murra
-
Posts
2,677 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by murra
-
-
Welcome back murra. How do you feel about the oil spill now?
Boy, was I wrong.
-
Also, I nominate "imagination" as the most ridiculous category ever.
Don't get me wrong here, I understand that people need a PhD in history to conclude that James Polk is the 17th most imaginitive president of all-time.
Presidential power-rankings ftw.
-
FDR ranks first in overall accomplishments
I love how fillmore wasn't on the bottom 5 list in '82, '90, '94... then he's the unanimous worst president of all-time in 2002. Must have had a bad year.
He's swiftly recovered of course, since in 2010 he's again not on the worst list. Moving on up.
-
big game
-
Interesting point there. When Lynch played in the probowl, something people forget when they want to trade him for some bubble gum and a 5th round pick, he actually led the AFC in yards per carry. Why? He had good offensive linemen to run behind for once. Lynch was also the RB called on when the AFC had to make a fourth down conversion. There was footage of the AFC coach whoever it was saying get me Lynch and tell him he better make it. Of course Lynch did.
All of our RBs have talents. Yes, that includes Lynch for all the haters. When Lynch has a hole he is devastating. Unfortunately our line rarely ever opens one
Did you just use the probowl to explain why someone was a good player?
-
Apparently you missed a lot my friend. This has been well documented for a while now.
Apparently you miss a lot, as well.
-
Mark Kelso, commentator
Really man?
-
oh nfl, you classy classy cat.
-
Conner.
Also, justnzane. Anyone who has the balls to link to their lower-than-low budget bills pregame youtube videos, including hours of footage of themselves stuttering, and still come back and post more is alright in my book. That takes the type of courage and honor that many of us simply do not have.
-
Pat LaFontaine.
-
Dale Hawerchuck is on the list.
-
-
On another note, anytime you see a Tim Graham article on the bills, the odds are good that he ripped it straight from a twobillsdrive thread.
-
Yeah, I know how to use the "search" function. Thanks though Genius.
Look here...find this article for me...
http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...Bpaul+posluszny
Again...Nice, try...Thanks again!
Actually this exact topic was discussed at great length, genius:
http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...mp;hl=Posluszny
-
Sarah Palin's kids. Wow that took me a long time to come up with that.
Wow Booster, you're such a troll man. Tool of the month material. Or just plain clueless of course.
-
Get this right. You're tool of the month for accusing me of bashing Bush for Katrina when as I quoted, I defended Bush for Katrina.
You're clueless for thinking dumping a few million gallons of oil into the gulf is no big deal.
And calling you a troll was giving you the benefit of the doubt about the tool and clueless labels.
So take your pick. If you're smart, you should go with troll.
I wasn't trolling at all, I believe the stuff I've said...except for me saying that you blamed bush for katrina, that was an educated guess, and I got that one wrong.
-
Murra, everyone made the points I might have made. In all seriousness, we aren't acting like a bunch of "environmentalist whackos" (a term it seems you may be familiar with) as most of us are more concerned with the economy. Sure, I am upset with the damage to the environment, but my main concern is what will this do to the economies of Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida, and ultimately the US.
My question to you is, are you trolling or simply clueless?
I don't think I've been that outrageous in this thread to warrant the "tool of the month" (although wouldn't the guy who monthly awards such an achievement be the real tool of the month/year/decade?), or troll, or clueless titles at all. I have seen much wilder claims throughout these boards than questioning the legitimacy of the predicted job loss, and certainly the projected ecological damage.
When 60,000 jobs are lost in louisiana directly because of this I will rescind my previous statements.
Until then, I have equal weight in this conversation since everyone's accusations are exaggerated and hypothetical. I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if this truly effects our economy, until then I have no clue why you guys are acting like you've won some sort of argument when there are still no facts on the table to support such a claim.
I don't think I've been that outrageous in this thread to warrant the "tool of the month" (although wouldn't the guy who monthly awards such an achievement be the real tool of the month?), or troll, or clueless at all. I have seen much wilder claims throughout these boards than simply questioning the legitimacy of the predicted job loss, and certainly the projected ecological damage.
