yourmomma

"wtf is wrong with me?" You are desperate to believe in something you know is all in your head. Don't feel bad delusion is a requisite of faith, and leads to all types of personality quarks.

"They didn't start out evil." You mean like the evangelical christian movement who started out evil and has soldiered on with their depravity almost uninterrupted.

you adhere to that position like you were born into it the first time.

That article, like wmd were found in Iraq, evolution defies thermodynamics, taxing rich people inhibits their desire to be rich; is just fucking stupid

you are right. If we had just killed the niggers, whopes, micks, spics, hunkies, kykes, frogs, krauts, POHM's, Moo's-lems, sand niggers, gookes, Japs, wok eyes, fagots, canadians, commies, liberals, pagens, baptists, mormens, ... everything would have been fine.

No.. you are wrong. It is a politicians fault. Either Bush should have or Obama could have. Bottom line is, they are less likely to die by the -22 than by suicide.

why don't you understand the niggers and jews(I really ment kykes) are the problem.

Really; Carnegie is the example?

I believe it means exactly what Jefferson wrote. There is a wall that keeps you from having to live buy the rules of Rome, England, pick a church. That is what he said. Others can interpret, like some do the bible. I take peoples writing at face value. I believe the bible means what it says, I believe Jefferson means what he said. And mickey boy I'm sure you interpret what either of them ment.

In the writings you cited it is extremely clear that the baptist were saying no religion in government, right? Jefferson said, yeah that's right. You can "interpret" it any way you like, as per the governments inability to make a law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Regardless of your or the Baptists interpretation Jefferson was very clear the wall between religion and government nevertheless stands. Or as Fezzik would say "I don't think it means what you think it means.

Fuckin'A TWJWD

You know the N.W.O is going to read that post. The only way to answer it is to amass lots of ammonium nitrate, gasoline and wait.... When the knock comes blow everything to hell cause TWJWD.

eh I regret typing that last bit. It was a PA and out of line. Sorry i can do better as a troll.

First, I don't "reply to". Conversation shouldn't be that hard. Secondly, I clearly typed that Reuters misquoted a website. One which I made no comment about other than to say it was misquoted. Apparently it's not my responsibility to provide the information as that is what google is for. If I was to quote a website, I would cite the quote because thats kinda what distinguishes fucktards typing from people quoting regardless if its brenthutch or reutres. Finally, maybe the quotes put you off. I typed " I would supply a citation but it is established a fact is only a link to a blog around these "education makes you stupid " parts. So here you go.....http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php ." Replying with "And, a reference to a blog site, to prove your point - guess that make you part of the 'education makes you stupid' crowd." proves you cannot or do not understand the written word. The entire point of that sentence was facts are not useful to some but blogs are. I now know you lack the ability to think critically and kallend really is a dick because he knows your limitations and doesn't humor you.

Both. And WTF! You, a conservative values fanboy accept a Reuters article as fact. Shame on you. Like I typed, the reuters "factoid" was taken out of contex t. I would supply a citation but it is established a 'fact' is only a link to a blog around these "education makes you stupid " parts. So here you go.....http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

When a source has no creditability a good defense is to attack it. Attacking the repeating lies until they are true tactic is also a good defense.

What part of "One can spend 30 sec on the AWEA site and see this quote was taken out of context." do you not understand. Secondly go to BLS web site (http://www.bls.gov/green/wind_energy/) and you know what you get? A glorious fucking endorsement of wind energy. And hear in lies the problem . Since no links were offered you were led to believe the information in that blog had merit. And not surprisingly, since it fits your world view, you didn't take your own advice and google the information you just regurgitated. Instead you make a snippy post as if that will make the lies you posted true.

Maybe, just maybe if you quoted verifiable information from the source people would not have to ignore you so loudly. Much like rushmc posting opinion pieces from a lobbyist, this site is an opinion blog. One can spend 30 sec on the AWEA site and see this quote was taken out of context. This may come as a shock but..just because its on the Internet doesn't mean its true.

Niggers are guilty. Jews run shit. You don't understand.

I truly believe we should abort the child the mother and the father when a society has to ask what a parent should do.

Steve Milloy ? Good fucking grief. If someone posted information from a "green energy ' lobbyist extolling the virtues of "green energy" you would, rightfully, dismiss it. That cunt needs to be made to live in a house built on statistically insignificant amounts of radiation , made of asbestos, and containing a second hand smoke generator and a DDT aspirator so we can see just how junk the science is.

"It is still not settled" One last time. Nothing in science is ever settled. Indeed, almost every scientist makes his or her living challenging what others have already agreed upon. There are scientist who carry bias into their work, but when done correctly the scientific method eliminates these bias. Put another way, science doesn't give us absolute truths. The ptolemaic method could (2000 some years ago) produce observations equal to the Copernican model, no one today holds these models as equal because additional information vetted using the scientific method produced evidence that heliocentrism matches reality more closely than geocentrism. This does not imply heliocentrism is an absolute truth of reality. Many scientist engage in pseudo-science on both sides of the issue. That has no bearing on the lines of evidence which support an understanding of warming as anthropomorphic. So while the science isn't settled the evidence points towards a consequence to our actions as opposed to just blaming it on the sun spinning around us.

I used to have to spend money on blotter, but now I just read your post and feel as though I've bathed in acid. Kudos

So if an individual does it with a mortgage they are a dead beat. But when a private equity firm does it with a business(no different than an LBO), it's called.... capitalism?

Explain the meaning of article 1 sec 2 ,and why the 14th amendment was not 'activist'.