Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Breitbart.com)   When an organization exposes people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks, it's time to shutter that organization   (breitbart.com) divider line 284
    More: Ironic, EPA, organizations, pollution, Southern California  
•       •       •

2387 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Apr 2014 at 12:57 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



284 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-04-03 10:40:36 AM  
media.tumblr.com
 
2014-04-03 11:02:52 AM  
So Breitbart is finally going to shut down?
 
2014-04-03 11:09:49 AM  
But what was the size of the experimentees' bank accounts?  That will help me know how I should feel about this.
 
2014-04-03 11:19:56 AM  
And there goes every manufacturer in the country...

Way to go dead moran jobkiller.
 
2014-04-03 11:25:25 AM  
Goodbye, Department of Defense.  It was nice working for you.
 
2014-04-03 11:32:19 AM  
The GOP is finally closing up shop?  good for them.
 
2014-04-03 11:35:40 AM  
That kind of article and its comments are quite brain numbing.

They've managed to reach some sort of clueless nirvana, sort of Shangra-Duh.
 
2014-04-03 11:46:49 AM  
ManateeGag [TotalFark]

The GOP is finally closing up shop? good for them.

Liberal organization.
In a far left state.
In a left leaning university.

moon-bat reply: gop wahargarble!!!
 
2014-04-03 11:50:28 AM  

www.breitbart.com

LORD PARAMOUNT OF VAPE

 
2014-04-03 11:52:51 AM  
I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.
 
2014-04-03 11:53:19 AM  
So we can finally put big oil in mothballs for good, right?
 
2014-04-03 11:55:42 AM  

OnlyM3: ManateeGag [TotalFark]

The GOP is finally closing up shop? good for them.
Liberal organization.
In a far left state.
In a left leaning university.

moon-bat reply: gop wahargarble!!!


DNRTFA, I was making a joke.  Lighten up Frances.
 
2014-04-03 11:57:05 AM  

Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.


OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.
 
2014-04-03 12:00:15 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.


FTFY..
 
2014-04-03 12:01:50 PM  

Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..


Aw - defending corporations and attacking government - aren't you adorable.
 
2014-04-03 12:06:08 PM  

Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..


Okay. Let's suppose you're right that the EPA should be completely shut down for the argument stated in the headline. How does that argument not also apply to companies that willfully expose people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks?
 
2014-04-03 12:06:44 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..

Aw - defending corporations and attacking government - aren't you adorable.


Thanks for illustrating my point - you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the EPA failed to disclose health risks.  Instead you attack the people reporting the story, the oil and gas industry for fracking, and me for pointing out your absurdity.

This is why nobody takes you people seriously.
 
2014-04-03 12:07:08 PM  

Serious Black: Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..

Okay. Let's suppose you're right that the EPA should be completely shut down for the argument stated in the headline. How does that argument not also apply to companies that willfully expose people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks?


Because reasons, like such as, and furthermore
 
2014-04-03 12:07:26 PM  

OnlyM3: ManateeGag [TotalFark]

The GOP is finally closing up shop? good for them.
Liberal organization.
In a far left state.
In a left leaning university.

moon-bat reply: gop wahargarble!!!


cdn.breitbart.com
"I'm totally going to sleep with you."
 
2014-04-03 12:10:28 PM  

Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..

Aw - defending corporations and attacking government - aren't you adorable.

Thanks for illustrating my point - you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the EPA failed to disclose health risks.  Instead you attack the people reporting the story, the oil and gas industry for fracking, and me for pointing out your absurdity.

This is why nobody takes you people seriously.


What the EPA did was terrible. They should be held accountable. As should every other entity, public or private, that fails to disclose the potential danger of their activities. Happy?

Now can you admit there are lots of stories about this kind of thing coming from corporations that Breitbart and other right-leaning sites ignore in favor of attacking the government?
 
2014-04-03 12:10:46 PM  

Serious Black: Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..

Okay. Let's suppose you're right that the EPA should be completely shut down for the argument stated in the headline. How does that argument not also apply to companies that willfully expose people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks?


Uh.. just because I think the EPA should be held accountable for what it does to people doesn't mean I am making an argument for it to be shut down.

Where do you guys come up with your assumptions?
 
2014-04-03 12:11:07 PM  
Yeah, like a highly partisan site would say the same if the shoe was on the other foot
 
2014-04-03 12:21:52 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Serious Black: Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..

Okay. Let's suppose you're right that the EPA should be completely shut down for the argument stated in the headline. How does that argument not also apply to companies that willfully expose people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks?

Uh.. just because I think the EPA should be held accountable for what it does to people doesn't mean I am making an argument for it to be shut down.

Where do you guys come up with your assumptions?


That's what the headline says, that the EPA should be shut down. Regardless of that, the exact punishment is not important, so let me rephrase my question.

Let's suppose the EPA should be held accountable, whatever that entails, for willfully exposing people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks. How does that argument not also apply to companies that willfully expose people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks?
 
2014-04-03 12:30:01 PM  

Serious Black: Lucky LaRue: Serious Black: Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..

Okay. Let's suppose you're right that the EPA should be completely shut down for the argument stated in the headline. How does that argument not also apply to companies that willfully expose people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks?

Uh.. just because I think the EPA should be held accountable for what it does to people doesn't mean I am making an argument for it to be shut down.

Where do you guys come up with your assumptions?

That's what the headline says, that the EPA should be shut down. Regardless of that, the exact punishment is not important, so let me rephrase my question.

Let's suppose the EPA should be held accountable, whatever that entails, for willfully exposing people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks. How does that argument not also apply to companies that willfully expose people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks?


Again, you let your assumptions get in the way of a clear thought process.  It is possible to criticize the EPA and not be an evil, capitalist monster, you know.   If the teabaggers and herbal teabaggers alike would understand that the world is not the pure dichotomy of good and evil their echo chambers tell them it is, we'd all be a little better off.
 
2014-04-03 12:32:42 PM  
FTFA: "Strongly edited description"? = lies?
 
2014-04-03 12:43:34 PM  
Seriously?  Someone actually thought, "Hey, let's expose kids with asthma to diesel fumes and see what happens!" was a good idea?
 
2014-04-03 12:58:47 PM  
So are we finally shutting down the tobacco industry?
 
2014-04-03 01:02:14 PM  
I don't believe they thought this argument through.
 
2014-04-03 01:03:26 PM  
the epa is a liberal organization??
 
2014-04-03 01:05:14 PM  

Serious Black: Okay. Let's suppose you're right that the EPA should be completely shut down for the argument stated in the headline. How does that argument not also apply to companies that willfully expose people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks?


If it were me who did it to my neighbor then I'd be prosecuted and be held liable for the cleanup.  

I guess I'd prosecute the officers of the company that exposed the population to toxic pollutants and hold the shareholders liable for the cleanup.
 
2014-04-03 01:05:55 PM  
We export every single job to the 3rd world except human guinee pig.... you just cannot explain that.
 
2014-04-03 01:06:48 PM  

timujin: Seriously?  Someone actually thought, "Hey, let's expose kids with asthma to diesel fumes and see what happens!" was a good idea?


Well, the problem is, apparently, there are people who think that regulating diesel fumes without doing such experiments is also beyond the pale.  See, the idea is that, these very dangerous fumes that the EPA exposed people to, in order to determine if more regulation was needed, should not occur, and, those very same diesel fumes, which are so dangerous, should not be regulated, because freedom, reasons and such as.
 
2014-04-03 01:07:11 PM  

Jackson Herring: the epa is a liberal organization??


It was created under the leadership of known liberal progressive Richard M. Nixon.
 
2014-04-03 01:08:40 PM  
junkscience.com

Isn't that site..well, a bunch of junk science?
 
2014-04-03 01:08:54 PM  

Lucky LaRue: herbal teabaggers


makeameme.org

It's not going to happen.
 
2014-04-03 01:10:09 PM  
Dihydrogen Monoxide? It's in the chemtrails, it's in the apples.
 
2014-04-03 01:10:21 PM  

timujin: Seriously?  Someone actually thought, "Hey, let's expose kids with asthma to diesel fumes and see what happens!" was a good idea?


Nineteen mentally retarded boys who thought they were participating in a science club in the 1940's and 1950's were actually fed radioactive milk by scientists who wanted to learn about the digestive system, The Boston Sunday Globe reported.
 
2014-04-03 01:11:49 PM  
So, in the interest of finding common-ground, we all agree: the EPA was stupid to do these experiments in the manner they did, and, industries who wish to continue to pollute should be heavily regulated by the EPA or it's equivalent so that they don't expose people to the exact same pollutants used in these experiments during the normal course of their business.  And that anyone who thinks that closing the EPA over these experiments, as many of the commenters on that article appear to be doing, are fancy lads.
 
2014-04-03 01:15:08 PM  

grumpfuff: junkscience.com

Isn't that site..well, a bunch of junk science?


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-04-03 01:17:08 PM  

ScaryBottles: grumpfuff: junkscience.com

Isn't that site..well, a bunch of junk science?

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x280]


I quickly scrolled thru the website and the only articles I found that weren't complaining about the EPA were complaining about how AGW is junk science.

So take that for what you will.
 
2014-04-03 01:17:48 PM  
 
2014-04-03 01:18:08 PM  
OK. How bad are the cancer risks from diesel fumes? I mean ...should we stop selling diesel? Shut down the trucking industry until they switch to gasoline? Have I been a participant in a long term (+60 year) experiment that nobody told me of?
 
2014-04-03 01:18:58 PM  

timujin: Seriously?  Someone actually thought, "Hey, let's expose kids with asthma to diesel fumes and see what happens!" was a good idea?


I dont know, someone actually thought, "Hey lets give these people syphilis and not tell them... lets see if they notice."

I really should have stayed in evil science school but I thought it was a dead end job, that ethics was stamping out the opportunities.... but no I could have had a job for a while now
 
2014-04-03 01:21:21 PM  

neversubmit: International Handbook of White-Collar and Corporate Crime

As of 2007, not a single U.S. government researcher had been prosecuted for human experimentation. Many of the victims of U.S. government experiments have not received compensation or, in many cases, acknowledgment of what was done to them.



Yeah and here's the problem.  The government should be held accountable and so should any private organization.  But often times, big business colludes with the government and they watch each others' backs.  Methinks that perhaps getting money out of politics might make our government more responsive to these concerns that most average Americans have.
 
2014-04-03 01:21:42 PM  

Saiga410: timujin: Seriously?  Someone actually thought, "Hey, let's expose kids with asthma to diesel fumes and see what happens!" was a good idea?

I dont know, someone actually thought, "Hey lets give these people syphilis and not tell them... lets see if they notice."

I really should have stayed in evil science school but I thought it was a dead end job, that ethics was stamping out the opportunities.... but no I could have had a job for a while now


I didn't go to Evil medical college for eight years to be called Mister.
 
2014-04-03 01:21:47 PM  

grumpfuff: ScaryBottles: grumpfuff: junkscience.com

Isn't that site..well, a bunch of junk science?

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x280]

I quickly scrolled thru the website and the only articles I found that weren't complaining about the EPA were complaining about how AGW is junk science.

So take that for what you will.


Oh yes. Literally junkscience.com is one of the websites my Geology professor used as an example of shoddy, result oriented academics.
 
2014-04-03 01:22:17 PM  

RyogaM: So, in the interest of finding common-ground, we all agree: the EPA was stupid to do these experiments in the manner they did, and, industries who wish to continue to pollute should be heavily regulated by the EPA or it's equivalent so that they don't expose people to the exact same pollutants used in these experiments during the normal course of their business.  And that anyone who thinks that closing the EPA over these experiments, as many of the commenters on that article appear to be doing, are fancy lads.


You forgot that the EPA is changing their policies and procedures to ensure that test subjects are safer from now on.

Breightbart and junk science really suck, and so do you if you pay attention to them without checking out what they say independently.  I have yet to see an article on either website that isn't intentionally misleading or downright lying.  I invite you to prove me wrong.
 
2014-04-03 01:23:53 PM  
Is ANY of that even true?
 
2014-04-03 01:26:57 PM  

Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.


Ha!

/but oops, better not laugh too loud at the guys who comes in hurling insults then cries to the mods when people are not being "civil" to him.....
 
2014-04-03 01:28:37 PM  

Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: herbal teabaggers

[makeameme.org image 250x250]

It's not going to happen.


Come on, just the tip?
 
2014-04-03 01:30:22 PM  

Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: herbal teabaggers



It's not going to happen.


He keeps pushing both sides are bad while constantly only going after anything remotely not GOP.

A cliched Fark Independent.
 
2014-04-03 01:30:22 PM  

Chummer45: neversubmit: International Handbook of White-Collar and Corporate Crime

As of 2007, not a single U.S. government researcher had been prosecuted for human experimentation. Many of the victims of U.S. government experiments have not received compensation or, in many cases, acknowledgment of what was done to them.


Yeah and here's the problem.  The government should be held accountable and so should any private organization.  But often times, big business colludes with the government and they watch each others' backs.  Methinks that perhaps getting money out of politics might make our government more responsive to these concerns that most average Americans have.


With talk like that, you are going to end up on the side of the experiment that doesn't get the antidote.
 
2014-04-03 01:30:37 PM  

udhq: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

Ha!

/but oops, better not laugh too loud at the guys who comes in hurling insults then cries to the mods when people are not being "civil" to him.....


Good lord, but you are easy.
 
2014-04-03 01:31:20 PM  

OnlyM3: ManateeGag [TotalFark]

The GOP is finally closing up shop? good for them.
Liberal organization.
In a far left state.
In a left leaning university.

moon-bat reply: gop wahargarble!!!


Not everyone can match wits with your brilliant Conservative debating skill.
 
2014-04-03 01:35:19 PM  
FTFA:  In February of 2013, JunkScience.com reported that the EPA gave USC money in the mid 2000's to find out whether diesel exhaust could "induce reproducible gene expression" in children.

The EPA commissioned the research, it did not do it itself.  If anything, USC is the culpable party, here.
 
2014-04-03 01:35:32 PM  
We did it guys! Now we can shut down fracking companies, cigarette companies, oil companies, coal companies, everything! It's over!
 
2014-04-03 01:36:28 PM  

NeverDrunk23: Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: herbal teabaggers

It's not going to happen.

He keeps pushing both sides are bad while constantly only going after anything remotely not GOP.

A cliched Fark Independent.


I hold that both the far left and far right are bad.  That is correct.  Whether you are a teabagger or a herbal tebagger, you are equally bad.  A teabagger will look at my comments and call me a liberal.  And, as you've illustrated, herbal teabaggers assume that my positions must be conservative because they don't mesh with the liberal hate and vitriol they've been taught.

