BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Nerd
Date: 22 Sep 04 - 09:45 PM

bb,

It is YOU who fail to read MY posts. On 16 Sep 04 - 04:41 PM, I linked to a press release from the BATF, and several pieces of legislation from the US and Canada that specifically refer to the existence of semi-automatic Military Assault Weapons. Your lame-ass quote from a dubious web site notwithstanding, our Federal government, several US State governments, and the Canadian government all recognize this as a real category of weapon.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: artbrooks
Date: 22 Sep 04 - 08:35 PM

And the quote is taken from this impartial site: GunCite.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Sep 04 - 07:00 PM

Nerd, since you can't seem to read my posts, I will have to repeat this one:

21 Sep 04 - 02:44 AM

ASSAULT RIFLE FACT SHEET #1
                        DEFINITIONS AND BACKGROUND


          Recent discussions of so-called "assault rifles" in both the
    media and legislative arenas have seen imprecise usage of the
    terms used to describe such firearms. This fact sheet is designed
    to improve the technical accuracy of future discussions.

    ASSAULT RIFLE: This term was coined during World War II. It is a
                   translation of the German "Sturmgewehr." Two key
                   characteristics that identify "assault rifles" are
                   full automatic fire and detachable magazines with
                   a capacity of 20 or more cartridges. These weapons
                   were designed to produce roughly aimed bursts of
                   full automatic fire. While some assault rifles
                   offer an option of semiautomatic fire (i.e.,
                   single-shot), all true assault rifles fire at
                   least fully automatic.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Nerd
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 12:46 PM

No, BB, it doesn't work like that. The army considered the M-14 a semi-automatic weapon, the BATF an automatic one. I don't know why we have to take the BATF's word. The interpretation of law is decided in court, not by law enforcement agencies.

In any case, in the time you've been away we've moved off the M-14 as a specific weapon and moved on to semi-automatic military assault weapons, which you said did not exist. (Well, not exactly. You said military assault weapons were automatic, and that therefore Kerry lied when he claimed that there were semi-automatic ones).

But as I demonstrated, the very BATF whose word you accept as gospel says that they DO exist. So the BATF supports MY position, not yours.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 09:52 AM

What a silly comparison:

Kerry's single comment on gun (which it has taken dozens of postings with cut-n-pastings to dissect, with no clear concensus that I can see) are the same as the Bush Administrations myriad strident assertions that Saddam had many ready-to-use W's of MD?

BB, you do, in fact, take the cake.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: sledge
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 08:30 AM

Surely bb since you started this thread with the accusation of a deliberate lie, then the onus of proof is more upon you than anyone else who has posted.

Really interested in what you can give us on this subject, and please not more deflections or complaints about liberals.


Sledge

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 07:56 AM

"You still have to prove it was a lie, a deliberate mistruth, nothing you have spouted off has shown it to be so, so what do we have a but a never ending dribble... "



And NO ONE has proved the same about the WMD- So I expect all of you liberals will stop bothering the rest of us about the war in Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 05:22 AM

Bearded Bruce

Yeah right, to hell with things like the economy, employment and education, lets make sure all candidates know the most trivial details about every gun ever made on the planet, that should impress the electorate.

You still have to prove it was a lie, a deliberate mistruth, nothing you have spouted off has shown it to be so, so what do we have a but a never ending dribble of hair splitting irrelavance over one weapon that was issued into, and withdrawn from military service decades ago.

YAWN, i shall now take advantage of the beardedbruce effect,

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 03:26 AM

Bobert:


"But if he actually doesn't make an effort to keep up with facts then, while he may not be lieing, he certainly is not qualified to lead the world's remaininf super power."


SO, this does not apply to Kerry? Or do you insist on a double standard?

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 02:54 AM

btw, Nerd-

The BATF is in charge of ENFORCING the law- If they say the M14 is "automatic", it is. End of arguement. No appeal.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 02:44 AM

ASSAULT RIFLE FACT SHEET #1
                        DEFINITIONS AND BACKGROUND


          Recent discussions of so-called "assault rifles" in both the
    media and legislative arenas have seen imprecise usage of the
    terms used to describe such firearms. This fact sheet is designed
    to improve the technical accuracy of future discussions.

