Any silly people "frightened" over the silly mmgw farce?
-
Well, Tour and Chris.... you can stop your slow dancing around the truth.
I'm not deluded - it's true. You two are just all wet in Egypt.
*****************************************
"Despite promises of European Union member states to take in 160,000 refugees, a new report shows that they've accepted a fraction, 6,000, while the United States has embraced 8,000 of a planned 10,000 this year.As President Obama, backed by Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, has ramped up accepting refugees fleeing Syria and other war-torn nations, the EU has put the brakes on hard, apparently bowing to public outrage.In the U.S., some governors and other politicians have warned against moving fast to bring in the refugees, concerned that poor vetting could let in terrorists.After officials moved to stem the huge influx if immigrants, Europe had led the way in making promises to accept the additional refugees in camps in Italy and Greece. But a new report in France found that Paris had accepted just 1,300 of the 30,000 it promised to take from Greece and Italy by 2017.What's more, according to the Center for Immigration Studies, all of the European Union member states that had promised to accept 160,000 asylum seekers have taken in just 6,000 so far."One year later, this commitment is far from being fulfilled. France is not the only 'bad student,' said Pierre Henry, director of an organization called France Terre d'Asile. Of the 160,000 asylum seekers in need of resettlement from Greece and Italy, EU member states admitted less than 6,000. 'There is an obvious lack of solidarity,' Henry claimed," said the CIS blog post from Nayla Rush based on some French media reports.CIS suggested that the EU refusal to move as fast as Obama might be a "sign of mere common sense," following a number of terror attacks."Keeping one's promise is certainly admirable. However, keeping citizens safe should bear no compromise. France, sadly, learned its lesson the hard way. Let us hope the U.S. doesn't have to," wrote Rush. "There's no shame in shifting gears. After all, as the French say, only fools do not change their minds."Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at [email protected]" -
I will patiently wait for a "oops, you were correct, Cal" response or two.
From either one of you.
A private email will do.
-
I have to run to the store - I'll check back later for a well-deserved "yes, Cal, you were right".......
-
The longer we put it off though the more abrupt the change will be. So much so that many people wont be able to cope
We aren't putting anything off. The other option is going back to the Stone Age. Or seriously curtailing our use of energy rationing gas electricity and outlawing leisure travel. If you think that would help I understand. I don't think you'd make that call though.The longer we put it off though the more abrupt the change will be. So much so that many people wont be able to cope
WSS
-
We aren't putting anything off. The other option is going back to the Stone Age. Or seriously curtailing our use of energy rationing gas electricity and outlawing leisure travel. If you think that would help I understand. I don't think you'd make that call though.The longer we put it off though the more abrupt the change will be. So much so that many people wont be able to cope
WSS
We aren't putting anything off. The other option is going back to the Stone Age. Or seriously curtailing our use of energy rationing gas electricity and outlawing leisure travel. If you think that would help I understand. I don't think you'd make that call though.
WSS
Look how hard it is for us to let go of coal. Our govt gets bitched at by the coal industry cause they dared tell them to scrub that shit that cmes out of their stacks. Anybody thats been to hong king or shsnghai can learn first hand the wonderful atmosphere unfettered cosl burning promotes.
Of course we're putting it off. They're terrified of people learning they can make a substantial amt of their power from multiple sustainable/semi-sustainable sources. Any decentralization of goods/services doesnt suit them
-
Well, Tour and Chris.... you can stop your slow dancing around the truth.
I'm not deluded - it's true. You two are just all wet in Egypt.
