southwind
Veteran
- Jan 22, 2008
- 7,709
- 3,928
We can survive without foreign oil ! It's called the "Drill now and drill deep" program. Just have to get the progressive libtards out of the way !
Crossing the "Red Line"
- Thread starter Knotbuyinit
- Start date
-
- Tags
- syria nerve gas
We can survive without foreign oil ! It's called the "Drill now and drill deep" program. Just have to get the progressive libtards out of the way !
Wrong again.......
I mentioned Bush being vindicated in the McCain Syria thread Bub........
Go check post nine in this thread, your boy Tree took it off topic and then in post eleven, you took it and ran it into the ground.......
And it wasn't about bigger cars smashing smaller cars..... cars were constructed
better and withstood crashes better than post CAFE standards. Probably why safety engineering got better, to survive crashes in whittled down automobiles.
I don't think Bush was mentioned at all in the Crossing the Line thread....
Dude.....you're in the wrong thread.....
Here, this might help:
You tried changing the narrative before and now you got egg on your face......
You lost the arguement again, Pal.....
See ya at the DNC rally.
- Banned
- #63
""If you can somehow force a liberal into a point-counterpoint argument, his retorts will bear no relation to what you’ve said — unless you were in fact talking about your looks, your age, your weight, your personal obsessions, or whether you are a fascist. In the famous liberal two-step, they leap from one idiotic point to the next, so you can never nail them. It’s like arguing with someone with Attention Deficit Disorder."
Where did I say anything about anyone's looks, age, weight, personal obsessions-or make any other similar attack n the person vs the message?
Looking through the active threads will,show plenty of examples, most from yourself, south, snap, and the others on the " conservative" side of the aisle.
Looks like Ann mistakenly attributed con behavior to liberals... Again.
Where did I say anything about anyone's looks, age, weight, personal obsessions-or make any other similar attack n the person vs the message?
Looking through the active threads will,show plenty of examples, most from yourself, south, snap, and the others on the " conservative" side of the aisle.
Looks like Ann mistakenly attributed con behavior to liberals... Again.
- Banned
- #64
Ddeu
The topics of the two threads were related
So I just responded to the ideas where it was handy
You interjected the small,cars are dangerous bit with your comment about folding up to fit in your casket with you
Up until then the topic had been concerned with Syria, the ME, and one of our principle reasons for caring about it-oil.
You also said "Hate to pee on your parade, national traffic safety stats show deaths have increased as structural sacrifice using plastics and aluminum and other means have been employed in the interest of fuel economy. Mileage went up so did casket sales. "
Note deaths have gone up as..
As
Not because
The studies you post record the correlation between two occurrences. Lighter cars and increased deaths. They suggest that, based on modeling, that if the same accidents had happened in heavier cars there may... May... Not have been as many deaths
Particularly in collisions between big/small vehicles.
No kidding. Agreed with that already
The increased deaths also occurred during a period of increasing driving. The fatality RATE has steadily, dramatically, and almost continously declined. Driving is safer. Cars are safer.
Anecdotally, to,suggest that the occupants of two of my old 1965 Fury's would have been better off in a head on collision, than say the occupants of two new Focus', is absurd.
Besides that the modern cars are so much better drivers, that it is much less likely the collision happens in the first place.
Accident RATES are down too.
Ok... Now you respond, mr point-counterpoint
Something about an urinal, perhaps?
Love exposing hypocrites... Especially FuaxConservative Hypocrites
The topics of the two threads were related
So I just responded to the ideas where it was handy
You interjected the small,cars are dangerous bit with your comment about folding up to fit in your casket with you
Up until then the topic had been concerned with Syria, the ME, and one of our principle reasons for caring about it-oil.
You also said "Hate to pee on your parade, national traffic safety stats show deaths have increased as structural sacrifice using plastics and aluminum and other means have been employed in the interest of fuel economy. Mileage went up so did casket sales. "
Note deaths have gone up as..
As
Not because
The studies you post record the correlation between two occurrences. Lighter cars and increased deaths. They suggest that, based on modeling, that if the same accidents had happened in heavier cars there may... May... Not have been as many deaths
Particularly in collisions between big/small vehicles.
No kidding. Agreed with that already
The increased deaths also occurred during a period of increasing driving. The fatality RATE has steadily, dramatically, and almost continously declined. Driving is safer. Cars are safer.
Anecdotally, to,suggest that the occupants of two of my old 1965 Fury's would have been better off in a head on collision, than say the occupants of two new Focus', is absurd.
Besides that the modern cars are so much better drivers, that it is much less likely the collision happens in the first place.
Accident RATES are down too.
Ok... Now you respond, mr point-counterpoint
Something about an urinal, perhaps?
Love exposing hypocrites... Especially FuaxConservative Hypocrites
So you're telling me you are looking in the mirror?
Gar, you're losing it.....get a grip.
snapthis
Veteran
- Dec 23, 2009
- 4,236
- 6,907
I like how Dell dismantled your arguments
I found you another Coulter quote:
Ann Coulter on Hypocrisy
"The reason any conservative’s failing is always major news is that it allows liberals to engage in their very favorite taunt: Hypocrisy! Hypocrisy is the only sin that really inflames them. Inasmuch as liberals have no morals, they can sit back and criticize other people for failing to meet the standards that liberals simply renounce. It’s an intriguing strategy. By openly admitting to being philanderers, draft dodgers, liars, weasels and cowards, liberals avoid ever being crites."
