ThinkFast: December 12, 2006
ThinkFast: December 12, 2006
Democratic congressional leaders announced yesterday they plan to “place a moratorium on all earmarks until lobbying changes are enacted.”
President Bush met yesterday with three retired generals and two academics who disagreed with the Iraq Study Group’s plan “to reduce the number of U.S. combat troops in Iraq and to reach out for help to Iran and Syria.” It is another sign “the president is gathering support for a new plan that ignores several of the bipartisan committee’s recommendations.”
The group of experts “also recommended the president make some changes in his national security team,” which is “‘likely to fuel Pentagon rumors‘ that Marine Gen. Peter Pace will be removed as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.”
“The founding pastor of a second Colorado church has resigned over gay sex allegations,” the AP reports, “just weeks after the evangelical community was shaken by the scandal surrounding megachurch leader Ted Haggard,” a long-time opponent of gay marriage.
Bienvenido a Miami, Rep. Tancredo. “After drawing criticism from Florida lawmakers for calling Miami a third-world country, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) will visit the city Thursday to speak on ‘The Need for Assimilation,’” The Hill reports. Tancredo agreed to visit Miami only if the trip included “a stay at a five-star beachfront resort.”
In the wake of a House ethics committee report that found the Foley scandal represented a “present danger to House pages and to the integrity of the institution of the House,” incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said yesterday that she will introduce legislation to increase oversight of the page program.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation pledged another $83.5 million to fight malaria. “All totaled,” the Gates Foundation “the Microsoft Corp. chairman and world’s richest man, and his wife, Melinda, has donated $765 million to fight malaria, which kills one person every 30 seconds.”
In a recent interview, Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), the incoming House intelligence committee chairman, could not identify the Muslim roots of Hezbollah and al Qaeda. Asked by a reporter whether al Qaeda was Sunni or Shiite, Reyes replied incorrectly, “Predominantly — probably Shiite.” Other members on the committee and several top counterterrorism officials also failed the quiz.
“Ice is melting so fast in the Arctic that the North Pole will be in the open sea in 30 years,” a team of NASA-funded scientists found. “Researchers assessing the impact of carbon emissions on the world’s climate have calculated that late summer in the Arctic will be ice-free by 2040 or earlier – well within a lifetime.”
USA Today reports on a Gallup poll that finds a “record high 62 percent of Americans say the war in Iraq isn’t ‘worth it,’ and a record low 16 percent say the United States is winning.”
And finally: SNL’s George Bush gets a makeover. “Previously played by Will Forte, Mr. Bush is now being played by Jason Sudeikis. Lorne Michaels, the NBC television show’s executive producer, said that where Mr. Forte played Mr. Bush as whiny and beleaguered, Mr. Sudeikis…is playing him as having ‘absolute confidence and buoyancy.’ But in a sign that the world is starting to look past Mr. Bush’s tenure, Mr. Michaels said he was freeing up Mr. Forte to play a new political role eventually: that of one of the 2008 contenders.”
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Way to go, Team America.
I feel SO much safer!
Stupid elected officials, you are STILL accountable ESPECIALLY when you overtly display flagrant ignorance.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:16 am“the Microsoft Corp. chairman and world’s richest man, and his wife, Melinda, has donated $765 million to fight malaria, which kills one person every 30 seconds.â€
Why not just resume spraying DDT? It would be a lot cheaper, and the extra money could go towards infrastructure, or AIDS research, or food for the starving or any number of other things.
“place a moratorium on all earmarks until lobbying changes are enacted.â€
December 12th, 2006 at 9:16 amSo they’re not letting Byrd or Stevens touch any of the bills any more?
a team of NASA-funded scientists found
What does NASA know about Earth? They’re specialty is space, obviously we can ignore this study.
What can Reyes be thinking? The Democrats did get the House majority and turn out several Rethug senators just to send MORE troops to Iraq. Bush has not reached a new low in the polls because he hasn’t sent MORE troops to Iraq. Don’t forget, there was a MISSION ACCOMPLISHED sign up on the carrier, Lincoln, over three years ago.
