Testing Democrat Honesty

[Mac1958]

[

"Don't judge the religion by the actions of a few",
.

So we should judge a religion by the actions of a few?

Then tell us this:

How much condemnation of innocent Catholics is appropriate owing to the Church's long running sex scandal?

So you admit that my point was correct.

Before you deflected, of course.

.

Why are you dodging the question? You brought up the subject.

Because you purposely deflected from the specifics of my post.

You are regularly dishonest, so I feel no obligation to try any more with you.

Please try this with someone else.

..

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is no danger from second hand smoke.
It's one of those article of faith drummed into Liberal, you know...to keep them in a perpetual state of fear.

You know...as you are.

you cannot be serious.

Of course I am both serious and correct.
The 'second hand smoke' ploy is just one more of the lies that keep you Chicken-Littles quaking in your pajamas.

And, the fact that you are a moron helps, too.


1. Among the Left is a group of anti-smoking activists for whom abolishing tobacco use is a religious calling. When Americans did not respond as totally, nor as quickly, as the activists wished, they devised a new strategy: they told nonsmokers that the smokers were killing them!

Since it was nearly impossible to point to people who died as a result of secondhand smoke, they use epidemiological studies, defined by the WHO as “the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states or events including disease” to “prove” their contention. 50,000 Americans a year, we are told, are killed by secondhand smoke.
Hysteria masquerading as science.


2. Dr. James Enstrom, disputed the epidemiological studies on secondhand smoke in the British Medical Journal: “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed…. Most epidemiological studies have found that environmental tobacco smoke has a positive but not statistically significant relation to coronary heart disease and lung cancer.” Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians 1960-98 The BMJ



But, it being a bogus crisis never stops you Liberals from mandating, passing laws and regulations...no matter how stupid.

3. A real laugher is the outdoor smoking ban various nanny-state governments have instituted. “But no evidence demonstrates that the duration of outdoor exposure — in places where people can move freely about — is long enough to cause substantial health damage…. To make matters worse, in trying to convince people that even transient exposure to secondhand smoke is a potentially deadly hazard, smoking opponents risk losing scientific credibility.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/opinion/06siegel.html


Now that I've educated you....again.....tell me this:
Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

You're making the case for facilitating an increase in smoking in the US.

WHY?

So....today you're gonna begin with obfuscation??/

Gee, I figured you've begin with your usual....you know: lies.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[

"Don't judge the religion by the actions of a few",
.

So we should judge a religion by the actions of a few?

Then tell us this:

How much condemnation of innocent Catholics is appropriate owing to the Church's long running sex scandal?

So you admit that my point was correct.

Before you deflected, of course.

.

Why are you dodging the question? You brought up the subject.

Because you purposely deflected from the specifics of my post.

You are regularly dishonest, so I feel no obligation to try any more with you.

Please try this with someone else.

..

And so ends another chapter in the saga of the life and times of "NYLiar"!

 

[Mac1958]

[

"Don't judge the religion by the actions of a few",
.

So we should judge a religion by the actions of a few?

Then tell us this:

How much condemnation of innocent Catholics is appropriate owing to the Church's long running sex scandal?

So you admit that my point was correct.

Before you deflected, of course.

.

Why are you dodging the question? You brought up the subject.

Because you purposely deflected from the specifics of my post.

You are regularly dishonest, so I feel no obligation to try any more with you.

Please try this with someone else.

..

And so ends another chapter in the saga of the life and times of "NYLiar"!

I've pretty much had it. If someone lies or throws out a straw man or distorts my words once, I'm out.

What's the point?

.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So we should judge a religion by the actions of a few?

Then tell us this:

How much condemnation of innocent Catholics is appropriate owing to the Church's long running sex scandal?

So you admit that my point was correct.

Before you deflected, of course.

.

Why are you dodging the question? You brought up the subject.

Because you purposely deflected from the specifics of my post.

You are regularly dishonest, so I feel no obligation to try any more with you.

Please try this with someone else.

..

And so ends another chapter in the saga of the life and times of "NYLiar"!

I've pretty much had it. If someone lies or throws out a straw man or distorts my words once, I'm out.

What's the point?

.

Well....on the bright side....you get to make fun of him.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

"Don't judge the religion by the actions of a few",
.

So we should judge a religion by the actions of a few?

Then tell us this:

How much condemnation of innocent Catholics is appropriate owing to the Church's long running sex scandal?

So you admit that my point was correct.

