Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    10:25 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Society of Citizens Really Enraged When Encircled by Drilling’ (SCREWED). Back to Topics
Cliffisher

Champion Author
Wisconsin

Posts:30,680
Points:3,809,475
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2014 12:05:35 PM

Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO) has formally extended a welcome to Tillerson to the fracking critic club, with this statement Friday:

I would like to officially welcome Rex to the ‘Society of Citizens Really Enraged When Encircled by Drilling’ (SCREWED). This select group of everyday citizens has been fighting for years to protect their property values, the health of their local communities, and the environment. We are thrilled to have the CEO of a major international oil and gas corporation join our quickly multiplying ranks.

EXXON CEO "NOT IN MY BACKYARD"
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2014 9:21:27 PM



SemiSteve, "Let's put it this way. Which is more elegant to see? A nice clean windmill and some wires? Or an oil pump and a pipeline / bunch of trucks?"

Oh say can you see?

"And if a problem occurs the windmill might burn out. But the trucks / pipline could lead to an ecological disaster."

We MUST save the "ecology".

"There is only so much oil in the ground. And the easy stuff has all been taken long ago. So the more we use the harder we have to work for it."

That is the same false argument that has been used since Hubbert came up with the false "Peak Oil" and President Jimmy Carter loudly and arrogantly proclaimed in 1978 that in 5 years there would be NO oil available at ANY price!

"And for money-obsessed conservatives that makes -all- the difference."

And when any kind of rational thought or discussion fails, the left goes to its patented name-calling.

Come on, SemiSteve.

I am disappointed in you.

I really thought you were better than that!

Profile Pic
Hemond
Champion Author Providence

Posts:12,172
Points:178,995
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2014 8:59:35 PM

QUOTE :::::Which is more elegant to see? A nice clean windmill and some wires? Or an oil pump and a pipeline / bunch of trucks?"::::


Most beautiful

Very nice

[Edited by: Hemond at 3/3/2014 9:01:46 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Hemond
Champion Author Providence

Posts:12,172
Points:178,995
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2014 8:57:06 PM

QUOTE "Let's put it this way. Which is more elegant to see? A nice clean windmill and some wires? Or an oil pump and a pipeline / bunch of trucks?"::::


Windmills aren't exactly clean. Their manufacture requires the mining of massive amounts of rare earths. This mining is devastating to the planet. Especially on the scale needed to supply a windmill. Plus their short lifetimes guarantees a quick trip to the landfill. That is if anyone is left who is responsible for the windmills and havent' abandoned them as derelict.




Profile Pic
Hemond
Champion Author Providence

Posts:12,172
Points:178,995
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2014 8:52:10 PM

I have 3 gigantic windmills within 1000ft of my backyard. I like seeing them and having them as neighbors.

That doesn't change the fact that they are a complete boondoggle and will be obsolete when they are finally paid for. They make no economic sense. I just hope that if they need repair, the manufacturer is still in business.

What usually happens is these green boondoggle companies go bust after the Obama subsidy runs out. Leaving customers holding the bag. Google "ghost windmills of Hawaii"

One major turbine in a nearby town (Portsmouth, RI) failed after 3 years. There is no money to pay the estimated $ 1/2 million dollars needed to fix it. It sits idle. A testimony to the failure of green energy.

Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,938
Points:1,886,560
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2014 7:08:26 PM

"Let's put it this way. Which is more elegant to see? A nice clean windmill and some wires? Or an oil pump and a pipeline / bunch of trucks?"

Tell that to your liberal friends in New England. The are the ones that do not want them on their shores and mountains. They want everyone else do use green energy but themselves.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,826
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2014 7:00:57 PM

Let's put it this way. Which is more elegant to see? A nice clean windmill and some wires? Or an oil pump and a pipeline / bunch of trucks?

And if a problem occurs the windmill might burn out. But the trucks / pipline could lead to an ecological disaster.

There is only so much oil in the ground. And the easy stuff has all been taken long ago. So the more we use the harder we have to work for it.

But the wind just keeps on blowing. And there is no end to it. That makes wind power a much larger potential source of energy than fossil fuels.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,938
Points:1,886,560
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2014 5:06:02 PM

Just put up a windmill? Wasn't it a bunch of liberals up in New England that voted no to windmills? They are more of an eyesore than a water tower....
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2014 4:30:18 PM



SemiSteve, "Or you could just put up the windmill.

And save ALL those other resources."

I agree with you, SemiSteve!

Let's just put windmills on top of airplanes!

