Right now, the Live Earth concert series is ongoing in each of the seven continents. Spearheaded by Vice President Al Gore, the event “marks the beginning of a multi-year campaign…to drive individuals, corporations and governments to take action to solve global warming.”
With more than 2 billion people in 100 countries across the globe expected to tune in, the concerts are “an unprecedented opportunity to ask for the world’s attention long enough to deliver an SOS and then to begin delivering information about the solutions to every single person,” says Gore.
But the right-wing is pushing back against the concerts in an effort to protect the interests of the oil lobby. Leading the charge is the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a think tank funded by both the oil and auto industries. On MSNBC’s Tucker yesterday, Myron Ebell, the director of energy and global warming policy at CEI, said Gore “makes this stuff up” about global warming and “there is no scientific support for his claims.” Watch it:
After downplaying concerns about global warming, Ebell switched tones and began criticizing the concerts “because they just use too much energy.” In fact, Live Earth organizers worked hard to minimize the energy usage of the entire event.
For example, the Live Earth organizers intentionally organized the concerts in such a way that a minimum of jets would be used. “In the planning stages, all air travel has been put through a rigorous approval process and trips deemed necessary” are being offset through carbon credits and investments in renewable energy, John Picard, leader of the event’s sustainability team, told the Associated Press.
Additionally, “several staffers are dedicated entirely to helping artists minimize the environmental impact of getting to and playing the shows, and each artist is given a ‘Green Handbook’ of touring tips.” In fact, “this is going to be the greenest event of its kind, ever,” according to Gore “The carbon offsets and the innovative practices that are being used to make this a green event, I think, will set the standard for years to come.”
For more on Live Earth, check out Climate Progress’s live blogging of the event.
Gore doesn't make stuff up. Myron Ebell makes stuff up. For a living.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:02 pmJust shows everyone how desperate they are these days!! Wow! What self-destructing antics they stoop to in order for the left not to be right! They'd destroy this earth for their own grandchildren. Now that's pretty pathetic and extremely desperate.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:08 pmAnd all because Cheney's secret oil meetings concluded with a smear campaign against global warming so their fortunes would continue! Amazing what horrendous stewardship of the environment these neocons have become.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:09 pmThe Concert speaks volumes and speaks for itself. It also provides the support for the Truth about what this administration has done to damage this planet. Any "disinformation campaign" the right launches will become their laughinstock and work totally against them this time.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:10 pmDo you know why this event is making us so mad?
It's not because of global warming or "oil lobby".
It's because the entire event embodies what we absolutely detest in you progressives and the left in general: things like your unlimited smugness, the use of arts and this intolerable drive for community based/oriented politics, sharing and compassion - the stench of weakness is overwhelming.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:10 pm"Gore “makes this stuff up†about global warming and “there is no scientific support for his claims....."
Oh really. I bet that will come as a surprised to all the published scientists who have done extensive study on the subject and who have come to the conclusion that global warming is not only real, it is a grave threat to the existence of our planet.
A very large majority (I mean huge here) of scientists in the world recognize global warming as a problem. The only "scientists" who don't think global warming is a threat are the "scientists" employed by the fossil fuel industry and the RNC. They were hired to find global warming to not be a threat so that's what they will find. It's pretty much how Bush operates the government. He doesn't get the answer he likes, he will fire the person who gave him the answer he didn't like and hire someone else who will give him what he wants.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:12 pmDo you know why this event is making us so mad?
It’s not because of global warming or “oil lobbyâ€.
It’s because the entire event embodies what we absolutely detest in you progressives and the left in general: things like your unlimited smugness, the use of arts and this intolerable drive for community based/oriented politics, sharing and compassion - the stench of weakness is overwhelming.
Comment by AnonGOPer — July 7, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
So, basically, you're saying your opposition to these concerts has nothing to do with the cause or the event itself; it's entirely based on partisan antipathy.
How mature.
Oh, wait -- I just realized that when you said it was the left's "intolerable drive for community based/oriented politics, sharing and compassion" that you're joking. You're a parody troll. Excellent.
Well done. You had me going there for a minute.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:14 pm"It’s because the entire event embodies what we absolutely detest in you progressives and the left in general: things like your unlimited smugness, the use of arts and this intolerable drive for community based/oriented politics, sharing and compassion - the stench of weakness is overwhelming."
Hopefully this was said with sarcasm because if it wasn't, this is one very disturbed human being. Anyone who would truly think that sharing and compassion and a drive towards community is in need of some kind of help.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:15 pmOld, white men throwing self-interested money and doubt around. Sorry guys, time for a new age.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:16 pmI'm not sure if this guy is real or just a funny joke by a regular, but if he's real, at least he's honest. Though I laugh at the idea that compassion, community and sharing is somehow weak.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:16 pmDo you know why this event is making us so mad?
It’s not because of global warming or “oil lobbyâ€.
It’s because the entire event embodies what we absolutely detest in you progressives and the left in general: things like your unlimited smugness, the use of arts and this intolerable drive for community based/oriented politics, sharing and compassion - the stench of weakness is overwhelming.
Comment by AnonGOPer
No one is listening to what you have to say and no one cares. Day by day another huge chunk of credibility is lost from your side. The masses have had enough.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:18 pmThese corporate interests should have their own concerts. You know, charge $10,000 a head for a shit kicker hoedown. That'd show Al.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:18 pm"Do you know why this event is making us so mad?"
Who cares what the 23%ers are gumming today? You guys are irrelevant, and becoming more so, daily.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:19 pmWhat I don't understand is why the right is so dead-set against the wole notion of global warming as a threat.
I mean, it really has nothing to do with political philosophy, does it?
I understand the oil lobby's interest in pooh-poohing the science, and I understand the partisan push-back against Gore, however childish it may be.
But does that explain why virtually EVERY global warming skeptic is a hard right-winger? Is AnonGOPer's hilarious caricature in post #5 closer to the mark than a reasonable person would think?
Man, if that's the case then the right wing is in deeper trouble than we ever imagined.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:20 pm"intolerable drive for community based/oriented politics, sharing and compassion"
WTF? Like being involved in local and regional politics is a bad thing?
July 7th, 2007 at 8:21 pmOh, I forgot. For fascists, it is.
Have you been watching?
Miniblue and I have been switching between Bravo and Sundance since 10:00am. (except for the trip home from Boston - but that's off topic)
It's great. I love when the performers speak out.
Melissa Ethridge's speech was decidedly political, but her message moved me all the same.
Then Al Gore made an apperance. (He was better this afternoon than he was this am)
Miniblue's observation that this is this generation's Woodstock was (I think) very astute.
Watch while you blog. It's great.
:)
July 7th, 2007 at 8:25 pmUntil AnonGOPer returns to confirm or disprove, I'm assuming it's a parody troll. And a pretty darn good one, so far.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:25 pmThis year is the second warmest on record, so let's not listen to these reich wing noise makers like Tucker and such who say that global warming is some kind of left wing conspiracy. Al Gore is putting on a great show and he has not asked for a single cent. This show is about awareness. If anyone is against awareness, they are nothing more than ostriches who bury their head in the said. This is our planet and our Mother Earth needs us. These flat earth, mouth breathing, knuckle dragging morons on the right are nothing but wrong.
Save the Planet, it's the only one that we have.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:28 pmRock on Al. Thanks for the show.
What I don’t understand is why the right is so dead-set against the wole notion of global warming as a threat. It conflict with big business...the greedy corporate thugs put making money before paying a little extra to help prevent further pollution.... they do not give a sh!t about the environment and future just the here and now. And some righties are so extreme, they feel the future does not matter as the rapture will come soon.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:28 pmOld, white men throwing self-interested money and doubt around. Sorry guys, time for a new age.
Comment by rollotomasi
Excellent sentiment. Kinda harks back to the late 60's/early 70's well deserved upheaval.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:29 pmOoooh -
Kelly Clarkson is finally gone.
Going to join miniblue for another bit.
:))
July 7th, 2007 at 8:30 pmJeez, how desperate are these fools - blaming Mr Rogers one day, denying the facts behind the live earth concert, all while excusing their leader for both breaking the law, and rewriting laws to suit himself.
All they care about is $$$ and how to get more. They will leave a fortune for their grandchildren, but the earth will pay the price. The future wars over water will be in competition for the wars for oil, but as long as the rich white bastards make their fortunes, they stupidly believe all the harm they do will not be visited upon their progeny as well.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:35 pmOr they don't care about their heirs -- just as they don't care about their own grandmothers and parents today, with their "screw Medicare" and give big pharma carte blanche.
Repugs are a group of incredibly stupid and/or incredibly greedy and/or incredibly short sighted bastards.
The only “scientists†who don’t think global warming is a threat are the “scientists†employed by the fossil fuel industry and the RNC.
Yes, and you can compare those "scientists" to the doctors who sold their souls to insurance companies as they deny medical claims with the goal of increasing profits for their company.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:37 pmRightwing/Dishonest/Misinformed; three words which always belong together
July 7th, 2007 at 8:38 pm#5 is an excellent parody of a GOPer, but GOPers have become self-parody, so the comment is also an accurate representation of the pathological thinking that has infected the 28 percenters.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:38 pm...the use of arts and this intolerable drive for community based/oriented politics, sharing and compassion...
SIGN ME UP! I am ALL about this!
If this is a bad thing it goes to show what republicans are all about. I am SO proud to be a thinking, feeling, liberal. That's what the GOP hates about liberals, we think and they espouse a continual line of crap. It's just too bad that there are so many people out there who can't think...and sadder that people actually think that sharing and compassion are bad things.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:41 pmthe greedy corporate thugs put making money before paying a little extra to help prevent further pollution…. they do not give a sh!t about the environment and future just the here and now. And some righties are so extreme, they feel the future does not matter as the rapture will come soon.
Comment by had enough — July 7, 2007 @ 8:28 pm
I understand all that, had enough. What I don't understand is your relatively normal, rank-and-file conservative without a real corporate interest, whose first impulse is to deride and disbelieve. Why? Is the partisan divide so bitter that they oppose anything that they perceive as a "liberal" cause no matter its nature?
I don't think it will hurt in the long run, as long as we can change directions in terms of the environment in time. The scientific community will begin to recognize that conservatives are not their friends, so that will be another faction that will lean left, and the right wing will see its relevance and influence shrink and shrink and shrink. Some other party will take the place of the GOP, and hopefully they will be true conservatives rather than political opportunists, and a real debate can begin.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:41 pmIt was parody, but that's the way the most hardcore right wingers think and feel.
