Is the GOP intentionally preventing a recovery?

[The T]

I said "at levels present in the atmosphere." Virtually any substance can be toxic if consumed in sufficient quantities, including H2O.

Do you want humans to quit using water?

So the answer is YES. High levels of CO2 in the atmosphere can harm human health.

Interesting they forget about the presence and purpose of plants?

 

[bripat9643]

The main constituency of the Republican party is productive members of society who are paying the freight for all the tics in the Democrat party. Why would they want the government to shake them down just so they could get a small percentage back?

and you dont think that the main Constituency of the Democratic Party is productive members of Society who are in turn paying the freight for all the tics in the Republican Party?....

No. The constituency of the Democrat party is tics on the ass of society. Democrats admit that almost on a daily basis. Every bill they support is another dispersion of ill-gotten swag to their hoard of tics.

The classic Obama constituent is the woman who as videoed saying that because Obama was elected she wouldn't have to buy gas or pay her mortgage.

Classic!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Cut taxes?

Are you nuts? We have a trillion dollar deficit!

We have to cut spending and raise taxes. It's simple mathematics.

Cut regulation? How did that work out with Wall Street?

Oh, yea, IT DESTROYED THE ECONOMY!

Which cuts in regulation do you feel destroyed the economy?
Spell it out.

Abandoning PAYGO, which was effectively a regulation Congress imposed on itself, is what busted the budget in the during Bush's tenure.

You were talking about Wall Street, not wasteful government spending.

If it was bad during Bush, it must be really bad now, eh?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The main constituency of the Republican party is productive members of society who are paying the freight for all the tics in the Democrat party. Why would they want the government to shake them down just so they could get a small percentage back?

and you dont think that the main Constituency of the Democratic Party is productive members of Society who are in turn paying the freight for all the tics in the Republican Party?....

No. The constituency of the Democrat party is tics on the ass of society. Democrats admit that almost on a daily basis. Every bill they support is another dispersion of ill-gotten swag to their hoard of tics.

The classic Obama constituent is the woman who as videoed saying that because Obama was elected she wouldn't have to buy gas or pay her mortgage.

Classic!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI]YouTube - ‪Obama Is Going To Pay For My Gas And Mortgage!!!‬‏[/ame]

 

[Susan45]

Your claim that you endorse the principles laid down by the Declaration of Indepence is laughable. Everything you post is an attack on those principles.

The loud and proud conservative element on this message board, four of whom I singled out recently, aren't interested in facts, they actually believe the platitudes they post and believe anyone who disagrees or questions what they hold as immutable truths is a "commie" or left wing "libtard"

The greater threat to America today is not from foreign shores, it hides in the soul of bigots and racists - of all colors and creeds - and extremists left and right who reject the basic, fundamental truth which we celebrate today:

" We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states."

Liberalism denies that all men are created equal.

OMG! Do you ever get tired of spewing lying BS?

 

[daveman]

Your claim that you endorse the principles laid down by the Declaration of Indepence is laughable. Everything you post is an attack on those principles.

Liberalism denies that all men are created equal.

OMG! Do you ever get tired of spewing lying BS?

Just because you disagree with it doesn't mean it's a lie.

Clayton hasn't answered, so maybe you'd like to give it a shot:

Do you support affirmative action and hiring quotas?

 

[Trajan]

Cut taxes?

Are you nuts? We have a trillion dollar deficit!

We have to cut spending and raise taxes. It's simple mathematics.

Cut regulation? How did that work out with Wall Street?

Oh, yea, IT DESTROYED THE ECONOMY!

Which cuts in regulation do you feel destroyed the economy?
Spell it out.

Abandoning PAYGO, which was effectively a regulation Congress imposed on itself, is what busted the budget in the during Bush's tenure.

uh huh and who "abandoned" it, then who reconstituted it (twice) and promptly ignored it?

 

[Trajan]

Abandoning PAYGO, which was effectively a regulation Congress imposed on itself, is what busted the budget in the during Bush's tenure.

Paygo?

Paygo was bullshit... Clinton ran a deficit fr 8 years and financed it through the raiding of SS and other intergovernmental funds. And thanks to massive defense cuts, he did come close in '98 to closing the gap; but still he never did.

Paygo isn't practicle, but the line item veto makes sense. Why not allow a president the authority to cut spending in a way all of us can see?

uhmmm because the SC killed it....?