Since the airplanes are already moving so fast, the windmills will DRIVE the airplane PLUS they will spin fast enough to create a LOT of electricity which we can use to charge LEAD batteries that we fill the airplane with and then we can use those batteries to drive ELECTRIC cars once we land!

And NO nasty CO2 that causes Global Warming and keeps us all SO hot this winter and has completely melted the polar ice caps and killed every polar bear!

BINGO!

Thank you, SemiSteve, for your BRILLIANT solution to ALL of our problems!

ROTFL and SMH

Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,826
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2014 4:23:05 PM

It would be far better to put up windmills than water towers for fracking. In order to get energy with fracking it is necessary to drill, truck, pump, use nasty secret chemicals, create a run-off problem, pound the roads into early resurfacing, possibly cause earthquakes and sinkholes, use tons of water which deplete the drinking supply, possibly pollute the drinking supply, get the oil out, pump it, truck it somewhere, refine it, burn it - ALL to get to the point that you have something spinning which makes electricity.

Or you could just put up the windmill.

And save ALL those other resources.

But, of course, energy is currently slightly cheaper the dirty way. And for money-obsessed conservatives that makes -all- the difference. We already know they would risk the future of the very habitability of the planet if it got them two more dollars.
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2014 10:57:11 AM



It sure seems to be!

ROTFL

Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:30,680
Points:3,809,475
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2014 10:55:46 AM

That ignore button is working well.
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2014 10:42:09 AM


No matter how much you try to attack fracking, Cliffisher, the lawsuit is NOT about fracking.

It is about elitists who don't want a water tower on their 'beautiful' horizon [ala Kennedy and Kerry] and who don't want trucks driving near them.

Period.

Your original post is bogus and dishonest.

And you continue it.

You could just as well have said "If people would quit drinking water ....."



[Edited by: AnotherOne at 2/26/2014 10:43:06 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:30,680
Points:3,809,475
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2014 10:37:59 AM

The students reading these articles soon understand that the water tower is needed to support the fracking in the area.

No fracking = no water tower!
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 6:19:15 PM



teacher tim, "Gotta get that anti-fracking message in there, even if it is a misleading headline."

You got it exactly right.

THANKS for the list of news stories as well.

And Cliffisher and the rest of the libs around here fell right into the "fracking" lie as well.

The left is TOTALLY dishonest when it comes to this.

And they will use ANYTHING to try to prevent fracking or any recovery of the massive amounts of oil we have.

Liberals are the Luddites of our day.

Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,811
Points:840,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 5:51:25 PM

You can't REALLY blame liberals for jumping to the fracking conclusion, instead of towers or trucks. here are the results from the libbie sites, courtesy of Google:

No Fracking in our 'Hood, Dick Armey & ExxonMobil CEO Say

Courthouse News Service-by Dan McCue-Feb 24, 2014

... of their neighbors sued the Bartonville Water Supply Corp., a suburban Dallas water utility, to stop construction of a 160-foot water tower near ...

Exxon CEO, Dick Armey sue to stop water tower in Bartonville
Dallas Business Journal-Feb 24, 2014

Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson Sues To Block Water Tower That Might ...
Highly Cited-Huffington Post-Feb 21, 2014

Exxon CEO troubled by fracking-related water tank in his ...
In-Depth-The Globe and Mail-Feb 24, 2014

Here's where you can send your fracking pizza
Blog-Philly.com (blog)-Feb 24, 2014

Exxon CEO: Don't frack in my backyard
In-Depth-RT-Feb 21, 2014

Exxon CEO Joins Suit Citing Fracking Concerns

Wall Street Journal-by Daniel Gilbert-Feb 20, 2014

Some Bartonville residents oppose this mostly built water tower, partly ... The dispute over the 160-foot water tower goes beyond possible ...

Exxon boss involved in Texas zoning dispute tied to fracking

UPI.com-Feb 24, 2014

... in Texas are protesting construction of a water tower to be used for ... who filed a lawsuit against construction of the 160-foot-high tower, ...

Exxon CEO Joins Lawsuit to Protect His Texas Property from Fracking

Ring of Fire-17 hours ago

... cites the inconveniences and negative consequences of fracking while seeking to block the construction of a 160-foot water tower associated ...

Exxon CEO doesn't want fracking facility near his US home, files a ...

The Voice of Russia-14 hours ago

The water tank will soar 160 feet, with a capacity of 750,000 gallons, ... The tower, being built by Cross Timbers Water Supply, would be a 15 ...

Exxon CEO joins anti-fracking lawsuit after drilling threatens his ...

Salon-Feb 21, 2014

Specifically, he wants to block the construction of a 160-foot water tower next to his home in Bartonville, Texas, which would provide water for ...