-
I edited your post. Maybe you get the point.
That it's not apocalyptic at all, because its happened plenty of times throughout history, despite what CNN tells you?
And if you're so hung up on this being America's fault, why are you not bashing Obama the way you bashed Bush for Katrina (a NATURAL DISASTER)? Clearly this is being managed worse, right?
-
Big deal. Doesn't affect me.
/murra
Please explain how these affected your life:
1. Kuwait - 1991 - 520 million gallons
Iraqi forces opened the valves of several oil tankers in order to slow the invasion of American troops. The oil slick was four inches thick and covered 4000 square miles of ocean.
2. Mexico - 1980 - 100 million gallons
An accident in an oil well caused an explosion which then caused the well to collapse. The well remained open, spilling 30,000 gallons a day into the ocean for a full year.
3. Trinidad and Tobago - 1979 - 90 million
During a tropical storm off the coast of Trinidad and Tobago, a Greek oil tanker collided with another ship, and lost nearly its entire cargo.
4. Russia - 1994 - 84 million gallons
A broken pipeline in Russia leaked for eight months before it was noticed and repaired.
5. Persian Gulf - 1983 - 80 million gallons
A tanker collided with a drilling platform which, eventually, collapsed into the sea. The well continued to spill oil into the ocean for seven months before it was repaired.
6. South Africa - 1983 - 79 million gallons
A tanker cought fire and was abandoned before sinking 25 miles off the coast of Saldanha Bay.
7. France - 1978 - 69 million gallons
A tanker's rudder was broken in a severe storm, despite several ships responding to its distress call, the ship ran aground and broke in two. It's entire payload was dumped into the English Channel.
8. Angola - 1991 - more than 51 million gallons
The tanker expolded, exact quantity of spill unknown
9. Italy - 1991 - 45 million gallons
The tanker exploded and sank off the coast of Italy and continued leaking it's oil into the ocean for 12 years.
10. Odyssey Oil Spill - 1988 - 40 million gallons
700 nautical miles off the cost of Nova Scotia.
(THIS IS ONLY THE TOP TEN)
-
Oh, thanks
Oh, you're welcome
-
Yeah, I'm thinking that impeachment is a less than remote possibility. Obama could rob a bank and still not get impeached.
Was there deeper meaning to that statement?
-
Of course, what I just typed was an unnecessarily long way of saying:
It's largely about regulations, taxes and control.But you retorted that with the same thing, so I thought if I repeated it back maybe you'd understand better.
-
I don't begrudge the issue being political, I'm wondering why it's so distinctly partisan.
What's happening physically with the climate has pretty much no relation whatsoever to social or economic convervatism or liberalism...and yet everybody seems to have aligned themselves based on their political identities.
Many liberals have themselves convinced the world is being destroyed. Many conservatives have themselves convinced the entire global warming theory is completely bunk. The truth is likely between these two ridiculous extremes, but hey, we all have to pick a side right?
Again, the politicization is rooted deeper than picking a side. There is political theory as to why conservatism* or liberalism aligns itself. There is no direct relation within the ideologies as to what's happening physically within the climate. There is however a strong correlation of beliefs between money and spending, and political identities.
Why would it be considered strictly and absurdly partisan for a conservative, someone who almost always says no to unnecessary spending, to be applaud and against the plan to stockpile funds and allocate them towards trying to do something as outlandish as changing the weather. Of course it digs deeper. It now has become a government regulation issue. Why would that conservative agree to allow the government to restrict the rights of business output based on what has yet to be concretely proven. Then it comes down to restricting chemical outputs and then taxing companies that go over their limited annual amount.
Those three issues are on the other end of the argument, and you're only looking at, "Many conservatives have themselves convinced the entire global warming theory is completely bunk."
Its painfully deeper than that.
-
No, it should be about regulations, taxes and control. What it is, is a giant partisan pissing contest.
You said that already.
Every issue is political, I can't believe you're trying to make an exception out of global warming.
Governator cuts CA State Workers to minimum wage
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
but why would you celebrate his cutting the salaries of working people in half because the government can't get it's act together?