*****************************************
"Despite promises of European Union member states to take in 160,000 refugees, a new report shows that they've accepted a fraction, 6,000, while the United States has embraced 8,000 of a planned 10,000 this year.As President Obama, backed by Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, has ramped up accepting refugees fleeing Syria and other war-torn nations, the EU has put the brakes on hard, apparently bowing to public outrage.In the U.S., some governors and other politicians have warned against moving fast to bring in the refugees, concerned that poor vetting could let in terrorists.After officials moved to stem the huge influx if immigrants, Europe had led the way in making promises to accept the additional refugees in camps in Italy and Greece. But a new report in France found that Paris had accepted just 1,300 of the 30,000 it promised to take from Greece and Italy by 2017.What's more, according to the Center for Immigration Studies, all of the European Union member states that had promised to accept 160,000 asylum seekers have taken in just 6,000 so far."One year later, this commitment is far from being fulfilled. France is not the only 'bad student,' said Pierre Henry, director of an organization called France Terre d'Asile. Of the 160,000 asylum seekers in need of resettlement from Greece and Italy, EU member states admitted less than 6,000. 'There is an obvious lack of solidarity,' Henry claimed," said the CIS blog post from Nayla Rush based on some French media reports.CIS suggested that the EU refusal to move as fast as Obama might be a "sign of mere common sense," following a number of terror attacks."Keeping one's promise is certainly admirable. However, keeping citizens safe should bear no compromise. France, sadly, learned its lesson the hard way. Let us hope the U.S. doesn't have to," wrote Rush. "There's no shame in shifting gears. After all, as the French say, only fools do not change their minds."Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at [email protected]"Well, Tour and Chris.... you can stop your slow dancing around the truth.
I'm not deluded - it's true. You two are just all wet in Egypt.
Deluded and a fucking moron...
Article plays with "resettled" figures as opposed to "registered", which means they are in country, but being processed.
In Germany registration seekers are not confined, but have overwhelmed the ability of communities to absorb them. As of April, 2016 600,000 Syrian refugees have been registered.
As for resettled... highest figure I can find is Canada with just shy of 32,000. But of course, Canada is not part of the EU... so there's that.
But maybe we are focused on the wrong border...
-
I have to run to the store - I'll check back later for a well-deserved "yes, Cal, you were right".......
-
-
Professor Brian Cox v.s Senator Malcolm Roberts Cal
-
-
We aren't putting anything off. The other option is going back to the Stone Age. Or seriously curtailing our use of energy rationing gas electricity and outlawing leisure travel. If you think that would help I understand. I don't think you'd make that call though.
WSS
Look how hard it is for us to let go of coal. Our govt gets bitched at by the coal industry cause they dared tell them to scrub that shit that cmes out of their stacks. Anybody thats been to hong king or shsnghai can learn first hand the wonderful atmosphere unfettered cosl burning promotes.
Of course we're putting it off. They're terrified of people learning they can make a substantial amt of their power from multiple sustainable/semi-sustainable sources. Any decentralization of goods/services doesnt suit them
Look how hard it is for us to let go of coal. Our govt gets bitched at by the coal industry cause they dared tell them to scrub that shit that cmes out of their stacks. Anybody thats been to hong king or shsnghai can learn first hand the wonderful atmosphere unfettered cosl burning promotes.
Of course we're putting it off. They're terrified of people learning they can make a substantial amt of their power from multiple sustainable/semi-sustainable sources. Any decentralization of goods/services doesnt suit them
It's still efficient and we are slowly moving to other things also scrubbers are becoming more and more useful. Anyway if you left wing Screech hawks would allow more nuclear plants...
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
Did cal delete a comment or something?
Did cal delete a comment or something?
Nah... still there. Shockingly we disagreed about something and he replied with:
not having to require an id, coupled with massive illegal immigration and
"refugees" from Muslim countries...
sets the stage for massive voter fraud. Only a dishonest fool would deny it.
Since I'd already denied it, he's calling me a liar. I took and still take exception to him crossing this line, and will therefore ride his ass until he apologizes.... the little bitch.
This is "cal's my little bitch" Day 3...
-
Look how hard it is for us to let go of coal. Our govt gets bitched at by the coal industry cause they dared tell them to scrub that shit that cmes out of their stacks. Anybody thats been to hong king or shsnghai can learn first hand the wonderful atmosphere unfettered cosl burning promotes.
Of course we're putting it off. They're terrified of people learning they can make a substantial amt of their power from multiple sustainable/semi-sustainable sources. Any decentralization of goods/services doesnt suit them
It's still efficient and we are slowly moving to other things also scrubbers are becoming more and more useful. Anyway if you left wing Screech hawks would allow more nuclear plants...
