The Waxman-Markey climate change bill has passed the House, but faces an uncertain fate in the Senate.
UPDATE at 6/26/09 4:34:28 pm:
Some scientists are opposed to the bill — because they believe it’s weak legislation that won’t fix anything: Should Congress pass Waxman-Markey?
2 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:32:41pm |
219-212 Who were the R’s, and were they coal state R’s?
| 3 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:32:51pm |
Here’s to hoping the Senate has enough sense that if the bill contains the name “Waxman” They should run far, far away.
| 5 |
researchok Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:33:51pm |
I don’t believe it will get through the Senate.
This gives Nancy Pelosi her beauty pageant win- no more than that.
| 6 |
cronus Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:34:02pm |
Republicans who voted for Cap & Tax:
Bono Mack, Castle, McHugh, LoBiondo, Lance, Kirk, Reichert, Smith (NJ)
| 7 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:34:23pm |
Here’s the R’s who voted for this :
Bono Mack
Castle
Kirk
Lance
LoBiondo
McHugh
Reichert
Smith (NJ)
h/t hot air
| 11 |
oronpam Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:35:13pm |
These idiots have no idea what they have just done, let alone just read the bill.
| 12 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:35:31pm |
Just got a Tweet that says
’ Dear Congress: You Cap Us, We Trade U’.
| 13 |
Sharmuta Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:35:36pm |
re: #6 cronus
Republicans who voted for Cap & Tax:
Bono Mack, Castle, McHugh, LoBiondo, Lance, Kirk, Reichert, Smith (NJ)
re: #7 Thanos
Here’s the R’s who voted for this :
Bono Mack
Castle
Kirk
Lance
LoBiondo
McHugh
Reichert
Smith (NJ)h/t hot air
They should be facing challengers for their seats within the party next year.
| 15 |
beens21 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:35:48pm |
that last para about the Senate version gives me some hope.
| 16 |
gulfloafer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:36:26pm |
Thought your power bill wasn’t high enough? This will fix that problem for you.
| 17 |
CynicalConservative Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:37:32pm |
Charles,
I’m honestly interested in your opinion on this.
| 19 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:37:39pm |
re: #13 Sharmuta
Never heard of any of ‘em. and I bet they’re all from some NE liberal district.
Or some SW liberal district.
Not from anywhere rational.
The scary thing is how few of ‘em it took to push it over, dammit.
| 20 |
oronpam Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:37:55pm |
So much for representing the people…..Boehner was great to watch, but the preview was way better than the main attraction (-:
| 21 |
CynicalConservative Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:38:17pm |
re: #17 CynicalConservative
Charles,
I’m honestly interested in your opinion on this.
I obviously have my own opinion based on comment history.
| 22 |
garden18 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:38:18pm |
Frist we have Regina Spektor, a wonderful representative of the Jewish people. And then we have Henry Waxman, an embarrassment.
| 23 |
McJenny50 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:38:27pm |
re: #2 Thanos
219-212 Who were the R’s, and were they coal state R’s?
Bono Mack
Castle
Kirk
Lance
LoBiondo
McHugh
Smith (NJ)
[Link: clerk.house.gov…]
| 24 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:39:01pm |
re: #13 Sharmuta
They should be facing challengers for their seats within the party next year.
I’m going to bet they aren’t up for re election in 2010 for the most part
| 25 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:39:07pm |
re: #23 McJenny50
Maybe we should send kudos to the Dems who voted no…….
| 27 |
Cathypop Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:39:21pm |
You M*&%$#er F*#$@ing Asswipes!
Why do they hate America?
| 28 |
astronmr20 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:39:23pm |
I work in a business that REQUIRES a certain amount of electricity. Broadcasting. Have put a good deal of my life into it, and am now vested in the company I work for.
We cannot turn our transmitters down, as it would simply mean decreased coverage area.
We cannot pass the cost on to consumers, as our clients are advertisers who are already strapped for cash. Media and advertising is already eviscerated— not by “new media,” but by this recession.
We are done if this becomes law— our margin is paper-thin as it is, and we’re doing better than most, as we cater to niche markets.
| 29 |
Cannadian Club Akbar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:39:43pm |
| 30 |
astronmr20 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:41:12pm |
I am having a hard time coming up with something to say that won’t get me banned from lizarddom for eternity.
| 31 |
McJenny50 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:41:32pm |
re: #25 tradewind
Think I will
John Boehner did as good a job of summing up as he could possibly do and I can’t believe that after that people STILL voted for it
| 32 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:41:39pm |
re: #28 astronmr20
I work in a business that REQUIRES a certain amount of electricity. Broadcasting. Have put a good deal of my life into it, and am now vested in the company I work for.
We cannot turn our transmitters down, as it would simply mean decreased coverage area.
We cannot pass the cost on to consumers, as our clients are advertisers who are already strapped for cash. Media and advertising is already eviscerated— not by “new media,” but by this recession.
We are done if this becomes law— our margin is paper-thin as it is, and we’re doing better than most, as we cater to niche markets.
Don’t worry. The fairness doctrine will insure a swift end to any suffering your industry may experience as a result of this bill.
| 33 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:41:41pm |
re: #30 astronmr20
Here, have a glass of wine. It’s helping me.
| 34 |
shifty Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:41:47pm |
I normally dont like Glen Beck very much with his fake Hillary tears and all, but he seems to be saying things I agree with on this one. Follow the money….where’s it going?
| 35 |
slartybartfast Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:41:57pm |
I listened to a good portion of the “debate” this afternoon. There were times when I thought blood would shoot out of my eyes!
For example, I heard one Dem saying that this legislation would reduce the frequency, duration, and intensity of hurricanes. No, really!
Another Dem said this would prevent us from “shedding any more blood” trying to take oil away from another country in the Middle East.
Finally, a Republican offered a lame amendment calling for a new Manhattan Project. Every time I hear that term tossed out, it makes me want to laugh (or cry).
Real Manhattan Project: the luminaries of nuclear physics approached our Gov’t and said, “Here’s the science. Please give us the money to develop it or some other country will develop it first.”
“New Manhattan Project”: throw a bunch of money at the scientists and hope for the best. Ugh!
Here are the Republicans who could have turned the vote the other way:
Bono Mack, Castle, Kirk, Lance, LoBiondo, McHugh, Reichert, Smith(NJ)
Two Republicans didn’t vote: Flake and Sullivan.
On to the Senate…
| 36 |
HelloDare Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:42:04pm |
If it passes more business will fail or wont be able to compete with countries like China. Business will go there. They don’t care at all about pollution. China is the largest user of coal in the world.
| 38 |
cronus Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:42:15pm |
Passage of waxman-like legislation in the Senate virtually guarantees a further reduction in production from coal and will result in a commodity price spike (ala what we’ve seen in oil) when we finally see a turn in the economy.
The Democrats will choke off any recovery with sharply higher energy costs. They now own the $4/$5 gallon gas and higher electric rates that we’ll see in the next year or so.
| 39 |
Cathypop Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:42:18pm |
re: #34 shifty
I normally dont like Glen Beck very much with his fake Hillary tears and all, but he seems to be saying things I agree with on this one. Follow the money….where’s it going?
Always follow the money!
| 40 |
songbird Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:42:37pm |
I’m getting pretty discouraged about the direction our country is going.
| 41 |
Sharmuta Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:42:39pm |
re: #24 Thanos
I’m going to bet they aren’t up for re election in 2010 for the most part
I think we should vote all the bums out, but that’s just me.
| 42 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:43:25pm |
re: #36 HelloDare
India is another viable option. Very viable.
| 44 |
oronpam Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:44:14pm |
300 hundred pages added at three in the morning and they still vote yeah. Never read it and don’t care. Our forefathers must be rolling in their graves. We’re leading alright, leading the world into a depression.
| 45 |
Dancing along the light of day Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:45:15pm |
The kicker for me is THEY HAVEN’T EVEN READ THE BILL.
| 46 |
tommygum Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:45:32pm |
re: #13 Sharmuta
They should be facing challengers for their seats within the party next year.
Primary out these prix.
| 47 |
WinterCat Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:45:37pm |
I keep imagining that living in America will soon be like living in Russia. Except we won’t be able to afford to run the space heaters.
You do not have thermostats in the apartments, you control heating and cooling by opening or closing a window. I bought a small space heater that heated my apartment very well.
| 48 |
CynicalConservative Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:45:39pm |
re: #44 oronpam
300 hundred pages added at three in the morning and they still vote yeah. Never read it and don’t care. Our forefathers must be rolling in their graves. We’re leading alright, leading the world into a depression.
Yeah, but it’s for the kiiiiiiiiiiiidddddddddddddssssssssssssssss…!1
////// are there really enough…
| 49 |
Sharmuta Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:46:07pm |
We don’t have the ability to completely clean the slate in the Senate, but we can do it in the House every two years. Maybe it’s time we did vote every incumbent out.
| 50 |
astronmr20 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:46:18pm |
re: #43 Cannadian Club Akbar
still has to go to the Senate
Where it will inevitably be amended before a vote in order to pay off members of the Senate so they’ll pass it.
Fuck you, John McCain for supporting this legislation.
| 51 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:46:21pm |
re: #44 oronpam
300 hundred pages added at three in the morning and they still vote yeah. Never read it and don’t care. Our forefathers must be rolling in their graves. We’re leading alright, leading the world into a depression.
What happened to Obama’s promise to give America 3 days to review every piece of legislation? Or was that Nancy who promised that? How many other promises will they break?
| 52 |
Cathypop Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:46:22pm |
re: #45 Floral Giraffe
The kicker for me is THEY HAVEN’T EVEN READ THE BILL.
Because they don’t give an shit about this country.
| 54 |
tommygum Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:46:43pm |
| 55 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:46:58pm |
Flake and Sullivan.
Sounds like a traveling road show. How ironic is it that Flake flaked out…..
| 56 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:47:01pm |
There’s a long lecture I posted last night about how the demand for Low sulfur diesel in Europe helped to drive us into the recession we are coming out of. Its’ well worth watching because there are a lot of arcane facts that they pundits don’t tell you in this hour long lecture and q / a session, I recommend watching.
We now have this as well as the shipping diesel mandate coming up…
| 57 |
grahamski Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:47:16pm |
They are just warming up, next up is socialized health care, and amnesty for illegal aliens…the twin daggers through the heart.
| 58 |
beens21 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:47:18pm |
I read somewhere that the bill has a provision for increasing unemployment benefits for the expected unemployment the bill will cause. Brilliant
| 59 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:47:24pm |
Maybe I picked the wrong turn of the century to stop drinking. //
| 60 |
CynicalConservative Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:47:32pm |
re: #51 Racer X
What happened to Obama’s promise to give America 3 days to review every piece of legislation? Or was that Nancy who promised that? How many other promises will they break?
He won.
| 61 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:47:38pm |
re: #45 Floral Giraffe
They have interns, it’s all good……
/sarc/
| 62 |
oronpam Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:47:54pm |
re: #51 Racer X
I lost count on how many times that promise was broken….media silent.
| 63 |
experiencedtraveller Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:47:57pm |
After some recent travel through the Left Coast I believe all of our problems will be resolved if corporations would just start calling themselves cooperatives.
| 66 |
CynicalConservative Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:48:35pm |
| 67 |
SlartyBartfast Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:48:38pm |
re: #47 WinterCat
I keep imagining that living in America will soon be like living in Russia. Except we won’t be able to afford to run the space heaters.
“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,” Obama said.
“That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen,” he added.
| 68 |
Cathypop Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:48:53pm |
| 69 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:48:58pm |
re: #51 Racer X
It’s a chess game, you see.
///////////// (like I needed it)
| 70 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:49:10pm |
re: #57 grahamski
They are just warming up, next up is socialized health care, and amnesty for illegal aliens…the twin daggers through the heart.
And an exodus of any one who can leave hauling anchor
| 71 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:49:29pm |
Our refining capacity is already razor thin.
/hey, I’ve got an idea, let’s make refining ridiculously expensive in the U.S., I wonder what will happen?
| 72 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:49:44pm |
I turned on Fox news for coverage of the vote: it’s still Michael Jackson coverage.
| 73 |
tommygum Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:50:00pm |
re: #32 DaddyG
Don’t worry. The fairness doctrine will insure a swift end to any suffering your industry may experience as a result of this bill.
Yeah, because you won’t hear about it.
| 74 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:50:19pm |
Who stands to gain from such legislation? It’s 5:49 PM my time and I’m thinking whiskey and beer.
| 75 |
Spartacus50 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:50:22pm |
Unchecked liberalism run amok. Thus begins Endgame
| 76 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:50:25pm |
re: #71 Killian Bundy
Our refining capacity is already razor thin.
/hey, I’ve got an idea, let’s make refining ridiculously expensive in the U.S., I wonder what will happen?
Gee, maybe someone should see about building more refineries?
Wait, what am I thinking? Sorry about that.
| 77 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:50:46pm |
re: #72 BatGuano
I turned on Fox news for coverage of the vote: it’s still Michael Jackson coverage.
Pedophile worship trumps America’s future.
| 78 |
garden18 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:51:04pm |
re: #34 shifty
Glen Beck is a dangerous individual, a fascist in the making. He is a hater of Israel. When the nation tires of Obama’s false hopes, I fear it will turn to a kook like Beck for guidance.
| 79 |
lostlakehiker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:51:08pm |
As an advocate of doing something sensible about global warming, and taking it seriously, I oppose this bill. Cap and trade is an open invitation to massive corruption.
Who gets an initial allowance? On what terms are trades conducted? Does one man’s promise to plant a forest in the Sahara count as an offset, while another’s is indignantly rejected for the transparent fraud that it is?
If we are to do something about rising CO2 levels, we might start by developing the technology to substitute solar for coal. In the meantime, we could seize such straws as are available: build more wind power, emphasize efficiency in the use of energy, make our buildings so they capture the sun in winter and reflect it in summer, etc.
If desperate measures are called for, we might do them honestly and just enact a carbon tax. Burning any fossil fuel would cost, in direct proportion to the carbon content of that fuel. Importing anything made abroad would cost, in direct proportion to the carbon content implicit in the thing made.
(Failure to include this second provision would just outsource all energy-intensive industry, forcing it offshore to where things are less efficient, energywise, but more efficient, economically, because they escape taxation.)
But then we get into the weeds—-what about things made with hydropower? But what about things made with hydropower, or so they say, when every other part of the exporting nation’s economy runs on coal? Energy is fungible. Who can say what fraction of the electricity used to make this or that ton of steel came from hydro?
The current bill has not even attempted to think through these complexities, which are multiplied in a cap and trade regime. What is to prevent the construction of factories right on the Canadian border, drawing their electricity from Quebec Hydro, while Quebec supplies its own industry from newly built coal-fired plants? The electricity would technically be “clean”, so there would be no carbon emissions. Riiiiggghhhtt.
What is to prevent an outsourcing of almost every energy-intensive activity to Brazil, China, etc.? These economies are not as efficient as our own, and world CO2 emissions will soar as a result of the perverse incentives built into our cap-and-trade law, but we will be able to preen. WE don’t emit as much CO2 as we used to.
| 80 |
Sharmuta Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:51:19pm |
re: #72 BatGuano
I turned on Fox news for coverage of the vote: it’s still Michael Jackson coverage.
Of course it is. They’re no better than any other msm outlet.
| 81 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:51:37pm |
the pressure on taxpayers will become too much…tea parties will seem so innocent….inflation, rising unemployment and a vanishing American dream will piss off a hell of alot of people…and it’s all contrived and premeditated
| 82 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:51:40pm |
| 83 |
VegasRick Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:51:41pm |
| 84 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:51:52pm |
it’s weak legislation that won’t fix anything
/enacting any cap and trade scheme that doesn’t at least include China and India is just so much pointless economic suicide on our part
| 85 |
Cathypop Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:51:55pm |
re: #74 Idle Drifter
Who stands to gain from such legislation? It’s 5:49 PM my time and I’m thinking whiskey and beer.
7:00 and I’m hitting the vodka.
| 86 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:52:02pm |
re: #58 beens21
I read somewhere that the bill has a provision for increasing unemployment benefits for the expected unemployment the bill will cause. Brilliant
Please tell me you forgot the sarc tag… nuts.
| 87 |
Jack Burton Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:52:12pm |
re: #80 Sharmuta
Of course it is. They’re no better than any other msm outlet.
“Look at the silly monkey!”
/mfmsm chewbacca defense
| 88 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:52:16pm |
re: #72 BatGuano
I turned on Fox news for coverage of the vote: it’s still Michael Jackson coverage.
We’ll hear more about the frickin autopsy than we will this bill.
| 90 |
Cannadian Club Akbar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:52:25pm |
re: #50 astronmr20
Where it will inevitably be amended before a vote in order to pay off members of the Senate so they’ll pass it.
Fuck you, John McCain for supporting this legislation.
We have a Senator in Florida who is retiring, so I don’t trust him. Then we have Bill Nelson who was an astronaut, which is cool, but he doesn’t want to drill. Nelson said the military needs the Gulf of Mexico as a bombing range, so national security is at risk. Funny, going green will take many years and more money goes to our enemies friends. Get a GOD DAMNED CLUE!
| 91 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:52:29pm |
re: #47 WinterCat
I keep imagining that living in America will soon be like living in Russia. Except we won’t be able to afford to run the space heaters.
3 dog nights might be the norm come winter time. Best start investing in dogs and getting use to them sleeping on or under your covers.
| 92 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:52:30pm |
| 93 |
shifty Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:52:39pm |
re: #72 BatGuano
I turned on Fox news for coverage of the vote: it’s still Michael Jackson coverage.
The good stuff like the custody battle of his ‘whiter than I am’ children hasnt even started yet.
| 94 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:52:46pm |
re: #24 Thanos
If they;re just Reps, don’t they have to run every two years?
Good old Congress. Our mayor is resigning next week one step ahead of the Fibbies, and says he thinks he’ll run for Congress.
It’s a time honored tradition down here… that’s how we got rid of Marion Barry and Al Gore.
Sent them to DC.
| 95 |
grahamski Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:52:50pm |
re: #58 beens21
I read somewhere that the bill has a provision for increasing unemployment benefits for the expected unemployment the bill will cause. Brilliant
But queen pelosi says it will create jobs….
rolls eyes…
| 96 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:53:00pm |
re: #80 Sharmuta
Of course it is. They’re no better than any other msm outlet.
agreed…is this news to anyone here?….talk about not paying attention
| 97 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:53:01pm |
re: #79 lostlakehiker
Dont worry. I hear we plan to borrow money from China to pay South American companies not to cut down trees to offset our carbon output. What could go wrong?
/
| 98 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:53:16pm |
The economic impact of the new draft varies from that of the original draft in several major ways:
• Compared to no cap and trade, real GDP losses increase an additional $2 trillion, from $7.4 trillion under the original draft to $9.6 trillion under the new draft;• Compared to no cap and trade, average unemployment increases an additional 261,000 jobs, from 844,000 lost jobs under the original draft to 1,105,000 lost jobs under the new draft; and
• Peak-year unemployment losses rise by 500,000 jobs, from 2 million under the original draft to 2.5 million under the new draft.
When there is no economy, we’ll have very little pollution.
BRILLIANT!
| 99 |
nyc redneck Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:53:24pm |
re: #45 Floral Giraffe
The kicker for me is THEY HAVEN’T EVEN READ THE BILL.
they never read o’s bills.
it is disgraceful how they are so bamboozled by this nobody.
we need to fight this commie.
he will keep grabbing until we are a 3rd world de-developed nation.
think hand to mouth living in huts eating dirt for a snack.
| 100 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:53:27pm |
re: #80 Sharmuta
I become more disappointed each time I watch it. It used to be the place for serious news that others would not cover. Now it is inconsequential fluff.
| 101 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:53:28pm |
re: #92 DEZes
Don’t do it….. you could end up like Michael.
| 102 |
Cannadian Club Akbar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:53:34pm |
I just need to find out if and how Vern Buchanon voted. Went to redstate.com and politico. So far nothing.
| 103 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:53:40pm |
Taking the chihuahuas for a walk. They have a much keener insight into the economy than our Congress, so I might feel better upon my return.
| 104 |
Jack Burton Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:53:50pm |
If Chewbacca does not live in Neverland Ranch you must vote for this bill.
| 105 |
SlartyBartfast Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:54:05pm |
re: #85 Cathypop
7:00 and I’m hitting the vodka.
Immediately following the election, some LGF wag said, “I hope He can turn water into wine ‘cause I plan to stay drunk for the next four years.”
Budweiser long necks for me tonight: Bottoms up!
| 106 |
shifty Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:54:15pm |
re: #85 Cathypop
7:00 and I’m hitting the vodka.
I’m drinking mojitos. They’re tasty and we’re all going to be drinking them soon enough anyway.
| 107 |
Dancing along the light of day Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:54:17pm |
re: #51 Racer X
What happened to Obama’s promise to give America 3 days to review every piece of legislation? Or was that Nancy who promised that? How many other promises will they break?
Heh, transparency in government.
//////////////
| 109 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:54:30pm |
re: #94 tradewind
If they;re just Reps, don’t they have to run every two years?
Good old Congress. Our mayor is resigning next week one step ahead of the Fibbies, and says he thinks he’ll run for Congress.
It’s a time honored tradition down here… that’s how we got rid of Marion Barry and Al Gore.
Sent them to DC.
Yep, you are right, for some reason I thought they staggered them.
| 110 |
eon Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:54:32pm |
re: #51 Racer X
What happened to Obama’s promise to give America 3 days to review every piece of legislation? Or was that Nancy who promised that? How many other promises will they break?
He read it. F**k, he basically wrote it.
And He Is America.
Therefore…….
///sarc + Obamabat pretzelogic
/I’ll be more coherent next post
cheers
eon
| 111 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:54:36pm |
It’s for damn sure that his corpse got a more thorough examination…..
| 112 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:54:42pm |
re: #99 nyc redneck
they never read o’s bills.
it is disgraceful how they are so bamboozled by this nobody.
we need to fight this commie.
he will keep grabbing until we are a 3rd world de-developed nation.
think hand to mouth living in huts eating dirt for a snack.
I got me a nitrous injector for car and a hockey mask. Working on my “Just walk away” speech, so I figure I’m all set.
| 113 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:54:49pm |
re: #95 grahamski
But queen pelosi says it will create jobs….
rolls eyes…
It will create jobs, in China.
| 114 |
calcajun Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:54:50pm |
It will die in the Senate— a slow, lonely death. Move along citizens. Nuthin to see here.
| 115 |
astronmr20 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:54:57pm |
re: #78 garden18
Glen Beck is a dangerous individual, a fascist in the making. He is a hater of Israel.
I think Beck is a nut too,
But where in the hell did you get that notion?
| 116 |
pink freud Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:55:02pm |
re: #86 DaddyG
Please tell me you forgot the sarc tag… nuts.
Also increasing Earned Income Credit refunds ….for those with no children.
| 117 |
Cathypop Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:55:19pm |
re: #103 ArmyWife
Taking the chihuahuas for a walk. They have a much keener insight into the economy than our Congress, so I might feel better upon my return.
How do you take a chihuahua for a walk? Seriously! And why?
| 118 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:55:20pm |
re: #106 shifty
Carta Blanca, since that’s what we’ve just given those dipsticks.
| 119 |
VegasRick Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:55:22pm |
re: #92 DEZes
Anybody have any Valliums?
Kennedy does!
And they even rallied a few lawmakers to come to Washington who hadn’t appeared here in weeks.
Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.) came in to vote for the plan after committing himself to rehab a few weeks ago. He’s struggled with alcohol and medication addiction.
[Link: www.foxnews.com…]
| 120 |
calcajun Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:55:28pm |
re: #106 shifty
I’m drinking mojitos. They’re tasty and we’re all going to be drinking them soon enough anyway.
No—I will never surrender my Scotch! Single-malt Rules!
| 121 |
Zimriel Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:55:31pm |
re: #93 shifty
The good stuff like the custody battle of his ‘whiter than I am’ children hasnt even started yet.
He died $400 million in the hole. Who wants that inheritance?
I mean, other than us taxpayers…
| 122 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:55:36pm |
Is there anyone left on the planet who doubts that MJ was a pedophile? Why does he get a pass? Was he a “good” pedophile?
I don’t get it.
| 124 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:55:44pm |
Drinkers ready your glasses!
| 126 |
calcajun Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:55:55pm |
re: #117 Cathypop
How do you take a chihuahua for a walk? Seriously! And why?
To feed the alligators, of course.
| 127 |
Sharmuta Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:56:01pm |
re: #87 ArchangelMichael
“Look at the silly monkey!”
/mfmsm chewbacca defense
Look! Over there! Something shiny!
| 128 |
The Shadow Do Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:56:04pm |
My favorite:
I can make a firm pledge, under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.
Cap and trade? I firmly pledge that it is not a tax. Really. Where does that say tax? I pledge it is not. Really. It is, uh, cap! And, uh, trade!
| 129 |
apachegunner Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:56:19pm |
re: #78 garden18
Glen Beck is a dangerous individual, a fascist in the making. He is a hater of Israel. When the nation tires of Obama’s false hopes, I fear it will turn to a kook like Beck for guidance.
and who would you suggest?
| 130 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:56:23pm |
re: #114 calcajun
It will die in the Senate— a slow, lonely death. Move along citizens. Nuthin to see here.
maybe and probably, but there is a higher principle here and people should be very upset at the way the govt is treating us….we pay them for this abuse, are you okay with that?
| 131 |
Cathypop Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:57:03pm |
| 132 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:57:12pm |
“Cap and Trade”
by
Crippling Traitors
It IS time to vote out the Incumbents. Make them…outcumbents!
| 133 |
calcajun Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:57:13pm |
| 134 |
HelloDare Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:57:16pm |
A very simple tactic would be for a reporter to ask Waxman specific questions about his own bill. Waxman wouldn’t know the answer. No way anybody understands this thousand page monster and the 300 supplemental pages that were just added.
| 135 |
Cannadian Club Akbar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:57:33pm |
re: #115 astronmr20
I think Beck is a nut too,
But where in the hell did you get that notion?
Glenn Beck does not hate Israel. You have no clue what you are talking about.
| 136 |
Jack Burton Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:57:34pm |
re: #129 apachegunner
and who would you suggest?
Someone who isn’t a paranoid kook waiting for the mothership.
| 137 |
sngnsgt Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:58:01pm |
I will not forgive them for they know what they did. They just crucified life as we know it.
| 138 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:58:22pm |
re: #121 Zimriel
Five hundred mil.
The thing is, now he can’t run up any more debt. (He was only broke because he modeled his life on the US Congress’ spending patterns…. don’t balance, don’t worry).
So with some careful managing of the rights to his music, after his debts are paid, his three kids should be left wealthy again in short order. The trick will be to make sure there’s no Col. Parker hanging over his family, swindling them out of what is theirs.
| 139 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:58:28pm |
re: #103 ArmyWife
Taking the chihuahuas for a walk. They have a much keener insight into the economy than our Congress, so I might feel better upon my return.
I betcha they will produce something better than our House of Representatives while you are out.
-note the lack of sarc tags-
| 140 |
calcajun Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:58:29pm |
re: #136 ArchangelMichael
Someone who isn’t a paranoid kook waiting for the mothership.
…say the man with the Reynolds-wrap chapeau.///
| 141 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:58:33pm |
Names of the 8 House Republican’s who voted to permit this farce of a bill to pass. Once again, the government is going to try to ‘fix’ a marketplace and end up doing nothing but severely damaging and crippling the country.
8 more reasons to ensure that the RNC doesn’t see another penny from me.
Bono Mack
Castle
Kirk
Lance
LoBiondo
McHugh
Reichert
Smith (NJ)
| 142 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:58:45pm |
re: #135 Cannadian Club Akbar
Glenn Beck does not hate Israel. You have no clue what you are talking about.
he will when it pays off for him….Beck is a useless whore and his fans are just as bad
| 143 |
CyanSnowHawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:58:53pm |
re: #136 ArchangelMichael
Someone who isn’t a paranoid kook waiting for the mothership.
RON PAUL!
/oh, you said “isn’t”, never mind.
| 144 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:59:03pm |
| 145 |
KingKenrod Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:59:09pm |
re: #114 calcajun
It will die in the Senate— a slow, lonely death. Move along citizens. Nuthin to see here.
If Al Franken is confirmed, the GOP won’t be able to filibuster, and the Dems will have up to 10 “no” votes to give red state Dem senators like Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu for final passage. The only hopes of stopping it is to get 1 Dem to join a filibuster, or keep Franken out of the Senate until more public sentiment turns against the bill. And we have to keep Snowe and Collins from voting for it too.
| 147 |
Killgore Trout Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:59:32pm |
re: #115 astronmr20
I think Beck is a nut too,
But where in the hell did you get that notion?
Listen to him talk about foreign policy. He’s one of those libertarian isolationists who doesn’t care if the Palestinians and Israelis kill each other. He claims it’s none of our business.
| 148 |
Cannadian Club Akbar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 4:59:55pm |
re: #135 Cannadian Club Akbar
Glenn Beck does not hate Israel. You have no clue what you are talking about.
Sorry! should have been #78….clueless
| 149 |
Cathypop Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:00:17pm |
I’m going to go outside and grill some beef. Maybe pretend that the cow was a democrat in a previous life. Yeah! Sweet!
| 150 |
pink freud Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:00:31pm |
re: #145 KingKenrod
If Al Franken is confirmed, the GOP won’t be able to filibuster, and the Dems will have up to 10 “no” votes to give red state Dem senators like Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu for final passage. The only hopes of stopping it is to get 1 Dem to join a filibuster, or keep Franken out of the Senate until more public sentiment turns against the bill. And we have to keep Snowe and Collins from voting for it too.
Landrieu plans on voting no from what I am hearing locally. (Although that was a week ago or so.)
| 151 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:00:33pm |
re: #114 calcajun
It will die in the Senate— a slow, lonely death. Move along citizens. Nuthin to see here.
AL FRANKEN US Senator…….
Betting that it will die in the Senate may not be the safe bet. This farce of a bill never should have gotten this far….and once again it wasn’t the Dems that made the difference, it was weakwilled Republicans that signed off on this crap and tax bill.
| 152 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:00:35pm |
If it is OK to like Michael Jackson for his music and ignore his pedohilia, is it OK to agree with Glenn Beck when he makes a valid point?
| 153 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:00:55pm |
re: #127 Sharmuta
Look! Over there! Something shiny!
For those who have seen the movie, “UP”…
SQUIRREL!
| 154 |
astronmr20 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:00:59pm |
re: #135 Cannadian Club Akbar
Glenn Beck does not hate Israel. You have no clue what you are talking about.
You quoted the wrong person. That’s what I was saying.
| 155 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:01:01pm |
re: #149 Cathypop
I’m going to go outside and grill some beef. Maybe pretend that the cow was a democrat in a previous life. Yeah! Sweet!
