ThinkFast: January 4, 2007
ThinkFast: January 4, 2007
“President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans’ mail without a judge’s warrant,” the New York Daily News reports. “The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a ’signing statement’ that declared his right to open people’s mail under emergency conditions.”
Neoconservatives “have found themselves under attack in Washington policy salons and, more important, within the Bush administration,” over the Iraq war. But now, “a small but increasingly influential group of neocons are again helping steer Iraq policy.” Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) will press for escalation at an event tomorrow at the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute.
Energy giant ExxonMobil borrowed tactics from the tobacco industry to “manufacture uncertainty” about climate change, spending $16 million on groups that question global warming, the Union of Concerned Scientists documents in a new report.
The “surge” becomes a “bump.” A State Department official says that President Bush is considering sending “no more than 15,000 to 20,000 U.S. troops” to Iraq. “Instead of a surge, it is a bump,” said a State Department official.
“A laboratory that has tested most of the nation’s electronic voting systems has been temporarily barred from approving new machines after federal officials found that it was not following its quality-control procedures and could not document that it was conducting all the required tests.”
The Washington Post highlights the plight of pregnant women in Iraq, who are “forgoing prenatal visits to doctors as a result” of the ongoing violence. “Fearful of going into labor during the nighttime curfew, they are having elective Caesarean sections.” They also suffer from a shortage of doctors, many of whom have fled the country, been kidnapped or killed.
The AFL-CIO has sued the Department of Labor to compel it to issue a rule requiring employers to pay for protective equipment used by an estimated 20 million workers to protect them from job hazards. By the department’s own estimates, “400,000 workers have been injured and 50 have died due to the absence of this rule, since 1999 when the rule was first proposed.”
2007 is “set to be the hottest on record worldwide due to global warming and the El Nino weather phenomenon,” beating the last record set in 1998, the Britain Meteorological Office says today. “This new information represents another warning that climate change is happening around the world,” the office said.
The New York Times may eliminate the “public editor,” an autonomous watchdog position created after controversies involving faulty Iraq war reporting and the Jayson Blair plagiarism scandal. Executive editor Bill Keller says the position might be scrapped after the current public editor, Byron Calame, completes his term in May.
And finally: Paris Hilton and 89-year-old Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) have more in common than you thought, including “a penchant for wearing leopard print,” spending a lot of time in front of cameras, and, The Hill reports, drinking Red Bull. “Although Byrd sometimes imbibes the hipster beverage, he’s not about to adopt a club-hopping lifestyle. ‘He likes Bob Evans and the Dairy Queen and Shoney’s,’” a spokesman said.
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
what a nightmare for American people having this abuser in power
January 4th, 2007 at 9:00 amWith every passing day, our rights are being chipped at and eliminated. No privacy in the mails, on the telephone, and eventually even the Internet. Oh, that these two years should pass quickly. I hope the Democrats can find some way of passing a Constitutional amendment by which presidential abusers of human rights can be removed from office.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:04 amI think it is time to start looking into the details of the methods of the “radical republicans” during the days of Abraham Lincoln. These extreme liberals took issue with conservative behavior and were millitant about putting an end to it. If Bush is going to bolding shit in our faces then he and his fellows need to get used to the taste of it themselves.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:18 am“A State Department official says that President Bush is considering sending “no more than 15,000 to 20,000 U.S. troops†to Iraq. “Instead of a surge, it is a bump,†said a State Department official.”
That’s just enough new soldiers to not do anything effective except provide more targets for the insurgents to attack.
Why does Pres. Bush obviously hate our troops so much?!?!?!?
January 4th, 2007 at 9:21 am“2007 is “set to be the hottest on record worldwide due to global warming . . . .”
Well, those who do not think more deeply about climate change might be alarmed by news such as this. But, it snowed in Denver a few days ago, so there’s no problem. See how easy that was? [sarcasm off]
January 4th, 2007 at 9:21 amtaking our rights one at a time, one day at a time. Democrats heed the warning. Stop this nonsense now. It’s time that you spoke up for the PEOPLE. Time to adhere to the Rule of Law and our Constitution. NOW!!!!!!
January 4th, 2007 at 9:22 amWarrentless phone tapping, warrentless mail opening….chip…chip…chip…goes our Constitutional rights….and from what …signing statements. How can these even stand the test in court? He contradicts a bill he just signs. What world are we living in? And he uses the old and tired excuse of protecting us from ourselves.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:24 amAnd You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid
But, it snowed in Denver a few days ago, so there’s no problem. See how easy that was?
Ah, but that was 2006, so we can use it to ignore 2006 being the hottest year on record, but we need a new blizzard or two for 2007. But I hear with all those new Ice Cubes in the ocean from that Canadian ice shelf, it should be a cold year for the oceans, which then disproves global warming of course.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:29 amHopefully this Congress will do something to rein in this signing statement BS.
When Congress passes a law that says one thing very specifically, and then the President issues a signing statement saying that he’s going to do the opposite why hasn’t Congress somehow shut down the President?
You’ve got a President who has essentially become his own Congress. This is not what the framers of the Constitution intended as far as I know.
In addition it gives the President the authority to veto a law without really vetoing it. This prevents Congress from having the ability to over the President’s veto.
I thought that the ABA had filed suit about this. Does anyone know if that is still proceeding?
January 4th, 2007 at 9:29 amThis President can “claim” he has whatever powers he wants, but it’s the Constitution that actually gives him his powers. No matter what he believes, he does NOT have the Constitutional authority to open your mail without a judge’s warrant. Every member of Congress, including Democrats, who voted for this bill should be impeached by their constituents and removed from office. (My congressman just got elected, so I’m not worried about him.)
As I see it, the problem is that in order to get this law declared unconstitutional, I believe that somebody has to be affected by it so they can claim their rights were violated. (Legal standing?) But if it’s done in secret, you may never know your rights were violated, so you couldn’t go into court and complain. And they might open your mail and learn something to use against somebody else (and then act on it). So that person would would have an even harder time proving his rights were violated.
