 | | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) Truly! I'm surprised to learn that the law says otherwise in PA. Could you indicate a specific other-than-tailpipe law in PA? You've really gotten me curious about this. Dave! (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
If you were as heavily into cars as I was, it would be plenty of reason. The hoops I have to jump through to get my main car to pass smog are insane in California. In just about any other state, all they care about is tailpipe emissions (the only (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) Which smog laws, out of curiosity? I know in some sections of the state they don't even inspect cars for emissions. By the way--that (of all things ) is a pretty goofy reason not to live in PA (not that you really *need* a reason to choose not (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) the Republicrats all around, but at least the Democrats tax-and-spend, instead of Republican borrow-and-spend (or "spend and borrow") tactics. At least with the former we feel the consequences right away and aren't fooled into supporting the (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
GOOOOD question. I've tried to convince her that TX is a really big state, it's not ALL high heat/desert, but she just doesn't want to move there. Then again, long ago, I said I'd never live in 3 states: PA - smog laws are almost as bad as CA, and (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) Er, I realize that I'm jumping into this 2 months later, but why does she refuse to go anywhere near Texas? james (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) It looks like Bush is going to have to "steal" to give you your $600 afterall! See here: (URL) A (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) You are the king of obfuscation, Larry. You turn people's comments in every direction and ignore the core of the argument. (...) Of course, I already said that in the post before this (which you've snipped). I'm not the wordmeister here, never (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I'd like to see how you prove happier from someone who lives in the projects, or in South Central LA, in comparison to someone who lives in Cuba. (...) Perhaps you are mistaking the political and economic systems? A Democratic Communist (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Show me a case where the baseline statement of communism has failed (or been followed either!) `From each according to Ability, To Each According to Need' The closest to what I view of communism is either kibitz's (if I can spell that (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Quick self-correction: Afghanistan. Can't forget Afghanistan! (But again, that territory was not intended to be appended to the USSR, so even that may not count.) best LFB (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I can't agree--it only makes the "moral call" that way if your personal values are based on individualism instead of the common good. Those values are nurtured in a capitalist system, so it's a self-replicating system, IMHO. (...) No more so (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Because, as wise spin doctors through the ages have said, the purpose of debate (and even .debate!) is *not* to persuade the other party--rather, it's to persuade the spectators, those who do not feel so strongly in X or Y direction and (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
Larry let me say that I'm proud of you for standing up for yourself, and believing in your own ideologies. To all the rest, why do you really care about Larry's opinions? Honestly, he's not going to change his mind, so why haven't all of you given (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I fail to see how calling you on the logical equivalent "It is the US's fault" vs. "It's not the US's fault" can be called nitpicking your exact wording. Rather it's pointing out glaring inconsistency at a basic level. Just admit you slipped (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Maybe you should have said that in the first place instead of Standard Anti US Diatribe # 8294, then. However it's not a statement that I agree with, except inasmuch as it's not possible to determine with certainty (from any real world (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Perfect! That's the main idea. Dan (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Well, you have ignored the basic point I tried to make in favor of complaining about and nitpicking my exact wording. So I conceed that I am not a good writer and I have not always been perfectly clear the first time I have said something (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
One topic I haven't seen mentioned here is that even with all the sanctions, Cuba still relies heavily upon the US for cash influx. Most of it is through Cuban-Americans sending money back to relatives in Cuba. If that process were denied, then the (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I'm not being bullheaded, I'm just pointing out your inconsistency. If you then take refuge in calling me names, so be it. Square "I never said in a general way that it's America's fault." with "By imposing sanctions, America is not ALLOWING (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