WSS
It's still efficient and we are slowly moving to other things also scrubbers are becoming more and more useful. Anyway if you left wing Screech hawks would allow more nuclear plants...
They're simply not economical, Steve. If you remember Obama's energy plan included funding for guaranteeing loans to build nuclear plants. Only one company, in Georgia IIRC, stepped up to apply for one. And this was before fracking took off and solar cell costs dropped.
Here's a link to the 2010 announcement of the project: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/obama-administration-announces-loan-guarantees-construct-new-nuclear-power-reactors Turns out I actually got the state right. Projected completion is now 2019. Want to deregulate so it can get done faster?
Here's a link to another goggle hit stating the program was expanded in 2015. I'd completely missed this at the time.
... the administration will allow nuclear plant developers to use government loans to cover the costs of more items related to power plant development, including licensing costs, compared with the previous policy that provided loan backing solely for the construction of the plant itself.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obama-tweaks-12.5-billion-in-nuclear-power-loans/article/2575815
The article also states that there is little money left of the original $12.5 billion budgeted for the program. In doing so it manages to ignore the fact that the administration no longer has much control over the budget.
-
Economical? Economical!!??
Neither is taxing the living shit out of business. Neither is cap and trade. Neither is jacking up the price of gasoline to 5 bucks a gallon like Obammy wanted to do to discourage use.
Nuclear power and led is the way to go.
And burn up the fossil fuels until it's ready.
WSS
-
Yes, uneconomical... the reason the gov't had to guarantee loans is that otherwise utilities could not secure the billions in loans needed to fund construction, i.e., no institutions would loan them the money.
Companies are not just in business to make money, they target a percentage return on investment. If they can't achieve their return on a project, then they either don't build the project or look for alternatives. The link below is to a chart that shows that nuclear generation is the most costly, i.e., generates the lowest return on investment.
Note that some cost estimates do not include waste disposal...
-
Nuclear Power is the way to go.
But people feel like it sounds scary.
-
calfoxwc, on 15 Aug 2016 - 3:06 PM, said:
not having to require an id, coupled with massive illegal immigration and
"refugees" from Muslim countries...
sets the stage for massive voter fraud. Only a dishonest fool would deny it.
Since I'd already denied it, he's calling me a liar. I took and still take exception to him crossing this line, and will therefore ride his ass until he apologizes.... the little bitch.
***********************************************************
Now, little sissy "victim"... here's the definition of "lie"
noun
1.a false statement made with deliberate intent todeceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.2.something intended or serving to convey a falseimpression; imposture:His flashy car was a lie that deceived no one.3.an inaccurate or false statement; a falsehood.4.verb (used without object), lied, lying.the charge or accusation of telling a lie:He flung the lie back at his accusers.5.to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, aswith intent to deceive.6.to express what is false; convey a falseimpression.It's one thing to dance around the truth, because you don't see it, or don't WANT toadmit it. Not wanting to admit it, is my assumption because you are generally kind ofa bright poster, sometimes, sometimes often.So, after you said iyhso, that voter fraud, in so many words, virtually doesn't happen,I showed you why I disagreed. and I said this:"not having to require an id, coupled with massive illegal immigration and
"refugees" from Muslim countries...
sets the stage for massive voter fraud. Only a dishonest fool would deny it."
Therefore, I'm saying that
A. Voter fraud most certainly HAS happened, some places often, in my opinion.
B. Opening the door to not requiring an ID, coupled with massive illegal immigration
and unvetted thousands of syrian refugees..... sets the stage for massive voter fraud.
It does. Of course it does, how the hell can anybody think that not requiring an id, etc etc etc, makes
it harder to commit voter fraud?
C. Therefore, Little Toursies, I never called you a liar on the issue of "setting the stage" for massive voter fraud.
You haven't denied that it "SETS THE STAGE FOR MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD". You disagreed that for the most
part except in... 11? rare occurences, it doesn't happen.
