PDA

View Full Version : Bad Science & The Bush Administration



Gayle in MD
05-04-2010, 08:16 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Search Bush Record Go


Bad Science and the Bush Record
How the Bush administration has systematically distorted science to weaken regulations and serve political ends.



The Record: Examples of the Bush administration's systematic distortion of science to serve political ends.


Words of Concern: Scientists, newspapers and policy experts speak out.


The Junk Science of George W. Bush by Robert Kennedy Jr.


Hard Job of Blowing the Whistle Gets Harder, from the Christian Science Monitor



No matter how strong the nation's environmental protections, our laws and regulations can be effective only if they are as protective as possible and are properly implemented and enforced. Unfortunately, the Bush administration has been criticized - and justifiably - for distorting science to weaken regulations so as to serve its political objectives.

The White House's favored tactics include misinterpreting information, ignoring scientific evidence, muzzling government scientists, censoring government studies, removing independent experts from federal advisory panels or stacking those panels with industry consultants. These tactics not only override basic environmental protections in favor of industry, but also undermines the authority of science itself.

It's no wonder the administration's mantra of "sound science" amounts to little more than a policy whereby decisions are based on whatever science sounds good to the White House.

What follows are specific examples compiled from NRDC's Web site -- "The Bush Record" -- illustrating how this administration's reliance on bad science threatens public health and the environment.

Toxics and Health


2/3/05 -- The Environmental Protection Agency manipulated science in developing industry-favored power plant pollution rules, according to the agency's own inspector general.
1/10/05 -- A report by the National Academy of Science, ordered by the Bush administration, concludes that it is safe for people to drink water with as much as 20 parts per billion of perchlorate - that level is 20 times the standard recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency two years ago.
11/15/04 -- The EPA accepts the recommendation of an industry-funded scientific review to downgrade the chemical captan from a "probable" human carcinogen to "not likely."
8/31/04 -- Bush administration proposes relaxing safety standards on the toxic metal selenium, which causes mass deformities and death in waterfowl.
8/15/04 -- Bush administration turns down a petition by health advocates to strengthen health standards for beryllium, a metal that OSHA concluded causes cancer and lung disease.
8/13/04 -- EPA criticized by Congress for issuing a rule that allows industry to treat toxin-laden towels as laundry, rather than as hazardous waste.
5/21/04 -- EPA recalculates the "safe" level of formaldehyde used in plywood manufacture to 10,000 times below the previous level -- after relying on a on a risk assessment provided by the chemical industry. A month later, the World Health Organization finds that formaldehyde is carcinogenic to humans, with sufficient evidence of nasopharyngeal cancer in humans and strong evidence of leukemia in humans. The pertinent studies were all in the published scientific literature before EPA took its action.
4/23/04 -- Federal court reprimands EPA for relying on an industry study in deciding that fertilizers can safely contain higher levels of toxic residue.
4/7/04 -- Evidence surfaces that the Bush administration downplayed the effects of mercury while working with EPA officials to write regulations for coal-fired power plants.
4/6/04 -- EPA allows pesticide industry to block regulatory initiatives that would protect children and wildlife from unintentionally ingesting rat poison
4/1/04 -- Bush administration, in cooperation with the U.S. chemical industry, weakens a European Union plan that would have required chemical manufacturers to test their products and disclose any potential health effects before selling them in Europe.
3/11/04 -- EPA's inspector general reports that agency officials repeatedly made misleading statements about purported improvements in national drinking water quality.
10/31/03 -- EPA decides not to restrict the use of the pesticide atrazine, which is known to cause cancer, and reduces its monitoring to only a small number of contaminated watersheds.
9/9/03 -- EPA inspector general reveals that Bush administration officials instructed the agency to downplay the dangers of air pollution in the aftermath of the World Trade Center collapse on September 11, 2001.
4/28/03 -- Bush administration imposes a gag order on EPA officials from publicly discussing perchlorate, a rocket fuel ingredient found in drinking water.
1/21/03 -- EPA declares that drinking water 12 times more contaminated with the herbicide atrazine than allowed by law does not pose a health problem.
10/8/02 -- Bush administration rejects renowned scientists for service on a Centers for Disease Control federal advisory committee, replacing them with individuals who have ties to the lead industry.
9/17/02 -- Bush administration replaces officials and committees from the Department of Health and Services with members who have strong ties to regulated industries.
9/02 -- Industry-funded group removes critical information on the dangers of perchlorate from a government scientific journal.
7/19/02 -- EPA determines that organophosphorous pesticides pose no danger to children. Instead of using the typical 10-fold safety standard for tests, however, EPA uses only a 3-fold safety margin.
7/8/02 -- EPA allows Louisiana rice growers to use Carbofuran, one of the most toxic pesticides in existence. The pesticide, banned since 1998, has killed tens of thousands of birds.