This is how I understand the law, but I am not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV). I happily welcome people like Briseadh (and other legal experts whose word I trust) to tell me where I’m wrong. I do hope I am wrong. And I hope it isn’t worse than I think, though I fear it is.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:32 amHey Shrub, sign this, you two-bit hack, piece of sh*t!
January 4th, 2007 at 9:34 amBaloney.
Evidence of Global Warming is not that it’s getting warmer. It’s ABNORMAL WEATHER PATTERNS. Ask anyone in Denver if what they’re seeing is normal. For that matter, ask anyone in Chicago, which has not seen even a hint of snow since winter officially began on December 21st.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:35 am“This new information represents another warning that climate change is happening around the world,â€
But there was a blizzard in Siberia and another one two days ago in Managua. So, no, there is no global warming /sarcasm
January 4th, 2007 at 9:36 amThe New York Times may eliminate the “public editor,†an autonomous watchdog position created after controversies involving faulty Iraq war reporting and the Jayson Blair plagiarism scandal.
Just in time for the presidential run-up, possible showdown with Iran and a troop escalation in Iraq. How convenient that they remove something that is working when new and greater mistakes are waiting to be made on the horizon.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:37 amTheToonGuy
Evidence of Global Warming is not that it’s getting warmer. It’s ABNORMAL WEATHER PATTERNS.
Then why is it called Global Warming instead of Global Abnorming?
January 4th, 2007 at 9:37 amWow, that is bad reporting. Shame on you, TL, this is below your standards:
“A laboratory that has tested most of the nation’s electronic voting systems has been temporarily barred from approving new machines after federal officials found that it was not following its quality-control procedures and could not document that it was conducting all the required tests.â€
The story is that this occured LAST SUMMER, and the Federal gov’t didn’t bother to tell the states that had certified voting equipment in reliance on that company.
This is a GIANT democratic and fiduciary scandal, brewing. Election equipment was not properly certified, and voting equipment companies which represented their equipment as still certified (but knew otherwise) were engaged in FRAUD.
Heads up, TL — don’t sleep, ¡huele a azufre!
January 4th, 2007 at 9:39 amEvidence of Global Warming is not that it’s getting warmer. It’s ABNORMAL WEATHER PATTERNS. Comment by TheToonGuy
I think and its wishful thinking that squeegee is half-joking. He doesnt believe too much in global warming but IMO his last comment was ironic.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:39 amI agree with you, global warming doesnt mean mediterranean tans for everybody, but climate change.
Note to self, send a note to TP staff requesting a picture of a (real bush) not the dreadful murderious man with no lip’s, no soul and dead greedy eyes portraying something living……Blessings
January 4th, 2007 at 9:42 amThen why is it called Global Warming instead of Global Abnorming?
Comment by squegeeboo
Cuz average temperature of the globe is increasing. No matter how much blizzards you have in Denver.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:42 amFor that matter, ask anyone in Chicago, which has not seen even a hint of snow since winter officially began on December 21st.
Comment by TheToonGuy
Not to mention the cherry blossoms in NYC are blooming months early.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:42 amsorry…many blizzards.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:42 amJuan C
January 4th, 2007 at 9:44 amHe doesnt believe too much in global warming
I do believe in it, I just don’t care that it’s happening, and it provides me with a great way to mock my side of the fence. Interesting choice on using ‘believe’ by the way, it makes it sound more like faith than science.
ToonGuy:
“Evidence of Global Warming is not that it’s getting warmer. It’s ABNORMAL WEATHER PATTERNS.”
…and those changing weather patterns are caused by?
January 4th, 2007 at 9:45 amJuan C
Cuz average temperature of the globe is increasing. No matter how much blizzards you have in Denver.
But but but, CLINTON….
I mean, but TheToonGuy said that it’s not about average increases in temperature. Evidence of Global Warming is not that it’s getting warmer.
How am I supposed to get on board with this Global Warming thing if you guys contradict each other so much?
January 4th, 2007 at 9:46 amDoes anyone know if these signing statements are binding on the next President?
January 4th, 2007 at 9:47 amIt’s like . . . . okay . . . you kicked our a##ses in the election . . .
my entire life has been a failure . . . we are going to be under continuous investigation and have to live with . . . . oh my god ! . . oversite ! . . .
plus . . .I no longer have my rubber-stamp congress . . . .
now . . . . I’m-gonna-read-your-mail ! naaaner naaaner naaaner.
If there’s anyone on this planet that even bothers to listen to this
January 4th, 2007 at 9:47 amboob I’d be suprised. Even more suprising is how
he hasn’t been physically removed from the W.H. by about a half
a million angry Americans.
Then why is it called Global Warming instead of Global Abnorming?
Comment by squegeeboo
By the scientists and people that really are involved in attempting to understand it it is called Global Climate Change. The Global Warming label is just another misinformed by product of our wonderful media and uniformed public.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:47 amThe “surge†becomes a “bump.†A State Department official says.
And the democratic congress becomes a “comma.”
January 4th, 2007 at 9:47 am“This President can “claim†he has whatever powers he wants, but it’s the Constitution that actually gives him his powers.”
With the exception of times of war. That’s the basis of his actions, of the canard of his actions. The real issue is that THIS IS NOT A LEGAL GOVERNMENT. They were NOT elected, either time — we are having a coup — and they have , and colluded with persons in the Congress to commit Conspiracy to Defraud the United States, and so on.
“Every member of Congress, including Democrats, who voted for this bill should be impeached by their constituents and removed from office.”
Well, that’s nonsense on several levels — the main one being that what you are suggesting is impossible, and ignores the existence of the judicial branch. Unless you want to argue that Congress can’t pass laws the President signs and become law if there is the chance or likelihood that they will be stayed by the Courts — which is, after all, our system of gov’t.
“As I see it, the problem is that in order to get this law declared unconstitutional, I believe that somebody has to be affected by it so they can claim their rights were violated.”