SO, Toursies - "arguing that any significant voter fraud happened before" <> "SETS THE STAGE FOR MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD"
Not equal. Has nothing to do with calling you a liar. I think, though, that if someone denies that not requiring an id to vote,
in the light of deliberate obaMao illgally flooding over our borders, SETS THE STAGE (as in, MAKES A HELL OF A LOT
EASIER) ...for massive voter fraud, I think that's dishonest, and foolish.
So, it has nothing to do with you, false victim Toursies, I never called you a liar. BTW, So, I'm sorry you are an
ASSWHOLE who crossed the line. I'll PM Steve as to why. You want a war? You got it now.
-
calfoxwc, on 15 Aug 2016 - 3:06 PM, said:
not having to require an id, coupled with massive illegal immigration and
"refugees" from Muslim countries...
sets the stage for massive voter fraud. Only a dishonest fool would deny it.
Since I'd already denied it, he's calling me a liar. I took and still take exception to him crossing this line, and will therefore ride his ass until he apologizes.... the little bitch.
***********************************************************
Now, little sissy "victim"... here's the definition of "lie"
noun
1.a false statement made with deliberate intent todeceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.2.something intended or serving to convey a falseimpression; imposture:His flashy car was a lie that deceived no one.3.an inaccurate or false statement; a falsehood.4.verb (used without object), lied, lying.the charge or accusation of telling a lie:He flung the lie back at his accusers.5.to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, aswith intent to deceive.6.to express what is false; convey a falseimpression.It's one thing to dance around the truth, because you don't see it, or don't WANT toadmit it. Not wanting to admit it, is my assumption because you are generally kind ofa bright poster, sometimes, sometimes often.So, after you said iyhso, that voter fraud, in so many words, virtually doesn't happen,I showed you why I disagreed. and I said this:"not having to require an id, coupled with massive illegal immigration and
"refugees" from Muslim countries...
sets the stage for massive voter fraud. Only a dishonest fool would deny it."
Therefore, I'm saying that
A. Voter fraud most certainly HAS happened, some places often, in my opinion.
B. Opening the door to not requiring an ID, coupled with massive illegal immigration
and unvetted thousands of syrian refugees..... sets the stage for massive voter fraud.
It does. Of course it does, how the hell can anybody think that not requiring an id, etc etc etc, makes
it harder to commit voter fraud?
C. Therefore, Little Toursies, I never called you a liar on the issue of "setting the stage" for massive voter fraud.
You haven't denied that it "SETS THE STAGE FOR MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD". You disagreed that for the most
part except in... 11? rare occurences, it doesn't happen.
SO, Toursies - "arguing that any significant voter fraud happened before" <> "SETS THE STAGE FOR MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD"
Not equal. Has nothing to do with calling you a liar. I think, though, that if someone denies that not requiring an id to vote,
in the light of deliberate obaMao illgally flooding over our borders, SETS THE STAGE (as in, MAKES A HELL OF A LOT
EASIER) ...for massive voter fraud, I think that's dishonest, and foolish.
So, it has nothing to do with you, false victim Toursies, I never called you a liar. BTW, So, I'm sorry you are an
ASSWHOLE who crossed the line. I'll PM Steve as to why. You want a war? You got it now.
Thanks sweetcheeks...
Not please explain the difference between being called "dishonest" for a position I expose and being called a liar...
I'll wait... and this time you'd be wise to do it without admitting you did so in your reply.
Not equal. Has nothing to do with calling you a liar. I think, though, that if someone denies that not requiring an id to vote,
in the light of deliberate obaMao illgally flooding over our borders, SETS THE STAGE (as in, MAKES A HELL OF A LOT
EASIER) ...for massive voter fraud, I think that's dishonest, and foolish.
And say hello to Steve for me...
Gotta love a guy that declares "war" by running to a mod... you whinny little fuck...
-
you didn't expose a position, asswhole wimp.
it has nothing to do with you. Again, you don't believe illegal voting has occured.
"not requiring voter id setting the stage for massive voter fraud" is a completely separate issue.
and still... "dishonest fool" does not mean "liar". Stop emotionally knee jerking, because you
are the one who made a very serious mistake.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login