Water, Air and Global Warming


11/8/04 -- Bush administration continues to resist regulating greenhouse gas pollution despite two newly released studies that confirm global warming is already drastically affecting conditions in the United States.
9/22/04 -- EPA records reveal, for the third time, that the agency's proposal for regulating mercury pollution from power plants copied passages -- in some cases word for word -- from memos written by a law firm representing the utility industry. It just so happens that the head of EPA's air program and his chief counsel were both partners at the firm before President Bush installed them at the agency.
2/4/04 -- Former EPA employee reveals that the agency knowingly used unreliable data when denying a petition to stop the use of sewage sludge as farm fertilizer.
1/30/04 -- EPA proposes extremely weak mercury emission regulations, much of which is transposed -- sometimes verbatim -- from memos submitted from a law firm representing the utility industry.
10/17/03 -- EPA announces it will not regulate dioxins from land applied sewage sludge, despite findings that dioxin exposure poses a threat to human health.
6/23/03 -- Bush administration forces EPA to remove a clause on the harmful effects of climate change, from the first-ever comprehensive report on environmental problems facing the United States.
11/9/02 -- Top Bush administration political appointee at Interior reverses earlier findings that air pollution from a proposed coal power plant in Kentucky would significantly hamper visibility at the nearby Mammoth Cave National Park.



Public Lands, Parks and Forests


1/28/05 -- BLM approves construction of 50,000 new natural gas wells in southeastern Montana and northeastern Wyoming, despite the threat to national parks and local air quality.
11/26/04 -- Records reveal that EPA deleted comments that referred in a negative manner to the Bush's proposed rollback of the roadless rule.
11/15/04 -- Evidence surfaces that Bush administration quietly changed rules, allowing oil companies to skip environmental requirements when drilling in National Parks.
11/10/04 -- Former BLM employee sues the bureau for wrongfully firing him when he refused to comply with orders to downplay toxic and radioactive dangers at a Nevada copper mine.
10/27/04 -- BLM overestimates the potential amount of natural gas underneath Colorado's Roan Plateau, stating that the gas reserves could power the country for nine months. A USGS report concludes that the tapped gas supplies could actually power the country for only 6 days.
4/29/04 -- EPA experts accuse Bush administration of altering science on poor air quality over National Parks.
2/24/04 -- Mine Safety and Health Administration demotes and relocates a top official for accusing the agency of covering up facts during the investigation of a massive coal slurry spill in West Virginia.
4/7/03 -- Bush administration deletes key information in letter urging the United Nations to remove Yellowstone from a list of endangered World Heritage Sites.
1/17/03 -- Bush administration claims that environmental laws restrict energy development in the West despite government findings that the vast majority of public lands are open for oil and gas drilling.
1/17/02 -- Interior Department claims that polar bears can be adequately protected from oil drilling in the Arctic Refuge despite government studies showing the opposite to be true.
1/3/04 -- Bush administration grants a Kentucky coal company a reprieve from obeying federal law, allowing mining to continue without a permit.



