SOFTLAW, removed by the "BIG O" as Softy calls........

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from GreenPartyCelt. Show GreenPartyCelt's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

    ABSOLUTELY NO hard feelings on my end!  I like Enchilada.  I don't even blame him or anyone else for ignoring the vile socio-political stuff by Stiffy, as I often try to simply ignore it myself.  Sometimes I just can't let it go, as it makes me sick to have Stiffy represent my party.  Also, having a gay brother, & having done my time in an evengelical church, I can't help tweaking the narrow minded.  I never really get mad, I just love shoving it up some guys arsssses.  Stiffy certainly likes that metaphor :)

    As for the coming thaw, & with it BASEBALL?????   I haven't been this excited for the Sox in years!  I pray for a scrappy team with a lot to prove!  A chip on their shoulders, wanting to show us all what they can do as a team!  Thank God the Bobby V. nightmare is over & we've got a manager I think these guys will rally behind.  Pitching will still be #1 & with Dempster & Ferrell, I like our chances.  Plenty of raw talent, with coaching to keep them on track. 

    It's gonna be a fun year!  I can feel it!!!!   :)

    p.s.  sorry if I come off as a bit too much sometimes!  I generally tend to use hyperbole for effect.



    You don't at all dog...You iz a very reasonable dude.....

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    Nuclear energy...I wonder what the anti-windmill people would think of that?  Personally, I like it...nuclear waste and all.

    Is not France run mostly on nuclear?

    I disagree with many people here, but refuse to get into a name-calling contest.

    Softy may be disagreeable to many, but he certainly isn't stupid.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to ampoule's comment:

    Nuclear energy...I wonder what the anti-windmill people would think of that?  Personally, I like it...nuclear waste and all.

    Is not France run mostly on nuclear?

    I disagree with many people here, but refuse to get into a name-calling contest.

    Softy may be disagreeable to many, but he certainly isn't stupid.




    Oh yeh you son of a bi...

     

    Ooooops!  Caught myself.

    How's it going in the berg Amp???   Cold & rainy as usual.  We gotta get out of this place, if it's the last thing we ever do....

    Some day I shall shake the berg & head back to my beloved Boston & Cape Cod!   Until then, it's a pretty good place to raise my kids.  GOD I miss being able to kick all things Sox, Bruins, Celtics, Patriots, political around with people who actually know something!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to ampoule's comment:

    Nuclear energy...I wonder what the anti-windmill people would think of that?  Personally, I like it...nuclear waste and all.

    Is not France run mostly on nuclear?

    I disagree with many people here, but refuse to get into a name-calling contest.

    Softy may be disagreeable to many, but he certainly isn't stupid.



    He repeats his statements like a parrot (like the posts he's still making about 'Wastefield' and Moonslav's proposed contract offer to him).  He refuses to debate reasonably with anyone who disagrees with him.  There are different kinds of stupid.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to ampoule's comment:

     

    Nuclear energy...I wonder what the anti-windmill people would think of that?  Personally, I like it...nuclear waste and all.

    Is not France run mostly on nuclear?

    I disagree with many people here, but refuse to get into a name-calling contest.

    Softy may be disagreeable to many, but he certainly isn't stupid.

     



    "DISAGREEABLE" HAS TO BE THE EUPHEMISM OF THE CENTURY when discussing the relative merits of the soft one :)  LOL    Come on now Amp, you can't BS a BS artist.  :)

     

    "DISAGREEABLE?"

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    I have one or 2 posters here I simply found it impossible to ignore... I have certainly targeted them. I must admit I have that flaw

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheExaminer. Show TheExaminer's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    Softy IS The Big O. Bill hasnt figured it out yet......

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

     

    To further answer your question, I have never and would never report someone for insulting me directly....I can take it.  Also, if black people, or gay people, or anyone chooses to use such language to address each other, it's up to them.  But not in my house, not in front of my daughters, not in my workplace, etc.   And it's against the rules here and I'm not willing to enable it.  You are.  To each his own.

