you say) is ignorant. Ignorance means lack of knowledge not stupidity and the Bible is not lacking knowledge at all, you might think it is, but I do not. What other book can even come close to 'prophecy fulfilled'?

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulit amazes me how christianity can survive...

Well that one is easy, its the blessings that God provides to those that accept his free gifts, to those that do not you can not explain the peace Gods goves you.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoulit's not a front in the war on terror. the problem is that we define every attack against our forces as terrorist BUT most people wouldn't be attacking us if we weren't in their country. the real terrorists, al qaeda, make up maybe 400 people in iraq.

That is horsepuckey. We chose a place to fight it, and yes its a hard fight to win, especially when your own people want to see you loose. Islam itself is a threat, its inherent in the religion itself. Christianity itself is not clean of this but it has changed with the times, Islam is going backwards. There are some peaceful Muslims but they are scared to speak out because of the threats of their own, strange huh?

[edit on 15-5-2007 by edsinger]