Wildlife


2/9/05 -- Hundreds of government wildlife scientists report political pressure, scientific distortion
12/18/04 -- Court records reveal that a Bush administration political appointee in the Interior Department conspired with industry lobbyists to support the California Farm Bureau's lawsuit against her own agency. After a series of emails and telephone calls Deputy Assistant Interior Secretary Julie MacDonald tried to scuttle scientific recommendations that favored protecting endangered fish and wildlife habitat by limiting the amount of water diverted for irrigation.
10/2/04 -- NOAA orders federal biologists to rewrite a report that had concluded harmful effects on endangered salmon from a federal plan to divert millions of gallons of water from rivers in Northern California to the southern part of the state.
7/20/04 -- USFWS fires Florida scientist who publicly criticized the agency for using faulty science when approving eight development projects in the critical habitat of the endangered Florida panther.
5/21/04 -- Government biologist resigns after accusing the Bush administration of politicizing science, and illegally disregarding his advice leading to the massive fish kill in the Klamath River.
5/3/04 -- Evidence surfaces that USFWS employed false data to conclude that the Florida panther's survival is not in jeopardy -- when in fact the panther population is severely dwindling.
4/15/04 -- Federal officials deleted information used in a cost-benefit analysis of its recovery of the endangered bull trout, falsely concluding that protecting the species would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
11/1/02 -- Bush administration admits to hiding three reports regarding Klamath River policies, which suggest that protecting water levels would benefit both wildlife and the economy through recreation. However, the administration later chooses to divert water for agriculture, leading to a massive fish kill.
10/28/02 -- NMFS whistleblower accuses the Bush administration of forcing his agency to violate the Endangered Species Act by overruling concerns that diverting water from the Klamath River for irrigation would harm fish. Subsequently, a massive fish kill resulted that later was linked to the administration's decision.
8/22/02 -- Industry lobbyists convince the Mineral Management Service to weaken sperm whale protections, which they complained hindered the oil and gas industry.
1/17/02 -- Interior Department abruptly reverses its decision that drilling in the Arctic Refuge would harm polar bears.
</div></div>

http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/science/default.asp

LAMas
05-04-2010, 09:08 AM
"Rumor has it that she has been tossed for 'stirring the pot."
hondo

LWW
05-04-2010, 09:55 AM
I have to stick up for Gayle on this one.

As bizarre as her belief system is and as rabid as her jihad against<span style='font-size: 14pt'> B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!!</span> might be ... she is entitled to those opinions.

It's when she goes into her spittle drenching rants filled with ad hominem attacks that she becomes objectionable.

Having opinions outside the mainstream isn't a bad thing in and of itself, becoming filled with rage because your opinions are shown to be indefensible is.

LWW

pooltchr
05-04-2010, 10:23 AM
There goes the neighborhood!

Steve

LWW
05-04-2010, 10:35 AM
Probably, but I will give her the benefit of the doubt and see if she has changed any.

LWW

Gayle in MD
05-04-2010, 10:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There goes the neighborhood!

Steve </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Since I have called out a few people (on both sides of the fence) for the negativity on this board, I feel it only fair to thank them for taking steps to move the tone of the board in a more civil direction.
It makes it much nicer to spend time here.

It's not perfect, but seems to be getting better.
Steve
</div></div>

Practice what you preach.

Sid_Vicious
05-04-2010, 10:41 AM
Well it looks like I'm back to reading the NPR again. Good to see you back Gayle. sid

Oh I forgot...giv'em hell!

Gayle in MD
05-04-2010, 10:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well it looks like I'm back to reading the NPR again. Good to see you back Gayle. sid

Oh I forgot...giv'em hell! </div></div>

Thank you friend. I will be doing what I always do, for the most part, ignoring the attackers.

Love,
Gayle

Stretch
05-04-2010, 11:12 AM
Welcome back Gayle! St.

Gayle in MD
05-04-2010, 11:19 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stretch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Welcome back Gayle! St. </div></div>

Thanks Stretch, missed ya. Not sure if I'll stay long, same ol' roudy bunch of know nothings around here, I see.

I was banned until the 29th, for being female, and having an opinion, lol...BTW, the notify icon is only for use by Republican men. Spread the word, since it doesn't say that in the rules. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

wolfdancer
05-04-2010, 11:24 AM
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility:
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger;
Be copy now to men of grosser blood,
And teach them how to war.
The game's afoot:
Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George!

LWW
05-04-2010, 11:35 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility:
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger;
Be copy now to men of grosser blood,
And teach them how to war.
The game's afoot:
Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George! </div></div>

Why are you cheering for war in the forum?

LWW

pooltchr
05-04-2010, 11:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Thank you friend. I will be doing what I always do, for the most part, ignoring the attackers.