There are other topics that the Dims are looking at now to follow the Rethug line. The fruit-basket turn over was not based on a strong desire to be more Rethugish.
Wake up Dim power structure!
December 12th, 2006 at 9:20 amThere’s just no satisfying some people. Newshounds reports that Rep Dana Rohrbacher was really, really upset that two federal agents were found guilty beause they shot an unarmed person in the back and then tried to cover it up. He, along with 48 other miscreants in Congress, are urging President Bush to pardon the two federal agents. (Besides being an awful idea, don’t you think they should exhaust their appeals first?) Read about it here.
Your tax dollars at work.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:23 amThank goodness the Iraq Study Group only cost $1.3 million to produce a report that the Commander-in-Chief can dismiss.
16% of the people still think we’re winning in Iraq. That’s like watching Baghdad Bob saying there are no Americans in Baghdad while U.S. tanks roll in the background.
Who are the “three retired generals and two academics?” Members of the board of directors of Halliburton, Carlyle, CACI and/or other War Profiteers?
December 12th, 2006 at 9:23 amI think we are entering a new phase of this war….intiatives vs counter intiatives..while the war is going on and the killing has no ending,the game of intiatives now in place….the wording has changed also from the days before the war started….from “WMDS and shock& Awe”..to “mission accomplished”…to “operation last throe ” to “elections and democratic Iraq”…to “stay the course”…and now NEW WAY FORWARD. Now the ISG report is a suspect …so the Administration will take some and throw some..and start another intiative….While the media is busy now with silly war between OBAMA & HILLARY…”one began to feel OBAMIZED with all of this..”, the war goes on..and no end in sight of the war path……
December 12th, 2006 at 9:25 amHopefully Reyes will use the next couple of weeks to get up to speed on the issues with which he will be dealing.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:26 amThe sad thing is that only 14% believe that the Dems will do better.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:27 amSo the Bushites shopped around to find a couple of generals who agreed with their views, then decided to ignore any advice that contradicted what God told the chimp to do?
December 12th, 2006 at 9:27 amMarvelous.
How about just putting an end to all earmarks?
December 12th, 2006 at 9:28 amIt seems clear to me that these here religious homo-types has spent so much time warnin’ us all about the sin of man-butt-lust that they has been overwhelmed by the intoxicating allure of same-sex embrace. And if these PREACHERS can succumb to the siren song of sodomy, just imagine how hard it will be for kids — INCLUDING Mary Cheney’s lez-b-child — to resist the lure of illicit homersexshuality.
Which is why it should be banned.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:28 amBush said after emerging from the morning session. “And that advice is . . . an important component of putting together a new way forward in Iraq.”
December 12th, 2006 at 9:31 amOh crap, here it comes, the new slogan
a new way forward in Iraq.”
Lorne Michaels, the NBC television show’s executive producer, said that where Mr. Forte played Mr. Bush as whiny and beleaguered, Mr. Sudeikis…is playing him as having ‘absolute confidence and buoyancy.’
Well that’s good…SNL is playing George Bush as he should be played right now, confident, buoyant and completely seperated from reality. Now if they’ll just throw in petulant and bully-ing it would be completely realistic.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:32 amTed Stevens was heard to say, “My earmarks! My precious, precious earmarks! Why? Whaaahaahaaha.”
December 12th, 2006 at 9:35 amComment by robert — December 12, 2006 @ 9:27 am
Read the report, robert, not just the spin.
To the question: Still thinking about Iraq, how much do you trust each of the following to recommend the right thing for the U.S. to do in Iraq – a great deal, a fair amount, not much, or not at all? 58% responded either “a great deal” or “a fair amount” regarding the Democratic leaders in Congress.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:39 amSqueege,
1> DDT is already used in many places, in fact in India it’s losing effectiveness against Mosquitos, as they are becoming resistant to it. Just like congress is losing it’s resistance to ethics, and silly right wing bloggers are losing against logic, and truth.
2> As for what NASA knows about the earth, well it resides in space just like every other planet. So I think they know enough, and a lot more than you! After all since everything in the universe is made of the same basic elements, wouldn’t a study of earth be first before studying other objects in space?