I understand that a narrow, insipid view of how the world works may be all that you can comprehend, so I don't take it as a personal insult that my more complex political position irritates you to the point of being rude and aggressive.
 
2014-04-03 01:37:07 PM  

Lucky LaRue: This is why nobody takes you people seriously.


Do you know why nobody takes Breitbart seriously? It's because of their long, sordid record of making up "news," omitting important details, and generally being completely unreliable shills for the far-right. Anyone who reads a Breitbart article and doesn't attempt to find the rest of the story, is willfully deceiving himself.
 
2014-04-03 01:37:18 PM  

neversubmit: timujin: Seriously?  Someone actually thought, "Hey, let's expose kids with asthma to diesel fumes and see what happens!" was a good idea?

Nineteen mentally retarded boys who thought they were participating in a science club in the 1940's and 1950's were actually fed radioactive milk by scientists who wanted to learn about the digestive system, The Boston Sunday Globe reported.


This radioactive milk is pretty much the same stuff as the barium they give you today before an xray of your digestive system. Article said it was as much radiation as 50 x-rays. 50 x-rays really aren't that much, the reason the person at the clinic hides behind the wall is because they are exposed to potentially hundreds a day.
 
2014-04-03 01:37:28 PM  
From epahumantesting.com:

    XCON Study. Starting in 2004, the EPA exposed adults with metabolic syndrome (including the elderly) to high levels of toxic PM2.5.

    OMEGACON Study. Starting in 2007, the EPA exposed older adults to high levels of diesel exhaust (which contains PM2.5 and other "toxic" substances) and then "treated" them with omega-3 fatty acids to see if whatever harm caused by PM2.5 was mitigated. In 2008, the diesel exhaust was replaced by plain PM2.5.

    KINGCON Study. Starting in 2008, the EPA exposed older adults with moderate asthma to PM2.5.

    CAPTAIN Study. The EPA is now recruiting older adults (including the elderly up to 75 years) to "... find out if a component of ambient air pollution to which we are all exposed, particulate matter (PM), produced by car and coal-fired power plants, increases the risks of changes in the heart and whether genotype will lessen the risks caused by PM.


Something about those dates doesn't seem right. Why didn't Obama take his time machine and go further into the past to authorize these studies? There must be some deeply nefarious reason, but it would have been nice to have the results sooner.
 
2014-04-03 01:39:54 PM  

yakmans_dad: OK. How bad are the cancer risks from diesel fumes? I mean ...should we stop selling diesel? Shut down the trucking industry until they switch to gasoline? Have I been a participant in a long term (+60 year) experiment that nobody told me of?


Dont worry the regulations on allowable PM emissions have dropped by a 60th in the past two decades and a 10th in the past decade.  They are getting a lot better.
 
2014-04-03 01:40:21 PM  

jcooli09: Breightbart and junk science really suck, and so do you if you pay attention to them without checking out what they say independently. I have yet to see an article on either website that isn't intentionally misleading or downright lying. I invite you to prove me wrong.


No way.  I avoid BB like the plague.  I swear it gives you cancer.  As for junk science, I've never heard of them till today, but I get the feeling they'd like to see the EPA abolished and let polluting industries go on the Honor System.  Fancy lads, all.
 
2014-04-03 01:42:25 PM  

Needlessly Complicated: Is ANY of that even true?


They could have at least linked to EPA report on this.

http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2014/20140331-14-P-0154.pdf

Generally speaking, it sounds like the EPA disclosed all forseeable risks in these studies but could have done a better in following timelines for reporting and for declaring followup responsibilities in consent forms.

I think some people feel like the EPA should have discussed death by cancer as a disclosed risk, whereas EPA feels that 2 hours of exposure to diesel exhaust carries to excess cancer risk.
 
2014-04-03 01:42:45 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Good lord, but you are easy.


"Joke's on you, I was just pretending to be retarded."
 
2014-04-03 01:43:44 PM  

ScaryBottles: grumpfuff: junkscience.com

Isn't that site..well, a bunch of junk science?

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x280]


Unrelated, but that farking scene almost killed me from laughing. The entirety of the last 6 years of politics as summed up by Kathy Bates playing a character dug up out of pre-Civil War watching Taft's inauguration.
 
2014-04-03 01:44:15 PM  

error 303: Needlessly Complicated: Is ANY of that even true?

They could have at least linked to EPA report on this.

http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2014/20140331-14-P-0154.pdf

Generally speaking, it sounds like the EPA disclosed all forseeable risks in these studies but could have done a better in following timelines for reporting and for declaring followup responsibilities in consent forms.

I think some people feel like the EPA should have discussed death by cancer as a disclosed risk, whereas EPA feels that 2 hours of exposure to diesel exhaust carries tno excess cancer risk.

 
2014-04-03 01:45:03 PM  
About the founder of junkscience.com, whence this information comes to light: "Mr. Milloy is a biostatistician and securities lawyer who has also been a registered securities principal, investment fund manager, non-profit executive, and a print/web columnist on science and business issues. "

Seems legit.
 
2014-04-03 01:45:31 PM  

Lucky LaRue: I understand that a narrow, insipid view of how the world works may be all that you can comprehend, so I don't take it as a personal insult that my more complex political position irritates you to the point of being rude and aggressive.


You literally could not make it 5 words into this thread without resorting to insults, and yet it's others who are rude and aggressive.....
 
2014-04-03 01:47:23 PM  
Well, deadbloatedfatman.com did its job. This "story" is not a thing on FoxNews.com and a couple other garbage right-wing "news" sites.

Can't wait until the facts come out and a reputable source gives the real story. If there is one, anyway.
 
2014-04-03 01:48:01 PM  
The EPA needs to change. The EPA is made up of former Monsanto execs who have no regard for the environment or human safety.
 
2014-04-03 01:48:50 PM  

error 303: error 303: Needlessly Complicated: Is ANY of that even true?

They could have at least linked to EPA report on this.

http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2014/20140331-14-P-0154.pdf

Generally speaking, it sounds like the EPA disclosed all forseeable risks in these studies but could have done a better in following timelines for reporting and for declaring followup responsibilities in consent forms.

I think some people feel like the EPA should have discussed death by cancer as a disclosed risk, whereas EPA feels that 2 hours of exposure to diesel exhaust carries tno excess cancer risk.


Ah. And the Scribd link actually was the EPA report. I'm failing at this.

I don't understand where they came to the conclusion that EPA is trying to lie to old people to kill them. The report more or less says the opposite of that.
 
2014-04-03 01:49:36 PM  

udhq: Lucky LaRue: Good lord, but you are easy.

"Joke's on you, I was just pretending to be retarded."


Well, at least you are willing to admit to your mistake.  I'll take that as an encouraging sign.
 
2014-04-03 01:50:43 PM  

Jackson Herring: the epa is a liberal organization??


Dimensio: It was created under the leadership of known liberal progressive Richard M. Nixon.


My first reaction as well.    Lots of  LIBS LIBS LIBS in this thread, but yet....nope.
 
2014-04-03 01:51:06 PM  

udhq: Lucky LaRue: I understand that a narrow, insipid view of how the world works may be all that you can comprehend, so I don't take it as a personal insult that my more complex political position irritates you to the point of being rude and aggressive.

You literally could not make it 5 words into this thread without resorting to insults, and yet it's others who are rude and aggressive.....


If you would articulate just one salient point or position, it would make all your other passive-aggressive swagger more bearable.
 
2014-04-03 01:51:55 PM  
RyogaM: So, in the interest of finding common-ground, we all agree: the EPA was stupid to do these experiments in the manner they did, and, industries who wish to continue to pollute should be heavily regulated by the EPA or it's equivalent so that they don't expose people to the exact same pollutants used in these experiments during the normal course of their business.  And that anyone who thinks that closing the EPA over these experiments, as many of the commenters on that article appear to be doing, are fancy lads.

QFT
 
2014-04-03 01:53:08 PM  

DarnoKonrad: So are we finally shutting down the tobacco industry?


Prohibition has worked so well for us so why not extend it, right?
 
2014-04-03 01:53:31 PM  

Lucky LaRue: ...passive-aggressive swagger...


Said the guy whose posts represent more than 1 in every 8 in the thread and has yet to actually say anything.
 
2014-04-03 01:55:08 PM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: So, in the interest of finding common-ground, we all agree: the EPA was stupid to do these experiments in the manner they did, and, industries who wish to continue to pollute should be heavily regulated by the EPA or it's equivalent so that they don't expose people to the exact same pollutants used in these experiments during the normal course of their business.  And that anyone who thinks that closing the EPA over these experiments, as many of the commenters on that article appear to be doing, are fancy lads.

QFT


Dude, when will you realize, its OK for their side to do it, but when you Liberals even dare to commence operations on things they think they have a monopoly on, thats when the trouble starts.
 
2014-04-03 01:55:45 PM  

Lucky LaRue: If you would articulate just one salient point or position, it would make all your other passive-aggressive swagger more bearable.


You need to look up what unfamiliar words mean before you use them.
 
2014-04-03 01:56:37 PM  

skozlaw: Lucky LaRue: ...passive-aggressive swagger...

Said the guy whose posts represent more than 1 in every 8 in the thread and has yet to actually say anything.


Ignoring what I say just because it hurts your feelings and hits too close to home is *exactly* how to go about keeping your head firmly in your echo chamber.  Don't worry, though, I am sure Rachel Maddow will tell you what to think soon enough.
 
2014-04-03 01:57:26 PM  

udhq: Lucky LaRue: If you would articulate just one salient point or position, it would make all your other passive-aggressive swagger more bearable.

You need to look up what unfamiliar words mean before you use them.


I don't see how it's going to help you if I look up words that you don't understand.
 
2014-04-03 01:58:13 PM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: So, in the interest of finding common-ground, we all agree: the EPA was stupid to do these experiments in the manner they did, and, industries who wish to continue to pollute should be heavily regulated by the EPA or it's equivalent so that they don't expose people to the exact same pollutants used in these experiments during the normal course of their business.  And that anyone who thinks that closing the EPA over these experiments, as many of the commenters on that article appear to be doing, are fancy lads.

QFT

 
2014-04-03 01:58:21 PM  
I know that when I want honest reporting of scientific facts, I go to the website that give James O'Keefe his fifteen minutes of fame and considers evolution to be scientifically disproven by the Bible, and that in this case is only repeating something that even they consider to be a source of junk.
 
2014-04-03 01:59:53 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Ignoring what I say just because it hurts your feelings and hits too close to home is *exactly* how to go about keeping your head firmly in your echo chamber. Don't worry, though, I am sure Rachel Maddow will tell you what to think soon enough.


This "echo chamber" apparently thinks that the EPA was stupid to allow the experiments be done in the manner they were done, and that anyone who thinks these actions should be used as a reason to close or hinder the EPA is an idiot.  What part of this "echo chamber" wisdom do you disagree with?
 
2014-04-03 02:02:02 PM  

MBrady: MaudlinMutantMollusk: So Breitbart is finally going to shut down?

Followed by CNN, MSNBC, HLN, the Democratic Party,


Hurhurhurhur
 
2014-04-03 02:02:07 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.


That jabroni's still around?
 
2014-04-03 02:03:03 PM  

Lucky LaRue: udhq: Lucky LaRue: If you would articulate just one salient point or position, it would make all your other passive-aggressive swagger more bearable.

You need to look up what unfamiliar words mean before you use them.

I don't see how it's going to help you if I look up words that you don't understand.


Ahhh, I see we've come to a "chess with a pigeon" stage of this conversation.  No matter which direction it goes, you win, because you really enjoy the attention.

Have fun with that.
 
2014-04-03 02:03:10 PM  

cman: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: So, in the interest of finding common-ground, we all agree: the EPA was stupid to do these experiments in the manner they did, and, industries who wish to continue to pollute should be heavily regulated by the EPA or it's equivalent so that they don't expose people to the exact same pollutants used in these experiments during the normal course of their business.  And that anyone who thinks that closing the EPA over these experiments, as many of the commenters on that article appear to be doing, are fancy lads.

QFT

Dude, when will you realize, its OK for their side to do it, but when you Liberals even dare to commence operations on things they think they have a monopoly on, thats when the trouble starts.


Heh...and I'm all about trouble. XD
 
2014-04-03 02:03:16 PM  

Lucky LaRue: NeverDrunk23: Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: herbal teabaggers

It's not going to happen.

He keeps pushing both sides are bad while constantly only going after anything remotely not GOP.

A cliched Fark Independent.

I hold that both the far left and far right are bad.  That is correct.  Whether you are a teabagger or a herbal tebagger, you are equally bad



That's why people don't believe you.

Oh, and add the requisite xkcd cartoon reference for good measure.
 
2014-04-03 02:05:47 PM  

error 303: error 303: error 303: Needlessly Complicated: Is ANY of that even true?

They could have at least linked to EPA report on this.

http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2014/20140331-14-P-0154.pdf

Generally speaking, it sounds like the EPA disclosed all forseeable risks in these studies but could have done a better in following timelines for reporting and for declaring followup responsibilities in consent forms.

I think some people feel like the EPA should have discussed death by cancer as a disclosed risk, whereas EPA feels that 2 hours of exposure to diesel exhaust carries tno excess cancer risk.

Ah. And the Scribd link actually was the EPA report. I'm failing at this.

I don't understand where they came to the conclusion that EPA is trying to lie to old people to kill them. The report more or less says the opposite of that.


Pretty much what I suspected. Breathless exaggeration about not following protocols for human experiments when the opposite is true. Nothing to see here. And no one holding deadbart.com to account for telling outright lies. Typical.
 
2014-04-03 02:07:01 PM  

yakmans_dad: Oh, and add the requisite xkcd cartoon reference for good measure.


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2014-04-03 02:08:01 PM  

udhq: Lucky LaRue: udhq: Lucky LaRue: If you would articulate just one salient point or position, it would make all your other passive-aggressive swagger more bearable.

You need to look up what unfamiliar words mean before you use them.

I don't see how it's going to help you if I look up words that you don't understand.

Ahhh, I see we've come to a "chess with a pigeon" stage of this conversation.  No matter which direction it goes, you win, because you really enjoy the attention.

Have fun with that.


Hey, if the conversation is too complicated, it's no shame to walk away from it.  But there's no need to sulk in a corner - there are plenty of people in this thread whose ideas are Herbal Teabagger approved, and you can happily agree with each other's talking points all day, if that's what floats your boat.
 
2014-04-03 02:10:25 PM  

yakmans_dad: Lucky LaRue: NeverDrunk23: Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: herbal teabaggers

It's not going to happen.

He keeps pushing both sides are bad while constantly only going after anything remotely not GOP.

