Page 1 of 72
Posted on May 24 at 2:20 p.m.
I know that I've said I'd try to avoid ad hominem arguments, but when the hominid in question is Jarvis, it seems useful to point out just where his arguments are coming from.
On Refugio Pipeline Shutdown Puts Brakes on Oil Production
Posted on May 24 at 2:08 p.m.
When someone who persists in claiming that the President's real, legal name is "Barry Soetoro" but who, like others who make the claim, has no evidence for this, characterizes the President's remark that there would be 1 million cars on the road by 2015 as a "promise," it's a good idea to check what the President actually said:
"With more research and incentives, we can break our dependence on oil with biofuels, and become the first country to have a million electric vehicles on the road by 2015."
A hopeful, conditional prediction is not a promise.
Jarvis also claimed that he wasn't assigning responsibility to Lois Capps for the oil spill in the dozen or so posts he made about her in relation to an earlier article, but now he forgets to cover himself in question marks and claims that she had "direct control" over the pipeline.
Posted on May 23 at 1:25 p.m.
Agree, we ought to stay closer to the topic and not just try to invent clever ways to insult one another. Guilty as charged.
It is a bit difficult, however, to point out lies and dishonesty without calling the poster a dishonest liar.
Point taken, though.
On [UPDATE]: Huge Oversight Gap on Refugio Pipeline in Santa Barbara County
Posted on May 23 at 12:21 p.m.
No one could get paid enough for the job of tracking your childishly self-satisfied and compulsively repetitive dishonesty. I just do it now and then, as an unpaid service to the community of Indy readers, who might benefit by having a bit of light cast onto the darker corners of TrollWorld.
Posted on May 23 at 11:51 a.m.
Actually, the new buzzword is "Jarvisbation" -- achieving self-gratification by repeated public exposure of one's dishonesty.
Posted on May 23 at 11:18 a.m.
Is Jarvis an idiot for thinking that no one can see that the context of his repeated remarks about Lois Capps shows that he thinks she should be held accountable for the oil spill? Is Jarvis an idiot for thinking that somehow she should have been able to get the Republican-dominated Congress to investigate this one pipeline? Is Jarvis an idiot for letting his partisan bias convince him that she was in the majority more often than not when 30 seconds spent checking the claim would have shown he was wrong?
Is Jarvis really such an idiot that he thinks he can get away with all of his crap just by repeating it over and over and not really caring whether any of it corresponds to reality?
Posted on May 23 at 10:55 a.m.
This is the ninth post in this string in which Jarvis has accused Lois Capps of something or other in relation to this pipeline, including the one in which he claimed that she "had the majority green light more often than not prior to 2010," which is true, if 2 is greater the 5, the number of times she actually was in the majority vs. being in the minority.
And of course a few posts above he couldn't help tossing in something completely irrelevant about public service unions, because he's Jarvis, and constantly reminding us that he has opinions is something Jarvis has to do.
Posted on May 23 at 10:13 a.m.
Lois Capps yet again?
Jarvis Syndrome, incurable.
Posted on May 22 at 2:08 p.m.
His nonsense about Obama and Capps exposed, Jarvis responds by repeating some of that nonsense and then posting some information whose relevance he seems to take for granted, even though, with regard to the present topic, it has nothing to add on the question of what can be done to avoid problems caused by irresponsible human behavior.
Posted on May 22 at 1:59 p.m.
So apparently because there are things we can't control, we shouldn't try to control the things we can.