     



    I don't enable anything. I barely respond or approve to anything softlaw writes that is not something I agree with. You never see me use words that anymore extreme then "moron" or "dumb-azz"..... I keep it clean otherwise.

    You target Bill pretty heavily ..... 

    Again I glaze right over every post softlaw makes that is in poor judgment or taste. When he is on his game and schooling people on baseball I enjoy his posts immensely. I do not seek him gone.



    Edmund Burke would disagree with you:  "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to LR3683paw's comment:

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

     

    Rich liberals & conservatives with beautiful places on the beaches of the Cape didn't need the nefarious oil companies to manifulate them.  In fact, most folks who simply love spending time on the cape didn't need much manifulation.  It was a cost benefit analysis for most.  The cost of the eye sore outweighed the benefit.  I do love to tweak the Libs who tout green unless they have to see it "in their back yards" though.  LOL

    If we are going to do green, taking advantage of renewables, it should be done by the government with ZERO cost to the taxpayers, as we already have to subsidize it's high cost.  There should be no competitive motive, as it is already a joke with respec to being a cost efficient alternative.  As most green energy is.  I could go on in depth to explain, but I'd be wasting my time. 

    btw...  clean green?  Electric cars green?  Really?  How do we charge those batteries???

     




     

    The Prius charges its battery sometimes when coasting down hills, steep inclines, mountains.  It uses no fuel when at a stoplight.  Those attributes are indeed green.




    But manufacturing the batteries is not...

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:

    In response to LR3683paw's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

     

    Rich liberals & conservatives with beautiful places on the beaches of the Cape didn't need the nefarious oil companies to manifulate them.  In fact, most folks who simply love spending time on the cape didn't need much manifulation.  It was a cost benefit analysis for most.  The cost of the eye sore outweighed the benefit.  I do love to tweak the Libs who tout green unless they have to see it "in their back yards" though.  LOL

    If we are going to do green, taking advantage of renewables, it should be done by the government with ZERO cost to the taxpayers, as we already have to subsidize it's high cost.  There should be no competitive motive, as it is already a joke with respec to being a cost efficient alternative.  As most green energy is.  I could go on in depth to explain, but I'd be wasting my time. 

    btw...  clean green?  Electric cars green?  Really?  How do we charge those batteries???

     




     

    The Prius charges its battery sometimes when coasting down hills, steep inclines, mountains.  It uses no fuel when at a stoplight.  Those attributes are indeed green.

     




    But manufacturing the batteries is not...

     



    ...and some electricity is created from coal-fired plants...

    However, electric cars are "greener" than gas guzzlers.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:

    In response to LR3683paw's comment:

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

    Rich liberals & conservatives with beautiful places on the beaches of the Cape didn't need the nefarious oil companies to manifulate them.  In fact, most folks who simply love spending time on the cape didn't need much manifulation.  It was a cost benefit analysis for most.  The cost of the eye sore outweighed the benefit.  I do love to tweak the Libs who tout green unless they have to see it "in their back yards" though.  LOL

    If we are going to do green, taking advantage of renewables, it should be done by the government with ZERO cost to the taxpayers, as we already have to subsidize it's high cost.  There should be no competitive motive, as it is already a joke with respec to being a cost efficient alternative.  As most green energy is.  I could go on in depth to explain, but I'd be wasting my time. 

    btw...  clean green?  Electric cars green?  Really?  How do we charge those batteries???

    The Prius charges its battery sometimes when coasting down hills, steep inclines, mountains.  It uses no fuel when at a stoplight.  Those attributes are indeed green.

    But manufacturing the batteries is not...



    ...and some electricity is created from coal-fired plants...

    However, electric cars are "greener" than gas guzzlers.




    BINGO Moon!  Somebody actually got the point, not to mention THEFOURB's.

    Approximately 40% of electricy comes from that horrific, disgusting, black, dirty, evil? coal.