December 12th, 2006 at 9:40 am“Democratic congressional leaders announced yesterday they plan to “place a moratorium on all earmarks until lobbying changes are enacted.â€
Good for them….I wish they had gone further and permanently prohibited earmarks, but this is a good start.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:42 amComment by squegeeboo — December 12, 2006 @ 9:16 am
Why not just resume spraying DDT?
Because it damages the environment, idiot. Oh, I forgot. Republicans like damaging the environment. It feeds their need to control everything.
What does NASA know about Earth? They’re specialty is space, obviously we can ignore this study.
NASA’s mission is not confined to space, nor has it ever been, ignoramus. NASA has long been commissioned to perform space-based (i.e. satellite) studies of the earth, particularly climate. After all, Earth is a planet, and who better to study planetary dynamics than a space agency.
Try not to flaunt your ignorance so early in the day.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:43 amWhat is it about closeted, self-hating homosexuals and radical Christianity?
December 12th, 2006 at 9:45 amDon’t miss this, TP:
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9294.html
Dick Cheney: Let’s fight with the Shiites. Then we’ll win the war in Iraq.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:46 am“Ice is melting so fast in the Arctic that the North Pole will be in the open sea in 30 years” – Santa’s gonna need a new delivery vehicle soon!
Maybe when all the ice has melted those in denial will finally see that we have a problem. But then again maybe they’ll just talk about how the lack of ice has opened up the shipping lanes and gee isn’t that great?!
December 12th, 2006 at 9:47 amSqueegeeboo is far from the most ignorant, stupid, or vile, right winger to post at this site. Nevertheless, this poster does illustrate well the tendency of right wing loud mouths to pop off with ignorant remarks about most everything.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:48 amBut then again maybe they’ll just talk about how the lack of ice has opened up the shipping lanes and gee isn’t that great?!
Comment by margaret — December 12, 2006 @ 9:47 am
Along this same line, check out this bizarre articles from the Times of London:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2499663,00.html
Note in particular the weird comment about tourism in the second paragraph. Imagine an article about 9/11 in which the first paragraph reports the destruction of the WTC, then mentions tourism and development opportunities in the second paragraph. But the strained attempt to find a silver lining doesn’t stop there. It just keeps on going. But it is hard to know what to think about someone who would start a sentence this way: “Scientists have long realised that ice reflects heat”. Does the Times think its readers are third graders?
December 12th, 2006 at 9:51 amJesusWasBrown
in fact in India it’s losing effectiveness against Mosquito
Ok that I did not know, so find something else for India, but resume spraying in Africa, until it looses effectiveness there, as for the NASA line, it was a joke.
VerbalKint
December 12th, 2006 at 9:51 amBecause it damages the environment, idiot. Oh, I forgot. Republicans like damaging the environment
Damage the environment vs. stopping the death of potential millions of lives….seems like an easy choice to me. But I understand, some people would rather save a tree than a human.
BnF, Looking at the poll, it looks like people have the MOST faith in the DOD/Military. Using the combination of Great deal amount and Fair amount like you did, it comes out to 81%.
Here is a good Idea, why don’t we let the Military decide what actions we take over there?
December 12th, 2006 at 9:54 amYou have to look at the make-up of a group and factor that into the recommendations. But it is telling that a military group is saying things that lead to a conclusion that a new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is necessary. Gen. Pace has been a poor representative for the military, often going out on the campaign trail cheerleading for the Bush administration. This group should be at arms length from the administration it serves and Gen. Pace has been anything but that. Gen. Meyers, before him, was also too much in bed with the administration.
I have been saying for years that the soldiers on the ground are doing their jobs very well but that this war is poorly “generaled” in that they have permitted Rumsfeld to micromanage events. Hopefully, some of this is starting to set in as, at least, the retired generals are speaking out. Now we just need some of the active duty generals to get some backbone.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/11/AR2006121100508_2.html
December 12th, 2006 at 9:55 amTP. Can you stop putting up pictures of Ted Hastert so early in the morning?
In a recent interview, Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), the incoming House intelligence committee chairman, could not identify the Muslim roots of Hezbollah and al Qaeda.