They will recoil from any idea of sharing or showing compassion beyond family because they see it as weakness - it's a dog-eat-dog world for them. They detest the idea of the people having a say in politics, because they've already got their Leader. Someone they have a psychological need to support at any cost. Daddy tells them what to think and they stand by the Daddy in order to feel that they are a part of something greater. Community based politics is abhorrent, because it involves sharing and limits the power of Daddy. Arts is infuriating, because they struggle to understand it.
Spend as much time with the Freepers and LGFers as I've done (I lurk there just to see what they're up to) and coming up with something like #5 doesn't even require thought. It's obvious. It's also scary how easy it is to switch into a wingnut emulation mode.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:42 pmIf the repugs were smart and admit that they are on the wrong end of the oil argument, they would join the environmentalists and create new forms of renewable energy, thereby creating jobs, aiding the economy as well as the earth.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:43 pmThey could even pass along their technological skills to third world countries and help them out of starvation.
I know, they would rather start wars that use oil and kill people. I think of how we might avert involvement in future wars if we were more honest and helpful in dealing with others less fortunate - you know, creating good will and practical aid instead of throwing money at dictators who let their people starve, get sick and die.
Comment by trueblue — July 7, 2007 @ 8:25 pm
I am watching, while doing other things as I can. Melissa Etheridge was just great - they all are - but her message was right on point.
I also made a comment about this looking like it might be the 21st century version of Woodstock.
It took years of protests, marches and gatherings like Woodstock and others to finally move the government. That was before the Internet, and before 24/7 news. Let's hope that after nearly 7 years of Bush&Co, and these last 4+ years of war are enough to create a change.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:47 pmSeems like AnonGOPer is saying that the left is too much about love, compassion and caring. Funny thing, but I thought that these attributes were "family values" and these attributes are also what I thought the Christian church was supposed to be based upon. Funny how apparently the things that Christians are supposed to be all about are what the right-wing detests the most.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:50 pmhttp://www.petitiononline.com/agdgw/petition.html
Sign the petition to see Al Gore defend his claims!!!!!!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 8:52 pmIf Myron Ebell had been saying this on television a few years ago, it would have been unremarked. Saying it now, however, he demonstrates what a tool he is. "No scientific support"? How does anyone say that with a straight face?
July 7th, 2007 at 8:53 pmRock on Al. Thanks for the show.
Comment by dave g — July 7, 2007 @ 8:28 pm
July 7th, 2007 at 8:54 pm--------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Al, do you got the doobies?
Who's got the doobies?
July 7th, 2007 at 8:55 pmWilly: See #28. Regarding your point, the wingnuts don't really read the Bible that way.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:55 pmThanks AnonGOPer. Like I said, you had me going. And it's a tribute to your skills (and the weird reality that is GOPerland) that so many of the regulars here took you seriously.
Well done.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:56 pmOn MSNBC’s Tucker yesterday, Myron Ebell, the director of energy and global warming policy at CEI, said Gore “makes this stuff up†about global warming and “there is no scientific support for his claims.â€
Let's see him say that to David Shuster and not get a, "Let me stop you right there." Pucker's a dweeb. Even though he took it off a long time ago, I can see an outline of that silly bow tie near his neck. Like a ghost image.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:56 pmNancy Pelosi has nice tits.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:58 pm“No scientific support� How does anyone say that with a straight face?
Comment by gummitch — July 7, 2007 @ 8:53 pm
Possibly the same way that Stephen Colbert can "spew" (not really) his faux-conservative views with a straight face. Maybe the guy's got natural comedic talent. He certainly is laughable, that's for sure. :)
July 7th, 2007 at 8:58 pmEbell: "Global warming is a phenomenon of the left and the left is all about redistributing income"
That's right, it's the red menace - the monster under everybody's bed.
Ebell: "If Live Earth goes off tomorrow as planned, it really should be the last one of these big global jamborees because they just use too much energy."
Carlson: "Yeah, I am concerned about that as an environmentalist."
Thanks for your concern, Tucker. I'm sure you're doing your part today to offset the carbon emissions from your ignorant, lying piehole.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:59 pmMr. Pee is wandering off into the bushes again. Can someone gently guide him back to the proper trail? Otherwise he could get bitten by a rattlesnake and someone would have to suck on his ankle. Eww.
Although, with all those bold exclamation marks he favors, it won't be too hard to locate him.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:00 pmThe economy under Bush is better than under Clinton.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:01 pmHi Marie,
I was so excited that I typed before I read. Sorry about the Woodstock reference.
You rock!
Actually, the whole world rocked today.
Yay entire world.
We are ALL citizens, like Ms. Ethridge pointed out.
Citizens of this world.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:03 pmWe all need to work together, and come together for the greater good.
Have YOU signed yet?
http://www.petitiononline.com/agdgw/petition.html
Sign the petition to see Al Gore defend his claims!!!!!!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 9:03 pmAl Gore should be tending to his sick son, not going to rock concerts. Shame on him.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:03 pmWhat Republicans really hate is that Gore is a class traitor. How dare a rich southern gentleman diss conspicuous consumption!
That's why the Troll-spin is all about Gore and not about the Science. The Science is irrefutable. However, if one can instill fear in the other rich white males, responsible action can be put off until it's too late.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:04 pmThe right wing is finished. And this government of tyrants will soon be on the ash heap of history.
Only the
July 7th, 2007 at 9:06 pmIf the best they can do is to have someone from a right wing think tank associated with oil and auto companies then Gore is standing on much higher ground than people who will lie to make money at the expense of our environment. Gore is not making this stuff up. 2 billion people will be taking part in these concerts. They are doing so because they know that global warming is a real threat. A bunch of suits that work for oil and auto companies are not going to convince the average American that the science is wrong and the notorious oil companies are right. This man can't have it both ways. On one hand he falsely claims that global warming is not real on the hand he claims that they use too much energy at the concerts. Whether republicans like it or not global warming is real and the science supports it.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:06 pmThe economy under Bush is better than under Clinton.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
How ya figure? Under Clinton, growth was more robust, the stock market gained far more, unemployment was lower. Under Clinton, middle class wages rose -- under Bush they have shrunk. Under Clinton the poverty rate shrank -- under Bush it has grown. Under Clinton, the federal budget achieved a surplus -- under Bush that surplus has turned into a huge deficit.
So how ya figure "the economy under Bush id better than under Clinton"? What measurements are you using?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:07 pmThe idea of reasonable consumption goes smack against the marketing agenda of much of corporate America. Look at the ads for cars telling you how huge they are. Look at the food ads that tell you to stuff yourself silly (disregarding how actually UNhealthy that is.)
July 7th, 2007 at 9:08 pmOnly the
July 7th, 2007 at 9:09 pmDo you have sources for any of that spit take? I will accept mainstream news articles, but not opinion pieces.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:09 pmThey will recoil from any idea of sharing or showing compassion beyond family because they see it as weakness - it’s a dog-eat-dog world for them. They detest the idea of the people having a say in politics, because they’ve already got their Leader.
Comment by AnonGOPer
I'm glad you're a parody AnonGOPer, because we already have enough beyond stupid trolls -- they're even making an appearance on this thread. :)
That way of thinking is so totally beyond the pale that I wonder how it develops. How could showing compassion outside of one's family be weak? Wow.
Thanks for spending time at those nutzoid sites. Someone should keep an eye on the happenings there, and I'm glad it's not me.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:09 pmMad dog! Mad dog! Shoot it, Atticus, shoot it.
My goodness! The trolls are desperate. One can almost see them devolving before one's very eyes.
They're losing hearts & minds over the wars in the Middle East, over universal healthcare, over justice, and now over the environment. If this keeps up the GOP will go the way of the Whig Party next year.
I openly appeal to all feeling and thinking small 'c' conservatives to abandon this sinking ship and form a new party and call it the Conservative Party. The GOP is a gyp.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:09 pmEXCUSE ME?????
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
That sick f*ck needs to be banned. This is getting ridiculous.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:10 pmThe economy under Bush is better than under Clinton.
Comment by Tupe
Mr Rogers did it, too.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:11 pm"If this keeps up the GOP will go the way of the Whig Party next year."
President Thompson.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:11 pmDo you have sources for any of that spit take? I will accept mainstream news articles, but not opinion pieces.
Comment by Tupe
We will require the same from you for your assertion.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:12 pm"Mr Rogers did it, too."
Mr. Rogers voted for George W. Bush.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:14 pm#43:
Define "the economy." If you mean the Dow, yeah - corporations are kicking ass in the plus column. How's YOUR economy?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:14 pmZoobie... I mean Zooey...
...man am I high right now...
anyway,
do you have the doobies?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:14 pm"How’s YOUR economy?"
Better than under Clinton.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:14 pmDo you have sources for any of that spit take? I will accept mainstream news articles, but not opinion pieces.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 9:09 pm
Try federal government resources on the web. It's all there. The Census Bureau is a good resource for income figures, OMB is good for budget history and heck, stock market info is all over the web like a rash. Takes some research, but it's worth it. What do you dispute?
And more importantly, by what measures do you declare that "the economy under Bush is better than under Clinton?"
While you're composing your answer, I'll dig for a few links for you.
Any backup at all?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:16 pmI just got an email from TP saying that I should apologize to Wayne and Jane Schneider. So I do.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:16 pmEXCUSE ME?????
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
That sick f*ck needs to be banned. This is getting ridiculous.
Comment by Zooey — July 7, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
Already contacted Faiz.
Everyone should contact TP.
That's what this concert is all about - taking a stand.
Doing Something.
Start now. All email TP and get the scumbag troll banned permanently.
Why don't we have registration?
We've only asked, pleaded for a year +...
July 7th, 2007 at 9:16 pmActually, the real star of the environmental movement, James Lovelock, has said that we can't aim for sustainable development any more; we need to embrace sustainable retreat.
Unfortunately, laissez-faire advocates are the last people to put in charge in a crisis. They freeze like deer in a truck's headlights. Their philosophical stance means Do Nothing. And so they pray to their big sugar Nobodaddy in the Sky.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:16 pm"Any backup at all?"
No I don't. Unemployment seems lower. The stock market seems to be going higher. I'm making a lot more money now than under Clinton.
But I still wouldn't mind seeing your sources to back up your claims.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:18 pmI understand all that, had enough. What I don’t understand is your relatively normal, rank-and-file conservative without a real corporate interest, whose first impulse is to deride and disbelieve. Why? Is the partisan divide so bitter that they oppose anything that they perceive as a “liberal†cause no matter its nature?
just got back.
Yes. Well put. Liberalism has been stereotyped partly due to right hate America corporate owned media.
Most of my family are republican and how well do I know that slight sneer when they say liberal. This case it is not media, but many generations of upbringing. And of course anything related to liberal such as environment ... you get that same attitude.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:19 pmPresident Thompson.
