Hey anti smoking bullies....I told you so!!

reply to post by kozmo


Funny how you are comparing Liberals to statins, when statins are typically used to lower cholesterol. If you don't want the side effects, than maybe you should switch to an actual high blood pressure medication.

*laughs* You are trying to say something about personal responsibility and how liberals lack it, yet you can't even handle your own medications.

reply to post by frazzle


Wow.

I will refrain from insulting you. A few well drillers means nothing.

Do you have any idea of the water situation out west?

Do you have any idea of the impending water wars going on out west?

Less than 3,000 days till Nevada, and the remaining southwest, run out of water.

The countdown clock

Originally posted by kozmo
Liberals are like modern medicine... Example: I have high blood pressure so I am prescribed a Statin. The statin has horrible side effects; sleeplessness and arthritic inflammation. So I take Cymbalta for the arthritis and Lunesta for the sleeplessness. Now I'm having side effects from those; Stomach issues and diarrhea from Cymbalta and anxiety and skin rashes from Lunesta. Now I'm prescribed new medication to address those problems and so on and so forth...

The reality is a that a little PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY on MY part would have probably just fixed the first problem, perhaps a change in diet. But no, the liberal mindset is fix it now and fix it at any cost, consequences be damned - we'll fix those later.

The problem is once you've entered the slippery slope, you cannot go back. And each "Fix" makes things worse than before. The greater problem is that liberals aren't "mature" or logical enough to see this. They are emotionally driven to "Fix" everything right now without recognizing that most things can only be fixed via PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY - something that they are NOT willing to demand of others. In fact, they enable the opposite - endless welfare, food stamps, unemployment benefits, section 8, HUD, Medicaid, etc... and create restrictive laws against those of us who are productive to make everything more "fair" for everyone.

It happens in school - participation trophies, can't fail students who are failing, no grading in red marker because it's offensive and scary, no corporal punishment, etc... So we can clearly expect the next generation of liberal whiners to be far worse than this one.

God help us all!

I agree with you on this, though usually I find when people have strong feelings about "liberals", they typically don't realize that (so-called) conservatives have acted in almost exactly the same way. "Anti-Libs" tend to also ignore such things as corporate welfare, the problems of giving taxpayer money away to foreign corporations like Halliburton, etc. The double standard where people are fine with welfare - as long as that welfare money is being taken from the middle and upper-middle class and given to billionaires and foreigners, but against welfare for poor (whether by choice or not) individuals, strikes me as most auspicious.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by frazzle

 

Wow.

I will refrain from insulting you. A few well drillers means nothing.

Do you have any idea of the water situation out west?

Do you have any idea of the impending water wars going on out west?

Less than 3,000 days till Nevada, and the remaining southwest, run out of water.

The countdown clock

I live in the west, so yes I am well aware that major corporations are locking down all the water sources. The problem is not the lack of water, its the surplus of major corporations. Same as any other resource.

So insult away, when you consider that less than 15% of the state of Nevada is privately owned, a hundred well drillers is not "a few".

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Agenda 21 is nothing but a voluntary organization, that the repubs find threatening because they support corporate communism,and anyone who follow corporate communism, shrinks at any environmental initiatives.

The only dangerous people here are the ones who are trying to paint smart growth as anti-American.

Wow!

Is there ANYTHING in the US that the big guys there are not trying to forbid?

Words of a wise man:

"Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save those snails"

reply to post by nixie_nox

No, you are not getting the point. You and the other republicans who can't wrap your simple, brain washed minds around the fact that your rights end where other's begin.

Did you get the point that there are also liberal Democrats who do not like having their personal choices and right to private property taken away? I guess even some liberal Democrats believe in the Constitution. Did you know that the original version of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness was drafted as life, liberty, and property....guess not! As you believe in the Collective, not individual rights and liberties. For Collective types, only the rights of the Collective are considered.

This is also AGENDA 21. Rosa Koire, a liberal Democrat, says that Communitarianism is the new key word for the Collective rights over individual rights.

He reply to post by timetothink


Right on man......notice too how the press and the TV types minimize the danger we are in by using trite euphemisms like "nanny state" to describe what is a complete takeover of the Unites States. Be wary of the Zionists! The only resolve is to REVOLT! Think 1787 rather than 1776!

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Agenda 21 is nothing but a voluntary organization, that the repubs find threatening because they support corporate communism,and anyone who follow corporate communism, shrinks at any environmental initiatives.

The only dangerous people here are the ones who are trying to paint smart growth as anti-American.

Rosa Koire is a gay liberal Democrat and her website is www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com...

I hate to be rude but do you read anything I post without the toxic partisan leftist blinders on?

And no it is not just a "voluntary organization". It is a UN directive which comes from the UN and filters down to the local level. Yes, it appears to be voluntary, as many operatives are tricking people into believing it is benign. Will it always be voluntary? Does it need to be involuntary when they can just trick people into accepting what later on will not be voluntary? Is it "VOLUNTARY" when eminent domain is used to force people off their land, or easements used to force people into not passing their land down to their loved families? No that is not voluntary when it is forced upon people by local governments and zoning boards.

Again, you either know NOTHING of Agenda 21 or you think you know something but you are only accepting that which works for your ideology, which is apparently Collectivism.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by kozmo

 

Funny how you are comparing Liberals to statins, when statins are typically used to lower cholesterol. If you don't want the side effects, than maybe you should switch to an actual high blood pressure medication.

*laughs* You are trying to say something about personal responsibility and how liberals lack it, yet you can't even handle your own medications.

edit on 2-1-2013 by nixie_nox because: (no reason given)

Nice dissembling... I've made my point - and apparently you understood it. BTW... simple error, know why? I don't take medications! I'm one of those evil libertarians who believe in personal responsibility and the ability to make decisions for myself. Interesting how you have all of the drugs figured out though - not surprised!

