Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:15 PM
 
1,728 posts, read 1,770,692 times
Reputation: 893

Advertisements

[SIZE=5]Cnote11[/SIZE][SIZE=5][/SIZE]
Senior Member
befriend
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia
564 posts, read 85,814 times
Reputation: 163



Quote:
Originally Posted by nutnfancy
Nope, you show a photo of some banana republic or Asian country and a photo of some occupy gathering and you want to say they are the same? Are you eating paint chips?

That is actually Miami. Look at the architecture! The Cubans have taken over!



Dont think so


And Miami is on of the cleanest cities in the country, air and water are top notch in comparison. Litter in the state of FL and you get a 1500.00 fine shoved up your arse
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:16 PM
 
Location: Pearland
799 posts, read 2,432,675 times
Reputation: 695
I bet Al Gore's plane pollutes more than my Camry.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:18 PM
 
Location: Dublin, CA
3,807 posts, read 4,257,349 times
Reputation: 3984
I thought it was the liberal mantra of I can do anything I want too. Its none of your business. And my civil rights to live my life the way I want too, without government involvement. So, If I want to drive a gas guzzling SUV, turn my AC on to 60 degs, not recycle, and leave the largest carbon footprint I can, in my life time, is that not MY right to do so?

Who are you or anyone else to tell me what I do is wrong?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:20 PM
 
Location: Pearland
799 posts, read 2,432,675 times
Reputation: 695
Quote:
Originally Posted by pantin23 View Post

Very common Pollution from conservative deregulation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cnote11 View Post
That is actually Miami. Look at the architecture! The Cubans have taken over!



That is a pic of India, but nice try.

Plastic pollution underestimated, say scientists - CSMonitor.com
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:20 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
1,166 posts, read 1,508,231 times
Reputation: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by KS_Referee View Post
How is it the wrong thread? Did YOU not title this thread, "Do conservatives willfully pollute and destroy the planet?"

I know I didn't make my comments to someone who was being polite and maybe deserved an ounce of respect. No, I made my comments to someone acting like a condescending jerk. You can try to blame it on studies, you can try to blame it on, he said, she said. The fact is YOU use studies and comments to attack people with whom you politically disagree on a regular basis.
Did you fail to read within the thread where I "condescendingly" "degraded" liberal environmentalists? I'm sorry that you feel the word "Conservative" is derogatory. I'm merely reporting what the study said, albeit in an admittedly more forward manner. If the study is true, then it is true regardless of what my political affiliation is. This has nothing to do with my political bias, as I'm not even an ardent environmentalist. It is rather poor form to take a small sample size and try to make a judgement purely off of that. After all, you don't know my political views. I'm sorry that you've happened to be very angry because of the results of a study that I did not undertake, nor did I manipulate the data to say anything. I'm merely reporting a study that claims information that happens to "attack" you. It isn't ME doing the attacking. If I posted a study claiming that religious people have lower IQs or liberals are more likely to be emotional, impulsive, and PC, that surely isn't me CLAIMING any of those things, nor is it me attacking religious people or liberals. REPORTING does not mean that I am claiming what is being reported.

I do not wish to have conflict, so please take this at my word and settle down.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:21 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
1,166 posts, read 1,508,231 times
Reputation: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by boner View Post
[SIZE=5]Cnote11[/SIZE][SIZE=5][/SIZE]
Senior Member
befriend
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia
564 posts, read 85,814 times
Reputation: 163



Quote:
Originally Posted by nutnfancy
Nope, you show a photo of some banana republic or Asian country and a photo of some occupy gathering and you want to say they are the same? Are you eating paint chips?

That is actually Miami. Look at the architecture! The Cubans have taken over!



Dont think so


And Miami is on of the cleanest cities in the country, air and water are top notch in comparison. Litter in the state of FL and you get a 1500.00 fine shoved up your arse
Sarcasm, dear boner; sarcasm!