A cliched Fark Independent.

I hold that both the far left and far right are bad.  That is correct.  Whether you are a teabagger or a herbal tebagger, you are equally bad


That's why people don't believe you.

Oh, and add the requisite xkcd cartoon reference for good measure.


Are you suggesting that the radical left doesn't like to have it pointed out that their behavior and political tactics are in line with their conservative counterparts?  You are saying that makes them angry and less likely to agree with me?
 
2014-04-03 02:10:52 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Don't worry, though, I am sure Rachel Maddow will tell you what to think soon enough.


Alleges the guy who spent half of the first page whining about other people making unfounded assumptions about him and his opinions.
 
2014-04-03 02:11:44 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Hey, if the conversation is too complicated, it's no shame to walk away from it. But there's no need to sulk in a corner - there are plenty of people in this thread whose ideas are Herbal Teabagger approved, and you can happily agree with each other's talking points all day, if that's what floats your boat.


Is the idea that the EPA was stupid to allow the experiments be done in the manner they were reportedly done, and that anyone who thinks these actions should be used as a reason to close or hinder the EPA is an idiot an Herbal Teabagger approved idea?  What part of this "Herbal Teabagger Approved " wisdom do you disagree with?
 
2014-04-03 02:11:51 PM  

Jackson Herring: the epa is a liberal organization??


Thanks Nixon.


Hmmmmm.... mid 2000's, lets see ... who would have been more than happy to approve of or appoint someone to conduct such a harmful study, i bet it would have to be someone that was fine with torture for sure.
 
2014-04-03 02:12:08 PM  

Lucky LaRue: udhq: Lucky LaRue: udhq: Lucky LaRue: If you would articulate just one salient point or position, it would make all your other passive-aggressive swagger more bearable.

You need to look up what unfamiliar words mean before you use them.

I don't see how it's going to help you if I look up words that you don't understand.

Ahhh, I see we've come to a "chess with a pigeon" stage of this conversation.  No matter which direction it goes, you win, because you really enjoy the attention.

Have fun with that.

Hey, if the conversation is too complicated, it's no shame to walk away from it.  But there's no need to sulk in a corner - there are plenty of people in this thread whose ideas are Herbal Teabagger approved, and you can happily agree with each other's talking points all day, if that's what floats your boat.


Next, do the one where you complain about other people using ad hominems. That's always good for a laugh.
 
2014-04-03 02:12:25 PM  

Lucky LaRue: yakmans_dad: Lucky LaRue: NeverDrunk23: Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: herbal teabaggers

It's not going to happen.

He keeps pushing both sides are bad while constantly only going after anything remotely not GOP.

A cliched Fark Independent.

I hold that both the far left and far right are bad.  That is correct.  Whether you are a teabagger or a herbal tebagger, you are equally bad


That's why people don't believe you.

Oh, and add the requisite xkcd cartoon reference for good measure.

Are you suggesting that the radical left doesn't like to have it pointed out that their behavior and political tactics are in line with their conservative counterparts?  You are saying that makes them angry and less likely to agree with me?


No. I'm saying you're behaving poorly.
 
2014-04-03 02:12:27 PM  

Needlessly Complicated: error 303: error 303: error 303: Needlessly Complicated: Is ANY of that even true?

They could have at least linked to EPA report on this.

http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2014/20140331-14-P-0154.pdf

Generally speaking, it sounds like the EPA disclosed all forseeable risks in these studies but could have done a better in following timelines for reporting and for declaring followup responsibilities in consent forms.

I think some people feel like the EPA should have discussed death by cancer as a disclosed risk, whereas EPA feels that 2 hours of exposure to diesel exhaust carries tno excess cancer risk.

Ah. And the Scribd link actually was the EPA report. I'm failing at this.

I don't understand where they came to the conclusion that EPA is trying to lie to old people to kill them. The report more or less says the opposite of that.

Pretty much what I suspected. Breathless exaggeration about not following protocols for human experiments when the opposite is true. Nothing to see here. And no one holding deadbart.com to account for telling outright lies. Typical.


Accountable? I thought it was a given that they posted bullshait.
 
2014-04-03 02:12:48 PM  

Lucky LaRue: udhq: Lucky LaRue: udhq: Lucky LaRue: If you would articulate just one salient point or position, it would make all your other passive-aggressive swagger more bearable.

You need to look up what unfamiliar words mean before you use them.

I don't see how it's going to help you if I look up words that you don't understand.

Ahhh, I see we've come to a "chess with a pigeon" stage of this conversation.  No matter which direction it goes, you win, because you really enjoy the attention.

Have fun with that.

Hey, if the conversation is too complicated, it's no shame to walk away from it.  But there's no need to sulk in a corner - there are plenty of people in this thread whose ideas are Herbal Teabagger approved, and you can happily agree with each other's talking points all day, if that's what floats your boat.


To be quite fair, the words you chose were a bit uncouth.

/9/10
 
2014-04-03 02:13:11 PM  

cman: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: So, in the interest of finding common-ground, we all agree: the EPA was stupid to do these experiments in the manner they did, and, industries who wish to continue to pollute should be heavily regulated by the EPA or it's equivalent so that they don't expose people to the exact same pollutants used in these experiments during the normal course of their business.  And that anyone who thinks that closing the EPA over these experiments, as many of the commenters on that article appear to be doing, are fancy lads.

QFT

Dude, when will you realize, its OK for their side to do it, but when you Liberals even dare to commence operations on things they think they have a monopoly on, thats when the trouble starts.


There is that.......
 
2014-04-03 02:17:07 PM  
I've looked through this entire thread, and I have yet to find a representative of the radical left.

C'mon raise your hand or something!
 
2014-04-03 02:19:27 PM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: I've looked through this entire thread, and I have yet to find a representative of the radical left.

C'mon raise your hand or something!


Well, there are plenty of people to the left of Ted Cruz here, so obviously you just weren't looking hard enough.
 
2014-04-03 02:19:43 PM  
Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.
 
2014-04-03 02:24:02 PM  

RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.


i can point you to some bottom shelf krokodil that can help you understand it
 
2014-04-03 02:24:44 PM  

grumpfuff: Satan's Bunny Slippers: I've looked through this entire thread, and I have yet to find a representative of the radical left.

C'mon raise your hand or something!

Well, there are plenty of people to the left of Ted Cruz here, so obviously you just weren't looking hard enough.


Damn Overton. Damn him to hell.
 
2014-04-03 02:26:08 PM  
Lucky LaRue:  Hey, if the conversation is too complicated, it's no shame to walk away from it.  But there's no need to sulk in a corner - there are plenty of people in this thread whose ideas are Herbal Teabagger approved, and you can happily agree with each other's talking points all day, if that's what floats your boat.

You've literally not made a single point in this entire thread.  You've not made a single comment in this thread without using a slur or personal attack.

You've got less than nothing.  You're entire shtick is to fling poo at everyone and everything because your dunning-kruger-infected mind never learned the difference between good attention and bad attention.
 
2014-04-03 02:26:20 PM  

RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.


Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.
 
2014-04-03 02:28:16 PM  

RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.


A couple of unclever bloggers, mostly 'libertarians' and conservative dems, tried to stick it on the Occupy protestors a few years ago. The herbal part is meant to imply that they're dirty hippy versions of the actual teabaggers.

It never stuck because it didn't make any sense and wasn't funny. I wasn't even aware anybody was dumb enough to still be trying to use it.
 
2014-04-03 02:29:16 PM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.


Jebus you guys are a bunch on poultry entomologists.
 
2014-04-03 02:31:36 PM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.


Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.
 
2014-04-03 02:32:14 PM  

Saiga410: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.

Jebus you guys are a bunch on poultry entomologists.


I'm on chicken bugs?

weird.
 
2014-04-03 02:33:31 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.

Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.


It's also amusing that the only time you condemn a conservative, is doing it in the same sentence as condemning liberals.

Just out of curiosity, was the inspiration of your trolling persona literally built on BSABSVR?
 
2014-04-03 02:34:53 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.

Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.


Did I say that?  I said right.  Not gop, not conservative shill. Yet here you are, screaming for attention yet again like the toddler you are.

Funny how the chickens come home to roost.
 
2014-04-03 02:37:45 PM  

grumpfuff: Lucky LaRue: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.

Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

It's also amusing that the only time you condemn a conservative, is doing it in the same sentence as condemning liberals.

Just out of curiosity, was the inspiration of your trolling persona literally built on BSABSVR?


I haven't seen many radicalized conservatives posting, but I'll give them what-for if they show up.

I understand the need to be dismissive of ideas you disagree with, but your disagreement does not a troll make.

I have no idea who or what a BSABSVR is. Sorry.
 
2014-04-03 02:41:12 PM  

yakmans_dad: add the requisite xkcd cartoon reference for good measure.


no
 
2014-04-03 02:42:54 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.

Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.


To be fair, the radical right are much worse than the radical left in the US.

The biggest thing I do like about the left in the United States is that they tend to keep their extreme radicals (like Communists) out of mainstream politics while the GOP has no problem courting the extreme right
 
2014-04-03 02:46:21 PM  

Lucky LaRue: grumpfuff: Lucky LaRue: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.

Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

It's also amusing that the only time you condemn a conservative, is doing it in the same sentence as condemning liberals.

Just out of curiosity, was the inspiration of your trolling persona literally built on BSABSVR?

I haven't seen many radicalized conservatives posting, but I'll give them what-for if they show up.

I understand the need to be dismissive of ideas you disagree with, but your disagreement does not a troll make.

I have no idea who or what a BSABSVR is. Sorry.


media0.giphy.com
 
2014-04-03 02:51:41 PM  

Lucky LaRue: herbal teabaggers


Nope. You guys get to own the 'tea bagger' moniker, though that was a rare case of conservative humor that's actually kinda funny. Not original, creative, or hilarious, but kinda funny. Which talking head did yo hear it from?


/If you can be funny,  you must be a RINO
 
2014-04-03 02:52:01 PM  

udhq: You've literally not made a single point in this entire thread. You've not made a single comment in this thread without using a slur or personal attack.



udhq:  You aren't making sense!  You aren't using any of the words Ed Shultz uses!
 
2014-04-03 03:02:05 PM  

Lucky LaRue: grumpfuff: Lucky LaRue: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.

Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

It's also amusing that the only time you condemn a conservative, is doing it in the same sentence as condemning liberals.

Just out of curiosity, was the inspiration of your trolling persona literally built on BSABSVR?

I haven't seen many radicalized conservatives posting, but I'll give them what-for if they show up.

I understand the need to be dismissive of ideas you disagree with, but your disagreement does not a troll make.

I have no idea who or what a BSABSVR is. Sorry.


So responding with an insult..?
 
2014-04-03 03:02:10 PM  

Lucky LaRue: You aren't using any of the words Ed Shultz uses!



Argle Bargle!  Herbal Tea-badgers!  WHY THANK YOU, I HAVE BEEN WORKING OUT!!1!

/i can typing words too
 
2014-04-03 03:03:04 PM  

cman: Lucky LaRue: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.

Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

To be fair, the radical right are much worse than the radical left in the US.

The biggest thing I do like about the left in the United States is that they tend to keep their extreme radicals (like Communists) out of mainstream politics while the GOP has no problem courting the extreme right


I agree that, in the current political environment, the far right is much more prominent than their left-wing counterparts, but I don't think they are less worse.

I've seen some indications that the Herbal Teabaggers are getting restless this election cycle - I don't know if that is something new of if it that happens every election cycle, and I just haven't noticed it before.  It will be fun if the far left comes out of the woodwork this cycle and nominates someone like Elizabeth Warren.
 
2014-04-03 03:04:38 PM  

Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: grumpfuff: Lucky LaRue: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.

Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

It's also amusing that the only time you condemn a conservative, is doing it in the same sentence as condemning liberals.

Just out of curiosity, was the inspiration of your trolling persona literally built on BSABSVR?

I haven't seen many radicalized conservatives posting, but I'll give them what-for if they show up.

I understand the need to be dismissive of ideas you disagree with, but your disagreement does not a troll make.

I have no idea who or what a BSABSVR is. Sorry.

So responding with an insult..?


Wut?  How did my response offend your gentle sensibilities?
 
2014-04-03 03:05:20 PM  
Next talk about "BOB".
 
2014-04-03 03:05:45 PM  

Lucky LaRue: skozlaw: Lucky LaRue: ...passive-aggressive swagger...

Said the guy whose posts represent more than 1 in every 8 in the thread and has yet to actually say anything.

Ignoring what I say just because it hurts your feelings and hits too close to home is *exactly* how to go about keeping your head firmly in your echo chamber.  Don't worry, though, I am sure Rachel Maddow will tell you what to think soon enough.


My god, this is like a case study in trying too hard.
 
2014-04-03 03:06:02 PM  
That would probably be why THIS Australian factory is going to close soon

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-02/philip-morris-to-quit-australi an -cigarette-manufacturing/5361436
 
2014-04-03 03:06:13 PM  
I guess it's call you're capable of
 
2014-04-03 03:12:52 PM  

Lucky LaRue: I haven't seen many radicalized conservatives posting, but I'll give them what-for if they show up.


Haven't held up a mirror today, eh?
 
2014-04-03 03:13:31 PM  
Well this thread got trolled to shait.
 
2014-04-03 03:14:12 PM  

Lucky LaRue: I've seen some indications that the Herbal Teabaggers are getting restless this election cycle - I don't know if that is something new of if it that happens every election cycle, and I just haven't noticed it before.


Where? Who are these people?
 
2014-04-03 03:14:14 PM  

Lucky LaRue: grumpfuff: Lucky LaRue: Satan's Bunny Slippers: RyogaM: Can someone point me to the definition of Herbal Teabagger because I've goggled it and found nothing and I hate to publicly use a word to which I don't know the meaning.

Thank FSM it's not just me.

I just attributed it to some new epithet the right has ginned up to make themselves feel better about losing just about everything.

Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

It's also amusing that the only time you condemn a conservative, is doing it in the same sentence as condemning liberals.

Just out of curiosity, was the inspiration of your trolling persona literally built on BSABSVR?

I haven't seen many radicalized conservatives posting, but I'll give them what-for if they show up.

I understand the need to be dismissive of ideas you disagree with, but your disagreement does not a troll make.

I have no idea who or what a BSABSVR is. Sorry.


I wish some of the other trolls around here would take a few lessons from you. Sigh.

/inmydaytrollingmeantsomething.jpg
 
2014-04-03 03:15:55 PM  

Fart_Machine: Well this thread got trolled to shait.


Don't you get it? He sees SIGNS! People are getting restless! You'll just have to believe him. I mean, he believes both sides are equally bad! What more do you want from him?
 