    ASSAULT RIFLE: This term was coined during World War II. It is a
                   translation of the German "Sturmgewehr." Two key
                   characteristics that identify "assault rifles" are
                   full automatic fire and detachable magazines with
                   a capacity of 20 or more cartridges. These weapons
                   were designed to produce roughly aimed bursts of
                   full automatic fire. While some assault rifles
                   offer an option of semiautomatic fire (i.e.,
                   single-shot), all true assault rifles fire at
                   least fully automatic.

site



A fully automatic weapon (a machine gun) is one that fires a succession of bullets so long as the trigger is depressed or until the ammunition supply is exhausted. In addition, any weapon that shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot automatically, more than one shot at a time by a single trigger pull, is legally considered to be a machine gun.



It has been unlawful since 1934 (The National Firearms Act) for civilians to own machine guns without special permission from the U.S. Treasury Department. Machine guns are subject to a $200 tax every time their ownership changes from one federally registered owner to another, and each new weapon is subject to a manufacturing tax when it is made, and it must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) in its National Firearms Registry.

To become a registered owner, a complete FBI background investigation is conducted, checking for any criminal history or tendencies toward violence, and an application must be submitted to the BATF including two sets of fingerprints, a recent photo, a sworn affidavit that transfer of the NFA firearm is of "reasonable necessity," and that sale to and possession of the weapon by the applicant "would be consistent with public safety." The application form also requires the signature of a chief law enforcement officer with jurisdiction in the applicant's residence.

Since the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of May 19, 1986, ownership of newly manufactured machine guns has been prohibited to civilians. Machine guns which were manufactured prior to the Act's passage are regulated under the National Firearms Act, but those manufactured after the ban cannot ordinarily be sold to or owned by civilians.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Sep 04 - 06:19 PM

Nerd:

I did not change the subject, I was not on Mudcat to respond...

The M14 has been classified as a fully automatic weapone, and thus was banned for private ownership without special permits long before the "Assult Weapons Ban" ditto the AKS. The M1A and SKS are the semi-automatic versions, which in SOME configurations were covered by the ban. Bot proponents and opponents of the ban agree that it was ineffectual.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: GUEST,no
Date: 19 Sep 04 - 06:03 AM

all i care about is when someone i love lies to me. that is the only lie that matters.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 19 Sep 04 - 03:41 AM

The first thought that occurred to me - not having read the thread closely all the way thru was "Six Feet Under".

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 19 Sep 04 - 03:18 AM

All Politicians lie, it's a fact of life. Kerry's no different to any other. Just a case of whether his lies, or someone elses, suit or offend your own agenda.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Nerd
Date: 18 Sep 04 - 11:34 PM

I notice bb also changed the subject as to whether Kerry actually lied, or whether there WERE such things as semi-automatic military assault weapons, as everyone on God's green earth except he seems to accept, even the gun lobby.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 18 Sep 04 - 09:42 PM

You're welcome.

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: pdq
Date: 18 Sep 04 - 08:42 PM

I didn't know such sensitive people came from the Idaho panhandle! I'll be real nice from now on. And yes: thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 18 Sep 04 - 08:29 PM

Gee, I went to all that trouble to document my statements for pdq, and what happens? He changes the subject. I'm hurt.

Can't you say thanks, p?

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Peace
Date: 18 Sep 04 - 07:15 PM

Anyone looking for more stuff please google

bush, lies

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Peace
Date: 18 Sep 04 - 07:12 PM

SATURDAY SNEAK...BUSH LIES...Trailers Of Mass Destruction, Part Two..."You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons....They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two.* And we'll find more weapons as time goes on, But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them." (italics ours) --WP, "Bush: 'We Found' Banned Weapons. President Cites Trailers in Iraq as Proof, " May 31, 2003

*At the time of this statement, no such weapons were found, and no such weapons have been found to this day. On this point as well as the use of the captured trailers as biolabs, the WP said this in the above article: "U.S. authorities have to date made no claim of a confirmed finding of an actual nuclear, biological or chemical weapon. In the interview, Bush said weapons had been found, but in elaborating, he mentioned only the trailers, which the CIA has concluded were likely used for production of biological weapons." There was no statement of fact, there was no smoking gun. The CIA's finding was advanced as an opinion based on its own particular process of elimination, and it was immediately challenged by both U.S. and U.K. intelligence analysts who had seen the trailers. --Politex, 08.09.03 (italics ours)

Now comes this..."Engineering experts from the Defense Intelligence Agency have come to believe that the most likely use for two mysterious trailers found in Iraq was to produce hydrogen for weather balloons rather than to make biological weapons, government officials say.