Ugh. Does any elected official know what the heck is going on in the ME?
December 12th, 2006 at 9:55 amHere is a good Idea, why don’t we let the Military decide what actions we take over there?
Comment by robert
I agree. Anything would be better than letting that idiot Bush continue to make decisions.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:57 amBut I understand, some people would rather save a tree than a human.
Comment by squegeeboo — December 12, 2006 @ 9:51 am
Typical false dichotomy, another hallmark of right wingers who can’t debate their point. To begin with, many tropical countries continue to use DDT. Contrary to myth, there has never been an international ban on DDT, but many countries have voluntarily reduced or eliminated its use out of concern for the the dangers it brings. Also, there are alternatives to DDT, albeit more expensive. But the notion that millions of lives have been lost specifically because DDT use has been cut back is far from certain. Had use not been cut back, the sort of massive and indiscriminate use of DDT previously practiced would undoubtedly had bred resistance long ago, to point where I doubt it would retain any effectiveness at all nowadays.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:02 amAnd by the way, there is a strong connection between saving trees and saving people. But right wingers rarely understand how the earth’s climate and ecosystems work. According to their binary thinking process, it is “jobs” vs. “the environment”, “people” vs. “animals”, etc.
People first! Idiot.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:05 amAnd he will continue to have meetings until he finds enough people who agree 100% with him. I predict that calls to mental hospitals will begin soon.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:06 amRegarding the homosexual pastor:
Barnes told church members: “I have struggled with homosexuality since I was a 5-year-old boy. … I can’t tell you the number of nights I have cried myself to sleep, begging God to take this away.”
I guess self-loathing is taught at a young age in the uber-religious community. Thank the stars I was never placed on such a “holy” path by my loving and nuturing parents.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:16 amThank goodness the Iraq Study Group only cost $1.3 million to produce a report that the Commander-in-Chief can dismiss.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
Sounds like it has a lot of pages. For $5 I could have told US government my own study conclusion about Iraq: Its a f*ckin mess caused by US invasion.
Damage the environment vs. stopping the death of potential millions of lives….seems like an easy choice to me.
Comment by squegeeboo
Probably not one of your brightest post ever, squeegee. Cause, you know, environment is where those million live…if you damage the environment, it is pretty likely that you will kill millions…There are things called sustainable development and trophic chains.
But I understand, some people would rather save a tree than a human.
Comment by squegeeboo
Well, yeah! Trees arent some lazy, poor idiots trying to get the welfare.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:16 amSqueegeeboo is far from the most ignorant, stupid, or vile, right winger to post at this site.
Comment by VerbalKint
I have to disagree. Im not a big fan of him, but he makes some good sarcastic posts.
“The founding pastor of a second Colorado church has resigned over gay sex allegations,†the AP reports, “just weeks after the evangelical community was shaken by the scandal surrounding megachurch leader Ted Haggard,†a long-time opponent of gay marriage.
Seems to fit the pattern.
On the videotape, which The Post was allowed to view, Barnes told church members: “I have struggled with homosexuality since I was a 5-year-old boy. … I can’t tell you the number of nights I have cried myself to sleep, begging God to take this away.”
Interesting. So, according to the prevailing wisdom of the religious right, the pastor made a lifestyle choice at the age of five.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:20 amBarnes told church members: “I have struggled with homosexuality since I was a 5-year-old boy. …
December 12th, 2006 at 10:21 amGood luck on that. These religious freaks are all about hate.
VerbalKint
many countries have voluntarily reduced or eliminated its use out of concern for the the dangers it brings
True, but others ‘voluntarily’ reduced them because some donor countries will reduce/cut-off aid, if they resume using DDT.
AFM asserts that many countries have been coming under pressure from international health and environment agencies to give up DDT or face losing aid grants, and that Belize and Bolivia have gone on record to say that they gave in to pressure on this issue from the US Agency for International Development.
It’s on the Wiki site for DDT.
Had use not been cut back, the sort of massive and indiscriminate use of DDT previously practiced would undoubtedly had bred resistance long ago, to point where I doubt it would retain any effectiveness at all nowadays.