Before you deflected, of course.

.

Why are you dodging the question? You brought up the subject.

Because you purposely deflected from the specifics of my post.

You are regularly dishonest, so I feel no obligation to try any more with you.

Please try this with someone else.

..

The specifics? You want to talk specifics. Watch how you won't talk 'specifics'.

This is what you said:

They'll claim it was "just an isolated incident", while condemning millions others for the actions of a few.

1. Who are they?

2. Who are the millions 'they' condemn for the actions of a few?

Be specific.

 

[ogibillm]

PC is part of that Westboro Baptist Christianity. Best to ignore it.

See what I mean....more outright lies.

Absolutely not. They're Christian. You're Christian. There is no difference.

 

[Uncensored2008]

How can you test, that which simply does not exist?

Testing democrat honesty is like testing the reaction time of unicorns - it is an absurd proposition.

 

[ogibillm]

There is no danger from second hand smoke.
It's one of those article of faith drummed into Liberal, you know...to keep them in a perpetual state of fear.

You know...as you are.

you cannot be serious.

Of course I am both serious and correct.
The 'second hand smoke' ploy is just one more of the lies that keep you Chicken-Littles quaking in your pajamas.

And, the fact that you are a moron helps, too.


1. Among the Left is a group of anti-smoking activists for whom abolishing tobacco use is a religious calling. When Americans did not respond as totally, nor as quickly, as the activists wished, they devised a new strategy: they told nonsmokers that the smokers were killing them!

Since it was nearly impossible to point to people who died as a result of secondhand smoke, they use epidemiological studies, defined by the WHO as “the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states or events including disease” to “prove” their contention. 50,000 Americans a year, we are told, are killed by secondhand smoke.
Hysteria masquerading as science.


2. Dr. James Enstrom, disputed the epidemiological studies on secondhand smoke in the British Medical Journal: “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed…. Most epidemiological studies have found that environmental tobacco smoke has a positive but not statistically significant relation to coronary heart disease and lung cancer.” Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians 1960-98 The BMJ



But, it being a bogus crisis never stops you Liberals from mandating, passing laws and regulations...no matter how stupid.

3. A real laugher is the outdoor smoking ban various nanny-state governments have instituted. “But no evidence demonstrates that the duration of outdoor exposure — in places where people can move freely about — is long enough to cause substantial health damage…. To make matters worse, in trying to convince people that even transient exposure to secondhand smoke is a potentially deadly hazard, smoking opponents risk losing scientific credibility.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/opinion/06siegel.html


Now that I've educated you....again.....tell me this:
Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

You realize none of that makes the claim that there are no negative effects on health from second hand smoke, right? They only question the degree

 

[Uncensored2008]

Absolutely not. They're Christian. You're Christian. There is no difference.

No doubt you blame the shootings on Republicans, da Comrade?

Question, does pimping for the terrorists make one a terrorist sympathizer?

Should Dean be referred to as "Known terrorist supporter Howard Dean?"

I would say yes. (You will say what the hate sites tell you to say,.)

 

[ogibillm]

There is no danger from second hand smoke.
It's one of those article of faith drummed into Liberal, you know...to keep them in a perpetual state of fear.

You know...as you are.

you cannot be serious.

Of course I am both serious and correct.
The 'second hand smoke' ploy is just one more of the lies that keep you Chicken-Littles quaking in your pajamas.

And, the fact that you are a moron helps, too.


1. Among the Left is a group of anti-smoking activists for whom abolishing tobacco use is a religious calling. When Americans did not respond as totally, nor as quickly, as the activists wished, they devised a new strategy: they told nonsmokers that the smokers were killing them!

Since it was nearly impossible to point to people who died as a result of secondhand smoke, they use epidemiological studies, defined by the WHO as “the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states or events including disease” to “prove” their contention. 50,000 Americans a year, we are told, are killed by secondhand smoke.
Hysteria masquerading as science.


2. Dr. James Enstrom, disputed the epidemiological studies on secondhand smoke in the British Medical Journal: “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed…. Most epidemiological studies have found that environmental tobacco smoke has a positive but not statistically significant relation to coronary heart disease and lung cancer.” Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians 1960-98 The BMJ



But, it being a bogus crisis never stops you Liberals from mandating, passing laws and regulations...no matter how stupid.