The classified findings by a majority of the engineering experts differ from the view put forward in a white paper made public on May 28 by the C.I.A. and the Defense Intelligence Agency, which said that the trailers were ["likely used"] for making biological weapons....

The State Department's intelligence branch, which was not invited to take part in the initial review, disputed the findings in a memorandum on June 2. The fact that American and British intelligence analysts with direct access to the evidence were disputing the claims included in the C.I.A. white paper was first reported in June, along with the analysts' concern that the evaluation of the mobile units had been marred by a rush to judgment." --NYT, 08.09.03



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons."
—Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, at a hearing of the Senate's appropriations subcommittee on defense, May 14, 2003

"We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."
—Vice President Dick Cheney on NBC's Meet the Press, March 16, 2003

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: pdq
Date: 18 Sep 04 - 06:54 PM

ANOTHER DAY AT THE KERRY CAMPAIGN:

"...the shotgun that John Kerry was waving around yesterday to show what a friend he is to hunters was one that he tried to have banned:

Kerry co-sponsored S. 1431 last year (The Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003) which would have banned a "semiautomatic shotgun that has a pistol grip."?

Whoops!

Update: The new Kerry rapid response team says that this is a Republican lie: The facts are clear. John Kerry opposes banning this gun and always will. John Kerry was proud to receive this union-made gun at the United Mine Workers Labor Day picnic in Racine, West Virginia.

Meanwhile, gun law expert Dave Koppel says, According to the bill, "(42) PISTOL GRIP- The term 'pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip." Kerry's new semi-automatic gun has a protrusion below the stock, which a person could grip. The protrusion is not a "pistol grip" in the ordinary meaning of the term, but it is a "pistol grip" as defined by S. 1431.

Hmmm. Koppel reads the bill that Kerry co-sponsored and concludes that it would have banned the gun. The Kerry campaign just asserts that he didn't without giving any facts or referring to the bill at all. This new rapid-response Kerry is excellent -- for the the Bush campaign. Let's talk about guns for a couple of days. Maybe we can argue about the NRA's rating of Bush and Kerry next. Hunter Kerry should want that, no? As the Kerry release says, John Kerry's opponents are worried because he's the first Democratic candidate to support Second Amendment gun rights and to be an avid hunter. Hey, bring it on!"


IF DEMOCRATS HAVE TO EAT CROW EVERYTIME ONE OPENS HIS MOUTH, THE CROW WILL WIND UP ON THE ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST!

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 18 Sep 04 - 12:07 AM

All right, I thought I was quoting Bush but I may have been paraphrasing. In the State of the Union Address 2003 he said

" I have sent you Clear Skies legislation that mandates a 70-percent cut in air pollution from power plants over the next 15 years. (Applause.)"

But according to

http://www.savethecleanairact.org/misc/DoingtheMathfinal.pdf

"The Bush Administration Air Pollution Plan
Doing the Math: More Pollution than the Clean Air Act

"Administration spokesmen claim their plan for power plant air pollution would reduce emissions by 35 million tons more than the current Clean Air Act over the next decade. In fact, just the opposite is true: Enforcing the Clean Air Act would deliver far more pollution reduction. Over the next 10 years, the administration plan actually would result in 21 million tons more of the pollution that causes soot and smog than simply enforcing the current law. And the burden of extra pollution only grows over time.
"What accounts for this huge discrepancy? The secret is in the White House yardstick.
"The administration is comparing its so-called Clear Skies plan to a misleading 'baseline' that expressly assumes the administration does not enforce the Clean Air Act."EPA's top air official calls this the 'the Rip Van Winkle scenario.'The Rip Van Winkle scenario includes only the pollution limits that are already on the EPA books (certain sulfur dioxide reductions already required by the 1990 acid rain program and nitrogen oxide cuts ordered in 19972) and expressly assumes that EPA does nothing more for a decade.
"But the Clean Air Act requires much more than that. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to bring our cities and counties into compliance with basic public health standards for soot and smog pollution before the end of this decade..." and so on.

Read the document and do the math, like it says.

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 05:52 PM

well dang,it's nice to see someone in here acknowling that kerry lies to!...but heck,kerry doesnt even care when he lies!!!!!!so,what's the point?

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Peace
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 04:28 PM

"Does anyone care when Kerry lies?"

