More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm proud that I don't endanger others. You wouldn't understand that.

I don't understand your support for CAFE standards.

Thousands of annual deaths are on your head.

CAFE standards save lives. They are one of the most effective tools that we have for reducing the cost in lives and dollars of AGW mitigation. As the limits of your concern are your own skin and this minute you are simply of no use to the world.

You believe that you have the right to endanger others.

If that's the best that you can do, so be it.

What that typically brings about from the others that you choose to endanger is that they return your attitude. Screw you.

CAFE standards save lives.

No, they cost thousands of lives a year. Screw you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I don't understand your support for big cars. Besides the fact that you are polluting the air we ALL breathe, consuming MORE than your share of the world's finite supply of petroleum and bringing on global warming as FAST as you can, it is YOU and your oversized DINOSAUR of a vehicle that are murdering OTHER PEOPLE out there on the road. You're a threat to the public well-being.

I don't understand your support for big cars.

Bigger cars are safer. I don't understand your support for smaller, higher fatality cars.

Besides the fact that you are polluting the air we ALL breathe

Modern large cars produce less pollution than ever, technology works.

consuming MORE than your share of the world's finite supply of petroleum

Between saving lives and burning fewer gallons of gas, I'll choose saving lives.

it is YOU and your oversized DINOSAUR of a vehicle that are murdering OTHER PEOPLE out there on the road.

I haven't forced anyone into a dangerous automobile, that's you guys.
And now Obama wants CAFE standards of 54.5 MPG?
That's idiotic. How many people will that kill?

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours. The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction that endangers others is not your problem. You have no concern for those who suffer the consequences of your life.

Classic, textbook conservatism

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours.

I'm concerned for the thousands killed every year by CAFE standards.
Soon to be many more thousands, if they rise to 54.5 MPG, like your idiot president desires.

The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction

Link?

 

[PMZ]

I don't understand your support for big cars.

Bigger cars are safer. I don't understand your support for smaller, higher fatality cars.

Besides the fact that you are polluting the air we ALL breathe

Modern large cars produce less pollution than ever, technology works.

consuming MORE than your share of the world's finite supply of petroleum

Between saving lives and burning fewer gallons of gas, I'll choose saving lives.

it is YOU and your oversized DINOSAUR of a vehicle that are murdering OTHER PEOPLE out there on the road.

I haven't forced anyone into a dangerous automobile, that's you guys.
And now Obama wants CAFE standards of 54.5 MPG?
That's idiotic. How many people will that kill?

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours. The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction that endangers others is not your problem. You have no concern for those who suffer the consequences of your life.

Classic, textbook conservatism

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours.

I'm concerned for the thousands killed every year by CAFE standards.
Soon to be many more thousands, if they rise to 54.5 MPG, like your idiot president desires.

The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction

Link?

http://www.forbes.com/2005/03/15/cx_da_0315topnews.html

 

[PMZ]

I don't understand your support for big cars.

Bigger cars are safer. I don't understand your support for smaller, higher fatality cars.

Besides the fact that you are polluting the air we ALL breathe

Modern large cars produce less pollution than ever, technology works.

consuming MORE than your share of the world's finite supply of petroleum

Between saving lives and burning fewer gallons of gas, I'll choose saving lives.

it is YOU and your oversized DINOSAUR of a vehicle that are murdering OTHER PEOPLE out there on the road.

I haven't forced anyone into a dangerous automobile, that's you guys.
And now Obama wants CAFE standards of 54.5 MPG?
That's idiotic. How many people will that kill?

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours. The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction that endangers others is not your problem. You have no concern for those who suffer the consequences of your life.

Classic, textbook conservatism

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours.

I'm concerned for the thousands killed every year by CAFE standards.
Soon to be many more thousands, if they rise to 54.5 MPG, like your idiot president desires.

The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction

Link?

If you are in fact ''concerned for the thousands killed every year'' you'd certainly drive the least lethal weapon. If, in fact, you were only concerned about yourself, you would drive a big, luxury sedan.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours. The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction that endangers others is not your problem. You have no concern for those who suffer the consequences of your life.

Classic, textbook conservatism

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours.

I'm concerned for the thousands killed every year by CAFE standards.
Soon to be many more thousands, if they rise to 54.5 MPG, like your idiot president desires.

The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction

Link?

Skinning The Auto-Safety Cat - Forbes

I read that link and it didn't show I "drive an aggressive weapon of destruction"

Try again?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours. The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction that endangers others is not your problem. You have no concern for those who suffer the consequences of your life.

Classic, textbook conservatism

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours.

I'm concerned for the thousands killed every year by CAFE standards.
Soon to be many more thousands, if they rise to 54.5 MPG, like your idiot president desires.

The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction

Link?

If you are in fact ''concerned for the thousands killed every year'' you'd certainly drive the least lethal weapon. If, in fact, you were only concerned about yourself, you would drive a big, luxury sedan.