They always come back as an ass.
| 156 |
calcajun Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:01:08pm |
re: #145 KingKenrod
It was too close in the House and there is not that much love for it. You’re assuming it will get out of committee in the Senate. If it does not get a sponsorship there, it dies in the Senate without ever going to a vote.
| 157 |
KingKenrod Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:01:21pm |
re: #150 pink freud
Landrieu plans on voting no from what I am hearing locally. (Although that was a week ago or so.)
She better join the filibuster then, if she’s serious about stopping it. Voting no isn’t good enough.
| 158 |
astronmr20 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:01:28pm |
| 159 |
SlartyBartfast Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:01:48pm |
re: #155 DEZes
Too bad I can only give you 1 up-ding for that one.
| 160 |
Noam Sayin' Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:01:48pm |
This kind of shit makes me want to get drunk.
| 162 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:02:08pm |
re: #156 calcajun
It was too close in the House and there is not that much love for it. You’re assuming it will get out of committee in the Senate. If it does not get a sponsorship there, it dies in the Senate without ever going to a vote.
It will make it out of committee - that is a given.
| 163 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:02:24pm |
re: #152 Racer X
If it is OK to like Michael Jackson for his music and ignore his pedohilia, is it OK to agree with Glenn Beck when he makes a valid point?
MJ is over…his contribution to our culture is minimal…he was a ghastly freak and nobody to look up to or emulate…good riddance
| 164 |
Cannadian Club Akbar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:02:34pm |
re: #147 Killgore Trout
Listen to him talk about foreign policy. He’s one of those libertarian isolationists who doesn’t care if the Palestinians and Israelis kill each other. He claims it’s none of our business.
No, wrong again. He wants the UN to get the fuck out of the way and stop blaming Israel for everything. But everyone knows everything listening to sound bites.
| 165 |
grahamski Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:02:39pm |
| 166 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:02:44pm |
re: #160 Noam Sayin’
This kind of shit makes me want to get drunk.
I’m buyin’ Noam. What are we having?
| 167 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:03:13pm |
re: #159 SlartyBartfast
Too bad I can only give you 1 up-ding for that one.
One was good enough, thanks.
| 168 |
mad_scientist Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:03:30pm |
Didnt read the comments yet, but it appears that these so called representatives didnt even read the damn bill! This is a bill that could wreck the US economy (even worse than it is now) and the Dems dont give them the real bill until 3:00 am. It is an outrage.
Any thoughts on if it will make it through the senate?
| 169 |
Cannadian Club Akbar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:03:34pm |
| 170 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:03:40pm |
| 171 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:03:41pm |
I opened a beer.
And took immense pleasure in the sound of CO2 escaping unregulated (for now) into the atmosphere.
| 172 |
wrenchwench Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:03:41pm |
| 173 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:03:42pm |
re: #152 Racer X
Before I ever really knew a thing about Glenn Beck… and I don’t watch him on television now, so I may not know a lot more… someone took me to a live stage show he did as part of a tour, and I have to say… I laughed until I thought I would die. The guy is an unbelievably funny standup comedian, at least live. He had the audience rolling.
I don’t really remember him being all that politically focused … it was sort of a general, Dave Barry-esque commentary on society today. Wish I had taped it.
| 174 |
Sharmuta Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:03:44pm |
It doesn’t matter that the news is covering Michael Jackson. They didn’t cover this bill enough for people to call or write to stop it before yesterday, so I don’t see what one news cycle cost. No one will care about this until they get the bill.
| 175 |
eon Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:04:22pm |
re: #38 cronus
Passage of waxman-like legislation in the Senate virtually guarantees a further reduction in production from coal and will result in a commodity price spike (ala what we’ve seen in oil) when we finally see a turn in the economy.
The Democrats will choke off any recovery with sharply higher energy costs. They now own the $4/$5 gallon gas and higher electric rates that we’ll see in the next year or so.
Don’t forget, they want $8/gallon gas. That’s how they intend to force us onto public transportation, so they can watch where we go, and make sure we’re perusing the Utne Reader as opposed to The Weekly Standard.
To get some idea if what kind of world they want to make us live in, you might want to read Fallen Angels by Jerry Pournelle, Larry Niven, & Michael Flynn.
cheers
eon
| 176 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:04:24pm |
re: #168 mad_scientist
Any thoughts on if it will make it through the senate?
Yes it will pass. Obama wants it to.
We are done.
| 177 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:04:50pm |
re: #134 HelloDare
A very simple tactic would be for a reporter to ask Waxman specific questions about his own bill. Waxman wouldn’t know the answer. No way anybody understands this thousand page monster and the 300 supplemental pages that were just added.
We are not even in July yet and it seems that they have been ramming away with legislation after legislation at breakneck speed. Is it because these bills might fail initially that they’ll be re-hatched under a different bill with new language in order to beat the election cycle? Or is congress trying to much done before summer vacation? What gives?
| 178 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:05:03pm |
re: #114 calcajun
It will die in the Senate— a slow, lonely death. Move along citizens. Nuthin to see here.
Snowe
Collins
Graham
| 179 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:05:14pm |
re: #171 jcm
I opened a beer.
And took immense pleasure in the sound of CO2 escaping unregulated (for now) into the atmosphere.
I hope they don’t start regulating methane emissions. That could put me in some serious debt.
“Pull my finger”
“Cha-ching!”
| 180 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:05:59pm |
re: #174 Sharmuta
It doesn’t matter that the news is covering Michael Jackson. They didn’t cover this bill enough for people to call or write to stop it before yesterday, so I don’t see what one news cycle cost. No one will care about this until they get the bill.
And then be surprised, shocked even.
Of course they will never blame themselves.
| 181 |
eon Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:06:04pm |
| 182 |
Osama Bin PorkChop Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:06:05pm |
Another aspect of this may be is of the “Placeholders” placed in the bill, which by my understanding, allow for actual bill language to be placed in that section, AFTER the vote.
That’s very, very troubling…..it doesn’t seem very constitutional to begin with
| 183 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:06:17pm |
Republican speakers on C-SPAN are kicking the shit out of this bill. Good for them.
| 184 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:06:22pm |
WE all have to get involved in the local political parties and help to identify true Conservatives for nomination.
/Darn, now I’ve got to do it, too.
| 185 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:06:28pm |
re: #179 DaddyG
I hope they don’t start regulating methane emissions. That could put me in some serious debt.
“Pull my finger”
“Cha-ching!”
Stock up on Lima beans. ;)
| 186 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:06:36pm |
re: #179 DaddyG
I hope they don’t start regulating methane emissions. That could put me in some serious debt.
“Pull my finger”
“Cha-ching!”
When it’s a crime to fart.
Only criminals will fart.
| 187 |
lawhawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:06:46pm |
Is it really an uncertain fate in the Senate? I don’t think so. If the GOP can’t filibuster, Democrats retain the numbers to get it done. And this President will sign it.
And no one will have read the damned thing.
Cap and trade tax is coming; the only question is how much damage will be done before saner politicians prevail and reverse this?
I have an even worse feeling over the health care plan, since once it’s enacted, it will be far more difficult to reverse.
| 189 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:07:11pm |
| 190 |
callahan23 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:07:15pm |
re: #166 Racer X
I’m buyin’ Noam. What are we having?
I am having a whiskey without the fizz and no ice.
We’ve been co2’ed enough and that bill is gonna rock the economic boat way too much.
| 191 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:07:23pm |
re: #183 Racer X
Not so much..they should be kicking the shiite out of their R colleagues who voted for it.
| 192 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:07:34pm |
re: #177 Idle Drifter
We are not even in July yet and it seems that they have been ramming away with legislation after legislation at breakneck speed. Is it because these bills might fail initially that they’ll be re-hatched under a different bill with new language in order to beat the election cycle? Or is congress trying to much done before summer vacation? What gives?
why wait around til people get smart, if they ever do…BO knows the public is stupid and he has Congress and the media in his pocket…he won…pretty simple
| 193 |
wrenchwench Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:07:37pm |
re: #175 eon
Don’t forget, they want $8/gallon gas.
I almost hate to say it, but that would be really good for my business. (Little bicycle shop.) $4.00/gallon increased my traffic a lot.
/I’ll be more coherent next post
| 194 |
VegasRick Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:07:39pm |
| 196 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:08:42pm |
Just skim the table of contents of this travesty.
/it screams boondoggle
| 200 |
Kosh's Shadow Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:09:14pm |
re: #182 Osama Bin PorkChop
Another aspect of this may be is of the “Placeholders” placed in the bill, which by my understanding, allow for actual bill language to be placed in that section, AFTER the vote.
That’s very, very troubling…..it doesn’t seem very constitutional to begin with
But I’m sure a Hispanic woman can make a better decision about whether it is constitutional or not than a green lizard.
////
| 201 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:09:28pm |
re: #191 tradewind
Not so much..they should be kicking the shiite out of their R colleagues who voted for it.
At least some in congress are not just bending over and taking it up the ass. I applaud them speaking out on record against this travesty.
| 202 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:09:28pm |
Tomorrow I am heading to the printers to get a stack of bumper stickers that read
You Cap Us,
We Trade U.
Guess I should try to get permssion first from the Twitterer who sent it…..
Meanwhile, you all might consider firing off one to your senators. It’s a short and succinct warning to them.
| 203 |
callahan23 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:10:04pm |
| 204 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:10:06pm |
re: #198 jcm
A million fart march on Washington!
I am selling gass masks at that event for 100 bucks a pop.
| 205 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:10:14pm |
re: #197 kawfytawk
can we sue our congressmen for malpractice?
No but in 2010 you can
FIRE THEIR GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING ASSES!
| 206 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:10:31pm |
| 207 |
cronus Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:10:35pm |
From teh Twitter:
@samishamieh: Congress is not monogamous, it screws everyone. #CapAndTrade
| 208 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:10:40pm |
blowback…maybe the illegals in this country will flock south and out of here…in hard times they will become the target of discontent
| 209 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:10:40pm |
re: #177 Idle Drifter
We are not even in July yet and it seems that they have been ramming away with legislation after legislation at breakneck speed. Is it because these bills might fail initially that they’ll be re-hatched under a different bill with new language in order to beat the election cycle? Or is congress trying to much done before summer vacation? What gives?
The last time a Democrat President had a majority in both House and Senate was LBJ. What resulted was the War on Poverty, Medicaid/Medicare, Public Housing complexes filling with Welfare mothers, and the President personally identifying targets for airstrikes in Viet Nam.
Clinton had a chance to sign more Liberal legislation until Newt and Rush got involved in 1994. It is my opinion that Obama knows he has an 18 month window, and he’s pushing as fast as he can.
| 210 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:10:45pm |
| 211 |
tblot Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:10:51pm |
The funny part is they the congress proberly don’t know what they passed
| 212 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:11:07pm |
re: #196 Killian Bundy
Just skim the table of contents of this travesty.
/it screams boondoggle
It’s only 1.94MB, how bad can it be?
////////////
| 213 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:11:09pm |
re: #205 jcm
No but in 2010 you can
FIRE THEIR GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING ASSES!
Like I said on another thread.
Congress, you STUPID SPOILED SOCIALIST TREE HUGGING APPEASEMENT MONKEYS.
| 214 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:11:09pm |
Yeah!
That last response on CSPAN was awesome!
| 215 |
Kosh's Shadow Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:11:11pm |
re: #205 jcm
No but in 2010 you can
FIRE THEIR GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING ASSES!
If someone actually runs against them! Remember, I live in moonbattachusetts.
| 216 |
Mr. In get Mr. Out Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:11:16pm |
So, when do the corporations start trading energy?
| 217 |
VegasRick Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:11:29pm |
re: #204 DEZes
I am selling gass masks at that event for 100 bucks a pop.
1 too many s’s and 1 too few o’s.
| 218 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:11:32pm |
re: #211 tblot
The funny part is they the congress proberly don’t know what they passed
unfortunately I don’t find that funny
| 219 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:11:36pm |
| 220 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:11:52pm |
| 221 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:12:03pm |
re: #215 Kosh’s Shadow
If someone actually runs against them! Remember, I live in moonbattachusetts.
write in…none of the above
| 223 |
Kosh's Shadow Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:12:29pm |
re: #208 albusteve
blowback…maybe the illegals in this country will flock south and out of here…in hard times they will become the target of discontent
They will, since they’ll be able to get jobs in Mexico (not considered developed enough to have emissions standards), but not in the US.
We’ll be joining them.
| 224 |
oronpam Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:12:39pm |
So my question is…..should I start trapping the family “methane” to trade for credits…../
| 225 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:12:40pm |
re: #7 Thanos
Here’s the R’s who voted for this :
Bono Mack
Castle
Kirk
Lance
LoBiondo
McHugh
Reichert
Smith (NJ)h/t hot air
Thanos -
Back in “the Day” I thought Chris Smith was dangerous, from a “Progressive” Standpoint. Apparently, I have changed more than HE.
Bad Vote Chris. “Runny Eggs” started doing it for me in this Bankrupt State back in 1993. You should KNOW Better. That is all.
-S-
| 226 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:12:56pm |
re: #223 Kosh’s Shadow
They will, since they’ll be able to get jobs in Mexico (not considered developed enough to have emissions standards), but not in the US.
We’ll be joining them.
good point
| 227 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:13:16pm |
| 228 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:13:34pm |
re: #213 DEZes
Like I said on another thread.
Congress, you STUPID SPOILED SOCIALIST TREE HUGGING APPEASEMENT MONKEYS.
Groundskeeper Willie couldn’t have said it better. ;)
| 229 |
VegasRick Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:13:47pm |
So…..How many of you folks feel like going out for a peaceful protest? Tea Party anybody? Killgore? Bueller? Anybody?
| 230 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:13:50pm |
The U.S. Senate, standing between you and the 18th century.
/I hear the health care was pretty good back then too
| 231 |
eon Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:13:58pm |
re: #190 callahan23
I am having a whiskey without the fizz and no ice.
We’ve been co2’ed enough and that bill is gonna rock the economic boat way too much.
I’m having a Klondike bar and a non-diet Mountain Dew right now.
Trust me- this is my equivalent of tying one on, going back thirty-plus years.
/much more of this s**t, and it’s non-decaf black coffee until 2012!
cheers
eon
| 232 |
hazzyday Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:14:02pm |
I wonder if I am reading these things wrong.
Is carbon = carbon dioxide? Or are they referring to carbon (C)? This is the one area I am an element chart nazi. I just think they are trying to fool me out of money by referring to soot as the problem.
All new government agencies and acts really do is remove money from the pockets of the taxpayers and give it to the legislators friends. That is government beyond market rules and defense in a nutshell. The common good here is poorly identified.
The best way to work over AGW is to raise the gas tax and to offer to help China green up. For every green kindergartner here learning to conserve there are two in China smoking cigarettes. let people self regulate.
| 233 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:14:10pm |
Liberal nitwits decide that they need to ‘fix’ the mortgage industry in order to get more minorities that can’t afford houses into houses. Result: Housing and Mortgage Industry collapses, collateral damage takes out Credit / Financial Industry - guarantee’s Obama win in 11/08 and 2 trillion deficit in 2009 - with no real repair to economy other than massive expansion of government power.
Liberal nitwits combined with junk science decide that carbon based fuels have to be priced out of the marketplace in order to make inefficient renewable fuel sources economically viable. Result: Massive energy price increases, massive energy shortages, collapsed businesses and industries, more government spending, more government takeovers of businesses, and a rapidly shrinking middle class.
Liberal ideologues decide that nationalized health care is needed in order to further their agenda. Result: $2-4 Trillion in additional spending over next decade, lessened health care, fewer doctors and medical personnel to treat the need and ultimately, only 10 million more people have ‘insurance’. Mortality rate in US increases and median life expectency drops 5 years in the 1st 3 years of the program.
And all of this shit is done in less than 9 months of Obama being inaugurated……marvelous.
| 234 |
lawhawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:14:20pm |
re: #216 Mr. In get Mr. Out
So, when do the corporations start trading energy?
Wrong question. Correct question is when do these energy companies pass on the costs to the end users - which will be everyone since no business is going to eat these costs.
Politicians fail economics 101 yet again - and this time they’re doing it on purpose because they’ve bought into the vaporware of cap and trade as though it will actually save the environment. It will do no such thing; it only will act as a brake on the economy and destroy whatever jobs are created or saved by the trillion dollar porkfest (and we’re already seen the fail of the porkfest since the jobs aren’t being created or saved).
| 235 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:14:22pm |
re: #193 wrenchwench
I almost hate to say it, but that would be really good for my business. (Little bicycle shop.) $4.00/gallon increased my traffic a lot.
Oil is used to make bicycle tires.
Bwahahahhaha!
Little Bicycle Shop of HORRORS!
/h
| 236 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:14:34pm |
re: #229 VegasRick
So…..How many of you folks feel like going out for a peaceful protest? Tea Party anybody? Killgore? Bueller? Anybody?
killgore likes what’s happening…count him out
| 237 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:14:43pm |
re: #225 Dr. Shalit
Thanos -
Back in “the Day” I thought Chris Smith was dangerous, from a “Progressive” Standpoint. Apparently, I have changed more than HE.
Bad Vote Chris. “Runny Eggs” started doing it for me in this Bankrupt State back in 1993. You should KNOW Better. That is all.-S-
wonder if there were drug deals made or were they willing partners to his sham…either way it sickens me
| 238 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:14:45pm |
re: #211 tblot
The funny part is they the congress proberly don’t know what they passed
| 239 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:14:58pm |
“I have been greatly abused, have been obliged to do more than my part in the war; been loaded with class rates, town rates, province rates, Continental rates and all rates…been pulled and hauled by sheriffs, constables and collectors, and had my cattle sold for less than they were worth…The great men are going to get all we have and I think it is time for us to rise and put a stop to it, and have no more courts, nor sheriffs, nor collectors nor lawyers.” - Plough Jogger, Farmer, 1786
| 240 |
tommygum Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:15:29pm |
re: #47 WinterCat
Thank you, read the whole thing.
Very informative.
Not that I’m going to Russia anytime soon……
| 241 |
Nadnerb Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:15:31pm |
I am LIVID. This is such a unabashed, naked tax increase, intendd to squeeze regular folks and force guidelines upon us that will do NOTHING to change the climate. For an example of what the fuck our leaders let pass without reading, take a look at this:
SEC. 789. CLIMATE CHANGE REBATE CONSUMER REFUNDS.
‘(a) Rebate- Not later than October 31 of each calendar year, the President, or such Federal agency or department as the President may designate, shall distribute the funds in the Consumer Climate Change Rebate Fundfund- In each year after deposits are made to the Climate Change Consumer Refund Account, the Secretary of the Treasury shall provide tax refunds on a per capita basis to each household in the United States.‘(b) Limitations- The President, or such Federal agency or department as the President may designate, that shall collectively equal the amount deposited into the Climate Change Consumer Refund Account
That’s just a random excerpt. I’m just waiting for the government to regulate me out of the car hobby-something I love. What do you all love that this might affect?
What a fucking travesty.
| 242 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:15:35pm |
re: #36 HelloDare
If it passes more business will fail or wont be able to compete with countries like China. Business will go there. They don’t care at all about pollution. China is the largest user of coal in the world.
China is opening one new coal burning plant daily.
| 243 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:15:41pm |
re: #230 Killian Bundy
The U.S. Senate, standing between you and the 18th century.
/I hear the health care was pretty good back then too
Killian Bundy -
Ask George Washington about that. From what we know now, He Died from BAD TEETH, in the 1790’s
-S-
| 246 |
Noam Sayin' Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:16:00pm |
| 247 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:16:08pm |
re: #190 callahan23
I am having a whiskey without the fizz and no ice.
We’ve been co2’ed enough and that bill is gonna rock the economic boat way too much.
Just wait until the congress critters start tax charred oak barrels and distilleries in general for producing CO2 then they’ll have a Whiskey Rebellion Part Duex.
| 248 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:16:41pm |
re: #216 Mr. In get Mr. Out
So, when do the corporations start trading energy?
Remind me again how that worked out for Enron?
| 249 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:16:53pm |
re: #239 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
“I have been greatly abused, have been obliged to do more than my part in the war; been loaded with class rates, town rates, province rates, Continental rates and all rates…been pulled and hauled by sheriffs, constables and collectors, and had my cattle sold for less than they were worth…The great men are going to get all we have and I think it is time for us to rise and put a stop to it, and have no more courts, nor sheriffs, nor collectors nor lawyers.” - Plough Jogger, Farmer, 1786
very nice in an old fashioned way….I dig that guy…my kind of American
| 250 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:16:59pm |
| 251 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:17:00pm |
re: #234 lawhawk
Wrong question. Correct question is when do these energy companies pass on the costs to the end users - which will be everyone since no business is going to eat these costs.
Politicians fail economics 101 yet again - and this time they’re doing it on purpose because they’ve bought into the vaporware of cap and trade as though it will actually save the environment. It will do no such thing; it only will act as a brake on the economy and destroy whatever jobs are created or saved by the trillion dollar porkfest (and we’re already seen the fail of the porkfest since the jobs aren’t being created or saved).
Companies will probably raise prices as soon as they can to match projected costs estimates in the future. My opinion
| 252 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:17:10pm |
| 253 |
tblot Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:17:44pm |
re: #218 kawfytawk
I dont’ either but congress has a way to make me laugh at them when they don’t even listen. And for some reason they just get voted in again and again. Maybe american is listening
| 254 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:17:52pm |
re: #234 lawhawk
Wrong question. Correct question is when do these energy companies pass on the costs to the end users - which will be everyone since no business is going to eat these costs.
Politicians fail economics 101 yet again - and this time they’re doing it on purpose because they’ve bought into the vaporware of cap and trade as though it will actually save the environment. It will do no such thing; it only will act as a brake on the economy and destroy whatever jobs are created or saved by the trillion dollar porkfest (and we’re already seen the fail of the porkfest since the jobs aren’t being created or saved).
No, in this case they aren’t failing econ 101. They understand econ 101 quite well. Their preference for energy use and sources are not economically viable in a free market system. They have decided to kill the free market system in order to make those renewable sources now ‘viable’.
| 255 |
hazzyday Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:18:06pm |
re: #225 Dr. Shalit
Reichert in a district that is rapidly yuppifying with urban green democrats. He can’t win the election without being very pro environment. My nephew came home from school a month ago with a lot of worries about climate disasters.
| 256 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:18:09pm |
re: #223 Kosh’s Shadow
They will, since they’ll be able to get jobs in Mexico (not considered developed enough to have emissions standards), but not in the US.
We’ll be joining them.
Not so fast! The Mexicans actually protect their country from illegal immigrants.
| 257 |
pat Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:18:27pm |
Of course it won’t fix anything. There is nothing to fix. There has been no significant warming in 10 years. As for the Bill, it is a tax bill that will relegate the American economy to that of Mexico. We will be exporting jibs at a rate the world has never seen. There will be no reason to manufacture in America. None. Our cheap energy and highway system has been the sole manufacturing asset that American manufacturers have. With bot gone, so will go American Industry if this passes the Senate…
| 258 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:18:35pm |
re: #117 Cathypop
Back - on a leash. They like it! They trot the whole time, head and tail up. They are dogs. Really.
| 259 |
razorbacker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:18:36pm |
‘Tis odd.
I can find the Republicans that voted for it, but not the Democrats who voted against it.
I wonder why.
| 261 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:18:45pm |
re: #251 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Kragar -
That which will MAINTAIN the Environment will come from Technology. The rest will make us POORER.
-S-
| 262 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:18:51pm |
Find our Senator’s fax number.
Send the bill from you computer to their fax machine.
Call them, ask if they’ve read it.
Keep sending it………
| 263 |
hazzyday Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:18:57pm |
re: #229 VegasRick
I think I’ll go to the next teaparty here and try and analyze it a little bit.
| 264 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:18:57pm |
re: #239 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
“I have been greatly abused, have been obliged to do more than my part in the war; been loaded with class rates, town rates, province rates, Continental rates and all rates…been pulled and hauled by sheriffs, constables and collectors, and had my cattle sold for less than they were worth…The great men are going to get all we have and I think it is time for us to rise and put a stop to it, and have no more courts, nor sheriffs, nor collectors nor lawyers.” - Plough Jogger, Farmer, 1786
Was he one of the participants in the Massachusetts Tax Rebellion? It was put down by force.
| 265 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:19:03pm |
re: #254 Athos
No, in this case they aren’t failing econ 101. They understand econ 101 quite well. Their preference for energy use and sources are not economically viable in a free market system. They have decided to kill the free market system in order to make those renewable sources now ‘viable’.
Spot on!
This is exactly what is happening.
| 266 |
VegasRick Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:19:14pm |
re: #259 razorbacker
‘Tis odd.
I can find the Republicans that voted for it, but not the Democrats who voted against it.
I wonder why.
There hiding.
/
| 267 |
lawhawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:19:43pm |
re: #254 Athos
You may be right, and we might find ourselves having blackouts, brownouts, and all kinds of energy shortages because the profit incentive to energy companies has disappeared and the “alternatives” are unavailable because they didn’t exist and couldn’t match the demand in even an ideal world.
| 268 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:19:59pm |
re: #258 ArmyWife
Back - on a leash. They like it! They trot the whole time, head and tail up. They are dogs. Really.
They’re rolling in it……..
| 269 |
grahamski Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:20:46pm |
| 270 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:20:47pm |
re: #255 hazzyday
Reichert in a district that is rapidly yuppifying with urban green democrats. He can’t win the election without being very pro environment. My nephew came home from school a month ago with a lot of worries about climate disasters.
hazzyday -
Been there, done that. Lost a “D” primary for reasons NOT repeatable here.
-S-
| 271 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:20:56pm |
Dammit! Scrappleface already has a linke for the T-Shirt!
[Link: www.cafepress.com…]
| 272 |
VegasRick Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:21:21pm |
re: #263 hazzyday
I think I’ll go to the next teaparty here and try and analyze it a little bit.
Good for you! I hope that there are no asshole RPers there but if there are some, oh well, it’s still a free country. I want MY voice heard, I’ll be there as well.
| 273 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:21:40pm |
re: #257 pat
We will be exporting jibs at a rate the world has never seen. With bot gone, so will go American Industry if this passes the Senate…
All those Robot-operated jibs sailing away to China…
*snif*
/h
| 274 |
wiffersnapper Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:22:10pm |
Man I hope the Senate gets it right. Can’t wait for 2010.
| 276 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:22:30pm |
well pin a rose on me….my congressman actually voted against it. He has always been in lockstep with the dems and NEVER says how he is going to vote…NEVER…guess I am gonna have to send him a note of thanks…since I continually beat him up for all the other stuff
| 277 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:22:40pm |
reload - I’VE NEVER SEEN A THREAD WITH SO MANY UPDINGS.
| 278 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:22:48pm |
re: #264 NelsFree
Was he one of the participants in the Massachusetts Tax Rebellion? It was put down by force.
| 279 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:22:51pm |
The U.S. House of Representatives.
/doing the work al Qaeda, Russia, and China can’t do
| 280 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:23:21pm |
re: #77 Racer X
Shhh, you’re liable to flush out another one of Aaron’s rants….
| 281 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:23:22pm |
re: #262 jcm
Find our Senator’s fax number.
Send the bill from you computer to their fax machine.
Call them, ask if they’ve read it.
Keep sending it………
…until our money stops paying for their fax paper!
| 282 |
callahan23 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:23:24pm |
| 283 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:23:28pm |
re: #267 lawhawk
You may be right, and we might find ourselves having blackouts, brownouts, and all kinds of energy shortages because the profit incentive to energy companies has disappeared and the “alternatives” are unavailable because they didn’t exist and couldn’t match the demand in even an ideal world.
We’ve already seen / experienced this in California - 40% population growth and zero new energy plants in the last 2 decades……now we have requirements for building solar and wind farms to deliver energy - and the farms will be ready 2 years before the transmission lines even get their environmental approvals to bring the power from the farm to LA….and these farms at full generation fail to meet the needs of the plants going offline because of cap & trade.
| 284 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:24:29pm |
Has Congress gone bat shit crazy?
Uhhh… never mind.
| 285 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:24:30pm |
re: #281 NelsFree
…until our money stops paying for their fax paper!
LOL!
We’re bankrupt away, who cares!
| 286 |
Killgore Trout Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:24:33pm |
re: #229 VegasRick
So…..How many of you folks feel like going out for a peaceful protest? Tea Party anybody? Killgore? Bueller? Anybody?
uhhhh, no thanks.
| 287 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:24:34pm |
Here’s a little Bob hope.
It surely fits the times.
Obviously, this doesn’t apply to Zombie.
| 288 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:24:38pm |
re: #274 wiffersnapper
Man I hope the Senate gets it right. Can’t wait for 2010.
“wiffer”
59 - 40 is a LOT easier.
-S-
| 290 |
tryagain Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:24:53pm |
If Mr. Hrynyshyn is considered a climate “scientist” then that explains quite a bit.
| 291 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:24:54pm |
re: #271 tradewind
Dammit! Scrappleface already has a linke for the T-Shirt!
[Link: www.cafepress.com…]
I’ll ask Obama to buy one for me.
//////s
| 292 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:25:07pm |
Well, the silver lining, I suppose, if there is one, is that children raised during the great depression were unusually resilient and self-sufficient, with a great work ethic.
My kids should be darn-near cast-iron between Cap and Trade and Mr. Hope and Change.
| 293 |
LGoPs Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:25:29pm |
re: #151 Athos
AL FRANKEN US Senator…….
Betting that it will die in the Senate may not be the safe bet. This farce of a bill never should have gotten this far….and once again it wasn’t the Dems that made the difference, it was weakwilled Republicans that signed off on this crap and tax bill.
I don’t excsue the 8 Republicans. I want them tarred and feathered and then run out of town. But don’t excuse the Democrats. They brought this on lock, stock and barrel.
| 294 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:25:41pm |
| 295 |
LGoPs Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:25:51pm |
re: #293 LGoPs
I don’t excsue the 8 Republicans. I want them tarred and feathered and then run out of town. But don’t excuse the Democrats. They brought this on lock, stock and barrel.
excuse….PIMF
| 296 |
Killgore Trout Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:25:55pm |
re: #236 albusteve
The blatant lies get tiresome. I’m not going to squabble with you about strawmen.
| 297 |
eon Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:25:56pm |
re: #232 hazzyday
I wonder if I am reading these things wrong.
Is carbon = carbon dioxide? Or are they referring to carbon (C)? This is the one area I am an element chart nazi. I just think they are trying to fool me out of money by referring to soot as the problem.
All new government agencies and acts really do is remove money from the pockets of the taxpayers and give it to the legislators friends. That is government beyond market rules and defense in a nutshell. The common good here is poorly identified.
The best way to work over AGW is to raise the gas tax and to offer to help China green up. For every green kindergartner here learning to conserve there are two in China smoking cigarettes. let people self regulate.
They’re using “carbon” as a buzzword for any carbon-bearing compound; CO, CO2, any sort of hydrocarbon, etc. And, in a neat bit of legerdemain, they’ve also defined water vapor as a “greenhouse gas”. Which means that anything that puts water vapor into the air will be defined as a Global Warming Facilitator (which, in their fantasyland, is sort of like being somebody who clubs baby seals to death just for fun).