I would think so. However, it seems he hasn't so far. When he does--well, we'll get on him real fast.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Nerd
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 04:23 PM

By the way, pdq, your attempts to break the world down into categories so that you can discredit other people's arguments are poorly conceived. Anecdotal and factual are not mutually exclusive categories, despite what you seem to think. Claims can be factual and also based on anecdotal evidence.

Also, statements can be politically driven and also factual.

You yourself have provided no evidence at all, just a bunch of assertions.

Or should I say

Fact: Claims can be factual and also based on anecdotal evidence.

Fact: Claims can be factual and also made for political reasons.

Fact: pdq has provided a series of assertions without evidence.

Fact: pdq has followed those assertions by casting aspersions on others' evidence.

Fact: Nerd has read many books...possibly too many!

Fact: Nerd knows many facts...almost certainly too many!

Opinion: this is an obnoxious way to carry on a conversation.

I'm swallowing that chill pill right now, pdq :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: DougR
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 04:18 PM

Apparently not, beardedbruce. Democrats are always held to a lower standard on the Mudcat, bb, if you haven't discovered that yet.

It's like Dan Rather said on a Bill O'Reilly program two days before 9/11,: O'Reilly asked him if he thought Bill Clinton was an honest person. Dan replied, "yes." O'Reilly pressed, "Even thought he lied about having sex with that woman?"

Rather replied that he thought completely honest people might lie about a variety of things, or words to that effect.

No need to point out that Clinton is a Democrat, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 02:49 PM

"Your statement is 100% anecdotal, 0% factual..." well, I'll trust someone who is there on the front lines ....soory I can't sit you down with him for a couple hours of eye opening horror stories, but..."No need arguing with people with closed minds.".......So I see..

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: pdq
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 02:15 PM

Nerd:

Read a book. You might get a few facts that way.

Take a chill pill.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Nerd
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 02:10 PM

No, PDQ, it is you who are confusing ME with Clint Keller, claiming that I said something about Clear Skies. But let's just see if I was confused.

This is from you

Clint Keller:

Most of the Enviromental statements you (=we) see on the internet fall into one of two categories:

1) Factual - based on science and intended to help the public understand a problem.

2) Politically-driven - these sites will always come to the conclusion: that pollution is due to the "fact" that people elected those dern Republicans again. That is the reason every problem in the world exists.

If you only visit politically-driven web sites you will always get answers that are fecal in substance. To use some of your words, if you "do not know chickenshit from chicken salad" on a given subject, you will never recognize that you are being fooled.

Now, the sites Clint had cited were CNN and the Inquirer plus the Sierra Club, and you accused him of "only visit[ing] politically-driven web sites."

Thus, you were claiming that CNN and the Inky were politically driven, not factually based. This makes you (more or less) full of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Nerd
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 02:05 PM

PDQ thinks that if he precedes wild ramblings with the shouted word "FACT" it will bully us into accepting them.

Talk about politically motivated, PDQ!

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: pdq
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 02:05 PM

Nerd:

You are confusing my posts with those of Clint Keller.

You claim that "...YOU said that the Philadelpia Inquirer and CNN were purely politically motivated". Not true. Read posts in that time frame to confirm.

Clint Keller put words in Presidents Bush's mouth and deserves to be called on it.

Environmentalism is one topic were facts can rule the discussion assuming that people are interested in facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: pdq
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 01:54 PM

Bill D. -

Your statement is 100% anecdotal, 0% factual. No need arguing with people with closed minds.

Fact - Clinton changed environmental standards as part of his 7,000+ pages of "executive orders" that were inflicted on us in the last 24 hrs. of his EIGHT YEARS ( = 70,000+ hours) in office. Many of those standards, such as arsenic in water, were not obtainable without huge and impractical investments in new technology. Those regulations were almost all politically driven, with Environmentalists planing stories about deformed babies and "poor and elderly targeted".

Fact - when all was said and done, the 8 years of Reagan resulted in the most ACTUAL progress in environmental cleanup of any presidency. This proves that the job can get done even if the chief executive is not an expert when he takes office.

Fact - the Northeastern "rust belt" needs to have slight (to moderate) reductions in standards to protect tens of thousands of jobs (many    union) in the manufacturing industries. This will hopefully allow newer, modern factories to be built. The old factories are not being updated      due to punitive TAX levels and ARBITRARY and pollution standards.