ExxonMobil CEO Cites Fracking Concerns in Homeowner Suit

Triple Pundit-Feb 24, 2014

... a 160-foot water tower adjacent to his and his wife's Bartonville, Texas home. The tower will supply water to a nearby hydraulic fracturing site."

Gotta get that anti-fracking message in there, even if it is a misleading headline.
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 5:44:03 PM



"Actually it is!"

NickHammer, "Actually, it isn't. Read the lawsuit (not the article), beginning at page 11."

Actually it IS!

ROTFL

It is about TRUCKS and a WATER TOWER!

It is NOT about FRACKING.

Nicky, PLEASE read the lawsuit. flyboy has already edumacated you on it but let me just support what he said and what I have said several times here!

The lawsuit is over the water tower and the increased truck traffic, NOT the fracking.

sgm4law, "It only mentions the water tower. Nothing about fracking. Stop this!"

Who are you telling to 'stop this' ... Nicky? I agree.

It is NOT about fracking. And it is ONLY your progressive liberal buddies, sgm, that are claiming the lawsuit is about fracking.

So thank you for giving them a truth smackdown!

Now to your contention that "It only mentions the water tower.", that is patently false.

Read it again, sgm4law. For someone who claims they are a legal beagle, that is not a very good reading of the text of a lawsuit.



[Edited by: AnotherOne at 2/25/2014 5:46:47 PM EST]
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:22,668
Points:328,045
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 5:38:31 PM

"If you read the lawsuit, you know what it's about."

If would be nice if some folks read the -entire- lawsuit... you know... to get the "gestalt" of it. Perhaps if there were pictures...

[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 2/25/2014 5:39:13 PM EST]
Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,899
Points:3,247,585
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 5:35:13 PM

>>Nick please refer to general forum guidelines #2 and #3. It is not acceptable to continue to attack other posters by calling them slurs such as "jerk"!<<

I didn't call you a jerk, so stop lying. Your comment "Marty - try a remedial reading class sometime" was a jerk comment. If you feel that your comment reflects who you are, so be it. But perhaps YOU should refer to those same guidelines to which you hypocritically tell others to refer.

>>Nick to refute your attack - from the lawsuit ---<<

Again, not an attack simply because you falsely claim it is. And you didn't refute anything. The word "truck" is mentioned exactly ONCE in the entire 30 page document. Wow - ONCE! In the last sentence of the 4th paragraph of the 3rd of 6 Causes of Action. The word "animals" was mentioned TWICE just above it. So, are you now going to claim that this is all about animals? And you're going to use this one occurrence to repeat one of your jerk comments ("Now just what part of ... is too difficult to understand?")?

If you read the lawsuit, you know what it's about. It's all in Section III - FACTS, starting on page 5. These people bought their houses in that area after supposed assurances that the water company would not build a high-rise water tower above the tree line. Don't pretend it's about something else.
Profile Pic
Zimcity
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:71,179
Points:4,325,960
Joined:Aug 2001
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 5:25:43 PM

"It is not acceptable to continue to attack other posters by calling them slurs such as "jerk"!"

Flyboy, perhaps you should attend that remedial reading class you suggested for marty. Clearly, Nickhammer did not call you a jerk, but aptly characterized your suggestion to marty as a "jerk comment".

Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,510
Points:3,064,320
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 4:15:48 PM

Complaint filed in the case. It only mentions the water tower. Nothing about fracking. Stop this!
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,794
Points:1,596,970
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 4:08:02 PM

Nick please refer to general forum guidelines #2 and #3. It is not acceptable to continue to attack other posters by calling them slurs such as "jerk"!

Nick to refute your attack - from the lawsuit ---
.
.
>>>From the lawsuit - Page 17

6.04 The construction of the water tower will create a constant and unbearable nuisance to those who live next to it. A water tower will have lights on at all hours of the night, traffic to and from the tower at unknown and unreasonable hours, noise from mechanical and electrical equipment needed to maintain and operate the tower, and creates and unsafe and attractive nuisance to the children of the area. Furthermore, water towers can create an attractive nesting spot for invasive species of bird and other animals. These animals will befoul Plaintiffs properties if the water tower is left to stand. Further, upon information and belief, BWSC will lease or sell rights to thin=rd parties for the location of antennas and cell towers. Furthermore, upon information and belief, BWSC will sell water to oil and gas explorers for fracing shale formations leading to traffic with heavy trucks on FM 407, creating a noise nuisance and traffic hazards.<<<

Both the original linked article and the actual lawsuit refer to the heavy trucks and the traffic.