Look for Cap N’ Trade to be used to “capture” whole new categories of activities, businesses, etc., all of which will be pilloried as “GWFs” and forced to pay oppressive taxes, or simply banned.
For instance, water vapor (referringf to above) accounts for better than 95% of the exahust of modern automobiles, because emission controls today are just that efficient. (J.D. Power & Associates Annual Report, 2008, quoted in this month’s Road & Track.) So, CO and CO2 aren’t enough of engine exhaust into the open air today to allow them to put sharp limits on, or ban, automobiles (banning them being the “gold standard” of the neo-Luddite/socialist left).
But, if they call that 95% water vapor a “Global Warming Facilitator”-
Gotcha.
Never underestimate the duplicity, viciousness, and plain sadism of our “enlightened elite’”.
Remember- They Don’t Like You.
cheers
eon
| 298 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:26:07pm |
This Cap and Throttle will bring great damage, perhaps disaster upon our economy, however, it is the direction we have been going and the voters have supported. The silver lining to the cloud is clear, the damage will be there and though the entire MSM will ignore or sugar-coat it, the blogosphere will run riot and the resulting rage may bring voters to some semblance of sanity in the next elections.
| 299 |
Cannadian Club Akbar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:26:24pm |
Everyone here has had a long day. Take the week off. See you Monday July 6 at 2PM. No? Oh, that’s right, congress gets the week off.
| 300 |
HoosierHoops Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:26:28pm |
re: #282 callahan23
There you go.
Had to upding you bro…Going back on the deck…I left my little doggie in a trillion degree temp.. Be back in a few…Poor Winston..Indiana Weather sucks
| 301 |
LGoPs Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:26:35pm |
re: #294 DEZes
Sorry, lizards gotta eat. ;)
Me too, but any more of these bills from Congress and I’m afraid I’m going to be eating dirt….
/
| 302 |
callahan23 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:26:47pm |
re: #284 BatGuano
Has Congress gone bat shit crazy?
Uhhh… never mind.
Let me think:
There is lots of moonbats - They do shitty work -And they are crazy in love with the 0.
| 303 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:27:00pm |
re: #74 Idle Drifter
Beaurocrats, moonbats and cheats (Oh My).
| 304 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:27:03pm |
re: #292 EmmmieG
Well, the silver lining, I suppose, if there is one, is that children raised during the great depression were unusually resilient and self-sufficient, with a great work ethic.
My kids should be darn-near cast-iron between Cap and Trade and Mr. Hope and Change.
Millions of Americans died of starvation. We must continue to fight fight fight.
| 307 |
pink freud Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:27:16pm |
Chickenshit bottom-of-a-dead-thread post over on the Onion/Obama thread blaming this on the republicans since they did nothing when they ‘ruled the roost’.
| 308 |
mattm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:27:21pm |
re: #156 calcajun
It was too close in the House and there is not that much love for it. You’re assuming it will get out of committee in the Senate. If it does not get a sponsorship there, it dies in the Senate without ever going to a vote.
Lets hope. If it gets signed any hope of a economic recovery will die. People forget it is not just them paying more for gas and utilities it is the farmers, ranchers, etc. who produce the food who will pay more for fuel who pass it on to the distributors, etc where the increased cost for the supermarkets to heat and cool and light their buildings in addition to get the food to the store who pass the increased cost across the board to the consumer.
| 309 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:27:43pm |
re: #292 EmmmieG This truly scares me. We already live a spartain life, but I won’t be able to provide some of the most basic services for my family if energy prices go up, health care goes up and my salary stays stagnant.
I am not a fan of being on the government dole.
| 310 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:27:44pm |
re: #283 Athos
That’s correct, they are not actual Wind Farms, rather they are Subsidy Farms which can only ever become competitive if all sensible alternatives are made illegal.
| 312 |
Mr. In get Mr. Out Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:28:12pm |
I wonder, will I still be able to exhale? Or will my breaths be capped, too?
| 313 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:28:25pm |
re: #293 LGoPs
No disagreement - this is the price that is to be paid for Pelosi, Dingy Harry, and Barry having the power they were handed. Far too many people in this country forgot 1976. Now they are going to get 1932 to the 10th power….and we don’t have a Reagan standing just offstage.
| 314 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:28:30pm |
re: #301 LGoPs
Me too, but any more of these bills from Congress and I’m afraid I’m going to be eating dirt….
/
Save me a spot at the table.
| 315 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:28:43pm |
We’re waiting here in Allentown…
| 316 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:28:58pm |
re: #297 eon
eon -
“…Duplicity, Rapacity, etc. et.al. - Hope you got the “Program.” Half f the Nation hasn’t - AS YET. That is all.
-S-
| 317 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:29:09pm |
re: #296 Killgore Trout
The blatant lies get tiresome. I’m not going to squabble with you about strawmen.
you approve of BOs economic policies…you said so right here…there is no strawman involved…stand up for your opinions
| 318 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:29:09pm |
Blame the fuckin’ republican’s folks, they, by their failures, permitted these socialists to take over.
| 319 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:29:09pm |
re: #300 HoosierHoops
I’m seriously thinking about putting an a/c unit in the garage. The dogs want a doggie door like they had in MD, and the garage is the only viable option for it at the new house, which means they’d want to hang out in there during they day when no one is home. Even though it’s insulated, I’m afraid it will be way too hot. So, A/C. Libs love me.
| 320 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:29:10pm |
re: #312 Mr. In get Mr. Out
The Greenie agenda is clear in stating that the “planet” is over-populated by humans who are killing it.
| 321 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:29:23pm |
re: #312 Mr. In get Mr. Out
You’ll be fitted with an emissions device that’ll make that decision…
/sarc/
| 322 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:29:30pm |
re: #310 Bagua
I think there was a suggestion for a wind farm march up thread…
| 323 |
LGoPs Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:30:18pm |
re: #314 DEZes
Save me a spot at the table.
I only wish we had a table. We have to eat on the floor…….
/
| 324 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:30:19pm |
re: #307 pink freud
Chickenshit bottom-of-a-dead-thread post over on the Onion/Obama thread blaming this on the republicans since they did nothing when they ‘ruled the roost’.
I happen to like when congress does nothing….that are harmless that way
| 326 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:30:46pm |
And what does the co-founder of Greenpeace have to say about energy developement?
In the early 1970s when I helped found Greenpeace, I believed that nuclear energy was synonymous with nuclear holocaust, as did most of my compatriots. That’s the conviction that inspired Greenpeace’s first voyage up the spectacular rocky northwest coast to protest the testing of U.S. hydrogen bombs in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands. Thirty years on, my views have changed, and the rest of the environmental movement needs to update its views, too, because nuclear energy may just be the energy source that can save our planet from another possible disaster: catastrophic climate change.
Look at it this way: More than 600 coal-fired electric plants in the United States produce 36 percent of U.S. emissions — or nearly 10 percent of global emissions — of CO2, the primary greenhouse gas responsible for climate change. Nuclear energy is the only large-scale, cost-effective energy source that can reduce these emissions while continuing to satisfy a growing demand for power. And these days it can do so safely.
| 327 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:30:51pm |
re: #312 Mr. In get Mr. Out
I wonder, will I still be able to exhale? Or will my breaths be capped, too?
Plugs at both ends, with random federally mandated plug inspections.
| 328 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:30:54pm |
re: #307 pink freud
Do WHAT exactly? Outlaw cap and trade regulation?
| 329 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:30:57pm |
re: #324 kawfytawk
I happen to like when congress does nothing….
thatthey are harmless that way
| 330 |
razorbacker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:30:57pm |
McHugh, of course, is leaving the House to accept a post offered by Obama.
The California representatives are, after all, from California.
One of the others is from Chicago.
| 331 |
mattm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:30:59pm |
re: #209 NelsFree
The last time a Democrat President had a majority in both House and Senate was LBJ. What resulted was the War on Poverty, Medicaid/Medicare, Public Housing complexes filling with Welfare mothers, and the President personally identifying targets for airstrikes in Viet Nam.
Clinton had a chance to sign more Liberal legislation until Newt and Rush got involved in 1994. It is my opinion that Obama knows he has an 18 month window, and he’s pushing as fast as he can.
I say 12-16 months. The latest RCP polling data shows that the majortiy dont like the direction of the country. Obama has been stuck at near 60/30 approval for a while now.
| 332 |
eon Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:31:19pm |
re: #283 Athos
We’ve already seen / experienced this in California - 40% population growth and zero new energy plants in the last 2 decades……now we have requirements for building solar and wind farms to deliver energy - and the farms will be ready 2 years before the transmission lines even get their environmental approvals to bring the power from the farm to LA….and these farms at full generation fail to meet the needs of the plants going offline because of cap & trade.
Exactly. They are going to move our energy-based economy from a “demand” system to an “availability” system, with them “prioritizing” who gets power, how much, when, and for how long. I’m sure they think of this as “fairness in action”, but the decisions will be made by a concatenation of eco-activists, lawyers, and “social reformers”, with nary an engineer or even anyone who has ever worked for a living in sight.
Or in short, imagine the entire country run by the likes of “Grayout” Davis.
In about two or three years, we won’t have to imagine it.
cheers
eon
| 333 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:31:21pm |
re: #309 DaddyG
Be very afraid. Realize you have nothing more to lose. Then go kick butt.
| 335 |
LGoPs Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:31:27pm |
re: #320 Bagua
The Greenie agenda is clear in stating that the “planet” is over-populated by humans who are killing it.
That’s ok. Some dimwit Democrat (Named Clark I think) said we’ll be ‘jettisoning’ them…..so no worries.
/
| 336 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:31:32pm |
re: #323 LGoPs
I only wish we had a table. We have to eat on the floor…….
/
We will eat what we sit on.;)
| 337 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:31:37pm |
Republicans gave us a Trillion Dollar deficit! Those assholes!
Waddya say we quadruple that deficit to get back at them?
| 338 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:31:52pm |
re: #313 Athos
No disagreement - this is the price that is to be paid for Pelosi, Dingy Harry, and Barry having the power they were handed. Far too many people in this country forgot 1976. Now they are going to get 1932 to the 10th power….and we don’t have a Reagan standing just offstage.
I’ve been trying to check out “Winston Churchill The Wilderness Years” from the Atlanta Public Library but some guy named Newt checked it out last January and hasn’t returned it yet. /
| 339 |
pink freud Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:31:59pm |
re: #328 ArmyWife
Do WHAT exactly? Outlaw cap and trade regulation?
Good question. I’m not the one to answer it, though.
| 342 |
lawhawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:32:30pm |
re: #293 LGoPs
I don’t excsue the 8 Republicans. I want them tarred and feathered and then run out of town. But don’t excuse the Democrats. They brought this on lock, stock and barrel.
There were 44 Democrats who voted against, which should tell you that they were seriously concerned about 2010 - they were allowed to vote because they didn’t want to end up on the wrong side in more conservative districts - mark my words on that…
| 343 |
Liberal Classic Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:32:32pm |
Any sensible legislative initiative to reduce carbon dioxide emissions should feature as a centerpiece a strong commitment to nuclear energy production. Any legislative initiative that does not is merely feel good politics.
Furthermore, the nigh-catastrophism of global warming politics is taking focus away from very real, very important environmental issues; issues that we actually *can* address effectively with domestic legislation. Namely, monitoring and management of aquifers and water table levels in the central plains, and algal blooms causing oxygen-deprived zones in our coastal fisheries.
| 344 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:32:41pm |
| 345 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:32:53pm |
re: #332 eon
Agreed, and Britain is in far worse shape than America, they will have the first brownouts and cut backs on industry, etc.
| 346 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:33:18pm |
re: #331 mattm
I say 12-16 months. The latest RCP polling data shows that the majortiy dont like the direction of the country. Obama has been stuck at near 60/30 approval for a while now.
You are absolutely right! As a result, you have to come to my house and shave my whiskers for the next week!
/Congratulations
| 347 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:33:44pm |
re: #338 DaddyG
- Problem is, he’s too much of a wonk and not a proper leader. He’s a guy who needs to be in the inner circle - but can’t pull it off as the candidate.
| 348 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:33:44pm |
The new international rules for shipping diesel fuel will come right on the heels of this. We need to turn up a nuclear freight and cruise ship building industry yesterday, but the Dems are not going to do that.
| 349 |
mattm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:33:53pm |
re: #326 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
And what does the co-founder of Greenpeace have to say about energy developement?
While I disagree on his climate change views I commend him for not sticking to the “green” line talking points and looking at the facts to make a decision.
| 350 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:33:56pm |
re: #337 Racer X
Republicans gave us a Trillion Dollar deficit! Those assholes!
Waddya say we quadruple that deficit to get back at them?
yes and nobody makes liberals reconcile this forgotten factoid…it’s a disease
| 351 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:33:58pm |
re: #318 unrealizedviewpoint
Too close to it’s BUSH’S fault!
We need reform, but don’t underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
| 352 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:34:06pm |
re: #307 pink freud
Chickenshit bottom-of-a-dead-thread post over on the Onion/Obama thread blaming this on the republicans since they did nothing when they ‘ruled the roost’.
His comment pasted here. Discuss.
re: #601 ShanghaiEd
My grumpy tuppence: This bill is the inevitable result of the GOP taking no action on addressing the energy problem during all the years when it ruled the roost.
Statesmen, as opposed to self-interested politicians, use a party’s period of popularity to force through necessary things that are unpopular. The time for drill-drill and nuke-plant building was at the turn of the century. We got evasion and jokes about Al Gore and heads in the sand. In a very real way, the GOP created this current bill themselves, by default. The laugh is on them, and all of us will pay the consequences of its shortcomings.
Over and out.
| 353 |
Bobblehead Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:34:09pm |
| 355 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:34:57pm |
| 356 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:35:10pm |
When my husband lived in an unnamed country overseas, they filled up buckets of water in the evening, and put them next to the toilet.
See, the water got shut off in the evening, and they had to use the buckets to flush.
Welcome to the new world.
| 357 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:35:12pm |
re: #318 unrealizedviewpoint
uvp -
You have a point to be sure. AND - We Will All Jump Off a Cliff, and Crush Our Bodies on Rocks - for WHAT? - COLD CASH JEFFERSON (D) LA, CUCKOLD CONYERS (D) MI - whose wife is about to be sentenced to about 48 Months as a Felon for Accepting Bribes as Head of the Detroit City Council? Don’t Think So. That is all.
-S-
| 358 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:35:22pm |
re: #334 ArmyWife
Wind Farm March up thread
Million Fart March. Ok, it wasn’t funny. nevermind.
Ah, missed the joke, but you are on the right track because if we don’t seek out humour and levity when we are being beaten down, we will be miserable.
This may well be the issue on which the unicorn herders over played their cards, the result will be a busted flush in the next elections.
| 359 |
Athens Runaway Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:35:31pm |
re: #342 lawhawk
There were 44 Democrats who voted against, which should tell you that they were seriously concerned about 2010 - they were allowed to vote because they didn’t want to end up on the wrong side in more conservative districts - mark my words on that…
Or voted against it because they thought it didn’t go far enough. House Rep. Kuinic.. Kuinini… screw it, House Rep. Keebler, the one that looks like an elf.
| 360 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:35:35pm |
re: #351 ArmyWife
Too close to it’s BUSH’S fault!
We need reform, but don’t underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Close, no cigar though. I blame the ‘publican’s for spending. That’s what did them in.
| 361 |
razorbacker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:35:46pm |
re: #342 lawhawk
There were 44 Democrats who voted against, which should tell you that they were seriously concerned about 2010 - they were allowed to vote because they didn’t want to end up on the wrong side in more conservative districts - mark my words on that…
Marion Berry, district 1, promised to vote no.
Mike Ross, district 4, promised to vote no.
Vic Snyder, district 2, did not promise.
Boozman, district 3, is a Republican, and voted no.
| 362 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:36:00pm |
re: #356 EmmmieG
When my husband lived in an unnamed country overseas, they filled up buckets of water in the evening, and put them next to the toilet.
See, the water got shut off in the evening, and they had to use the buckets to flush.
Welcome to the new world.
we had to do that when we were stationed on Guam
| 363 |
NelsFree Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:36:10pm |
Would the “Environmentalists” please go home, turn off all your utilities, then come back in a week to let us know how it feels? Thank you.
| 364 |
lawhawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:36:15pm |
If I were a journalist in DC right now, among the questions I’d be asking the members of the Congress whether they actually read the bill in its entirety. I doubt they did.
| 366 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:36:25pm |
We can always look forward to 2012. What RINO Septuagenarian does the RNC have on tap?
/
| 367 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:36:29pm |
re: #351 ArmyWife
We need reform, but don’t underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
They already got one of themselves elected to President
| 368 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:36:51pm |
Hey!
I have a great idea. We are currently in the midst of the worst depression in over 70 years. Lets spend Trillions of dollars (we do not have) on social programs?
| 369 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:37:00pm |
re: #360 unrealizedviewpoint
I agree. We screwed up. Not as badly as this yahoo we have now, though. Again, I was incensed by W’s drunken sailor economic policy, but this is a whole new boat.
| 370 |
Athens Runaway Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:37:07pm |
| 371 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:37:12pm |
This one’s for TOTUS: a shame, since it’s a great song.
[Link: vids.myspace.com…]
| 372 |
Liberal Classic Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:37:35pm |
re: #297 eon
And, in a neat bit of legerdemain, they’ve also defined water vapor as a “greenhouse gas”.
Technically, they’re correct. Water vapor is a greenhouse gas. It actually supplies the largest fraction of the greenhouse effect that keeps our planet warm.
The difference, however, is that by combusting fossil fuels, we are releasing carbon dioxide that has been sequestered in mineral deposits for millions of years. This is not true of our use of water, which comes from the water cycle and does not have an effect on the net amount of water vapor in the atmosphere.
| 373 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:38:05pm |
re: #363 NelsFree
Would the “Environmentalists” please go home, turn off all your utilities, then come back in a week to let us know how it feels? Thank you.
Judging from Zombies Berkeley photos they don’t bathe- what difference does it make to them?
| 374 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:38:19pm |
re: #364 lawhawk
Raise your hand if you read this? None? Ok, 1/2? 1/4? The first page? How about the first paragraph, anyone?
| 375 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:38:26pm |
re: #363 NelsFree
Would the “Environmentalists” please go home, turn off all your utilities, then come back in a week to let us know how it feels? Thank you.
fraud and hypocricy….over and over again the very people they presume to care for suffer….Rangle made some snark today about republicans not caring about poor people….it’s a mind set that cannot be changed
| 376 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:38:27pm |
re: #356 EmmmieG
When my husband lived in an unnamed country overseas, they filled up buckets of water in the evening, and put them next to the toilet.
See, the water got shut off in the evening, and they had to use the buckets to flush.
Welcome to the new world.
Kermanshah, Iran 1967 our section of town had water from 5am to 6am.
Dad put a bucket under the tap and leave it open. At 5 when the water would sputter and spurt he’d get up and fill the buckets we’d use during the day.
| 378 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:38:46pm |
re: #364 lawhawk
Old news. The precedent was already set with the porkulus bill that was supposed to stimulate the economy and keep the unemployment rate no higher than 8%.
Reading is immaterial and a sign of a lack of faith towards The Dear Leader. 2+2=5 Big Brother is watching…….
coming soon, Obama Gin……
| 379 |
grahamski Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:38:53pm |
re: #299 Cannadian Club Akbar
Everyone here has had a long day. Take the week off. See you Monday July 6 at 2PM. No? Oh, that’s right, congress gets the week off.
As far as I’m concerned, they can take the rest of the millennium off…
| 380 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:38:58pm |
re: #361 razorbacker
Marion Berry, district 1, promised to vote no.
Mike Ross, district 4, promised to vote no.
Vic Snyder, district 2, did not promise.
Boozman, district 3, is a Republican, and voted no.
THE Marion Berry?
| 381 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:39:07pm |
re: #363 NelsFree
Would the “Environmentalists” please go home, turn off all your utilities, then come back in a week to let us know how it feels? Thank you.
You know they are serious about not flushing if it’s only pee, don’t you?
(Which smells really bad, I can tell you, living in a house with underage boys who do it unintentionally all the time.)
| 382 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:39:13pm |
re: #341 wiffersnapper
“Whiff” -
Per former Vice President and President T. JEFFERSON. The Senate is the Saucer to the Tea/Coffee Cup of the House of Representatives. It allows things to cool.
-S-
| 383 |
DaddyG Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:39:42pm |
re: #366 BatGuano
We can always look forward to 2012. What RINO Septuagenarian does the RNC have on tap?
/
I think they plan to run Lieberman in a bid to appear more moderate and bi-partisan. /
| 385 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:39:52pm |
re: #379 grahamski
As far as I’m concerned, they can take the rest of the millennium off…
If they keep passing a few more bills like this one, and most of us will be……
| 387 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:40:12pm |
re: #369 ArmyWife
I agree. We screwed up. Not as badly as this yahoo we have now, though. Again, I was incensed by W’s drunken sailor economic policy, but this is a whole new boat.
A submarine with a screen door economic policy.
| 388 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:40:19pm |
re: #374 ArmyWife
Raise your hand if you read this? None? Ok, 1/2? 1/4? The first page? How about the first paragraph, anyone?
from what I understand…not one person had a copy of that revised bill before the vote
| 389 |
code red 21 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:40:21pm |
I hope all of the people in the coal producing states, who belong to the UMWA and voted for BO, are going to be happy when they shut down their coal mines and won’t let them burn coal for heat in the winter and they freeze their fucking asses off. Bow down to BO you stupid fucks.
| 390 |
lawhawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:40:28pm |
re: #342 lawhawk
Here’s the full roll call vote.
| 391 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:40:36pm |
why don’t our liberal posters come out and defend this vote?…where are they?
| 392 |
callahan23 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:40:59pm |
re: #372 Liberal Classic
Ever heard of the albedo-effect of low cloud-cover? The suns rays are reflected back into space. No warming there.
Doh.
| 393 |
Cannadian Club Akbar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:41:10pm |
| 394 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:41:15pm |
re: #374 ArmyWife
Raise your hand if you read this? None? Ok, 1/2? 1/4? The first page? How about the first paragraph, anyone?
Have you read the first page of the bill question would get some reluctant hands raised half-way up responses.
| 395 |
LGoPs Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:41:20pm |
Conservatives don’t generally participate in demonstrations or million man marches cause they’re busy working. One bright side to all this bullshit is that once we’re all out of work, we’ll have the time to march on Washington and shut the fucking place down.
| 396 |
Liberal Classic Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:41:23pm |
re: #377 Bagua
Nonsense.
What is nonsense? That water vapor is a greenhouse gas, or that we are releasing carbon from mineral deposits?
| 397 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:41:25pm |
re: #389 code red 21
How can we lay this one on Obama when McCain was also totally in the bag for the whole AGW hoax?
| 399 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:41:52pm |
Sad.
A small bunch of Republicans remain on the house floor talking to themselves on CSPAN. Most everyone else has left.
Still goes into the official record.
| 401 |
medaura18586 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:42:09pm |
That ‘scienceblog’ article makes me shudder. It’s so radical! I get a feeling if this country were a technocracy, our towering scientific geniuses would destroy civilization as we know it…
| 402 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:42:13pm |
re: #391 albusteve
why don’t our liberal posters come out and defend this vote?…where are they?
Maybe because even they know it’s indefensible?
| 403 |
razorbacker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:42:15pm |
re: #380 BatGuano
THE Marion Berry?
The one and only Marion Berry.
Perhaps you are thinking of Marion Barry?
| 404 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:42:21pm |
re: #388 kawfytawk
from what I understand…not one person had a copy of that revised bill before the vote
there was only one copy on the House floor today…Pelosi’s copy
| 405 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:42:21pm |
| 406 |
Bloodnok Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:42:23pm |
| 407 |
huckfunn Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:42:24pm |
re: #390 lawhawk
Here’s the full roll call vote.
I saw that one. I want to find a roll call that breaks it down by state. I’d love to see how many coal belt dems voted to kill their own state’s prime industry.
| 408 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:42:33pm |
re: #380 BatGuano
No, not the one that the Bitch Set Up….. another one.
| 409 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:42:48pm |
re: #397 Bagua
How can we lay this one on Obama when McCain was also totally in the bag for the whole AGW hoax?
Last I looked, McCain wasnt elected president.
| 410 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:43:04pm |
re: #395 LGoPs
Conservatives don’t generally participate in demonstrations or million man marches cause they’re busy working. One bright side to all this bullshit is that once we’re all out of work, we’ll have the time to march on Washington and shut the fucking place down.
ding this thing up ppl!
| 411 |
Ojoe Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:43:14pm |
Madness! Violates equal protection! Or else tax me for breathing out, tax a farmer for liming his field, and tax or legislate away the fizz in beer, and make us drink our cokes flat.
O, and I fart in the general direction of the morons in congress.
By the way, for 95% of the earth’s climate history there was no ice at the poles. (ref: Brittanica) So, we are trying to hold on to a climate anomaly.
Or, show me convincing arguments that the Earth has left behind its recent glacial-interglacial, repeating cycles. Maybe the carbon is staving off the next ice age, and temporarily at that.
Group-thinking, chicken little, congressional morons.
| 412 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:43:18pm |
re: #366 BatGuano
BatGuano -
Whaddabout a 48 year old Female OR a 65 year old Male, both smart, both former governors?
-S-
| 413 |
horse Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:43:35pm |
This will be as useful and successful as the stimulus bill. It won’t provide any tangible positive results, but it will fill the pockets of political parasites. But it all will be short lived; very soon they will pull up to rob some more private citizens and will find there is no money to be had. Already happening in CA.
| 414 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:43:35pm |
re: #400 ArmyWife
Well that makes it better, doesn’t it?
I know…it is malpractice. I am soooo furious you have no idea….and this isn’t the first time a bill gets voted on UNREAD
| 415 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:43:36pm |
| 416 |
medaura18586 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:43:42pm |
re: #401 medaura18586
That ‘scienceblog’ article makes me shudder. It’s so radical! I get a feeling if this country were a technocracy, our towering scientific geniuses would destroy civilization as we know it…
/channeling the Burkean in me.
| 417 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:43:48pm |
re: #395 LGoPs
Conservatives don’t generally participate in demonstrations or million man marches cause they’re busy working. One bright side to all this bullshit is that once we’re all out of work, we’ll have the time to march on Washington and shut the fucking place down.
You’re on a roll tonight!
| 419 |
LGoPs Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:44:02pm |
re: #389 code red 21
I hope all of the people in the coal producing states, who belong to the UMWA and voted for BO, are going to be happy when they shut down their coal mines and won’t let them burn coal for heat in the winter and they freeze their fucking asses off. Bow down to BO you stupid fucks.
I have sympathy for them. They were busy watching American Idol when Obama fucking told them that he was going to bankrupt the coal industry……..
///
| 420 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:44:12pm |
re: #404 albusteve
there was only one copy on the House floor today…Pelosi’s copy
that’s despicable.
| 422 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:44:44pm |
Posting schedule in the Post Caper and Trade world.
Nics beginning with :
A-D may post from 1-2 AM
E-H from 2-3 AM
I-L from 3-4 AM
M-P from 4-5 AM
Q-T from 5-6 AM
U-W from 6-7 AM
X-Z from 7-8 AM
We appreciate your electrons. The Blackberry must be recharged from time to time, you know.
Eat your Raman noodles and breathe slower.
/
| 425 |
razorbacker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:45:27pm |
So. Berry and Ross did as they promised and voted no.
Snyder did as liberals do and voted yes.
What did the Representatives from your state say when you contacted them?
| 426 |
cronus Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:45:31pm |
Weekly Standard: What Does Tonight’s Vote Mean?
Here’s the view of one senior House GOP staffer who just emailed me:
“Tonight, 50 Democrats lost their jobs and this bill is dead in the Senate.”
| 427 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:45:35pm |
I’m truly surprised we didn’t get the arrogant speed reader
| 428 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:45:40pm |
re: #396 Liberal Classic
What is nonsense? That water vapor is a greenhouse gas, or that we are releasing carbon from mineral deposits?
Sorry I hit enter too soon, neither of those two statements is wrong, what I am calling nonsense is the idea that mankind’s release of carbon into the atmosphere has a greater effect on climate than mankind’s altering the atmopheric water vapour concentrations though such activities as land use changes, with the biggie (among others) being the cutting down the rain-forests in order to grow cane, which is made into ethanol to replace fossil fuels.
| 429 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:45:42pm |
re: #407 huckfunn
I saw that one. I want to find a roll call that breaks it down by state. I’d love to see how many coal belt dems voted to kill their own state’s prime industry.
Waxman and Pelosi had that worked out, the coal state Dems will get huge pollution credits under the bill, which is what bought their vote.
| 430 |
sngnsgt Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:45:47pm |
This means Dems will sell off their SUV’s and limo’s and walk or ride their bikes like the rest of us will be doing right?
| 432 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:46:23pm |
400 comments in 1 hour. hmmm
I suspect LGF’ers mostly disapprove of Cap-n-Trade.
| 433 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:46:30pm |
Congress makes a crap fight in a monkey house look respectable
| 434 |
kateca Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:46:35pm |
Why is it ok for Iran to persue neucleur energy ‘for peaceful purposes’ but not the US?
Cap and trade: Go neuclear Iran, we here in the United States will be persuing windmills.
| 435 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:46:36pm |
re: #395 LGoPs
Conservatives don’t generally participate in demonstrations or million man marches cause they’re busy working. One bright side to all this bullshit is that once we’re all out of work, we’ll have the time to march on Washington and shut the fucking place down.
If I were’nt on the left coast I’d take the day off and be there for that event. I’m glad the heroes of Lexington and Concord were not otherwise occupied. And I am NOT advocating violence of any kind at any march, rally or gathering in opposition to this administrations policies.
| 436 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:46:44pm |
re: #418 Killgore Trout
Nice.
Thanks, faux macro using a 300mm lens from about ten feet away… the only art to it is that I took it from a moving train.
| 437 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:47:17pm |
| 438 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:47:18pm |
re: #409 DEZes
Last I looked, McCain wasnt elected president.
I agree, and I absolutely condemn the actual president for pushing this, I’m just making the point that I expected this craziness regardless of who won the election, something we need to consider ahead of the next.
| 439 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:47:18pm |
re: #426 cronus
Weekly Standard: What Does Tonight’s Vote Mean?
I hope and pray that is true…2010 is a long way away and I fear there will be something shiny to grab the voter’s attention
| 440 |
Dancing along the light of day Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:47:37pm |
re: #395 LGoPs
Conservatives don’t generally participate in demonstrations or million man marches cause they’re busy working. One bright side to all this bullshit is that once we’re all out of work, we’ll have the time to march on Washington and shut the fucking place down.