2014-04-03 03:18:33 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: I haven't seen many radicalized conservatives posting, but I'll give them what-for if they show up.

Haven't held up a mirror today, eh?


If only there was another group of people from which we could draw a comparison.  If there was a group of radicals who believes you are their political opposites unless you agree with their entire agenda, what do you think we would call them?
 
2014-04-03 03:20:55 PM  

Lucky LaRue: If only there was another group of people from which we could draw a comparison.  If there was a group of radicals who believes you are their political opposites unless you agree with their entire agenda, what do you think we would call them?


I would call them you. I prefer to talk about the thread subject, myself. Clearly you're more interested in personal attacks than actually talking about the EPA report.
 
2014-04-03 03:21:41 PM  
What the fark is an "Herbal Teabagger"?
 
2014-04-03 03:23:11 PM  

Lucky LaRue: herbal teabaggers assume that my positions must be conservative because they don't mesh with the liberal hate and vitriol they've been taught


There is a way for us to tell if someone isn't as impartial as they claim to be.
We simply present them with an example of the opposite party performing a similar act and ask for a response. Hopefully they will provide an answer and not dismiss the question as "changing the subject."
 
2014-04-03 03:23:15 PM  

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: What the fark is an "Herbal Teabagger"?


Something that happens when you want to distract from the actual thread topic.
 
2014-04-03 03:23:47 PM  

grumpfuff: junkscience.com

Isn't that site..well, a bunch of junk science?


Run by a paid shill>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Milloy
 
2014-04-03 03:24:26 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: If only there was another group of people from which we could draw a comparison.  If there was a group of radicals who believes you are their political opposites unless you agree with their entire agenda, what do you think we would call them?

I would call them you. I prefer to talk about the thread subject, myself. Clearly you're more interested in personal attacks than actually talking about the EPA report.


hahaha.. you've not made a single comment on the EPA report, dude.
 
2014-04-03 03:26:46 PM  

Lucky LaRue: cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: If only there was another group of people from which we could draw a comparison.  If there was a group of radicals who believes you are their political opposites unless you agree with their entire agenda, what do you think we would call them?

I would call them you. I prefer to talk about the thread subject, myself. Clearly you're more interested in personal attacks than actually talking about the EPA report.

hahaha.. you've not made a single comment on the EPA report, dude.


Yes I have. You may be confusing me with yourself.
 
2014-04-03 03:29:37 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Fart_Machine: Well this thread got trolled to shait.

Don't you get it? He sees SIGNS! People are getting restless! You'll just have to believe him. I mean, he believes both sides are equally bad! What more do you want from him?


To be fair once again, he never said both sides are equally bad.
 
2014-04-03 03:31:31 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: If only there was another group of people from which we could draw a comparison.  If there was a group of radicals who believes you are their political opposites unless you agree with their entire agenda, what do you think we would call them?

I would call them you. I prefer to talk about the thread subject, myself. Clearly you're more interested in personal attacks than actually talking about the EPA report.

hahaha.. you've not made a single comment on the EPA report, dude.

Yes I have. You may be confusing me with yourself.


You have posted like 6 times - it doesn't take a lot of effort to confirm that you've resorted to lying.  I kind of expected brash bravado and hyperbolic excuses.  The lying is a little disappointing.  It makes me feel like I am dealing with a 7 year old caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
 
2014-04-03 03:32:38 PM  

Lucky LaRue: You have posted like 6 times - it doesn't take a lot of effort to confirm that you've resorted to lying.  I kind of expected brash bravado and hyperbolic excuses.  The lying is a little disappointing.  It makes me feel like I am dealing with a 7 year old caught with his hand in the cookie jar.


Can you point out the lie, please?

I posted about the EPA report - I said "I'd much rather talk about the EPA report"

Now, care to apologize to me or will you leave the thread now?
 
2014-04-03 03:33:27 PM  

cman: cameroncrazy1984: Fart_Machine: Well this thread got trolled to shait.

Don't you get it? He sees SIGNS! People are getting restless! You'll just have to believe him. I mean, he believes both sides are equally bad! What more do you want from him?

To be fair once again, he never said both sides are equally bad.


I don't see it as a two sided equation.  Both of the radicalized fringes *are* bad, but there is an entire spectrum of moderation in the middle.
 
2014-04-03 03:34:51 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: You have posted like 6 times - it doesn't take a lot of effort to confirm that you've resorted to lying.  I kind of expected brash bravado and hyperbolic excuses.  The lying is a little disappointing.  It makes me feel like I am dealing with a 7 year old caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

Can you point out the lie, please?

I posted about the EPA report - I said "I'd much rather talk about the EPA report"

Now, care to apologize to me or will you leave the thread now?


Hahaha:  I just said that I'd rather talk about the EPA report, ergo I have talked about the EPA Report!
 
2014-04-03 03:36:18 PM  

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: What the fark is an "Herbal Teabagger"?


Why, an acolyte of BOB, of course.....
 
2014-04-03 03:37:21 PM  

Lucky LaRue: cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: You have posted like 6 times - it doesn't take a lot of effort to confirm that you've resorted to lying.  I kind of expected brash bravado and hyperbolic excuses.  The lying is a little disappointing.  It makes me feel like I am dealing with a 7 year old caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

Can you point out the lie, please?

I posted about the EPA report - I said "I'd much rather talk about the EPA report"

Now, care to apologize to me or will you leave the thread now?

Hahaha:  I just said that I'd rather talk about the EPA report, ergo I have talked about the EPA Report!


Is that wrong? You still haven't pointed out the lie, here.

Now, can you quit accusing me of lying without evidence and have a discussion on the actual topic?
 
2014-04-03 03:40:24 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: You have posted like 6 times - it doesn't take a lot of effort to confirm that you've resorted to lying.  I kind of expected brash bravado and hyperbolic excuses.  The lying is a little disappointing.  It makes me feel like I am dealing with a 7 year old caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

Can you point out the lie, please?

I posted about the EPA report - I said "I'd much rather talk about the EPA report"

Now, care to apologize to me or will you leave the thread now?

Hahaha:  I just said that I'd rather talk about the EPA report, ergo I have talked about the EPA Report!

Is that wrong? You still haven't pointed out the lie, here.

Now, can you quit accusing me of lying without evidence and have a discussion on the actual topic?


It is bad enough to get caught-out in a bald-faced lie, but your attempt to excuse yourself from it is pathetic and makes you come across as phony.  You'd do much better to just accept it and move on.
 
2014-04-03 03:41:42 PM  

Lucky LaRue: It is bad enough to get caught-out in a bald-faced lie, but your attempt to excuse yourself from it is pathetic and makes you come across as phony.  You'd do much better to just accept it and move on.


What lie?

Look, would you like to talk about the thread topic or not? I mean, you can't even seriously prove a claim that I was lying, why would I even think you could talk seriously about this report?
 
2014-04-03 03:43:30 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.


You know, it's funny. I don't know when I marked you in my favorites, but "complete and utter 'both sides r bad' douche" was exactly the right label
 
2014-04-03 03:44:04 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: It is bad enough to get caught-out in a bald-faced lie, but your attempt to excuse yourself from it is pathetic and makes you come across as phony.  You'd do much better to just accept it and move on.

What lie?

Look, would you like to talk about the thread topic or not? I mean, you can't even seriously prove a claim that I was lying, why would I even think you could talk seriously about this report?


If you say it often enough, you may be able to convince yourself of your honesty and integrity.  But there is no way I am going to engage a known liar in this or any other conversation.
 
2014-04-03 03:44:33 PM  

Lucky LaRue: cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: It is bad enough to get caught-out in a bald-faced lie, but your attempt to excuse yourself from it is pathetic and makes you come across as phony.  You'd do much better to just accept it and move on.

What lie?

Look, would you like to talk about the thread topic or not? I mean, you can't even seriously prove a claim that I was lying, why would I even think you could talk seriously about this report?

If you say it often enough, you may be able to convince yourself of your honesty and integrity.  But there is no way I am going to engage a known liar in this or any other conversation.


So, you can't prove your claim that I'm a liar, you'd much rather run away.

Sounds about right.
 
2014-04-03 03:45:46 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Lucky LaRue: Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

You know, it's funny. I don't know when I marked you in my favorites, but "complete and utter 'both sides r bad' douche" was exactly the right label


Wow. Talk about spot-on.
 
2014-04-03 03:46:54 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Lucky LaRue: Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

You know, it's funny. I don't know when I marked you in my favorites, but "complete and utter 'both sides r bad' douche" was exactly the right label


Why is it so difficult for you (not just you, specifically, of course) to see the entire political spectrum?  It strikes me as very narrow minded to look at politics as an either-or proposition, and a condemnation of the radical fringes does not preclude the possibility of *any* position.
 
2014-04-03 03:47:21 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Lucky LaRue: Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

You know, it's funny. I don't know when I marked you in my favorites, but "complete and utter 'both sides r bad' douche" was exactly the right label


Do you have me farkied? If so what is it under?
 
2014-04-03 03:51:50 PM  

Lucky LaRue: If you say it often enough, you may be able to convince yourself of your honesty and integrity. But there is no way I am going to engage a known liar in this or any other conversation.


Engage me.  The general consensus in this thread is the the EPA apparently screwed up on how they oversaw these experiments but that this screw up should not be used to hinder or shut down the EPA as many commenters in the article are advocating doing .  Do you agree?  Also, you apparently have an issue with radical leftist Herbal Teabaggers. Please, point to any comments in this thread that you think were made by a radical, Herbal Teabagger as you define the term and explain why.  Finally, please define Herbal Teabagger as you use it, and give some examples.

Or don't.  I don't give a shiat. You appear to be whinging about how no one understands your unique point of view, yet refuse to answer questions to allow other to understand you. Your wounds of being misunderstood are self-inflicted.
 
2014-04-03 03:53:41 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Ctrl-Alt-Del: Lucky LaRue: Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

You know, it's funny. I don't know when I marked you in my favorites, but "complete and utter 'both sides r bad' douche" was exactly the right label

Why is it so difficult for you (not just you, specifically, of course) to see the entire political spectrum?  It strikes me as very narrow minded to look at politics as an either-or proposition, and a condemnation of the radical fringes does not preclude the possibility of *any* position.


I understand your frustrations indeed, but there really isn't anything worthy of bashing the left in this story.

You have bashed them unjustly.

I am one who hates being grouped with those who wish to stone homosexuals, but sometimes I act like I belong with that group.
 
2014-04-03 03:55:10 PM  
t1.rbxcdn.com
 
2014-04-03 04:00:44 PM  

grumpfuff: [t1.rbxcdn.com image 420x420]


They don't care.  You can tell them, "hey, I am trolling the hell out of you right now" and the most vociferous will just keep coming back to get another taste of the bait.
 
2014-04-03 04:03:51 PM  

Lucky LaRue: grumpfuff: [t1.rbxcdn.com image 420x420]

They don't care.  You can tell them, "hey, I am trolling the hell out of you right now" and the most vociferous will just keep coming back to get another taste of the bait.


And now you've just admitted to trolling, something that is against the FarQ. Congratulations!
 
2014-04-03 04:04:23 PM  

cman: Ctrl-Alt-Del: Lucky LaRue: Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

You know, it's funny. I don't know when I marked you in my favorites, but "complete and utter 'both sides r bad' douche" was exactly the right label

Do you have me farkied? If so what is it under?


Meh, no nasty labels for you, you're not a megadouche, you're just wrong a lot :-)
 
2014-04-03 04:06:38 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: cman: Ctrl-Alt-Del: Lucky LaRue: Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

You know, it's funny. I don't know when I marked you in my favorites, but "complete and utter 'both sides r bad' douche" was exactly the right label

Do you have me farkied? If so what is it under?

Meh, no nasty labels for you, you're not a megadouche, you're just wrong a lot :-)


I try not to be a douche. I don't always succeed.

But you are right, I am wrong a lot.
 
2014-04-03 04:07:27 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: grumpfuff: [t1.rbxcdn.com image 420x420]

They don't care.  You can tell them, "hey, I am trolling the hell out of you right now" and the most vociferous will just keep coming back to get another taste of the bait.

And now you've just admitted to trolling, something that is against the FarQ. Congratulations!


Ah.. not only a liar but you are incapable of reading as well.  I am beginning to see a pattern, here.  Since you aren't capable of comprehension, you will have to take my assurances that I most definitely did not admit to trolling in that statement.
 
2014-04-03 04:15:27 PM  

cman: Lucky LaRue: Ctrl-Alt-Del: Lucky LaRue: Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

You know, it's funny. I don't know when I marked you in my favorites, but "complete and utter 'both sides r bad' douche" was exactly the right label

Why is it so difficult for you (not just you, specifically, of course) to see the entire political spectrum?  It strikes me as very narrow minded to look at politics as an either-or proposition, and a condemnation of the radical fringes does not preclude the possibility of *any* position.

I understand your frustrations indeed, but there really isn't anything worthy of bashing the left in this story.

You have bashed them unjustly.

I am one who hates being grouped with those who wish to stone homosexuals, but sometimes I act like I belong with that group.


I really didn't intend to bash liberals that hard today.  My initial comment was just laughing at them for reacting to the story by denigrating Breitbart and deflecting the argument to what corporations are doing wrong.  Then everyone got all "ZOMG!  He called us herbal teabaggers!" and pretending not to know what that means and, well, it kind of degenerated from there.
 
2014-04-03 04:17:43 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Why is it so difficult for you (not just you, specifically, of course) to see the entire political spectrum? It strikes me as very narrow minded to look at politics as an either-or proposition, and a condemnation of the radical fringes does not preclude the possibility of *any* position.


See, the irony is that in a macro sense, it's YOU and people like you--no the partisans--that are the problem with the political discourse.

You're willing to smear your own feces on anything and everything to get attention and to feel "superior" because you're not self-aware enough to realize how bad you're making yourself look.
 
2014-04-03 04:18:30 PM  

Lucky LaRue: cman: Lucky LaRue: Ctrl-Alt-Del: Lucky LaRue: Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

You know, it's funny. I don't know when I marked you in my favorites, but "complete and utter 'both sides r bad' douche" was exactly the right label

Why is it so difficult for you (not just you, specifically, of course) to see the entire political spectrum?  It strikes me as very narrow minded to look at politics as an either-or proposition, and a condemnation of the radical fringes does not preclude the possibility of *any* position.

I understand your frustrations indeed, but there really isn't anything worthy of bashing the left in this story.

You have bashed them unjustly.

I am one who hates being grouped with those who wish to stone homosexuals, but sometimes I act like I belong with that group.

