[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

I have a different theory on why your head hurts.

I don't want my children being forced to watch an inconvenient truth, when the person responsible for the video is ethically bankrupt. Its a bad message to send to our children.

I have to side with Moncton, this is pretty dumb.

There are all sorts of ethically bankrupt people that have produced important cultural work. I don't see the point in trying to shelter your kids from all of these sorts of pieces, whether you are talking about Michael Jackson (if you believe he molested those kids), watching Tiger Woods, or any of the other examples provided. I believe it is better to let kids decide these sorts of things for themselves and to try to indoctrinate as little as possible.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

I don't want my children being forced to watch an inconvenient truth, when the person responsible for the video is ethically bankrupt. Its a bad message to send to our children.

Right.

Just as long as you ban them from doing any of those other things that have been pointed out. Just so, you know... you don't become a hypocrite.

greg

[BadKosh]

And a sleaze bucket!

Sex complaint against Gore is detailed, credible | Washington Examiner

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Right.

Just as long as you ban them from doing any of those other things that have been pointed out. Just so, you know... you don't become a hypocrite.

greg

Pay attention - I didn't say I wanted the movie banned. But i certainly don't want them forced to watch it in school. Perhaps, you know, it could be my decision as a parent how and when to subject them to the teachings of several of Al Gore's inconvenient truths.

It isn't your, or any school's, place to decide how and when my kids will be subjected to controversial and biased content - especially featuring a morally bankrupt sexual deviant. With this said, the school should avoid controversial issues like the plague - and address them in a way that best lets parents make parenting decisions.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Pay attention - I didn't say I wanted the movie banned. But i certainly don't want them forced to watch it in school. Perhaps, you know, it could be my decision as a parent how and when to subject them to the teachings of several of Al Gore's inconvenient truths.

It isn't your, or any school's, place to decide how and when my kids will be subjected to controversial and biased content - especially featuring a morally bankrupt sexual deviant. With this said, the school should avoid controversial issues like the plague - and address them in a way that best lets parents make parenting decisions.

The problem with that is that there are some parents that will take issue with *everything*, literally. Halloween type things = blasphemy, anything featuring or involving somebody gay = the same, there was somebody in here that thought that the movie Wall-E was controversial, etc.

At some point I think you just have to let the kids think for themselves and decide what is right *for them*. All the teacher needs to do is explain that not everybody agrees with an Inconvenient Truth, and challenge the kids to decide for themselves... They have to be pushed to be adults at some point, might as well start early. I've come across waaayyyyy to many helicopter moms and extremely sheltered kids even at the college level. It's pretty sickening, if you ask me.

[Snow-i]

Indeed, besson, but its not the school's place to be the arbiter of good vs bad parenting - its the parents. That is the price of a free society. Anything other than that is not a free society.

[besson3c]

Snow-i: I'd love your participation in this spin off thread: http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...l/#post3986904

Another thing that could be added to the list that some parents no doubt take issue with is sex ed (when, how, extent, etc.). Pleasing all parents is a tough thing to do!

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Indeed, besson, but its not the school's place to be the arbiter of good vs bad parenting - its the parents. That is the price of a free society. Anything other than that is not a free society.

Okay, but I don't think that really answers my question. Exactly what should the schools do in light of the fact that every parent has their own political, religious, moral, sexual, etc. beliefs? I'm looking for something a little more tangible rather than broad and philosophical.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

I don't want my children being forced to watch an inconvenient truth

Go on - you know you want to.
When they've been brainwashed they'll come home and start whining to you about green issues. And come weekend the following conversation will occur:

Sprog: Daddy, can you take me to the cinema to see Inane 3D Crap please?
You: No.
Sprog: Daddy! Why not?
You: Because driving hurts the planet.

A while later...

Sprog: Daddy, can I have the latest Inane, Crappy 3D Wii Game please?
You: No. The manufacture of those games hurts the planet. Go find some twigs from the garden and play with those instead.

...Annnnnd that's how you make a right-winger for life. Simply follow the teachings of your sprog's brainwashers to the letter.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Okay, but I don't think that really answers my question. Exactly what should the schools do in light of the fact that every parent has their own political, religious, moral, sexual, etc. beliefs? I'm looking for something a little more tangible rather than broad and philosophical.

Ummm. How about teaching them important stuff. Like how to read and write. Or how to add up.

Do schools need to teach politics, religion or sexuality? No.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Ummm. How about teaching them important stuff. Like how to read and write. Or how to add up.