Comment by Tupe
He's spent one third of his life as a lobbyist. He'll get the 23%ers vote. Not much else.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:19 pmLive Aid may be using quite a bit of energy, but not nearly as much as the broadcast media does. I think the broadcast media should stop broadcasting to reduce the 'hot air'.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:20 pmTupe...well, I'm happy for ya. Care to help out the children at the poverty level with your riches? Or is that too lib for ya?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:20 pm"He’s spent one third of his life as a lobbyist. "
Of his adult life maybe. But this was before being a lobbyist was a dirty word.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:20 pmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/4307745.stm
(My source - something you still haven't given us)
July 7th, 2007 at 9:20 pmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/4307745.stm
(my source, by the way)
July 7th, 2007 at 9:21 pmI'm actually watching "Who Killed the Electric Car" narrated by Martin Sheen on cable.
The oil executives should be all put in prison for what they've done to this country.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:21 pmbarfly,
Come on man...
I know you have some doobies!
July 7th, 2007 at 9:21 pm"Care to help out the children at the poverty level with your riches? Or is that too lib for ya?"
I give 10% of my income to charity. I'm by no means rich, but I'm making at least double now than under Clinton.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:22 pmWouldn't if be fun to help Tucker tighten his bow tie?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:23 pmI know you have some doobies!
Comment by Mr. President
Get your own, ya f*cking leech. No wonder you don't have any friends.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:25 pmRather than being banned, I was asked by TP not to post here anymore. They just sent me another email. So I will honor that request.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:25 pm"I know you have some doobies!"
Comment by Mr. President
I've got a new strain of cannabis, that is genetically engineered to smell just like oregano. I've got pounds of the stuff; make me an offer.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:26 pmI give 10% of my income to charity. I’m by no means rich, but I’m making at least double now than under Clinton.
Comment by Tupe
How old were you in the Clinton years, and what was your job?
What do you do now?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:26 pmI give 10% of my income to charity. I’m by no means rich, but I’m making at least double now than under Clinton.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 9:22 pm
For the same job at the same company, for the same hours, etc. right? Otherwise this is a stupid comment. If you where a 13 year old paperboy during the Clinton era but now a dishwasher and high school drop out, your statement might be true.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:26 pmTupe:
for wages, there's a real good chart on page 4 of this pdf from the Census Bureau.
As for the Dow Jones, it first rose above 4000 in Feb of 1995. In Jan 2000 it closed above 11,700. That's a rise of over 250%. Since then the Dow has risen less than 2000 points -- about 12%.
Here's some poverty stats: this article is from 2003, and the trend has continued since, with a pause between 2004 and 2005, where the poverty rate remained the same. The money quote:
The national poverty rate declined from 1993 to 2000, when it reached a low of 11.3 percent. In the next three years, 4.3 million more people fell below the poverty line, and the median household income dropped by more than $1,500 in inflation-adjusted terms.
Everyone knows about the budget, so that should be enough for you to chew on for now.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:27 pmWhat I don’t understand is why the right is so dead-set against the whole notion of global warming as a threat.
I mean, it really has nothing to do with political philosophy, does it?
I understand the oil lobby’s interest in pooh-poohing the science, and I understand the partisan push-back against Gore, however childish it may be.
Comment by spit take — July 7, 2007 @ 8:20 pm
It has little to nothing to do with actual political philosophy. It is about greed, an abject fear of change (even of the good kind), a lack of foresight, and a sociopathic mindset that brings with it a complete lack of empathy for anything and anyone else, including one's own descendants' health and wellbeing.
It doesn't even make any sense from a practical standpoint. Think about it:
A) What if the 27%ers are correct, and global climate change isn't a threat? What is the worst that can happen? We can "waste" a lot of money researching technologies that make our land, winds and seas cleaner, and our businesses more efficient in terms of energy consumption to waste ratio. While opening up a whole new world of technologies that are green, we also gain a much broader, yet simultaneously more deep and detailed understanding of the environment and how it works as a system. If we are still using oil and coal after all the research, but are also using nuclear, solar, wind and thermodynamic energy sources, we have that many more viable, working industries in the Market. That many more potential entrepreneurs, taking part in the free market, and keeping the healthy spirit of competition and innovation alive in the marketplace. That many more avenues for both Capital and Labor to invest, expand, and maximize. Even if we find that oil and coal are the best, most efficient forms of energy, and we find they are in fact renewable, what did we lose? R&D costs.
B) What if those "damned hippies" are right? What if global climate change is a dangerous feedback loop that we need to stop? What is the worst that can happen? We all die. The End.
Do any of you on the Right see how incredibly obtuse and stupid your argument is? Which of the two options above is more "conservative" in its approach? Which of these two options has the worst option should we fail? Which has the worst option if we succeed? As far as I can tell, only the carbon-energy industry, and carbon-energy lobbyists, carbon-energy lawyers, and politicians paid $$$ by the former two, "suffer" under option (A). Everyone else breathes easier, eats more healthy diets, gets cancer less often, and the marketplace has more options to fall back on should one industry fail. Option (B) offers the carbon-energy industrialists and lobbyists a massive short-term gain, then virtually everybody on Earth dies.
It is so ridiculous on its face, much less as you explore the depths of the claims of the deniers. It would be one thing if it were an approximately even split between alarmists and naysayers. It's another thing altogether when the majority of the scientific community has concluded that the global climate crisis is real, while the only deniers are scientists working for the carbon-energy industries, lobbyists working for the carbon-energy lobbies, and the people who have historically (and blindly) followed everything their specific political party stands behind.
Put that in your damned pipe and smoke it, trolls!
July 7th, 2007 at 9:27 pmHow old were you in the Clinton years, and what was your job?
What do you do now?
---------------
I'm a salesman. And I'm 44 years old. I was a salesman during the Clinton years.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:27 pmRather than being banned, I was asked by TP not to post here anymore. They just sent me another email. So I will honor that request.
Comment by dogtrottors — July 7, 2007 @ 9:25 pm
Good riddance, you sick f*ck.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:28 pm"For the same job at the same company, for the same hours, etc. right?"
Right.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:28 pmWhat exactly do you sell?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:31 pmAl Gore ROCKS the world!
This is how we can live! Live Earth.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:31 pmThe 8 Clinton years were them most prosperous this country ever knew.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:31 pmBart. Who Killed the Electric Car? is a GREAT film! Enjoy! I saw it on Earth Day when I was working at a solar company; they showed it as a lunch event and it blew me away.
Just think...had GM continued with their electric car, we could have been the world leader (and think about the trickle down effect of job creation there!), but no, they killed it (how much do you want to bet that the CEO of GM has a ton of oil stock?) From world leader to pretty much last to market. Woo hoo.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:31 pmI’m a salesman. And I’m 44 years old. I was a salesman during the Clinton years.
Comment by Tupe
Sorry, but sales jobs are pretty subjective.
For example: I made close to minimum wage for almost all of the Clinton years I worked, but I'm unemployed now. Obviously I did much better in the Clinton years.
Just as lame as your example.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:32 pmMy thoughts exactly, Zooey.
This tithing line was used by Reagan, but his tax returns revealed he actually gave less than the average American and certainly not 10%.
Tupe was either in high school during the 90s or is working for the Bush administration. Or perhaps both. I mean, the DoJ seems chock full of kids with their gumball machine law degrees dispensing dubious legal opinions on Rights, Truth, Justice and the American Way.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:33 pmWhat exactly do you sell?
Comment by dbadass
You're expecting a truthful answer from him, after his wrongheaded assertion about Clinton's economy?
Good luck with that.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:33 pm“Any backup at all?â€
No I don’t. Unemployment seems lower. The stock market seems to be going higher. I’m making a lot more money now than under Clinton.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 9:18 pm
Ah, yes, the anecdotal "common sense" approach to making bold pronouncements of fact. No actual sources needed. No wider world to consider
Truthiness rules.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:34 pm"What exactly do you sell?"
Medical instruments.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:35 pmHahaha. Wanna bet Tupe sells arms?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:35 pm"I’m a salesman. And I’m 44 years old. I was a salesman during the Clinton years."
Comment by Tupe
Prove it.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:35 pm"Ah, yes, the anecdotal “common sense†approach to making bold pronouncements of fact."
It was my opinion.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:36 pm"Medical instruments"? I take it that's a euphemism for thumb-screws and nipple electrodes and waterboards.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:37 pmMedical instruments.
Comment by Tupe
Well, there ya go.
Dismissed.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:37 pm"The 8 Clinton years were them most prosperous this country ever knew."
Maybe for you. But my income was half what it is now.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:37 pmIt was my opinion.
Comment by Tupe —
For which you offered no proof. Yet you require others to prove their assertions to you. Can you see the contradiction?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:38 pmOpen your eyes America!
July 7th, 2007 at 9:38 pmPlease
I know you have some doobies!
Comment by Mr. President
Of course, P boy.
I love the Dobbie Brothers.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:39 pmIs anyone watching it?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:39 pm"Yet you require others to prove their assertions to you."
I'm chewing on spit take's sources as we speak.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:40 pmHi True. I've been watching, on and off.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:41 pm"I made close to minimum wage for almost all of the Clinton years I worked, but I’m unemployed now."
I'm sorry to hear that. Maybe one of your friends here can help you locate a job.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:41 pmI just got an email from TP saying that I should apologize to Wayne and Jane Schneider. So I do.
Comment by dogtrottors — July 7, 2007 @ 9:16 pm
Apology accepted.
I'm sorry for what may appear to be a snub on my lengthy absence, but I was actually watching this concert for a bit. Bon Jovi was on from Giants Stadium, which is not technically in NYC, but that's where they say it's from. I was not intentionally ignoring you.
One last question before we both move on.
What on earth prompted you to do that out of the blue?
If I've said something which you would like to discuss, there are other ways of conveying that thought.
But, I'll forget about it if I never see it again.
Thank you.
And thank you, TP, for your concerns. :)
P.S. I will tell Jane about everything in case she comes in later and doesn't see this exchange. I will tell her that there should be no need to bring this up again. Okay? Okay. Let's get back to debating.
Good concert.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:42 pm"I’m chewing on spit take’s sources as we speak."