Fact - the greatest environmental disaster in the history of the United States was the addition of MTBE to our gasoline. There were at east 10 choices for an addative, and almost everyone thought that it would be ethanol. Carol Browner, Clinton's EPA chief, chose MTBE, even thought the chemical had already polluted many areas in the country. Once a aquifer is polluted by MTBE, which is water soluble, it is poisoned forever.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Nerd
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 01:23 PM

Or how about this one, PDQ

I LOVE BUSH>>>Nerd criticized Bush>>>I MUST ACCUSE NERD OF SAYING THINGS HE NEVER SAID IN ORDER TO SMEAR HIM!!!!

That seems about your style too.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Nerd
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 01:20 PM

Actually, PDQ, I never said anything about pollution standards, nor did I accuse Bush of lying about them.

But YOU said that the Philadelpia Inquirer and CNN were purely politically motivated. I guess your logic must have been

I LOVE BUSH>>The Philadelphia Inquirer and CNN criticized Bush>>THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER AND CNN ARE LYING!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 12:40 PM

pdq...I, personally, know someone VERY high up in the E.P.A. I recently asked him, "so, how's it going...doing any protecting of the environment these days?"

his answer..."Nope..." he then explained that HE, a 30 year employee, and director of a major area, had been given to understand that his 'input' on problems that needed to be addressed was not required. Decisions about environmental policy were being made 'elsewhere' and his job was to oversee their implementation and rubber-stamp the paper. This fellow sat thru the Reagan administration, where Ronnie's minions dismantled programs that had taken years to create....but he says now "I have never seen anything like it in my 30 years" (direct quote"

The Bush administration has almost totally reduced the EPA's mission to implementing policies that fulfill POLITICAL and economic agendas of the Republicans, and environmental concerns be damned!

(I, myself, worked briefly for EPA in the days of William Ruckleshaus, and have met him, and although he was a Republican, HE sincerely wanted progress on pollution and such....there is no evidence there is much beyond lip service to that ideal any longer.)

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Peace
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 12:40 PM

The new low in pollution standards has been established by the Bush administration. They have polluted virtually everything they've touched.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Amos
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 12:35 PM

Bush wants to change some pollution standards

PDQ,

your use of the word "logic" is excessive. If Bush wants to change pollution standards, you can be assured it is to lower them (meaning worsen the pollution rates).

A

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: pdq
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 12:02 PM

Nerd - here is your typical logical sequence:

I HATE BUSH! > Bush wants to change some pollution standards > BUSH IS LYING!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Nerd
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 11:52 AM

Yes, politically driven websites like the Philadelphia Inquirer and CNN! You know, Clint, if you're not looking at Fox News it CAN'T be accurate.

That's a laugh, pdq.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 12:22 AM

Well, I let myself get suckered into a nit-picking argument again. I never learn.

Look at it this way:

1. When I say Bush lied it's shorthand for "people in Bush's administration, including Bush, lied."

2. I care about his lies because they've hurt people, physically and economically.

3. Kerry's turn will come.

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 10:49 PM

pdq

Well, ten states thought Clear Skies was a bad idea almost immediately. 20% of the states in the union thought it was bad enough to sue. Or do you think the Philadelphia Enquirer lied?

And are you telling me Bush's revision does not relax the emission standards?

There are a lot of politically-driven web sites, and so is Mr Bush politically driven.

But show me some fact-driven statistics; I can be convinced.

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Nerd
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 10:39 PM

Touche, beardedbruce. I don't know much about automatic weapons.

BUT, The BATF, the Canadian Government, the states of California and Minnesota, and even the pro-gun lobby that runs Firearms Central, recognize the existence of semi-automatic military assault weapons, which you are claiming don't exist. Should I trust you or them?

Hmm, tough choice...NOT!

Also, artbrooks sounds like he knows more about the M14 than you.

So...prove that "Military assult rifles, since the mid 1940's, have been automatic weapons." You've made that claim. I see no evidence for it, and plenty of evidence against it.

Your entire case that Kerry is a liar is based on it. So far, you've convinced no one!

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: pdq
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 08:28 PM

Clint Keller:

Most of the Enviromental statements you (=we) see on the internet fall into one of two categories:

1) Factual - based on science and intended to help the public understand a problem.

2) Politically-driven - these sites will always come to the conclusion: that pollution is due to the "fact" that people elected those dern Republicans again. That is the reason every problem in the world exists.