3. A real laugher is the outdoor smoking ban various nanny-state governments have instituted. “But no evidence demonstrates that the duration of outdoor exposure — in places where people can move freely about — is long enough to cause substantial health damage…. To make matters worse, in trying to convince people that even transient exposure to secondhand smoke is a potentially deadly hazard, smoking opponents risk losing scientific credibility.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/opinion/06siegel.html


Now that I've educated you....again.....tell me this:
Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

You realize none of that makes the claim that there are no negative effects on health from second hand smoke, right? They only question the degree

Told any vet's widows that god wanted their spouse dead like a good Christian today?

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC is part of that Westboro Baptist Christianity. Best to ignore it.

See what I mean....more outright lies.

Absolutely not. They're Christian. You're Christian. There is no difference.

1. You lied when you claimed that you had knowledge of my belonging to that group.
You have no such knowledge of that, or of hardly anything else...

2. I challenge you to find any post where I have specified my religious denomination.
Inability to do so will, of course, establish my claim that you are a low-life liar.

 

[PoliticalChic]

How can you test, that which simply does not exist?

Testing democrat honesty is like testing the reaction time of unicorns - it is an absurd proposition.

Hmmmmm.......tough to argue with that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is no danger from second hand smoke.
It's one of those article of faith drummed into Liberal, you know...to keep them in a perpetual state of fear.

You know...as you are.

you cannot be serious.

Of course I am both serious and correct.
The 'second hand smoke' ploy is just one more of the lies that keep you Chicken-Littles quaking in your pajamas.

And, the fact that you are a moron helps, too.


1. Among the Left is a group of anti-smoking activists for whom abolishing tobacco use is a religious calling. When Americans did not respond as totally, nor as quickly, as the activists wished, they devised a new strategy: they told nonsmokers that the smokers were killing them!

Since it was nearly impossible to point to people who died as a result of secondhand smoke, they use epidemiological studies, defined by the WHO as “the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states or events including disease” to “prove” their contention. 50,000 Americans a year, we are told, are killed by secondhand smoke.
Hysteria masquerading as science.


2. Dr. James Enstrom, disputed the epidemiological studies on secondhand smoke in the British Medical Journal: “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed…. Most epidemiological studies have found that environmental tobacco smoke has a positive but not statistically significant relation to coronary heart disease and lung cancer.” Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians 1960-98 The BMJ



But, it being a bogus crisis never stops you Liberals from mandating, passing laws and regulations...no matter how stupid.

3. A real laugher is the outdoor smoking ban various nanny-state governments have instituted. “But no evidence demonstrates that the duration of outdoor exposure — in places where people can move freely about — is long enough to cause substantial health damage…. To make matters worse, in trying to convince people that even transient exposure to secondhand smoke is a potentially deadly hazard, smoking opponents risk losing scientific credibility.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/opinion/06siegel.html


Now that I've educated you....again.....tell me this:
Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

You realize none of that makes the claim that there are no negative effects on health from second hand smoke, right? They only question the degree

Good to see I've made you back down already.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Absolutely not. They're Christian. You're Christian. There is no difference.

WHO is Christian, Comrade?

Rudolph stated he was NOT motivated by religion is is not particularly religious.

CNN.com - Rudolph reveals motives - Apr 15 2005

Look, lying is what you leftists do - I expect it from you. And when you need to protect your terrorist buddies, we can expect no end of lies from you.

 

[ogibillm]

Im n

There is no danger from second hand smoke.
It's one of those article of faith drummed into Liberal, you know...to keep them in a perpetual state of fear.

You know...as you are.

you cannot be serious.

Of course I am both serious and correct.
The 'second hand smoke' ploy is just one more of the lies that keep you Chicken-Littles quaking in your pajamas.

And, the fact that you are a moron helps, too.


1. Among the Left is a group of anti-smoking activists for whom abolishing tobacco use is a religious calling. When Americans did not respond as totally, nor as quickly, as the activists wished, they devised a new strategy: they told nonsmokers that the smokers were killing them!

Since it was nearly impossible to point to people who died as a result of secondhand smoke, they use epidemiological studies, defined by the WHO as “the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states or events including disease” to “prove” their contention. 50,000 Americans a year, we are told, are killed by secondhand smoke.
Hysteria masquerading as science.


2. Dr. James Enstrom, disputed the epidemiological studies on secondhand smoke in the British Medical Journal: “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed…. Most epidemiological studies have found that environmental tobacco smoke has a positive but not statistically significant relation to coronary heart disease and lung cancer.” Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians 1960-98 The BMJ



But, it being a bogus crisis never stops you Liberals from mandating, passing laws and regulations...no matter how stupid.