Probably true, however it was cut back, so the resistance isn’t there in most areas, so spray with DDT, and when the mosquitoes, gnats, etc. gain resistance, switch over to a more-expensive or less-effective (until resistance to DDT) alternative.
But the notion that millions of lives have been lost specifically because DDT use has been cut back is far from certain.
In the period from 1934-1955 there were 1.5 million cases of malaria in Sri Lanka, resulting in 80,000 deaths. After the country invested in an extensive anti-mosquito program with DDT, there were only 17 cases reported in 1963. Thereafter the program was halted, and malaria in Sri Lanka rebounded to 600,000 cases in 1968 and the first quarter of 1969. Although the country resumed spraying with DDT, many of the local mosquitoes had acquired resistance to DDT in the interim, presumably because of the continued use of DDT for crop protection, so the program was not nearly as effective as it had been before. Switching to the more-expensive malathion in 1977 reduced the malaria infection rate to 3,000 by 2004.
So DDT takes it down to 17 cases, an alternative takes it down to 3k cases a year, DDT took 8 years to get there, the alternative, nearly 30, so who knows how many people died in the extra 20 years it took for the alternative to drop the case load.
When you look at the total usage of DDT for crops compared to malaria control, malaria control uses much less, so if you stop using it for crops, and only use it for Malaria control it will help slow the insects gaining resistance and will also provide for less of an environmental impact.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:27 am#20 — that Carpetbagger website is fraught with Demmycrat opinion and other treason. As a warning to all right thinking Americans, I has added it as a link to my website so others may beware.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:27 amHere’s an idea. Get two jobs, a college education, save some money and then move away from the places where malaria is proficient.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:30 amDamage the environment vs. stopping the death of potential millions of lives….seems like an easy choice to me. But I understand, some people would rather save a tree than a human.
Comment by squegeeboo
Damaging or destroying the environment will kill many more humans, in addition to those killed by DDT resistant mosquitos.
But you know that, don’t you Squeegy. You’re winding up the locals early today…
December 12th, 2006 at 10:30 amJuan C
There are things called sustainable development and trophic chains.
Eh, DDT is mostly gone from the US, just take a couple decades, and it’s still used in the US as per the limitations on the ban. Get Malaria under control with DDT, then switch over to a more friendly pesticide if you don’t want it lingering in the environment longer than necessary.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:31 amI have to disagree. Im not a big fan of him, but he makes some good sarcastic posts.
So you think I am one of the most ignorant, stupid, or vile, right winger posters? That hurts me here (Points to heart)
squegeeboo,
Nice, it looks like I provoked you to do a little research. Now try to study the relationship between healthy trees and healthy people.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:33 am#2 squegeeboo
Why not just resume spraying DDT? It would be a lot cheaper, and the extra money could go towards infrastructure, or AIDS research, or food for the starving or any number of other things.
DDT was responsible for bringing the bald eagle population to the brink of extinction. Banning its use was what saved them. Women who are exposed to DDT show a concentrated presence of it in breast milk, so nursing babies get an unusually high dose of it. It’s been linked to delays in physical and mental development.
See Independent Online: “Rural mothers have DDT in breast milk – study”
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=14&click_id=14&art_id=vn20060724003819434C666973
Some people woiuld rather save the whole planet–people, animals, and all.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:36 amThat hurts me here (Points to heart)
Comment by squegeeboo
Did you manage a welling up of tears?
*eyes rolling*
December 12th, 2006 at 10:45 am*tiny violin playing*
Some people woiuld rather save the whole planet–people, animals, and all.
Comment by chimpeach
No need to make the difference. We are animals. I believe that since we choose to place ourselves in a higher category than animals causes many of the problems we see. We are not disconnected from the Animal Kingdom. We are part of it. “Save The Animals” includes saving ourselves.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:45 amchimpeach
See Independent Online: “Rural mothers have DDT in breast milk – studyâ€
From your Link:
Scientists said the levels of DDT found in babies warranted strong concern, but believed the malaria threat outweighed the negative effects of DDT at these levels.