I really didn't intend to bash liberals that hard today.  My initial comment was just laughing at them for reacting to the story by denigrating Breitbart and deflecting the argument to what corporations are doing wrong.  Then everyone got all "ZOMG!  He called us herbal teabaggers!" and pretending not to know what that means and, well, it kind of degenerated from there.


Sometimes we have to be reminded of our biases. We are all human.

There are times that I say the dumbest shiat and think it is the smartest thing man has ever said. There are those on Fark who tend to call me out when I spill that kind of bullshiat. Which, in a way, is nice, as it keeps us all on our toes.
 
2014-04-03 04:18:50 PM  
cdn.ksk.uproxx.com

Breitbart.  Accurate!
 
2014-04-03 04:21:11 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Ah.. not only a liar but you are incapable of reading as well.


Yep, you are both of those things. You repeatedly lie about me lying in this thread. And clearly you are incapable of reading the EPA report.
 
2014-04-03 04:24:44 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: Ah.. not only a liar but you are incapable of reading as well.

Yep, you are both of those things. You repeatedly lie about me lying in this thread. And clearly you are incapable of reading the EPA report.


img3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-04-03 04:24:57 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: Ah.. not only a liar but you are incapable of reading as well.

Yep, you are both of those things. You repeatedly lie about me lying in this thread. And clearly you are incapable of reading the EPA report.


I am kind of embarrassed for you, but it it's fascinating watching you twist yourself into a knot of illogical conceit.
 
2014-04-03 04:28:30 PM  
 

Lucky LaRue: I really didn't intend to bash liberals that hard today. My initial comment was just laughing at them for reacting to the story by denigrating Breitbart and deflecting the argument to what corporations are doing wrong. Then everyone got all "ZOMG! He called us herbal teabaggers!" and pretending not to know what that means and, well, it kind of degenerated from there.


Breitbart still sucks, and it's not deflection when the headline says we should shutter the EPA due to this story, and everyone points out, uh, we don't do that to all the polluting companies out there, and, then, when everyone pretty much agreed after the first 15 comments that what the EPA did was wrong, but that calls to shut down the EPA are asinine, and you spent the next 90+ comments turning it into pathetic display where you refused to engage in debate and just showed your ass for no reason.  Thanks, for being you, you unique flower.  And, no, I still don't know what an Herbal Teabagger is, and neither does Google.
 
2014-04-03 04:34:18 PM  

RyogaM: but that calls to shut down the EPA are asinine


I can agree to that, but the EPA does need to be put in their place every once in a while.  Lately, it seems like they have been taking pointers from he AFT on how to conduct business and have been interjecting themselves into all kinds of things that they shouldn't.
 
2014-04-03 04:38:35 PM  

RyogaM: Lucky LaRue: I really didn't intend to bash liberals that hard today. My initial comment was just laughing at them for reacting to the story by denigrating Breitbart and deflecting the argument to what corporations are doing wrong. Then everyone got all "ZOMG! He called us herbal teabaggers!" and pretending not to know what that means and, well, it kind of degenerated from there.

Breitbart still sucks, and it's not deflection when the headline says we should shutter the EPA due to this story, and everyone points out, uh, we don't do that to all the polluting companies out there, and, then, when everyone pretty much agreed after the first 15 comments that what the EPA did was wrong, but that calls to shut down the EPA are asinine, and you spent the next 90+ comments turning it into pathetic display where you refused to engage in debate and just showed your ass for no reason.  Thanks, for being you, you unique flower.  And, no, I still don't know what an Herbal Teabagger is, and neither does Google.


I am not engaging in a debate because I don't disagree with you - the EPA was wrong and there needs to be consequences, but those consequences shouldn't entail shutting them down.  I am not the subby for this thread, but my impression of the headline is that subby was shooting for irony and making chariture of liberal attitudes towards corporations.  You appeared to have taken it literally, though.

It's kind of disappointing that you have heard the term "teabagger" used for the last 6 years and yet are still incapable of discerning what an "herbal teabagger" might be, but I suppose I need to learn to to expect subtlety in everyone's thought process.
 
2014-04-03 04:43:29 PM  

Lucky LaRue: cameroncrazy1984: Lucky LaRue: Ah.. not only a liar but you are incapable of reading as well.

Yep, you are both of those things. You repeatedly lie about me lying in this thread. And clearly you are incapable of reading the EPA report.

I am kind of embarrassed for you, but it it's fascinating watching you twist yourself into a knot of illogical conceit.


How so? You should have maybe pointed it out before now, instead of just repeating unfounded accusations post after post.
 
2014-04-03 04:44:07 PM  

HeadLever: RyogaM: but that calls to shut down the EPA are asinine

I can agree to that, but the EPA does need to be put in their place every once in a while.  Lately, it seems like they have been taking pointers from he AFT on how to conduct business and have been interjecting themselves into all kinds of things that they shouldn't.


Such as?
 
2014-04-03 04:49:58 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: HeadLever: RyogaM: but that calls to shut down the EPA are asinine

I can agree to that, but the EPA does need to be put in their place every once in a while.  Lately, it seems like they have been taking pointers from he AFT on how to conduct business and have been interjecting themselves into all kinds of things that they shouldn't.

Such as?


Aww shiat, you wanted examples?? Dammit. Lets not get all technical, now.
 
2014-04-03 04:51:01 PM  

Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..

Aw - defending corporations and attacking government - aren't you adorable.

Thanks for illustrating my point - you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the EPA failed to disclose health risks.  Instead you attack the people reporting the story, the oil and gas industry for fracking, and me for pointing out your absurdity.

This is why nobody takes you people seriously.


This is why nobody takes you seriously and there will never be a Democrat elected president.
 
2014-04-03 04:52:17 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Such as?


Remember the Sackett Case?
 
2014-04-03 04:54:21 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: cameroncrazy1984: HeadLever: RyogaM: but that calls to shut down the EPA are asinine

I can agree to that, but the EPA does need to be put in their place every once in a while.  Lately, it seems like they have been taking pointers from he AFT on how to conduct business and have been interjecting themselves into all kinds of things that they shouldn't.

Such as?

Aww shiat, you wanted examples?? Dammit. Lets not get all technical, now.


Y'all are on shaky ground when even the Washington Post has an article titled "The EPA is earning a reputation for abuse".
 
2014-04-03 04:55:33 PM  

magusdevil: Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..

Aw - defending corporations and attacking government - aren't you adorable.

Thanks for illustrating my point - you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the EPA failed to disclose health risks.  Instead you attack the people reporting the story, the oil and gas industry for fracking, and me for pointing out your absurdity.

This is why nobody takes you people seriously.

This is why nobody takes you seriously and there will never be a Democrat elected president.


Wut?
 
2014-04-03 04:58:40 PM  

Lucky LaRue: I am not engaging in a debate because I don't disagree with you - the EPA was wrong and there needs to be consequences, but those consequences shouldn't entail shutting them down. I am not the subby for this thread, but my impression of the headline is that subby was shooting for irony and making chariture of liberal attitudes towards corporations. You appeared to have taken it literally, though.

It's kind of disappointing that you have heard the term "teabagger" used for the last 6 years and yet are still incapable of discerning what an "herbal teabagger" might be, but I suppose I need to learn to to expect subtlety in everyone's thought process.


Then you agree with 99% of the thread and yet pretended that it epitomized some nebulous Herbal Teabagger echo chamber for no reason.  Congrats.

As for the headline, it epitomizes an idea I've heard again and again from Republicans.  Oh, look at these assholes. http://act.theteaparty.net/12358/its-time-to-shut-down-epa/  or these fancy lads and lasses http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/us/politics/18epa.html?_r=0   These reactions do not occur in a vacuum, there are actually people who think due to one or two bad actions, the entire EPA needs to be shuttered. 

Again as the the TEA party.  The TEA in Teabagger stands for Taxed Enough Already.  They began as a Tax protester group that appealed mainly to Republicans who were embarrassed by the last year of the Bush administration and frustrated by the loss of McCain to Obama.  Every single Teabagger I know personally, and I know dozens, were Bush supporting, pro-life, Republicans who, after Bush reached historic low levels of support, suddenly discovered that they were the true Conservatives all along and Bush was an aberration. Then voted for every Republican they could.

There is no counterpoint to the left, not yet anyway.  Until you have a movement on the left that embraces a new party due to embarrassment with their old party and it's leader, and yet continues to vote for the Democrats and support them at every turn, then you will have an Herbal Teaparty.  That does not exist.  And, until enough people use the phrase for someone to get the definition, you are using a meaningless and quite nonsensical phrase.  Don't be surprised when no one understands it.
 
2014-04-03 05:00:14 PM  

HeadLever: RyogaM: but that calls to shut down the EPA are asinine

I can agree to that, but the EPA does need to be put in their place every once in a while.  Lately, it seems like they have been taking pointers from he AFT on how to conduct business and have been interjecting themselves into all kinds of things that they shouldn't.


Like what?
 
2014-04-03 05:01:58 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: Aww shiat, you wanted examples?? Dammit. Lets not get all technical, now.


The Sackett Case was not really technical as that was an obvious infringement of the Due Process clause of the 5th Amendment.  Another example was the Spruce No. 1 Mine permit lawsuit where they got biatchslapped for trying to veto a permit AFTER they approved it.  Again that heavy handed tactic did not work out too well for them.

Something a bit more 'technical' will be the issues and debate (and resulting lawsuits) regarding a certain stock pond in Wyoming.  This one will have quite a few eyes on it as it moves forward.
 
2014-04-03 05:02:24 PM  

RyogaM: Then you agree with 99% of the thread and yet pretended that it epitomized some nebulous Herbal Teabagger echo chamber for no reason. Congrats.


This thread has gone off on a number of tangents.  It is disingenuous on your part to attempt to conflate them into a single topic just so you can congratulate yourself on scolding me over it.
 
2014-04-03 05:04:30 PM  

yakmans_dad: Like what?


Again, the Sackett case, the Spruce No. 1 Mine case and now the Andy Johnson issue.
 
2014-04-03 05:05:46 PM  
Chapter 2
Studies Obtained Required Approvals,but Sequence of Approvals Not Followed andProcedures Could Be Improved
Conclusions:  The EPA obtained the required approvals for the five studies we reviewed.However, in four of five studies, the branch chief approved the study on the NHEERL sign-off sheet after the initial IRB approval. In addition, several of thereviews did not occur in the order called for in NHEERL guidance, andinformation was missing on the NHEERL sign-off sheet for several studies.


Chapter 3
EPA Obtained Informed Consent From Human Subjects, but Consent Forms Addressed Pollutant Exposure Risks Differently
Conclusions:  The EPA obtained informed consent from the 81 study subjects that participated in the five studies in 2010 and 2011 as required by 40 CFR 26.116. However, the EPA inconsistently addressed pollutant risk in its consent forms. Only two of the five studies' consent forms included the risk of death from exposure to high levels of selected air pollutants such as PM and diesel exhaust, and only one study's consent form included the upper limits of exposure levels. Because EPA's regulations do not define "reasonably foreseeable risks," EPA investigators, the IRB and the HSRRO must define the term using their professional judgment,which leads to inconsistencies in addressing risks in the study consent forms.Such inconsistencies could lead to inconsistent protection of human subjects. TheEPA needs to develop guidance to help ensure more consistent interpretation ofreasonably foreseeable risks. Furthermore, the EPA should provide the studysubjects with a summary of the EPA assessments about the short- and long-termeffects of the pollutants to which human study subjects will be exposed.The EPA's diesel exhaust studies did not include language about the long-term cancer risks of diesel exhaust. The NHEERL manager explained that the cancer risk from diesel exhaust was not relevant to the 2-hour exposures included in the LAMARCK study. However, evidence suggests that at least some human study subjects would like to know if a study involves risk of death, even if the risk is very small. In the future, the EPA should include the long-term risk of cancer to potential subjects in its consent forms so study subjects can make the mostinformed decision about whether to participate in a study.

There's no gotcha-moment here.

And the Breitbart article is blatantly inflammatory where it remarks on diesel studies conducted on children and junkscience's FOIA request, insinuating some sort of cover-up cuz, well, 8-year olds, dude.
 
2014-04-03 05:09:16 PM  

Lucky LaRue: even the Washington Post

An entirely different entity than The Washington Post. Which existed as a liberal newspaper for around 2 years. +40 years ago. Jeff Bezos owns it. Katherine Graham died in 2001 and wasn't really that liberal to begin with. It became a neo-con mouthpiece throughout the Bush admin which constantly did the "even the Washington Post" gag to lie the country into war.

So, "even the Washington Post" is stale.

 
2014-04-03 05:12:43 PM  

yakmans_dad: Lucky LaRue: even the Washington Post

An entirely different entity than The Washington Post. Which existed as a liberal newspaper for around 2 years. +40 years ago. Jeff Bezos owns it. Katherine Graham died in 2001 and wasn't really that liberal to begin with. It became a neo-con mouthpiece throughout the Bush admin which constantly did the "even the Washington Post" gag to lie the country into war.

So, "even the Washington Post" is stale.


Seriously, arguing that the Washington Post isn't liberal is eerily similar to teabaggers insisting that Fox News isn't conservative.
 
2014-04-03 05:13:51 PM  
 
2014-04-03 05:17:23 PM  

HeadLever: yakmans_dad: Like what?

Again, the Sackett case, the Spruce No. 1 Mine case and now the Andy Johnson issue.


The SCOTUS changed what had been the understanding of its jurisdiction. As the appellate court decisions showed.

The Spruce mine decision is ridiculous. The abuses of coal mines on clean water are what the EPA was established to counter.

Why should anyone be able to divert established water ways simply because they really, really, really want to?
 
2014-04-03 05:20:09 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: cameroncrazy1984: HeadLever: RyogaM: but that calls to shut down the EPA are asinine

I can agree to that, but the EPA does need to be put in their place every once in a while.  Lately, it seems like they have been taking pointers from he AFT on how to conduct business and have been interjecting themselves into all kinds of things that they shouldn't.

Such as?

Aww shiat, you wanted examples?? Dammit. Lets not get all technical, now.


I know, crazy right?

HeadLever: yakmans_dad: Like what?

Again, the Sackett case, the Spruce No. 1 Mine case and now the Andy Johnson issue.


Can you please explain what makes those things "not the EPA's problem"?
 
2014-04-03 05:22:31 PM  
forum.gamerage.com
 
2014-04-03 05:22:43 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Seriously, arguing that the Washington Post isn't liberal is eerily similar to teabaggers insisting that Fox News isn't conservative.


lol

Here's a guy that thinks anything that isn't owned by Murdoch is liberal.
 
2014-04-03 05:24:20 PM  
cameroncrazy1984:

HeadLever: yakmans_dad: Like what?