And if you were concerned about the safety of others, you wouldn't force people to drive more dangerous cars. Typical liberal, screwing the little people.

 

[PMZ]

What you've made clear is that the only life that you're concerned about is yours.

I'm concerned for the thousands killed every year by CAFE standards.
Soon to be many more thousands, if they rise to 54.5 MPG, like your idiot president desires.

The fact that you drive an aggressive weapon of destruction

Link?

Skinning The Auto-Safety Cat - Forbes

I read that link and it didn't show I "drive an aggressive weapon of destruction"

Try again?

I have no idea what you drive. Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer, the risk to others is inconsequential.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Skinning The Auto-Safety Cat - Forbes

I read that link and it didn't show I "drive an aggressive weapon of destruction"

Try again?

I have no idea what you drive. Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer, the risk to others is inconsequential.

I have no idea what you drive.

That's why I laugh when you make your stupid claims.

Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer

Wrong, you idiot, I want everyone to be safer.

Without government forcing us to be less safe.
You're a typical low IQ liberal.

 

[PMZ]

I read that link and it didn't show I "drive an aggressive weapon of destruction"

Try again?

I have no idea what you drive. Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer, the risk to others is inconsequential.

I have no idea what you drive.

That's why I laugh when you make your stupid claims.

Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer

Wrong, you idiot, I want everyone to be safer.

Without government forcing us to be less safe.
You're a typical low IQ liberal.

You have to be an idiot to believe that you in a big car, hitting a small car, is safer for the small car passengers, than getting in the same collision with another small car.

And to think that you are entitled to any share of the world's oil reserves that you want.

And to think that there is no limit to how much destructive waste you can dump into the one atmosphere the world will ever have.

No wonder that you have to deny science to obscure your screw you attitude.

 

[bripat9643]

I have no idea what you drive. Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer, the risk to others is inconsequential.

I have no idea what you drive.

That's why I laugh when you make your stupid claims.

Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer

Wrong, you idiot, I want everyone to be safer.

Without government forcing us to be less safe.
You're a typical low IQ liberal.

You have to be an idiot to believe that you in a big car, hitting a small car, is safer for the small car passengers, than getting in the same collision with another small car.

And to think that you are entitled to any share of the world's oil reserves that you want. .

We're entitled to any share of the world's oil reserves that we pay for. Furthermore, there is no such thing as "the world's oil reserves" in terms of ownership. Specific people or groups own various oil reserves. They decide who they will sell to, not liberal numskulls like you.

[And to think that there is no limit to how much destructive waste you can dump into the one atmosphere the world will ever have.

CO2 is not a pollutant, so your whining is irrelevant.

[No wonder that you have to deny science to obscure your screw you attitude.

You're spouting dogma, not science.

 

[PMZ]

I have no idea what you drive.

That's why I laugh when you make your stupid claims.

Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer

Wrong, you idiot, I want everyone to be safer.

Without government forcing us to be less safe.
You're a typical low IQ liberal.

You have to be an idiot to believe that you in a big car, hitting a small car, is safer for the small car passengers, than getting in the same collision with another small car.

And to think that you are entitled to any share of the world's oil reserves that you want. .

We're entitled to any share of the world's oil reserves that we pay for. Furthermore, there is no such thing as "the world's oil reserves" in terms of ownership. Specific people or groups own various oil reserves. They decide who they will sell to, not liberal numskulls like you.

[And to think that there is no limit to how much destructive waste you can dump into the one atmosphere the world will ever have.

CO2 is not a pollutant, so your whining is irrelevant.

[No wonder that you have to deny science to obscure your screw you attitude.

You're spouting dogma, not science.

Great example of conservative screw you attitude. Classic. Demonstrates specifically what conservatism is based on and what kind of person is attracted to it and why.

 

[skookerasbil]

POP question...........

Identify who is the bonafide limpwrister on this page??

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I have no idea what you drive. Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer, the risk to others is inconsequential.

I have no idea what you drive.

That's why I laugh when you make your stupid claims.

Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer

Wrong, you idiot, I want everyone to be safer.

Without government forcing us to be less safe.
You're a typical low IQ liberal.

You have to be an idiot to believe that you in a big car, hitting a small car, is safer for the small car passengers, than getting in the same collision with another small car.

And to think that you are entitled to any share of the world's oil reserves that you want.

And to think that there is no limit to how much destructive waste you can dump into the one atmosphere the world will ever have.

No wonder that you have to deny science to obscure your screw you attitude.

So what's your next idea, ban big cars?

I know you hate the statistics that show your ideas kill people, but that's the case.

 

[bripat9643]

You have to be an idiot to believe that you in a big car, hitting a small car, is safer for the small car passengers, than getting in the same collision with another small car.

And to think that you are entitled to any share of the world's oil reserves that you want. .

We're entitled to any share of the world's oil reserves that we pay for. Furthermore, there is no such thing as "the world's oil reserves" in terms of ownership. Specific people or groups own various oil reserves. They decide who they will sell to, not liberal numskulls like you.



