A few choice examples of the collected lies of Texmaster:
By the way, as far as a new attack, there isn't ONE independent econonic figure that thinks the price caps proposed by the Democrats will work. Not one.
Proven a lie. I provided a link. Then Tex immediately followed with a "clarification."
"Ten prominent economists ? including Paul Joskow of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Severin Borenstein of the University of California at Berkeley and Alfred Kahn, the architect of airline deregulation under President Carter ? have sent a letter to the president calling for the federal government to clamp down on wholesale energy prices. Nostrums suitable to the textbook world of perfect competition, they argue, do not fit the messy facts of electricity markets."
Link
Tex's reply:
I should have been more clear. An economist that specializes in energy. None of those do.
And his further reply:
LOL OF COURSE there are energy economists! LOL Even the HEAD of California's Energy Department said it isnt the answer! LOL And he's IN California.
When asked what that had to do with energy economists, Tex offered this gem:
He's the HEAD of California's Energy Department. a Federal Employee.
And even another:
Alan Blinder one of Davis' own advisors.
I provided a link to Mr. Blinder's bio which shows no history of expertise in energy issues.
How the fact that one fellow is the head of the CA Energy Dept. has any bearing on the need for the unbiased analyses of energy economists is perplexing to say the least.
And this choice one:
I'm still waiting for a name of someone who actually deals with Energy Policy and economic fiures. You haven't provided one. None of the names you gave specialize in the subject.
That's because I did not assert that anyone had to be an energy economist to make a valid analysis. Tex did. And he still has not provided any proof to support that position.
Still no references to any energy economists that Tex believes are required since those "other" econmists are not good enough.
And your school prayer comment is ludicrus. Please explain why when a Mosk or Temple get desecrated the media is all over it and the people are thrown in jail (as it should be) but when a guy in New York defaces over 20 different Cathloic churches gets caught, says he did it because he hates Catholics, a democrat judge not only lets him out but dismisses the case even with a confession.
Still no proof that this story even exists and still no link showing that it is Democratic policy to encourage judges to excuse vandalism cases.
Democrats want new books in the public schools "Tommy has 2 daddies" or "Nancy has 2 mommies"
Still no link showing that it is an official Democratic position to want these books added to school curricula.
Democrats want no restrictions on public profanity.
Still no proof.
Are you against a moment of silence instaed of a prayer? Democrats are. Are you?
Once agian, no proof that this is an official Democratic position. (I already answered several times that I support a moment of silence, as long as there are no strings attached.)
Yes, I know there's lots more, but Tex seems capable of handling this stuff only in very small bites. I suspect that this is even too much for him to understand in one reading. And I am certian his lies will continue to stand out because there is no proof of his assertions. He still has no spine.