3. A real laugher is the outdoor smoking ban various nanny-state governments have instituted. “But no evidence demonstrates that the duration of outdoor exposure — in places where people can move freely about — is long enough to cause substantial health damage…. To make matters worse, in trying to convince people that even transient exposure to secondhand smoke is a potentially deadly hazard, smoking opponents risk losing scientific credibility.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/opinion/06siegel.html


Now that I've educated you....again.....tell me this:
Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

You realize none of that makes the claim that there are no negative effects on health from second hand smoke, right? They only question the degree

Good to see I've made you back down already.

Im not backing down. There is no question that second hand smoke is harmful to people's health. You haven't produced any evidence to the contrary, and have in fact backed my claim.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You think you're going to find some element of honesty among cowards? All this ass-kissing of Islam today by Western leftists, what's it motivated by except cowardice, and what's it accomplishing except to empower Islamic fanaticism? The Western left never found a human institution so horrible, that it wouldn't still kiss its ass up one side and down the other.

Islam is the PC-protected religion, so we can count on the usual suspects to do what they usually do.

"Don't judge the religion by the actions of a few",
.

And no Christians do that when Christian terrorism occurs?

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is no danger from second hand smoke.
It's one of those article of faith drummed into Liberal, you know...to keep them in a perpetual state of fear.

You know...as you are.

you cannot be serious.

Of course I am both serious and correct.
The 'second hand smoke' ploy is just one more of the lies that keep you Chicken-Littles quaking in your pajamas.

And, the fact that you are a moron helps, too.


1. Among the Left is a group of anti-smoking activists for whom abolishing tobacco use is a religious calling. When Americans did not respond as totally, nor as quickly, as the activists wished, they devised a new strategy: they told nonsmokers that the smokers were killing them!

Since it was nearly impossible to point to people who died as a result of secondhand smoke, they use epidemiological studies, defined by the WHO as “the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states or events including disease” to “prove” their contention. 50,000 Americans a year, we are told, are killed by secondhand smoke.
Hysteria masquerading as science.


2. Dr. James Enstrom, disputed the epidemiological studies on secondhand smoke in the British Medical Journal: “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed…. Most epidemiological studies have found that environmental tobacco smoke has a positive but not statistically significant relation to coronary heart disease and lung cancer.” Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians 1960-98 The BMJ



But, it being a bogus crisis never stops you Liberals from mandating, passing laws and regulations...no matter how stupid.

3. A real laugher is the outdoor smoking ban various nanny-state governments have instituted. “But no evidence demonstrates that the duration of outdoor exposure — in places where people can move freely about — is long enough to cause substantial health damage…. To make matters worse, in trying to convince people that even transient exposure to secondhand smoke is a potentially deadly hazard, smoking opponents risk losing scientific credibility.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/opinion/06siegel.html


Now that I've educated you....again.....tell me this:
Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

You realize none of that makes the claim that there are no negative effects on health from second hand smoke, right? They only question the degree

Told any vet's widows that god wanted their spouse dead like a good Christian today?

When you lie as you just have, it supports my ego, and my contention, that you are unable to compete with me when restricted to honesty and truthfulness.

Another victory over evil!
Muah! I love me.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Im n

There is no danger from second hand smoke.
It's one of those article of faith drummed into Liberal, you know...to keep them in a perpetual state of fear.

You know...as you are.

you cannot be serious.

Of course I am both serious and correct.
The 'second hand smoke' ploy is just one more of the lies that keep you Chicken-Littles quaking in your pajamas.

And, the fact that you are a moron helps, too.


1. Among the Left is a group of anti-smoking activists for whom abolishing tobacco use is a religious calling. When Americans did not respond as totally, nor as quickly, as the activists wished, they devised a new strategy: they told nonsmokers that the smokers were killing them!

Since it was nearly impossible to point to people who died as a result of secondhand smoke, they use epidemiological studies, defined by the WHO as “the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states or events including disease” to “prove” their contention. 50,000 Americans a year, we are told, are killed by secondhand smoke.
Hysteria masquerading as science.


2. Dr. James Enstrom, disputed the epidemiological studies on secondhand smoke in the British Medical Journal: “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed…. Most epidemiological studies have found that environmental tobacco smoke has a positive but not statistically significant relation to coronary heart disease and lung cancer.” Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians 1960-98 The BMJ



But, it being a bogus crisis never stops you Liberals from mandating, passing laws and regulations...no matter how stupid.

