When "I told you so" just doesn't cut it....

[ishootblanks]

Hey kids, learn your ABCs the fun Obama way:
A=Affordable Care Act (not affordable)
B=Benghazi (cover-up)
C=Cash for Clunkers (failure), Credit Rating Drop (historic) & Clinton (“what difference does it make?”)
D=Debt (6.4T added)
E=EPA Regs (higher bills/job killer) & Executive Privilege (see F)
F= Fast & Furious (cover-up) & Food Stamps (record)
G= Gas Prices (doubled) & Green Tech WH Cronies (scams)
H=Health Insurance (skyrocketing) & Holder (spied on press, lied to Congress)
I=IRS (scandal/lies)
J=Jobless (record)
K=Keystone (blocked)
L= Labor Participation (lowest since 1978) & Libya (see M)
M=Middle East (chaos)
N=NSA (scandal/lies)
O=Obamacare (lies/job killer)
P=Putin (ate O’s lunch)
Q=QE1 & QE2 (failures)
R=Race Relations (worse)
S=Stimulus (failure) & Syria (see P)
T=Transparency (none)
U=Unemployment (record)
V=”Video caused Benghazi”
W=Wages (down) & Waivers (Obamacare)
X=X–Ray Machines (med equipment tax)
Y=“You didn’t build that” &
Z=Zip, Zilch & Zero (what O’s done for freedom in America). Quiz tomorrow.

Paula Priesse

Also in the last 12 months having record ice cover at both the northern and southern poles as well as the IPCC announcing that the threat of Global Warming is largely unfounded (after a 16 year period of no global temp change).. looks like I've been right on that one as well!

[Rucati]

Trying to figure out what your point is. A bunch of republican opinions and nonsense with no facts is all I really see here. Perhaps add some sources to some of it for it to actually be credible. Except there are no sources, so... Nevermind I guess?

[obdigore]

Like your name, this thread is blank of reason or thought.

I do like the fact that this post shows you have no understanding of how the American Government works, however.

[ishootblanks]

Trying to figure out what your point is. A bunch of republican opinions and nonsense with no facts is all I really see here. Perhaps add some sources to some of it for it to actually be credible. Except there are no sources, so... Nevermind I guess?

pick one and let's discuss it!

[Adam Jensen]

Like your name, this thread is blank of reason or thought.

I do like the fact that this post shows you have no understanding of how the American Government works, however.

More than half of those things aren't even things Obama controls, like gas prices, or the economy

And I really love "Y." Because, two years later, they're STILL taking that one out of context. Jesus christ.

[bayushisan]

OK since this seems to keep coming up I'll say it here, as I've said it elsewhere. There have been multiple Congressional hearings and investigations into Benghazi. All of those hearings and investigations have been covered by pretty much all of the major cable news outlets, especially Fox News. So far none of those hearings or investigations have turned up any evidence of a coverup. None. If they had turned up anything, even one thing that could lead to criminal charges, then Fox News would have been calling for someone's head months ago instead of continuing to demand MORE investigations. I do hope they know the definition of insanity.

[obdigore]

More than half of those things aren't even things Obama controls, like gas prices, or the economy

And I really love "Y." Because, two years later, they're STILL taking that one out of context. Jesus christ.

Obama is the sole controller of the Middle East. Didn't you know? Or that he blames Obama for Congress causing the credit rating decline. Or suggesting that Benghazi is a cover up, or that he somehow ordered the IRS to deal with the repercussions of Citizens United without having more people to do it. Or that Obama sets all wages in the country for every single person. Or that he blocked fast-tracking the Keystone and so 'blocked' it.

Bah. Its a stupidly bias thread without any facts or anything. I like him trumpeting the Climate Change thing when we have a 30+ page thread on it proving him wrong on every. single. page.