The ACLU/CCR lawsuit is in representation of Americans and non-Americans who are being or were detained in Guantanamo or elsewhere. They do have standing.
“And I hope it isn’t worse than I think, though I fear it is.” Wayne A. Schneider
Oh, it’s worse all right. But better plan on the Congress not indicting itself across the aisle is my advice.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:48 amWaxman or somebody in Congress needs to challenge in court the use of signing statements on separation of powers grounds. Congress has not voted on the language in these signing statements. On the surface they look clearly illegal.
Frankly, there should be a special court that reviews all bills signed into law for constitutional compliance. Look at how the line item veto was handled. Clinton issued a line item veto but did not enforce the provision vetoed until after the the line item measure was processed through the court system. That was the right thing to do because in the end the Supreme Court ruled the line item bill unconstitutional. (The line item veto was signed into law by George H. W. Bush with an effective date of January 1993). Signing statements are just another form of line item veto and an attempted end run on the Supreme Court decision.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:50 amInteresting choice on using ‘believe’ by the way, it makes it sound more like faith than science.
Comment by squegeeboo
To believe the scientific evidence in front of you is not faith. Faith is belief without fact.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:51 amWayne, the postal reform bill specificially protected First Class mail from intrusion without the appropriate warrants. Bush’s signing statement REVERSES that bill. Damn…this is one more nail in the coffin containing the Constitution and Bill of Rights. GW has, indeed, become the dictator he openly said would make “ruling” easier for him. IMPEACH the bast..d!!
January 4th, 2007 at 9:53 am#10, you are correct. Until the feds try to use any info obtained w/o a warrant, it won’t be challenged. Which brings up another point: if they are actually doing this to catch terrorists, how can they get a conviction if the evidence won’t hold up? So essentially they are sabatoging any potential case they might have by obtaining said evidence w/o a warrant. So once again, either they’re lying or they’re stupid. And I don’t think they’re stupid.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:56 am…and those changing weather patterns are caused by?
Comment by smafdy
Unreleased infrared terrestrial radiation (IR), absorbed by greenhouse gases like CO2, methane, water vapor, etc. It is a fact that the human is contributing to the increasing levels of CO2 and methane which can absorbed 25 times more IR than CO2.
How am I supposed to get on board with this Global Warming thing if you guys contradict each other so much?
Comment by squegeeboo
Making your own research. I recommend non-american sources of info.
Interesting choice on using ‘believe’ by the way, it makes it sound more like faith than science.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:01 amThats why I said it for your case.
When Congress passes a law that says one thing very specifically, and then the President issues a signing statement saying that he’s going to do the opposite why hasn’t Congress somehow shut down the President?
Well, we have had a rubber-stamp Congress led by Republicans for the last 6 years. Now that the Dems are in control, we might see some action on this.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:02 amWayne A.,
I need you to help me here. Can you translate for me as you understand my position?
I am not to keen on the idea of my mail being open at the whims of someone in political office.
Again, please translate for the masses that may not understand.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:03 amdlet
January 4th, 2007 at 10:06 amTo believe the scientific evidence in front of you is not faith. Faith is belief without fact.
True, but if you just use ‘believe’ you run into a similar issue as this comment The Global Warming label is just another misinformed by product of our wonderful media and uniformed public.
By using ‘believe’ in debates on Global Warming you give the opposition an easy out, because they can then turn that statement around on you to make it look like a belief in what scientists have told you, as opposed to an understanding of what their research shows. While it won’t change your opinion, it can be used as a way to boost skepticism among people who are either mis-informed or still on the fence about the issue.
RE: “President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans’ mail without a judge’s warrant,†the New York Daily News reports. “The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a ’signing statement’ that declared his right to open people’s mail under emergency conditions.â€
Let’s rewind to the Nixon Whitehouse. From CNN.com today:
Fool (noun): Anyone who says that Bush would never use warrantless wiretapping, or as we today learn, warrantless mail reading, to spy on ordinary Americans or, as has been suggested, members of Congress.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:08 amDallasNE – GW is asking for the Congress to give him the line item veto NOW..despite the fact that the Supreme Court found it to be unconstitutional and I would hope, would do so again.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:09 am#8: very clever. Problem solved for another year.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:11 amCan’t we just investigate him and then impeach? I mean, I know the votes aren’t there, but after the investigation, who knows…
January 4th, 2007 at 10:15 amGeorge W. Bush is a scumbag.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:16 am…the Supreme Court found it to be unconstitutional and I would hope, would do so again.
Comment by impeachcheneythenbush — January 4, 2007 @ 10:09 am
But now that Bush has 2 relatively easy appointments to the SC, who’s to say?
(And remember…Harriet Miers is still the most qualified person in America to be on the SC. George Bush himself said so. Everyone else is just a pretender.)
January 4th, 2007 at 10:17 amI’m not important enough to get an anthrax letter from any one..At best I only get junk mail and 3 bill’s a month…Can I hope bull shit himself would open an anthrax letter sent to me, before it arrives or I even know about it…My guess not likely, to bad……This like everything this paranoid, insane madman does is his attempt at dictatorship and probably intended for his political advoceries……Time is long past Impeachment, life time prison for the insane is the answer…….Blessings
January 4th, 2007 at 10:18 amWasn’t Homeland Security reading people’s mail and forwarding it with a note saying they read it?
January 4th, 2007 at 10:22 amBy using ‘believe’ in debates on Global Warming you give the opposition an easy out, because they can then turn that statement around on you to make it look like a belief in what scientists have told you, as opposed to an understanding of what their research shows.
It only gives them an out if they are idiots and they don’t understand the meaning of the word “believe”. Either that or they just want to muddle up the discussion for their own purposes which have nothing to do with a reasonable discussion. Semantics are just a way to ignore the facts and if a person were to discuss Global Climate Change with me and they got hung up on the word “believe” if I said it I would probably laugh at them and leave because there is no use in having a discussion with someone like that.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:23 amCan’t we just investigate him and then impeach? I mean, I know the votes aren’t there, but after the investigation, who knows…
Comment by PoliticalCritic — January 4, 2007 @ 10:15 am
Are you so sure he’d step down? All you gotta do is set off a nuke in Dallas and delcare a national security emergency.