So Nick before you question others again and cast slurs you just might try following your own advice. Read the original linked article and then read the actual lawsuit. Both of them specify that one reason for the lawsuit is the perceived problem with truck traffic.

I say again - " Now just what part of "...the plaintiffs argue the project would cause too much noise and traffic from hauling the water from the tower to the drilling site." is too difficult to understand?"
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,811
Points:840,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 3:40:01 PM

In the actual lawsuit, it's all about the 160 foot water tower and the associated noise, traffic, lights, etc.
Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,899
Points:3,247,585
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 3:26:40 PM

>>Marty - try a remedial reading class sometime.<<

Flyboy, in the future I would suggest that you know what you're talking about before making your jerk comments. You see, instead of relying solely on the opinion of the columnist or what the columnist feels like putting in his article, Marty was able to figure out all by himself what the lawsuit is about by reading the entire 30-page, grammar- and spelling-error filled lawsuit. He went right to the source - what a concept.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:22,668
Points:328,045
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 3:01:25 PM

"Actually it is!"

Actually, it isn't. Read the lawsuit (not the article), beginning at page 11.




[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 2/25/2014 3:02:32 PM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,811
Points:840,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 1:38:35 PM

You see, it's really Friends United to Ban Accepted Reality [FUBAR]. They won't be happy until our economy and entire country and way of life is FUBAR. They often use Friends United to "Create" Knowledge that Ends Drilling for their goals.

The REAL problem they have with fracking is that is makes America energy independent with the only viable form of energy for years to come and makes it that much more difficult to push "green" energy, so named for the huge piles of money it makes for liberals' friends and contributors. Money taken from taxpayers who could better use the money to stimulate the economy and create jobs.
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 12:59:18 PM


sgm, "This statement from the link in the OP is misleading"

This whole topic is misleading ... as is everything that comes from the progressive left who tries to attack any rational actions to make us energy independent.

It is all the left has. They have been and are being defeated on every front because they are so dishonest.

And here is yet one more case of blatant progressive liberal dishonesty!

btw, sgm, I thought that the "real" concern of leftists about fracking was that it was polluting every drop of drinking water in the world!! When that failed, now it is earthquakes?

ROTFL



[Edited by: AnotherOne at 2/25/2014 1:00:47 PM EST]
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,510
Points:3,064,320
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 12:54:26 PM

This statement from the link in the OP is misleading:

"Tillerson has joined a lawsuit that cites fracking’s consequences in order to block the construction of a 160-foot water tower next to his and his wife’s Texas home."

When they say "fracking's consequences" they intend you to think of the earthquakes, etc., that are the real concern with fracking, but what his suit mentions is "traffic with heavy trucks on FM 407, creating a noise nuisance and traffic hazards."

No go.
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 12:45:49 PM



"It is due to TRUCKS!"

MTMarty, "Actually, it's not. Read the lawsuit."

Actually it is!

I HAVE read the lawsuit.

I wish you would do the same.

SMH

Contrary to what you and Cliffisher and other libs want us to believe, this is NOT about fracking or the 'dangers' of fracking.

It is about TRUCKS and the noise and traffic of TRUCKS.

And about a water tower being built NEAR their precious land.

It is NOT about fracking no matter how many times you biased libs try to claim it is.



[Edited by: AnotherOne at 2/25/2014 12:48:00 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,794
Points:1,596,970
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2014 11:46:13 AM

Marty - try a remedial reading class sometime.

From the linked article --
.
.
>>>The exception is when Tillerson’s $5 million property value might be harmed. Tillerson has joined a lawsuit that cites fracking’s consequences in order to block the construction of a 160-foot water tower next to his and his wife’s Texas home.

The Wall Street Journal reports the tower would supply water to a nearby fracking site, and the plaintiffs argue the project would cause too much noise and traffic from hauling the water from the tower to the drilling site.<<< Now just what part of "...the plaintiffs argue the project would cause too much noise and traffic from hauling the water from the tower to the drilling site." is too difficult to understand?
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:22,668
Points:328,045
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 7:11:59 PM

"It is due to TRUCKS!"

Actually, it's not. Read the lawsuit.

[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 2/24/2014 7:14:09 PM EST]
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 6:50:35 PM


MTMarty, According to the extremist liberal website THINK PROGRESS that Cliffisher cited, the suit IS about the trucks!

In fact it could be argued that it is totally about the TRUCKS and the water tower. NOT fracking as Cliffisher and Think Progress falsely claim.

What is new is that they will have a lot of trucks hauling water from the tower to fracking sites.

But THANK YOU, MTMarty, for admitting [even if an inadvertent way] that Cliffisher's story has NOTHING to do with the opposition to fracking.