Except, we won’t be able to afford the gas to get there…
| 442 |
callahan23 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:47:42pm |
re: #430 sngnsgt
This means Dems will sell off their SUV’s and limo’s and walk or ride their bikes like the rest of us will be doing right?
Wrenchwench could do a superb business.
No offense {wrenchwench}
| 443 |
huckfunn Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:47:44pm |
re: #429 Thanos
Waxman and Pelosi had that worked out, the coal state Dems will get huge pollution credits under the bill, which is what bought their vote.
Hopefully the Senate will flush this garbage.
| 445 |
avanti Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:47:59pm |
re: #391 albusteve
why don’t our liberal posters come out and defend this vote?…where are they?
We’ve been asked to go away, and that makes sense. Most on the right don’t accept AGW, so I understand your frustration with attempts to deal with it.
I’ll make one statement and leave. It’s unlikely the Senate will pass the bill and even if they do, and it’s the disaster you predict, you can repeal all the C02 controls when you’re swept back into power. The bill starts out slow enough that you can kill it all in 2012 without much kicking in. Now back to lurking.
| 446 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:48:03pm |
re: #430 sngnsgt
This means Dems will sell off their SUV’s and limo’s and walk or ride their bikes like the rest of us will be doing right?
The president will trade in his bullet proof limo for a bullet proof tricycle.
I swear. ;)
| 447 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:48:04pm |
re: #390 lawhawk
Well I’m in CO 2nd District and I see Polis voted aye. The 2nd district includes Boulder so I’m SOL on a lot of votes.
| 448 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:48:29pm |
re: #419 LGoPs
I have sympathy for them. They were busy watching American Idol when Obama fucking told them that he was going to bankrupt the coal industry……..
///
He did tell us. Unfortunately, no one believed him.
| 449 |
Bloodnok Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:48:34pm |
| 450 |
VioletTiger Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:48:36pm |
re: #6 cronus
Republicans who voted for Cap & Tax:
Bono Mack, Castle, McHugh, LoBiondo, Lance, Kirk, Reichert, Smith (NJ)
If these are your critters, please write to them and let them know that you object. They need to hear what we think so they eventually get the message. Their emails are all available on line.
| 451 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:48:56pm |
gotta run friends….take care…and pray it dies in the senate
| 452 |
Athens Runaway Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:49:10pm |
re: #434 kateca
Because people don’t understand atoms, and if people don’t understand something, it must be bad for them.
| 453 |
FrogMarch Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:49:14pm |
This isn’t just about coal - it’s about making Nancy Pelosi rich.
Green House gasses make up less than 2% or our atmosphere.
| 454 |
CynicalConservative Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:49:16pm |
re: #445 avanti
We’ve been asked to go away, and that makes sense. Most on the right don’t accept AGW, so I understand your frustration with attempts to deal with it.
I’ll make one statement and leave. It’s unlikely the Senate will pass the bill and even if they do, and it’s the disaster you predict, you can repeal all the C02 controls when you’re swept back into power. The bill starts out slow enough that you can kill it all in 2012 without much kicking in. Now back to lurking.
Kudos for an honest reply from one who told you (wrongly) to go away.
| 455 |
legalpad Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:49:22pm |
re: #395 LGoPs
Conservatives don’t generally participate in demonstrations or million man marches cause they’re busy working. One bright side to all this bullshit is that once we’re all out of work, we’ll have the time to march on Washington and shut the fucking place down.
Once we’re all out of work - hmmm - I think the place will already be shut down. One big New Orleans in an economic Katrina; gangs and black markets. After we take our guns back from the government we camper types will be very comfortable.
| 456 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:49:39pm |
re: #434 kateca
Why is it ok for Iran to persue neucleur energy ‘for peaceful purposes’ but not the US?
Cap and trade: Go neuclear Iran, we here in the United States will be persuing windmills.
‘cause Iran has a long demonstrated history of peaceful intent.
//////////////
| 457 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:49:45pm |
re: #434 kateca
Why is it ok for Iran to persue neucleur energy ‘for peaceful purposes’ but not the US?
Cap and trade: Go neuclear Iran, we here in the United States will be persuing windmills.
Tilting at windmills is an accurate description of Global Warming debate
| 458 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:49:54pm |
re: #445 avanti
I don’t agree with the go away. You have every right to share your opinion here - as wrong as that opinion may be.
| 459 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:07pm |
re: #412 Dr. Shalit
BatGuano -
Whaddabout a 48 year old Female OR a 65 year old Male, both smart, both former governors?
-S-
No problem. I hope I didn’t sound “ageist”, I was just taking a shot at the RNC and McCain. Palin and Romney look very good now. What candidate will the RNC pick? Who’s turn is it?
| 460 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:10pm |
re: #438 Bagua
I agree, and I absolutely condemn the actual president for pushing this, I’m just making the point that I expected this craziness regardless of who won the election, something we need to consider ahead of the next.
McCain was not a great pick by any means, and I do see your point.
We now have a full deck of crazy in control.
| 461 |
LGoPs Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:12pm |
re: #440 Floral Giraffe
Except, we won’t be able to afford the gas to get there…
I’ll fucking walk…..all the way from California.
Sorry for the obsenity - not aimed at you Giraffe. Just highly pissed off.
We all need to do our patriotic duty and dissent. Right in the fucking Democrats face.
| 462 |
Cheechako Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:18pm |
I’ve been trying to calm down and cool off after today’s vote. But I can’t. I expect cap and trade will pass the Senate in a form very similar to what passed House, but with only a 1 or 2 vote margin. With the House and Senate going on “vacation” for the next week, there’s time to read the Bill and find out exactly what crap is in it.
Once we have the details it’s time to begin educating the Senators on how bad this Bill will affect the country. Contacting the Senate has to begin as soon as possible in order to build momentum to get this Bill killed. We have at least a week and possibly two weeks to get this information out in the public venue. The RINO’s (Snow, Collins, and Graham) are going to need a lot of education on this issue so we’ll need specific information on how this Bill will affect Maine and Pennsylvania.
If this Bill passes both the House and Senate I think we’ll never be able to stop the health care reform juggernaught.
| 463 |
code red 21 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:20pm |
re: #397 Bagua
How can we lay this one on Obama when McCain was also totally in the bag for the whole AGW hoax?
Don’t you remember BO won he tells us that all the time he’s in office McCain isn’t.
| 464 |
kawfytawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:36pm |
re: #453 FrogMarch
This isn’t just about coal - it’s about making Nancy Pelosi rich.
Green House gasses make up less than 2% or our atmosphere.
and 0.11 percent is man made
| 465 |
grahamski Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:41pm |
| 466 |
CynicalConservative Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:42pm |
re: #458 ArmyWife
I don’t agree with the go away. You have every right to share your opinion here - as wrong as that opinion may be.
I personally told him to go away (wrongly). Retracted in my 454.
| 467 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:44pm |
I’m for doing things to combat AGW this century as well, but Cap and Trade is not it. It’s already been proven to be a big fail in Europe.
| 468 |
VioletTiger Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:52pm |
re: #453 FrogMarch
This isn’t just about coal - it’s about making Nancy Pelosi rich.
Green House gasses make up less than 2% or our atmosphere.
The most plentiful ‘greenhouse’ gas is water vapor.
| 469 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:50:57pm |
re: #432 unrealizedviewpoint
400 comments in 1 hour. hmmm
I suspect LGF’ers mostly disapprove of Cap-n-Trade.
/no, no, I like paying more for electricity and driving corporations out of the U.S., so the Chinese and Indians can exploit their economic advantage even more and still pollute to their heart’s content
| 470 |
eon Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:51:21pm |
re: #426 cronus
Weekly Standard: What Does Tonight’s Vote Mean?
eon’s standard;
Tonight, 211 Democrats and 8 Republicans gave America the finger, followed by saying, “if you freeze to death in the coming winters, it’s not our fault- you just weren’t living in the right place.”
too pissed to be even remotely cheerful
eon
| 471 |
FrogMarch Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:51:28pm |
Betsy Markey is a hack and a fraud and she needs to be tossed out.
| 472 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:51:35pm |
re: #466 CynicalConservative
Glad you did that. Good on you!
| 473 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:51:46pm |
Heritage Foundation estimates the impact of Cap and Trade
An analysis of the Waxman-Markey bill (as reported out of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce) by The Heritage Foundation found that unemployment will increase by nearly 2 million in 2012, the first year of the program, and reach nearly 2.5 million in 2035, the last year of the analysis. Total GDP loss by 2035 would be $9.4 trillion. The national debt would balloon as the economy slowed, saddling a family of four with $114,915 of additional national debt. Families would also suffer, as the bill would slap the equivalent of a $4,609 tax on a family of four by 2035.
This bill alone, if the Porkulus was stimulating an economic recovery, would kill the recovery. But since Porkulus is doing nothing to stimulate the economy, this is just another nail in the coffin of the middle class.
“We have to destoy it in order to save it” is the new mantra of the Democrat Party……..and I doubt 2010 will become another 1994 or 1980.
| 474 |
Liberal Classic Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:52:04pm |
re: #428 Bagua
Sorry I hit enter too soon, neither of those two statements is wrong, what I am calling nonsense is the idea that mankind’s release of carbon into the atmosphere has a greater effect on climate than mankind’s altering the atmopheric water vapour concentrations though such activities as land use changes, with the biggie (among others) being the cutting down the rain-forests in order to grow cane, which is made into ethanol to replace fossil fuels.
Okay, thank you. I partially agree with what you wrote. I don’t disagree that deforestation can have a significant impact on regional climates. However, I do disagree with you that our release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere has a negligible effect. An increase in carbon dioxide concentrations will have a non-trivial cumulative effect in the long term, IMO greater than regional effects of deforestation or desertification.
| 475 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:52:11pm |
re: #445 avanti
We’ve been asked to go away, and that makes sense. Most on the right don’t accept AGW, so I understand your frustration with attempts to deal with it.
I’ll make one statement and leave. It’s unlikely the Senate will pass the bill and even if they do, and it’s the disaster you predict, you can repeal all the C02 controls when you’re swept back into power. The bill starts out slow enough that you can kill it all in 2012 without much kicking in. Now back to lurking.
so you let a couple of people run you off?….weak…and you didn’t defend the bill, why not?
| 476 |
gulfloafer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:52:14pm |
re: #255 hazzyday
re: #297 eon
Good article in the WSJ today about this. Check it out.
[Link: online.wsj.com…]
| 477 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:52:25pm |
re: #443 huckfunn
Hopefully the Senate will flush this garbage.
/they did the last time the House passed something like this
| 478 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:52:32pm |
re: #372 Liberal Classic
Why don’t they just do something practical and useful, like , oh I don’t know…..vote to cap Mt. St Helens
…… one burp from her and the climate changes in ways we couldn’t even begin to emulate.
No doubt it would cost less than this piece of trash…
/only part sarc/
| 480 |
astronmr20 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:52:50pm |
re: #448 unrealizedviewpoint
He did tell us. Unfortunately, no one believed him.
He told us, but do you remember how it went down?
It took some industrious beavers; bloggers on the right— digging and digging until the quote was found, plan as day, from a radio station interview.
It might have been a tide-changing quote.
The problem is, it came out about 48-hours before the election. How many coal states got to hear of it? As soon as I heard the quote, I called McCain’s limp-di**’ed campaign, who had no time to do anything with it even if they wanted to make an ad and run it all over Ohio, West VA, and PA.
A bomb that big deserved coverage on all MSM channels for a week. It was huge. But it was simply swept under the rug. When I tell people that “our president wants to bankrupt the coal industry,” I am laughed at, even though those are his exact words.
Still, no-one knows of it.
| 481 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:53:00pm |
re: #433 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Congress makes a crap fight in a monkey house look respectable
You can clean off monkey crap with a water hose and a couple dozen bottles of shampoo and bodywash.
| 482 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:53:14pm |
re: #445 avanti
We’ve been asked to go away, and that makes sense. Most on the right don’t accept AGW, so I understand your frustration with attempts to deal with it.
I’ll make one statement and leave. It’s unlikely the Senate will pass the bill and even if they do, and it’s the disaster you predict, you can repeal all the C02 controls when you’re swept back into power. The bill starts out slow enough that you can kill it all in 2012 without much kicking in. Now back to lurking.
Avanti,
You completely miss the point, regardless of the truth or fiction on the carbon part of AGW, this bill will not reduce carbon emissions, nor has there been any sensible economic survey done on the real costs of these measures. When they are done, the conclusion is often that there is no reduction in carbon emissions and a very real reduction in the economy and standards of living.
Wind/Subsidy Farms being the best example, as to the rest, we just don’t know as the unicorn herders are not doing any math and the MSM is acting as cheerleaders.
| 483 |
Kosh's Shadow Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:53:35pm |
re: #475 albusteve
so you let a couple of people run you off?….weak…and you didn’t defend the bill, why not?
He’s worried about what it will do to his Avanti sales.
| 484 |
pre-Boomer Marine brat Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:53:38pm |
*walking in holding nose, tossing dead skunk on floor*
Technical issues aside, if Waxman-Malarkey doesn’t control the possibility of a financial bubble in offset trading, it should NOT be enacted.
A bubble will happen as sure as methane exploding in a sewer. Our economy as it is can’t support the Stimulus debt. A offset bubble crash would be deadly.
rant off
*stomping out*
/be back tomorrow, have a great evening all
| 485 |
Bloodnok Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:54:02pm |
| 486 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:54:03pm |
| 487 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:54:06pm |
re: #445 avanti
I’ll make one statement and leave. It’s unlikely the Senate will pass the bill and even if they do, and it’s the disaster you predict, you can repeal all the C02 controls when you’re swept back into power. The bill starts out slow enough that you can kill it all in 2012 without much kicking in. Now back to lurking.
Trying to rollback Cap-n-Tax will be as difficult as rolling back Medicare.
| 488 |
Racer X Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:54:08pm |
Hey guys, its OK. If this bill does not work out we can always repeal it.
///
When has the government ever repealed a stupid law?
Why not take some time and put laws in place that have been well thought out and thoroughly debated? Are we all going to melt in the next 6 weeks?
This is about money. Plain and simple. It always is. Follow the money - look at who will prosper the most from all of these policies.
| 489 |
apachegunner Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:54:30pm |
re: #450 VioletTiger
If these are your critters, please write to them and let them know that you object. They need to hear what we think so they eventually get the message. Their emails are all available on line.
[Link: www.google.com…] here is the link to email those suckers
| 490 |
astronmr20 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:55:06pm |
re: #467 Thanos
I’m for doing things to combat AGW this century as well, but Cap and Trade is not it. It’s already been proven to be a big fail in Europe.
AGW does not exist.
| 491 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:55:29pm |
re: #488 Racer X
When has the government ever repealed a stupid law?
Well, Prohibition is too obvious, so skip to repealing the Death Tax.
Oh wait……I forgot…….
| 492 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:55:50pm |
re: #480 astronmr20
He told us, but do you remember how it went down?
It took some industrious beavers; bloggers on the right— digging and digging until the quote was found, plan as day, from a radio station interview.
It might have been a tide-changing quote.
The problem is, it came out about 48-hours before the election. How many coal states got to hear of it? As soon as I heard the quote, I called McCain’s limp-di**’ed campaign, who had no time to do anything with it even if they wanted to make an ad and run it all over Ohio, West VA, and PA.
A bomb that big deserved coverage on all MSM channels for a week. It was huge. But it was simply swept under the rug. When I tell people that “our president wants to bankrupt the coal industry,” I am laughed at, even though those are his exact words.
Still, no-one knows of it.
We here saw & heard that quote months before. McCain wouldn’t use it. He needed play fair, remember?
| 493 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:56:01pm |
re: #483 Kosh’s Shadow
He’s worried about what it will do to his Avanti sales.
well in all fairness, his sales should tank…nobody deserves such frivolties
| 494 |
razorbacker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:56:03pm |
re: #489 apachegunner
[Link: www.google.com…] here is the link to email those suckers
Send email if you wish.
If you want to make a difference, write a letter.
I urge any that are concerned to get out pen and paper and write your Senator.
| 495 |
Fenway_Nation Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:56:04pm |
Wow…..I had this horrible dream that this sweeping legislation designed to kill the coal, oil and natural gas industries and all the jobs that came with it just passed the house and had one more stop to go before it wound up on the desk of a president who was cetain to sign it into law.
/good thing it was just a dream….
| 496 |
kateca Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:56:17pm |
re: #397 Bagua
How can we lay this one on Obama when McCain was also totally in the bag for the whole AGW hoax?
McCain is not my standard barer.
| 497 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:56:28pm |
re: #383 DaddyG
I think they plan to run Lieberman in a bid to appear more moderate and bi-partisan. /
DaddyG -
As Weird - AND I MEAN WEIRD - as it is for ME to say - Sen. Joe is “On the Team” as regards Foreign Relations - as to Domestic - Not As Much, Getting Better.
-S-
| 498 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:56:29pm |
re: #463 code red 21
Agreed, and we must hold responsible the actual President, I’m just making the point that on this issue we were screwed either way and Obama is doing just what the voters expected him to do.
The ignorant uneducated voters I would add, made more so by the vile MSM.
| 500 |
jcm Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:56:34pm |
re: #484 pre-Boomer Marine brat
*walking in holding nose, tossing dead skunk on floor*
Technical issues aside, if Waxman-Malarkey doesn’t control the possibility of a financial bubble in offset trading, it should NOT be enacted.
A bubble will happen as sure as methane exploding in a sewer. Our economy as it is can’t support the Stimulus debt. A offset bubble crash would be deadly.
rant off
*stomping out*/be back tomorrow, have a great evening all
HEY!
Take the damn skunk with you!
jeeze some people.
Hatchling! get that thing outta here.
| 501 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:56:39pm |
| 502 |
saberry0530 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:56:42pm |
I, would personally like to give my heartfelt thanks to the House, the leadership and all the minions for fucking me, my family, and America with the passage of this Cap and Trade bill. I will not forget. Neither should you.
| 503 |
apachegunner Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:56:50pm |
[Link: www.usa.gov…] I mean here is the link
| 504 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:57:21pm |
| 505 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:57:33pm |
well avanti won’t defend this bill….maybe someone else will step up
| 506 |
VioletTiger Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:57:35pm |
I hope this bill dies in the Senate, but don’t assume anything. Call and write your Senator and let them know how you feel. I never thought my rep would vote for this thing. Don’t assume, speak up!
| 507 |
Fenway_Nation Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:57:56pm |
re: #499 Ojoe
I am going to do my best to only fart in cars with 0bama-Biden bumper stickers, thus trapping the foul emissions.
| 508 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:57:56pm |
How is TOTUS gonna ‘splain the massive and lavish luau he held on the WH lawn for the press today, complete with all that barbecue smoke?
| 509 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:58:03pm |
| 510 |
poteen Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:58:19pm |
| 511 |
jordash1212 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:58:25pm |
That article has more to say about the effect of the bill on global warming than it does on how it will impact America’s addiction to foreign oil. If this bill creates an impetus for green technology that keeps our money inside the US and out of rogue, theological governments and terrorists, I’m all for it.
| 513 |
Silvergirl Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:58:49pm |
I’m usually in hope against hope mode, but I really didn’t think this one had a snowball’s chance of defeat, did anyone here, really? I’m interested to know. It will pass the Senate also, yes? It’s sad, but true. I’ll be the first to rejoice if I’m wrong.
| 514 |
HoosierHoops Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:58:59pm |
re: #500 jcm
HEY!
Take the damn skunk with you!
jeeze some people.
Hatchling! get that thing outta here.
Birthday Boy! You keep getting updings…
Bring it home brother
| 515 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:59:09pm |
re: #501 Thanos
You can pretend that if you like, it won’t change fact
If it were “fact” as you say, there would be no need for the massive Media/Liberal/NGO Bias in its favor. Facts stand on there own merit, AGW has wobbly legs.
| 516 |
NukeAtomrod Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:59:19pm |
If this passes the senate, there will be no significant change in the environment, but we will all be significantly poorer. There’s no way around it. This is a “Make Energy More Expensive” bill.
Bye bye potential economic recovery. Hello breadline.
| 517 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:59:20pm |
re: #508 tradewind
How is TOTUS gonna ‘splain the massive and lavish luau he held on the WH lawn for the press today, complete with all that barbecue smoke?
Mine, all mine !
I eated da industries….
| 518 |
saberry0530 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:59:31pm |
If Waxman stopped breathing with those massive nostrils of his that would decrease CO2 by at least 15%!
///////
| 519 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:59:33pm |
re: #499 Ojoe
I am going to do my best to fart more.
/the Nostril King will send his Flatulence Police to sequester you and your illegal emissions
| 520 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:59:37pm |
re: #515 Bagua
If it were “fact” as you say, there would be no need for the massive Media/Liberal/NGO Bias in its favor. Facts stand on there own merit, AGW has wobbly legs.
Do you own a car?
| 521 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:59:51pm |
re: #506 VioletTiger
I hope this bill dies in the Senate, but don’t assume anything. Call and write your Senator and let them know how you feel. I never thought my rep would vote for this thing. Don’t assume, speak up!
Udall, D NM just emailed me asking what he can do for me….hahaha!….these people are fucking crazy
| 522 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:00:08pm |
re: #505 albusteve
well avanti won’t defend this bill….maybe someone else will step up
hard to defend something that is irretrievably stupid…..to the point that only rank ideologues will defend it….well, not all rank ideologues apparently will defend it…
| 523 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:00:24pm |
Just got a call to participate in a survey in my opinions on the state of the US economy. That was fun
| 524 |
BatGuano Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:00:25pm |
re: #499 Ojoe
I am going to do my best to fart more.
I’m right behind you (Not, literally, of course)!
| 525 |
VioletTiger Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:00:35pm |
re: #495 Fenway_Nation
Wow…..I had this horrible dream that this sweeping legislation designed to kill the coal, oil and natural gas industries and all the jobs that came with it just passed the house and had one more stop to go before it wound up on the desk of a president who was cetain to sign it into law.
/good thing it was just a dream….
And then there’s the sequel, when all the industries go over seas and benefit the Indians and Chinese, where they burn the same fossil fuels and make the same green house gases. Funny thing about gases, they won’t stay on that side of the world….
| 526 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:00:55pm |
re: #511 jordash1212
That article has more to say about the effect of the bill on global warming than it does on how it will impact America’s addiction to foreign oil. If this bill creates an impetus for green technology that keeps our money inside the US and out of rogue, theological governments and terrorists, I’m all for it.
It will do nothing of the sort, all the oil recoverable will be pumped, sold and used. What this bill does is guarantee that that oil will be sold at a very inflated price enriching the producers.
| 527 |
Kosh's Shadow Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:00:56pm |
re: #494 razorbacker
Send email if you wish.
If you want to make a difference, write a letter.
I urge any that are concerned to get out pen and paper and write your Senator.
Kennedy and Kerry. ‘nuff said.
| 528 |
Shr_Nfr Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:01:12pm |
It was amazing to listen to Boehner run down the 300+ page amendment to the bill that got dumped on Congress at 3 AM this morning. Among the provsons:
1) You are now more or less subject to the CA building code no matter where you are. If you sell your house, you have to pay to get it energy rated and brought up to CA standards.
2) Son of Smoot-Hawley
3) Every city, town, and municipality must hire 3 full time people to deal with the bill
4) All house appraisers must now be retrained and re-certified by some sort of federal agency to evaluatie “properly” the energy enhancements
5) FNM and FRE are to be set free to have to make more lost cost mortgages.
6) There is a 5 billion dollar set-aside for the creation of a “Green Bank” to make loans to worthy people.
7) Acorn gets a slice, since they get some money to perform the retrofit “greening”. CRA all over again.
And that is just in the damn amendment. Talk about a massive crock of crap, this is it. By the grace, it goes down in flames in the Senate. Too bad 4 or 5 too many blue dogs and republicans voted for this travesty.
| 529 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:01:17pm |
re: #485 Bloodnok
A lot of PA Democrats voted for it. Probably the ones from the city districts, but lets hope there’s blowback from the coal producers in the state.
Bloodnok -
GOOD - let the worker whose job was Unionized in the 1930’s recognize the “GREENS” as who/what they are. They are “Watermelons” - The “Green” on the Outside - The RED within, the potential totalitarianism without limit. Go from there.
-S-
| 530 |
Fenway_Nation Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:02:26pm |
re: #528 Shr_Nfr
Ah yes….isn’t California the same state that’s looking down the barrel of bankruptcy.
Excellent model for the rest of the country to follow
//
| 531 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:02:28pm |
re: #512 Sambo
I get that he owes them, but that was just over the top. This was not a state dinner for a dignitary, or another country’s leader… this was slopping the MSM hogs.
We’re supposed to be having a financial meltdown in the country, and they’re dishing up LomiLomi salmon and suckling pig marinated in Kahlua , and rubbing it in our faces.
Not cool.
| 532 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:02:36pm |
re: #526 Bagua
It will do nothing of the sort, all the oil recoverable will be pumped, sold and used. What this bill does is guarantee that that oil will be sold at a very inflated price enriching the producers.
You got that part right, but supporting statements like “AGW doesn’t exist” weakens your argument because it makes you look like an idiot.
Do you own a car?
| 533 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:02:51pm |
re: #511 jordash1212
That article has more to say about the effect of the bill on global warming than it does on how it will impact America’s addiction to foreign oil. If this bill creates an impetus for green technology that keeps our money inside the US and out of rogue, theological governments and terrorists, I’m all for it.
jordash1212 -
With Obama as President, DO YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT? Pray Tell.
-S-
| 534 |
Gus Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:03:00pm |
Let’s hope this doesn’t pass the senate. If it does it will expand the size of the Federal government in America and add another thick layer of regulations and mandates from the Feds.
If they want to control “AGW” there are alternative to meet that goal and one that doesn’t include a massive bureaucracy. To say otherwise is to admit to an acceptance of an addiction to government cures and oversight.
At least read the legislation which they haven’t done. This is clearly another bill that is being shoved down the throat of the American public.
| 535 |
VioletTiger Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:03:00pm |
re: #521 albusteve
Udall, D NM just emailed me asking what he can do for me….hahaha!….these people are fucking crazy
Now, how tempting is it to answer honestly?
| 536 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:03:40pm |
re: #532 Thanos
You got that part right, but supporting statements like “AGW doesn’t exist” weakens your argument because it makes you look like an idiot.
Do you own a car?
I agree simplistic arguments weaken the so called “skeptic” side. Yes, I own a car.
| 537 |
Gus Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:03:59pm |
re: #528 Shr_Nfr
It was amazing to listen to Boehner run down the 300+ page amendment to the bill that got dumped on Congress at 3 AM this morning. Among the provsons:
1) You are now more or less subject to the CA building code no matter where you are. If you sell your house, you have to pay to get it energy rated and brought up to CA standards.
2) Son of Smoot-Hawley
3) Every city, town, and municipality must hire 3 full time people to deal with the bill
4) All house appraisers must now be retrained and re-certified by some sort of federal agency to evaluatie “properly” the energy enhancements
5) FNM and FRE are to be set free to have to make more lost cost mortgages.
6) There is a 5 billion dollar set-aside for the creation of a “Green Bank” to make loans to worthy people.
7) Acorn gets a slice, since they get some money to perform the retrofit “greening”. CRA all over again.
And that is just in the damn amendment. Talk about a massive crock of crap, this is it. By the grace, it goes down in flames in the Senate. Too bad 4 or 5 too many blue dogs and republicans voted for this travesty.
There it. More bullshit.
| 538 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:04:23pm |
re: #528 Shr_Nfr
5) FNM and FRE are to be set free to have to make more lost cost mortgages.
/gee, you’d think they could at least wait until we’re finished cleaning up after the last time they did that
| 539 |
razorbacker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:04:28pm |
re: #527 Kosh’s Shadow
Kennedy and Kerry. ‘nuff said.
Well. I try not to hold people’s elected House and Senate members against them, personally.
It must suck, though, to know that the majority of your fellow voters think that those are the best you have to offer.
| 540 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:04:33pm |
re: #522 Athos
hard to defend something that is irretrievably stupid…..to the point that only rank ideologues will defend it….well, not all rank ideologues apparently will defend it…
pretty wimpy when you won’t defend your president when he is under fire
| 542 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:04:58pm |
re: #535 VioletTiger
Now, how tempting is it to answer honestly?
Violet Tiger -
Answer HIM Honestly - And RIP HIM a New Anus. You Go Girl!
-S-
| 543 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:05:02pm |
re: #527 Kosh’s Shadow
Perhaps this message from Palin to Lurch may cheer you up - Why the long face?
I’m sure it left a mark.
| 544 |
eon Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:05:04pm |
re: #476 gulfloafer
re: #297 eon
Good article in the WSJ today about this. Check it out.
[Link: online.wsj.com…]
The fact that even scientists who previously helped write the UN’s AGW “White Paper” are now essentially calling it a fraud explains why The one is so anxious to ram this through. He wants to have it codified into law before the majority of Americans find out they’ve been sold a bill of goods, for the purpose of turning the lights out on the future once and for all.
The One & Co. dream of a future that looks a lot like an idealized (i.e., non-existent and never-really-happened) version of Europe about the time of the Norman Conquest of England- with themselves as royalty, nobility, and Holy Father Church all tied up in one nice, neat package.
/Guess what role’ that leaves for the rest of us in their little neofeudal, medieval “Passion Play?”
cheers
eon
| 545 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:05:12pm |
re: #536 Bagua
I agree simplistic arguments weaken the so called “skeptic” side. Yes, I own a car.
Forgetting all about carbon dioxide for the moment, can you drive it to work without the engine contributing radiant heat that otherwise wouldn’t be there?
| 546 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:05:15pm |
| 548 |
poteen Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:05:36pm |
re: #528 Shr_Nfr
1) You are now more or less subject to the CA building code no matter where you are. If you sell your house, you have to pay to get it energy rated and brought up to CA standards.
Buy Simpson strongtie stock. Seriously.
They benefit most from the relatively new CA Building Code.
| 550 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:06:18pm |
re: #540 albusteve
pretty wimpy when you won’t defend your president when he is under fire
Must be something about sharing foxholes…..
| 551 |
Kosh's Shadow Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:06:37pm |
re: #528 Shr_Nfr
You are now more or less subject to the CA building code no matter where you are. If you sell your house, you have to pay to get it energy rated and brought up to CA standards.
They’ve now killed the real estate market while it is down.
Let’s see - historic houses? Can’t modify them, can’t sell them, either.
Older houses? Cost a ridiculous amount to get the house up to standards. Might as well burn the house down and rebuild. Think of all the CO2 emissions that will cause!
/not serious
| 552 |
Athens Runaway Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:06:39pm |
re: #544 eon
The One & Co. dream of a future that looks a lot like an idealized (i.e., non-existent and never-really-happened) version of Europe about the time of the Norman Conquest of England- with themselves as royalty, nobility, and Holy Father Church all tied up in one nice, neat package.