And don’t tell me this government is not capable of planning such an event. Google “Operation Northwoods” and get back to me.
Would…could?…Congress order the police to remove him? The military? Would they carry out the orders?
Talk about a Constitutional crisis.
Too bad we are not on the U.S.S. Enterprise where we could have the doctor relieve the captain from duty due to mental incompetence.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:24 am#33. Your comments about the government ruining their own cases.
I’ve always been amazed at people in very high places, government or private business. Some of them seem to get this arrogance that they can do anything they want with impunity. There are just too many examples to cite.
I’ve wondered quite a bit about the lack of progress with many of the terrorist cases. Especially for what the administration refers to as high profile cases. You’d think they’d want to bring these cases to trial as quickly as possible so they could trumpet the results.
My thought is that the reason these cases are being delayed is that the administration has broken so many laws that if the cases went to any type of normal court they would be thrown out right away. Evidence obtained improperly, “detainees” who were tortured, “detainees” who gave evidence while being tortured, etc.
I feel the administration desparately wants to win these cases, but they can’t afford the light of day shining on the cases.
JMHO.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:25 amWasn’t Homeland Security reading people’s mail and forwarding it with a note saying they read it?
Comment by Jeff — January 4, 2007 @ 10:22 am
I do believe they were. Seems they were also opening packages being sent through the mail from overseas.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:26 am#48 Actually, I think the lack of progress on terrorist cases points to their over-hyping in addition to lack of real evidence. I’m thinking Padilla and the Miami case along with the so-called British plot. It’s done to instill fear and to make people think they’re actually doing something. But like the boy who cried wolf. it only works a few times until the masses figure out it’s a bunch of bs.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:35 am#25 they are not binding on this president as the power to make law still is with the congress. Signing statements in effect are the president making law.
#24 I thought you said you do agree that global warming is occurring, it’s just that you don’t care? How is anyone supposed to take your position seriously if you don’t have a solid position? Additionally the earlier quote about believing in global warming is not a question of faith it is a question of accepting that the facts as laid out by thousands of climate scientists are real facts and that those fact support the hypothesis. What a bunch of non-scientists on a message board think is irrelevant to the picture, science is in agreement. So what if the message board guys are inconsistent. At least they are inconsistent with each other, you seem to be inconsistent with yourself.
#30 I am sure that is going to occur soon.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:46 amThe “surge†becomes a “bump.†A State Department official says that President Bush is considering sending “no more than 15,000 to 20,000 U.S. troops†to Iraq. “Instead of a surge, it is a bump,†said a State Department official.
A “surge” sounds scary, but a “bump” sounds cute. Thank you State Department official, I feel so much better.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:48 am/sarcasm
The New York Times may eliminate the “public editor,†an autonomous watchdog position created after controversies involving faulty Iraq war reporting and the Jayson Blair plagiarism scandal. Executive editor Bill Keller says the position might be scrapped after the current public editor, Byron Calame, completes his term in May.
No more of that pesky oversight or accuracy crap…
January 4th, 2007 at 10:52 amZooey, My Dad found a bump once, then he found out it was cancer and it spread. You know, got bigger and bigger.
Just sayin’…
January 4th, 2007 at 10:53 amMy Dad found a bump once, then he found out it was cancer and it spread. You know, got bigger and bigger.
Just sayin’…
Comment by robert
That’s why I put the sarcasm tag on there, Robert.
Gosh…..
January 4th, 2007 at 10:57 am**eyes rolling**
TP: “a small but increasingly influential group of neocons are again helping steer Iraq policy.â€
And this influential group recommends that the US should: (Link to LA Times) “…implement more traditional counterinsurgency ideas, such as keeping soldiers longer in their deployed areas so they could get to know the local population.”
Let’s see…this scheme would be implemented by soldiers who don’t know the people, their customs, their religion, their history of tribalism, even their language. Sounds like a plan, all right…just not a good one.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:00 amyou get my point;)
January 4th, 2007 at 11:00 amLet those bloodthirsty old farts, McCain and Lieberman, take some M-16s and go to Iraq—if they’re so gung-ho to kill. Meanwhile, lets bring our troops home.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:03 amyou get my point;)
Comment by robert
As long as you got mine first!
Tag — you’re it. :)
January 4th, 2007 at 11:04 amWhile the administration hides behind a veil of secrecy, “we the Peope” must hang out their laundry? Totally unamerican.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:05 amBush has failed to live up to his pledge to uphold the Constitution.
Traitor Bush.
The 2006 election: was it just a dream? All American elections: just a dream?
We’ve got to find another way.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:08 amCan I say something about global warming?! Even the idiots who claim it’s not man-made should care enough to want to do something about it.
If we saw an asteroid approaching earth, with the potential to destroy the planet, what would you do? Say “I didn’t cause it” and watch it hit? Or try to stop it?
January 4th, 2007 at 11:09 amSens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) will press for escalation at an event tomorrow at the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute.
So the McCain/Lieberman ticket is solidifying. Thanks CT. I wonder if this would make Lieberman the only person to lose the vice-presidential election running for two different parties.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:16 amFor everyone who is concerned about President Bush’s signing statement mentioned above.
You’re willing to write your comments here. That’s great.
At the same time just a reminder. Be they Democrats, or Republicans, PLEASE write your senators and representatives about this!
With the new Congress in power, it’s time to help direct their actions.
“We’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it any more!”
January 4th, 2007 at 11:17 amBush is lucky if he can lace up his own shoes, so expecting him to follow along on more complex items is a leap of faith.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:22 amAs long as you got mine first!
Tag — you’re it. :)
Comment by Zooey
Oy!
January 4th, 2007 at 11:23 am#62 – Exactly the right point! The asteroid could be filling the sky, and we’d still be arguing about whether something should be done, or could be done… just like global warming.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:31 amOy!