    How "green" is it really?  I'm constantly amazed at the fact that most people equate electric cars with a virtual "zero carbon footprint," to steal a phrase from big Al.

    I don't have a problem with electric cars, just trying to inject a little bit of reality into the discussion.

    So, if we're gonna go electric, I hope the president supports the expanded exploration and mining of coal, as we are the Saudi Arabia of coal in the world.  Why has he villified coal mining in his first term?  I assume we are going to get all that electricity somewhere???  Perhaps all those super ifficient wind mill farms & solar panel farms???  IDTS!

    :)

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

     

    In response to ampoule's comment:

     

    Nuclear energy...I wonder what the anti-windmill people would think of that?  Personally, I like it...nuclear waste and all.

    Is not France run mostly on nuclear?

    I disagree with many people here, but refuse to get into a name-calling contest.

    Softy may be disagreeable to many, but he certainly isn't stupid.

     




     

    Oh yeh you son of a bi...

     

    Ooooops!  Caught myself.

    How's it going in the berg Amp???   Cold & rainy as usual.  We gotta get out of this place, if it's the last thing we ever do....

    Some day I shall shake the berg & head back to my beloved Boston & Cape Cod!   Until then, it's a pretty good place to raise my kids.  GOD I miss being able to kick all things Sox, Bruins, Celtics, Patriots, political around with people who actually know something!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

     




     

    What??  WE gotta get out of this place?  You live here?????

    OOPS.....my wife just said it may be Beattle lyrics...

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to LR3683paw's comment:

    Well then, are you for wind power and solar power for energy?  If you agree then we don't need to conflict and debate that. It would be great to find SOMETHING that we all agree upon.



    As I said earlier, I have no problem with them, but they should compete on a level playing field in the energy market.  As it is, we subsidize a high percentage as taxpayers, & municipalities are forced to buy x percentage of mind & solar. 

    I really don't even have a big problem with that, but if the president actually wants to see this country's economy take off, a la North Dakota, he should champion ALL DOMESTIC sources of energy.  I simply advocate us having a GROWN UP energy policy, especially in the midst of the greatest RECESSION in U.S. history. 

    Time to elect some grown ups.  The greatest injustice to Americans is allowing millions to slide further into the lower classes of our economy, with no prospect of a decent paying job.  The feceral gov. is not the answer, it's the problem!  Get out of our way.  I hear all this talk of green this & green that, but when you look into just how green these folks your talking to are, you only need to watch them drive off in their big Lexus SUV, Hummer, or ........  Cut the sh  i   t!

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to ampoule's comment:

     

    Nuclear energy...I wonder what the anti-windmill people would think of that?  Personally, I like it...nuclear waste and all.

    Is not France run mostly on nuclear?

    I disagree with many people here, but refuse to get into a name-calling contest.

    Softy may be disagreeable to many, but he certainly isn't stupid.

     



    He repeats his statements like a parrot (like the posts he's still making about 'Wastefield' and Moonslav's proposed contract offer to him).  He refuses to debate reasonably with anyone who disagrees with him.  There are different kinds of stupid.

     




    Good point...the repitition even irritates me.  You're right....time for the flip side.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to LR3683paw's comment:

    Natural Gas from domestic sources is a solution, so is solar and wind power power, so are more efficient cars.  Nothing wrong with that and I applaud the legislators who are in favor of that. Sadly, the two parties can't agree on such a simple solution. Another solution is to use our vast coal resources without polluting the air for millions of people downwind. Aren't the Republicans always the Party that cared not about the sh-it down river or the air downwind? Why is that? Why is one party so concerned about stock dividends for those companies that want to pollute our water and air in order to maximize profits? How moral is that?




    You can demagogue the issue all you want, & I can explain my point more slowly if it helps.

    I'm not going to get into the partisan politics of it.  It's so easy, & intellectually lazy to pretend it's just the evil Republicans who want to pollute the world while maximizing profits.  I simply argue that we don't live in a vacuum, & that our environmental standards are the best in the world, given the industry. 