Sounds like the risk of a disabled child from DDT was weighed against the lives saved by DDT, a hard choice, but if it drops the Malaria cases enough while only affecting a small enough amount of children/newborns, its the right one.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:45 amJuan C.
Well, yeah! Trees arent some lazy, poor idiots trying to get the welfare.
ZING, Oh wow, I completely missed that one, in that case I would be all for saving the tree.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:47 amGet Malaria under control with DDT, then switch over to a more friendly pesticide if you don’t want it lingering in the environment longer than necessary.
Comment by squegeeboo
I really dont know how that answer is related with what I said. I really dont know too much how much DDT can survive in the environment before it is decomposed. Perhaps it is not a bad idea what you say about the DDT, it could be a measure, but I dont know if it is a wise one. People in the US is safe from Malaria due to its health services, vaccines and related medical studies. People die from Malaria because they dont have access to health services, and not because they lack DDT. What I mean about your post is that it was really stupid: if you damage the environment, you will kill not only people, but also the entire ecosystem.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:49 amSqueegyWorld: If it can’t apply for welfare – save it.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:00 amSqueegyWorld: If it can’t apply for welfare – save it.
Comment by Zooey
Save Nicole Richie!
December 12th, 2006 at 11:01 amSave Nicole Richie!
Comment by dlet
Well, of course. She, like Paris Hilton, work really hard to earn their well deserved money. Not onlike those stinky bums…gosh, how I miss the Nazis /sarcasm off
December 12th, 2006 at 11:07 amJuan C
People die from Malaria because they dont have access to health services
Partially true, but they also die from Malaria because they get Malaria. Spray with DDT, and there are less mosquitoes to spread the disease, so less people dying from it regardless of the potential health services available to them.
People in the US is safe from Malaria due to its health services, vaccines and related medical studies.
No, we are safe from it because we wiped it out in the last 40’s and early 50’s, by draining breeding grounds and by spraying insecticides, most notably DDT, from planes over high risk areas. Both of those are environmental no-no’s, but the US seems to be doing fine enough from an ecological view point.
Zoo
December 12th, 2006 at 11:08 am*eyes rolling*
*tiny violin playing*
I need a hug, somebody tell Tundra stat.
#45
Sounds like the risk of a disabled child from DDT was weighed against the lives saved by DDT, a hard choice, but if it drops the Malaria cases enough while only affecting a small enough amount of children/newborns, its the right one.
It’s arguable. The point is, there’s no slamdunk decision here. It’s not a choice between saving trees and saving humans. And even if that were the issue, saving trees does save humans.
Anti-environmentalists are notoriously short-sighted. Too often they have a flippant disregard for the interdependence of species on this planet and for the roles that some seemingly unimportant environmental factors play in our survival. For example, short-sighted developers will fill in wetlands if they aren’t prevented from doing so by legal means, and then their developments will end up getting flooded.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:11 amVerbalKint – omigod….I just read from your link:
“Tourist (sic) could open up to allow visitors Arctic cruises with cocktail parties over the North Pole that previously defied the best efforts of many explorers.”
Oh well then – I guess that it’s all good then! (insert scream) As long as the tourists can have a good place to sip champagne!
The next paragraph was no freakin’ surprise either:
December 12th, 2006 at 11:11 am“Oil companies would move in to tap resources previously protected by the ice and freight firms could use the ocean as a shortcut.” Looks like Canada and Russia are about to enter the oil wars for real.
I need a hug, somebody tell Tundra stat.
Comment by squegeeboo
Oh man, you’re gonna get hurt, Squeegy….
Tundra — details, please…
Heh.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:13 amGood Morning all, Good post and link Chimpeach…..Wish the reich would get better educated before they type their dumb statement’s here. It does get tiresome reading their crap…..You’re local tree hugger, me, will add a note…DDT turned out to be one of the worst chemichles ever invented both for wildlife and all our enviroment…..By the way Squeegeboo, no trees, no air, no nothing…..Got it.?….Hope so….