Comment by Tupe
Yet, curiously, when called to offer up proof, you have none - except for an anecdotal exercise in jerking off.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:43 pm“What exactly do you sell?â€
Medical instruments.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 9:35 pm
Interesting. Whereas I have heard of no one doubling the income of any professional career in such short time under the exactly identical work conditions you describe, to what do you attribute this marvel. Do you feel it has anything to do with the fleecing of the consumer by the medical industry? When you made only half as much what was your charity rate? I have a sis who made big money with big pharma but walked away for ethical reasons. Well cheers for you. I teach the children but my wages have gone backward as have my benefits despite a third degree during these years. Sales is way more important than ed though so I understand. With luck every ship will rise with the incoming tide of the new administration. I assume you have noticed the widening income gap which the current administration has presided over.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:44 pmOf course, there's been brisk business for the "medical instrument" business ever since Bush started blowing the Middle East to bits. The USA sends tonnes of the stuff to Iraq --unfortunately, mostly shoddy stuff from no-bid contractors.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:45 pmUnemployment statistics:
the unemployment rate dropped every year under Clinton until it hit its lowest point since 1969 in Clinton's final year in office. The trend reversed itself when Bush took office.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:46 pmSpit Take, I have reviewed your sources. Thank you for posting them. However, I can only speak to my personal financial position and that of my family. I am doing much better now than I was during the Clinton years. Sales are really snappy. Hopefully it will be even better under President Thompson. ;)
July 7th, 2007 at 9:46 pmComment by Tupe
Perhaps you shouldn't make such sweeping statements, with no proof.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:49 pm"The trend reversed itself when Bush took office."
It's in the mid 4% now.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:49 pmCHENEY 2008!!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 9:51 pmIt’s in the mid 4% now.
Comment by Tupe
*Sigh*
It doesn't take into account those who have stopped looking for work. They aren't counted.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:51 pm"I take it that’s a euphemism for thumb-screws and nipple electrodes and waterboards."
I sell equipment for cardiac surgery and for the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:52 pmThese guys have money to burn when it comes to putting together bogus lies.Their puplic-dis-service team are known fabricators.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:52 pmRemember the tabacco industry and ther efforts to prove they knew nothing about addiction and health risks.
This was of course while their r/d teams were developing methods to insure the right mix of chemicals was in evey smoke to get kids,especially kids addicted.
This was at a time in the 70's when they faced a real crises.
The marlboro crowd was getting older and they needed to target the 10-12 year olds and start the next generation of addicts.Guess what came out of that pr binge?
joe camel, yep, aimed at children folks.Nice guys these killers.(and girls too)
You can see an actual internal industry "red alert,we are losing the kids,we must get the kids addicted" from early 70's in a washington monthly mid 90's issue.
Only pointing this out because the smog industry has way way way more money to burn and keep everyone in a haze.
No facts please.Just some sexy cars will do.Or at least cars with sex smeared on them.
No one seems to understand why they are addicted yet.The smog industry gets a free roadway right into peoples brains.
They have no mercy.Have you noticed that??
"It doesn’t take into account those who have stopped looking for work. They aren’t counted."
Were they counted during the Clinton years?
July 7th, 2007 at 9:53 pmCHENEY 2008!!!!
Comment by Mr. President — July 7, 2007 @ 9:51 pm
I see you are still really high on those doobies you had to jones from everyone else
July 7th, 2007 at 9:54 pm“What exactly do you sell?â€
Medical instruments.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 9:35 pm
It's funny how self-absorbed the trolls are such that all of their threads end up becoming about them. I, for one, could care less about this guy and feel that I owe him absolutely no explanation for anything. If he wants to come here and educate his Fox-soaked brain, that's ok. If he's going to come here demanding that we prove something (like global warming) where there is more than adequate scientific consensus, I will have no part of it. I have posted many posts to this effect but the trolls are stuck in their ways.
However you look at it, this event is GREAT. It's a concert that involves millions and millions of people with the intent of educating them about the future of our planet. And all the Repuke A**holes can do is p*ss on the thing as if it's something horrible. That's how disgusting these people are. When there's an effort to do something good, they don't just sit on the sidelines and watch, they actively try to counteract it. ABSOLUTELY SICK!!
July 7th, 2007 at 9:54 pm“Ah, yes, the anecdotal “common sense†approach to making bold pronouncements of fact.â€
It was my opinion.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 9:36 pm
You didn't state it as opinion. You stated it as fact.
The only thing you have to base your opinion on is your personal experience. Pretty limited sample of data, wouldn't you agree?
Now, you basically have two choices: either revise your statement to say something like, "my personal economic situation is better under Bush than under Clinton", which given an extra decade of professional experience and, hopefully, advancement, isn't a surprise. That's pretty much the way it's supposed to work.
Your second choice is to stick by your original intent and say something like, "I thought the economy under Bush was better than under Clinton, but it looks like statistics show otherwise." That shouldn't be too hard; after all Ronald Reagan made a very similar statement to the nation on March 4, 1987:
A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not.
See? Simple.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:56 pmCHENEY 2008!!!!
Comment by Mr. President — July 7, 2007 @ 9:51 pm
And this guy is absolutely out to lunch. TP should ban him for any number of reasons. IMHO, we should not respond to him at all. It would really show himself as the lonesome loser he is. However, I know it's hard not to respond. The trolls are good at pushing our buttons. That's their goal in life.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:56 pm“my personal economic situation is better under Bush than under Clintonâ€, which given an extra decade of professional experience and, hopefully, advancement, isn’t a surprise.
------------
I would agree with that.
July 7th, 2007 at 9:58 pmCHENEY 2008!!!!
------------
Fred! Fred! Fred!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:00 pmI have been watching the shows and have to say I have been moved. I have been sitting on a phone # to call and get solar panels put up and I will definitely call on Monday. I'm also going to have a gas line put in to replace the oil burner. Its about time.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:00 pmGetting back to the topic, the CEI is a notorious Exxon-funded institution. Here's from Wikipedia:
"ExxonMobil Corporation was a major donor to CEI, with over $2 million in contributions between 1998 and 2005. [8] In 2002 the company gave $405,000;[9] in 2004 it gave CEI $180,000 that was earmarked for "global climate change and global climate change outreach." [4] In 2006, the company announced that they had ended their funding for the group.[10]"
July 7th, 2007 at 10:01 pmCHENEY! CHENEY! CHENEY!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:01 pmCHENEY/THOMPSON '08!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:02 pmPlease it'll be Barry or Hill.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:02 pmSpit Take, I have reviewed your sources. Thank you for posting them. However, I can only speak to my personal financial position and that of my family. I am doing much better now than I was during the Clinton years. Sales are really snappy. Hopefully it will be even better under President Thompson. ;)
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 9:46 pm
Well, you could also speak about the wider national picture with the support of some trustworthy sources, but you seem reluctant to do that.
It's a cop-out to say "I can only speak to my personal financial position and that of my family." That's all you WANT to address, because the wider picture doesn't support your stated position. And like a good right-winger, your personal situation is all that matters.
So it sounds like you're choosing option number one in my last post -- revise your statement to say something like, “my personal economic situation is better under Bush than under Clintonâ€.
The only problem with that is, it's not very meaningful beyond the four walls of your family house. It certainly has almost nothing to do with the national debate, and is completely irrelevant to this thread.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:03 pmFred/Mitt?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:04 pm"The only problem with that is, it’s not very meaningful beyond the four walls of your family house."
Except who I'm going to vote for in '08.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:05 pmLive Earth 'breaks streaming record'
THE Live Earth global pop concerts have broken a record for an online entertainment show by generating more than nine million internet streams, Microsoft web portal MSN said.
As the last two of the nine Live Earth concerts got under way in the US and Brazil, MSN product manager Karin Muskopf said the number of streams had surpassed the previous record held by 2005's Live 8 global concerts to fight poverty.
"We have exceeded any other online entertainment event," Mr Muskopf said. "It's really exciting to see the enthusiasm for the concert."
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,22037660-1702,00.html
July 7th, 2007 at 10:07 pmIt doesn’t take into account those who have stopped looking for work. They aren’t counted.
Comment by barfly — July 7, 2007 @ 9:51 pm
It doesn't take into account the homeless, those not looking for work for more than FOUR WEEKS, those looking for work but COMPLETELY UNABLE TO FIND IT, homemakers, anyone who doesn't make a living wage, people only ABLE to work part time, people who work but have received no hours (in it doesn't matter how long), small business owners whose businesses aren't making them any money anymore, among others.
How the hell can any reasonable level of unemployment statistics deny so many of the above categories. Between just the homeless, not looking for work for more than FOUR WEEKS, and unwillingly part-time only workers, you are talking about the BULK of people who should be considered unemployed.
“It doesn’t take into account those who have stopped looking for work. They aren’t counted.â€
Were they counted during the Clinton years?
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 9:53 pm
Umm, yeah. It was counted that way then, too. Doesn't change anything. If 5% of the population in 1998 fell in this category then but 90% of who was left were employed, and 95% of the population falls in that category now in 2007 and 90% of who is left are employed, it STILL looks like we have a 10% unemployment rate. It is playing with statistics to manipulate people, without giving you an accurate gauge of the reality of the situation. It is gaming the system, plain and simple.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:07 pmDick Cheney is a natural leader and a brilliant strategist.
A man like him should not waste his abilities.
The USA needs him.
Role model. Patriot. Humanitarian.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:07 pmCHENEY 2008!!!
Dick Cheney killed Edwards in their debate.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:09 pmDick Chenney should have a heart attack, while driving his entire family over a very narrow bridge.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:10 pmTHERE IS NO proven science that we humans are the cause of global warming. SHOW ME THE SCIENTIFIC PROOF that we are the cause of global warming and I will concede and eat crow. I want to believe but as a PHD holder in Analytical Analysis, no matter how much I read and research, I can't find scientific proof anywhere. Through my trained mind, all I see is a bunch of fanatics who have to have some reason to glom off the people, spouting off GLOBAL WARMING!!!! WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE garbage...no science at all. Just a "consensus" that there is Global Warming....DUHHH. There is Global Warming but the consensus among scientists it is a natural Earth cycle. UNDERSTAND No reason to panic! No reason for crazy life changes!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:11 pmDick Cheney killed Edwards in their debate.
Comment by Tupe
And he shot his friend in the face while drunk down in Texas. Deadeye's a killer ALLLLLRIGHTY!!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:11 pmMr. President, what is your opinion on John Edwards' $1200 haircut?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:11 pm#49: What Republicans really hate is that Gore is a class traitor. How dare a rich southern gentleman diss conspicuous consumption!
That’s why the Troll-spin is all about Gore and not about the Science. The Science is irrefutable. However, if one can instill fear in the other rich white males, responsible action can be put off until it’s too late.
Yes, that's part of it. Also, they're banking on Gore's low approval ratings, hoping to attach the issue of global climate change to an unpopular figure and to distract people from the science.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:11 pm"And he shot his friend in the face while drunk down in Texas. Deadeye’s a killer ALLLLLRIGHTY!!!!"
Cheney's friend apoligized for that. hehe.
What Texan hasn't done that?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:12 pmCheney is a political genius, it is a shame that his health is not better.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:12 pm“The only problem with that is, it’s not very meaningful beyond the four walls of your family house.â€
Except who I’m going to vote for in ‘08.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:05 pm
By all means, decide your vote along the narrowest knowledge base possible.