CO2 is not a pollutant, so your whining is irrelevant.

[No wonder that you have to deny science to obscure your screw you attitude.

You're spouting dogma, not science.

Great example of conservative screw you attitude. Classic. Demonstrates specifically what conservatism is based on and what kind of person is attracted to it and why.

How does anything I said exemplify a "screw you" attitude? If anything it's your "run your life the way I tell you" policy that exemplifies the attitude of "screw you." You've made it clear you don't care what other people want. You only care about ramming your agenda down their throats. What they believe to be in their self-interests just doesn't interest you.

 

[skookerasbil]

The whole car thing is just another example of the level of nutter we deal with on this site when it comes to the AGW alarmists. In their world, driving THIS >>>>





is more preferable than driving THIS >>>






In the real world though, 95 out of 100 American males would rather be dead than be caught driving one of those gay 2 door SPECKS!!! Too.....most people who see somebody driving those little gay cars figure the driver is fucking k00k.

 

[skookerasbil]

I have no idea what you drive. Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer, the risk to others is inconsequential.

I have no idea what you drive.

That's why I laugh when you make your stupid claims.

Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer

Wrong, you idiot, I want everyone to be safer.

Without government forcing us to be less safe.
You're a typical low IQ liberal.

You have to be an idiot to believe that you in a big car, hitting a small car, is safer for the small car passengers, than getting in the same collision with another small car.

And to think that you are entitled to any share of the world's oil reserves that you want.

And to think that there is no limit to how much destructive waste you can dump into the one atmosphere the world will ever have.

No wonder that you have to deny science to obscure your screw you attitude.

Amazing that these meathead AGW OC's read Plato, Hobbes, Sir Thomas Moore and Marx in their early years and embraced that BS. That is the foundation of the thinking of all of these jackasses......the state rules the sheep and that is the perfect society. A classless society where everybody is the same. Choice and individual freedoms don't matter for shit to these people. Make no mistake......these are the most intolerant mofu's walking the planet and the most dangerous too by the way.

Thankfully......they represent a small % of the way people think. Look at ANY poll......which gets right back to the whole point of this thread. The k00ks are losing!!



"The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through
changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then, is humanity itself."

- Club of Rome,
premier environmental think-tank,
consultants to the United Nations

 

[PMZ]

The conservative compulsion to return us to the 50s, big cars, racism, pollution, race riots, KKK cross burnings, polio, barefoot and pregnant woman, all of the trimmings, is not only undesirable but unattainable.

Does either wake them up to reality?

Not a chance. There's is a dream world in which they are, once again, relevant in and to America. It, thank God, is over, never to infect American culture again.

They are now trying to lead from the rear. Trying to drag us back to what we already ended.

Thank God we have the vote to extinguish the hoard forever.

 

[skookerasbil]

The conservative compulsion to return us to the 50s, big cars, racism, pollution, race riots, KKK cross burnings, polio, barefoot and pregnant woman, all of the trimmings, is not only undesirable but unattainable.

Does either wake them up to reality?

Not a chance. There's is a dream world in which they are, once again, relevant in and to America. It, thank God, is over, never to infect American culture again.

They are now trying to lead from the rear. Trying to drag us back to what we already ended.

Thank God we have the vote to extinguish the hoard forever.

Gallup poll: Conservatives outnumber liberals

Conservatives continue to make up the largest segment of political views in the country, outnumbering liberals nearly two-to-one, according to a new poll Thursday.

The Gallup survey found that 40 percent of Americans consider themselves conservative; 35 percent consider themselves moderate; and 21 percent see themselves as liberal. The figures did not change from 2010.


Read more: Gallup poll: Conservatives outnumber liberals - Tim Mak - POLITICO.com

 

[skookerasbil]

more k00k losing >>>>

Why the IPCC Meeting Isn?t Being Televised | NoFrakkingConsensus



The fix is in.

 

[PMZ]

I have no idea what you drive.

That's why I laugh when you make your stupid claims.

Only what you advocate. That as long as you're safer

Wrong, you idiot, I want everyone to be safer.

Without government forcing us to be less safe.
You're a typical low IQ liberal.

You have to be an idiot to believe that you in a big car, hitting a small car, is safer for the small car passengers, than getting in the same collision with another small car.

And to think that you are entitled to any share of the world's oil reserves that you want.

And to think that there is no limit to how much destructive waste you can dump into the one atmosphere the world will ever have.

No wonder that you have to deny science to obscure your screw you attitude.

So what's your next idea, ban big cars?

I know you hate the statistics that show your ideas kill people, but that's the case.

As the oil that you are so big on taking more than your share of runs out, big cars will be seen as huge waste that they have, in reality, always been. Huge, guzzling monuments to waste. People will be embarrassed to be seen in them. They will be nothing but evidence of conspicuous consumption and will be laughed out of town.