[Cthulhu 2020]

The NIPCC announced that global climate change wasn't as bad as we thought, not the IPCC. Important difference. The NIPCC is founded by oil and gas, mostly koch brothers, and fudges their data all over the place. Their expertise includes people who aren't really climatologists. The IPCC is a group of scientists with a multitude of background affiliations and who are experts on climate change. They still back it.

Also,

1) Isolated event outliers do not disprove a trend.
2) Massive amounts of melting land ice (which causes a positive feedback cycle of warming) has lowered the salinity of the ice cap waters, making the freezing temperature go UP. This was actually PREDICTED to happen and it was also predicted that ignorant deniers would use it to try and disprove GCC.

Your move nothought.

[ishootblanks]

OK since this seems to keep coming up I'll say it here, as I've said it elsewhere. There have been multiple Congressional hearings and investigations into Benghazi. All of those hearings and investigations have been covered by pretty much all of the major cable news outlets, especially Fox News. So far none of those hearings or investigations have turned up any evidence of a coverup. None. If they had turned up anything, even one thing that could lead to criminal charges, then Fox News would have been calling for someone's head months ago instead of continuing to demand MORE investigations. I do hope they know the definition of insanity.

let's look at it like this.. Obama knew within days that Assad knowingly used chemical weapons against the Syrian rebels and was already sending troops to begin a Libya (where Benghazi is) style attack on the Assad military in Syria...

yet over a year later we still do not know who gave the stand down order.. who refused the increased security requests made by the ambassador.. and that all of the surviving personnel from that embassy were forced to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents them from speaking to any media outlet or even Congress about the events at Benghazi under penalty of perjury..

please tell me how this amounts to a completed investigation?

- - - Updated - - -

The NIPCC announced that global climate change wasn't as bad as we thought, not the IPCC. Important difference. The NIPCC is founded by oil and gas, mostly koch brothers, and fudges their data all over the place. Their expertise includes people who aren't really climatologists. The IPCC is a group of scientists with a multitude of background affiliations and who are experts on climate change. They still back it.

Also,

1) Isolated event outliers do not disprove a trend.
2) Massive amounts of melting land ice (which causes a positive feedback cycle of warming) has lowered the salinity of the ice cap waters, making the freezing temperature go UP. This was actually PREDICTED to happen and it was also predicted that ignorant deniers would use it to try and disprove GCC.

Your move nothought.

ok.. so massive increases in ice cover constitute an outlier.. yet sudden decreases do not?

[Deleted]

As I thought, uneducated right wing nutcases grabbing on to the fact that IPCC reported the climate chance projections were too high, while completely and utterly ignoring the fact that the new IPCC report shows more evidence that climate chance is caused by humans, and that it really is happening.

Color me unsurprised.

[ishootblanks]

As I thought, uneducated right wing nutcases grabbing on to the fact that IPCC reported the climate chance projections were too high, while completely and utterly ignoring the fact that the new IPCC report shows more evidence that climate chance is caused by humans, and that it really is happening.

Color me unsurprised.

and yet if these guys had been right about anything in the last 30 years.. we would have no ice today.. every storm would look like something from "The Day After Tomorrow" the north atlantic current would have stopped years ago.. and the third of the planet long the equator would be uninhabitable desert..

at what point will any of these people lose credibility in your eyes?

[obdigore]

ok.. so massive increases in ice cover constitute an outlier.. yet sudden decreases do not?

It isn't an outlier, it was predicted to happen on this lovely journey while we fuck up the climate. Maybe I will make this easier for you: Fresh Water ice doesn't have salt in it. Salt lowers the temperature at which water freezes. If the water in the ocean is less salty, it will freeze easier, meaning that we will get more polar ice cap temporarily, while we damage the ecosystem of the oceans.

Try and, you know, understand things, instead of just throwing out fox news one-liners.

[Rucati]

and yet if these guys had been right about anything in the last 30 years.. we would have no ice today.. every storm would look like something from "The Day After Tomorrow" the north atlantic current would have stopped years ago.. and the third of the planet long the equator would be uninhabitable desert..

at what point will any of these people lose credibility in your eyes?