/Guess what role’ that leaves for the rest of us in their little neofeudal, medieval “Passion Play?”
cheers
eon
The Welsh?
| 553 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:06:50pm |
re: #543 Athos
Perhaps this message from Palin to Lurch may cheer you up - Why the long face?
I’m sure it left a mark.
Arhos -
SURELY HOPE SO. Gov. Palin is the First to take on “His Pompousness” on HIS own terms - AND WIN!
-S-
| 554 |
VioletTiger Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:07:12pm |
re: #528 Shr_Nfr
Even if you were one to agree with AGW, voting for a bill that was 1500 pages long that nobody had time to read in inexcusable. Who knows what they hid in there? It’s becoming the new left tactic. Baffle ‘em with bullshit.
| 555 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:07:25pm |
re: #542 Dr. Shalit
Violet Tiger -
Answer HIM Honestly - And RIP HIM a New Anus. You Go Girl!
-S-
“Dear Sir, I would like to say what an honor it is to speak with. I’d like to, but I actually have a thing called integrity. Here is a link to its definition, since I’m sure that word isn’t one you have much experience with.”
| 556 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:07:47pm |
re: #535 VioletTiger
Now, how tempting is it to answer honestly?
he’s coming to ABQ for a town hall thing…sit a talk to a bunch of poor people and pimp his office…spit…I’ll be on his ass tomorrow
| 557 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:07:57pm |
| 558 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:08:06pm |
re: #530 Fenway_Nation
California exports.
| 559 |
dapperdave Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:08:27pm |
I found this appropriate video for Obama’s economy.
| 561 |
kateca Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:08:43pm |
re: #506 VioletTiger
I hope this bill dies in the Senate, but don’t assume anything. Call and write your Senator and let them know how you feel. I never thought my rep would vote for this thing. Don’t assume, speak up!
Did you try calling them today? All lines busy. I could not get trhough. “Message box full”
| 562 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:09:30pm |
re: #545 Thanos
No Thanos, I can’t, and I don’t discount that there is an Anthropogenic effect on climate on the micro-climate level, nor do I doubt that there is some effect on a systemic level as well, however, I strongly challenge that we understand the systemic effect to a degree that we can start using words like “fact” or propose crippling our economies as a response.
| 563 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:09:31pm |
re: #554 VioletTiger
Even if you were one to agree with AGW, voting for a bill that was 1500 pages long that nobody had time to read in inexcusable. Who knows what they hid in there? It’s becoming the new left tactic. Baffle ‘em with bullshit.
Democrats will henceforth vote on Nov 4.
All others will vote on Nov 38.
| 564 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:10:16pm |
This new demoncrat habit of ‘no reading of the bills’ before voting sure will make for some great one-liners for the 2010 & 2012 elections.
| 566 |
Athens Runaway Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:11:00pm |
Ok, so those of you who know me, know that I’m going to school at Ohio University. One of the most liberal campuses in the nation. I am a native of a solidly red part of Ohio, in between Columbus and Cleveland, along I-71.
How messed up is it that the House Rep who represents all these liberals in the People’s Republic of Athens voted “no,” and the Rep who represents a very conservative part of Ohio voted “yes”?
| 567 |
huckfunn Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:11:10pm |
re: #554 VioletTiger
Even if you were one to agree with AGW, voting for a bill that was 1500 pages long that nobody had time to read in inexcusable. Who knows what they hid in there? It’s becoming the new left tactic. Baffle ‘em with bullshit.
I think that’s always been their tactic. Tell the lie often enough and the masses will believe.
| 568 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:11:21pm |
re: #558 Idle Drifter
California exports.
Idle Drifter -
AND - The World Purports - to Buy from California. Think Again. A five (5) letter word - CHINA. Same thing happened to “Our Korea” a/k/a Mexico.
-S-
| 569 |
irongrampa Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:11:25pm |
re: #528 Shr_Nfr
Watched that on C-Span. Man really lit things up, didn’t he?
| 570 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:12:11pm |
re: #530 Fenway_Nation
Ah yes….isn’t California the same state that’s looking down the barrel of bankruptcy.
Excellent model for the rest of the country to follow//
They ain’t kidding when they say that where California goes the nation follows. The thing is, it took the el cubos a decade to CA to this point, Obama will get the nation to catch up in less than 9 months.
| 571 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:12:14pm |
re: #562 Bagua
No Thanos, I can’t, and I don’t discount that there is an Anthropogenic effect on climate on the micro-climate level, nor do I doubt that there is some effect on a systemic level as well, however, I strongly challenge that we understand the systemic effect to a degree that we can start using words like “fact” or propose crippling our economies as a response.
I oppose this bill as well, but I’m not a denialist. We do need to do something before 9 billion souls inhabit the planet all wanting to drive, to cook, to burn things… I’m a lukewarmist, and always have been - one of the reasons I’ve strongly advocated nuclear energy for 25 years, even when it was uncool and unpopular to do so.
| 572 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:12:16pm |
re: #567 huckfunn
I think that’s always been their tactic. Tell the lie often enough and the masses will believe.
even seemingly reasonable people here…the koolaid is strong
| 573 |
callahan23 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:12:54pm |
Gals ‘n guys its been a hasty evening. Those whiskeys are taking their toll.
Gotta go.
I love you (Lizardim} - mostly.
| 574 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:13:13pm |
re: #566 Athens Runaway
Ok, so those of you who know me, know that I’m going to school at Ohio University. One of the most liberal campuses in the nation. I am a native of a solidly red part of Ohio, in between Columbus and Cleveland, along I-71.
How messed up is it that the House Rep who represents all these liberals in the People’s Republic of Athens voted “no,” and the Rep who represents a very conservative part of Ohio voted “yes”?
Energy lobbies. He was probably angling for pollution credits for coal plants in his district
| 576 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:13:38pm |
re: #571 Thanos
I oppose this bill as well, but I’m not a denialist. We do need to do something before 9 billion souls inhabit the planet all wanting to drive, to cook, to burn things… I’m a lukewarmist, and always have been - one of the reasons I’ve strongly advocated nuclear energy for 25 years, even when it was uncool and unpopular to do so.
well now you are even less cool and more unpopular…in fact you have no voice at all…save your strength
| 577 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:13:40pm |
re: #567 huckfunn
I think that’s always been their tactic. Tell the lie often enough and the masses will believe.
It’s also how the European Union operates, they make everything as confusing and tedious as possible so that the voters eyes just roll and the voters are either apathetic of conditioned to accept the feel good platitudes.
| 578 |
callahan23 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:14:01pm |
re: #572 albusteve
even seemingly reasonable people here…the koolaid is strong in them
FTFY
/ SW mode off
| 579 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:14:15pm |
re: #570 Athos
They ain’t kidding when they say that where California goes the nation follows. The thing is, it took the el cubos a decade to CA to this point, Obama will get the nation to catch up in less than 9 months.
Athos -
I am from NJ, the California of the “Right Coast” - what happens in CA, happens here 12-18 months later - “Oy Vey!”
-S-
| 580 |
MandyManners Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:14:16pm |
I hope that everyone who refused to vote for McCain because he wasn’t conservative enough is fucking happy now.
| 581 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:14:20pm |
re: #568 Dr. Shalit
I meant the main export of California now is bad legislation.
| 582 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:14:27pm |
re: #565 ArmyWife
do share!
Bunch of statements to rate: strongly agree, agree, no opinion, disagree, strongly disagree.
Statements were like:
I plan to start a new business, I think the economy will improve, I have faith in the government’s action on the economy.
I’ll let you guess my answers.
| 583 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:14:30pm |
US will not use force to inspect NKorean ship
The United States will not use force to inspect a North Korean ship suspected of carrying banned goods, an American official was quoted as saying Friday.
An American destroyer has been shadowing the North Korean freighter sailing off China’s coast, possibly on its way to Myanmar.
/but hey, thanks for the naval escort
| 584 |
brookly red Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:14:42pm |
re: #567 huckfunn
I think that’s always been their tactic. Tell the lie often enough and the masses will believe.
I fear that it has come to the point that the masses don’t even believe anymore & these PsOS are just going to do it any way…
| 585 |
ArmyWife Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:14:51pm |
I’m going to go read, and then early to bed maybe. I’ve got to go in to the Ye Olde Chemical Plant bright and early, and then my family comes home!
| 586 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:14:56pm |
liberals…
why are you so frightened of nuclear power?…where will the green energy come from?
| 587 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:15:19pm |
re: #580 MandyManners
I hope that everyone who refused to vote for McCain because he wasn’t conservative enough is fucking happy now.
Bout time you posted that. ;)
| 589 |
Shr_Nfr Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:15:31pm |
re: #501 Thanos
The reality is that if you do increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere it will raise the temperature a slight amount. I have heard the number 0.00125 C as the first partial of the surface temperature per ppm of CO2 at the present 380 ppm. Frankly, I believe it since I know something of the field. The CO2 absorbtion lines in the infra-red are already opqaue as they can be for all practical purposes. Adding more CO2 does not make them more opaque at the surface, but raises the atltitude at which they become opaque. Thus we should see increased temperatures at about 10 km in the atmosphere which will be compoounded with an increase in absorpton by H20. Not only has this not been observed, but the stratospheric temperatures have been declining over the past 30+ years in the high stratosphere and are fairly constant in the lower stratosphere. There is no evidence of greenhouse warming. On the other hand the 30 years prior to 1999 were warmer. This is largely attribituable to the ATO/AMO cycle in the Atlantic. The gloabal temperatures increase for 30 years and then decrease for 30 years. If you will look at the Hadley data, you can easily see this at work.
As I have said, I do my own thing with solar panels, etc. as a hobby and to try and get off the grid. However, it makes for a crud energy policy at the domestic level.
| 591 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:16:09pm |
re: #581 Idle Drifter
I meant the main export of California now is bad legislation.
Idle Drifter -
AND CITIZENS?
-S-
| 592 |
Gus Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:16:10pm |
re: #586 albusteve
liberals…
why are you so frightenedof nuclear power?…where will the green energy come from?
FTFY
| 593 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:16:17pm |
re: #571 Thanos
Yes I know, we also agree on the nuclear energy. This bill, and most of the Greenie agenda has nothing to do with science or CO2, it is all about control and reducing human population.
| 594 |
solomonpanting Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:16:17pm |
re: #22 garden18
Frist we have Regina Spektor, a wonderful representative of the Jewish people. And then we have Henry Waxman, an embarrassment.
WTF is that supposed to mean?
| 595 |
njdhockeyfan Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:16:28pm |
re: #583 Killian Bundy
US will not use force to inspect NKorean ship
/but hey, thanks for the naval escort
re: #580 MandyManners
I hope that everyone who refused to vote for McCain because he wasn’t conservative enough is fucking happy now.
What she said.
| 596 |
DEZes Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:16:30pm |
| 597 |
Shr_Nfr Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:16:55pm |
re: #530 Fenway_Nation
Yep the state with billboards telling people that if they move they can keep more of their money.
| 598 |
Gus Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:16:57pm |
If this bill forces the USA to be just like California by 2020 that means the USA will be bankrupt just like California at that time.
| 599 |
Kragar Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:16:58pm |
re: #583 Killian Bundy
US will not use force to inspect NKorean ship
/but hey, thanks for the naval escort
Great. Our national security response has become “I’M NOT TOUCHING YOU! BOOGA BOOGA!”
| 600 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:17:08pm |
re: #589 Shr_Nfr
How do you account for overnight temps being where the increase is seen?
| 601 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:17:21pm |
re: #580 MandyManners
I hope that everyone who refused to vote for McCain because he wasn’t conservative enough is fucking happy now.
It’s no secret that McCain supported Cap-n-Tax, but be sure, we wouldn’t be here today, if he were President.
| 602 |
SasquatchOnSteroids Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:17:28pm |
re: #580 MandyManners
I hope that everyone who refused to vote for McCain because he wasn’t conservative enough is fucking happy now.
Nuclear was more than something he’d have ‘looked at”
Whatever other issues I had with him, this wasn’t one of them.
| 603 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:17:46pm |
re: #580 MandyManners
I hope that everyone who refused to vote for McCain because he wasn’t conservative enough is fucking happy now.
McCain was no different on this issue, (yes he was vastly better on other issues but not this one, it was Palin that gave one hope.)
| 604 |
Shr_Nfr Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:17:52pm |
re: #592 Gus 802
What is highly ironic is that if it were not for the effects of fission in the earth’s core we would have long since been a cold planet like the moon.
| 605 |
Gus Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:17:58pm |
re: #583 Killian Bundy
US will not use force to inspect NKorean ship
/but hey, thanks for the naval escort
More bullshit from the Democrats.
I might need to get drunk tonight.
| 606 |
horse Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:18:15pm |
re: #445 avanti
We’ve been asked to go away, and that makes sense. Most on the right don’t accept AGW, so I understand your frustration with attempts to deal with it.
I’ll make one statement and leave. It’s unlikely the Senate will pass the bill and even if they do, and it’s the disaster you predict, you can repeal all the C02 controls when you’re swept back into power. The bill starts out slow enough that you can kill it all in 2012 without much kicking in. Now back to lurking.
All very good points, and lets hope it dies fast. But what is really scary, and truly unfcking believable is there were 219 adults who voted in favor for something they did not read, did not understand, and has such broad adverse affects on every citizen in this country. They have abdicated their elected responsibilities nearly as much as the idiot governor of South Carolina. At least they can get ride of the governor without long lasting ill affects.
| 607 |
Gus Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:18:55pm |
re: #604 Shr_Nfr
What is highly ironic is that if it were not for the effects of fission in the earth’s core we would have long since been a cold planet like the moon.
Might as well ban the sun — using Liberal Logic. /
| 608 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:19:00pm |
This new vote-without-reading has really exposed the fact that they really aren’t voting for laws, they are doing what their party tells them to. We really ought to think about that, as I highly doubt it only happens on one side.
| 609 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:19:07pm |
| 610 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:19:28pm |
re: #598 Gus 802
If this bill forces the USA to be just like California by 2020 that means the USA will be bankrupt just like California at that time.
Pelosi represents CA…look at the mess liberals have created and the hardships they induce…she should be arrested for something…she refuses to take any responsibility for her role in this tragedy….she is a liar and a fraud…why don’t liberals defend her policies here?
| 611 |
avanti Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:20:41pm |
re: #586 albusteve
liberals…
why are you so frightened of nuclear power?…where will the green energy come from?
That I can’t answer, some liberals are against nukes, but not me. It’s my fondest hope that Obama comes around to being more supportive.
| 612 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:20:42pm |
You’re gonna get too drunk if you enter that lounge. ————————->
| 613 |
Idle Drifter Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:21:04pm |
re: #591 Dr. Shalit
Idle Drifter -
AND CITIZENS?
-S-
Soon they won’t have a state to escape to so why leave.
| 614 |
pink freud Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:21:58pm |
re: #610 albusteve
Pelosi represents CA…look at the mess liberals have created and the hardships they induce…she should be arrested for something…she refuses to take any responsibility for her role in this tragedy….she is a liar and a fraud…why don’t liberals defend her policies here?
They will show up later after the clamor and outrage have died down and issue forth their lofty sounding marble-mouthed crap that will have no meaning but sound really really good. It’s what they do.
| 615 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:22:00pm |
re: #611 avanti
That I can’t answer, some liberals are against nukes, but not me. It’s my fondest hope that Obama comes around to being more supportive.
why are you so out of touch with your ideological mates?…don’t you have any idea what they are thinking?
| 616 |
dapperdave Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:22:01pm |
re: #580 MandyManners
I hope that everyone who refused to vote for McCain because he wasn’t conservative enough is fucking happy now.
So what is it your trying to say?/
| 617 |
lostlakehiker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:22:47pm |
re: #77 Racer X
Pedophile worship trumps America’s future.
That’s not fair to MJ. There are any number of historical figures who did great things both good and bad. This kind of man has to be evaluated carefully and fairly.
The good does not excuse the bad. The bad does not unmake the good. The portrait of his life will be hard to write.
| 618 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:22:52pm |
re: #600 Thanos
How do you account for overnight temps being where the increase is seen?
That is a distraction and irrelevant to the discussion, this bill will not reduce the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere one bit.
| 619 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:23:26pm |
re: #614 pink freud
They will show up later after the clamor and outrage have died down and issue forth their lofty sounding marble-mouthed crap that will have no meaning but sound really really good. It’s what they do.
I’ll be cutting Z’s…what a bunch of chicken shits
| 620 |
poteen Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:23:41pm |
I Will Not—-
buy a carbon credit
buy an elec.car
pay out my ass for a beer (I’ll brew my own)
give up my once a week cigar
let my lawn die for lack of water
get rid of my classic car
spend a fortune on solar panels (I’ll burn some trees first)
stop putting the shitty cat litter in the garbage
If these simple things put me on the wrong side of the law;
Then pass the ammo and call me Dillinger
| 621 |
pink freud Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:23:50pm |
re: #614 pink freud
They will show up later after the clamor and outrage have died down and issue forth their lofty sounding marble-mouthed crap that will have no meaning but sound really really good. It’s what they do.
And, if they DO post here, they will wait until everyone has moved and on then congregate and stroke each other. It’s becoming predictable.
| 622 |
kateca Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:23:59pm |
This bill calls for a .77/gln tax on gas. Sorry no linc, heard it on talk radio. I’m thinking that a sudden increase like that, the common man who pays little attention to politics, is going to notice. I don’t know what it takes to wake people up. Maybe that just might do it?
| 623 |
avanti Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:24:01pm |
re: #615 albusteve
why are you so out of touch with your ideological mates?…don’t you have any idea what they are thinking?
The left is no more monolithic then the right. Is everyone on the right a AGW denier and a creationist ?
| 624 |
Shr_Nfr Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:24:02pm |
re: #600 Thanos
A large number of ground stations are heavily corrupted by being sited in heat islands. My favorite is in Italy. Right behind a jet airstrip where there is jet engine exhaust washing over it and where it has a paved parking lot on the other side. Watt’s up with that has been doing a survey of the surface stations, He has found some very, very poor station siting. Once upon a time, it was reasonable to put them there. It no longer is. NOAA just announced that according to their surface data, May was the 4th hottest in 130 years. Remote sensing from the MSU gives it as the 15th coolest n 31 years. Somebody is wrong. Knowing the station sitings as I do, I am betting on the stations. In fact, I no longer consider them reliable data sources.
| 625 |
Killian Bundy Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:24:08pm |
re: #588 ArmyWife
Cojones. The One Has None.
Likely Destination of N Korean Ship Often Used for Weapons Deliveries
The Myanmar International Terminals Thilawa (MITT), believed to be the destination of the Kang Nam 1, a North Korean cargo ship being tracked by the US Navy, has often been used for deliveries of weapons, according to sources at the facility.
The Kang Nam 1, which left a North Korean port on June 17, is believed to be carrying weapons, missile parts or possibly even nuclear materials.
“There are two reasons to use Thilawa,” said an MITT operator. “First, it is not too close to Rangoon, and second, it is easy to increase security here so people don’t know what is being unloaded.”
The international multi-purpose container port, Burma’s largest deep sea port, is located about 30 km south of Rangoon.
According to other MITT employees, the facility has often been used for deliveries of weapons since it was built in the mid-1990s.
“Cargo ships carrying many kinds of weapons from Russia, China, North Korea and the Ukraine have docked at Thilawa,” said an MITT worker.
Normally, the source explained, the ships are offloaded around midnight to avoid attracting attention. Then, around 2 a.m., convoys of trucks deliver the weapons to a military depot at Intaing, about 25 km north of Rangoon.
“When cargo ships carrying military equipment dock at the port, naval personnel based near Thilawa take over port security and coordinate the unloading of the ships,” he said. “No unauthorized personnel are allowed near the port when cargo ships carrying weapons dock here.”
/unless we board it, we’ll never know what the cargo was
| 626 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:25:31pm |
re: #604 Shr_Nfr
What is highly ironic is that if it were not for the effects of fission in the earth’s core we would have long since been a cold planet like the moon.
Shr_Nfr -
You are right AND - as far as the “Greens” are concerned - SO WHAT! Now you know what you are up against - LUDDITES of the FIRST ORDER.
-S-
| 627 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:26:42pm |
re: #618 Bagua
That is a distraction and irrelevant to the discussion, this bill will not reduce the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere one bit.
It’s not a distraction, I’m not arguing for the bill. We are 618 comments in. I hate kneejerk neanderthals saying things like “AGW doesn’t exist” because it does. It gets us the fail when we try to propose alternatives. It makes us the luddites who don’t understand basic science.
| 628 |
albusteve Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:26:45pm |
re: #623 avanti
The left is no more monolithic then the right. Is everyone on the right a AGW denier and a creationist ?
then condemn BO…do it…you want karma points then tell us how this bill is a fraud and harmful to our economy, and you reject BOs destruction of market capitalism…do it…for the children
| 629 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:27:45pm |
| 630 |
gulfloafer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:28:14pm |
re: #607 Gus 802
To hell with the sun I fkn hate it! That bastard’s always warming the damn planet!//
| 631 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:28:15pm |
re: #623 avanti
The left is no more monolithic then the right. Is everyone on the right a AGW denier and a creationist ?
Nonsense, just using the term “denier” and comparing a very reasonable skepticism at the unsupported claims of the AGW propagandists as being comparable to being a creationist is unfair and unfounded.
| 632 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:28:17pm |
re: #624 Shr_Nfr
A large number of ground stations are heavily corrupted by being sited in heat islands. My favorite is in Italy. Right behind a jet airstrip where there is jet engine exhaust washing over it and where it has a paved parking lot on the other side. Watt’s up with that has been doing a survey of the surface stations, He has found some very, very poor station siting. Once upon a time, it was reasonable to put them there. It no longer is. NOAA just announced that according to their surface data, May was the 4th hottest in 130 years. Remote sensing from the MSU gives it as the 15th coolest n 31 years. Somebody is wrong. Knowing the station sitings as I do, I am betting on the stations. In fact, I no longer consider them reliable data sources.
I’ve seen that argument, and there is some credence to how it skewed the data and gave the alarmists ammo, but the satellite data supports the average overnight being warmer too.
| 633 |
sngnsgt Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:28:52pm |
re: #426 cronus
Weekly Standard: What Does Tonight’s Vote Mean?
re: #523 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Just got a call to participate in a survey in my opinions on the state of the US economy. That was fun
Do you have caller ID so I can call them and have some fun, I always love those stupid survey things.
| 634 |
njdhockeyfan Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:31:53pm |
re: #628 albusteve
then condemn BO…do it…you want karma points then tell us how this bill is a fraud and harmful to our economy, and you reject BOs destruction of market capitalism…do it…for the children
For the children!
It will make you feeeeel better too.
| 635 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:31:59pm |
re: #627 Thanos
Thanos -
Human Assisted “AGW” does exist. Compared to what The Sun can do within its Normal Cycles, It Is Miniscule.
SO, Lemmesee - The USA becomes an Economic Backwater, Like he DPRK, Then What?
-S-
| 636 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:32:02pm |
re: #627 Thanos
It’s not a distraction, I’m not arguing for the bill. We are 618 comments in. I hate kneejerk neanderthals saying things like “AGW doesn’t exist” because it does. It gets us the fail when we try to propose alternatives. It makes us the luddites who don’t understand basic science.
No argument there, precision and depth are important on such a weighty issue. And yes I read that you don’t support the bill. The entire issue of AGW should be debated on its merits, free of the media bias and hype, regardless of whether it be yea or nay.
| 637 |
avanti Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:32:35pm |
re: #632 Thanos
I’ve seen that argument, and there is some credence to how it skewed the data and gave the alarmists ammo, but the satellite data supports the average overnight being warmer too.
I posted a link last night that showed the almost exact correlation between the “bad” sensors and the good ones. They all agree with the final warming result.
| 638 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:32:38pm |
re: #615 albusteve
why are you so out of touch with your ideological mates?…don’t you have any idea what they are thinking?
At the risk of karma and flying brickbats, I’ll jump in. I can’t and won’t defend the add-ons. I don’t know the specifics. But the basics of the bill are certainly familiar to anyone who’s has been in Congress for any length of time. Cap and trade has been discussed ad nauseum. Many of the power companies have been clamoring for it, knowing it was going to happen sooner or later. They want to know what the playing field looks like. Let’s face it, coal and oil are finite resources. We will have to develop alternatives sooner or later. Why not do it now?
| 639 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:33:27pm |
re: #635 Dr. Shalit
Thanos -
Human Assisted “AGW” does exist. Compared to what The Sun can do within its Normal Cycles, It Is Miniscule.
SO, Lemmesee - The USA becomes an Economic Backwater, Like he DPRK, Then What?-S-
Starvation of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of humans is one possible result I could make a very good case for.
| 640 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:33:29pm |
re: #632 Thanos
Thanos -
In WHAT YEAR? Certainly NOT 2009 in NJ. Coldest/Wetest Summer in a Very Long Time.
-S-
| 641 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:33:43pm |
re: #635 Dr. Shalit
Thanos -
Human Assisted “AGW” does exist. Compared to what The Sun can do within its Normal Cycles, It Is Miniscule.
SO, Lemmesee - The USA becomes an Economic Backwater, Like he DPRK, Then What?-S-
Why are you trying to pretend I support this bill? I do not.
| 642 |
tommygum Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:35:05pm |
re: #323 LGoPs
I only wish we had a table. We have to eat on the floor…….
/
Luxury.
We used to DREAM about eating on the floor.
| 643 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:35:59pm |
re: #639 Bagua
Starvation of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of humans is one possible result I could make a very good case for.
Bagua -
That IS TRUE. AND - I am Primarily concerned about the USA. The World Without the USA as we Know It - Is a World of “POTTERSVILLES.” ‘Nuff Said.
-S-
| 644 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:36:18pm |
re: #638 austin_blue
At the risk of karma and flying brickbats, I’ll jump in. I can’t and won’t defend the add-ons. I don’t know the specifics. But the basics of the bill are certainly familiar to anyone who’s has been in Congress for any length of time. Cap and trade has been discussed ad nauseum. Many of the power companies have been clamoring for it, knowing it was going to happen sooner or later. They want to know what the playing field looks like. Let’s face it, coal and oil are finite resources. We will have to develop alternatives sooner or later. Why not do it now?
Because it is economically unsound to “do it now.” Instead of putting a choke hold on industry, we should be working to collapse the price of crude oil, NG, Coal, Nuclear, etc. the resulting cheap energy will lead us to a golden age in which we will no doubt make massive progress in a variety of alternatives. It is much easier to make progress with lots of money and productivity. The greenie agenda will do the opposite, it will starve us.
| 645 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:36:39pm |
re: #640 Dr. Shalit
Thanos -
In WHAT YEAR? Certainly NOT 2009 in NJ. Coldest/Wetest Summer in a Very Long Time.
-S-
-S-
That’s the difference between weather (where you are) and climate (the mega-trends for the planet as a whole). In any given year in any given place, you will have anomalies. Right now in Austin, we are in the midst of a severe heat wave, with 11 days straight over 100 degrees and the last five over 105. That’s weather, not climate.
| 646 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:38:00pm |
re: #643 Dr. Shalit
I don’t think the US will be the first to starve by any means, though surely it will incur poverty, the starvation will first occur in Africa, Middle East, Asia, etc.
| 648 |
Optimizer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:38:44pm |
re: #6 cronus
Republicans who voted for Cap & Tax:
Bono Mack, Castle, McHugh, LoBiondo, Lance, Kirk, Reichert, Smith (NJ)
I did a little research on these folks:
1) Bono Mack, (woman) southeast CA (wineries & outdoor tourism)
2) Castle, DE
3) Kirk, IL (northern suburb of Chicago)
4) Lance, NJ (suburban NYC)
5) LoBiondo, NJ (southern tip of NJ)
6) McHugh, NY (Adirondacks)
7) Reichert, WA *(suburban Seattle)
8) Smith, Chris, NJ (central - Trenton)
So you have a combination of some elitist suburbs of liberal bastions (not just in the Northeast) and a couple of “nature” districts in NY & CA.
Let’s hope Inhofe knows what he’s talking about.
/ObamaWorld ON:
*The economy’s suffering, so let’s “help it out” by taxing the crap out of businesses and choking off its fuel supply!
*The national debt is out of control. I know! Let’s “solve” that by coming up with more ways to spend ever more insane amounts of money!
*Third World countries are working on ICBMs! I know what to do - let’s stop working on Missile Defense! THAT should keep us “safe”!
/ObamaWorld OFF
It’s like watching Pee Wee Herman. WTF!?!
| 649 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:39:09pm |
re: #645 austin_blue
-S-
That’s the difference between weather (where you are) and climate (the mega-trends for the planet as a whole). In any given year in any given place, you will have anomalies. Right now in Austin, we are in the midst of a severe heat wave, with 11 days straight over 100 degrees and the last five over 105. That’s weather, not climate.
austin_blue -
Glad YOU agree. The Prediction of WEATHER beyond 72 Hours is quite hard. Why should the prediction of CLIMATE be SO EASY? Pray Tell?
-S-
| 650 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:39:32pm |
re: #640 Dr. Shalit
Thanos -
In WHAT YEAR? Certainly NOT 2009 in NJ. Coldest/Wetest Summer in a Very Long Time.
-S-
When the sunspots crank back up (and they will soon) it will go back to warming over the long term. Don’t mistake a jog in the graph as a trend.
| 651 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:41:24pm |
re: #646 Bagua
I don’t think the US will be the first to starve by any means, though surely it will incur poverty, the starvation will first occur in Africa, Middle East, Asia, etc.
Southern Asia, Africa, and poor Island nations will be the first to see the effects ( they actually already have) I don’t expect their lot to improve either.
[Link: noblesseoblige.org…]
| 652 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:41:24pm |
re: #307 pink freud
Chickenshit bottom-of-a-dead-thread post over on the Onion/Obama thread blaming this on the republicans since they did nothing when they ‘ruled the roost’.
Didn’t mean to offend, pink. I’m a newbie here. Was my post off-topic, or what? There was a lot of discussion about the new climate bill, and I joined in.
Help me with the etiquette. Posting beyond what number in a thread makes for “chickenshit”? I hate to look stupid because my computer moves slowly.
Thanks.
| 653 |
solomonpanting Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:41:29pm |
From the link:
I tend to agree. If China and India don’t come on board (and they probably won’t if we don’t do anything for our own emissions), then we might as well just throw up our hands and enjoy the last century of human civilization.
Were all gonna die!
“You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of smoke.”
| 654 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:41:40pm |
re: #638 austin_blue
Many of the power companies have been clamoring for it, knowing it was going to happen sooner or later. They want to know what the playing field looks like. Let’s face it, coal and oil are finite resources. We will have to develop alternatives sooner or later. Why not do it now?
