Originally posted by no1marauderOuch, how humiliating for the original poster.
Your "eidetic memory" (LMFAO!) obviously failed you. The whole point of this passage is about global warming. Here it is from the link (see; that's not hard) provided by Ikuturso:
OBAMA: All right. [b]So that's what we want to do on global warming here in the United States. We are also going to have to negotiate with other countries. Chin ...[text shortened]... ligence like yourself shouldn't try to be smug; it's rather pathetic and sad.
I doubt Obama stating the obvious - i.e. that the US government will be ineffective in getting other countries to reduce their emissions while we are pumping out several times per capita more of the same substances - will hurt him politically. According to the "liberal media" at Fox News' poll of last year, 82% of Americans believe global warming is real and 79% of those believe human activity is either responsible for it (41😵 or a contributing factor (38😵. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250571,00.html Effete right wingers might hate these numbers (George Will had a column out today questioning the human contribution to global warming) but what are you gonna do?
Originally posted by PinkFloydI just did a Google search of Obama and "keep saying it's okay", and the only hit is PF's first post in this thread! PF's a hoot, ain't he?
I typed the following in that little google box at the top left of my screen: obama remark SUV thermostat. Know what I got? 4670 matches. The first one quoted his speech word for word. The second listing informed me that the Media Cover Up Obama's Malaise Speech--which, at closer read, turns out to be the very same speech I've already told you abo ...[text shortened]... n get back to me, preferably groveling.
You thought like Nelly, thought s--t was jelly 😛
Originally posted by no1marauderSo sad that some of us are blessed with eidetic memories, nuanced thought, the ability to read between the lines...I deel no anger toward you Sonny. I only hope you will grow in wisdom. And go in peace😀
Your "eidetic memory" (LMFAO!) obviously failed you. The whole point of this passage is about global warming. Here it is from the link (see; that's not hard) provided by Ikuturso:
OBAMA: All right. [b]So that's what we want to do on global warming here in the United States. We are also going to have to negotiate with other countries. Chin ...[text shortened]... ligence like yourself shouldn't try to be smug; it's rather pathetic and sad.
Originally posted by no1marauderThat only proves that 79% of those surveyed do not know very much about global warming. Humans contribute statistically 0% to global warming--and can do 0% to stop it, even if we did cause it.
I doubt Obama stating the obvious - i.e. that the US government will be ineffective in getting other countries to reduce their emissions while we are pumping out several times per capita more of the same substances - will hurt him politically. According to the "liberal media" at Fox News' poll of last year, 82% of Americans believe global warming is real ...[text shortened]... mn out today questioning the human contribution to global warming) but what are you gonna do?
Originally posted by gaychessplayerYou, I thought were a civilized debator. Sorry to see you go. And I can't be blamed for your errors. I didn't use quotation marks in my search, AND I used different words. Try that--then we'll work on your apology.
I just did a Google search of Obama and "keep saying it's okay", and the [b]only hit is PF's first post in this thread! PF's a hoot, ain't he?[/b]
Originally posted by PinkFloydIn your first post, you quoted Obama as saying "keep saying it's okay." You put it in quotation marks, which means you were saying that those were Obama's exact words. If those were in fact his exact words, then absolutely nobody on the internet quoted him correctly except you. It is of course possible that you are the only person on the internet to quote him correctly. If that is in fact the case, then I will apologize. If you are mistaken, then I would ask that you please apologize for misquoting Obama.
You, I thought were a civilized debator. Sorry to see you go. And I can't be blamed for your errors. I didn't use quotation marks in my search, AND I used different words. Try that--then we'll work on your apology.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI didn't ask you to assign me homework. I asked you what you were talking about.
Start by looking up 'farm subsidies'. Then look into the World Bank, 'foreign debt'. The US does not have fair trade relations with the rest of the world. The fact that much of the worlds economy is centered around the US and the US dollar enables the US to force unfair trade agreements on other countries.
Also many African countries were persuaded (by v ...[text shortened]... money they are 'paying for it' is actually staying in Iraq and not going to US companies?
The US does not have fair trade relations with the rest of the world.
What are "fair trade relations"? Be specific please.
The fact that much of the worlds economy is centered around the US and the US dollar enables the US to force unfair trade agreements on other countries.
Then learn from us and become productive. The EU and China are good examples of how to handle this. Japan was too, but they made the mistake of trying to use their newfound success to attack the US. Dumb! But they're still doing pretty well despite getting nuked because they realized early on that they needed to learn how the more powerful West got so powerful.
"Bribery" implies that the money offered was illegal or something. What specifically are you talking about, and why was it bribery and not simply part of the agreement?
"Persuasion" and "strong arming" do not seem all that compatible to me.
Which Zambian loans are you referring to?
How much oil were they getting before attacking and conquering it? How much of the money they are 'paying for it' is actually staying in Iraq and not going to US companies?
Apparently you can't elaborate. All you can do is ask me to provide you with information. So not only can't you explain your vague comments, but you're ignorant about the situation you're criticising in Iraq.
Why should anyone pay any attention to you?
What Obama said in Oregon makes sense and is essentially correct. In fact, "the rest of the world" has already been exerting pressure on Americans to consume less resources for a few years. India, China and other nations are coming into their own, and as their economies develop their need for natural resources -- oil being foremost -- is precipitating a long-term trend toward higher prices for those resources. While I'm not going to sound any Malthusian alarm bells, I will say that we as a civilization have probably seen the end of "cheap oil" and "cheap meat".
Obama said the world won't let us drive our SUVs forever, and we can see that in a sense that is true. Demand for oil in the developing world, and distillates in particular, has caused gas and diesel prices in the US to skyrocket. Peruse the business section of, say, the New York Times or CNN websites and you'll find all sorts of stories about people of all walks of life giving up their SUVs or driving them less. Ford is cutting back SUV production by something like 25%, and compact cars are selling like hotcakes while SUVs and pickups gather rust. The US no longer drives the market value of fuel commodities. In the past, whenever fuel costs went up in the US, the US economy would "cool" and cause fuel costs to fall again. But now? Fuel costs are in the stratosphere and still rising in the US even as US consumption goes down and the US economy heads into a probable recession. The cause of this curious phenomenon is easy to ascertain: WORLD WIDE, demand is still high and getting higher. Obama is right.
Rising diesel costs are causing food prices to ramp up in the US across the board, and greater demand for meat in countries once too penniless to buy much of it is going to compel Americans to consume less of it in years to come. The realities of globalisation, capitalist supply and demand, and sheer population pressures that cannot be any longer denied are coming home to roost in the US heartland, and ordinary Americans are going to have to adjust to these new realities. The world doesn't have the resources to permit everyone to live like an American, and now it no longer has enough to go around to even permit Americans to live like Americans.
The solution is not to blame the Chinese or Indians, or retreat into isolationism, or initiate another criminal invasion of a sovereign nation to plunder its resources. The solutions are many: increase international cooperation efforts to tackle problems that affect all of humanity, institute serious energy conservation programs, commit to large-scale investment in renewable energy sources (solar and wind power in particular), and so on.
Originally posted by PinkFloydWhat a dumbass. He forgot to mention airco. And refrigerators as big as wardrobes. Tsssk. The guy really doesn't have a clue.
Man, this guy must WANT a Republican in the White House! He's said some boneheaded things, but that quote out of Oregon today? That sealed it. He announced that the rest of the world was not going to just "keep saying it's okay" for us (Americans) to drive our SUV's, eat all we want, and keep our thermostats set at 72 all the time.
1. Just who does ...[text shortened]... effete elitist in this jerk. Once again, the party "of the people" has feet of clay.