Sounds to me like you simply don't know what you're talking about and have no real grasp on science or how the environment works. Stop letting Fox News spoon feed you and do some actual research, would be my advice.

[Judas the Priest]

Y=“You didn’t build that”

I would be willing to bet my house that you've never seen the actual speech. They cut off the last of the line. "You didnt built that BY YOURSELF." [emphasis mine]

Huge difference. But I suspect that your Limbaugh/Hannity/Beck/O'Reilley dulled mind may struggle with parsing it, so here goes. What Mittens wanted to imply was class war. What the President was saying was "Hey, society provides an education for your workforce, roads to get them to work, a legal system to protect you and them, etc. You didnt magic your corporate empire into being all by yourself."

[ishootblanks]

Sounds to me like you simply don't know what you're talking about and have no real grasp on science or how the environment works. Stop letting Fox News spoon feed you and do some actual research, would be my advice.

so... your answer is "never"?

- - - Updated - - -

I would be willing to bet my house that you've never seen the actual speech. They cut off the last of the line. "You didnt built that BY YOURSELF." [emphasis mine]

Huge difference. But I suspect that your Limbaugh/Hannity/Beck/O'Reilley dulled mind may struggle with parsing it, so here goes. What Mittens wanted to imply was class war. What the President was saying was "Hey, society provides an education for your workforce, roads to get them to work, a legal system to protect you and them, etc. You didnt magic your corporate empire into being all by yourself."

he actually said it multiple times.. if you take in the context of the entire speech Obama was referring to people accomplishing things without government assistance..

here is the comment:

[Veyne]

Aren't they so cute when they pretend to be informed?

Infracted: Please post constructively and contribute to the topic.

[Rucati]

so... your answer is "never"?

They'll lose credibility when they say or do things that are actually incorrect. Until then, why would anything change? It seems like you're just ignoring facts (shocker) to try and prove your point. Except, your point will never be proven without facts, and in fact all the facts completely disprove what you're trying to say.

It's... Kinda sad really that you think you're somehow acting intelligently by just ignoring everything except what you want to believe. People like you are truly not worth my time, it's clear you have absolutely no desire to debate any facts in this thread, you just want to say the same thing over and over while ignoring anything other people say. Rather pointless.

[Veyne]

so... your answer is "never"?

Here's the difference between scientists and republicans. Scientists: "Our long-term predictions weren't accurate, but there is still clear and undeniable proof that climate change IS happening." Republicans: "Scientists' long-term predictions weren't accurate, so let's ignore the rest of the overwhelming amount of evidence that climate change is happening."

[Xalzel]

Wait, Obama sucks? Obama's destroying America? This news isn't from 2008 or anything...



>told ya so

[ishootblanks]

They'll lose credibility when they say or do things that are actually incorrect. Until then, why would anything change? It seems like you're just ignoring facts (shocker) to try and prove your point. Except, your point will never be proven without facts, and in fact all the facts completely disprove what you're trying to say.

It's... Kinda sad really that you think you're somehow acting intelligently by just ignoring everything except what you want to believe. People like you are truly not worth my time, it's clear you have absolutely no desire to debate any facts in this thread, you just want to say the same thing over and over while ignoring anything other people say. Rather pointless.

can you give an example of where they were correct about any of their predictions? of course not.. because it's a constantly moving goal post.. the rules change constantly to fit the narrative.. remember when wood fueled stoves were harming the environment because the require trees to be cut down? well now that the massive wind/solar farms popping up all over Europe are proving to be unreliable failures.. and coal and nuclear power are PURE EVIL!! wood is all that's left to back up these sources.. and it's now mysteriously a green fuel again..

and please give an example of one of the consequences of failing to implement all of the recommendations of these organizations! what? CO2 increased to 400ppm? ok.. any noticeable changes? temp increases? storm intensity increases? nope.. and nope..

there is absolutely zero evidence to back up the claims you are blindly supporting!