Don't worry about broad economic statistics; if a policy is going to help you personally in the short term, who cares if it drives more people into poverty? Or sustains the illusion of growth on credit from China? Or positions our economy for a recession? Go Fred!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:13 pm"if a policy is going to help you personally in the short term, who cares if it drives more people into poverty?"
Clinton didn't do much about poverty.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:14 pmComment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:11 pm
That is all John Edwards is, a walking $1200 haircut.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:14 pmDick Cheney killed Edwards in their debate.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:09 pm
Not that it has anything to do with topic which seems long forgotten but how'd you score the Gore/Bush debates?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:14 pmDick Cheney killed Edwards in their debate.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:09 pm
I take it THIS is your opinion, too, and not the statement of fact it appears to be.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:14 pmAl Gore... should be Al Snore.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:15 pm#145: You're an idiot.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:16 pmWord is that there's going to be a "big surprise" at the end of the Giants Stadium show tonight.
I thought about that for a bit and, after ruling out the possibility that George W. Bush was going to come onstage and tell everyone that he's "decided" that global warming is real after all - and all federal buildings were going green (hell would freeze over before that would ever happen, of course), I figured it will be a special musical guest.
And I'm guessing it will be Sir Paul McCartney with his mandolin. And it will be at that point, I will leave the room and go throw up. God, how I hope I'm wrong!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:16 pmClinton didn’t do much about poverty.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:14 pm
You didn't look at those links very closely, did you? Or do you just have that short of an attention span? (That wouldexplain a lot, actually.)
Under Clinton, the poverty rate declined every year he was in office. That means fewer people living in poverty. Considering that is something Bush hasn't been able to accomplish, I'd say that's "doing something".
July 7th, 2007 at 10:17 pm"Not that it has anything to do with topic which seems long forgotten but how’d you score the Gore/Bush debates?"
Bush won them. Gore annoyed people by sighing and a different Al Gore showed up for each debate.
Ask me about the '04 debates.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:17 pmWhat Texan hasn’t done that?
Comment by Tupe
Bush hasn't shot anyone in the face, that we know of. He's blown up frogs w/ firecrackers, branded pledges on the ass, gotten hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed over his lies... but then, Duh-bya isn't a real Texan, is he?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:18 pm#156: Al Gore… should be Al Snore.
That's your opinion.
I don't think Al Gore is perfect, but I'm glad he's making an effort to address the problem of anthropogenic climate change. For that I commend him.
What are you doing, Mr. President, to help prevent anthropogenic climate change?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:19 pm"Under Clinton, the poverty rate declined every year he was in office."
The poverty rate is not much different now.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:19 pmJust my opinion Jimbo.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:20 pmThe poverty rate is not much different now.
Comment by Tupe
Hard to say w/ the way the Brusch Admin cooks the numbers endlessly.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:20 pmWhat does everyone think of John Edwards and his $2 million haircut?
I heard he spent $3.5 million on it and he held up an airport, a funeral procession for a fallen soldier and an ambulance while he got it.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:20 pmWhat are you doing, Mr. President, to help prevent anthropogenic climate change?
Comment by Jim — July 7, 2007 @ 10:19 pm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smoking doobies with Goracle III,
What else?!?!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:20 pmI guess my right on comment has been censored, deleted, edited out of cyberspace...what a site!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:20 pm"I don’t think Al Gore is perfect, but I’m glad he’s making an effort to address the problem of anthropogenic climate change."
Shouldn't he be caring for his son?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:20 pm"What does everyone think of John Edwards and his $2 million haircut?"
What does John Edwards know about poverty?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:22 pmComment by Moderation — July 7, 2007 @ 9:27 pm
Bravo, Moderation. Well said! Your writing on this was superb, and your point made so well that only someone being paid by them to do this would bother to try to refute.
And from a business standpoint, what's the long term benefit to your company if you kill off your customer base?
Thank you for your excellent post.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:23 pm#167: So, basically, you don't give a crap about climate change, or about science, or about endangered species, or about people in vulnerable coastal areas. You're just interested in name-calling and mockery. Is that a fair characterization?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:23 pmCOMPARE & CONTRAST:
Under Clinton: Lowest poverty rate in 20 years: the poverty rate declined from 15.1 percent to 11.8 percent in 1999--the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years
Under GWB: Since 1999 there's been a 22 percent increase in U.S. households in which there was hunger due to poverty during the year. --U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service
July 7th, 2007 at 10:23 pmWhat else?!?!
Comment by Mr. President
What, you're passing up the opportunity to snort coke w/ Duh-bya and then go slaughter cage-raised animals w/ Deadeye?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:23 pmThe poverty rate is not much different now.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:19 pm
Because there aren't any more poor people living on your block? That's how you judge? Oh -- wait -- that's right, this is another one of your opinions. The fact that it's faith-based and nothing else is your problem, yes, but it's also our problem as Americans.
Why did I ever think that actual facts from government sources would have any impact on your thinking?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:24 pm"Bush has gotten hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed over his lies"
There is no evidence Bush lied.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:24 pmSmoking doobies with Goracle III,
What else?!?!
Comment by Mr. President — July 7, 2007 @ 10:20 pm
Can't you ever get your own. You are lamer than I thought. No doubt you bogarted his joints as well.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:24 pmComment by Moderation — July 7, 2007 @ 9:27 pm
Moderation, you've outdone yourself this time. Excellent post!
Oops, gotta run, Pink Floyd!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:25 pm"but it’s also our problem as Americans."
And it's not much different than during the Clinton years.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:25 pm#169: Shouldn’t he be caring for his son?
I generally let people make decisions about such things in consultation with their own families. I leave the pious judgments to right-wing hacks such as yourself.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:25 pmIf global warming doesn't exist, why are the Fox guys making such a big deal about the energy use for Live Earth? It shouldn't matter any more than how much energy Gore uses in his home. Yet, they seem fixated on these issues, even though they deny that excessive energy use causes any problem at all.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:26 pmHe should be with his son, Jim. You would.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:26 pmComment by Jim — July 7, 2007 @ 10:23 pm
Nah, mon.
I'm about peace and love and harmony around the world.
I'm about the music, mon.
Pass the doobie...
You gotta learn to chill, mon, and be at one with all the creatures of God, you know... Mother-Earth.
She created us all from star-dust and we need to respect Her...
Here, mon, take the doobie and chill out, mon.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:27 pmAnd it’s not much different than during the Clinton years.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:25 pm
On what do you base this opinion?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:28 pmGore doesn’t make stuff up.
Comment by VerbalKint — July 7, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:28 pm#182: He should be with his son, Jim. You would.
You don't give a crap about his son.
This is a typical strategy of right-wing commentators--try to make global climate change an issue of Al Gore's personality, rather than an important problem facing all of humanity. Gore knows this, and so do I.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:29 pm'If global warming doesn’t exist, why are the Fox guys making such a big deal about the energy use for Live Earth?"
Fox is hoisting them on their own petard.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:29 pmNot cool, Goracle III, total buzz-kill, mon.
I'm trying to zone out on some tunes...
July 7th, 2007 at 10:29 pm"On what do you base this opinion?"
The stats you posted, spit take. Poverty is not much different now than during the Clinton years.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:30 pm#183: Here, mon, take the doobie and chill out, mon.
Apparently you have to create fictional caricatures of what you think liberals are like in order to mock them. What if you actually tried to be sincere? Would your head explode?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:31 pmThere is no evidence Bush lied.
Comment by Tupe
Lie No. 6: “[Iraq] has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of Al Qaeda.â€
No one, not even US government, seriously believes there is a significant connection between the Islamic fundamentalists and the secular nationalist Ba’athist regime in Iraq, which have been mortal enemies for decades. The continued assertion of an Al Qaeda-Iraq alliance is a desperate attempt to link Saddam Hussein to the September 11 attacks.
It also serves to cover up the responsibility of American imperialism for sponsoring Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. The forces that now comprise Al Qaeda were largely recruited, trained, armed and set in motion by the CIA itself, as part of a long-term policy of using Islamic fundamentalists as a weapon against left-wing movements in the Muslim countries. This policy was pursued from the 1950s and was escalated prior to and during the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, which ended in 1989. Osama bin Laden himself was part of the CIA-backed mujaheddin forces in Afghanistan before he turned against Washington in the 1990s.
Pssst... hey, Dude, this is just No. 6 in a list of TWENTY, for starters...
July 7th, 2007 at 10:31 pm"You don’t give a crap about his son."
I seem to care more about him than Al Gore does.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:31 pmHe should be with his son, Jim. You would.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:26 pm
This approach, while novel, differs radically from the rugged individualist ideal that 'Pubes hold so dear. An adult son needs caring for?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:31 pmRepublic, do you have a link for that?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:32 pmComment by Jim — July 7, 2007 @ 10:31 pm
I don't know, mon.
Trippy.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:32 pmComment by Mr. President — July 7, 2007 @ 10:29 pm
Could you take a more Carl Sagan approach to the weed and use it to foster thought please
July 7th, 2007 at 10:32 pmFox is hoisting them on their own petard.
Comment by Tupe
That's almost it. let me correct your statement for you.
Fox is hoisting themSELVES on their own petard.
(Pssst... have any idea what a petard is?)
July 7th, 2007 at 10:33 pm#192: I seem to care more about him than Al Gore does.
Wow, that is so sincere. Have you sent Mr. Gore's son a card?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:33 pm"An adult son needs caring for?"
Yes. Al Gore, III is sick. His father should be with him.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:34 pm#196: Could you take a more Carl Sagan approach to the weed and use it to foster thought please
Even a Bob Marley approach would be a vast improvement.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:34 pmCould you take a more Carl Sagan approach to the weed and use it to foster thought please
Comment by dbadass — July 7, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow. Negative vibes, mon.
You're killing my buzz.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:35 pm"Fox is hoisting themSELVES on their own petard."
Their ratings are way better than CNN or MSNBC.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:35 pm#199: Yes. Al Gore, III is sick. His father should be with him.
Yawn.
So, what are your thoughts on anthropogenic climate change? What are you doing to help prevent it and/or slow it down?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:35 pm"Wow, that is so sincere. Have you sent Mr. Gore’s son a card?"
His father needs to be with him and check him into rehab. And stick by him.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:36 pm"So, what are your thoughts on anthropogenic climate change? What are you doing to help prevent it and/or slow it down?"
I have bought some carbon offsets.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:37 pmI'd like to know more about anthropogenic climate change!
