Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 20, 1:40 pm, "D.Duck" wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 20, 11:11 am, I am Tosk
wrote:
In article 8ab39275-4f53-4342-be57-97ae507a3f19
@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com, says...
On Dec 20, 8:32 am, Jack wrote:
On Dec 20, 8:16 am, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 19, 9:44 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
"This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for
something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created
market...."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re...
Huh - how about that...
It's amazing how your side can cherry pick people's thoughts and
present just that as fact and expect everyone to eat it up. I know
that many on the right will, afterall, they'll take some lie that
Hannity or Rush tells them and run with it as the truth too.
So instead of attacking the messenger, which is your side's MO, how
about addressing the quotation. Specifically, what part of it isn't
true, and why?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Easy! First, if you read the whole article, not just the cherry picked
parts, you'll see that they are discussing Europe's cap and trade
problems saying that we will have the same problems. This without even
knowing how we are going to model our system. Pretty audacious if the
right wing thinks that their side can predict the future.
If you look at the Czars and others President Obama has put in charge of
such policy, you can get a pretty good idea, it's not rocket science...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
What in HELL does that have to do with the right acting like they have
the ability to predict the future? They've done it before too. Look at
healthcare. For some stupid reason, they think it will be like the
UK's plan. They'll bring up the failed systems and say, "see, that's
what it will be like for us". You NEVER see them point to a well
though out system that works very well and say "see, that's what it
will be like for us"......
Why? PURE politics. They would rather play politics than do what's
right for the country.
Will "it" work as "well" as Medicare? 8)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Again, apparently the right wing can predict the future, so they'll
know the answer to that.


Fore warned is fore armed.

On 12/20/09 2:31 PM, D.Duck wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 20, 1:47 pm, "D.Duck" wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 20, 10:43 am, "D.Duck" wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 19, 9:44 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
"This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for
something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz
said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created
market...."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re...

Huh - how about that...
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/.../27/chain-emai...

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/.../23/chain-emai...

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/.../27/mary-matal...

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/.../20/christophe...

And here's a good one about the right's idea that more CO2 is
actually
good for the environment:
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/.../07/plantsneed...

The gist of Tom's post was the "cap and trade" fraud in Europe and the
potential for the same here in the US. Do you disagree with that
premise?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yes, because as far as a know, people just aren't very good at
correctly and precisely predicting the future. Also, who told this
nitwit Schulz that our system will be like Europes?
As proposed the trading will be handled with the likes of Merril Lynch.
Were you happy with the way these folks handled like transactions in
the past?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What "like" transactions would that be?


"like" = financial derivatives, e.g. CDS


It upsets me that our weak congress, and both parties are to blame, was
not willing to put a noose around the neck of the financial services
industry.

Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 20, 1:17 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 05:16:44 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker





wrote:
On Dec 19, 9:44 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
"This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for
something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created
market...."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re...
Huh - how about that...
It's amazing how your side can cherry pick people's thoughts and
present just that as fact and expect everyone to eat it up. I know
that many on the right will, afterall, they'll take some lie that
Hannity or Rush tells them and run with it as the truth too.
I have come to know you on a personal level over the past few months -
you're a good guy - a little weird, but then again, most of us are on
some way.

Weird? I consider that a compliment, thanks!
But this kind of reply bothers me. "Cherry pick"? It's not "cherry"
picking at all - it's a fact. Fraud is rampant - something that I've
been pointing out for years. This isn't "cherry" picking - it's
governments actively creating a market that is basically unregulated
and uncontrollable and, frankly, unsupported unless you count
government money backing the concept.

Wake up man - this is all about economic control and the ones who play
along get to play. It's the Robber Baron economy all over again.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There's fraud to a certain degree in everything political.


I thought the "left" was so sick of the fraud they want to clean it up.
Why create additional programs that will most likely be turned into a
cash cow for those so inclined to game the system.

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
"This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for
something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created
market...."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...%20Politics%29

Huh - how about that...

Obama and congress mad-off with my money....

Harry wrote:
On 12/20/09 2:31 PM, D.Duck wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 20, 1:47 pm, "D.Duck" wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 20, 10:43 am, "D.Duck" wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 19, 9:44 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
"This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for
something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz
said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially,
politically-created
market...."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re...


Huh - how about that...
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/.../27/chain-emai...


http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/.../23/chain-emai...


http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/.../27/mary-matal...


http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/.../20/christophe...


And here's a good one about the right's idea that more CO2 is
actually
good for the environment:
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/.../07/plantsneed...


The gist of Tom's post was the "cap and trade" fraud in Europe and
the
potential for the same here in the US. Do you disagree with that
premise?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yes, because as far as a know, people just aren't very good at
correctly and precisely predicting the future. Also, who told this
nitwit Schulz that our system will be like Europes?
As proposed the trading will be handled with the likes of Merril Lynch.
Were you happy with the way these folks handled like transactions in
the past?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What "like" transactions would that be?


"like" = financial derivatives, e.g. CDS


It upsets me that our weak congress, and both parties are to blame, was
not willing to put a noose around the neck of the financial services
industry.


Amen....

Gene wrote:
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 21:44:35 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for
something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created
market...."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...%20Politics%29

Huh - how about that...

Textbook example of Faux News.... Organized Crime is present ANYWHERE
mass quantities of money is found, though the concept of carbon
credits is purely idiotic....

Cap and trade is a world wide fraud. Just that our politicians will not
come out and say it.

It is a tax by dysfunctional banana republics on successful western
nations. Bet China doesn't partake.