It is due to TRUCKS!

But once again, the dishonest left uses the story to make a dishonest bogus attack on fracking.

Typical of illogical liberals.

"The Wall Street Journal reports the tower would supply water to a nearby fracking site, and the plaintiffs argue the project would cause too much noise and traffic from hauling the water from the tower to the drilling site. The water tower, owned by Cross Timbers Water Supply Corporation, “will sell water to oil and gas explorers for fracing [sic] shale formations leading to traffic with heavy trucks on FM 407, creating a noise nuisance and traffic hazards,” the suit says."

Think Progress's FALSE Statements

[Edited by: AnotherOne at 2/24/2014 6:55:55 PM EST]
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:22,668
Points:328,045
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 6:44:29 PM

"So, MTMarty, I guess you could argue that ExxonMobil uses trucks and Tillerson is CEO of ExxonMobil. Therefore we MUST get rid of all trucks."

Except Tillerson didn't join a lawsuit against trucks in his neighborhood, but against a water tower for a nearby fracking site. So although one could argue as you indicated, one would be stupid for doing so. Additionally, Tillerson isn't looking to be rid of all water towers, just the one in his backyard.

Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 6:37:31 PM



MTMarty, "Except that ExxonMobil does hydraulic fracturing and Tillerson is CEO of ExxonMobil. Other than that..."

A distinction without a difference, MTMarty.

This story has NOTHING to do with fracking.

It is yet one more attempt by liberals to dishonestly attack fracking.

This is about rich people not wanting to look at water towers or listen to trucks!.

So, MTMarty, I guess you could argue that ExxonMobil uses trucks and Tillerson is CEO of ExxonMobil. Therefore we MUST get rid of all trucks.

Head spinning "logic" of the libs.

Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,811
Points:840,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 3:44:24 PM

Marty,
Except that almost ALL "greenies" drive cars powered by and houses heated by the products of "fracking". Other than that...

Unsightly water towers and noisy trucks, but hey, desperate people can't be choosey...

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 2/24/2014 3:45:08 PM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,811
Points:840,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 3:41:46 PM

"The blog is edited by Judd Legum, who founded it in 2005. It was edited by Faiz Shakir from January 2007 to May 2012 when it was announced that he would leave to join Nancy Pelosi's team as Director of New Media." - wikipedia

Yup, no more extremist than the NRA.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,826
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 3:26:10 PM

"This article is from the extremist liberal group "Think Progress.""

I can understand labeling Think Progress as liberal; but what, exactly, makes it 'extremist?'
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:22,668
Points:328,045
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 3:03:49 PM

"This is NOT about FRACKING at all."

Except that ExxonMobil does hydraulic fracturing and Tillerson is CEO of ExxonMobil. Other than that...
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 11:23:32 AM



Cliffisher, the fact remains ....

your article and claims have NOTHING to do with fracking!

Sorry to expose the lies of this "Think Progress" hit piece.

The truth is such an inconvenience, isn't it?

The lawsuit is about water towers and trucks ... NOT fracking.

Deal with it.

It DOES seem that someone is trying to distract from the truth but it sure is not me.

ROTFL

Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:30,680
Points:3,809,475
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 11:19:27 AM

All of the far right winger got together here for anotherone of those GOPer smoke and mirror projects.

Divert attention!
Divert attention!
Etc
Etc
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,237
Points:1,953,510
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 11:12:55 AM

Just more Ted Kennedy NIMBY liberals.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,570
Points:786,830
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 10:52:09 AM



Two points about this story ....

1. This article is from the extremist liberal group "Think Progress".

2. The lawsuit really is not about the safety of fracking at all.

They are suing because they don't want a water tower in their area!

As teacher tim has already pointed out, this is like Teddy Kennedy and John Kerry being totally in love with windmills. Until someone wanted to build windmills where Kerry and Kennedy could SEE them! Then they fought windmills viciously. TOTAL dishonesty from the libs.

The other thing they are suing about is trucks hauling WATER to the water tower.

They don't want TRUCKS where they can see or hear them.

ROTFL

Once more we see the total DISHONESTY and deception of liberals.

This is NOT about FRACKING at all.

ROTFL

Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,811
Points:840,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 9:40:03 AM

So this is the Republican example of Ted Kennedy's opposition to wind farms offshore that would mess up his lovely views from the compound? I guess it doesn't matter what political persuasion you are for NIMBY, does it?
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:22,668
Points:328,045
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2014 8:20:29 PM

Former Majority Leader Dick Armey and his wife are the lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,826
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2014 6:09:17 PM

This is great!
Post a reply Back to Topics