The only shortage there is is the shortage of brainpower. Who told you we’re running out coal & oil, probably your govt educated school teacher, right? We’re not running out. There’s enough coal to carry us well into the 23rd century and as far as oil goes there’s oil shale, enough to carry us also. Do some research. This entire Cap-n-Tax bill is not about finite resources, but about the fictitious climate change issue. Read. Learn.
| 655 |
humpty dumpty was pushed Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:42:26pm |
In celebration of today`s House vote I plan to ride my slammed Softail Harley with no pipe baffels and stupidly tall apehangers an extra 100 miles this weekend. The parasite class is in contol and Big Brother has his foot on our throats. Ride while you can, smoke `em if you got `em, lizards.
| 656 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:43:10pm |
re: #650 Thanos
When the sunspots crank back up (and they will soon) it will go back to warming over the long term. Don’t mistake a jog in the graph as a trend.
Thanos -
I DO NOT Believe I Do. What you have just said proves MY point. Sun Cycles are FAR more powerful as to “Climate” than “AGW.” Thank You.
-S-
| 657 |
NukeAtomrod Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:43:20pm |
re: #545 Thanos
Forgetting all about carbon dioxide for the moment, can you drive it to work without the engine contributing radiant heat that otherwise wouldn’t be there?
Is this a problem? If so, what’s your solution?
Humans do things. Those things do create some heat that isn’t naturally occurring. Those things also create a comfortable, long life for a lot of people that otherwise wouldn’t have it.
The only way to stop radiant heat due to human activity is to stop that activity. So either force people to suffer by denying them transportation, food, home heating/cooling, lighting, etc. Or cut to the chase and just exterminate a significant portion of humanity.
It’s much better to attempt to do the unnatural things that increase the quality of human life than suffer the natural way. Especially since the warming caused by human activity may be insignificant and may not even be harmful.
Technology isn’t the enemy. It’s the solution.
| 658 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:43:46pm |
re: #644 Bagua
Because it is economically unsound to “do it now.” Instead of putting a choke hold on industry, we should be working to collapse the price of crude oil, NG, Coal, Nuclear, etc. the resulting cheap energy will lead us to a golden age in which we will no doubt make massive progress in a variety of alternatives. It is much easier to make progress with lots of money and productivity. The greenie agenda will do the opposite, it will starve us.
As has been pointed out, the requirements of this bill kick in relatively slowly. By your reasoning, it will *never* be “economically sound” to act, because you believe that acting will make the economy unsound. That’s a circular argument. In addition, we would never be able to go to China and India and say “You first.” They would laugh their asses off at such condescension. We must lead. We always have and should continue to do so.
One more point. Industry has always screamed disaster at any bill that forces them to change. The Clean Air and Clean Water Acts were going to ruin the economy. They didn’t. And research seem show that for every dollar spent, over two were made in innovative products, new markets, and public health savings.
| 659 |
lostlakehiker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:43:46pm |
re: #545 Thanos
Forgetting all about carbon dioxide for the moment, can you drive it to work without the engine contributing radiant heat that otherwise wouldn’t be there?
The direct heat emissions of auto engines are of no consequence outside city limits. Urban heat islands are just that: islands.
Imagine 9 billion people, each driving 10 000 miles per year in a 20 mpg vehicle. That’s 4.5 trillion gallons of gasoline a year. Grabbing numbers from an energy conversion chart gives that this would amount to 0.0185 percent (2 parts in ten thousand) of direct solar energy hitting the earth.
On the other hand, that much driving would contribute a lot to world CO2 levels. Using more search engine facts (Wikipedia for CO2 stats, and an energy conversion chart for carbon content of a gallon of gasoline, it works out that just from all that driving, we’d be pushing up world CO2 levels by about 5 percent per year.
To put this in perspective, such driving, alone, would in just 7 years match all the increase we’ve seen since the beginning of the industrial revolution.
If there is anything at all to the calculations that point to a degree or two temperature increase from that extra CO2, we’d be looking at 1 whole degree every 7 years.
Before centuries were out, North Dakota would have the climate of Texas, and anywhere south of that would be verging on unlivable. And that’s not counting other sources of CO2.
| 660 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:44:52pm |
re: #657 NukeAtomrod
Is this a problem? If so, what’s your solution?
Humans do things. Those things do create some heat that isn’t naturally occurring. Those things also create a comfortable, long life for a lot of people that otherwise wouldn’t have it.
The only way to stop radiant heat due to human activity is to stop that activity. So either force people to suffer by denying them transportation, food, home heating/cooling, lighting, etc. Or cut to the chase and just exterminate a significant portion of humanity.
It’s much better to attempt to do the unnatural things that increase the quality of human life than suffer the natural way. Especially since the warming caused by human activity may be insignificant and may not even be harmful.
Technology isn’t the enemy. It’s the solution.
My solution has been more nuclear energy for the past 25 years. What’s yours?
| 661 |
wee fury Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:45:49pm |
re: #655 humpty dumpty was pushed
In celebration of today`s House vote I plan to ride my slammed Softail Harley with no pipe baffels and stupidly tall apehangers an extra 100 miles this weekend. The parasite class is in contol and Big Brother has his foot on our throats. Ride while you can, smoke `em if you got `em, lizards.
Helmetless?
| 662 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:46:05pm |
re: #657 NukeAtomrod
NukeAtomrod -
It is IMPOSSIBLE to “drive” anywhere without HEAT being generated. Ask any HORSE that pulls a Hansom Cab ‘bout that one.
-S-
| 663 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:47:08pm |
re: #651 Thanos
Southern Asia, Africa, and poor Island nations will be the first to see the effects ( they actually already have) I don’t expect their lot to improve either.
[Link: noblesseoblige.org…]
Exactly, and while it is hugely debatable as to whether warming or cooling is the biggest killer of humans*, it is readily demonstrable that massive starvation is a major killer and that these well meaning measures to “fight climate change” have a good chance of leading to poverty and famine.
* I lean to the side that cooling is the far greater, and inevitable curse on humanity, whereas warming has only limited adverse effects on certain local populations.
| 664 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:47:13pm |
re: #659 lostlakehiker
You are missing the point. To flatly state that “AGW doesn’t exist” is plainly idiotic.
| 665 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:47:28pm |
re: #658 austin_blue
The fact is and you know it, or should anyway, we will never be able to tell China to halt burning of fossil fuels. China is opening one new coal burning (not clean coal) plant daily.
| 666 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:47:35pm |
re: #649 Dr. Shalit
austin_blue -
Glad YOU agree. The Prediction of WEATHER beyond 72 Hours is quite hard. Why should the prediction of CLIMATE be SO EASY? Pray Tell?
-S-
Odd isn’t it? But is a lot easier to predict statistical trends over a larger area than over a small one. That’s the beauty of mega-trend modeling.
| 667 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:47:40pm |
| 668 |
humpty dumpty was pushed Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:48:58pm |
re: #661 wee fury
`Course…this is Texas, friend.
| 669 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:49:02pm |
re: #658 austin_blue
Sorry, but that is nonsense on so many levels I don’t know where to start. But enjoy, you have the full weight of the MSM behind you to promote such propaganda and your side is clearly winning.
| 670 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:50:29pm |
re: #664 Thanos
You are missing the point. To flatly state that “AGW doesn’t exist” is plainly idiotic.
Thanos has a point, we need to raise the level of the debate and get rid of the propaganda on both sides.
| 671 |
NukeAtomrod Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:51:05pm |
re: #650 Thanos
When the sunspots crank back up (and they will soon) it will go back to warming over the long term. Don’t mistake a jog in the graph as a trend.
When it comes to climate, a 1000 year span is just a jog in the graph. We simply do not have any reliable global temperature data before the invention of weather satellites. That’s why getting all gloom-and-doom over a couple of degrees of warming/cooling is so alarmist.
| 672 |
eon Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:51:38pm |
re: #623 avanti
The left is no more monolithic then the right. Is everyone on the right a AGW denier and a creationist ?
You’re missing the fundamental difference between the two.
In moderate-conservative circles, the far-right (or off-the-known-map, in the case of the YECkies and IDiots) are tolerated as long as they stay in the back of the hall and keep their voices down. Mainly because they have friends and/or relations who aren’t quite as crazy as they are, plus the fact that we tend to be tolerant of others’ opinions, even if we don’t agree with them. (It’s called, “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you”.)
In liberal/progressive circles, the crazier and more fanatical someone is (whether they’re a One World Socialist or a Back To The Caves neo-Luddite) , the more likely it is that they’re going to be up on stage, at the podium, bellowing their weirdness into the mike, and demanding obedience. And, all too often, getting it- because one of the basic principles of “progressivism” is that The Dogma Is Never To Be Questioned, and actually stopping to think about it borders on apostasy.
And voicing an opinion contrary to same is outright blasphemy worthy of an inquisition. (Coming from a family of such, all Democrats, I know exactly how tolerant of my “differing opinions” they were. About as tolerant as Torquemada was toward Jews.)
It has been that way in “progressive” circles since at least the 1960s, with some of the more self-defined “intellectuals” in that category holding such views going back to Woodrow Wilson’s Presidency. The bottom line being, they are utterly convinced that they are always right- so anyone who disagrees with them, even a tiny amount, must be absolutely wrong.
And therefore, must be compelled to “behave properly”- the consequences be d***ed.
Furthermore, progressives never admit error, even when it is patently obvious. They always hunt for scapegoats and excuses. “It wasn’t properly funded.” “No one tried hard enough to make it work.” “They didn’t try with the right people.” “It was sabotaged by the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.”
And then they do the exact same thing over again, expecting it to work. (“This time we’ll get it right!”)
(As Einstein said, “Fanaticism is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result each time.”)
I personally would take liberalism a bit more seriously, and be a bit more charitable toward it, if just once, when a Great Liberal Plan blew up in its creators’ faces, instead of the usual alibis, they would say, “OK, maybe it wasn’t such a great idea to begin with. You got a better one? You do? OK, let’s try it your way.”
I have never seen that happen, and I’ve been on this mudball for fifty-one years. Apparently, those who are the “gurus” of the Left have an absolute faith in their own infallibility which is unfazed by anything- including abject failure due to their unwillingness to deal with reality when it conflicts with their “philosophy”.
Avanti, if you want those you regard as “unenlightened” to take your preferred philosophy a bit more seriously, you might want to take a hard look at the mindset of the people calling the shots on your side of the aisle.
/respectfully submitted
eon
| 673 |
Dr. Shalit Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:51:46pm |
re: #664 Thanos
You are missing the point. To flatly state that “AGW doesn’t exist” is plainly idiotic.
Thanos -
As I have previously “admitted” - AGW - DOES EXIST. THAT is NOT the Question. The question is Quantity and Effect. To get to ZERO AGW - there is One and Only One Requisite - Eliminate All Humans. Don’t think you want to go there. I CERTAINLY DO NOT. ‘Nuff Said?
-S-
| 674 |
Sambo Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:52:13pm |
re: #665 unrealizedviewpoint
I believe China is also building (something like) 25 pebble bed nuclear reactors.
| 675 |
mfarmer1 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:52:43pm |
Can’t wait for this winter’s sob stories about people not being able to afford the cost of heating oil, not being able to put gas in their cars, still out of work as more companies downsize to reduce the costs associated with this bill.
Grab another blanket. Walk. Post another resume. I don’t care. Chances are you voted for this bunch. In fact, I’m going to laugh my ass off each and every time one of these cases hits the news.
| 676 |
Optimizer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:52:54pm |
re: #67 SlartyBartfast
“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,” Obama said.
“That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen,” he added.
I remember. The guy LITERALLY said that we would have to have a decline in our standard of living - and was voted in anyway! He also said he LIKED the idea of $4 gasoline - just not the sudden onset (back when it occurred). Now - surprise, surprise! - he’s working hard to make both those things happen, while everybody drinks their Kool-Aid and feels good about it.
Anybody remember when the Dems blamed high gasoline prices on Republicans being in bed with oil companies, and promised to make prices low again if elected? Now they pass a bill to dramatically raise the price ON PURPOSE. How do they get away with this stuff?
| 677 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:53:21pm |
re: #665 unrealizedviewpoint
The fact is and you know it, or should anyway, we will never be able to tell China to halt burning of fossil fuels. China is opening one new coal burning (not clean coal) plant daily.
Yes, and it is in our best interest to slow that growth and sell them wind generators, thin film solar panels, and 4G nuclear power plants. We are going to need coal for the foreseeable future for plastics and fertilizer production. Gotta have those long-chain hydrocarbons. They can be synthesized from coal.
And there will always be coal burning somewhere on the planet. It’s too cheap for the poorest countries not to utilize. But poor countries don’t burn that much of it, and relatively rich countries need to be weaned off that teat.
| 678 |
solomonpanting Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:53:53pm |
re: #659 lostlakehiker
Just curious as to why you picked 9 billion drivers.
| 679 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:54:01pm |
re: #670 Bagua
Thanos has a point, we need to raise the level of the debate and get rid of the propaganda on both sides.
Yes, that whole line of debate needs to be parked in a trunk. Forgetting global warming a moment, it’s a better idea to advocate clean, cheap, and plentiful energy. That’s where the Republicans should all be. It’s positive, and there’s no real debate possible against it.
| 680 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:55:03pm |
re: #671 NukeAtomrod
When it comes to climate, a 1000 year span is just a jog in the graph. We simply do not have any reliable global temperature data before the invention of weather satellites. That’s why getting all gloom-and-doom over a couple of degrees of warming/cooling is so alarmist.
I’m not gloom and doom, but I do see a trend. I’m a lukewarmist - we need to do more sometime this century or early next.
| 681 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:55:22pm |
re: #648 Optimizer
Bono Mack is from the Palm Springs, CA area…….
Perhaps she sees opportunities in large numbers of solar farms that will have to built in the desert area in her district…….of course, they will not be economically viable nor will it be easy or efficient to get the power from the desert to LA / Orange / San Diego Counties.
| 682 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:55:22pm |
re: #669 Bagua
Sorry, but that is nonsense on so many levels I don’t know where to start. But enjoy, you have the full weight of the MSM behind you to promote such propaganda and your side is clearly winning.
Hey, I’m at least *trying* here. The MSM doesn’t speak for me. I do.
| 683 |
Sambo Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:55:27pm |
re: #674 Sambo
Actually, looks like it’s 30 reactors:
[Link: www.wired.com…]
Any nuke-wise lizards that can comment on this?
| 684 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:57:34pm |
re: #683 Sambo
Actually, looks like it’s 30 reactors:
[Link: www.wired.com…]
Any nuke-wise lizards that can comment on this?
It started as 20 a couple years back, and keeps going up.
| 685 |
wee fury Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:58:02pm |
re: #675 mfarmer1
Think I will trap muskrat, mink, beaver and rabbit. Will then make warm coats and blankets for myself. I will then blame the environmentalists because I could no longer afford to heat my home. ;-)
| 686 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:58:17pm |
re: #680 Thanos
I’m not gloom and doom, but I do see a trend. I’m a lukewarmist - we need to do more sometime this century or early next.
For the last 300,000 to 500,000 years, each interglacial period has peaked at around 280 ppm of atmospheric O=C=O. We are now busting toward 400 ppm. Not good to mess with Mother Nature.
| 687 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 6:58:33pm |
re: #680 Thanos
I’m not gloom and doom, but I do see a trend. I’m a lukewarmist - we need to do more sometime this century or early next.
I don’t entirely disagree. I just would like to see India, China, and a lot of other 2nd and 3rd world nations operate for about three or four decades under something very similar to the 1970’s Clean Air and Clean Water acts before the US decides to cripple its economy to achieve something that other nations get a pass on. It’s less about AGW than it is about taking some sensible environmental steps which will pay dividends.
| 688 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:01:11pm |
re: #677 austin_blue
Yes, and it is in our best interest to slow that growth and sell them wind generators, thin film solar panels, and 4G nuclear power plants. We are going to need coal for the foreseeable future for plastics and fertilizer production. Gotta have those long-chain hydrocarbons. They can be synthesized from coal.
There is enough coal to carry the entire planet pretty much forever. No shortage!
The Chinese are starting up one new (dirty) coal burning plant daily and you want to go over there and ask them to switch over to (clean green) solar.
/Maybe we’ll do that after we convince DinnerJacket to discontinue his nuclear program.
| 689 |
NukeAtomrod Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:01:11pm |
re: #660 Thanos
My solution has been more nuclear energy for the past 25 years. What’s yours?
More energy from all readily available sources (nuclear, hydroelectric, coal, oil, etc) while we make a it a priority to develop lunar and orbital solar collectors that can beam energy back to Earth. Also, remove barriers to the industrial development of third world countries so they can enjoy the same quality of life that we enjoy in America and other developed countries.
| 690 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:01:56pm |
re: #682 austin_blue
Hey, I’m at least *trying* here. The MSM doesn’t speak for me. I do.
I know, but it is important to understand how much of our opinions are shaped by the continuous propaganda of the Media.
| 691 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:02:43pm |
re: #689 NukeAtomrod
More energy from all readily available sources (nuclear, hydroelectric, coal, oil, etc) while we make a it a priority to develop lunar and orbital solar collectors that can beam energy back to Earth. Also, remove barriers to the industrial development of third world countries so they can enjoy the same quality of life that we enjoy in America and other developed countries.
Well we are in violent agreement :)
| 692 |
formercorpsman Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:03:52pm |
Who will make a windfall profit?
Have they read the legislation we pay them to?
| 693 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:04:27pm |
re: #679 Thanos
Yes, that whole line of debate needs to be parked in a trunk. Forgetting global warming a moment, it’s a better idea to advocate clean, cheap, and plentiful energy. That’s where the Republicans should all be. It’s positive, and there’s no real debate possible against it.
Yes good points, however, the demonisation of fossil fuels is excessive and and the end result is to greatly slow our advances in other fuels as it chokes the economy.
| 694 |
Optimizer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:05:12pm |
re: #681 Athos
Bono Mack is from the Palm Springs, CA area…….
Perhaps she sees opportunities in large numbers of solar farms that will have to built in the desert area in her district…….of course, they will not be economically viable nor will it be easy or efficient to get the power from the desert to LA / Orange / San Diego Counties.
Could be. I used to live in that “Adirondack” district in NY, and when I read about her district the number of “National Monuments” (nature parks) and mention of tourism reminded me of my old tree-hugging district. But she could certainly be after some solar farm action. She’s right next to AZ, which is prime solar farm real estate, in terms of useful sunlight they get.
| 696 |
solomonpanting Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:06:17pm |
re: #689 NukeAtomrod
Also, remove barriers to the industrial development of third world countries so they can enjoy the same quality of life that we enjoy in America and other developed countries.
We’d have to invade so many countries to rid them of corruption, socialism, communism, illiteracy, disease,…
I don’t think we’re that much into nation building.
| 697 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:06:45pm |
Everyone forgets the payoff of even dirty power for the environment. If we were to stop cleaning sewage because it became to energy expensive what would be the effect? If home heating gets to expensive with conventional fuels the fallback is deforestation and wood heat…( it’s already happening due to the fuel price spike up in Alaska btw. ) If a coal plant and electric ranges put out ten million daily cooking fires in Africa forever, is it a bad thing?
| 698 |
chukardog Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:06:57pm |
I haven’t been this mad since 9-11. This kind of lunacy has to stop. Global warming or climate change or whatever bullshit name the libtards are calling it this week, is the biggest Orwellian fraud since the spectre of “Mcarthyism”. The Sun’s activity is the biggest contributor to temperature variations. Junk science doesn’t even begin to describe the church of global warming. I’m constantly amazed at what people will fall for.
| 699 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:08:35pm |
re: #690 Bagua
I know, but it is important to understand how much of our opinions are shaped by the continuous propaganda of the Media.
I would like to think I have the stones to resist the popular press as much as you do.
;-)
| 700 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:09:05pm |
re: #695 Capitalistincharge
Ok, Thanos, who are you really?
Someone who survived the thermonuclear comment wars of the energy forums on the Usenet in the 80’s.
| 701 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:10:10pm |
re: #687 Athos
I don’t entirely disagree. I just would like to see India, China, and a lot of other 2nd and 3rd world nations operate for about three or four decades under something very similar to the 1970’s Clean Air and Clean Water acts before the US decides to cripple its economy to achieve something that other nations get a pass on. It’s less about AGW than it is about taking some sensible environmental steps which will pay dividends.
I agree that in an ideal world, India and China and others should be doing their share. The fact that they aren’t doesn’t relieve the U.S. of any responsibility, I don’t think. What would you consider some “sensible environmental steps” that we could take in the meantime?
| 702 |
NukeAtomrod Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:10:25pm |
re: #683 Sambo
Actually, looks like it’s 30 reactors:
[Link: www.wired.com…]
Any nuke-wise lizards that can comment on this?
Yes, the reactor cores are being built by Curtiss-Wright (Westinghouse) and being sold to China. China has the right idea. It’s too bad we haven’t built a new nuke power plant in the USA since the 1970s. Well, the military has built them… just no civilian or commercial ones since the 1970s.
| 703 |
Banner Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:10:45pm |
Well, we’re halfway to hell. A phony bill addressing a phony problem. If it passes the senate, the fallout will be huge, and we will all pine for the old days (ie now).
Man made global warming is a myth. It is junk science. There is no proof, and all of the proof shown to date has been shown to be either mistaken or faked. This isn’t about global warming, it’s about socialism and power. We are so screwed.
| 704 |
solomonpanting Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:10:48pm |
re: #698 chukardog
Junk science doesn’t even begin to describe the church of global warming
Shhh. There are some who don’t subscribe to the notion of some causes falling into a quasi-religious spectrum.
(I’m not one of them.)
| 705 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:11:17pm |
Here’s an interesting graph btw:
| 706 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:11:30pm |
re: #702 NukeAtomrod
Yes, the reactor cores are being built by Curtiss-Wright (Westinghouse) and being sold to China. China has the right idea. It’s too bad we haven’t built a new nuke power plant in the USA since the 1970s. Well, the military has built them… just no civilian or commercial ones since the 1970s.
I agree completely. Nuclear expansion is one of the keys.
| 707 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:12:48pm |
re: #699 austin_blue
True, and I don’t mean to imply otherwise, however, I think the constant media bias on this alleged issue is massive and poorly understood, as a result, we are all influenced.
| 709 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:13:11pm |
re: #705 Thanos
Here’s an interesting graph btw:
I would hope that solar PV would decrease with economies of scale. Is that factored in?
| 710 |
legalpad Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:13:14pm |
re: #704 solomonpanting
Shhh. There are some who don’t subscribe to the notion of some causes falling into a quasi-religious spectrum.
(I’m not one of them.)
Who are they?!
/
| 711 |
razorbacker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:14:40pm |
re: #697 Thanos
Everyone forgets the payoff of even dirty power for the environment. If we were to stop cleaning sewage because it became to energy expensive what would be the effect? If home heating gets to expensive with conventional fuels the fallback is deforestation and wood heat…( it’s already happening due to the fuel price spike up in Alaska btw. ) If a coal plant and electric ranges put out ten million daily cooking fires in Africa forever, is it a bad thing?
How long do you suppose that we will be allowed to heat with wood?
Carbon emissions, ya’ know.
| 712 |
Sambo Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:15:29pm |
re: #706 austin_blue
Any thoughts as to why so many on the left seem to be opposed to nuclear power?
| 713 |
solomonpanting Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:15:58pm |
| 714 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:16:13pm |
re: #705 Thanos
Here’s an interesting graph btw:
Oh, and it’s always good to follow the money:
Institute for Energy Research
The Institute for Energy Research (IER), founded in 1989 from a predecessor non-profit organisation, advocates positions on environmental issues which happen to suit the energy industry: climate change denial, claims that conventional energy sources are virtually limitless, and the deregulation of utilities.
It is a member of the Sustainable Development Network. The IER’s President was formerly Director of Public Relations Policy at Enron.
IER has been established as a 501(c)(3) non-profit group. It is a “partner” organization of the American Energy Alliance[1], a 501c4 organization which states that it is the “grassroots arm” of IER.[2] AEA states that, by “communicating IER’s decades of scholarly research to the grassroots, AEA will empower citizens with facts so that people who believe in freedom can reclaim the moral high ground in the national public policy debates in the energy and environmental arena.”[2] AEA states that its aim is to “create a climate that encourages the advancement of free market energy policies” and in particular ensure drilling for oil is allowed in the Arctic National Wildlife refuse and in US coastal waters.[2]
[Link: www.sourcewatch.org…]
| 715 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:16:55pm |
re: #705 Thanos
Yep, Solar and Wind depend on subsidy. They simply do not make any sense for remote use, it is also highly debatable as to whether there is any net reduction in CO2 emissions as a result of their deployment when all factors are considered.
| 716 |
unrealizedviewpoint Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:16:57pm |
re: #711 razorbacker
How long do you suppose that we will be allowed to heat with wood?
Carbon emissions, ya’ know.
So goes California, so goes the country.
[Link: www.sfgate.com…]
| 717 |
formercorpsman Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:17:24pm |
re: #697 Thanos
Thanos, this is where I am at a crossroads.
I am on the right, and I like the idea of exploring alternative, truly viable forms of energy. But in an effort to employ intellectual honesty, there are too many g-d damned hypocrites telling my kids in school, their own existence is killing cute cuddly polar bears, all the while the prophets of this doom trek the country on jets.
They gin up hysteria, in place of having an actual honest discussion about the pros and cons of our current process.
I can remember the fuel prices that went up to $4.00 dollars per gallon, and being subject to the same people telling me it was due to Bush being an “Oil Man” & that is where the argument stopped for them.
Once the purveyors come to the table with that argument, yes, I have a jaundiced eye, and an extremely limited tolerance to hear them out.
When I see all of the deals being made behind closed doors, seeing the flat out corruption that goes unpunished too often, I become suspect.
Right now, I am very suspect.
How many of those people who I cut a check for every quarter, actually read the legislation?
| 718 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:17:49pm |
re: #703 Banner
Well, we’re halfway to hell. A phony bill addressing a phony problem. If it passes the senate, the fallout will be huge, and we will all pine for the old days (ie now).
Man made global warming is a myth. It is junk science. There is no proof, and all of the proof shown to date has been shown to be either mistaken or faked. This isn’t about global warming, it’s about socialism and power. We are so screwed.
Banner, there is much proof in the links that Charles posts routinely on the subject of global warming. If there are facts there that you can repute, I would appreciate knowing them.
| 719 |
razorbacker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:18:03pm |
re: #716 unrealizedviewpoint
So goes California, so goes the country.
[Link: www.sfgate.com…]
I know that. That’s why I ask.
| 720 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:18:30pm |
re: #709 austin_blue
I would hope that solar PV would decrease with economies of scale. Is that factored in?
I don’t know, I haven’t had time to read the article yet, they’ve got me on the phone at work still
| 721 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:18:35pm |
re: #713 solomonpanting
ShanghaiEd, would you like to respond to legalpad?
Be glad to respond, but I didn’t understand the question.
| 722 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:19:43pm |
re: #712 Sambo
Any thoughts as to why so many on the left seem to be opposed to nuclear power?
Yes. Three Mile Island. Chernobyl. The China Syndrome. Ignorance of the difference between old technology and new emerging tech. As much fear of change as you see in the extractive industries. The lingering problem of long term storage of waste. Group think. Laziness.
| 723 |
NukeAtomrod Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:20:23pm |
re: #696 solomonpanting
We’d have to invade so many countries to rid them of corruption, socialism, communism, illiteracy, disease,…
I don’t think we’re that much into nation building.
It would be a great help just to stop trying to force green energy and environmental restrictions on them. Maybe sell them some good old coal power plants. Once they have reliable cheap energy, they will have an easier time of survival. When they aren’t starving, all the socialism, communism, illiteracy, disease-issues will be diminished. Then they can start dealing with first world country issues like poor people getting fat from eating too much McDonalds food.
| 724 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:20:32pm |
re: #714 austin_blue
Following the money is far more damming when applied to the greenie side, the “Global Warming Research” industry has funding that makes any monies on the other side look like small potatoes. No doubt both sides are corrupted by funding and bias, they are both, after all, populated by humans. What is necessary is an honest examination on a factual and economic level that cuts though the bias and influence.
| 725 |
RalphShort Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:20:42pm |
the fact is the group of bolsheviks who voted for this bill need money for the government to finance the multitude of schemes they are planning. They are mostly professional politicians and adore pandering. It has zero to do with emissions and will not affect emissions globally. It is only about getting money and control. It will achieve a few things if it actually becomes law, no doubt about that. The USA will be a 3rd world country, our standard of living will decline, and those who invested in windmills and other inefficient ways to create energy will prosper. Algore will be one of them. Liberals and commiecrats are by and large a plague in my view, hopefully it will only last another year or so.
| 726 |
chukardog Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:20:44pm |
It’s not a distraction, I’m not arguing for the bill. We are 618 comments in. I hate kneejerk neanderthals saying things like “AGW doesn’t exist” because it does. It gets us the fail when we try to propose alternatives. It makes us the luddites who don’t understand basic science.
fucking bullshit. The data is so weak and the computer models that this assertion is based on are severely flawed. Sorry, but its far from proven fact. Man’s contribution is so small its nearly impossible to know if we are contributing or not.
| 727 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:21:40pm |
re: #718 ShanghaiEd
PIMF in #718: “repute” should be “refute”
| 728 |
Ben F Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:22:55pm |
re: #79 lostlakehiker
Your econ/scientific analysis is spot on, but this is about politics. Cap and Trade works much less well than a straight tax, but the cost to voters is hidden. And by giving away permits rather than auctioning them, legislators can reward supporters by throwing permits their way. Lobbyists and litigators do well, and that means that campaign coffers get filled.
In general permits go to existing firms, creating barriers to entry. It’s monopolization of the worst kind.
| 729 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:23:09pm |
re: #714 austin_blue
Thanks for that background, I haven’t had time too look at the article yet. I imagine there are some facts behind the graphs however. I know that most people don’t factor in fuel replacement cycles when talking about how costly an energy source is. (e.g. nuclear pays off against the others when it comes to fuel cycle and their bar would probably be lower on the graph if you factored that in.) I’m not sure if these are “lifetime of plant” generation costs or not.
| 730 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:25:06pm |
re: #724 Bagua
Following the money is far more damming when applied to the greenie side, the “Global Warming Research” industry has funding that makes any monies on the other side look like small potatoes. No doubt both sides are corrupted by funding and bias, they are both, after all, populated by humans. What is necessary is an honest examination on a factual and economic level that cuts though the bias and influence.
I’d appreciate the link showing that research funding far outweighs the amounts that established industries are paying to refute that research. I’ve been asking for a comparison for years, but nobody can show me specific totals.
| 731 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:26:36pm |
re: #724 Bagua
Following the money is far more damming when applied to the greenie side, the “Global Warming Research” industry has funding that makes any monies on the other side look like small potatoes. No doubt both sides are corrupted by funding and bias, they are both, after all, populated by humans. What is necessary is an honest examination on a factual and economic level that cuts though the bias and influence.
I’ll have to disagree with you. Scientific AGW research worldwide can be measured in the low billions. Energy industry profits worldwide are in the trillions. No real comparison, eh?