Comment by Yenta 2
My kakameyme baby sister, the forever kvetsher….oy.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:36 amSomebody saw …a moment…between you and robert, Zoo. Just sayin.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:40 amMark
I thought you said you do agree that global warming is occurring, it’s just that you don’t care? How is anyone supposed to take your position seriously if you don’t have a solid position?
Who’s says I mean to be serious about my global warming posts, not I.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:41 amit provides me with a great way to mock my side of the fence.
Global Abnormalizing
Don’t sound like phrases meant to be taken seriously. And to reiterate on my ‘believe’ stance, it is to easy of a word to be manipulated/misconstrued to be used in a debate when your side has the facts, and provides an excellent opportunity to sway any onlookers away from your side, so it should be avoided and instead words like ‘fact’, or phrases like ’scientific evidence points towards’
#65, My bet, bush doesn’t own any lace up’s..Bet all they allow him to wear are velcro or loafers and I am sure this nut bag is soft in those loafers….Blessing
January 4th, 2007 at 11:46 amSomebody saw …a moment…between you and robert, Zoo. Just sayin.
Comment by Juan C
I thought that was you, Juan. Sorry!
I guess Robert and I can’t even be friendly without somebody making something of it?
January 4th, 2007 at 11:50 amShit, we don’t need hearings to impeach this idiot.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:53 amGet the complete list of signing statements that prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that he has violated hundreds of laws, expressly contravened the intent of the congress with respect to said laws, and is a crucking fiminal.
Impeach the bastard.
squegeeboo
You do have a point about the use of the word “belief” in the argument about global warming (and I could add evolution, stem cell research, and any other science issue). Using the word “accept” is better in that it forces the opponent to deny the reality of facts or to offer alternative facts.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:54 am“Signing statements” could easily be deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. The argument could easily be made that the intention of the signing statement is that it should be taken as law, yet this is law that was not voted on in Congress. If Bush wants to write an Executive Order, then he should do so within the allowed bounds of the EO. But he can’t just make up anything that he likes and expect it to be considered law. From now on, if I ever get a speeding ticket or a parking ticket, next to my signature, I’ll just issue a signing statement saying that I can park wherever I want and drive at any speed I like.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:07 pmI was talking to someone last night who lives on the ocean side of Nova Scotia in Canada – her crocuses are blooming…
January 4th, 2007 at 12:09 pmEnough already! How as a nation can we continue to stand on the sidelines and allow our fascist President to continually violate our Constitution.
At this point, I wholly support the physical incarceration and detention of Pres. Bush et al. Give him the treatment that he feels that he is authorized to give to others.
He is supposed to be a servant of the Constitution, not an interpreter, or rather a misinterpreter.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:10 pmSo the McCain/Lieberman ticket is solidifying. Thanks CT.
Comment by dlet
Who do I thank for GWB? I mean, CT shouldn’t get to have ALL the credit for this mess! ;~)
January 4th, 2007 at 12:21 pmI guess Robert and I can’t even be friendly without somebody making something of it?
Comment by Zooey
mmmm…no, if can say something about it. ;)
January 4th, 2007 at 12:21 pmCT shouldn’t get to have ALL the credit for this mess! ;~)
Comment by margaret
Naw, CTs not bad. I like to visit. Just a bad judgement. As for GWB I blame Barbara.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:33 pmAnd to reiterate on my ‘believe’ stance, it is to easy of a word to be manipulated/misconstrued to be used in a debate when your side has the facts, and provides an excellent opportunity to sway any onlookers away from your side, so it should be avoided and instead words like ‘fact’, or phrases like ’scientific evidence points towards’ – Sponge Bob
I don’t buy that it is an easy word to manipulate and distort, only when you choose to distort it for dishonest purposes. For instance if you had a discussion on the Holocaust. One side presents the facts of the German record system, the dead bodies, witness testimony, photography, statements from the criminals themselves etc… then they sum up their argument by saying we believe that the holocaust occurred. The other side then makes your comment about believe sounding more like faith than facts etc… the word believe is simply being used to manipulate the listener and to make their argument, period. i.e. they distort the meaning of the word believe in this context so they can ignore the facts and stoke their argument which more likely than not has no basis so they need to resort to spurious attacks because they have nothing. It is only easy to abuse and manipulate only when one side of the debate chooses to be dishonest with the presentation of their case or rebuttal of the other side’s portion of the argument. Once you see the trick attempted then you should have a pretty good idea that whomever does it is shooting blanks. I also feel that the word believe can be properly used to channel the pattern of facts into the conclusion. I use it all the time when summing arguments with the IRS. Paragraph I – Issue at hand, II – Facts of our case, III- Summary of applicable law and cites, IV – Summation of our argument tying Issues, facts and Law together…therefore we believe the facts as presented… V – Suggested resolution VI – Thank you and good bye…. I usually get more resolved favorably than not and the word believe has never hurt me. The IRS people tend to be very honest and don’t distort the meaning of the word because when used in an argument with fact supporting it, it is contextually correct.
True though that statements like the facts support… might help alleviate deliberate distortion, but any honest thinking person can spot the dishonesty and draw their own conclusions of the person perpetrating the fraud and their argument.
#75 People think the reason Alito was nominated was for his views on Abortion and other right wing issues. I tend to believve that the real reason he was nominatred by Bush is because Alito believes in the theory of the unitary executive which I would think enncompasses signing statements. I have not seen anything written about Robberts and the unitary executive, but I have with Alito.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:37 pmdlet,
Blame both Poppy and Barbara. They created the devil child, and supposedly raised him together. Just sayin’
January 4th, 2007 at 12:40 pmmmmm…no, if can say something about it. ;)
Comment by Juan C
You’re a sweet one, Juan. :)
January 4th, 2007 at 12:41 pmThose millions of Republican dollars portrayed Lamont as an elitist, inexperienced, one-issue candidate. With all the cards stacked against him, Lamont almost pulled it off anyway.