Sign the petition to have Al Gore explain further:
July 7th, 2007 at 10:37 pmhttp://www.petitiononline.com/agdgw/petition.html
“An adult son needs caring for?â€
Yes. Al Gore, III is sick. His father should be with him.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:34 pm
Per form you appear to have missed the point. Please reconcile this sudden interest in the human condition with your Republican leanings. On the surface, they don't appear to mesh.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:37 pmMr Rogers did it, too.â€
Mr. Rogers voted for George W. Bush.
Comment by Tupe
I thought votes were private. Link please.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:39 pmRepublic, do you have a link for that?
Comment by Tupe
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0320-11.htm
Different source, same quote. Try googling the quote. You'll find all the hits you need.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:39 pm#205: I have bought some carbon offsets.
Well, if you did, that's better than not buying carbon offsets.
Somehow, though, I suspect you care about as much about global climate change as you do about Al Gore's son. What do you actually care about, other than making as much money as possible?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:39 pm"Please reconcile this sudden interest in the human condition with your Republican leanings."
Al Gore is a liberal Democrat and he doesn't seem to have any interest in the human condition. Go figure.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:39 pm"On what do you base this opinion?"
The stats you posted, spit take. Poverty is not much different now than during the Clinton years.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:30 pm
So you saw statistics that showed the poverty rate declined every year Clinton was in office, from 15.4% to 11.3% -- that's roughly 12 million fewer people living in poverty in 2000 than in 1993 -- and that since Bush has taken office, the poverty rate has RISEN every year, which means MORE people in poverty, and that to you means there's essentially no difference?
Wow. I guess we have to go back to the basics: do you think it's better for the US economy to have MORE people living in poverty, or FEWER? Which do you think is the better situation, and which indicates a better economy?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:41 pmThanks for the link, Republic. But that article did not provide any evidence that Bush knowingly lied.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:42 pmTheir ratings are way better than CNN or MSNBC.
Comment by Tupe
And w/ Bill Orally going off about lesbian gangs packing pink pistols and terrorizing Wash, DC, I'm sure their ratings will stay up there... no really, they will... you'll see... especially once that link between the Lesbos, al Qaeda, the DNC, and global warming come out...
July 7th, 2007 at 10:42 pm#211: Al Gore is a liberal Democrat and he doesn’t seem to have any interest in the human condition.
Uh-huh. I mean, that's such a compelling argument, what with his organizing concerts around the world to raise awareness about global climate change.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:42 pmAl Gore is a liberal Democrat and he doesn’t seem to have any interest in the human condition. Go figure.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:39 pm
Or where they live, obviously. Nice work.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:42 pmBut that article did not provide any evidence that Bush knowingly lied.
Comment by Tupe
You are a disingenous fraud.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:42 pmSpit take, these stats go up and down. The fact is the poverty rate is not much different now under Bush than it was under Clinton.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:43 pmhttp://www.smirkingchimp.com/node/8573/print
Read this and know that impeachment is THE ONLY ANSWER to this problem with our national security right now.
Send this to every legislator you know! We can't wait a moment longer or more damage will be done.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:43 pmFox is hoisting them on their own petard.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:29 pm
Wait. So the people trying to save the Earth in this whole Live Earth event are actually trying to HURT people? And FOX is trying to use that concert, which is being used to HURT PEOPLE, to instead HURT THE CONCERT GOERS AND ORGANIZERS with their OWN CONCERT? Really?!?! I had no idea that helping people actually meant HURTING them! Wow.
"You mean, inflammable means flammable? What a country!"
July 7th, 2007 at 10:44 pm"with his organizing concerts around the world to raise awareness about global climate change."
He should be with his son, not organizing concerts.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:44 pmRight Wing Launches Dishonest, Misinformed Attacks Against [insert any truth or idea that helps average people]
water is wet..attacking truth and community with lies and disinformation is what wingnuttia does.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:44 pmMr. Rogers voted for George W. Bush.
Comment by Tupe
I thought votes were private. Link please.
Comment by shane — July 7, 2007 @ 10:39 pm
No worries, Shane. Tupe has established a reputation here for pronouncing opinions as "fact". Trustworthiness is not high on his personal list of priorities.
He's also fond of demanding links to support others' statements while at the same time dismissing the need to back up his own statements.
All in all, typical troll behavior.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:44 pm#206: Having Al Gore "debate" industry-funded skeptics like Richard Lindzen and Timothy Ball wouldn't serve to educate anyone. It sounds to me that you're interested in obfuscating, rather than illuminating, the issue. Indeed, that's what you've been doing throughout this whole thread.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:44 pmBut that article did not provide any evidence that Bush knowingly lied.
Comment by Tupe
As if watching him speak isn't enough proof. Have you ever known a person that is a worse liar than Bush?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:44 pm#
this is important! Read Now!!
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/node/8573/print
Read this and know that impeachment is THE ONLY ANSWER to this problem with our national security right now.
Send this to every legislator you know! We can’t wait a moment longer or more damage will be done.
Comment by veritas — July 7, 2007 @ 10:43 pm
July 7th, 2007 at 10:45 pm"So the people trying to save the Earth in this whole Live Earth event are actually trying to HURT people?"
Not trying to hurt people. But they sure are using up a lot of energy. Kind of like Al Gore's uses three times the amount of energy as the normal home.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:46 pm#221: He should be with his son, not organizing concerts.
Shouldn't you be with Al Gore's son, rather than writing inane and repetitive posts on this website?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:46 pmAs if watching him speak isn’t enough proof. Have you ever known a person that is a worse liar than Bush?
Comment by willyloman
Dick Cheney...
July 7th, 2007 at 10:46 pmWhat exactly do you sell?â€
Medical instruments.
Comment by Tupe
Well no wonder you're making so much money. You're part of the health industry that's gone crazy with Bushco and Congress setting no limits. You'd think you'd be saving your energy for debunking Sicko, what are you, warming up?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:47 pmSpit take, these stats go up and down. The fact is the poverty rate is not much different now under Bush than it was under Clinton.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:43 pm
Exactly. They went DOWN under Clinton and they've gone UP under Bush.
That's hardly "not much different now", unless you're looking to minimize the impact on your personal beliefs and don't give a flying f*ck about others.
And, by the way, you're really not in a good position to throw around the word "fact" as if you knew what it meant.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:47 pmcommondreams?
Ha!
Heyooo!!!!
Nice one, Republic!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:48 pm"Well no wonder you’re making so much money. You’re part of the health industry that’s gone crazy with Bushco and Congress setting no limits."
Setting no limits to what?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:48 pm#227: Not trying to hurt people. But they sure are using up a lot of energy.
The hope, I assume, is that raising awareness about global climate change will have the eventual effect of reducing carbon emissions globally in such a way as to more than offset any emissions produced by these concerts. A bit of a gamble, I suppose, but a pretty safe one.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:49 pmFormer Tennessee Sen. Fred D. Thompson, who is campaigning for president as a "pro-life" Republican, accepted a lobbying assignment from a family-planning group to persuade the first Bush White House to ease a controversial abortion restriction, according to a 1991 document .
A Thompson spokesman categorically denied this.
If the story proves true, Thompson is toast in the GOP primaries.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:49 pmI think we should call this game "Smoke that Troll" with rules similar to "Name that Tune". For example, I just got the troll du jour to circle back on himself in three posts. Some can likely do it quicker. So, for the championship, please, SMOKE THAT TROLL!!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 10:50 pm"Exactly. They went DOWN under Clinton and they’ve gone UP under Bush."
Nominally. It is pretty much the same under both administrations.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:50 pmComment by Jim — July 7, 2007 @ 10:49 pm
I’d like to know more about global climate change!
Sign the petition to have Al Gore explain further:
July 7th, 2007 at 10:51 pmhttp://www.petitiononline.com/agdgw/petition.html
A Thompson spokesman categorically denied this.
If the story proves true, Thompson is toast in the GOP primaries.
------------
You wish. I wouldn't want to face Fred either if I were you.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:52 pm#236: I think we should call this game “Smoke that Troll†with rules similar to “Name that Tuneâ€. For example, I just got the troll du jour to circle back on himself in three posts.
My favorite game is seeing how many logical fallacies I can catch people committing. Tupe is especially adept at these.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:53 pmI recognize that laconic style and imitation of HAL. Tupe is The Captain. And he doesn't care about Al Gore III.
Funny that Goppers who can get so self-righteous about the merest mention of Mary Cheney are so eager to repeat the troubles of Al Jr. They're such hypocrites.
Remember: the theme of this thread is the dishonest and misinformed attack on Live Earth by the Right Wing. It's not about Gore Jr, Guidant & Medtronics slumping sales, or bad impersonations of Jamaicans.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:53 pmWhy is Al Gore so afraid to debate Lord Monckton?
It's not like he's with his son trying to keep him off drugs or anything.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:54 pmAs you wish, Jim. It's basically the same game, with the same level of difficulty.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:54 pm#238: Isn't there a rule where you get banned if you post the same idiotic comment over and over again? If there isn't, there should be.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:55 pmNice one, Republic!
Comment by Mr. President
Google the exact quote and you'll getm ore hits than you know what to do with. It is an honest quote of Duh-bya's.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:55 pmI don’t think Al Gore is perfect, but I’m glad he’s making an effort to address the problem of anthropogenic climate change.â€
Shouldn’t he be caring for his son?
Comment by Tupe
His son is a 24 year old adult. What is wrong with you lunatics?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:56 pmAs you wish, Jim. It’s basically the same game, with the same level of difficulty.
Comment by Retrogrouch
Are the rules anything like Whack-A-Troll?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:56 pmComment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 7, 2007 @ 10:55 pm
But it doesn't prove your point.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:57 pm#242: Why is Al Gore so afraid to debate Lord Monckton?
Afraid? I suspect not. He wasn't afraid to testify before the Senate.
I suspect he's not interested in wasting his time on someone who wishes only to obfuscate the issue. I wouldn't be, either.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:57 pmI already tried smoking trollls.
Couldn't keep 'em lit.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:58 pm"His son is a 24 year old adult."
Why isn't he with him trying to help him?
July 7th, 2007 at 10:58 pmWhat does John Edwards know about poverty?
Comment by Tupe
Well he grew up poor. What does Bush know about poverty, he was born with a silver spoon up his ass and apparently he only removed it when he needed it for his drug habit. Unless he used it for his exgirlfriends abortion.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:58 pm#247 - Implements of physical violence are discouraged, so please leave your mallets at home. We, after all, are more civil.... but, if you must.....
July 7th, 2007 at 10:59 pm"I suspect he’s not interested in wasting his time on someone who wishes only to obfuscate the issue. I wouldn’t be, either."
Bush defeated Gore in their debates. Imagine what Lord Monckton would do to him.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:00 pm#251: Why isn’t he with him trying to help him?