Rummy’s doing what the reich does when bush baby kick’s them to the curb, winnnnnnne..Also note bull shit bush alway’s does the same over and over..Keeps acting like he will change, lip service to america and the world and continues to stall, lie, steal and murder through his war’s….All this administration ever does is come up with a new buzz, catch phrase in place of the one before,,Nothing changes except what the little dictator want’s…We must make our newly elected see we ment business when we put them in office and they had better do what we the people demand be done…..Hurry up January….Blessings all….Peace and put up you’re no spray signs..
December 12th, 2006 at 11:23 amBoth of those are environmental no-no’s, but the US seems to be doing fine enough from an ecological view point.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:29 amComment by squeegeeboo
mmm…squeegee, you are the most polluting country in the world per capita.
Juan C
mmm…squeegee, you are the most polluting country in the world per capita.
And?
December 12th, 2006 at 11:37 amIf it seems like Bush is acting like a petulant child, angry that the adults have decided to intervene and try to help him get out of the mess he created, insisting on doing it his way even though he has no idea what that is, it’s because he is. Not acting like a petulant child, he IS a petulant child. He has the mind of a seven year old, at best. The things of greatest importance to him are that he not be shown up and that he not accept advice from others. This is the level of Bush’s emotional maturity.
Contrast that with Lincoln, who not only accepted the counsel of others, he encouraged and accepted it from his political rivals. And Lincoln’s intellect was so far beyond Bush’s that it’s not even fair to compare them. It’s funny to hear Republicans call themselves the “party of Lincoln”. What a long downhill slide it’s been since then. They’re the “party of Bush” now. What a disgrace.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:40 amAnd?
Comment by squegeeboo
nothing. *sigh* nothing.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:42 amCaption Contest!
“Sen. Ted Stevens (R) peers from behind bars in his new residence after unexpectedly retiring from Congress.”
December 12th, 2006 at 11:44 amCaption Contest!
“Four Legs Good, Two Legs Better.”
December 12th, 2006 at 11:45 amWhat does NASA know about Earth? They’re specialty is space, obviously we can ignore this study.
Comment by squegeeboo — December 12, 2006 @ 9:16 am
You turd. NASA’s specialty is also planetary exploration.
You know, planetary.
As in, planet.
As in, Earth.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:49 amHere…go educate yourself.
Life on Earth.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:52 amVerbalKint – omigod….I just read from your link:
“Tourist (sic) could open up to allow visitors Arctic cruises with cocktail parties over the North Pole that previously defied the best efforts of many explorers.â€
Comment by margaret — December 12, 2006 @ 11:11 am
Bizarre, huh? The Times is a conservative paper, but this article is ridiculous. It sounds like an oil company representative with an IQ of 80 wrote it.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:55 amWC
You turd. NASA’s specialty is also planetary exploration.
You know, planetary.
As in, planet.
As in, Earth.
Bit to early in the morning for sarcasm to work on you? Or to read a bit further down, all the way to comment #24 before getting into a huff?
December 12th, 2006 at 11:56 amHe has the mind of a seven year old, at best. The things of greatest importance to him are that he not be shown up and that he not accept advice from others. This is the level of Bush’s emotional maturity.
Comment by chimpeach — December 12, 2006 @ 11:40 am
Your description is right on the mark. What baffles me is that so many people have failed to recognize this, though to me and most other educated people I know it was obvious even before Bush was elected in 2000.
December 12th, 2006 at 11:58 amThe trouble with the human race is the same inherent trouble with many polatician’s..Greed….The vast majority of the populace does not care about the big picture, inviroment, all life or true spirituality…..Relegion and war’s are big business….More stuff is the moto of the masses and much of the population does not care about pollution, they only care if it affect’s them personaly……Cut down all the trees, no air to breath….Pollute the soil and water and all the food supply is contaminated, no food, no water to drink all life dies……Pollute the air with contaminates and the death of the planet is slower but just as dead…..Most of the pollutant’s have genetic altering affect’s, disease promoting genes are in the fore front now with all the cancers….We were making some head way before this administration took over to stop all the pollution…..Now big business is in charge and they do as they please….Conservation and caring for our earth are hardly in the picture, neither is the loss of life from war’s all over our planet…..Building bomb’s to distroy life has been the number 1 for profit with the bush regime…..Blessings
December 12th, 2006 at 12:11 pm#25 I fully agree that the military needs to be in charge on the ground over there. So I Assume you do not agree with the Washington micromannaging of Bush & Co. Also the military whould be in charge, but the mission is, and should be, under governmental control…always.