The non-Republicans in CT who didn’t have the guts to take a chance with Lamont are probably wondering why Lieberman is spending so much time with McCain these days.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:41 pmNot to mention the cherry blossoms in NYC are blooming months early.
Comment by dlet — January 4, 2007 @ 9:42 am
a) There’s cherry trees in NYC? and b) they’re blooming!?
We’re about an hour north of NYC, and we’ve only had light snow showers one or two times. It’s supposed to get up to about 60 on Saturday here.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:52 pmsquegeeboo, check out this link.
This blizzard was a freak anomaly in a freek anomaly of a year. Read that. Tied for the Driest year since record keeping began. Even with that blizzard, we were still in the top 10 driest years.
The overall values for 2006 are again, frightening. The average maximum temperature here in Denver is 64.3degF. Guess what last year was? 66.2. The year before? 65.7. Our average minimun temperature at 37.3 beat both the year before (37.2) and the average (35.9). You’re right. Global Warming may not explain these anomalies, but Global Warming (err, Global Climate Change) fits the facts pretty well.
One-time weather events do not make or break a prediction. Climate is _trends_ in weather. As we continue to break records, the average values start changing. Average temperature, factoring in 2006, will raise by a fraction of a degree. Average rainfall, with the 7th driest year factored in, will decrease. What do changes in averages mean? Changes in long-term climate.
We can and have tested the CO2 levels for hundreds of thousands of years in the past. We know that our current atmospheric CO2 levels are loads higher than any time in that hundred+ thousand year stretch. It’s harder for us to test temperatures during that time, but here’s where ‘belief’ comes into play. Theories can be disbelieved, and conversely believed, though some argue that ‘belief’ in a theory is misusing the word belief. However, belief or not, the key is that you stop and look at the evidence. It is accepted that CO2 blocks heat from escaping the Earth’s atmosphere like glass keeps heat from escaping a greenhouse (hence another term for Global Warming/Climate Change. The Greehouse Effect). It logically follows that more CO2 traps more heat. Heat is nothing more than energy. What happens if you inject more energy into a system? It starts exhibiting signs of stronger activity.
Powerful blizzards that dump 2 feet of snow on Denver.
Forest Fires that burn hundreds or thousands of acres of land.
Powerful hurricanes with 180mph winds in the Atlantic Ocean.
Powerful tornadoes that cut swaths across the American midwest.
Altering of global ocean currents that, while they won’t have the effect of a hollywood blockbuster made back in 2004, still could paradoxically lower the temperature of Europe.
Forced migration or extinction of animal and plant species further north.
Extensive desertification of large swaths of land in extremely politically sensitive lands, such as the Middle East.
So what is it about Climate Change can’t you understand or accept? Is the thought that we humans can change the climate of this planet too much for you to swallow? Is it that since we can’t understand every possible nuance of the complex system that comprises Earth you can’t accept the overall view that increased CO2 results in increased heat retention in our Atmosphere? Is it because you can’t accept that sometimes flukes may occur where temporary events may cause blizzard-like conditions even though the rest of the month continues to exhibit typical heating conditions (Denver’s December average maximum was 2.1degF under the all-time average, but it’s average minimum was 5.0degF over the all-time average, pushing December’s Mean temperature 1.4degF over the all-time Mean)?
Weather’s complicated, that much is sure. Weathermen, especially up here in Colorado, rarely have the ability to get the right answer consistantly. We don’t know exactly what the additional heat from the increased CO2 will do to our atmosphere, but one thing is certian. Increased energy means change in climate. It’s commonly thought that the Ancestral Puebloans, an ancient race of Native Americans that lived in the four-corners area of Colorado and other areas, left this land because of an extreme drought. Denver draws the majority of its water supplies from snow-melt from the western slopes of the Rockies. If it turns out that a consequence of altered climate because of global warming is that the rains and snows either fail or move to areas where our water system can’t catch it, then you’ll have a million or so people who won’t have water anymore. And that’s just Denver. Imagine the rest of the world also suffering from such things, especially such unstable areas as the Arabian sands. If you thought the war in Iraq is bad, wait until we have to start policing the Middle-East to keep our oil (the biggest thing that makes the CO2 in the first place) flowing into our cars. You may be comfortable in ignoring climate change, but I’m not.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:00 pmMark
when you choose to distort it for dishonest purposes.
but any honest thinking person can spot the dishonesty and draw their own conclusions of the person perpetrating the fraud and their argument.
Dude, it sounds like your placing your trust in the honesty/integrity of your ideological opponents, and in the intelligence/logic skills of the average person. Placing trust in either of those areas is a huge mistake. Cover your bases and cut out language that is easy for your opponents to manipulate, and winning arguments/debates becomes much easier.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:02 pmI worry about all these global warming predictions… If 2007 becomes the second hottest and not hottest year on record, all we’ll hear in the news is how the predictions didn’t come true, not the more relevant fact that the trends are 100% supported by global warming theory and not “urban heat islands” or whatever other dumb thing they pull out. There have got to be better press releases than just predictions, right? Show the damage actually happening NOW, not what will be… People respond when they see pictures showing the shrinking ice caps better than just “south florida will be underwater by 2050″ no matter how true the prediction may turn out to be…
Second… Would a presidential signing statement actually hold up if challeneged in the supreme court? I mean Bush is pretty much usurping all separation powers here… I know this is nothing new, but it’s getting more and more serious every day. The USA cannot survive if presidents just do what they want and then get pardoned if they get caught. This is just sick…
January 4th, 2007 at 1:08 pmJeremy
So what is it about Climate Change can’t you understand or accept? Is the thought that we humans can change the climate of this planet too much for you to swallow?
Perhaps you missed my above comment (#22), I agree that Global Warming is happening. I just don’t care.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:10 pma) There’s cherry trees in NYC? and b) they’re blooming!?
Comment by JaneESchneider
They are only at the Botanical Gardens but yeah they started to bloom. I love going there to see them but it just doesn’t seem right to go now.