- Banned
- #68
Dell didn't dismantle a thing
He ran to the ditches with his coffin comment, then continued to hang with studies showing a correlation of data between car weight and fatalities, which I agree was true as far as it went, butmeven in his references was a correlation of data, not the causal factor he wanted it to be.
Meanwhile ignoring real historical data, as opposed to a correlatin of statistics, that show the fatality rate has steadily and dramatically decreased.
Drivng is safer, not more dangerous.
His point was still a deflection from the topic, because, apparantly, he had nothing to say about that besides his usual not quite witty putdowns, and attempting to exonerate Dumbya
And his monumental screwups.
At least, unlike you, he actually does respond.
Everything Coulter says can be applied to some people, across any and all of the ideeological, religious, educational, ethnic, or whatever spectrum. They are no more exclusively liberal than they are exclusively conservative, and much of it is in the eye of e beholder.
Her labeling od human nature as exclusively liberal traits is the part that makes her intellectually dishonest, unless she really is stupid. Of course, it does pay the bills.
He ran to the ditches with his coffin comment, then continued to hang with studies showing a correlation of data between car weight and fatalities, which I agree was true as far as it went, butmeven in his references was a correlation of data, not the causal factor he wanted it to be.
Meanwhile ignoring real historical data, as opposed to a correlatin of statistics, that show the fatality rate has steadily and dramatically decreased.
Drivng is safer, not more dangerous.
His point was still a deflection from the topic, because, apparantly, he had nothing to say about that besides his usual not quite witty putdowns, and attempting to exonerate Dumbya
And his monumental screwups.
At least, unlike you, he actually does respond.
Everything Coulter says can be applied to some people, across any and all of the ideeological, religious, educational, ethnic, or whatever spectrum. They are no more exclusively liberal than they are exclusively conservative, and much of it is in the eye of e beholder.
Her labeling od human nature as exclusively liberal traits is the part that makes her intellectually dishonest, unless she really is stupid. Of course, it does pay the bills.
snapthis
Veteran
- Dec 23, 2009
- 4,236
- 6,907
Using a quote I agree is a response. I think Ann has some valid criticisims of the liberal mindset. She's a lightning rod and for the left and she and does a pretty good job zapping her critics in return. Kinda like Dell hiting you with his verbal taser with his reply.
- Banned
- #72
Like I said, it pays the bills
That's what she gets paid to do, tell people what they want to hear.
She is selling a canned version of "what's wrong with the other guy"
You agree with her, and think she is right, because she aims her comments at liberals, whom you disagree with.
Someone else will see the exact same quote, and conclude that she is right aboutthe behavior, but that it really applies to the folks who like to think they are conservatives.
Its human behavior, and people across the political spectrum engage in it. She consistently attributes the bad or negative aspects to "liberals", and the good or positive aspects to the so-called conservatives.
It is either intellectual dishonesty, pandering to the audience, or she reallymis stupid. I don't actually think that is it.
But, hey, it pays the bills.
Unfortunately, it also passes for thoughtful commentary, among a certain audience.
That just shows how far we have to go.
That's what she gets paid to do, tell people what they want to hear.
She is selling a canned version of "what's wrong with the other guy"
You agree with her, and think she is right, because she aims her comments at liberals, whom you disagree with.
Someone else will see the exact same quote, and conclude that she is right aboutthe behavior, but that it really applies to the folks who like to think they are conservatives.
Its human behavior, and people across the political spectrum engage in it. She consistently attributes the bad or negative aspects to "liberals", and the good or positive aspects to the so-called conservatives.
It is either intellectual dishonesty, pandering to the audience, or she reallymis stupid. I don't actually think that is it.
But, hey, it pays the bills.
Unfortunately, it also passes for thoughtful commentary, among a certain audience.
That just shows how far we have to go.
- Banned
- #73
Dell,
You were the original poster.
It sure appeared, and would be in keeping with your posting history, that you were attempting to draw a parallel between Syria, and Bush's actions re Iraq.
Were you not?
Your coffin comment, and subsequent focus on the big car little car collision was the first detour from Syria, the ME, oil, reasons for us being there, that made up the general discussion.
Of course, snap never responded to any of the issues he raised, in any type of point-counterpoint discussion(that was what the darling Ann called it, wasn't it...?). Preferring to tell stories about who had "done well", and enjoy your "zingers".
Guess it isn't about public policy, or principle, at all. Guess it is all about $$$, and "being right", even if you're wrong.
You were the original poster.
It sure appeared, and would be in keeping with your posting history, that you were attempting to draw a parallel between Syria, and Bush's actions re Iraq.
Were you not?
Your coffin comment, and subsequent focus on the big car little car collision was the first detour from Syria, the ME, oil, reasons for us being there, that made up the general discussion.
Of course, snap never responded to any of the issues he raised, in any type of point-counterpoint discussion(that was what the darling Ann called it, wasn't it...?). Preferring to tell stories about who had "done well", and enjoy your "zingers".
Guess it isn't about public policy, or principle, at all. Guess it is all about $$$, and "being right", even if you're wrong.
Ms Tree
Veteran
- Jul 13, 2010
- 9,731
- 9,009
- Banned
- #74
Counter, Oberman, Jackson, Limbaugh, Mathews ..... are fringe talking heads. Why anyone with an ounce of critical thinking skills would use them as source for anything is beyond me. As fly said, they do appeal to certain people and that's sad but a reality. Difficult to have a rational conversation with them.
Stick with it, you are making yourself less and less viable with each post.
Similar threads