Similarly to mtgmike.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:32 PM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
3,038 posts, read 2,505,373 times
Reputation: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by pantin23 View Post
Rarely common Pollution from liberal protests


Very common Pollution from conservative deregulation
Picture of India? They are heavily regulated. Look at the laws they have passed concerning water:

1882 - The Easement Act allows private rights to use a resource that is, groundwater, by viewing it as an attachment to the land. It also states that all surface water belongs to the state and is a state property

1897 - The Indian Fisheries Act establishes two sets of penal offences whereby the government can sue any person who uses dynamite or other explosive substance in any way (whether coastal or inland) with intent to catch or destroy any fish or poisonous fish in order to kill.

1956 - The River Boards Act enables the states to enroll the central government in setting up an Advisory River Board to resolve issues in inter-state cooperation.

1970 - The Merchant Shipping Act aims to deal with waste arising from ships along the coastal areas within a specified radius.

1974 - The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act establishes an institutional structure for preventing and abating water pollution. It establishes standards for water quality and effluent. Polluting industries must seek permission to discharge waste into effluent bodies.
The CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board) was constituted under this act.

1977 - The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act provides for the levy and collection of cess or fees on water consuming industries and local authorities.

1978 - The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Rules contains the standard definitions and indicate the kind of and location of meters that every consumer of water is required to affix.

1991 - The Coastal Regulation Zone Notification puts regulations on various activities, including construction, are regulated. It gives some protection to the backwaters and estuaries.

Maybe they should deregulate. Things can't possibly be worse than the picture you used to prove deregulation is a failure in a regulated area. lols.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:38 PM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
3,038 posts, read 2,505,373 times
Reputation: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cnote11 View Post
Did you fail to read within the thread where I "condescendingly" "degraded" liberal environmentalists? I'm sorry that you feel the word "Conservative" is derogatory. I'm merely reporting what the study said, albeit in an admittedly more forward manner. If the study is true, then it is true regardless of what my political affiliation is. This has nothing to do with my political bias, as I'm not even an ardent environmentalist. It is rather poor form to take a small sample size and try to make a judgement purely off of that. After all, you don't know my political views. I'm sorry that you've happened to be very angry because of the results of a study that I did not undertake, nor did I manipulate the data to say anything. I'm merely reporting a study that claims information that happens to "attack" you. It isn't ME doing the attacking. If I posted a study claiming that religious people have lower IQs or liberals are more likely to be emotional, impulsive, and PC, that surely isn't me CLAIMING any of those things, nor is it me attacking religious people or liberals. REPORTING does not mean that I am claiming what is being reported.

I do not wish to have conflict, so please take this at my word and settle down.
If there were any truth to what you claim in this post the thread title (your choice) would not be:

Do conservatives willfully pollute and destroy the planet?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:38 PM
 
Location: Planet earth
3,617 posts, read 1,810,206 times
Reputation: 1258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cnote11 View Post
Did you fail to read within the thread where I "condescendingly" "degraded" liberal environmentalists? I'm sorry that you feel the word "Conservative" is derogatory. I'm merely reporting what the study said, albeit in an admittedly more forward manner. If the study is true, then it is true regardless of what my political affiliation is. This has nothing to do with my political bias, as I'm not even an ardent environmentalist. It is rather poor form to take a small sample size and try to make a judgement purely off of that. After all, you don't know my political views. I'm sorry that you've happened to be very angry because of the results of a study that I did not undertake, nor did I manipulate the data to say anything. I'm merely reporting a study that claims information that happens to "attack" you. It isn't ME doing the attacking. If I posted a study claiming that religious people have lower IQs or liberals are more likely to be emotional, impulsive, and PC, that surely isn't me CLAIMING any of those things, nor is it me attacking religious people or liberals. REPORTING does not mean that I am claiming what is being reported.

I do not wish to have conflict, so please take this at my word and settle down.

All one has to do is scan back over your lengthy list of posts. Get bent.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:40 PM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
3,038 posts, read 2,505,373 times
Reputation: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil306 View Post
I thought it was the liberal mantra of I can do anything I want too. Its none of your business. And my civil rights to live my life the way I want too, without government involvement. So, If I want to drive a gas guzzling SUV, turn my AC on to 60 degs, not recycle, and leave the largest carbon footprint I can, in my life time, is that not MY right to do so?

Who are you or anyone else to tell me what I do is wrong?
That only applies to abortion.

Look at how they view the world. "Keep the government out of my bedroom"

Next breath. "I demand government sanction my gay wedding"

lols. They are morons.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top