 

[Trajan]

approximately 0.035%. Short-term exposure to CO2 at levels below 2% (20,000 parts per million or ppm) has not been reported to cause harmful effects. Higher concentrations can affect respiratory function and cause excitation followed by depression of the central nervous system. High concentrations of CO2 can displace oxygen in the air, resulting in lower oxygen concentrations for breathing. Therefore, effects of oxygen deficiency may be combined with effects of CO2 toxicity.

Volunteers exposed to 3.3% or 5.4% CO2 for 15 minutes experienced increased depth of breathing. At 7.5%, a feeling of an inability to breathe (dyspnea), increased pulse rate, headache, dizziness, sweating, restlessness, disorientation, and visual distortion developed. Twenty-minute exposures to 6.5 or 7.5% decreased mental performance. Irritability and discomfort were reported with exposure to 6.5% for approximately 70 minutes. Exposure to 6% for several minutes, or 30% for 20-30 seconds, has affected the heart, as evidenced by altered electrocardiograms.

Workers briefly exposed to very high concentrations showed damage to the retina, sensitivity to light (photophobia), abnormal eye movements, constriction of visual fields, and enlargement of blind spots. Exposure to up to 3.0% for over 15 hours, for six days, resulted in decreased night vision and colour sensitivity.

Exposure to 10% for 1.5 minutes has caused eye flickering, excitation and increased muscle activity and twitching. Concentrations greater than 10% have caused difficulty in breathing, impaired hearing, nausea, vomiting, a strangling sensation, sweating, stupor within several minutes and loss of consciousness within 15 minutes. Exposure to 30% has quickly resulted in unconsciousness and convulsions. Several deaths have been attributed to exposure to concentrations greater than 20%. Effects of CO2 can become more pronounced upon physical exertion, such as heavy work.



So the answer is YES. High levels of CO2 in the atmosphere can harm human health.

and Alar can harm an average adult if they ate 28,000 pounds of Alar-treated apples each year for 70 years, or a 10-pound infant eating 1,750 pounds per year.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Which cuts in regulation do you feel destroyed the economy?
Spell it out.

Abandoning PAYGO, which was effectively a regulation Congress imposed on itself, is what busted the budget in the during Bush's tenure.

uh huh and who "abandoned" it, then who reconstituted it (twice) and promptly ignored it?

Bush and the Republicans let PAYGO expire.

 

[Susan45]

Paygo isn't practicle, but the line item veto makes sense. Why not allow a president the authority to cut spending in a way all of us can see?

Here is the way I understand the line-item veto bill went down.

Congress passed a line-item veto bill during the Clinton administration. Someone then protested it was unconstitutional. The Supremes ruled on it that yes it was unconstitutional.

In the constitution it is written that the president only has three options when a bill gets to him. Sign it, veto it or let it pass without any action. By using the line-item veto the pres was given a right he wasn't entitled to, and that was changing a bill (in this case a budget bill) once it got to the Oval office.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Which cuts in regulation do you feel destroyed the economy?
Spell it out.

Abandoning PAYGO, which was effectively a regulation Congress imposed on itself, is what busted the budget in the during Bush's tenure.

You were talking about Wall Street, not wasteful government spending.

If it was bad during Bush, it must be really bad now, eh?

I wasn't talking about Wall st. You're confusing me with someone else.

 

[Trajan]

And this once again demonstrates that Republicans are not necessarily conservative.

If by "conservative" you mean Moronic Religious Christian Fundamentalists you are correct. They were bit players in the party until Bush II and Karl Rove actively recruited their participation in his daddy's run for POTUS. I despise those stupid fucks. They ruined the GOP.

I hope you don't mind if a liberal speaks up. But I agree with you. It used to be that I could have good substantial discussions with conservatives. Most of the time we didn't change each others minds but they were fun and gave us each a basic understanding of how the other side (if you will) was thinking. I've really missed them. I know you good folks are still out there somewhere, but I don't run into them much anymore. So it's really nice to see you here and I hope we can communicate without rancor.

So it's really nice to see you here and I hope we can communicate without rancor

 

[Susan45]

CO2 Now | CO2 Home

 

[Trajan]

Abandoning PAYGO, which was effectively a regulation Congress imposed on itself, is what busted the budget in the during Bush's tenure.

uh huh and who "abandoned" it, then who reconstituted it (twice) and promptly ignored it?

Bush and the Republicans let PAYGO expire.

you didn't answer the entire question which is par for the course so I'll give you part of it.............yes they did so the postulation that escapes you goes like this- they didn't bother to pretend to even want to adhere to it, they let it go.