Why are you totally unconcerned about global climate change, an issue that affects everyone on this planet, including people who prostitute themselves to the medical supplies industry?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:00 pm"Well he grew up poor."
Edwards grew up middle class, not in poverty. He's living the life of luxury now. He even was involved in a hedge fund.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:02 pmHe even was involved in a hedge fund.
Comment by Tupe
Oh my god... Gore was trading hedges? Qucik, call the SEC!!!
Son of a mill worker and postal clerk doesn't sound too middle class to me. First in his family to go to college?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:04 pm#254: Bush defeated Gore in their debates.
That's an absurd comment. That's true only if you agree with the notion, promulgated by manistream and right-wing media pundits, that all Bush had to do was to "keep from drooling" in order to win the debate. There is no objective standard by which Bush won any of the 2000 debates.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:04 pmBush defeated Gore in their debates. Imagine what Lord Monckton would do to him.
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 11:00 pm
Bush did not defeat Gore on any measure of logic or rationality. He appealed to people that were afraid to elect a leader who may be smarter than them. Isn't that what one would expect? Do we want our President to be a coke-addled underachieving frat boy of privilege? Is this what you're defending?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:05 pm#246, shane, that is a rhetorical question, I hope. Don't get me started on my list of things that are wrong with our trolls....
July 7th, 2007 at 11:05 pmSon of a mill worker and postal clerk doesn’t sound too middle class to me. First in his family to go to college?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
More like Working Class, actually.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:05 pmBut it doesn’t prove your point.
Comment by Mr. President
So, you're **cough... cough...** "claiming" that Bush actually BELIEVED those words when he made that statement??
July 7th, 2007 at 11:05 pmWhy isn’t he with him trying to help him?
Comment by Tupe — July 7, 2007 @ 10:58 pm
This whole line of "thought" may be the stupidest shit I have seen here today and it takes alot to outdo that scamp Mr. president.
Anyway, I assume you have absolutely what has already transpired within the Gore family as to their son's "condition". Nor do I . I also belive that some treatment strategies feel that some isolation from loved ones can be beneficial. It may be that Mr. Gore is in hourly contact with his son. Unless you know otherwise, why jerk everyone around with this charade?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:06 pmMore like Working Class, actually.
Comment by Zooey
That's what I'd say too.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:06 pmYes. Al Gore, III is sick. His father should be with him.
Comment by Tupe
How would you know that? Did you look up his medical records through some privilege at your job. That is VERY, VERY illegal.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:06 pmOtherwise, all you know is that he made a very bad decision on the night in question.
Anyway, a 24 year old man who drinks and uses a small amount of marijuana is pretty typical and it is only the Hitleresque Los Angeles Police Dept., remember Rodney King, and the Fox News hacks that think this is an issue. In case you weren't paying attention, he identified himself as Al Gore's son before they decided to search his car and detain him.
Why is ANYONE responding to the idiot Tupe?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:06 pmWorking class. I can just see Bush the younger doing a Maynard G. Krebs.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:07 pmWORK!
After downplaying concerns about global warming, Ebell switched tones and began criticizing the concerts “because they just use too much energy.â€
This is getting childish, especially from someone from an "Enterprise Institute." This is called "advertising," and businesses do it all the time. Pay more now, or lose a lot more in opportunity costs.
Also, when is someone going to call these guys' bluff when they start accusing scientists of political bias? It always reminds me of the old one about the pot and the kettle...
July 7th, 2007 at 11:07 pmCouldn’t keep ‘em lit.
Comment by Tom3
Hang them out to dry a little more first.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:07 pm#259: Do we want our President to be a coke-addled underachieving frat boy of privilege?
I assume that's a rhetorical question. Most Republicans, in spite of everything they presumably learned between 2000 and 2004, voted to "re-elect" Bush.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:07 pmWow. Negative vibes, mon.
You’re killing my buzz.
Comment by Mr. President
Those vibes aren't aimed at your "buzz". Watch your back.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:07 pmTupe needs to remind everyone of his fourteen DUIs.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:08 pm#266: Why is ANYONE responding to the idiot Tupe?
It's a disease, Zooey. I can't help myself.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:09 pmComment by dbadass — July 7, 2007 @ 11:06 pm
Isolation from loved ones can be therapeutic?
How so?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:09 pmI already tried smoking trollls.
Couldn’t keep ‘em lit.
Comment by Tom3
That's because they're all wet.
As usual, the trolls are just trying to get attention. No content necessary:
Edwards grew up middle class, not in poverty. He’s living the life of luxury now. He even was involved in a hedge fund.
Comment by Tupe
This retard doesn't even know what that means, although he's on a dead run to Wikipedia right . . . about . . . now
July 7th, 2007 at 11:09 pmWhy is marijuana illegal? Why are alcohol and tobacco legal?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:09 pmplease insert "no idea" between absolutely and what. As to the rest of the typos, whatever
July 7th, 2007 at 11:10 pmLord Monkeybutt.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:10 pmWorking class. I can just see Bush the younger doing a Maynard G. Krebs.
WORK!
Comment by RUCerious
You are an oldie, aren't you?
Anyway, it's more like "Weeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrk?"
July 7th, 2007 at 11:11 pm#268: Also, when is someone going to call these guys’ bluff when they start accusing scientists of political bias?
That's already happening. A number of Republicans, including the notorious James Inhofe (R-OK), have issued veiled threats about cutting off funding for scientists who do research on anthropogenic climate change.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:11 pmIs "Tupe" pronounced like "toupee"?
Totally OT: Hey, TRoS, what is it with Mets v Astros extra-inning games?! Jeez, it's in the 14th!
I'll go back on topic next post.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:11 pmgummitch, I prefer to use the term, goldie...
July 7th, 2007 at 11:12 pmIsolation from loved ones can be therapeutic?
How so?
Comment by Mr. President
Well, Mr. President, we would put you in a nice skinny barrel and pin a flag to your dorsal fin, so everyone knew you loved America, and we would then, take turns filling up the barrel with the end results of many high colonics. That would be very therapeutic for us.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:12 pmComment by dbadass — July 7, 2007 @ 11:06 pm
Isolation from loved ones can be therapeutic?
How so?
Comment by Mr. President
Imagine, for example, one was related to you. Being somewhere else on the planet would mean not having to deal with your childish self-involvement. Tough love, as it were. Figuring you would go off somewhere else for your constant need for attention -- like to a liberal blog where you could plague everyone while contributing nothing. But at least your relatives are safe and relatively more sane.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:13 pmSome of the "Libertarians" are also on this Hippy/Environmentalist-Hating rant. if Alex Jones, Mike Rivero, and Jeff Rense could stick with Police State and 9/11, they would be credible, but they state the following:
1) Al Gore is a member of the Illuminati
2) Environmentalism is designed to steal our land and control us.
Then again, they say The Beatles were members of the CIA, Labor unions are Communist, and the ACLU is under control of the Neo-Cons.
That's why Libertarians will always be a fringe political group, unless they embrace Labor and the Greens. Otherwise, they are not a viable alternative to the current brand of garbage we have in power now. It takes more than owning guns and not paying taxes.
I know one guy who says, "You are not going to get me to give my Pickup truck and get me to drive one of those fairy electric cars".
Speaking of electric cars:
July 7th, 2007 at 11:13 pmhttp://www.teslamotors.com/index.php
Or perhaps "seasoned veteran"
July 7th, 2007 at 11:13 pmNot trying to hurt people. But they sure are using up a lot of energy. Kind of like Al Gore’s uses three times the amount of energy as the normal home.
Comment by Tupe
Nice going CompTROLLER, I only suspected it was you but like the egomaniacal idiot you are you just had to keep blabbling. What a jackass.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:13 pm#266: Why is ANYONE responding to the idiot Tupe?
It’s a disease, Zooey. I can’t help myself.
Likewise, Jim. I'll add that it's also more entertaining than thinking about the decades of harm their ilk have borne upon this nation.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:13 pmTotally OT: Hey, TRoS, what is it with Mets v Astros extra-inning games?! Jeez, it’s in the 14th!
I’ll go back on topic next post.
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Angels had to go into extra innings in order to kick the yankees in the nuts. Sometimes, you just got to do it.
Go Mets!
July 7th, 2007 at 11:14 pmHey y'all,
Why not let the experts discuss the issues?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:14 pmhttp://www.petitiononline.com/agdgw/petition.html
ey, TRoS, what is it with Mets v Astros extra-inning games?! Jeez, it’s in the 14th!
I’ll go back on topic next post.
At least the Mets haven't lost yet. Geez, what's going on w/ these guys? I'm stunned that they're still in first.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:14 pmNice going CompTROLLER, I only suspected it was you but like the egomaniacal idiot you are you just had to keep blabbling. What a jackass.
Comment by shane
I knew that was a familiar trollvoice. Good on you for pegging it.
"Wah, wah! Gore's house! Wah!"
July 7th, 2007 at 11:15 pmSetting no limits to what?
Comment by Tupe
Limits to what medicare will pay and what the industry can charge the public. No cost containment whatsoever.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:15 pmThanks, Jane! I thought I missed the game. Go Blue State!
July 7th, 2007 at 11:15 pmComment by gummitch — July 7, 2007 @ 11:13 pm
I asked a serious question.
If dbadass can not back up his assertion, then he should say so.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:16 pmIsolation from loved ones can be therapeutic?
How so?
Comment by Mr. President — July 7, 2007 @ 11:09 pm
I didn't say it was a good idea or that I supported it. What I said was that some substance abuse programs in extreme cases advocate some "intensive" care type methods which can involve hospitalization without visitation. From what we know young Mr. Gore hardly qualifies and seems no different from most other waspy uppermiddle class suburbian kids I have dealt with for years. My point is that the whole line of reason put forth by Tupe is moronic
July 7th, 2007 at 11:16 pmCan one trust a travelling PAD salesman?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:17 pmAt least the Mets haven’t lost yet. Geez, what’s going on w/ these guys? I’m stunned that they’re still in first.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Just one of those nights. Looks like Boston/Detroit game is also deep into extra innings.
I would also like to note that the Mariners have just beaten two of the best starters in the AL. Ahem.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:17 pm#288: I’ll add that it’s also more entertaining than thinking about the decades of harm their ilk have borne upon this nation.
Yeah, I guess I consider it my patriotic duty to tell people when they're wildly wrong, even when I know it's unlikely to change their behavior. I think it's necessary to call people out when they say dishonest and/or inaccurate things.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:17 pm#298: Looks like Boston/Detroit game is also deep into extra innings.
Yup. Go Sox!
