Quote:
Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Aug 23 2003, 11:51 AM
Quote:
Seems to me you have no real substantive argument.
|
No real substantiate arguement ON WHAT? Clean air? Clean water? Kyoto? Global warming? Cleaner cars? Chemical use in agriculture? Sustainable resources? The balance between property owner rights and environmental safety?
You want to talk about an issue, I can deal with that. You're the one making the broad generalization here - I'm just stating that your argument is bunk, just like the arguements of the likes of ELF.
Quote:
what should one expect from a self described civil disobedient from the 60's / 70's?
|
You left off "who has admitted reading Marx." 
|
Look numbnuts... you took argument with my statement. After 20 meandering posts, we finally got to the point where you clarified that my broad brushing use of 99% was too extreme a number.
Since my ONLY point was that a LARGE majority of folks are wackos and sheep, I asked you to pick what number you think represents the sides (smart folks vs wackos and sheep. So far you have not priviledged us with your number.
Instead, you took it as a personal insult. Probably because you were one of these clueless knuckleheads in the 60's.
You never, nor did I, bring up Clean air, Clean water, Kyoto.... The debate you started was why I am devoid of reason because I used the number 99% to describe the masses.
Now you are crawfishin' and trying to enter in new topics of debate to camoflouge your loss.
Give it up. It's over.