Do schools need to teach politics, religion or sexuality? No.

So, how do they approach these subjects which are intertwined with just about everything? If some kid comes into school with a Harry Potter lunchbox and some parent complains on religious grounds, how is this handled?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

So, how do they approach these subjects which are intertwined with just about everything? If some kid comes into school with a Harry Potter lunchbox and some parent complains on religious grounds, how is this handled?

Said parent should be visited by Jack Bauer and given an enema with bong water.

[Snow-i]

They don't approach them bess, they back away from them as best they can and make it clear exactly what their role is, and perhaps even provide information to parents on where they can go for impartial information on how to tackle such issues with their children.

And bess, we're talking about what the schools teach. Your example has nothing to do with what the schools are teaching. Thats an administrative task and unrelated to what I'm saying.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

And a sleaze bucket!

Sex complaint against Gore is detailed, credible | Washington Examiner

As credible as the Climategate controversy. Or the ACORN pimp controversy. Or the Shirley Sherrod controversy.

All trumped up controversies to discredit a person or organization.

To conservatives, facts don't matter.

[Snow-i]

And to you, neither does sexual harrassment. As long as there's a (D) at the end of their name, they have free reign, right?

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

To conservatives, facts don't matter.

The Left is FULL of liars and sloppy 'news readers' who as an example repeated the false Limbaugh-NFL quote for FOUR DAYS without ANY of the liberal leaning news dolts ever checking facts. After 4 days the typical un-read liberal and moderate stooges just NEW limbaugh had said the words. When it came time to put up or shut up, one by one from Maddow to Matthews and the like had to eat their words or get sued by Limbaugh.

Lack of facts and lack of ethics.

Your own idiot president didn't have the facts when he came to the defense of his radical college professor buddy. That lost him some credibility. He hadn't read the AZ immigration bill before spouting off either. Perhaps you need to better understand facts.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

The Left is FULL of liars and sloppy 'news readers' who as an example repeated the false Limbaugh-NFL quote for FOUR DAYS without ANY of the liberal leaning news dolts ever checking facts. After 4 days the typical un-read liberal and moderate stooges just NEW limbaugh had said the words. When it came time to put up or shut up, one by one from Maddow to Matthews and the like had to eat their words or get sued by Limbaugh.

Lack of facts and lack of ethics.

Your own idiot president didn't have the facts when he came to the defense of his radical college professor buddy. That lost him some credibility. He hadn't read the AZ immigration bill before spouting off either. Perhaps you need to better understand facts.

Be it far from me to defend hyteckit, but this is just hilarious.

Hilarious.

Hilarious!

Great stuff, thou reeking hypocrite.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

And to you, neither does sexual harrassment. As long as there's a (D) at the end of their name, they have free reign, right?

And to you, you believe in fake sexual harassment stories even after it has been proven false as long as there's a (D) at the of their name.

[Snow-i]

I'm sorry, i missed the headline...where and by whom was it proven false? Was it an IPCC consensus?

[sek929]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

The Left is FULL of liars and sloppy 'news readers' who as an example repeated the false Limbaugh-NFL quote for FOUR DAYS without ANY of the liberal leaning news dolts ever checking facts. After 4 days the typical un-read liberal and moderate stooges just NEW limbaugh had said the words. When it came time to put up or shut up, one by one from Maddow to Matthews and the like had to eat their words or get sued by Limbaugh.

Lack of facts and lack of ethics.

Why the flying f**k are you arguing about the ethics of entertainers? Limbaugh, Maddow, Beck, Matthews, are all entertainers and consistently spew out opinions as fact. Why you think one side is championing truth while the other is nothing but slick hucksters concerns me greatly.

When Limbaugh starts to catch heat the conservatives defend his show by saying he is an entertainer. When the Lib talking heads do the same damn thing all of a sudden they are lacking ethics.

I'd like to see, at least, a one percent level of reduction in your astronomical hypocrisy.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

I'm sorry, i missed the headline...where and by whom was it proven false? Was it an IPCC consensus?

Wait, wait, wait.....guilty until proven innocent is our new system now? When did that happen?

I'll take this opportunity to accuse Dakar of being a dog-rapist, prove it false or the statement stands!

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by sek929 

I'll take this opportunity to accuse Dakar of being a dog-rapist, prove it false or the statement stands!

Wait, when did this become the Glenn Beck show?

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Wait, wait, wait.....guilty until proven innocent is our new system now? When did that happen?