Again, the Sackett case, the Spruce No. 1 Mine case and now the Andy Johnson issue.

Can you please explain what makes those things "not the EPA's problem"?


How do you function on a day-to-day basis?  HeadLever provided you examples you asked for and your best counter argument is to ask him to explain how they are not the EPA's problem.

WTF is wrong with you, dude?
 
2014-04-03 05:25:49 PM  

I_Am_Weasel: That kind of article and its comments are quite brain numbing.

They've managed to reach some sort of clueless nirvana, sort of Shangrai-Duh.


It's Shangri-la.  You might have been thinking of Shambhala (Shambhaduh?)
 
2014-04-03 05:31:02 PM  

Lucky LaRue: arguing that the Washington Post isn't liberal is eerily similar to teabaggers insisting that Fox News isn't conservative.


Fox New isn't conservative, it is fair and balanced. :)

//To me the Washington Post is "center-left" but then again my definition of "left" is pretty farkin far left.
 
2014-04-03 05:32:45 PM  

Flargan: Lucky LaRue: arguing that the Washington Post isn't liberal is eerily similar to teabaggers insisting that Fox News isn't conservative.

Fox New isn't conservative, it is fair and balanced. :)

//To me the Washington Post is "center-left" but then again my definition of "left" is pretty farkin far left.


LOL.. A friend of mine who is an unabashed teabagger calls fox news "center-right"..
 
2014-04-03 05:34:52 PM  

yakmans_dad: The SCOTUS changed what had been the understanding of its jurisdiction


The 'understanding of its jurisdiction' was devoid of the ability of citizens to challenge administrative compliance orders.  Hence the biatchslap.


The Spruce mine decision is ridiculous. The abuses of coal mines on clean water are what the EPA was established to counter.

The 'abuse' of clean water had nothing to do with this case as that was addressed in the earlier approval of the permit.  Again, what was at the heart of this case was the fact that they exceeded their jurisdictional authority by vetoing a permit that was already issued.  You are not arguing that the ends justify the means here, are you?

Why should anyone be able to divert established water ways simply because they really, really, really want to?

So long as they have the required permits, why not?
 
2014-04-03 05:40:20 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Can you please explain what makes those things "not the EPA's problem"?


?

These were defiantly the EPA's problems in the context of how they conduct business. In several of these instances they have been required to correct their jurisdictional 'problems' by various federal courts.
 
2014-04-03 05:45:07 PM  

HeadLever: yakmans_dad: The SCOTUS changed what had been the understanding of its jurisdiction

The 'understanding of its jurisdiction' was devoid of the ability of citizens to challenge administrative compliance orders.  Hence the biatchslap.


The Spruce mine decision is ridiculous. The abuses of coal mines on clean water are what the EPA was established to counter.

The 'abuse' of clean water had nothing to do with this case as that was addressed in the earlier approval of the permit.  Again, what was at the heart of this case was the fact that they exceeded their jurisdictional authority by vetoing a permit that was already issued.  You are not arguing that the ends justify the means here, are you?

Why should anyone be able to divert established water ways simply because they really, really, really want to?

So long as they have the required permits, why not?



The Supreme Court refused Monday to hear an appeal from a coal mining company challenging the Environmental Protection Agency's decision to veto a West Virginia coal project.
EPA blocked the permit for the Spruce No. 1 mine in 2011, four years after the Army Corps of Engineers under President George W. Bush (R) granted the permit to Mingo Logan, a subsidiary of Arch Coal Inc. The permit, granted under the Clean Water Act, would have allowed the company to dump waste materials into waterways.

Arch brought the case to the Supreme Court after an appeals court ruled in favor of EPA.
Arch had argued in court papers that the Clean Water Act "does not remotely grant EPA a retroactive trump card that trivializes the Corps' authority and destroys the regulated community's ability to rely on the permit." The law allows EPA to block a permit before it is issued, but Arch argued that the same power does not apply retroactively.
Business groups such as the American Petroleum Institute, the National Mining Association and the Chamber of Commerce supported Arch's appeal, as did 27 states, including West Virginia.
The Supreme Court did not give a reason for rejecting the case. The rejection does not affect a separate federal lawsuit Arch has brought over different issues in the Spruce rejection.

Hmph. Bush and the Army Corps of Engineers issued the permit. The EPA quashed it. The SCOTUS refused to hear Arch Coal, Inc.'s appeal. The EPA even gave some reasons why, under the authority of the CWA.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this doesn't seem to fit that whole EPA-overstepping-its-authority story. Seems the EPA reviewed a permit issued by a separate governmental body and found the operations to be in violation of federal law. And that "diversion of waterways" was actually "disposal of mining waste in streams " at the mine.
 
2014-04-03 05:49:39 PM  

HeadLever: yakmans_dad: The SCOTUS changed what had been the understanding of its jurisdiction

The 'understanding of its jurisdiction' was devoid of the ability of citizens to challenge administrative compliance orders.  Hence the biatchslap.

Except that had been the process until the SCOTUS changed it.

The Spruce mine decision is ridiculous. The abuses of coal mines on clean water are what the EPA was established to counter.

The 'abuse' of clean water had nothing to do with this case as that was addressed in the earlier approval of the permit.  Again, what was at the heart of this case was the fact that they exceeded their jurisdictional authority by vetoing a permit that was already issued.  You are not arguing that the ends justify the means here, are you?

Why should they not be able to respond to a different  undetstanding of the situation.

Why should anyone be able to divert established water ways simply because they really, really, really want to?

So long as they have the required permits, why not?


They had a state permit. The EPA said they needed one from the Army Corps of Engineers.

You had stated that the EPA was getting into novel areas. What they've been getting into is the same thing they were assigned to do from the beginning. I hardly think 3 instances of disagreement over a span of many years is some kind of menacing appetite. In what human endeavor aren't there disagreements?
 
2014-04-03 05:52:56 PM  
I can't take anyone who thinks fluoride is a poison seriously.

/In the quantities consumed in municipal water, that is
 
2014-04-03 05:55:42 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: Hmph. Bush and the Army Corps of Engineers issued the permit. The EPA quashed it. The SCOTUS refused to hear Arch Coal, Inc.'s appeal. The EPA even gave some reasons why, under the authority of the CWA.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this doesn't seem to fit that whole EPA-overstepping-its-authority story.


Yeah, looking at that more it went like this

Bush and ACoE issued the permit with the EPA saying it would not veto
EPA vetoed the permit
Federal District Court biatchslapped the EPA saying that it could not retroactively veto a permit (my argument above)
Federal District Appeals court Biatchslapped the FDC saying 'Yes they can'
Case was submitted to the SCotUS who refused to hear the case.

My info here was based upon only the first three parts.  Good catch.
 
2014-04-03 05:57:12 PM  

Lucky LaRue: cameroncrazy1984:

HeadLever: yakmans_dad: Like what?

Again, the Sackett case, the Spruce No. 1 Mine case and now the Andy Johnson issue.

Can you please explain what makes those things "not the EPA's problem"?

How do you function on a day-to-day basis?  HeadLever provided you examples you asked for and your best counter argument is to ask him to explain how they are not the EPA's problem.

WTF is wrong with you, dude?


He provided names of things, he didn't provide examples. WTF is wrong with you that you feel the need to defend bare assert...oh wait, I answered my own question.
 
2014-04-03 06:01:04 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-04-03 06:03:40 PM  

yakmans_dad: The EPA said they needed one from the Army Corps of Engineers.


yakmans_dad: The EPA said they needed one from the Army Corps of Engineers.


The ACoE also says (pdf):
Are your activities exempt from a Section 404 permit?
Certain activities are exempt from the requirement to get a Section 404 permit. These include discharging dredged or fill material from normal and ongoing farming, forestry (silviculture), and ranching activities; maintaining currently serviceable structures such as dikes and dams, including emergency reconstruction of recently damaged parts; constructing/maintaining farm or stock ponds or irrigation ditches; maintaining drainage ditches; constructing temporary sedimentation basins on a construction site

That is why this will be watched from all sides.  The EPA says one thing and the rules seem to say something else.  Hence my point.
 
2014-04-03 06:07:20 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: He provided names of things, he didn't provide examples.


'Low-information voter' typing detected.
 
2014-04-03 06:09:00 PM  

HeadLever: The ACoE also says (pdf):


Not sure why the link did not come through   Try again:
 
2014-04-03 06:10:08 PM  

HeadLever: cameroncrazy1984: Can you please explain what makes those things "not the EPA's problem"?

?

These were defiantly the EPA's problems in the context of how they conduct business. In several of these instances they have been required to correct their jurisdictional 'problems' by various federal courts.


These problems were defiant? How so? Can you explain?
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-04-03 06:10:08 PM  

RyogaM: Again as the the TEA party. The TEA in Teabagger stands for Taxed Enough Already. They began as a Tax protester group that appealed mainly to Republicans who were embarrassed by the last year of the Bush administration

...

...and is ending as a group of people that are both pants on head retarded, has no morals, and is proudly hypocritical on every subject.  One of the biggest groups of useful idiots for the oligarchy ever created.
 
2014-04-03 06:10:27 PM  
Obvious solution is to sell the EPA to the Koch brothers, let them run it (to the ground), then all the teabaggies wont get butthurt when the Enviromental Kock Protection Agency uses their towns water supply as a storage facility for some chemical which produces horrible side affects. Just so long as nobody sends them Obama-water damn it.
 
2014-04-03 06:10:31 PM  
So how's that "I'm from the government and I'm here to help!" going for ya?  I don't think this is what was originally intended when they created the EPA.
 
2014-04-03 06:14:12 PM  

bobothemagnificent: So how's that "I'm from the government and I'm here to help!" going for ya?  I don't think this is what was originally intended when they created the EPA.


You don't think they intended for the EPA to test the effects of pollution on humans?

What the fark do you think the EPA is for?
 
2014-04-03 06:14:38 PM  

HeadLever: yakmans_dad: The EPA said they needed one from the Army Corps of Engineers.

yakmans_dad: The EPA said they needed one from the Army Corps of Engineers.

The ACoE also says (pdf):
Are your activities exempt from a Section 404 permit?
Certain activities are exempt from the requirement to get a Section 404 permit. These include discharging dredged or fill material from normal and ongoing farming, forestry (silviculture), and ranching activities; maintaining currently serviceable structures such as dikes and dams, including emergency reconstruction of recently damaged parts; constructing/maintaining farm or stock ponds or irrigation ditches; maintaining drainage ditches; constructing temporary sedimentation basins on a construction site

That is why this will be watched from all sides.  The EPA says one thing and the rules seem to say something else.  Hence my point.


Erm, actually it looks like the EPA was doing exactly what it says it would: EPA officials have questioned the Spruce Mine from the beginning and, in a comment letter submitted to the corps under President George W. Bush in 2006, complained about the potential impacts and said more changes in the operation were needed.
In January 2011, the EPA rescinded the corps' approval for Arch to dump waste rock and dirt into 6.6 miles of Pigeonroost Branch, Oldhouse Branch and their tributaries. The agency said it would allow mining to continue on another portion of the site, burying nearly a mile of streams in the Seng Camp Creek watershed, because work there already had begun.
The EPA cited the growing scientific evidence that mountaintop removal mining significantly damages water quality downstream, and noted an independent engineering study that found Arch Coal could have greatly reduced the Spruce Mine's impacts.


And the Appeals Court said the EPA had broad powers with no temporal limit under the CWA: "In its Tuesday decision, the appeals court said the Clean Water Act contains 'unambiguous language' that 'manifests the Congress's intent to confer on EPA a broad veto power extending beyond the permit issuance.' "

I don't think Spruce Mine No. 1 is really relevant to your point. Sackett, perhaps, but Spruce isn't cleaning up to good as support.
 
2014-04-03 06:15:19 PM  
Looks like this thread is all about Lucky LaRue. fark that shiat.
 
2014-04-03 06:27:21 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: Erm, actually it looks like the EPA was doing exactly what it says it would:


This point here was in regards to the Andy Johnson issue, not the Spruce Mine.
 
2014-04-03 06:27:40 PM  

Tarkus: Looks like this thread is all about Lucky LaRue. fark that shiat.


There really should be an entire tab dedicated to my awesomeness.
 
2014-04-03 06:32:29 PM  

Tarkus: Looks like this thread is all about Lucky LaRue. fark that shiat.


Dude I finally stuck his ass in the can.
 
2014-04-03 06:34:34 PM  

HeadLever: rzrwiresunrise: Erm, actually it looks like the EPA was doing exactly what it says it would:

This point here was in regards to the Andy Johnson issue, not the Spruce Mine.


And yet you named it as an issue where the EPA overstepped. Which is it?
 
2014-04-03 06:40:32 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: And yet you named it as an issue where the EPA overstepped


What makes this point mutually exclusive with the EPA overstepping in the Andy Johnson issue?
 
2014-04-03 06:44:56 PM  

Lucky LaRue: derp


WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?
 
2014-04-03 06:47:11 PM  

HeadLever: rzrwiresunrise: Erm, actually it looks like the EPA was doing exactly what it says it would:

This point here was in regards to the Andy Johnson issue, not the Spruce Mine.


Ah.

HeadLever: yakmans_dad:Why should anyone be able to divert established water ways simply because they really, really, really want to?

So long as they have the required permits, why not?


Well, it looks like the man failed to get the proper federal permit. I imagine that's important to the EPA since rivers like the Green and the Blacks Fork don't just stop at state lines.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-04-03 06:49:08 PM  

HeadLever: cameroncrazy1984: And yet you named it as an issue where the EPA overstepped

What makes this point mutually exclusive with the EPA overstepping in the Andy Johnson issue?


Anything that cost a corporate organization over 50 cents.

//fark useful idiots
 
2014-04-03 06:49:42 PM  

Kittypie070: Tarkus: Looks like this thread is all about Lucky LaRue. fark that shiat.

Dude I finally stuck his ass in the can.


Whhy AREYOU  HErBALL TEA BADGERS So AFrAID OF HeERRING aternait vewPointS??/?
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-04-03 06:50:23 PM  
oh, by the way... this hall-of-shame tweet...

www.motherjones.com

...is from a Breitbart contributor.
 
2014-04-03 06:52:44 PM  

cc_rider: grumpfuff: junkscience.com

Isn't that site..well, a bunch of junk science?

Run by a paid shill>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Milloy


Steven Milloy is right at the front of the "douse the world in DDT Rachel Carson is teh EVUL!" crowd.  S/he/it is also a climate change denier (img1.fark.net).  Steven Milloy believes in curtailing pollution the way the Koch brothers believe in Karl Marx.
 