Not that there is anything wrong with profit. I’m a capitalist! I’m all for it! But trying to compare the two is a little out there. Saying that the researchers have more at stake than the energy companies cannot be correct.
| 732 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:26:41pm |
re: #726 chukardog
fucking bullshit. The data is so weak and the computer models that this assertion is based on are severely flawed. Sorry, but its far from proven fact. Man’s contribution is so small its nearly impossible to know if we are contributing or not.
Does man contribute some? You seem to be saying so in your reply….
Upthread, if you had followed the conversation someone said “AGW doesn’t exist” I countered that.
So are you saying that “AGW doesn’t exist” so I can give you the smackdown too? Because any five year old can counter that statement by pushing the handle down on a toaster and putting your hand above it.
| 733 |
Optimizer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:27:28pm |
re: #664 Thanos
You are missing the point. To flatly state that “AGW doesn’t exist” is plainly idiotic.
IMHO, to quibble over the distinction between saying “AGW, to the extent it might exist, is negligible compared to natural forcing” and saying “AGW doesn’t exist” is - as you say - “idiotic”.
But even that “misses the point”.
The point is that we have a situation rather analagous to the ethanol fiasco. Even before THAT legislation was passed, it was completely obvious that it would have an imperceptible impact on gasoline prices and energy independence, while driving up the price of corn. All that has come to pass, which means the main effect was to make corn more expensive, and yet we STILL subsidize ethanol.
We KNOW that even IF AGW were the threat the alarmists say it is, that these measures - by their own estimates - will do very little to help. At the same time, we KNOW (unless you’ve been really hitting the Kool-Aid REAL hard) that this bill will significantly increase the price of energy, while damaging our already beleagered economy.
So - even according to AGW theology - this bill is virtually ALL down-side, while providing little to no up-side. So why the hell would anybody vote for it? Nothing rational is afoot here. Yet, once it is in place, and all this down-side comes into being, history tells us that we will STILL stick with it!
| 734 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:27:59pm |
re: #729 Thanos
It would be a health change in this debate if we could argue and investigate on the basis of facts, and not so quickly resort to ad hominem such as questioning sources of funding. Regardless, it is easily demonstrable that the pro AGW* side has a massive advantage in funding. Go ahead and seek funding for research that would prove a species of toad is benefiting from Global Warming, there will not be a penny, change that to suffering and there is a gravy train.
| 736 |
Athos Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:29:41pm |
re: #701 ShanghaiEd
Actually, I think that the steps the US has taken in terms of the Clean Air / Clean Water acts prior to the concept of Cap & Trade constitute sensible steps. I would like to see the addition of 30-40 nuclear reactors over the next decade at least. I would like to see far less $$ go to Teacher’s Unions and their bloat and instead be used for rooftop solar arrays.
There is ultimately no reason why the US cannot get 50-70% of its electricity from nuclear sources. Until this is done, we can continue to require clean coal actions and retrofits.
Perhaps at some point, renewable resources like wind, solar, and hydro / tidal will become economically viable and efficient enough to replace clean coal and oil fired power plants…..along with more efficient transport and delivery mechanisms.
But ultimately, unless these other nations are required to take steps, the savings and environmental steps in the US will be made immaterial. They have to step up and catch up since, for example, China is the world’s largest polluter at this point. To expect the US and Europe to carry the burden is pointless and ignoring science in order to establish something for political / economic reasons.
As far as I am concerned, the US is firmly living up to its responsibility and has been since the 1970’s without this farce of cap and trade or the farce of Kyoto.
| 737 |
NukeAtomrod Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:30:10pm |
re: #712 Sambo
Any thoughts as to why so many on the left seem to be opposed to nuclear power?
They’re all hippies, ex-hippies, paleo-hippies, and neo-hippies that equate Nuclear Bombs with Nuclear Power. Also, the waste from a fission reactor can be refined to make fuel for nuclear bombs(bad) or feeder reactors(good).
| 738 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:30:12pm |
re: #734 Bagua
It would be a health change in this debate if we could argue and investigate on the basis of facts, and not so quickly resort to ad hominem such as questioning sources of funding. Regardless, it is easily demonstrable that the pro AGW* side has a massive advantage in funding. Go ahead and seek funding for research that would prove a species of toad is benefiting from Global Warming, there will not be a penny, change that to suffering and there is a gravy train.
I’ve never seen a contrary study funded at all. You would think they would at least be willing to do the “check our work” part.
| 739 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:31:04pm |
re: #735 Bagua
Are you serious?
Absolutely. In fact, austin blue in #731 just expressed my view far more succinctly than I did. If there’s evidence to the contrary, I’d love to see it. As I say, I’ve been asking for years.
| 741 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:32:08pm |
re: #731 austin_blue
You are missing the point, I’m not talking about profits, I’m talking about funding. The amounts of monies I’ve seen attributed to “big oil” funding the so called “skeptic” side is a small fraction of the vast monies that flow in to the AGW side, including research, and propaganda.
| 742 |
FrogMarch Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:34:33pm |
It won’t do anything to make us cleaner or produce less carbon.
It will kill-off more jobs and further destroy our faltering economy. Nice job.
It will make people Like Pelosi and Gore even richer.
It will hurt the little guy.
| 743 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:35:09pm |
re: #738 Thanos
I’ve never seen a contrary study funded at all. You would think they would at least be willing to do the “check our work” part.
Exactly, all the effort goes into propaganda over-stating the pro-AGW side, even to suggest a study to challenge it and one is branded a “denier” and compared to creationists and holocaust deniers. If the science was really so strong and settled, then attempts at falsification would be welcomed as they would only support the pro-AGW side.
| 744 |
Capitalistincharge Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:36:12pm |
Boehner is reading the Amendments and pointing out how rediculus this is.
| 745 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:37:05pm |
Actually the funding is hefty on all sides. It’s never as simplex as people make it out to be. The variegated energy lobbies are at odds with each other as well, fighting for tenths of percents of energy market share that equate to hundreds of billions of dollars per year in revenue. That’s why you see the energy lobbies funding groups on both sides of the issue. If you look at Al Gore’s alarmist group “We” for instance you will find an interesting assortment of long time anti-nuclear activists, clean coal pimps, and biofuel pimps.
The energy lobbies are trying to kneecap each other more than they are the AGW movement, and they use environmental groups as pawns and footsoldiers in many cases.
| 746 |
Sambo Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:37:21pm |
re: #737 NukeAtomrod
Thanks to you and austin_blue for the perspective.
| 747 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:41:09pm |
It is a difficult issue to prove with data, if a study is rejected for funding, or a paper refused for publication, it could be for good reason or because of bias. This is a very gray area in which I’d like to see some serious examination.
The media bias however is so overwhelming that it can not be seriously questioned. If New York City was being over-run by polar bears they would ignore this.
| 748 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:42:14pm |
re: #737 NukeAtomrod
They’re all hippies, ex-hippies, paleo-hippies, and neo-hippies that equate Nuclear Bombs with Nuclear Power. Also, the waste from a fission reactor can be refined to make fuel for nuclear bombs(bad) or feeder reactors(good).
I may be the only exception to that rule, nuke. I’m a science hobbyist who probably read more widely about Chernobyl and Three Mile Island than is good for my mental health, and have tried to follow the technological improvements in nuclear power to the degree that my limited expertise can follow. What should I read to put my mind more at ease?
| 749 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:44:44pm |
re: #741 Bagua
You are missing the point, I’m not talking about profits, I’m talking about funding. The amounts of monies I’ve seen attributed to “big oil” funding the so called “skeptic” side is a small fraction of the vast monies that flow in to the AGW side, including research, and propaganda.
Dude, really, who do you think funds the groups that are out there saying that AGW is a hoax? Well meaning citizens donating their pennies to 501c3’s? It is the extractive industries who have a dog in this hunt. As Thanos notes, none of their funding goes to research, it goes to pay people to pick holes in the research. And when the body of knowledge firms up to deny the nits that are picked, more holes are poked and money is spent to ensure that those new nits are presented to the media as a “balanced view”. It is what the tobacco industry did for years until they ran out of nits to pick.
The difference is that smoking is an individual choice (I know, I are one), while the possibility that increased O=C=O in the atmosphere may be (and at this point, certainly looks to be) calamitous raises the bar on our acceptance of their actions. At some point, you just have to say “Stop it, unless you can show, by peer reviewed research, that we are wrong.” But that is not what Exxon, et al, are doing. They are just throwing wrenches. And they have huge sums to do it. And for them, it makes sense. In the short term, it maximizes shareholder value. In the long run, it’s probably stupid.
| 750 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:45:15pm |
re: #748 ShanghaiEd
Try Patrick Moore’s latest book, NEI nuclear notes is a good blog. It’s definitely nuclear energy lobby funded, but they stay empirical and factual.
| 751 |
razorbacker Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:45:19pm |
The Gorebull Warmenists would have better ammunition were their poster children not so nakedly unconcerned about their own contributions.
See Al Gore and his jetting about to spread the word anywhere he can make a buck.
See David Attenborough living in a 400 year old house that leaks energy like nobody’s business.
See our fine leaders who oppose wind turbines because they obstruct their pricey views.
It is almost like they don’t believe their own statements.
| 752 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:45:24pm |
re: #741 Bagua
You are missing the point, I’m not talking about profits, I’m talking about funding. The amounts of monies I’ve seen attributed to “big oil” funding the so called “skeptic” side is a small fraction of the vast monies that flow in to the AGW side, including research, and propaganda.
Bagua, those figures you describe are exactly what I’ve been looking for. Please direct me to them. Also anything you have for “big coal” versus the AGW side.
| 753 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:47:29pm |
re: #748 ShanghaiEd
I may be the only exception to that rule, nuke. I’m a science hobbyist who probably read more widely about Chernobyl and Three Mile Island than is good for my mental health, and have tried to follow the technological improvements in nuclear power to the degree that my limited expertise can follow. What should I read to put my mind more at ease?
Ed-
I’d look to the info on Wiki on some of the 4G systems that are being designed. A lot of them are intrinsically safe (if something goes tango uniform, they simply shut down). Good stuff.
| 754 |
Unakite Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:50:12pm |
re: #45 Floral Giraffe
The kicker for me is THEY HAVEN’T EVEN READ THE BILL AGAIN.
FIFY (I know, I’m only 700 behind).
| 755 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:50:34pm |
re: #750 Thanos
Try Patrick Moore’s latest book, NEI nuclear notes is a good blog. It’s definitely nuclear energy lobby funded, but they stay empirical and factual.
Thanks, Thanos! I’ve added those to my list.
| 756 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:51:17pm |
re: #748 ShanghaiEd
I may be the only exception to that rule, nuke. I’m a science hobbyist who probably read more widely about Chernobyl and Three Mile Island than is good for my mental health, and have tried to follow the technological improvements in nuclear power to the degree that my limited expertise can follow. What should I read to put my mind more at ease?
Here’s another good source, Atomic Rod is a liberal, but he’s also been pro nuclear as long I have, we used to be two among the handful of people trying to counter the biomass “split wood not atoms” crowd on alt.sci.energy in the antediluvian period of The Usenet.
| 757 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:53:17pm |
re: #753 austin_blue
Ed-
I’d look to the info on Wiki on some of the 4G systems that are being designed. A lot of them are intrinsically safe (if something goes tango uniform, they simply shut down). Good stuff.
Thanks, austin. The 4G concept is new to me. I’ll check it out. What are some up-to-date sources about the waste issue?
| 758 |
Sambo Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:54:07pm |
re: #756 Thanos
Like ShanghaiEd said, thanks for the references.
And I also remember Usenet. Back in the days when it was!UUCP!based .
| 759 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:55:04pm |
re: #756 Thanos
Here’s another good source, Atomic Rod is a liberal, but he’s also been pro nuclear as long I have, we used to be two among the handful of people trying to counter the biomass “split wood not atoms” crowd on alt.sci.energy in the antediluvian period of The Usenet.
Geez. Usenet. My first browser was Mosaic. Worked pretty well. No worms. No spam on the boards. Rational discussions by folks who could generally agree to disagree. Good times.
But Lordy, some of those flame wars…..
| 760 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:55:09pm |
Shanghai and Austin,
There is certainly funding from industry as well, I am not suggesting otherwise. It is also difficult to prove the basis for lack of funding, I have certainly seen claims from those in the scientific community who state that funding and publication is readily available for any research that supports the Global Warming theory, whereas it is not only unavailable for the anti side, it is actually chilling to their careers. (I will collect some links for you and for future discussions.) However, this is a bit of a dead end because it is difficult to prove bias by omission.
| 761 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:57:49pm |
re: #756 Thanos
Here’s another good source, Atomic Rod is a liberal, but he’s also been pro nuclear as long I have, we used to be two among the handful of people trying to counter the biomass “split wood not atoms” crowd on alt.sci.energy in the antediluvian period of The Usenet.
I’ll give Atomic Rod a look. Usenet! You’ve walked some cyber-miles, bro…
| 762 |
Randall Gross Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:58:04pm |
Time for me to run, I need to get some reading in
| 763 |
Sambo Fri, Jun 26, 2009 7:58:35pm |
re: #759 austin_blue
You had a browser? I had to use “rn” and not only that, but I had to walk three miles through the snow to borrow a 300 baud modem. :-)
And I’m checking out too. Thanks for the discussion tonight.
| 764 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:00:06pm |
re: #757 ShanghaiEd
Thanks, austin. The 4G concept is new to me. I’ll check it out. What are some up-to-date sources about the waste issue?
Now you are getting into the bitch kitty. I am proposing the construction of a space elevator made of buckyball fiber with a big-ass asteroid as a counterweight to allow us to fling the shit at Venus as a giant unlicensed landfill…….
In other words, unless someone permits a site on the continental craton of Canada, which has been geologically inert for a billion years (well except for that comet strike that carved out the east side of Hudson Bay), it ain’t gonna happen
| 765 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:00:54pm |
re: #762 Thanos
Me too, thank you for taking the time to chat on this important subject.
| 766 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:02:35pm |
re: #760 Bagua
Shanghai and Austin,
There is certainly funding from industry as well, I am not suggesting otherwise. It is also difficult to prove the basis for lack of funding, I have certainly seen claims from those in the scientific community who state that funding and publication is readily available for any research that supports the Global Warming theory, whereas it is not only unavailable for the anti side, it is actually chilling to their careers. (I will collect some links for you and for future discussions.) However, this is a bit of a dead end because it is difficult to prove bias by omission.
I know the bias-by-omission is a tricky area. I was referring to your other statement above:
…the “Global Warming Research” industry has funding that makes any monies on the other side look like small potatoes.
Those are the comparison figures I’m looking for, and would appreciate sources.
| 767 |
austin_blue Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:08:00pm |
re: #760 Bagua
Shanghai and Austin,
There is certainly funding from industry as well, I am not suggesting otherwise. It is also difficult to prove the basis for lack of funding, I have certainly seen claims from those in the scientific community who state that funding and publication is readily available for any research that supports the Global Warming theory, whereas it is not only unavailable for the anti side, it is actually chilling to their careers. (I will collect some links for you and for future discussions.) However, this is a bit of a dead end because it is difficult to prove bias by omission.
Ah, you put your finger on it! Exxon, et al, have unlimited funding for counter-research. Why do you think they don’t do it? They could have a stable of the best scientists on the planet, secure that they would be allowed to do their research for the rest of their lives—*because Exxon guaranteed it*— but that isn’t happening. High quality, peer reviewable research, is *always* accepted for publication. That is what the periodicals are for. The fact that no counter research exists and Exxon et al are completely disinterested in funding it should be ringing alarm bells at full volume. Why aren’t they?
| 768 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:10:37pm |
re: #766 ShanghaiEd
OK, I’ll look into it. In the meantime, the almost complete absence of any funded or published research that disputes AGW is in itself very revealing. It would seem impossible to allege that no species, no ecosystem, no social group can benefit from increased warming, yet there the research and papers are almost non-existent. This is highly suspicious at the least.
| 769 |
Optimizer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:13:12pm |
re: #196 Killian Bundy
Just skim the table of contents of this travesty.
/it screams boondoggle
If we’re LUCKY, historians will write inciteful papers comparing it to Chairman Mao’s Great Leap Forward, which was also an ill-conceived Central Government plan to create new industry that completely backfired.
(If we’re UNLUCKY, Big Brother will be re-writing history, calling it a great success.)
It embarrasses me to think that 100 years from now people will look back upon our once-mighty civilization, that had accomplished so much toward the advancement of science, and see that all-of-a-sudden we started burying CO2 due to bizarre superstitions scientists picked up from eco-freaks and socialist radicals. And that one of the most energy-rich nations in the world (by way of our coal reserves) destroyed it’s own economy through a sort of “energy anorexia”. Again, that assumes that we haven’t regressed into some sort of Dark Ages by then, and generally wise-up, eventually.
Imagine if Saudi Arabia (not exactly the pinnacle of humankind’s civilization) all of a sudden decided that they just didn’t want to drill for oil any more - because they had simply decided that it was “destroying the world”. We’d say they were crazy (and we’d be right), but here we are - doing practically the same thing!
| 770 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:17:49pm |
re: #764 austin_blue
Now you are getting into the bitch kitty. I am proposing the construction of a space elevator made of buckyball fiber with a big-ass asteroid as a counterweight to allow us to fling the shit at Venus as a giant unlicensed landfill…….
In other words, unless someone permits a site on the continental craton of Canada, which has been geologically inert for a billion years (well except for that comet strike that carved out the east side of Hudson Bay), it ain’t gonna happen
Buckyball of radioactive waste flung toward Venus! By golly, who said there were no new solutions to this problem? :) (I love the big-ass asteroid as counterweight, too, though in my neck of the woods, the state of the art term is big-ol’-ass.)
| 771 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:21:45pm |
Austin,
In the current political, academic and media climate it is a kiss of death to accept money from the “evil big oil corporations” even those that did are now shying away due to the peer pressure. I’ve also seen several of those is the scientific community, some of which have been linked here, who have alleged bias in publication and research.
Secondly, big oil is aware of the culture and is at pains to prove how green they are in the last ten years or so.
Thirdly, I think big oil has wizened up to the fact that their profits are far greater in a climate of scarcity. Crude oil should be below $37 a barrel in current conditions, every dollar above cost is profit.
Lastly, humans are motivated through bias, emotions and cultural pressures. How many people go into “climate studies” because they want to save the polar bears and help the planet. If you’ve not spoken with a college student lately you may be surprised by the degree of passion. The motivation is never to research, it’s always to save or help.
| 772 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:26:05pm |
re: #768 Bagua
OK, I’ll look into it. In the meantime, the almost complete absence of any funded or published research that disputes AGW is in itself very revealing. It would seem impossible to allege that no species, no ecosystem, no social group can benefit from increased warming, yet there the research and papers are almost non-existent. This is highly suspicious at the least.
Not sure I understand the logic of that, Bagua. If you have evidence that a catastrophe is down the road and needs preventing, why would you spend time and money to determine who would be affected least by the catastrophe? Seems to me those folks would be relatively fine, research or not.
Example: giant asteroid predicted to hit my home state, 2014, and I’m in charge of minimizing the damage. Guy comes to me wanting funding for a study that shows some people may actually benefit from the strike? I don’t doubt it a bit, and I’m sure he’s got an interesting theoretical point, but I’m probably not going to write him a check.
| 773 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:33:23pm |
Well, yes, but then your example is one in which it is quite obvious the the event itself is catastrophic. Just so one doesn’t spend much time proving the benefits of train wrecks and airplane crashes.
Yet in the case of the warming it is not so obvious that this must result in a near universal catastrophe. It would seem quite logical to want to find out the actual benefits and damages, and then balance these against the economy changing costs that are being proposed.
Yet it all bad news all the time. This doesn’t seem logical to me. The final conclusion may well be that the damage outweighs the benefits, but why is it forbidden to do the research and the math?
| 774 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:37:25pm |
re: #771 Bagua
…Lastly, humans are motivated through bias, emotions and cultural pressures. How many people go into “climate studies” because they want to save the polar bears and help the planet. If you’ve not spoken with a college student lately you may be surprised by the degree of passion. The motivation is never to research, it’s always to save or help.
I agree with your premise, but not the conclusion you draw from it. I suspect most doctors and scientists go into the field with idealistic intentions, but they’re quickly educated that faking or distorting evidence is not permissible under any circumstances. It can be a matter of life or death, and has killed many a career. I don’t buy that there’s an army of AGW promoters willing to risk their careers to bend the evidence.
| 775 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:38:18pm |
Just to pick a few topics:
There is an obvious benefit to agriculture through elevated atmospheric CO2, it is most certainly a partial player in the agricultural success that is feeding the human population.
There is an obvious benefit to areas that are difficult to farm because of cold that makes for a shorter planting season.
These examples go on and on.
| 776 |
Optimizer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:38:20pm |
re: #241 Nadnerb
I am LIVID. This is such a unabashed, naked tax increase, intendd to squeeze regular folks and force guidelines upon us that will do NOTHING to change the climate. For an example of what the fuck our leaders let pass without reading, take a look at this:
SEC. 789. CLIMATE CHANGE REBATE CONSUMER REFUNDS.
‘(a) Rebate- Not later than October 31 of each calendar year, the President, or such Federal agency or department as the President may designate, shall distribute the funds in the Consumer Climate Change Rebate Fundfund- In each year after deposits are made to the Climate Change Consumer Refund Account, the Secretary of the Treasury shall provide tax refunds on a per capita basis to each household in the United States.‘(b) Limitations- The President, or such Federal agency or department as the President may designate, that shall collectively equal the amount deposited into the Climate Change Consumer Refund Account
That’s just a random excerpt. I’m just waiting for the government to regulate me out of the car hobby-something I love. What do you all love that this might affect?
What a fucking travesty.
Wow. I didn’t realize that they were being so blatant in using this to “redistribute the wealth”. This is more than anti-industry eco-fascism - it’s actually disguised socialism. I always knew it served the socialist cause of seizing control of the life blood of free industry, but I didn’t realize there was more “direct socialism” built into this. Oh, man… our economy is really in for it.
That means it’s also a f-ing travesty that the Republicans only harp on this as a “tax increase”, when it’s so much more. They have totally disarmed themselves - how can they hope to succeed?
I don’t buy the theory that Obama is moving so quickly because he’s afraid that he won’t get another term. I think that’s just wishful thinking from the Right, and fear that their Utopian wet dream will end for the Left. I think he has two reasons for moving quickly. First, he realizes that his “honeymoon” period, where he will have the most influence, will only last just so long. Second, he knows that the faster he goes, the less scrutiny he will have. (That’s probably one of the rules in Alinsky’s handbook.)
| 777 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:45:08pm |
ShanghaiEd,
Agreed also, and I do not believe that people are faking or intentionally distorting the data, this applies to both sides. In most cases I believe the people involved are mostly unaware of the influence of their bias on their research and conclusions, that is why there is a need for falsification. Yet this is suppressed under the claim of heresy, something I find very troubling. Valid data and good theories would hold up under challenge.
| 778 |
Gretchen Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:45:50pm |
Well, I no longer have to worry about hoping the Democrats fail. They have done that entirely by themselves. The stimulus was a boondoggle, cap and trade will cripple what is left of the economy and they’ll top it off with socialized medicine (they HATE that phrase). They’ll tax the health care benefits of anyone with better benefits than they have except for union workers, and force even more people into the gummint plan. Obama and his family however will get great care.
I can hardly begin to fathom the dirty deals that were made to pass this legislation. Billions will be made by the cronies of the Dems in trading credits and other AGW schemes.
When will the media wake up? When will Americans wake up.
| 779 |
Gretchen Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:49:34pm |
re: #776 Optimizer
Yes they are moving quickly so no one has a chance to figure out what they are doing. The stimulus boondoggle was a huge rush, this is a huge rush, all too big to read. The healthcare redistribution bill will be crammed through too. Obama is trying to get as many people dependent on the government as possible, and paying off wealthy donors in the process.
| 780 |
UncleSam Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:53:11pm |
Say goodbye to your money and freedom.
This means government control of every moment of our lives.
As Nancy Pelosi said about a month ago,
“Every aspect of our lives must be subject to inventory.”
She’s getting the power-crazed totalitarian control she craves.
| 781 |
SuperdaveTWC Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:56:15pm |
Re: 686 Austin_Blue:
For the last 300,000 to 500,000 years, each interglacial period has peaked at around 280 ppm of atmospheric O=C=O. We are now busting toward 400 ppm. Not good to mess with Mother Nature.
Ahem… I AM a physical chemist who has worked in academia, in industry, and now for the US Government.
I have worked with gas-phase and aerosol chemistry for 17 years now, including atmospheric physical chemistry. I have quite a few publications in highly respected scientific journals (i.e. The Journal of the American Chemical Society, The Journal of the Chemical Society Dalton, Trans., The Journal of Physical Chemistry A., Spectrochimica Acta., etc.). I KNOW my “global warming” mechanisms, and anthropogenic (“human caused”) CO2 is NOT, I repeat NOT a contributor to “global warming” any more than a cat fart is a contributor to a hurricane! Increases in solar energy flux cause massive increases in global relative humidity. Water, which has a MUCH higher concentration in the atmosphere than CO2 (about 50 times higher on average), absorbs IR radiation over a MUCH larger range and is a MUCH greater “greenhouse gas” than CO2 can ever hope to be!
Are we ow to do cap and trade n H2O emissions?
| 782 |
SuperdaveTWC Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:59:09pm |
Re: 781: SDTWC
It should read “Are we now to do cap and trade on H2O emissions?”
Silly anti-spill keyboard cover protects my keyboard form my 5-year-old, but not from light keystrokes!
| 783 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 8:59:53pm |
re: #773 Bagua
Well, yes, but then your example is one in which it is quite obvious the the event itself is catastrophic. Just so one doesn’t spend much time proving the benefits of train wrecks and airplane crashes.
Yet in the case of the warming it is not so obvious that this must result in a near universal catastrophe. It would seem quite logical to want to find out the actual benefits and damages, and then balance these against the economy changing costs that are being proposed.
Yet it all bad news all the time. This doesn’t seem logical to me. The final conclusion may well be that the damage outweighs the benefits, but why is it forbidden to do the research and the math?
I haven’t seen a scientist use the term “near universal catastrophe.” But on the evidence, the event would be life-threatening and society-changing for many. Isn’t it the job of our emergency preparedness people to protect existing interests and concerns, regardless of some people who might luck out in spite of the destruction?
Let’s say, for argument, that the damages and benefits of AGW are exactly equal. The farming land in my region will be flooded and millions displaced, but suddenly an uninhabitable region of that exact size and population will become an agricultural paradise, ready for planting. Bingo. Even trade? No way.
Who would allow their land and property to be destroyed, if it’s preventable, so that somebody far away will eventually have a better life? I’m not that philanthropic myself. I want to keep what I’ve got. Oddly, many of the people making this take-what-comes-with-a-shrug argument are the same ones protesting because our government is taking from some of us to help others. Wouldn’t a “positive catastrophe” be Socialism to the umpteenth power?
Some people actually do benefit from train wrecks and airplane crashes. Attorneys. Medical students practicing autopsies. Competing transportation companies, with better safety records. Why don’t we see any stories about the good side of catastrophe?
Sorry, I can’t agree.
| 784 |
SFGoth Fri, Jun 26, 2009 9:06:11pm |
re: #749 austin_blue
The difference is that smoking is an individual choice (I know, I are one), while the possibility that increased O=C=O in the atmosphere may be (and at this point, certainly looks to be) calamitous raises the bar on our acceptance of their actions.
Oh really, so all the smokers together aren’t putting a whole lot of CO2, CO, and all that other crap into the air? Smoking’s an individual choice no more than anything else is; that doesn’t make it right. We could have had nuke plants several generations improved from 1979 if it weren’t for the enviro wackos after 3 Mile Island — yes, I know, it was worse than Chernobyl, hundreds died, and now the entire area w/i 100 miles is uninhabited wasteland, but we would have learned from it. Warming, cooling, warming, cooling, warming…. We don’t know diddly squat, except thanks to traitorous Republicans during the Bush years, who put their asshole selfish interests above the good of the country, Congress and the White House are controlled by the hard Left.
| 785 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 9:06:19pm |
re: #777 Bagua
ShanghaiEd,
Agreed also, and I do not believe that people are faking or intentionally distorting the data, this applies to both sides. In most cases I believe the people involved are mostly unaware of the influence of their bias on their research and conclusions, that is why there is a need for falsification. Yet this is suppressed under the claim of heresy, something I find very troubling. Valid data and good theories would hold up under challenge.
The valid data and good theories do hold up under challenge, remarkably well. Have you read the links Charles has posted, to a very helpful site in sorting out information from misinformation on the subject?
And for argument sake, why wouldn’t the scientists trying to disprove AGW suffer equally from their own subconscious bias? Does it take away their credibility? Why can’t we assume that scientists on either side are equally human? Otherwise, it’s a hero-and-villain situation, and nothing good can come of that.
| 786 |
Optimizer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 9:08:53pm |
re: #372 Liberal Classic
Technically, they’re correct. Water vapor is a greenhouse gas. It actually supplies the largest fraction of the greenhouse effect that keeps our planet warm.
The difference, however, is that by combusting fossil fuels, we are releasing carbon dioxide that has been sequestered in mineral deposits for millions of years. This is not true of our use of water, which comes from the water cycle and does not have an effect on the net amount of water vapor in the atmosphere.
Actually, they normally like to exclude water vapor from the list of greenhouse gasses, because it exposes the fact that, as you say, water vapor is almost the whole show (well over 90%) as far as greenhouse warming.
At the same time, they magnify the effect of CO2 in their models with a positive-feedback effect (that science is currently learning doesn’t exist) that presumes a coupling of CO2 with the much more powerful water vapor.
You might say that they invoke concern over water vapor as a greenhouse gas when it’s “convenient” for them.
| 787 |
Optimizer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 9:21:04pm |
re: #433 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Congress makes a crap fight in a monkey house look respectable
Yet Congress STILL manages to look respectable compared to the NY Senate…
| 788 |
Promethea Fri, Jun 26, 2009 9:38:38pm |
re: #84 Killian Bundy
/enacting any cap and trade scheme that doesn’t at least include China and India is just so much pointless economic suicide on our part
Plus, why bother? This scheme is just an example of nutty craziness. Think “Enron Scandal #2.”
Money will be made, but not by the average person who isn’t into fraud and theft.
| 789 |
ShanghaiEd Fri, Jun 26, 2009 9:55:05pm |
Bagua, austin, & all: I’ve greatly enjoyed the conversation. I know it’s been productive for me, because it’s made me sweat. :)
I’m heading upthread and then to bed, and will check back here on the morrow. Hope to talk with you again soon.
| 790 |
HarryTheHawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 9:55:30pm |
What do you expect when the statists are in charge? Another nail in the coffin of American Exceptionalism.
| 791 |
Bagua Fri, Jun 26, 2009 9:57:58pm |
re: #785 ShanghaiEd
re: #789 ShanghaiEd
Bagua, austin, & all: I’ve greatly enjoyed the conversation. I know it’s been productive for me, because it’s made me sweat. :)
I’m heading upthread and then to bed, and will check back here on the morrow. Hope to talk with you again soon.