But our politicians have egos to drive and want to play big shot in the
world arean of politics.

On Dec 20, 12:42*pm, Gene wrote:
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 21:44:35 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports

wrote:
"This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for
something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created
market...."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re...

Huh - how about that...

Textbook example of Faux News.... *Organized Crime is present ANYWHERE
mass quantities of money is found, though the concept of carbon
credits is purely idiotic....

So a news agency isn't allowed to report on something that *is*
happening? I guess it has to agree with your political bent to be
allowed to be reported.

Meanwhile you agree the whole concept is bogus... control that knee,
Gene.

On Dec 20, 12:24*pm, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 20, 10:33*am, Jack wrote:





On Dec 20, 9:39*am, Loogypicker wrote:

On Dec 20, 9:23*am, Jack wrote:

On Dec 20, 8:53*am, Loogypicker wrote:

On Dec 20, 8:32*am, Jack wrote:

On Dec 20, 8:16*am, Loogypicker wrote:

On Dec 19, 9:44*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports

wrote:
"This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for
something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created
market...."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re...

Huh - how about that...

It's amazing how your side can cherry pick people's thoughts and
present just that as fact and expect everyone to eat it up. I know
that many on the right will, afterall, they'll take some lie that
Hannity or Rush tells them and run with it as the truth too.

So instead of attacking the messenger, which is your side's MO, how
about addressing the quotation. *Specifically, what part of it isn't
true, and why?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Easy! First, if you read the whole article, not just the cherry picked
parts, you'll see that they are discussing Europe's cap and trade
problems saying that we will have the same problems. This without even
knowing how we are going to model our system. Pretty audacious if the
right wing thinks that their side can predict the future.

You're movving the goalposts. *You stated that a thought was cherry-
picked, presented as fact, and went on to try to smear it as a lie.

No I didn't. Show everyone where I said that the quote was a lie.

The quote you attacked as a lie was: "This is the problem with
politicians trying to create a market for something that the free
market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created
market...."

Again, no I didn't. Show me where I attacked the quote as a lie.

What *specifically* in that quote is not true. *C'mon, you attempted
to smear it as a cherry-picked lie, so it should be easy to point out
the falsehood in the quote.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Again, show me where I said the quote was a lie.
Where you wrote: "...run with it as the truth too." *The word "too"

indicates you also think this quote, to which you were responding, is
a lie also... "too".

Uh, no. Now YOU are cherry picking. Read my whole paragraph, and maybe
you'll comprehend what was said.



Now, do you think the quote is the truth? *Since you're now
backpedalling from calling it a lie, it must be true. *So why did you
attack it, and it's messenger?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm not backpeddling from ****. YOU accused me of saying something I
didn't say.

You obviously don't understand the meaning of the words you use. I'm
sure I can't teach you in a few sentences.

Meanwhile, you are no better than the ones you rail against here.
Congrats.

On 12/20/09 2:48 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
Gene wrote:
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 21:44:35 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market for
something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially, politically-created
market...."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...%20Politics%29


Huh - how about that...

Textbook example of Faux News.... Organized Crime is present ANYWHERE
mass quantities of money is found, though the concept of carbon
credits is purely idiotic....

Cap and trade is a world wide fraud.

You and SW Tom ought to get together and co-post your absurd
pronouncements. Really. You know what real fraud is? It's Aetna Joe
holding up serious health care insurance reform.

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 20, 11:11 am, I am Tosk
wrote:
In article 8ab39275-4f53-4342-be57-97ae507a3f19
@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com, says...







On Dec 20, 8:32 am, Jack wrote:
On Dec 20, 8:16 am, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 19, 9:44 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
"This is the problem with politicians trying to create a market
for
something that the free market otherwise doesn't value," Schulz
said.
"An emissions trading market is an artificially,
politically-created
market...."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-cap-trade-re...
Huh - how about that...
It's amazing how your side can cherry pick people's thoughts and
present just that as fact and expect everyone to eat it up. I know
that many on the right will, afterall, they'll take some lie that
Hannity or Rush tells them and run with it as the truth too.
So instead of attacking the messenger, which is your side's MO, how
about addressing the quotation. Specifically, what part of it isn't
true, and why?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Easy! First, if you read the whole article, not just the cherry
picked
parts, you'll see that they are discussing Europe's cap and trade
problems saying that we will have the same problems. This without
even
knowing how we are going to model our system. Pretty audacious if the
right wing thinks that their side can predict the future.
If you look at the Czars and others President Obama has put in charge
of
such policy, you can get a pretty good idea, it's not rocket
science...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
What in HELL does that have to do with the right acting like they have
the ability to predict the future? They've done it before too. Look at
healthcare. For some stupid reason, they think it will be like the
UK's plan. They'll bring up the failed systems and say, "see, that's
what it will be like for us". You NEVER see them point to a well
though out system that works very well and say "see, that's what it
will be like for us"......
Why? PURE politics. They would rather play politics than do what's
right for the country.

Will "it" work as "well" as Medicare? 8)


I'm sure you're first in line to voluntarily give it up. And, if not you,
I'm sure you'll be happy to volunteer your family members to do that.



My point is the amount of fraud brought to Medicare. The Government
cannot seem to control it. Will they be able to control the inevitable
fraud that will be associated with "cap and trade"?


The gov't can't control it because the fraud investigators have not been
given the resources to deal with it.

As I said, there's always fraud around. So, your question really is a non
sequitur.

--
Nom=de=Plume