I'll take this opportunity to accuse Dakar of being a dog-rapist, prove it false or the statement stands!

Last I checked I didn't need a court of law to make character judgements or form opinions for me.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Last I checked I didn't need a court of law to make character judgements or form opinions for me.

You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

There is a difference between me saying you are an idiot and me saying you are a child molester.


You are just reaffirming what I've just said.

To certain conservatives like yourself, facts don't matter. Your opinion are your facts.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Seriously though, are those allegations going ahead to court or not? I'm too lazy to google

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

There is a difference between me saying you are an idiot and me saying you are a child molester.


You are just reaffirming what I've just said.

To certain conservatives like yourself, facts don't matter. Your opinion are your facts.

The problem with your 'response' is that your own logic sucks. You have no way of actually knowing all the facts, so that means your assuming too, and judging others. Getting crappy 'news' that you assume is fact is part of the problem. Garbage in, Gospel out...

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

The problem with your 'response' is that your own logic sucks. You have no way of actually knowing all the facts, so that means your assuming too, and judging others. Getting crappy 'news' that you assume is fact is part of the problem. Garbage in, Gospel out...

Haha...

I get it. Pres. Obama is a terror baby born in Kenya.

Those are your facts.

[BadKosh]

Since I never said such BS, I guess the problem is you and your inability to see facts and opinions and know the difference.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Since I never said such BS, I guess the problem is you and your inability to see facts and opinions and know the difference.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Last I checked I didn't need a court of law to make character judgements or form opinions for me.

How is saying Al Gore certainly harassed a woman a character judgement?

Since he is certainly faking MMGW, and certainly a Librul Dem, that must mean he harasses women!

I know where you can buy a slightly used jump-to-conclusions mat.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by sek929 

How is saying Al Gore certainly harassed a woman a character judgement?

Since he is certainly faking MMGW, and certainly a Librul Dem, that must mean he harasses women!

I know where you can buy a slightly used jump-to-conclusions mat.

Let me rephrase - what you just said didn't make a bit of sense as a response to my argument.

In the context of the discussion - I don't need a court of law to convict him for me to decide whether or not I want my young children subjected to his influence. There is enough doubt about his character and motivations in both his private and public life for me to have objections to his material being used to teach children. Leave it to higher-ed when the kids are informed enough to make their own decisions and to their parents before then.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Since I never said such BS, I guess the problem is you and your inability to see facts and opinions and know the difference.

You never said such thing?

http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...not-a-citizen/

http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...nt-anything/5/

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

You have to wonder why Obama stopped by Hawaii a few months back. Pay-offs? Political favors? Planting a fake birth certificate?

Talk about:

BadKosh - Convenient Liar - The Master of Hypocrisy

[Buckaroo]

CLIMATE CHANGE LIES ARE EXPOSED

A high-level inquiry into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found there was “little evidence” for its claims about global warming.
It also said the panel had emphasised the negative impacts of climate change and made “substantive findings” based on little proof.

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Climate change lies are exposed

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Ahhh, you post-and-run pussies never stop, do you.

Originally Posted by The Report

The Committee found that the IPCC assessment process has been successful overall. However, the world has changed considerably since the creation of the IPCC, with major advances in climate science, heated controversy on some climate-related issues, and an increased focus of governments on the impacts and potential responses to changing climate. A wide variety of interests have entered the climate discussion, leading to greater overall scrutiny and demands from stakeholders. The IPCC must continue to adapt to these changing conditions in order to continue serving society well in the future.

Having said that:

The committee’s report was informed by public meetings where presentations were made by IPCC and U.N. officials as well as experts with different perspectives of IPCC processes and procedures. The committee also gathered input from experts and groups via interviews and a widely circulated questionnaire that was posted on the web so the public could comment.

Waste of time.

[Buckaroo]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Ahhh, you post-and-run pussies never stop, do you.




Having said that:

Waste of time.

Darn it. I forgot to post my comments. I even had something written up ahead of time. I wrote it while at work and posted this when I got home. I'll find it and post it. I'm sorry.

[Warren Pease]

Originally Posted by Buckaroo 

Darn it. I forgot to post my comments. I even had something written up ahead of time. I wrote it while at work and posted this when I got home. I'll find it and post it. I'm sorry.

Was it these thoughts? http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...2/#post3927484

Because if there is anything new in this article, I'm not seeing it.

Well, they did mention messing up the 90-250 MILLION range (which should be 75-220 MILLION), because, you know with estimations, being off by a couple million in terms of hundreds of millions is so very damning.