Same here, sorry I was slow in responding to your last valid point, I got distracted by a phone call. I look forward to continuing our discussion later.
Have a good night!
| 792 |
charlesincharge Fri, Jun 26, 2009 10:12:28pm |
Have not had a chance to read all of this report.I just downloaded it. It is,reportedly, the report that the new “transparent” EPA has been suppressing. Just reading the “Executive Summery” and the Table of Contents, tells me the Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis is in a Shipload of trouble.
| 793 |
barflytom Fri, Jun 26, 2009 10:15:29pm |
Have they gone raving mad ?
If this passes the senate it will cripple the country for absolutely no benefit at all - except of course to the despicable Al Gore types.
The fact that a bill is over 1,000 pages should be enough to disqualify it from consideration. This bill is a monstrosity.
Leaving aside the extremely dubious pretext of “climate change” for this, how about just restricting the length of any particular bill so that there would be at least some prospect of the semi-literate buffoons in congress actually reading the thing before they vote on it.
The Tynwald parliament in the Isle of Man, which may be the world’s oldest in continuous existence, has a tradition of requiring someone to stand outside once a year and read out all the laws currently in force. Imagine Pelosi doing that - she’d still be there a year later. ( The Isle of Man is a very pleasant place by the way, with the world’s greatest motor race of any kind -[Link: www.iomtt.com…] ).
How many more massive and unread bills are these turkeys going to pass this year ?
| 794 |
rollwave87 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 10:21:35pm |
it’s high time we stop killing our planet (and stop sending billions of dollars to arab dictators who are the antithesis of america). this bill is a step in that right direction. period.
| 795 |
rollwave87 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 10:23:28pm |
re: #12 tradewind
Just got a Tweet that says
are you people insane? how could you so willingly be on the wrong side of history? STOP KILLING OUR PLANET WITH DISGUSTING FOSSIL FUELS. thanks!
| 796 |
HarryTheHawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 10:28:31pm |
re: #794 rollwave87
… this bill is a step in that right direction. period.
Al Gore couldn’t have stated it better. The debate is over. Now let’s go start measurin’ that American CO2. Yee Haw!
| 797 |
rollwave87 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 10:32:38pm |
re: #796 HarryTheHawk
Al Gore couldn’t have stated it better. The debate is over. Now let’s go start measurin’ that American CO2. Yee Haw!
yeah. because al gore is an idiot right? what is wrong with you? do you still think the earth is flat and the sun revolves around us?
you know how in the middle ages they used to dump their sewage-filled chamber pots out into the middle of the street? your gas guzzling arab-funding old-technology fuel burning automobile is the modern equivalent of that, blowing carcinogenic fumes into the air that we all have to breathe in! dont be scared of, you know, living in the 21st century bro!
| 799 |
rollwave87 Fri, Jun 26, 2009 10:36:48pm |
re: #798 Sambo
if you mean nuclear power plants, then yes definitely
| 800 |
HarryTheHawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 10:46:55pm |
re: #797 rollwave87
yeah. because al gore is an idiot right? what is wrong with you? do you still think the earth is flat and the sun revolves around us?
you know how in the middle ages they used to dump their sewage-filled chamber pots out into the middle of the street? your gas guzzling arab-funding old-technology fuel burning automobile is the modern equivalent of that, blowing carcinogenic fumes into the air that we all have to breathe in! dont be scared of, you know, living in the 21st century bro!
hey! are you really…Al Gore?
| 801 |
Optimizer Fri, Jun 26, 2009 10:56:02pm |
re: #749 austin_blue
Dude, really, who do you think funds the groups that are out there saying that AGW is a hoax? Well meaning citizens donating their pennies to 501c3’s? It is the extractive industries who have a dog in this hunt. As Thanos notes, none of their funding goes to research, it goes to pay people to pick holes in the research. And when the body of knowledge firms up to deny the nits that are picked, more holes are poked and money is spent to ensure that those new nits are presented to the media as a “balanced view”. It is what the tobacco industry did for years until they ran out of nits to pick.
The difference is that smoking is an individual choice (I know, I are one), while the possibility that increased O=C=O in the atmosphere may be (and at this point, certainly looks to be) calamitous raises the bar on our acceptance of their actions. At some point, you just have to say “Stop it, unless you can show, by peer reviewed research, that we are wrong.” But that is not what Exxon, et al, are doing. They are just throwing wrenches. And they have huge sums to do it. And for them, it makes sense. In the short term, it maximizes shareholder value. In the long run, it’s probably stupid.
This is seriously ignorant. One of the more important voices supporting the skeptic view is a retired Canadian statistician who works as a volunteer: [Link: www.climateaudit.org…] Another very important voice is a climate professor at MIT who has took a sum total of $10,000 from an oil company ONCE. I suppose the President of the Czech Republic is also on Big Oil’s payroll. Wake up. At least you didn’t try to imply that they simply have an anti-science agenda, by trying to show that they’re Creationists.
“Huge sums”? As been covered by others, the donations by the Soros’ of the world dwarf anything spent by oil companies - by orders of magnitude (we can explain to you what this last phrase means, if you like).
Demonizing oil companies is a favorite sport of many, but what those guys do for us is nothing short of amazing. Drilling miles into the ground in the most God-foraken places on Earth, dealing with the most despicable and corrupt governments on Earth, shipping the goo thousands of miles, and refining the crap out of it. And all with such efficiency that it cost less per gallon than orange juice! I know MY life would be a lot more challenging if these guys weren’t so good at what they do. Talk about “biting the hand that feeds us”!
| 802 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 11:03:33pm |
re: #794 rollwave87
I’m so getting your green aura! And I love that you eschew capital letters so that you can keep that carbon footprint down.
Just saying…….
| 803 |
tradewind Fri, Jun 26, 2009 11:06:02pm |
re: #797 rollwave87
yeah because al gore is an idiot right
Well, he flunked out of divinity school, and dropped out of law school to avoid being kicked out for failing grades…you do the math…
| 804 |
HarryTheHawk Fri, Jun 26, 2009 11:13:00pm |
re: #801 Optimizer
Dude, clearly you are a flat-earther, a creationist, a denier. In fact, you are probably just a stooge of the “extractive industries”. People like you just need to realize that the government knows best. Heck, if it weren’t for the federal government, I wouldn’t even know how to put my pants on in the morning. We should all be thrilled that benevolent folks like Nancy and Al are leading America to the promised land with landmark legislation like the Taxman-Malarkey bill.
| 805 |
MarineVet Fri, Jun 26, 2009 11:55:37pm |
Might as well break out and sign the Kyoto accords now! Congress doesn’t care, they are all rich “kick back” out of touch **enter derogatory adjective*** ***expletive***!
| 806 |
MarineVet Sat, Jun 27, 2009 12:00:11am |
re: #794 rollwave87
Hmmm your absolutely are correct….but you should have actually came out with that tried and true banter you people are so famous for…”Bush did it”.. for you to validate this through anti-war statements sickens me! Why don’t you get a job so that you can get a haircut and a daily bath too?
| 807 |
Optimizer Sat, Jun 27, 2009 12:08:46am |
re: #771 Bagua
…
Secondly, big oil is aware of the culture and is at pains to prove how green they are in the last ten years or so.
Thirdly, I think big oil has wizened up to the fact that their profits are far greater in a climate of scarcity. Crude oil should be below $37 a barrel in current conditions, every dollar above cost is profit.
…
“Yea”, to the former - so-called “Big Oil” will pander to whoever they have to, however they have to, to make money.
That being said, I was disappointed in the latter, which is reminiscient of typical Left-wing conspiratorial quackery. Let me rephrase what you wrote, and listen to yourself. You’re saying, “Big Oil has figured out that it can make more money by NOT producing oil.”
In reality, it works more like “Chevron can make more money if Exxon decides to produce less.” Chevron can’t earn the extra profit from the increased price unless they actually produce actual oil to sell, and with the price boost from Exxon’s hypothesized foolishness, their incentive would be to produce even MORE. “Oddly”, the Exxon’s of the world do NOT operate that way, and so if Chevron wants to make more money the incentive is to actually produce more oil, more cheaply.
“Big Oil” decides how much drilling to do based on long term forecasting of oil prices vs. the cost of doing the drilling, on a case-by-case basis. When they decide to drill they’re taking an educated guess, and are often putting at least a $1B at risk. If they hadn’t always done that, they’d have been out of business a long time ago. They’re not “wising up” to anything.
As to the notion that “Crude oil should be below $37 a barrel in current conditions”, there’s always people who will tell you what the price of oil SHOULD be, but if you think about it that’s all a load of crap. When it comes down to it, supply and demand (or the expectation of future supply and demand, anyway) determines the price, and anything else is hot air. It takes a long time (and a lot of expense) to increase the supply of oil, so when expected demand varies the price jumps around a LOT. Expect the price to shoot back well over $100, if the global economy ever starts humming along again.
Oh, and Big Oil only controls a few percent of the global marketplace. They wouldn’t even have enough clout to impact price significantly if they wanted to.
I’m not sure the US oil companies can even produce for less than $37. The way you put it, you make it sound like there’s something inherently evil in their charging what the market will bear, in order to make a profit. Are you aware that that is a decidely Marxist attitude? And do you know that last quarter they lost money.
| 808 |
Wendya Sat, Jun 27, 2009 12:37:09am |
re: #795 rollwave87
are you people insane? how could you so willingly be on the wrong side of history? STOP KILLING OUR PLANET WITH DISGUSTING FOSSIL FUELS. thanks!
Well, thank you Chicken Little.
| 809 |
Wendya Sat, Jun 27, 2009 12:43:23am |
re: #731 austin_blue
Saying that the researchers have more at stake than the energy companies cannot be correct.
Sure it can.
If your living depends on getting research dollars, particularly from the government, you are going to have a very short career unless your results just happen to coincide with the ideological position of the day.
That’s why “everyone” knows that we’re destroying the earth and “everyone” knows saturated fats cause heart disease. /
| 810 |
OldDog Sat, Jun 27, 2009 12:44:49am |
1. We have to stop Global Warming!
You mean the Cooling thats been going on for the last ten years
2. We must Control CO2
You mean that stuff what Plants Breath to make Oxygen.
3. We know better than you!
You mean you swallowed when the UN spurted!.
| 811 |
Optimizer Sat, Jun 27, 2009 12:54:52am |
re: #772 ShanghaiEd
…
Example: giant asteroid predicted to hit my home state, 2014, and I’m in charge of minimizing the damage. Guy comes to me wanting funding for a study that shows some people may actually benefit from the strike? I don’t doubt it a bit, and I’m sure he’s got an interesting theoretical point, but I’m probably not going to write him a check.
Now we’re getting somewhere! Suppose the guy comes to you wanting funding to investigate whether the asteroid is really coming? You’re out of a job (and can no longer pat yourself on the back as being the Savior of the town) should this guy determine that the “asteroid” (that was never atcually SEEN throught he telescope) is really the result of an astronomer’s ginned up computer model. You going to employ him? Or the other guy, who’s predicting that widespead catastrophe for you to preside over?
re: #774 ShanghaiEd
I agree with your premise, but not the conclusion you draw from it. I suspect most doctors and scientists go into the field with idealistic intentions, but they’re quickly educated that faking or distorting evidence is not permissible under any circumstances. It can be a matter of life or death, and has killed many a career. I don’t buy that there’s an army of AGW promoters willing to risk their careers to bend the evidence.
Unfortunately, this is quite naive, especially considering the volume of stories to the contrary. They will not only tolerate faking or distorting evidence, they implicitly demand it. This is not just some random study - there are countless billions of dollars at stake, and those billions are looking for one - and only one - conclusion.
I, personally, have been in more than one business situation where people magically become True Believers in the most absurd things - because it means money in their pocket. You only keep looking for bugs until the software tells you what they’re looking to see. You dream up convoluted arguments for how black really is white. Apostates don’t fare well, and do not find redemption even when they are later proven to be correct.
AGW promoters risk not advancing within their careers if they don’t find some way to come up with a pre-determined answer. “Bend the evidence”? Not if you’re clever. A hefty “spin” will usually do. And then there’s the Mann method - just keep tinkering with the mathematical modelling, until it gives the result you’re looking for. Remember the “hockey stick”? That guy hasn’t exactly been run out of town.
| 812 |
Mr Spiffy Sat, Jun 27, 2009 1:35:16am |
re: #186 jcm
When it’s a crime to fart.
Only criminals will fart.
That makes me a life-long, habitual offender
| 813 |
Manster Sat, Jun 27, 2009 3:05:49am |
Completely criminal. This is what happens when dumb people elect even dumber people into public office.
| 815 |
unrealizedviewpoint Sat, Jun 27, 2009 5:45:25am |
re: #795 rollwave87
are you people insane? how could you so willingly be on the wrong side of history? STOP KILLING OUR PLANET WITH DISGUSTING FOSSIL FUELS. thanks!
Apparently “rollwave87” stopped in, only reading as far as comment #87, blurted out this turd, then split. How does the govt make them this dumb?
| 816 |
rollwave87 Sat, Jun 27, 2009 6:09:59am |
you all can call me “dumb,” a “turd,” and a “chicken” as much as you like. at the end of the day, or, even, at the end of my life, Ill be able to look back and say I did everything I could to make this earth god gave us a better, cleaner place. literally. all you ‘global warming is a liberal scam’ people will so clearly be pushed into the reject pile of history (along with others who have a penchant for refusing to recognize scientific fact, like creationists, holocaust deniers, anti-vaccine nut jobs, etc.) that I kind of almost enjoy being attacked by the likes of you because it makes me feel even more sure that I am doing and believing the right things here.
For the record, I am a Republican. but not an ‘anti-science, obama is a dictator, its patriotic to use as much arab fuel as possible’ kind of republican.
charles is one of the most enlightened minds Ive ever come across so far in my relatively short 2+ decades of life. that the comment threads here can be full of so many ignoramuses really does shock me. but it seems especially bad on this thread. at least with other issues, like gay marriage, the bigoted neanderthal comments make up not even a third of total posts. which is good. but if we can mostly agree on that, i dont see why we cant agree on aiming for a healthier planet., which, even the most religious among us should recognize, was a task reserved for us by God.
| 817 |
gringo69 Sat, Jun 27, 2009 6:52:54am |
re: #816 rollwave87
Words fail me. With enlightened minds like yours in the up and comer field, we are screwed.
| 818 |
docremulac Sat, Jun 27, 2009 6:55:40am |
Here’s a couple of “scientific facts”
The term “scientific facts” gets thrown around so much as a way to punctuate somebody’s belief that it’s about as useful as the term “clinically proven”.
The global warming thugs all leave nuclear energy out of their planning despite Japan and France proving it’s safety for decades now. Coincidentally, there is no money to be made by the Green Reich should nuclear power be expanded despite that fact that it would eliminate a huge source of fossil fuel consumption.
The term has been changed from “global warming” to “climate change”. Why? Because they want to leave the door open to make money if the Earth cools as was the prophecy several decades ago by the way. If the Earth is warming why call it anything else?
A society needs a certain amount of intelligence and common sense to keep it’s freedom. This is our test and so far it looks like we didn’t pass it.
| 819 |
MPH Sat, Jun 27, 2009 7:41:46am |
Maddening…the single most maddening thing to sprout out of DC in many years, actually. The misinformation campaign and media dodge was handled almost perfectly by the Democrats — and MJ dying was like the cherry on top.
Sick sick sick…
| 820 |
rollwave87 Sat, Jun 27, 2009 7:53:23am |
re: #818 docremulac
the ‘green reich?’ seriously? out of all the evil sh*t that goes on in the world, your problem is with the environmentalists? whats wrong with you?
duh of the day: WE NEED A CLEAN PLANET
sorry, did they not start teaching that till the ’90s?
I spent 8 years (since I was 14) defending W from left-wing moon bats. but so many of you are just the conservative equivalent of that, so completely blinded by your hatred of president obama that you actually think its a bad idea to promote environmentally friendly policies. i will always be a republican. but i will never be a sheep.
| 822 |
The Dude Sat, Jun 27, 2009 8:30:30am |
And for argument sake, why wouldn’t the scientists trying to disprove AGW suffer equally from their own subconscious bias?
There is no such thing as a burden of disproof. There is a burden of proof however, and it lies on those advocating AGW. Thus far, that burden has not been satisfied and, despite that, we’re now on a path to initiate far reaching economic policy based on missing disproof, which many foolishly believe is due.
| 824 |
kywrite Sat, Jun 27, 2009 9:34:04am |
Did some research:
Two (Castle and Kirk) are members of the Republicans for Environmental Protection (REP), a group started in the 90s that helped shape McCain’s views. Kirk is also a part of the Chicago Machine.
Bono is Sonny Bono’s widow and is bringing home some bacon — big windmill project in her district.
Lance, LoBiondo, and Smith are all New Jersey senators with a history of environmental liberalism, whatever their other beliefs.
Reichert is Washington State, and though he’s not a member of the REP he somehow got a 103% voting approval rating from them (what is up with that?) and a 100% from a wind energy ratings group.
The most interesting one is McHugh. He’s a New York senator who has been tapped by Obama to be Secretary of the Army (replacing a Bush appointee) but has not been confirmed yet. He’s also a really strong supporter of private-market methods to reform health care. So — quid pro quo? You vote this way, we’ll get you confirmed, and oh, by the way, we get you out of the House so we can get someone in to vote OUR way prior to the healthcare bill voting? There’s a story behind that one somewhere.
Every single one is West Coast, East Coast, or Chicago.
I’m going to look at the Senate for members of the REP — I bet that’s where a Republican voting bloc will form.
| 825 |
docremulac Sat, Jun 27, 2009 9:47:30am |
re: #820 rollwave87
So you’re response to my statement is I hate Obama?
Which part? The promotion of nuclear power to help clean the environment?
Your leaders couldn’t care less about the environment and their ignoring nuclear power is proof of this. I support Obama when he does the right thing and he has on some issues. He had spoken of incorporating nuclear power into an overall energy strategy during his campaign and I was hopeful he was sincere, but that seems to have been dropped from the program. My allegation is that’s because it takes away from the real issue at hand which is Democrats getting the biggest money and power grab the United States has ever seen.
| 826 |
Spartacus50 Sat, Jun 27, 2009 9:54:30am |
re: #820 rollwave87
the ‘green reich?’ seriously? out of all the evil sh*t that goes on in the world, your problem is with the environmentalists? whats wrong with you?
duh of the day: WE NEED A CLEAN PLANET
sorry, did they not start teaching that till the ’90s?
I spent 8 years (since I was 14) defending W from left-wing moon bats. but so many of you are just the conservative equivalent of that, so completely blinded by your hatred of president obama that you actually think its a bad idea to promote environmentally friendly policies. i will always be a republican. but i will never be a sheep.
These policies being voted on are not environmentally friendly, nor are they economically feasible. They will simply raise the cost of goods further in an already abyssmal economy. They are simply preying on the very same guilt that you evidently feel.
| 827 |
docremulac Sat, Jun 27, 2009 9:57:08am |
re: #820 rollwave87
And by the way, the statement: “i will always be a republican. but i will never be a sheep.” is a little confusing. By swearing allegiance to any one political party aren’t you being the epitome of a sheep?
| 828 |
endotoxin Sat, Jun 27, 2009 10:14:46am |
Pretty damn sad when we have a democrat representing us in my area of Oklahoma who voted no to cap and trade yet there are so called republicans who voted for it.
| 829 |
rollwave87 Sat, Jun 27, 2009 11:23:57am |
re: #827 docremulac
By swearing allegiance to any one political party aren’t you being the epitome of a sheep?
nope. because the policies of freedom and individual choice/responsibility that are the bedrock of the repuiblican party, as espoused by Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, John McCain, and others are also the bedrock of my political beliefs. to some i may be a conservative, to others, a moderate or liberal, and my position on certain issues may change, but I will alway be a republican.
and as far as the whole nuclear energy things goes, I am totally in support of nuke power, and, btw, totally opposed to ethanol. so there is a lot of obamas energy plan i dont really like. but to ignore the significance of congress officially recognizing climate change just because you dont think the bill is perfect is completely short-sighted. our constitution was, when it was ratified, arguably one of the greatest documents ever written in world history. it also happened to have some inane laws, such as saying blacks were only 3/5 of a person. but it didnt make the constitution any less miraculous in the grand scheme of things. you have to start somewhere. despite my differences with him, the president seems to understand this.
| 831 |
MPH Sat, Jun 27, 2009 2:50:41pm |
re: #829 rollwave87
nope. because the policies of freedom and individual choice/responsibility that are the bedrock of the repuiblican party,
If that was unequivocally true, the republicans would still be in power today.
| 832 |
Galroc Sun, Jun 28, 2009 8:42:23am |
re: #627 Thanos
I hate kneejerk neanderthals saying things like “AGW doesn’t exist” because it does…It makes us the luddites who don’t understand basic science.
Now I am a knee-jerk neanderthal luddite because I don’t believe in AGW. Are you confusing GW with AGW?
AGW isn’t a fact. It is a theory and currently it isn’t doing so well. CO2 is increasing but land temperatures have flat lined or even decreased for the last 8 years. The ocean’s heat content has been dropping for the last 5-6 years since launching of the Argo buoys. None of the current models predicted it. Hansen’s 3 predictions based upon models from 1988 that he presented in front of congress were all wrong and in another few years, we can say the current models were wrong as well.
There is no empirical evidence for AGW. Correlation isn’t evidence. Models aren’t evidence. Saying it is a fact isn’t evidence.
I believe there is a 30 year cycle independent of AGW but is evidence of GW. We have been warming since LIA. You overlay a 30 year cycle onto a gradual warming trend which explains the warm 1930s, cooling to 1970s, and now warming to 2000s. Guess what we are doing now? Cooling and we will be cooling for the next 30 years.
I will match my scientific credentials against yours because this knee-jerk neanderthal luddite is a practicing scientist.
| 833 |
Galroc Sun, Jun 28, 2009 9:03:15am |
Just a follow up
AGW is a theory. It is either true or false. It isn’t partially true or partially
false. That isn’t how science work. Saying that we are emitting CO2 (true) and emitting heat by driving cars (true) or burning oil to heat our houses (true) doesn’t mean AGW must be true because of the former are true. That isn’t how theories work.
I say again, I don’t believe AGW as a theory is true, even though we are adding heat (insignificant, IMO) to our environment.
| 834 |
mcaplan6102 Sun, Jun 28, 2009 6:16:56pm |
I am an environmental attorney and teach environmental law. We need a cap and trade bill. Climate change is happening and will continue to worsen. I understand people have a visceral reaction to reject anything and everything that the Democrats or a majority of scientists support, but we need to do something about climate change and need to do it now. Not only climate change, but the particulates that are emitted from coal-fired power plants are impairing the health of our citizens.
The EU is way ahead of us in adopting the precautionary principle. What the Dems are going to do with the bill is push up the cost of traditional fossil fuels which will make alternative energy more attractive. Those that claim this will push jobs overseas fail to understand that the same arguments were made with most environmental legislation (and most labor laws).
I’m proud that Obama is taking the lead on this instead of just letting the tired old policies continue. Of course nobody wants to pay a tax and of course nobody wants the deficit to increase. But the alternatives are just too costly. Stop polluting the air with fossil fuels and let’s set the groundwork to make some change. The republicans are just digging a deeper and deeper hole for themselves by aligning themselves with the deep pockets of the coal industry and the oil industry. It will take them several election losses to realize that they are no longer a party, but a club unless they change and change fast. Obama will push the climate change bill in the senate after Franken becomes the 60th senator which will happen in the next few months. He may lose about 10 votes in the senate to Dems in coal-producing and Dems with significant coal-fired generators in their states, so it will be a close vote in the Fall.
Lastly, I’d glad the US has chosen to be a leader on this issue. The Bush policies of focussing on countries that do less is a poor policy. We need to do more. If it costs us more as citizens to take the hit now so our world will be a better place for our children and grandchildren, so be it. I’d rather be in debt than have my children living with asthma in a destroyed environment.
| 835 |
Optimizer Mon, Jun 29, 2009 8:49:12am |
re: #820 rollwave87
the ‘green reich?’ seriously? out of all the evil sh*t that goes on in the world, your problem is with the environmentalists? whats wrong with you?
duh of the day: WE NEED A CLEAN PLANET
sorry, did they not start teaching that till the ’90s?
I spent 8 years (since I was 14) defending W from left-wing moon bats. but so many of you are just the conservative equivalent of that, so completely blinded by your hatred of president obama that you actually think its a bad idea to promote environmentally friendly policies. i will always be a republican. but i will never be a sheep.
You’re admittedly a youngster, so if you’re still around let me ask that you try to keep an open mind, and consider a few things.
First of all, you apparently have the same perception of environmentalism as popular culture, which is somewhat ignorant and naive. Sure, it was great back in the 70s, when there was a real need to clean up the air and water (and there’s likely still some more to be done on this), but making the world safer for humans to live on (which is a noble cause) has never really been the root motivation of environmentalists. As a philosophy, environmentalism is decidedly anti-human. There’s a whole spectrum of views within that group, of course, but it runs from the simple, classical Earth-worship to the people who literally consider humans to be a parasite on Earth that ought to be extinguished (a view, BTW, that’s pretty evident in the movie Independence Day). The whole “man despoils nature” guilt trip is an ancient one, going back even before the story of Adam and Eve. See [Link: www.vhemt.org…] to see an example of one of the more extreme (but non-violent) fringes, to get the idea.
Don’t believe me? Fine. But try to explain why that side is so vehemently against nuclear power. We could throw all the nuclear waste in the world in one tiny corner of it, where it would decay to a harmless state on it’s own eventually (Mother Earth has plenty of time to wait!). If that’s not enough for you, maybe as you get older you’ll start to notice that NO solution to any environmental problem is EVER good enough for the environmentalist crowd (because it allows for us evil humans to live more “unnatural” lives). You might also notice that they ALWAYS talk about “saving the Earth”, and NEVER talk about making the Earth safer for PEOPLE.
| 836 |
Optimizer Mon, Jun 29, 2009 9:56:53am |
re: #820 rollwave87
the ‘green reich?’ seriously? out of all the evil sh*t that goes on in the world, your problem is with the environmentalists? whats wrong with you?
duh of the day: WE NEED A CLEAN PLANET
sorry, did they not start teaching that till the ’90s?
I spent 8 years (since I was 14) defending W from left-wing moon bats. but so many of you are just the conservative equivalent of that, so completely blinded by your hatred of president obama that you actually think its a bad idea to promote environmentally friendly policies. i will always be a republican. but i will never be a sheep.
Secondly, I don’t mean to offend, but your public school programming is evident. I’m not sure if you’re young enough to have seen this, but these days, for example, An Inconvenient Truth is routinely shown in American classrooms. Now think about that. This is a film by a left-wing, extremely partisan, politician, who dropped out of college and has absolutely NO scientific credentials, whatsoever. In a movie that - quite literally - has been found to be lacking in about a dozen key points in a court of law (in the UK, of all places!). The core organization pushing AGW is the IPCC, an organization that paints itself as scientific, but is in fact run by politicians (from countries who are fed up with the US economic dominance - which is practically ALL of them, of course), and whose very charter pre-supposed AGW as a fact.
Try to understand that the people who have taught you for most of your life are the foot-soldiers of the Big Government near-monopoly on education.
Beyond that, you should also understand that the “scientific concensus” on AGW is as questionable as it is irrelevant. Over 31,000 scientists have signed the “Oregon Petition”, which says, in part:
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
While this is not a denial of AGW for all of them, it IS a denial that AGW - to the extent it exists at all - is significant enough to justify trashing the economy to try to fix. (The criticisms of this petition, BTW, are lame. Yes, the organizer called it a “survey” once, when it isn’t one. That’s irrelevant. Then they argue that, essentially, the signers are “unqualified” by reasons that all come down to “because they’re not on board with AGW”). There’s also a conference among skeptics every year that draws hundreds of scientists. As to the irrelevence of scientific concensus, there’s the example of guys like Copernicus, Galileo, and even Einstein - who weren’t exactly “with the concensus”.
As to the scientific merits of AGW, this is an excellent opportunity to think for yourself, and not be a “sheep”. If you read the literature carefully, what you will find is that the AGW theory is completely based on the output of climate models. If you look at the satellite data for the last few decades, it becomes obvious that those models aren’t worth a damn. The positive feedback mechanism for CO2 that they put in there, in particular, is not holding up to scrutiny. The fact is, the AGW crowd are the anti-science, flat-Earth Luddites, not the skeptics.
BTW, you mentioned religion. I dare say I’m about the most irreligious person you can imagine (to put it mildly), so don’t even TRY to associate me with any Creationist baffoons.
Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Observatory Just Captured Ominous Signals About the Planet’s Health Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Observatory just captured an ominous sign about the pace of global warming. Atmospheric levels of planet-warming carbon dioxide aren’t just on their way to yet another record high this year - they’re rising faster than ever, ...
Cheechako
The Good Liars at the Schnecksville Trump Rally [VIDEO] New theories, great tunes and SHOCKING breaking news. SUPPORT US: http://Herohero.co/thegoodliars SEE THE GOOD LIARS LIVE!WASHINGTON D.C. MAY 23RD: https://www.unionstage.com/shows/good-liars-fix-america/NASHVILLE, TN JUNE 6TH: https://www.etix.com/ticket/p/42992972/the-good-liars-nashville-the-lab-at-zaniesSAN FRANCISCO, CA JUNE 25TH: https://www.livenation.com/event/G5vYZbavGvggG/the-good-liars SUBSCRIBE TO OUR AUDIO PODCAST:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-good-liars-tell-the-truth/id1731178442Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7mgfiwzr32907N4y68eFOCJoin this channel ...
teleskiguy
Trump’s “Stolen Election” Lie Based on Evidence From Pervy Bathroom Cam-Spy OK, this really takes the cake. If you have relatives that still cling to the “election was stolen, dadgum, I jes’ KNOW IT … This should be a slight remedy to the stubborn madness Thanks to online anonymity, the ...
Khal Wimpo (free internal organs upon request!)
Best of April 2024 Nothing new here but these are a look back at the a few good images from the past month. Despite the weather, I was quite pleased with several of them. These were taken with older lenses (made from the ...
William Lewis
Gateway Pundit, Sued by Election Workers, Declares BankruptcyA onetime favorite, now just pathetic figure around these parts, Jim Hoft aka SMOTI ("Stupidest Man On The Internet"), has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in response to the defamation lawsuits filed against him to the same election workers that ... Khal Wimpo (free internal organs upon request!)
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ... Cheechako
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ... Cheechako
![Dandelion [photo]](http://noblesseoblige.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/dandelion.jpg){kind=link}