I haven’t wore my winter jacket yet this year either and so far the snow suit we bought for “baby dlet” has only been worn for photo ops. Origionally being from Buffalo I miss the snow and the cold. Makes me feel wonderful to be out on a freshly fallen snow day and the air heavy and quiet with cold.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:14 pmNope I never place trust in them especially when they are right wingers who have shown a tremndous willingness to distort. I put the trust in the mind of the listener and hope that they can discern the dishonesty and act accordiingly. For a few years I was loing faith that people have this ability anymore, but the last year has seen my faith in our people grow. Now if the 30% who seem to be easily swayed by faulty arguments finally see the light…
Funny thing one of our managers was bitchign about his software nto working and mutter the word dmocrats over and over. His secretary asked him what was up and he said that the stupid program was probabbly designed by democrats and that is why he could not get it to do what he wanted it to do. So for him there may be no hope becauuse he blames democrats for his inability to use microsoft word. Much like my brother in law still blames everything on Clinton. and I mean everything!
January 4th, 2007 at 1:18 pmPerhaps you missed my above comment (#22), I agree that Global Warming is happening. I just don’t care.
Comment by squegeeboo
For not caring you sure do make a lot of comments on it. So even though you say it I belie….thin…..understa….KNOW that you must a little. Whew almost let my “faith” show by saying believe.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:19 pmdlet
For not caring you sure do make a lot of comments on it.
I find it a fun one to discuss now and again, if it’s just a global warming thread I tend to stay away, to many zealots on each side.
So even though you say it I belie….thin…..understa….KNOW that you must a little. Whew almost let my “faith†show by saying believe.
ZING!!!!
Mark
January 4th, 2007 at 1:28 pmFunny thing one of our managers was bitchign about his software nto working and mutter the word dmocrats over and over.
Nah, you can tell it wasn’t programmed by a Democrat, because that would have required work on their part to write the code.
Makes me feel wonderful to be out on a freshly fallen snow day and the air heavy and quiet with cold.
Comment by dlet — January 4, 2007 @ 1:14 pm
Yes, I can feel and smell it now–you know that indefinable snow smell. I love that smell.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:32 pmZooey, OK, no more moments between us. I think Juan is jealous.
We are up to about 10 things we agree on, just for the record.
My $.02 on Global Warming/Climate Change. Whether it is cause by man alone, nature alone or both is irrelevant. It is something to be concerned about and we should try to decrease the human element of it as much as possible.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:35 pmrobert
It is something to be concerned about and we should try to decrease the human element of it as much as possible.
So we should all eat more beef, to decrease the surplus cow population, there by cutting down on their C02 emissions.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:41 pmSo we should all eat more beef, to decrease the surplus cow population, there by cutting down on their C02 emissions.
Comment by squegeeboo
Isn’t the cattel industry’s new slogan “Eat beef we’ll clone more”?
January 4th, 2007 at 1:49 pmI’d like for Congress to pass a binding resolution or something stating that regardless of what the President says when signing a bill into law, it is his responsibility and his duty to uphold and obey the laws that Congress has written and he has signed. It is not his job to decide what is constitutional or not; that is the job of the Supreme Court.
As to any statements he makes regarding his supposed “war time” powers, those powers would not come into effect (if they even really exist) until Congress declares war and Congress has not done that.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:56 pmSo the McCain/Lieberman ticket is solidifying. Thanks CT. I wonder if this would make Lieberman the only person to lose the vice-presidential election running for two different parties.
Comment by dlet — January 4, 2007 @ 11:16 am
THAT would almost make the ticket and the run worth it…
January 4th, 2007 at 1:59 pmi’d really like to see that… the loser mcCAVE/LIEberman ticket, that is…
So we should all eat more beef, to decrease the surplus cow population, there by cutting down on their C02 emissions.
Comment by squegeeboo
Cows was made for eatin’. Pass the A1 steak sauce!
January 4th, 2007 at 2:18 pmyou know that indefinable snow smell. I love that smell.
Comment by JaneESchneider
Yep. Its strange that cold air and snow have a smell but its the best.
January 4th, 2007 at 2:19 pm#36 robert,
Sorry for the delay, I’ve been busy at work. I am also a little confused by your post, but I presume that you mean you would like to hear from another libertarian-type person about why we should be concerned about this?
If so, the way I see this is that we have a constitutional right to be left alone unless the government has probable cause to think we are violating the law. The concept that “if you’re not doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about” is stupid on so many levels, not least of which that it goes against every principle of liberty this country was founded on. It makes no difference whether or not you’re doing something wrong, the government cannot invade your privacy unless a judge says there’s reason to. Now, if someone wants to let the government search him or his possessions whenever they want without a warrant, then that someone is stupid, because the government can then use anything they find against you even if it was unrelated to the original reason for the search. And then that person couldn’t claim it was an unconstitutional search because you have the right to refuse them their search if they don’t have a warrant! I understand that the police can be intimidating, but if you don’t want to be searched and they don’t have a warrant, tell them to go get one. (There was a case – I believe it was Bostwick v. Florida, something like that – in which the Supreme Court ruled that if you give the police permission to search you, you can’t complain if they find something illegal. The defendant felt intimidated by the police and did not think he had a right to refuse them, so he didn’t. He should have, because then they wouldn’t have found the pot on him. Fun Fact: Ken Starr was the US Solicitor General who argued the case on behalf of the government. It should surprise no one that he supports limiting freedom.)
In short, we are not here to serve our government, our government is here to servce us. They can only do what we give them permission to do. And searching our mail or phone records or houses or cars or persons without a warrant, issued by a judge, supported by oath or affirmation, is unconstitutional. And you have the right to say no to them.
I hope this answers your question (or someone else’s.) If this is not what you were asking for, then please clarify.
January 4th, 2007 at 2:25 pmPerhaps you missed my above comment (#22), I agree that Global Warming is happening. I just don’t care.