Nancy however made a big show of re-enacting paygo in jan 07. and?

what happened next?

and-

for bonus points, what associated event occurred on On February 12, 2010?

 

[Too Tall]

uh huh, well if you read it you would not have made the statement you made back in your original post, unless you suffer a lack of mental stability or are a fibber hoping no one would notice.

Pssst. Don't bother. This is the shrill that thinks that SSDI benefits are only for crippled children. Not all there, so save your energy.

HAHAHAHAHA!! I figured you probably misread something I wrote. What I posted was,

Your ignorance is showing. SSDI is not part of the retirement program and you do not have to work to collect. This is the program they use for disabled children.

As you can see I never said that SSDI was ONLY for crippled children, plus this had nothing to do with the articles about the president and the healthcare bill. Gawd, you guys are slow.

SSDI is managed by the Social Security Administration as is the 'retirement program' known as Social Security.

 

[Susan45]

Pssst. Don't bother. This is the shrill that thinks that SSDI benefits are only for crippled children. Not all there, so save your energy.

HAHAHAHAHA!! I figured you probably misread something I wrote. What I posted was,

Your ignorance is showing. SSDI is not part of the retirement program and you do not have to work to collect. This is the program they use for disabled children.

As you can see I never said that SSDI was ONLY for crippled children, plus this had nothing to do with the articles about the president and the healthcare bill. Gawd, you guys are slow.

SSDI is managed by the Social Security Administration as is the 'retirement program' known as Social Security.

HAHAHAHAHA!! Your post is the perfect example of joining a discussion when it is almost over. We all know the SSDI is managed by SS. Like most threads this has meandered back and forth about SS and other subjects. But trajan tried to "get" me, but came up short. I wasn't going to bring it up, because I just didn't think it was important. But if he wants to back this up I am a little curious what he was talking about when he directed this at me.

Quote: Originally Posted by Trajan View Post

uh huh, well if you read it you would not have made the statement you made back in your original post, unless you suffer a lack of mental stability or are a fibber hoping no one would notice.

 

[Too Tall]

HAHAHAHAHA!! I figured you probably misread something I wrote. What I posted was,



As you can see I never said that SSDI was ONLY for crippled children, plus this had nothing to do with the articles about the president and the healthcare bill. Gawd, you guys are slow.

SSDI is managed by the Social Security Administration as is the 'retirement program' known as Social Security.

HAHAHAHAHA!! Your post is the perfect example of joining a discussion when it is almost over. We all know the SSDI is managed by SS. Like most threads this has meandered back and forth about SS and other subjects. But trajan tried to "get" me, but came up short. I wasn't going to bring it up, because I just didn't think it was important. But if he wants to back this up I am a little curious what he was talking about when he directed this at me.

Quote: Originally Posted by Trajan View Post

uh huh, well if you read it you would not have made the statement you made back in your original post, unless you suffer a lack of mental stability or are a fibber hoping no one would notice.

I responded to this in your post:

Your ignorance is showing. SSDI is not part of the retirement program and you do not have to work to collect....

SSSI is part of the retirement program and is funded by FICA and and administered by the SSA.

Merely trying to inform you of the facts and make you think twice before calling someone ignorant.

Also, good job in explaining the line item veto time line and reasoning behind the Supreme Court decision.

 

[Si modo]

uh huh and who "abandoned" it, then who reconstituted it (twice) and promptly ignored it?

Bush and the Republicans let PAYGO expire.

you didn't answer the entire question which is par for the course so I'll give you part of it.............yes they did so the postulation that escapes you goes like this- they didn't bother to pretend to even want to adhere to it, they let it go.

Nancy however made a big show of re-enacting paygo in jan 07. and?

what happened next?

and-

for bonus points, what associated event occurred on On February 12, 2010?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKg5ggoqJ0g&feature=related]YouTube - ‪Jeopardy! Think Music, 1997-2008‬‏[/ame]

 

[Wry Catcher]

Paygo?

Paygo was bullshit... Clinton ran a deficit fr 8 years and financed it through the raiding of SS and other intergovernmental funds. And thanks to massive defense cuts, he did come close in '98 to closing the gap; but still he never did.

Paygo isn't practicle, but the line item veto makes sense. Why not allow a president the authority to cut spending in a way all of us can see?

uhmmm because the SC killed it....?

Duh. The Congress could have and still can begin the process to amend the COTUS and provide for a line-item veto.