2014-04-03 06:53:53 PM  

HeadLever: cameroncrazy1984: He provided names of things, he didn't provide examples.

'Low-information voter' typing detected.


dev.solita.fi
 
2014-04-03 06:56:25 PM  

udhq: Kittypie070: Tarkus: Looks like this thread is all about Lucky LaRue. fark that shiat.

Dude I finally stuck his ass in the can.

Whhy AREYOU  HErBALL TEA BADGERS So AFrAID OF HeERRING aternait vewPointS??/?


I don't think you are *afraid* of hearing alternate points of view, necessarily. Say "incapable", rather, and you will be closer to the point.
 
2014-04-03 07:01:55 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?


Seriously - we all have a solid understanding of what a teabagger is as we've dealt with their intractable black-and-white worldview for 6 years, now. I find your claim not to understand the concept of a herbal teabagger disingenuous at the very least, and at the worst, a sign of intellectual dishonesty.
 
2014-04-03 07:02:03 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Seriously, arguing that the Washington Post isn't liberal is eerily similar to teabaggers insisting that Fox News isn't conservative.


So what liberal pundits does Fox Propaganda give a soapbox to in the way that the Washington Compost gives column space to George Will and Charles Krauthammer?
 
2014-04-03 07:05:22 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: Seriously, arguing that the Washington Post isn't liberal is eerily similar to teabaggers insisting that Fox News isn't conservative.

So what liberal pundits does Fox Propaganda give a soapbox to in the way that the Washington Compost gives column space to George Will and Charles Krauthammer?


What exactly are you trying to prove? That I am wrong, and the Washington Post isn't a liberal newspaper? Or are you trying to cast your own argument that the Post isn't as partisan as Fox News?
 
2014-04-03 07:10:04 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?

Seriously - we all have a solid understanding of what a teabagger is as we've dealt with their intractable black-and-white worldview for 6 years, now. I find your claim not to understand the concept of a herbal teabagger disingenuous at the very least, and at the worst, a sign of intellectual dishonesty.


So then a faux clever bit of NO U!  That's about what it looked like.

Teabaggers believe in Gold und Silber über alles, government small enough to fit in your bedroom and cutting off the Welfare Queens except for the very expensive Welfare Queens that blow Scary Mooselimbs to bits (as long as someone else goes to fight and generations not yet born pay the bill).

Now what, according to you, are the liberal counterparts of these positions?  What actual positions do "herbal teabaggers" take, according to you?
 
2014-04-03 07:10:22 PM  

Lucky LaRue: I don't think you are *afraid* of hearing alternate points of view, necessarily. Say "incapable", rather, and you will be closer to the point.


Well, if I were to stumble upon one in the thread, I would be all ears, but so far, it's just been crickets.

Such is the life of the elusive herbal tea badger...
 
2014-04-03 07:10:37 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?


A failed meme full of fail posted by artists whose chief medium is fail.
 
2014-04-03 07:13:17 PM  

udhq: Lucky LaRue: I don't think you are *afraid* of hearing alternate points of view, necessarily. Say "incapable", rather, and you will be closer to the point.

Well, if I were to stumble upon one in the thread, I would be all ears, but so far, it's just been crickets.

Such is the life of the elusive herbal tea badger...


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-04-03 07:13:40 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?


It's an insult on par with "honky" in its ability to offend or irritate.
 
2014-04-03 07:14:30 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?


The platonic ideal of conservative humor.
 
2014-04-03 07:15:47 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?


A phrase used by people that beat off while watching Hannity.
 
2014-04-03 07:16:33 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?

Seriously - we all have a solid understanding of what a teabagger is as we've dealt with their intractable black-and-white worldview for 6 years, now. I find your claim not to understand the concept of a herbal teabagger disingenuous at the very least, and at the worst, a sign of intellectual dishonesty.

So then a faux clever bit of NO U!  That's about what it looked like.

Teabaggers believe in Gold und Silber über alles, government small enough to fit in your bedroom and cutting off the Welfare Queens except for the very expensive Welfare Queens that blow Scary Mooselimbs to bits (as long as someone else goes to fight and generations not yet born pay the bill).

Now what, according to you, are the liberal counterparts of these positions?  What actual positions do "herbal teabaggers" take, according to you?


It's really less about the position and more about the intractability of those positions.  It's about the proclivity to treat political issues like religious dogma where there is a dichotomy of right and wrong and, if you don't adhere completely to their platform, then you are wrong.  If you are a liberal, then you probably know and can site multiple instances of teabaggers turning on conservatives (like McCain, Dole, and even recently Lindsay Graham) and calling them RINOs.  The same phenomena happens on the left - even now the herbal teabaggers are convinced that Hillary isn't a true liberal, and are pushing for Warren as one of their own to be their next banner carrier.
 
2014-04-03 07:16:35 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?


Your mom on weed!
 
2014-04-03 07:17:55 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?


A code phrase that virgins use like a secret handshake
 
2014-04-03 07:18:43 PM  

Epic Fap Session: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?

It's an insult on par with "honky" in its ability to offend or irritate.


I am glad it offends radical liberals.  Their ideology is offensive and is deserving of being shamed.
 
2014-04-03 07:21:14 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Epic Fap Session: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?

It's an insult on par with "honky" in its ability to offend or irritate.

I am glad it offends radical liberals.  Their ideology is offensive and is deserving of being shamed.


Offends? This is fun.

BTW, your failure to properly interpret the emotions of others tells me your probably "on the spectrum." If this is the case, let me know. I'm not comfortable mocking handicapped people.
 
2014-04-03 07:21:14 PM  

Epic Fap Session: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?

It's an insult on par with "honky" in its ability to offend or irritate.


splitsider.com
 
2014-04-03 07:24:06 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: udhq: Lucky LaRue: I don't think you are *afraid* of hearing alternate points of view, necessarily. Say "incapable", rather, and you will be closer to the point.

Well, if I were to stumble upon one in the thread, I would be all ears, but so far, it's just been crickets.

Such is the life of the elusive herbal tea badger...

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 600x439]



See, it's all political!  The bunny represents economic populism, and the cupcakes represent cupcakes!
 
2014-04-03 07:25:54 PM  

Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: Epic Fap Session: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?

It's an insult on par with "honky" in its ability to offend or irritate.

I am glad it offends radical liberals.  Their ideology is offensive and is deserving of being shamed.

Offends? This is fun.

BTW, your failure to properly interpret the emotions of others tells me your probably "on the spectrum." If this is the case, let me know. I'm not comfortable mocking handicapped people.


At least try for a consistent, logical argument.

You are able to look at the radical right and label them - I am sure you have many labels, but "teabagger" is certainly one of them.  What I find curious is how you are seemingly incapable of extrapolating that, if radicalism exists on the right, then it surely exists on the left.
 
2014-04-03 07:26:33 PM  

udhq: See, it's all political!  The bunny represents economic populism, and the cupcakes represent cupcakes!


Those are potato-cakes. You're no true patriot.
 
2014-04-03 07:30:03 PM  

Lucky LaRue: udhq:
Hey, if the conversation is too complicated, it's no shame to walk away from it.  But there's no need to sulk in a corner - there are plenty of people in this thread whose ideas are Herbal Teabagger approved, and you can happily agree with each other's talking points all day, if that's what floats your boat.


rzrwiresunrise: udhq: See, it's all political!  The bunny represents economic populism, and the cupcakes represent cupcakes!

Those are potato-cakes. You're no true patriot.


See, udhq?  I told you that you'd fine someone to agree with all day.
 
2014-04-03 07:30:41 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: Well, it looks like the man failed to get the proper federal permit.


The issue here is that the EPA is claiming that he needs the permit, but he seems to be qualified for the exceptions that I was linking to earlier.  For this, the jury is still out, but you can bet that it will become a pretty large case.

The bigger issue here is that navigable waters is not well defined (read Alito's comments in the Sackett case).  Regarding the Johnson case, it is being framed as the EPA trying to assert jurisdiction where it shouldn't.  This will ultimately be left to the courts.
 
2014-04-03 07:32:24 PM  

HeadLever: rzrwiresunrise: Well, it looks like the man failed to get the proper federal permit.

The issue here is that the EPA is claiming that he needs the permit, but he seems to be qualified for the exceptions that I was linking to earlier.  For this, the jury is still out, but you can bet that it will become a pretty large case.

The bigger issue here is that navigable waters is not well defined (read Alito's comments in the Sackett case).  Regarding the Johnson case, it is being framed as the EPA trying to assert jurisdiction where it shouldn't.  This will ultimately be left to the courts.


So it shall.
 
2014-04-03 07:41:12 PM  

Lucky LaRue: Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: Epic Fap Session: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?

It's an insult on par with "honky" in its ability to offend or irritate.

I am glad it offends radical liberals.  Their ideology is offensive and is deserving of being shamed.

Offends? This is fun.

BTW, your failure to properly interpret the emotions of others tells me your probably "on the spectrum." If this is the case, let me know. I'm not comfortable mocking handicapped people.

At least try for a consistent, logical argument.

You are able to look at the radical right and label them - I am sure you have many labels, but "teabagger" is certainly one of them.  What I find curious is how you are seemingly incapable of extrapolating that, if radicalism exists on the right, then it surely exists on the left.


Honky isn't offensive. Neither is herbal teabagger. Both are failed insults. I'm being consistent.

I'm sorry about your affliction. Keep your chin, lil buddy.
 
2014-04-03 07:43:15 PM  

Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: Epic Fap Session: Lucky LaRue: Epic Fap Session: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Lucky LaRue: derp

WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?

It's an insult on par with "honky" in its ability to offend or irritate.

I am glad it offends radical liberals.  Their ideology is offensive and is deserving of being shamed.

Offends? This is fun.

BTW, your failure to properly interpret the emotions of others tells me your probably "on the spectrum." If this is the case, let me know. I'm not comfortable mocking handicapped people.

At least try for a consistent, logical argument.

You are able to look at the radical right and label them - I am sure you have many labels, but "teabagger" is certainly one of them.  What I find curious is how you are seemingly incapable of extrapolating that, if radicalism exists on the right, then it surely exists on the left.

Honky isn't offensive. Neither is herbal teabagger. Both are failed insults. I'm being consistent.

I'm sorry about your affliction. Keep your chin, lil buddy.


Epic Fap Session:  "Herbal Teabagger" offends and irritates
Lucky LaRue:  I'm glad it offends
Epic Fap Session:  Offends?  It doesn't offend

Lulz..
 
2014-04-03 07:45:13 PM  
Since you snipped my quote:

It's an insult on par with "honky" in its ability to offend or irritate.
 
2014-04-03 07:50:41 PM  
I've seen better trolling on Xbox Live, you minor leaguer.
 
2014-04-03 07:52:37 PM  

Epic Fap Session: I've seen better trolling on Xbox Live, you minor leaguer.


It isn't trolling to point out the inconsistencies in your argument.  But if calling me a troll makes the cognitive dissonance go away, then I'm ok with that.
 
2014-04-03 08:16:35 PM  

Lucky LaRue: It isn't trolling to point out the inconsistencies in your argument. But if calling me a troll makes the cognitive dissonance go away, then I'm ok with that.


I like how you keep insulting people, then pretending you just made a point, and THEN pretending that your views are why everybody is making fun of you.

Yup, this thread has been a real hoot.
 
2014-04-03 08:26:49 PM  

udhq: Lucky LaRue: It isn't trolling to point out the inconsistencies in your argument. But if calling me a troll makes the cognitive dissonance go away, then I'm ok with that.

I like how you keep insulting people, then pretending you just made a point, and THEN pretending that your views are why everybody is making fun of you.

Yup, this thread has been a real hoot.


The next time someone asks me what a herbal teabagger is, I'm just going to link this thread and advise them to read yours and Cameron's comments.
 
2014-04-03 08:37:59 PM  

Lucky LaRue: The next time someone asks me what a herbal teabagger is, I'm just going to link this thread and advise them to read yours and Cameron's comments.


Oh, I absolutely own up to being an herbal teabadger.  They're so fuzzy and delightful!
 
2014-04-03 08:58:26 PM  
The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger
 
2014-04-03 09:09:05 PM  

SpacePirate: The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger


You sound concerned.....

Its Breitbart. I think we'll be fine.
 
2014-04-03 09:36:39 PM  

ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger

You sound concerned.....

Its Breitbart. I think we'll be fine.


Nope. Someone on the internet said it, so it must be true. The sky is perpetually falling.

Nah, but here, have some other sources:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-02/epa-failed-to-disclose-c an cer-risk-to-people-in-research-studies 
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/watchdog-epa-human-test-s ub jects-not-always-told-about-lethal-risks-studies/ 

I don't know who would sign up to be a human guinea pig, but I think I'll keep my day job.
 
2014-04-03 09:54:07 PM  

SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger

You sound concerned.....

Its Breitbart. I think we'll be fine.

Nope. Someone on the internet said it, so it must be true. The sky is perpetually falling.

Nah, but here, have some other sources:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-02/epa-failed-to-disclose-c an cer-risk-to-people-in-research-studies 
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/watchdog-epa-human-test-s ub jects-not-always-told-about-lethal-risks-studies/ 

I don't know who would sign up to be a human guinea pig, but I think I'll keep my day job.


You might want to read the actual article linked further up the thread. It's not all that "scandalous".
 
2014-04-03 10:00:28 PM  

SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger

You sound concerned.....

Its Breitbart. I think we'll be fine.

Nope. Someone on the internet said it, so it must be true. The sky is perpetually falling.

Nah, but here, have some other sources:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-02/epa-failed-to-disclose-c an cer-risk-to-people-in-research-studies
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/watchdog-epa-human-test-s ub jects-not-always-told-about-lethal-risks-studies/

I don't know who would sign up to be a human guinea pig, but I think I'll keep my day job.


Look I'm gonna give you some earnest advice, one troll to another. Quoting shiat like Business Week and FOX News is only going to make people laugh at you. Citations are good but not when they come from biased sources.

*Scary puts trollololo cap back on*
 
2014-04-03 10:04:36 PM  

ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger

You sound concerned.....

Its Breitbart. I think we'll be fine.

Nope. Someone on the internet said it, so it must be true. The sky is perpetually falling.

Nah, but here, have some other sources:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-02/epa-failed-to-disclose-c an cer-risk-to-people-in-research-studies
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/watchdog-epa-human-test-s ub jects-not-always-told-about-lethal-risks-studies/

I don't know who would sign up to be a human guinea pig, but I think I'll keep my day job.

Look I'm gonna give you some earnest advice, one troll to another. Quoting shiat like Business Week and FOX News is only going to make people laugh at you. Citations are good but not when they come from biased sources.