Comment by squegeeboo — January 4, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
You don’t care that the effects of global warming could affect the production of crops in America…say, oranges…thus driving up the prices for consumers?
You don’t care that the effects of global warming could create hotter summers, driving up the price of energy?
You don’t care that the effects of global warming could mean more droughts, increasing the chances of wildfires that destroy homes, businesses, and kill people?
You don’t care that the effects of global warming could lead to warmer winters, increasing the amount of insects in the spring and summer which could also affect the production of crops, again driving up prices?
You don’t care that the effects of global warming could lead to an increase in the number, and intensity of, storms, including hurricanes and tornadoes?
January 4th, 2007 at 2:33 pmComment by Wayne A. Schneider — January 4, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
Excellent post, my friend!
January 4th, 2007 at 2:37 pmWayne A.,
Thanks for the response. What I actually ment was, concidering that I am on active duty I can not say that this illegal opening of the mail smacks of Dictatorship at its finest. I can think that all I want, I just can’t say it.
January 4th, 2007 at 2:38 pm#105 – Robert, that was frickin’ hilarious. Well done!
January 4th, 2007 at 2:52 pmi’d really like to see that… the loser mcCAVE/LIEberman ticket, that is…
Comment by katy — January 4, 2007 @ 1:59 pm
Or, you could call it the mcCAVE/lieberMAN ticket!
January 4th, 2007 at 2:56 pmA “surge†sounds scary, but a “bump†sounds cute. Thank you State Department official, I feel so much better.
/sarcasm
Comment by Zooey — January 4, 2007 @ 10:48 am
Hmmm, hope the State Department clarified the terminology they’re using for bush – I’m guessing a ’surge’ in troops (or a cancerous lump) is not the first thing that comes to mind for the chimpster when he hears the word ‘bump’.
January 4th, 2007 at 2:58 pmZooey, I figured you would like that.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:00 pmSorry, robert, I keep forgetting that you’re on active duty. Now, as active duty military, you do not own yourself for the duration of your enlistment. The government owns you and could search anything of yours they want. (When I was at Keesler AFB, there were students who were given Article 15s because they got severe sunburn. They were charged with damaging government property!) So you, yourself, probably can’t do a thing about this if they want to search your mail, especially if the mail is carried through the military’s postal system. But you certainly have the right to complain about the effects of this on your non-military family members (unless they live with you on a military base and get their mail that way.)
But you are right about one thing. This tendency on the part of the president to decide for himself what the law is not only smacks of a dictatorship, it is a de facto one. Because when the president decides that the other two branches of government mean nothing, you have a dictator. We’ve all heard the quote: “A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, so long as I’m the dictator.” What most people don’t understand is that he really meant it, and wants it. (Hope that helps.)
January 4th, 2007 at 3:08 pmOr, you could call it the mcCAVE/lieberMAN ticket!
Comment by JaneESchneider
So stupid, only a caveman would vote for them!
(Now I’m gonna get spammed by all the cavemen out there.)
January 4th, 2007 at 3:10 pmWC
You don’t care that the effects of global warming….
Correct. And I prob. won’t start until global warming manages to warm my heart.
dlet
January 4th, 2007 at 3:46 pmIsn’t the cattel industry’s new slogan “Eat beef we’ll clone more�
You forgot the end part of it: Now Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy FREE!!!!
Now Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy FREE!!!!
Comment by squegeeboo
A friend of mine who was stationed in West Germany (it no longer exists) at the same time I was in the ’80s said that he tried to give blood but was told that because he ate beef in Europe during that time, he couldn’t donate blood because of the danger that he might have unknowingly contracted Mad Cow Disease. Well, I ate beef there, too.
So I got that going for me.
Which is nice.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:09 pmWayne A. Schneider
So I got that going for me.
Which is nice.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:15 pmChanneling Bill Murray I see.
That’s now a standard Red Cross question when you donate, over a specific amount of time in Europe over the past 20 years or something like that, don’t recall exactly it’s been about a month since the last time I was short a pint.
#114 squeegeeboo,
I was in Europe from about Apr ‘86 to Mar ‘88, and I haven’t tried to donate blood since. What concerns me is that if the USAF knew about this, why not at least inform me about the potential risk? That way, it’s someting I could be in mind in case later on I start developing symptoms consistent with CJS (I’m not going to try to spell it out; I know my spelling limits). I know there’s nothing I could do about it, but that doesn’t mean I have a right to know. Otherwise, if not for my friend, I might never have found out.
Glad to see someone got the Caddyshack reference. :-)
January 4th, 2007 at 4:59 pmCorrection:
“I know there’s nothing I could do about it, but that doesn’t mean I have a right to know”
should be:
I know there’s nothing I could do about it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t have a right to know
January 4th, 2007 at 5:30 pmjane schneider – good one!
and wayne’s motto wraps it up!
and robert – i liked that one (105) also… way to whirl! …heh…
January 4th, 2007 at 5:53 pmkaty,
I think I can safely speak for Jane when I say, “Thank you.” And I do as well. Have a good night; time to pack.
January 4th, 2007 at 6:10 pmBush thinks that the Constitution is good only for toilet paper.
January 4th, 2007 at 7:15 pmMy letters to my ladyfriend is none of that %&@*#!!#@#^Bush’s business. If this shit keeps up, I will organize a revolution to overthrow these Nazi bastards by any means necessary.
January 4th, 2007 at 7:39 pmMike
Freeeeedom!
March 20th, 2008 at 6:35 pmshowers wc
Nice Post… do you know what is the first? Maybe You can se My Post Here
March 27th, 2008 at 10:58 amFree Soft Baby Shoes Pattern
Can it be that your server is infected with a virus – I get an Virus warning when I open your site with Firefox – Just for your Info.
March 31st, 2008 at 12:34 ambackground checks
I found your post comments while searching Google. Very relevant especially as this is not an issue which a lot of peaople are conversant with.
April 8th, 2008 at 11:07 amChristene
happens.
April 13th, 2008 at 6:22 pm