Love,
Gayle </div></div>

At least you could be honest enough to admit that you don't ignore anyone on this forum. One day back and you are already quoting me and Larry....the two you claim to have on permanent ignore.
I would bet you read every post, every day while you were in exile. We all know you do it. Why can't you admit it?
Honesty in posting would go a long way is showing that you have mended your ways.

Steve

wolfdancer
05-04-2010, 12:06 PM
while I would normally not reply to you,....it was a comment on Gayle's return "once more into the fray". Seems she is "stirring the pot" once again, with a damning article on the "3rd Reich" regime.
"WAR" being allegorical, in this instance

Sev
05-04-2010, 04:30 PM
Absolutely stunning.
Only back a few minutes and she nails herself to a cross crying victimhood due to her sex.

HAHAHHHAHAAHHAHA!!!

You take the cake babe. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

LWW
05-04-2010, 04:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stretch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Welcome back Gayle! St. </div></div>

Thanks Stretch, missed ya. Not sure if I'll stay long, same ol' roudy bunch of know nothings around here, I see.

I was banned until the 29th, for being female, and having an opinion, lol...BTW, the notify icon is only for use by Republican men. Spread the word, since it doesn't say that in the rules. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

</div></div>

Back to name calling and fabrications already.

Whoodathunkit.

LWW

ccboard_admin_back
05-04-2010, 05:34 PM
No, you were banned for stirring up trouble and then trying to report anyone else who you felt was stirring up trouble.

Admin

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I was banned until the 29th, for being female, and having an opinion, lol...BTW, the notify icon is only for use by Republican men. Spread the word, since it doesn't say that in the rules. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

</div></div>

Sev
05-04-2010, 05:58 PM
Thanks for straightening that out.

LWW
05-04-2010, 06:34 PM
And I thank you also.

LWW

LAMas
05-04-2010, 10:55 PM
Admin - Kudos.

"Rumor has it that she has been tossed for 'stirring the pot."
hondo

hondo speaks the truth - kudos.

Stretch
05-05-2010, 03:23 AM
There will be no pot stirring here! Pot smoking is optional. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif St.

LWW
05-05-2010, 03:57 AM
Yep, he nailed that one.

LWW

Sev
05-05-2010, 05:36 AM
There is that. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

pooltchr
05-05-2010, 06:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ccboard_admin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, you were banned for stirring up trouble and then trying to report anyone else who you felt was stirring up trouble.

Admin

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I was banned until the 29th, for being female, and having an opinion, lol...BTW, the notify icon is only for use by Republican men. Spread the word, since it doesn't say that in the rules. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

</div></div> </div></div>

Another lie put to rest very quickly!
Thanks, Admin, for straightening it out.

Steve

cushioncrawler
05-05-2010, 07:14 AM
Bush and Bush were/are prix.
Things are getting better now.
madMac.

Gayle in MD
05-05-2010, 09:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ccboard_admin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, you were banned for stirring up trouble and then trying to report anyone else who you felt was stirring up trouble.

Admin

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I was banned until the 29th, for being female, and having an opinion, lol...BTW, the notify icon is only for use by Republican men. Spread the word, since it doesn't say that in the rules. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

</div></div> </div></div>

So you saying that others can report me, by using the notify icon, when they feel that I am stirring up trouble, but I cannot report them, by using the notify icon, when I think that they are stirring up trouble.

One person here exposed my legal first name. Is that against the rules? Were they banned?

IMO, people should be warned in the rules that using the notify icon, is grounds for being banned. Nothing I have done here, or written here, is any worse than the bahvior of many others here. Writing things that "Others would find offensive" covers plenty of posts that have been aimed at me. "The Rules" need to be more specifically defined, and equally applied to everyone.



Those are the facts.

Gayle in MD

pooltchr
05-05-2010, 09:20 AM
How odd that you would quote the very lie the admin denounced. And then you go on the attack toward the admin.

I would think someone who just got back from being banned would be wise to tone down their posts a little bit.

Your time in "time out" might have been well spent reviewing some of you many posts with an honest mind to see what it was that caused you to be banned in the first place.