    As I clearly said, WE NEED RELATIVELY CHEAP ENERGY to compete in the world economy!  PERIOD!  Unless we want to slip to a second world nation economically.  Given this necessity, we need to capitalize on the DOMESTIC SOURCES available.  If we don't exploit the domestic sources we have, other countries certainly will, and do so in a far less environmentally sound way.  We sould still continue to produce green energy! 

    I only argue that far too many are unwilling to talk about an energy policy as grown ups in the REAL WORLD.  The world where energy needs are soaring, & supply is dominated in the dirtiest parts of the world.  We can do it better & cleaner.  We can set the market with domestic energy & lead our way out of this horrible Recession. 

    So let's not keep driving our huge SUV's around at the same time we argue "not in our back yard," oblivious to the fact that we get the energy somewhere.  Where?  The filthy middle east (which is still a part of our environment last I heard), & protect that source through endless wars.  I thought we hated pollution and WAR?  OR do we simply hate pollution in our country?  Are you still driving that car?  Buying those products that help pollute the world?  Cut the s h i t!

    Save the demagoguery & listen to a grown up argument.

     

    Don't want to hear it???  Grow up & don't come to this rediculous thread.  Of course it's absurd.  Get over yourself.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to LR3683paw's comment:

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

     

    In response to LR3683paw's comment:

     

    Natural Gas from domestic sources is a solution, so is solar and wind power power, so are more efficient cars.  Nothing wrong with that and I applaud the legislators who are in favor of that. Sadly, the two parties can't agree on such a simple solution. Another solution is to use our vast coal resources without polluting the air for millions of people downwind. Aren't the Republicans always the Party that cared not about the sh-it down river or the air downwind? Why is that? Why is one party so concerned about stock dividends for those companies that want to pollute our water and air in order to maximize profits? How moral is that?

     




     

    You can demagogue the issue all you want, & I can explain my point more slowly if it helps.

    I'm not going to get into the partisan politics of it.  It's so easy, & intellectually lazy to pretend it's just the evil Republicans who want to pollute the world while maximizing profits.  I simply argue that we don't live in a vacuum, & that our environmental standards are the best in the world, given the industry. 

    As I clearly said, WE NEED RELATIVELY CHEAP ENERGY to compete in the world economy!  PERIOD!  Unless we want to slip to a second world nation economically.  Given this necessity, we need to capitalize on the DOMESTIC SOURCES available.  If we don't exploit the domestic sources we have, other countries certainly will, and do so in a far less environmentally sound way.  We sould still continue to produce green energy! 

    I only argue that far too many are unwilling to talk about an energy policy as grown ups in the REAL WORLD.  The world where energy needs are soaring, & supply is dominated in the dirtiest parts of the world.  We can do it better & cleaner.  We can set the market with domestic energy & lead our way out of this horrible Recession. 

    So let's not keep driving our huge SUV's around at the same time we argue "not in our back yard," oblivious to the fact that we get the energy somewhere.  Where?  The filthy middle east (which is still a part of our environment last I heard), & protect that source through endless wars.  I thought we hated pollution and WAR?  OR do we simply hate pollution in our country?  Are you still driving that car?  Buying those products that help pollute the world?  Cut the s h i t!

    Save the demagoguery & listen to a grown up argument.

     

    Don't want to hear it???  Grow up & don't come to this rediculous thread.  Of course it's absurd.  Get over yourself.

     




     

    I agree with your strategy so I don't know why you are being so hostile towards me. I want clean energy, solar , natural gas,  wind, safe nuclear, tides power, and more efficient cars, LED lighting, and many other energy smart solutions. I don't come here for conflict like many do.  Most Americans want us to be self sufficient and not be dependent on Middle East oil which we created two wars over. We need to harness the wind and solar power. Everone should agree with that - even a five year old kid knows that.