#30 I don’t think it’s that they don’t understand, I think it is more thhat they do not care. It iis not really hard to understand at all.
general – The whole issue of this guy struggling with his homosexuality since he was five should (I would hope) clue in a few people to the fact that the did nto choose tobe gay as it has beena life long issue for him. HHe can choose to deny what he is, but he did nto choose to be what he is.
December 12th, 2006 at 12:12 pmBit to early in the morning for sarcasm to work on you? Or to read a bit further down, all the way to comment #24 before getting into a huff?
Comment by squegeeboo — December 12, 2006 @ 11:56 am
Nah. The odds were just too great that you were ignorant of NASA’s function.
December 12th, 2006 at 12:27 pmWC
Nah. The odds were just too great that you were ignorant of NASA’s function.
Fair enough, I do play stupid to a T. But everyone knows their function, it’s the inverse COS.
December 12th, 2006 at 12:30 pmThis homosexual pastor has been praying since he was 5 that God would take away his homosexuality. Has he ever meditated on his own experience and considered that he did not choose his sexuality, it was given to him by God. Has ever considered that God WANTS him to be homosexual?
December 12th, 2006 at 12:38 pmHas ever considered that God WANTS him to be homosexual?
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC)
The proverbial elephant in the living room…
That guy’s parents ought to be strung up for allowing him to grow up with such self-loathing.
December 12th, 2006 at 12:56 pmRobert: “Here is a good Idea, why don’t we let the Military decide what actions we take over there?”
Washington, Madison, Jefferson, Adams, et. al felt that the military shouldn’t be making policy decisions. They wanted a civilian government, civilian leadership and a military which would answer to civilians. So, no, it’s not a good idea to let the military make the decisions. The military works on military strategy to impliment civilian policy decisions. If the people of the U.S. want the military out of Iraq, and they do, it is the duty of our representatives to make that policy and the duty of our military to carry out that policy.
December 12th, 2006 at 1:09 pmDoes the homosexual pastor think god made a mistake?
December 12th, 2006 at 1:10 pmThe black community is now a liability to the Dems, as seen with William Jefferson (Clinton, coincidence, I think not), Cynthia McKinney and now Alcee Hastings. Dems will take their votes, but not share power (familiarity breeds contempt?), nor will Dems give the black community school vouchers to end the cycle of poverty.
The black community is now at its weakest point since prior to the civil rights legislation in the 1965. Women are quickly following, with only hispanics gaining incredible power. This is possible, because Dems have a lock on the black vote, as well as a significant percent of the female vote.
December 12th, 2006 at 2:22 pmGood post Zooey and many other’s..Some parent’s and peer’s do terrible damage…..Some day, and I hope I live to see the day when sexual preferance is not an issue, nor politics, relegion or race…..When war’s are never faught for any reason we will have become an enlightened society……The day diplomacy is the only answer will be a good day….Save the matches and burn nothing, not even the stake…..Blessings
December 12th, 2006 at 4:34 pmSharon,
I hope you see that day, too. When will people figure out that our children are perfect, just the way they come to us?
December 12th, 2006 at 6:07 pm#77 – Zooey,
December 12th, 2006 at 7:00 pmAccording to my other half – they are incapable of raising their own children as well as we raised them. Perfection is seen in the eye of the beholder.
“Democratic congressional leaders announced yesterday they plan to ‘place a moratorium on all earmarks until lobbying changes are enacted.’”
***************************
Sounds good…but “the proof of the pudding is in the eating”, or so it is said. It’s also said that “actions speak louder than words” and that “the road to Hell is paved with good intentions”. In short…I’ll believe it when I see it!!
December 12th, 2006 at 7:19 pmSqueegeebo, have you read Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson?
December 13th, 2006 at 12:29 am