Steve

eg8r
05-05-2010, 09:39 AM
Why are you only responding to Gayle when she defends herself? Why not respond when a question is asked?

eg8r

eg8r
05-05-2010, 09:43 AM
Steve, she was banned for notifing the mod of the actions of others. She got banned for that but other people who notify the mod do not get banned. The mod unfairly treats different members of the board.

To be honest pointing out, to the mod, that others are doing wrong is NOT stirring the pot. That is just a piss poor excuse for the mod when he is not doing his job.

eg8r

eg8r
05-05-2010, 09:45 AM
Steve what was the lie? Gayle got banned for having her opinion. She wasn't doing anything any different than you or anyone else on this board but she was the only one getting chastised for that behaviour. When she decided to point it out the mod noticed that SHE WAS RIGHT and since he was not doing his job he decided to try and shut her up instead of admitting his failure. How could this situation be viewed any differently?

eg8r

LAMas
05-05-2010, 10:12 AM
"And then you go on the attack toward the admin."

You don't want to do that...hondo did at AZ NPR...

LWW
05-05-2010, 10:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Steve, she was banned for notifing the mod of the actions of others. She got banned for that but other people who notify the mod do not get banned. The mod unfairly treats different members of the board.

To be honest pointing out, to the mod, that others are doing wrong is NOT stirring the pot. That is just a piss poor excuse for the mod when he is not doing his job.

eg8r </div></div>

How can you say this when you don't know what was said to the mods?

LWW

LWW
05-05-2010, 10:27 AM
It is amazing to watch "SUICIDE MY MODERATOR" isn't it.

I've watched hondo do it, I've watched Mike60 do it under numerous alia, and it seems to be happening again.

LWW

LWW
05-05-2010, 10:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nothing I have done here, or written here, is any worse than the bahvior of many others here. Writing things that "Others would find offensive" covers plenty of posts that have been aimed at me.

Gayle in MD </div></div>

How could you possibly claim this ... even it were true ... and also claim that you never read any of these folks posts and have them all on ignore?

LWW

eg8r
05-05-2010, 01:28 PM
Are you seriously going to believe no one has ever contact the mod except for Gayle? On top of that, any interaction with the mod outside of actually click the "notify" button is the same thing.

eg8r

wolfdancer
05-05-2010, 02:41 PM
maybe it isn't a lie, as you claim.....but just her opinion and beliefs about events. I think she got banned mainly for "badgering" (my words) the admin. Also think he has more important things to do then to become a "playground supervisor" here.

LWW
05-05-2010, 03:17 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you seriously going to believe no one has ever contact the mod except for Gayle? On top of that, any interaction with the mod outside of actually click the "notify" button is the same thing.

eg8r </div></div>

1 - Please pay attention to what I posted, as your reply isn't even vaguely related to the question I asked.

2 - I have no idea how many times others have hit the "NOTIFY" button ... and neither do you.

3 - Gayle launched an ad hominem attack thread once over another member using the "NOTIFY" function ... and it turns out she seems to have been a serial abuser of the function.

LWW

Gayle in MD
05-05-2010, 04:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">maybe it isn't a lie, as you claim.....but just her opinion and beliefs about events. I think she got banned mainly for "badgering" (my words) the admin. Also think he has more important things to do then to become a "playground supervisor" here.
</div></div>

I got banned for pointing out to him buy using the notify iconl that I was attacked, over and over, by the same people, although I had a history of not responding to their attacks. That was it in a nutshell.

I think his remarks here are very revealing, given the other accusations aginst me in this very thread, a thread which was once again ruined by the very same stalking and insulting attackers who ruin every other thread I launch here.

G.



G.
G.

LWW
05-05-2010, 05:37 PM
Again ... how can you claim to be attacked when you also claim to not have read the posts containing the alleged attack?

A minimum of one of the two statements must be false.

LWW

wolfdancer
05-05-2010, 06:16 PM
my use of "badgering" was what I believe the admin felt. I also think there might be a little political bias there, according to what Hondo has mentioned.
As to the other reply to your post....I also have him on ignore, but read many of his replies,and I'm sure you read a few yourself... He should note that your main point is that you do not, as a rule, reply to him, unlike his apparent compulsion to post behind you....

Sev
05-05-2010, 07:54 PM
You may have a point on the badgering Wolfi.