    Sorry!  It was more a general rant against narrow minded partisan thinking.  Not you specifically!  Just going off a little :)

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    It sort of drives me crazy, the people who constantly come to these ridiculous none Red Sox / baseball threads & berate the idiots who are bored & want to argue about something.  I fully admit being one of those morons who likes a decent socio-political debate.  I wish it could be done without the rancor, but that would probably take away some of the fun.  I know, I know!  I'm a little sick that way, but to me it's all in good fun.  Even when I occasionally lose it.  Just the way I grew up.  Irish Catholic. Boston...   Let it fly.  Get down & dirty for a bit, & 2 minutes later you really couldn't give a s hit.  I never take it personally, though I get that some really do.  The exception? Stiffy & co.  They truly are morons.

    Anyway.....  No offense intended.  I could be completely full of s hit.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    ...and some electricity is created from coal-fired plants...

    However, electric cars are "greener" than gas guzzlers.

     




    BINGO Moon!  Somebody actually got the point, not to mention THEFOURB's.

     

    Approximately 40% of electricy comes from that horrific, disgusting, black, dirty, evil? coal.

    How "green" is it really?  I'm constantly amazed at the fact that most people equate electric cars with a virtual "zero carbon footprint," to steal a phrase from big Al.

    I don't have a problem with electric cars, just trying to inject a little bit of reality into the discussion.

    They are still better than gas/oil cars, but they are hardly "zero carbon footprint" vehicles. 

    So, if we're gonna go electric, I hope the president supports the expanded exploration and mining of coal, as we are the Saudi Arabia of coal in the world.  Why has he villified coal mining in his first term? 

    It's dirty.

    I assume we are going to get all that electricity somewhere??? 

    "Nuculer"?? ( as GW called it)

    Perhaps all those super ifficient wind mill farms & solar panel farms???  IDTS!

    :)

    In theory, maybe future electricity will be created in a cleaner way, but right now, it is not very clean. However, it is hard to imagine anyway will be invented to burn gas and oil cleanly, so electric does seem "greener" going forward, but not by as much as many feel it is.

    I'm going to buy some land in the foothills of the Rockies and wait until it becomes prime beachfront property. I'm gonna make a killin'! Wanna join me the venture?

     



    LOL...  Right behind ya :)

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to LR3683paw's comment:

    I remember a few years back in this forum when the majority here said that the climate wasn't warming and that polar caps were not receding and that the oceans were not rising and getting warmer. It matters not what caused it, that is academic. The problem is that something has to be done about it. Why in the he-ll is it a political issue/




    Stupid ideas like Cap & Trade, which would put the U.S. at a further disadvantage competing in a global.....  global marketplace.....

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    Or how 'bout them "carbon credits."

    Analogous to the glutinous paying thin people to go on a diet for them.  At least they feel like they're doing something to help fight obesity.....   It's all about "feeling" you've done something to make a change.  Or at least make guys like Al Gore get rich quick, while living in a 30,000 sq. foot mansion, all while whining about "carbon footprints."  PLEASE!   :)   Ya gotta love his b alls!

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    I like the trading carbon credit scheme. It is like saying "okay we have not polluted a lot so we will sell our credits to you (thus ensuring pollution is continued) to another company for a profit."

     

    Either way the actual pollution is not curbed

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

    Or how 'bout them "carbon credits."

    Analogous to the glutinous paying thin people to go on a diet for them.  At least they feel like they're doing something to help fight obesity.....   It's all about "feeling" you've done something to make a change.  Or at least make guys like Al Gore get rich quick, while living in a 30,000 sq. foot mansion, all while whining about "carbon footprints."  PLEASE!   :)   Ya gotta love his b alls!




    Lake Oswego?

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: SOFTLAW, removed by the

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I'm going to buy some land in the foothills of the Rockies and wait until it becomes prime beachfront property. I'm gonna make a killin'! Wanna join me the venture?

     



    Not a bad punt.  About a quarter of Denmark's electricity is from wind turbines, and they plan to raise that to 50% by 2020....and Danish plans actually tend to happen.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share