If you only visit politically-driven web sites you will always get answers that are fecal in substance. To use some of your words, if you "do not know chickenshit from chicken salad" on a given subject, you will never recognize that you are being fooled.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 07:58 PM

I wasn't clear; I should have said Bush's Clear Skies modification of the Clean Air Act.

you can check CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/04/22/churches.bush/

and the Philadelphia Inquirer

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/5091437.htm?1c

which says: "Nine states, including New Jersey, filed suit immediately after the Bush administration's new source review rules were issued Dec. 31. Pennsylvania is pursuing a similar, but separate, lawsuit."

and

"The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection last week sued the federal government over new regulations that would relax industrial pollution standards. Let's hope this action heralds an era of aggressive and sustained attention to federal mischief that could endanger Pennsylvanians' health.

The Bush administration's "new source review" rules make it easier for aging factories, mills, refineries and coal-fired power plants to expand or modernize without upgrading pollution controls. They take effect March 3 and apply to 800 industrial facilities in Pennsylvania and 17,000 nationwide.

The new standards are so loose that emissions of soot and smog are likely to increase, causing asthma attacks and respiratory disease. Eighty percent of Pennsylvanians already live where air is deemed "unsafe to breathe" by the American Lung Association. The new rules could further spoil air quality - and Pennsylvania would have no recourse against polluters outside its borders."

and there's this, from the Sierra Club -- but you can find it lots of other places if you're an anti-environmentalist

"Mercury is a dangerous toxin that threatens people and wildlife as a pollutant from coal-fired power plants. The EPA estimates that enforcement of existing toxic air pollution protections in the Clean Air Act will limit mercury pollution to 5 tons per year by 2008. The Bush Administration's plan weakens the limit to 26 tons per year by 2010 – allowing 520 percent more mercury pollution. A new EPA report discusses the ways pregnant women pass mercury on to their babies, causing mental retardation, but why did the Administration sit on the report for more than nine months and only release it after journalists exposed their findings?"

My computer's sickly & I've got to go, but I can find you more stuff later, if you doubt me.

•pdq: All I said was that the Bush proposal put more pollution (that's pollution in addition to the MTBE) in the air, and that he said this would give us clean air. He misled us about what his administration was doing.

I made my accusation once, but had to repeat it four times to get a reply. I didn't get an answer, however. I am not an expert on air pollution, but, like LBJ, I do know chickenshit from chicken salad.

*His words did not match his administration's action.* That's my point, not the relative merits of MTBE, mercury and soot.

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Peace
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 07:32 PM

bruce,

That was not meant to be an 'insulting' or 'tongue-in-cheek' question. I figger you're way too smart to vote for Bush; you don't seem to care for Kerry; so . . . .

BM

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Peace
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 07:26 PM

So, uh, BB, who ya gonna vote for?

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 07:24 PM

"HERE there is a definite bias. "
well, if you mean YOU are outnumbered by clear thinking people who are not taken in by the conservative agenda, I guess I gotta agree...*grin*

I always assumed 'bias' was having your mind made up before you entered the discussion, then streching arguments to fit. That's not what I generally have seen here in my 8 years....but, maybe I'm biased?

I consider myself to be a reasonable man whose 'agenda' is not being pushed into corners by those with agendas FOR pushing...and I will tell you frankly, I see the current Republican administration as going beyond 'pushing' and into 'herding' and 'intimidating' and VERY close to threatening. I did not see that degree of pressure in, for example, the Ford administration, but I saw it beginning in the Reagan administration. I saw smatterings of it in the Bush #1 era, but I never felt like he, personally, was much more than a basic conservative....I did not agree with him on many things, but I sort of trusted him to be doing what he 'thought' was best for the country at large. I do not feel that now.......

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 07:16 PM

Is it just me or does anybody really care whether the M-14 was automatic or semi-automatic or non-automatic? This forum has turned into a bunch of alter kakhers discussing the merits of a weapon that has no business of being in an American home.

Subject: RE: BS: Does anyone care when Kerry lies?
From: pdq
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 07:15 PM

Clint Keller:

If you can explain what benefits we received from MTBE in our gasoline (thanks, Carol Browner) or why it was chosen over ethanol, you will have some credibility in the air pollution game. If not, we do not need to hear your anti-Bush accusation more the the four times you have aleready made made it.