Personally I have never contacted a moderator on any site.
However I would not be surprised if the notify button has been hit for me on more than a few occasions on his one.

I also believe Gayles view is skewed as it appears that she believes that she can do no evil and her word is the word of god on all matters.

Unfortunately for her she is quite wrong.

wolfdancer
05-05-2010, 09:30 PM
I complain about you every other day, and yer pal every day, but so far I have heard nothing in reply.Maybe it's because I forget to hit the send button after writing them out...
Your last two lines are a cousin to circular reasoning to me.
You make an accusation about her,offer no proof except your belief and then deliver a judgment against that accusation.
Gayle believes that she is in the right, just as you do. The difference I see is that people post insultingly behind her and not the other way around, as a rule. But, It's over and done with ,c'ept someone has an eye on her posts, and if she goes "one toke over the line",....Sweet Jesus, she'll be history.
I'm not sure how two people can be jawing at each other, and only one gets charged.....
I guess I'll have to check out AZB, to see what a board with no dissenting posts allowed reads like.....
maybe like in that movie...
*** (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAiyrees0uM)

LWW
05-06-2010, 04:16 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You may have a point on the badgering Wolfi.

Personally I have never contacted a moderator on any site.
However I would not be surprised if the notify button has been hit for me on more than a few occasions on his one.

I also believe Gayles view is skewed as it appears that she believes that she can do no evil and her word is the word of god on all matters.

Unfortunately for her she is quite wrong.



</div></div>

And I suspect her demands that only people she approves of my comment and only people she approves should be allowed to start threads was a large part of her undoing.

Besides ... I thought she was going to take her triple top secret covert identity to a new blog and deprive us proletariat of her pontifications?

LWW

Gayle in MD
05-06-2010, 06:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my use of "badgering" was what I believe the admin felt. I also think there might be a little political bias there, according to what Hondo has mentioned.
As to the other reply to your post....I also have him on ignore, but read many of his replies,and I'm sure you read a few yourself... He should note that your main point is that you do not, as a rule, reply to him, unlike his apparent compulsion to post behind you....
</div></div>


Jack,
I thik we both know what goes on around here. I donot read, nor respond, to the vast number of posts behind my posts, from LWW, or from his cronies from AZ, or from Steve, who, IMO, cannot write a post without sarcastic condescending attacks.

I ignore all of them, as a rule...

What I find so interesting is the moderator's statement, right here in a thread, which was obviously twisted and side tracked by the very same attackers about whom I complained, away from an interesting historical analysis of Bush's vast decomposing of the very regulatory government oversight which might have prevented a disaster such as what we are witmessing now off the Gulf, from ever happening, into yet another of their Gayle Bashing Fests.

His interjection of a justification for banning me, right in the midst of such an excellent example their usual and continuous "Stirring of the pot".... highjacking this tthread completely away from the subject matter, and turning it into another Gayle bashing fest, is just too funny for words.

Suffice it to say, the Kitchen Aid, MixMaster folks, could learn a great deal from the above, treu "pot stirrers" around here.

G.

pooltchr
05-06-2010, 08:01 AM
It was Obama who recently gave BP a pass on inspections of their facilities in the gulf, determining that there was little if any reason to do so. That happened just weeks before the explosion.

But if you want to blame Bush for it, that wouldn't be surprising. If you try hard enough, you can probably find a way to blame him for your recent vacation from the board.

Steve

LWW
05-06-2010, 12:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It was Obama who recently gave BP a pass

Steve </div></div>

He was the person they contributed the most to ... I would think they expected something back in return.

Oh ... and Obama's against corporate political contributions also. http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/images/smilies/biglaugh.gif

LWW

Sev
05-06-2010, 08:44 PM
You know you luv me buddy.
Your day is more exciting with me around. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Besides if you had not noticed things have been pretty civil around here lately.

I will say this for you. You at least will attempt to have a conversation with individuals that you disagree with or dislike.

Gayle on the other hand had attacked me repeatedly and then put me on ignore when I responded to it.

She can cry victim all she wants. I'm not buying it.

Eg and Q disagree with me more often than not. However they respond to me in a civil manner. To which I do the same. It really is pretty easy to have a civil and spirited conversation at the same time.

Mike60 and Twister didnt. And where are they?