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Agenda 21 is nothing but a voluntary organization, that the repubs find threatening because they support corporate communism,and anyone who follow corporate communism, shrinks at any environmental initiatives.

The only dangerous people here are the ones who are trying to paint smart growth as anti-American.

BS ALERT BS ALERT BS ALERT! "Voluntary"??? LIAR!

BTW... what makes Agenda 21's growth "Smart"? Aside from their literature and talking points. Pretty much everyone with a brain agrees that the entire principle lacks any intelligence.

Originally posted by dogstar23
I agree with you on this, though usually I find when people have strong feelings about "liberals", they typically don't realize that (so-called) conservatives have acted in almost exactly the same way. "Anti-Libs" tend to also ignore such things as corporate welfare, the problems of giving taxpayer money away to foreign corporations like Halliburton, etc. The double standard where people are fine with welfare - as long as that welfare money is being taken from the middle and upper-middle class and given to billionaires and foreigners, but against welfare for poor (whether by choice or not) individuals, strikes me as most auspicious.

Oh, I completely agree. The Right Wingers are just as bad, but in the direct opposite way. Let's be clear here... the right wing and left wing are simply opposite sides of the same counterfeit currency!

reply to post by nixie_nox

Agenda 21 is nothing but a voluntary organization

Social Security was once voluntary, too, and the number was never to be used for identification. Now you can't hook up electric services for your NON wood burning utility without that number.

Income tax was once voluntary.

A driver's license was once voluntary.

Medical and auto insurance were once voluntary.

Originally posted by AnnKoontz
California is the worse. How can the call themselves Liberals, when all they do is take away people's rights? You can get drugged up and have all the orgies you want, but don't light a fire to keep yourselves warm.

edit on 1-1-2013 by AnnKoontz because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-1-2013 by AnnKoontz because: (no reason given)

Agreed.,
west coast liberals are not as the keyword identifies it to be in general. liberalism is, at least in regards to what is going on in your home, your own business..liberty to do as you please so to speak.

The anti-smoking thing is not a liberal stance in my opinion (and this fireplace thing). A business should be able to simply hang a sign on the door stating it is a smoking establishment if they want..let the customers decide then if they want to deal with the evils of secondhand smoke. same with anything else...some exceptions would be places like supermarkets and other areas where the public needs to go for survival things.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
The only dangerous people here are the ones who are trying to paint smart growth as anti-American.

I disagree.
The measure was to basically not burn wood on tuesday for "clean air".
But short of shutting power off of the residents, heat will be used in its place...
from energy...
from coal and oil burning in powerplants (SF is not even remotely close to renewable energy).

So, what this is literally doing is saying...don't burn wood..burn coal.
Which one is more toxic?

So, its a nothing measure that addresses no actual problem..this is sending canned beans to earthquake victims..makes you feel individually like your doing something, but your actually causing more harm than good...

So, do we want rules and such that feel like they do good, or actually do good?

A better measure would be to simply tell everyone to use candles only for lighting verses electric lights on that day. the energy saved if everyone did it for a 24 hour cycle may be significant.

So ya..logistically, this isn't being smarter..its "feeling" smarter...but its of no consequence..frankly, it might be more damaging than intended.

Seriously, someone's gotta be cold just so the libs get their way?
Sorry too bad so sad, if I lived there, and I had a fireplace, you know i would sitting in front of it, cigar in one hand, drink in the other

Originally posted by HomerinNC
Seriously, someone's gotta be cold just so the libs get their way?

You are exempt from the ban if a wood fire is your only source of heat or cooking.

reply to post by SaturnFX

Agreed. If people don't "enjoy a fire" on the holidays it will have little to do with the overall "pollution index" or air quality. That distinction belongs to the major polluters in the Bay, primarily the North Bay.

Refineries, Coal fired power plants, automobiles, even a cement company (near me), all produce much more pollution than a few fire places. And their pollution is of a much more dangerous kind than "soot".

Carcinogens, organic solvents and especially CO2 is what is killing us, not a "holiday fire". By blanket policing the population, they make it seem like they are controlling pollution and at the same time distracting from the Big Ones who really do.

Heres an older report (2008) that lists them and the miniscule fines that were levied on their "violations".

Biggest Polluters, SF Bay Area

I have lived there / here my whole life. "Spare the Air" days are useless because all they do is make people switch from one source of energy to another. So if you have to go back to the wall thermostat instead of a cozy "holiday fire" the only people that really benefit is... wait for it... the Power Company. Derp.

Being environmental by requiring the masses to alter their lifestyles for the benefit of the big corporations so they can earn more and pollute more is... greedy.

A close parallel is raising everyones taxes except the wealthy.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
The measure was to basically not burn wood on tuesday for "clean air".

Correct, but not in the way you think. This isn't an eco drive to save the environment, this is a ban in place during a short period of unusual weather conditions. Conditions which, if normal wood burning were to persist, would result in an unusually high level of CO and particulates in a specific area, which would be extremely harmful to the residents of said area.

Originally posted by intrptr
Agreed. If people don't "enjoy a fire" on the holidays it will have little to do with the overall "pollution index" or air quality. That distinction belongs to the major polluters in the Bay, primarily the North Bay.

This ban is not about the ""pollution index"" or air quality, it's about the wood burning from the banned area being collated by unusual weather conditions in another area in an unusually high concentration. This unusually high concentration would be harmful to the residents of the area.

Analogy:
You're talking about this ban as a global smoking ban, when it is in fact more akin to a blowing-smoke-right-in-someone's-face ban.