*Scary puts trollololo cap back on*


Dude.  Trolling is *not* cool, and totally against the FARq.
 
2014-04-03 10:10:02 PM  

Lucky LaRue: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger

You sound concerned.....

Its Breitbart. I think we'll be fine.

Nope. Someone on the internet said it, so it must be true. The sky is perpetually falling.

Nah, but here, have some other sources:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-02/epa-failed-to-disclose-c an cer-risk-to-people-in-research-studies
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/watchdog-epa-human-test-s ub jects-not-always-told-about-lethal-risks-studies/

I don't know who would sign up to be a human guinea pig, but I think I'll keep my day job.

Look I'm gonna give you some earnest advice, one troll to another. Quoting shiat like Business Week and FOX News is only going to make people laugh at you. Citations are good but not when they come from biased sources.

*Scary puts trollololo cap back on*

Dude.  Trolling is *not* cool, and totally against the FARq.

0-media-cdn.foolz.us
 
2014-04-03 10:15:33 PM  

ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger

You sound concerned.....

Its Breitbart. I think we'll be fine.

Nope. Someone on the internet said it, so it must be true. The sky is perpetually falling.

Nah, but here, have some other sources:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-02/epa-failed-to-disclose-c an cer-risk-to-people-in-research-studies
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/watchdog-epa-human-test-s ub jects-not-always-told-about-lethal-risks-studies/

I don't know who would sign up to be a human guinea pig, but I think I'll keep my day job.

Look I'm gonna give you some earnest advice, one troll to another. Quoting shiat like Business Week and FOX News is only going to make people laugh at you. Citations are good but not when they come from biased sources.

*Scary puts trollololo cap back on*



Brah, so what's not biased? Maybe reuters? Most things have spin, you just have to look for common threads and facts.

img.fark.net

My bad, here's another:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/report-epa-fails-disclose -r isks-human-tests-23164469 

*Steals trollololo cap*
 
2014-04-03 10:21:37 PM  

SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger

You sound concerned.....

Its Breitbart. I think we'll be fine.

Nope. Someone on the internet said it, so it must be true. The sky is perpetually falling.

Nah, but here, have some other sources:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-02/epa-failed-to-disclose-c an cer-risk-to-people-in-research-studies
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/watchdog-epa-human-test-s ub jects-not-always-told-about-lethal-risks-studies/

I don't know who would sign up to be a human guinea pig, but I think I'll keep my day job.

Look I'm gonna give you some earnest advice, one troll to another. Quoting shiat like Business Week and FOX News is only going to make people laugh at you. Citations are good but not when they come from biased sources.

*Scary puts trollololo cap back on*


Brah, so what's not biased? Maybe reuters? Most things have spin, you just have to look for common threads and facts.

[img.fark.net image 475x382]

My bad, here's another:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/report-epa-fails-disclose -r isks-human-tests-23164469

*Steals trollololo cap*


ABC News eh.... 50/50 but MSNBC. Their word isn't worth shiat CNN either.
 
x23
2014-04-03 10:28:21 PM  

MrBallou: From epahumantesting.com:

XCON Study. Starting in 2004, the EPA exposed adults with metabolic syndrome (including the elderly) to high levels of toxic PM2.5.

OMEGACON Study. Starting in 2007, the EPA exposed older adults to high levels of diesel exhaust (which contains PM2.5 and other "toxic" substances) and then "treated" them with omega-3 fatty acids to see if whatever harm caused by PM2.5 was mitigated. In 2008, the diesel exhaust was replaced by plain PM2.5.

KINGCON Study. Starting in 2008, the EPA exposed older adults with moderate asthma to PM2.5.

CAPTAIN Study. The EPA is now recruiting older adults (including the elderly up to 75 years) to "... find out if a component of ambient air pollution to which we are all exposed, particulate matter (PM), produced by car and coal-fired power plants, increases the risks of changes in the heart and whether genotype will lessen the risks caused by PM.



wait wait wait... so exposure to PM2.5 is bad now? because where i live the teabaggers are HUGE proponents of being able to expose everyone around them to PM2.5 because of freedoms.

they buy poorly made external wood boilers with insufficient smokestacks (eliminating the chimney effect) and keep them fired up all winter long in a city with a big inversion. basically choking out all their neighbors.

a borough proposal to ban their crappy wood boilers caused a massive uproar amongst "libertarians" and teabaggers because of "government regulation" and "socialism" and trying to take away their constitutional rights to make their neighborhoods smell like a year-round bonfire.

so i am really confused that it is suddenly bad.
 
2014-04-03 10:29:34 PM  

ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger

You sound concerned.....

Its Breitbart. I think we'll be fine.

Nope. Someone on the internet said it, so it must be true. The sky is perpetually falling.

Nah, but here, have some other sources:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-02/epa-failed-to-disclose-c an cer-risk-to-people-in-research-studies
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/watchdog-epa-human-test-s ub jects-not-always-told-about-lethal-risks-studies/

I don't know who would sign up to be a human guinea pig, but I think I'll keep my day job.

Look I'm gonna give you some earnest advice, one troll to another. Quoting shiat like Business Week and FOX News is only going to make people laugh at you. Citations are good but not when they come from biased sources.

*Scary puts trollololo cap back on*


Brah, so what's not biased? Maybe reuters? Most things have spin, you just have to look for common threads and facts.

[img.fark.net image 475x382]

My bad, here's another:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/report-epa-fails-disclose -r isks-human-tests-23164469

*Steals trollololo cap*

ABC News eh.... 50/50 but MSNBC. Their word isn't worth shiat CNN either.


Journalism truly sucks balls at the moment. I'm usually stuck in a Catch-22. I can either link to a biased MSM source and get called on it, or link to an alternative media source and get called on it.

It's a rough time to be an internet forum tough guy.
 
2014-04-03 10:35:14 PM  

SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: ScaryBottles: SpacePirate: The EPA might have a human experimentation scandal on its hands and you champs are arguing about the dumbest shiat. Well played.

/herbal teabagger

You sound concerned.....

Its Breitbart. I think we'll be fine.

Nope. Someone on the internet said it, so it must be true. The sky is perpetually falling.

Nah, but here, have some other sources:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-02/epa-failed-to-disclose-c an cer-risk-to-people-in-research-studies
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/watchdog-epa-human-test-s ub jects-not-always-told-about-lethal-risks-studies/

I don't know who would sign up to be a human guinea pig, but I think I'll keep my day job.

Look I'm gonna give you some earnest advice, one troll to another. Quoting shiat like Business Week and FOX News is only going to make people laugh at you. Citations are good but not when they come from biased sources.

*Scary puts trollololo cap back on*


Brah, so what's not biased? Maybe reuters? Most things have spin, you just have to look for common threads and facts.

[img.fark.net image 475x382]

My bad, here's another:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/report-epa-fails-disclose -r isks-human-tests-23164469

*Steals trollololo cap*

ABC News eh.... 50/50 but MSNBC. Their word isn't worth shiat CNN either.

Journalism truly sucks balls at the moment. I'm usually stuck in a Catch-22. I can either link to a biased MSM source and get called on it, or link to an alternative media source and get called on it.

It's a rough time to be an internet forum tough guy.


True true but on the plus side there is no middle ground anymore so whatever side you're on you have a lot more to work with.
 
2014-04-03 10:56:53 PM  

SpacePirate: My bad, here's another:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/report-epa-fails-disclose -r isks-human-tests-23164469


/sigh

FTA:  While diesel fumes include 19 potentially cancer-causing substances, an EPA manager said cancer risk was irrelevant because subjects were exposed for two-hour periods. Cancer typically develops over years of exposure.

The EPA agreed to disclose all risks on future consent forms. The agency was not found in violation of any law or regulation.

So test subjects were exposed to what you'd experience everyday in a major city during rush hour but because they neglected to list the "long term effects" due to it being very short-term exposure it's Tuskegee 2 Electric Boogaloo.
 
2014-04-03 11:48:22 PM  
They must've learned it from the Army.

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20121102/NEWS/211020309/Army-No-ris k- from-secret-St-Louis-tests

Haven't read the non-Breitbart articles yet but this was the first thing to pop in my head.
 
2014-04-04 12:10:45 AM  
OK, let me try.

The Herbal Tea Party is an astroturf movement of left wing radicals, funded by GEORGE SOROS! through a shadowy network of front groups with the aim of taking over the Democrat Party and pushing it far to the left.  Aims include the dictatorship of the global proletariat, abolishing traditional marriage in favor of teh ghey, an abortionplex in every major city and persecuting good Christians in the name of Allah and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Maybe Glenn Beck was on to something?

lh3.ggpht.com
 
2014-04-04 12:29:12 AM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: OK, let me try.

The Herbal Tea Party is an astroturf movement of left wing radicals, funded by GEORGE SOROS! through a shadowy network of front trout groups with the aim of taking over the Democrat Party and pushing it far to the left.  Aims include the dictatorship of the global proletariat, abolishing traditional marriage in favor of teh ghey, an abortionplex in every major city and persecuting good Christians in the name of Allah and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Maybe Glenn Beck was on to something?


Yeah he was freebasing the chalk dust.
 
2014-04-04 01:12:48 AM  

Serious Black: Lucky LaRue: Serious Black: Lucky LaRue: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure change the subject. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

FTFY..

Okay. Let's suppose you're right that the EPA should be completely shut down for the argument stated in the headline. How does that argument not also apply to companies that willfully expose people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks?

Uh.. just because I think the EPA should be held accountable for what it does to people doesn't mean I am making an argument for it to be shut down.

Where do you guys come up with your assumptions?

That's what the headline says, that the EPA should be shut down. Regardless of that, the exact punishment is not important, so let me rephrase my question.

Let's suppose the EPA should be held accountable, whatever that entails, for willfully exposing people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks. How does that argument not also apply to companies that willfully expose people to toxic pollutants without informing them of the risks?


because freedom?
 
2014-04-04 09:22:30 AM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: WTF is an "herbal teabagger"?


Epic Fap Session: It's an insult on par with "honky" in its ability to offend or irritate.


Lucky LaRue: I am glad it offends


ts1.mm.bing.net
 
2014-04-04 11:43:57 AM  
Oil companies, frackers, etc pollute, but the pollution is an unintended byproduct of their production process.  They don't intend to hurt people.  They are trying to produce oil and gas, products consumers demand and use.  They pay penalties for the pollution.  They have lost lawsuits from people who have been harmed by them and paid them restitution.  There are health codes and restrictions and rules they are required to meet to stay in business.

The EPA here, backed by their official distinction and authority as part of our Federal government and at the approval of bureaucrats, paid for by our tax dollars intentionally mislead people with the sole purpose of harming them.  They intentionally sought to harm American citizens.

these two things are not the same.
 
2014-04-04 12:15:54 PM  

cman: Ctrl-Alt-Del: Lucky LaRue: Just because I find the radical left worthy if scorn and ridicule, doesn't mean I'm a conservative shill for the GOP. All it means is I find the intractablilty of herbal tea baggers as ridiculous as I find it in the tea baggers on the right.

You know, it's funny. I don't know when I marked you in my favorites, but "complete and utter 'both sides r bad' douche" was exactly the right label

Do you have me farkied? If so what is it under?


I have you farkied as 'saddest troll'


I mean, you tried when you first came here. Should I update you as 'mostly reformed?'

=^D

You seem like you a'ight, cman.
 
2014-04-04 12:26:12 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: So Breitbart is finally going to shut down?


I am sorry, i missed the part in the article where it said Breitbart works for the EPA now.

This thread is a fantastic illustration of how people can so blindly support their own side, they are willing to do and allow almost anything.  People are more interested in making the other side out to be equally as bad to justify what the EPA did than they are in condemning.  If you won't condemn this, if you are grasping at ways to justify this, like finding ways to make the guys on the side look worse, then if the EPA asked you to conduct this experiment yourself, you probably would.  You have conceded your morals to the cause.  You no longer have any.

Does anyone here think the people responsible for this should be fired?
 
2014-04-04 12:33:09 PM  

Rwa2play: DarwiOdrade: Lucky LaRue: I like how the herbal teabaggers are completely ignoring the fact that the EPA didn't provide full disclosure and focusing on a Breitbart beat-down.  That's why I like you guys - your truly the intellectual elite.

OK - let's talk about pollutants and full disclosure. I'll go first:
Fracking companies won the right to keep secret the chemical cocktails they pump underground during shale gas drilling in North Carolina under a chemical disclosure rule approved Tuesday by the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission.

That jabroni's still around?


Yay! Another jabroni user!
My son is 17, we've caught up on the series now and, well-
I want to buy them I think. (I never do that- buy a tv series)
But I digest...
I use jabroni, and it makes my son cringe. It's awesome.

So would that joke.

'...Hey kiddo! Come check out Fark for a minute!'

'Again?'
 
2014-04-04 12:45:29 PM  

SlothB77: MaudlinMutantMollusk: So Breitbart is finally going to shut down?

I am sorry, i missed the part in the article where it said Breitbart works for the EPA now.

This thread is a fantastic illustration of how people can so blindly support their own side, they are willing to do and allow almost anything.  People are more interested in making the other side out to be equally as bad to justify what the EPA did than they are in condemning.  If you won't condemn this, if you are grasping at ways to justify this, like finding ways to make the guys on the side look worse, then if the EPA asked you to conduct this experiment yourself, you probably would.  You have conceded your morals to the cause.  You no longer have any.

Does anyone here think the people responsible for this should be fired?


You completely missed that the comment wasn't exactly serious, too

/but you go right ahead and use it to make your point
//whatever it is
 
2014-04-04 12:48:53 PM  

SlothB77: MaudlinMutantMollusk: So Breitbart is finally going to shut down?

I am sorry, i missed the part in the article where it said Breitbart works for the EPA now.

This thread is a fantastic illustration of how people can so blindly support their own side, they are willing to do and allow almost anything.  People are more interested in making the other side out to be equally as bad to justify what the EPA did than they are in condemning.  If you won't condemn this, if you are grasping at ways to justify this, like finding ways to make the guys on the side look worse, then if the EPA asked you to conduct this experiment yourself, you probably would.  You have conceded your morals to the cause.  You no longer have any.

Does anyone here think the people responsible for this should be fired?


I would be all for replacing the staff.
But abolishment or cutting funding?
Fu(k no, fix old no new!

Or, if you replace the EPA with an equivalent, preferably one with much more control over what goes into the air, water and food from civilization.
Because I'm a dirty liberal.
 
2014-04-04 01:52:04 PM  

SlothB77: They don't intend to hurt people.They're basically indifferent to people except as revenue streams.


FTFY
 
Displayed 284 of 284 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report