[BadKosh]

Some other paragraphs that say something different.
============================================
The panel was forced to admit its key claim in support of global warming was lifted from a 1999 magazine article. The report was based on an interview with a little-known Indian scientist who has since said his views were “speculation” and not backed by research.

Independent climate scientist Peter Taylor said last night: “The IPCC’s credibility has been deeply dented and something has to be done. It can’t just be a matter of adjusting the practices. They have got to look at what are the consequences of having got it wrong in terms of what the public think is going on. Admitting that it needs to reform means something has gone wrong and they really do need to look at the science.”

[Warren Pease]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Some other paragraphs that say something different.
============================================
The panel was forced to admit its key claim in support of global warming was lifted from a 1999 magazine article. The report was based on an interview with a little-known Indian scientist who has since said his views were “speculation” and not backed by research.

It's telling that the author, and people here presumably, believe that the crux of the global warming argument rests entirely on this one claim, in one paragraph of a several hundred page document.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Independent climate scientist Peter Taylor

Perhaps some credentials might be useful?

said last night: “The IPCC’s credibility has been deeply dented and something has to be done.

Credibility is damaged. Check.

It can’t just be a matter of adjusting the practices. They have got to look at what are the consequences of having got it wrong in terms of what the public think is going on.

"...have got it wrong in terms of what the public think is going on."

So...they're educating the public in the wrong way. Check.

Admitting that it needs to reform means something has gone wrong and they really do need to look at the science.”

*...silence...*

...what? This conclusion makes zero - zero! - sense. How does reform of the IPCC mean that the science has problems? How does what the public thinks is going on mean that they need to look at the science?

Great stuff.

greg

[BadKosh]

And another believer in AlGores BS...

James Lee, the crazed environmentalist that took hostages at Discovery Channel's Maryland headquarters only to be shot and killed by police Wednesday, was "awakened" by Nobel Laureate Al Gore's schlockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth."


Of course, this has been mentioned a few places already.

[sek929]

Did Gore ever call for the extinction of the human race to save the planet? Or are you talking out of your ass for the one millionth time?

I think I know the answer.

What's been mentioned elsewhere is that this guy is obviously a complete loony. In perfect form you took the opportunity to talk about you BFF Al Gore.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Did Gore ever call for the extinction of the human race to save the planet? Or are you talking out of your ass for the one millionth time?

I think I know the answer.

What's been mentioned elsewhere is that this guy is obviously a complete loony. In perfect form you took the opportunity to talk about you BFF Al Gore.

Ho hum....Wrong again. Sure the guys a loony. That he 'was awakened' by Gores film has been covered more than a few times today by the local (DC Area) news outlets. That he is a leftist, environmental wacko seems to fit with the rest of the GoreFans. Another non-intellectual leftist LOL!!! Birds of a Feather......

[sek929]

Same retarded argument as the Columbine shootings being caused by Doom 2 and Marilyn Manson.

Sample size of tens of millions of normal folks who experienced the same media and did not take hostages versus the couple of nutcases that would have went berserk no matter what subject matter they decided to let their twisted mind get set on.

As usual, you let common sense slip past your tenuous grasp of it in order to take an opportunity for more Gore bashing. You are, literally, the exact same type of person that called Bush a murderer, blood for oil, etc etc. You have no facts, no sense, and no logic....and a whole heaping helping of complete loudmouth shill.

[The Final Dakar]

Helter Skelter anyone?

[sek929]

Bingo, forgot about that one.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Another non-intellectual leftist LOL!!! Birds of a Feather......

More posterity

[sek929]

I think we should make a 'ridiculous BadKosh quotes' page-a-day calendar.

[besson3c]

BadKosh: how do you identify an intellectual? What makes an intellectual an intellectual? Is it possible to be an intellectual if they believe things that you disagree with?

[The Final Dakar]

I'd more interested if he thinks he's fairly objective.

[Buckaroo]

Now the truth is out. Global warming is a scam, all to destroy and steal from the US economy.





WikiLeaks cables reveal how US manipulated climate accord

A Greenpeace activist in a hot air ballon ahead of the current UN climate summit in Cancún. WikiLeaks cables expose US use of espionage before the 2009 Copenhagen summit. Photograph: Luis Perez/AFP/Getty Images

WikiLeaks cables reveal how US manipulated climate accord | Environment | The Guardian

Embassy dispatches show America used spying, threats and promises of aid to get support for Copenhagen accord