3. A real laugher is the outdoor smoking ban various nanny-state governments have instituted. “But no evidence demonstrates that the duration of outdoor exposure — in places where people can move freely about — is long enough to cause substantial health damage…. To make matters worse, in trying to convince people that even transient exposure to secondhand smoke is a potentially deadly hazard, smoking opponents risk losing scientific credibility.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/opinion/06siegel.html


Now that I've educated you....again.....tell me this:
Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

You realize none of that makes the claim that there are no negative effects on health from second hand smoke, right? They only question the degree

Good to see I've made you back down already.

Im not backing down. There is no question that second hand smoke is harmful to people's health. You haven't produced any evidence to the contrary, and have in fact backed my claim.

1. Let's begin with the important stuff: I proved that you are a lying low-life, and an idiot.

2. Now, let's include the fact that there is no science behind the fake hand-wringing second hand smoke crisis....as posited by the Liberal Washington Post...

“Lung cancer and cardiovascular diseases develop at advancing ages. Estimating the risk of those diseases posed by secondhand smoke requires knowing the sum of momentary secondhand smoke doses that nonsmokers have internalized over their lifetimes. Such lifetime summations of instant doses are obviously impossible, because concentrations of secondhand smoke in the air, individual rates of inhalation, and metabolic transformations vary from moment to moment, year after year, location to location….

In reality, it is impossible to summarize accurately from momentary and vague recalls, and with an absurd expectation of precision, the total exposure to secondhand smoke over more than a half-century of a person's lifetime.

No measure of cumulative lifetime secondhand smoke exposure was ever possible, so the epidemiologic studies estimated risk based not only on an improper marker of exposure, but also on exposure data that are illusory….

More than two dozen causes of lung cancer are reported in the professional literature, and over 200 for cardiovascular diseases; their likely intrusions have never been credibly measured and controlled in secondhand smoke studies. …

It has been fashionable to ignore the weakness of "the science" on secondhand smoke, perhaps in the belief that claiming "the science is settled" will lead to policies and public attitudes that will reduce the prevalence of smoking. “ Gio Batta Gori - The Bogus Science of Secondhand Smoke



3. "There is no question that second hand smoke is harmful to people's health."
So....you got that from the Magic 8-Ball?

Get it, you dunce????

" It has been fashionable to ignore the weakness of "the science" on secondhand smoke, ...."

...so that we can keep the dunces voting Democrat.


Worked with you, huh?


Now wipe that egg off your face.....or is that drool???

 

[NYcarbineer]

Absolutely not. They're Christian. You're Christian. There is no difference.

WHO is Christian, Comrade?

Rudolph stated he was NOT motivated by religion is is not particularly religious.

CNN.com - Rudolph reveals motives - Apr 15 2005

Look, lying is what you leftists do - I expect it from you. And when you need to protect your terrorist buddies, we can expect no end of lies from you.

From the actual, full, text of Rudolph's confession:

"I ask these peaceful Christian law-abiding Pro-Life citizens, is there any point at which all of the legal remedies will not suffice and you would fight to end the massacre of children? How many decades have to pass, how many millions have to die? Is there any point when the cries of children will not go unanswered? I think that your inaction after three decades of slaughter is a sufficient answer to all of these questions.
The Republican party is the modern equivalent to the Pharisaical sect in ancient Judea. "You are like whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and all uncleanness. Even so you outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and inequity." Matthew 23:28. The coward Bush talks about the "culture of life," but intends to effect no change with respect to Roe v. Wade. He made this perfectly clear when he stated during the stem cell debate that "America is not ready to abolish Roe v. Wade." Three of the key justices who are instrumental in maintaining Roe v. Wade — O'Connor, Kennedy and Souter — were appointed by Republican presidents. No politician in Washington will ever seriously threaten abortion on demand. And the fools who listen to them, in their hearts, know this but do not care. You so-called "Pro-Life," "good Christian people" who point your plastic fingers at me saying that I am a "murderer," that "two wrongs don't make a right," that even though "abortion is murder, those who would use force to stop the murder are morally the same," I say to you that your lies are transparent....

...And now after the agreement has been signed the talking heads on the news opine that I am "finished," that I will "languish broken and unloved in the bowels of some supermax," and but I say to you people that by the by the grace of God I am still here — a little bloodied, but emphatically unbowed."

Full Text of Eric Rudolph s Confession NPR