July 7th, 2007 at 11:18 pmComment by dbadass — July 7, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
Well, do you think most "waspy uppermiddle class suburbian kids" should be abandoned by loved ones and isolated as part of their rehab treatment?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:19 pmI would also like to note that the Mariners have just beaten two of the best starters in the AL. Ahem.
Comment by gummitch — July 7, 2007 @ 11:17 pm
Good for them!:D I'm going in to watch the 15th! (sigh)
July 7th, 2007 at 11:19 pm“His son is a 24 year old adult.â€
Why isn’t he with him trying to help him?
Comment by Tupe
Oh that's right PoopTROLLER, you think your an adolescent at about the same age. Mommy still changing your diapers, little boy. By 24 a normal man needs to take responsibility for his actions. Not expect daddy to spoon feed him. But maybe his mother is with him, wouldn't that serve your obsessive need to treat him like an infant.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:19 pmYup. Go Sox!
Comment by Jim
Sounds like a preview of the AL championship series to me.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:20 pmWell, do you think most “waspy uppermiddle class suburbian kids†should be abandoned by loved ones and isolated as part of their rehab treatment?
Comment by Mr. President — July 7, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
No, why would I?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:21 pm#285: In fairness, I do think that Libertarians tend to be more intellectually honest than Republicans. Unlike Republicans, Libertarians have a set of guiding principles. Unfortunately, they do tend to be susceptible to wild conspiracy theories.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:21 pm#304: Sounds like a preview of the AL championship series to me.
That's a pretty solid prediction. I'll bet the Angels might have something to say about that, too, though.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:22 pmNo, why would I?
Comment by dbadass — July 7, 2007 @ 11:21 pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, because it sound as if you disagreed with Tupe.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:23 pmBut it seems that you two are on the same page.
Isolation from loved ones can be therapeutic?
How so?
Comment by Mr. President
If we loved you we'd isolate you. Then you'd learn to recognize you are not eliciting desired responses from others by your behavior.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:24 pmIt’s a disease, Zooey. I can’t help myself.
Commet by Jim
Likewise, Jim. I’ll add that it’s also more entertaining than thinking about the decades of harm their ilk have borne upon this nation.
Comment by Retrogrouch
Perfectly understandable answers, guys. Proceed..... :)
July 7th, 2007 at 11:26 pmOff topic, but seeing as how today is 7/7/7, did anybody buy a lottery ticket today??
July 7th, 2007 at 11:26 pm#310: Perfectly understandable answers, guys. Proceed….. :)
Thank you, Zooey. I appreciate your enabling my addiction.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:27 pmThat’s a pretty solid prediction. I’ll bet the Angels might have something to say about that, too, though.
Comment by Jim
I'll grant you that. I was rather disappointed when the Mets never went after Vlad when he was a free agent. He's one of handful of players in MLB who intimdates every time he comes to bat.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:28 pmWell, do you think most “waspy uppermiddle class suburbian kids†should be abandoned by loved ones and isolated as part of their rehab treatment?
Comment by Mr. President
24 year old men, like Gore's son, are not kids. Grow up.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:28 pmI guess this thread pretty well illustrates the post--there really aren't any cogent arguments that global warming is a hoax. All Republicans can hope to do is try to confuse the issue. Admittedly, they've been pretty good at it so far, but they're going to lose this battle eventually.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:29 pmMaybe you are high. I do not disagree with Tupe as to a father's love for their child. I disagree with a clear attempt to diminish Mr. Gores efforts by attempting to run this red herring implying a lack of concern for his son's welfare. Unless Tupe has specific details as to the dynamics of the Gore family, it remains the stupidest line of reason I have seen today. Even your Cheney 08 fantasy has more legitimacy
July 7th, 2007 at 11:29 pmI didn't read all the comments, did you all catch the subtle new scare tactic?
It went something like this: "Democrats are all about income re-distribution, we have to become a lot poorer and China has to become a little poorer".
Wow, there is a lot to think about there.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:30 pm#317: I disagree with a clear attempt to diminish Mr. Gores efforts by attempting to run this red herring implying a lack of concern for his son’s welfare. Unless Tupe has specific details as to the dynamics of the Gore family, it remains the stupidest line of reason I have seen today.
Yup. Red herrings are this dude's specialty.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:31 pmDon't wet your pants, Mr Pee. Just because your mommy still tucks you in at night is no reason to think a 24 year old Harvard grad with a good job should be treated like a child by his parents. Al Gore gave up a chance to seek the presidential nomination to be with his son during Pappy Bush's reign. So I don't think he needs to prove his love to his son. His son needs to take charge of his own life. (Just as many trolls do. Does your mommy know you're smoking weed?)
As for Lord Monkeyton, what a farce! What? That lunatic debate Gore?? He'd need to be miked the way Bush was in the Kerry/Bush debate. He's a fraud. Read what Monbiot has to say about him HERE.
I think the following is the best bit:
July 7th, 2007 at 11:31 pm
Good then we all agree:
CHENEY 2008!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 11:32 pmThank you, Zooey. I appreciate your enabling my addiction.
Comment by Jim
You may be asked one day to enable my own addiction.
*hanging head in shame*
July 7th, 2007 at 11:33 pm#317: It went something like this: “Democrats are all about income re-distribution, we have to become a lot poorer and China has to become a little poorerâ€
Get used to it. We're going to be hearing scare tactics like this, indefinitely into the future. We just have to make sure people see these scare tactics for what they are.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:33 pmOT to the max, but a rerun of SNL just featured Dick and Lynne Cheney reading Valentine's cards:
-From Scooter Libby - Roses are red, violets are blue, if I go to jail, so do you.
Timely.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:35 pmComment by Zooey — July 7, 2007 @ 11:33 pm
Hi, Zooey. What did I miss? Concert on TV (I know, I'm sorry) just ended and they're showing a "Best Of", and I'm sure you can catch any act at the link willyloman provided. Mets are going to the top of the 16th! 3-3 in Houston.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:35 pm#321: You may be asked one day to enable my own addiction.
*hanging head in shame*
Don't be ashamed, Zooey. At least you're not a Republican.
At least, I hope THAT'S not your addiction.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:36 pmUnless Tupe has specific details as to the dynamics of the Gore family, it remains the stupidest line of reason I have seen today.
Comment by dbadass
Bold words, considering some of the comments posted here today!
July 7th, 2007 at 11:37 pmhttp://entimg.msn.com/i/ExperienceData/p1-7/en-us/x.htm?sh=LiveEarthLive&g=fd3116b3-ebc3-439e-a9a0-2bb5dbf305cb
you have to watch one commercial, but james Blunt is coming up in a few at the UK site
July 7th, 2007 at 11:38 pmBold words, considering some of the comments posted here today!
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
I personally beat that one with the Cheese Flavored Condums. patent pending.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:39 pmBed time for trolls?
July 7th, 2007 at 11:41 pmI personally beat that one with the Cheese Flavored Condums. patent pending.
Comment by willyloman
Indeed you did, indeed you did. You stopped me cold in my tracks w/ that one.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:43 pmthe Cheese Flavored Condums. patent pending.
Comment by willyloman
Perhaps you could call the product "Cheezy Stiffs"???
July 7th, 2007 at 11:44 pmHi, Zooey. What did I miss? Concert on TV (I know, I’m sorry) just ended and they’re showing a “Best Ofâ€, and I’m sure you can catch any act at the link willyloman provided. Mets are going to the top of the 16th! 3-3 in Houston.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Just troll shit, and a lot of patience on the part of TP commenters. :)
July 7th, 2007 at 11:45 pmDon’t be ashamed, Zooey. At least you’re not a Republican.
At least, I hope THAT’S not your addiction.
Comment by Jim
I safely escaped the influence of my family, thank goodness, but I do try to enlighten the trolls no and then.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:47 pmIndeed you did, indeed you did. You stopped me cold in my tracks w/ that one.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Yeah, me too. Oy....
July 7th, 2007 at 11:48 pmHow smug of you Zooey.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:48 pmYour Left masters must be pleased!
July 7th, 2007 at 11:49 pmbut I do try to enlighten the trolls "no and then".
Comment by Zooey
"no and then"???
I'm sure that's a typo, yet oddly more effective that way.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:50 pmWhat I don’t understand is why the right is so dead-set against the wole notion of global warming as a threat.
I mean, it really has nothing to do with political philosophy, does it?
I understand the oil lobby’s interest in pooh-poohing the science, and I understand the partisan push-back against Gore, however childish it may be.
But does that explain why virtually EVERY global warming skeptic is a hard right-winger? Is AnonGOPer’s hilarious caricature in post #5 closer to the mark than a reasonable person would think?
Man, if that’s the case then the right wing is in deeper trouble than we ever imagined.
Comment by spit take — July 7, 2007 @ 8:20 pm
Actually, your question is directed to the wrong side. You SHOULD be asking why the LEFT is so damn eager to swallow the entire global warming agenda.
And the answer is clear.
Not so coincidentally, all of the "remedies" being called for by the left to combat global warming dovetail so perfectly with the rest of their anti-capitalist, anti-business, tax-raising, marxist agenda, which has failed to capture the public's imagination. In fact, outside of a few rogue judicial activist judges, that agenda has gained no traction whatsoever. Global warming is merely the latest vehicle to attempt to weasel that agenda through the back door. For this reason alone, the left must be viewed with deep suspicion on this issue and, in fact, does not deserve the benefit of the doubt.
And when you also consider that many serious scientists view the extreme doomsday scenarios painted by advocates with great skepticism, that mistrust becomes even more stark. Such scientists ask legitimate questions that are dismissed by the overzealous warming crowd, such as: Is the warming of the earth due primarily, or even largely, to manmade greenhouse gasses? Is the earth simply in another warming cycle (considering we were in an ice age only 10,000 years ago, that's not far-fetched)? How much of the warming is due to the sun's cycle? We know that other planets are warming as well, so perhaps the sun is the primary culprit. If the earth is warming, will that warming result in the catastrophic scenarios painted by advocates? Or will it mean merely a couple of degrees? And will a couple of degrees result only in negative consequences or might other areas of the globe benefit from such warming?
But perhaps most importantly, assuming the very worst case scenario, that the warming IS primarily man-made and that we can expect the absolute worst case scenario as a result, will the remedies being called for actually DO anything to combat the problem? And if China and India and other countries don't also join in any effort, it probably wouldn't make any difference anyway. In fact, it's been said that even if every country DID sign on to Kyoto, it would result in temperature reductions so insignfiicant (less than 1 degree) as to be meaningless. In short, the science of global warming is hardly "settled" science--NOT the question of whether the earth is warming, but how much, what's responsible, what are the true repurcussions and what can be done? And let's also remember, these are the same people who warned of the coming ice age only 30 years ago.
Given all of that, even if we accept all of the claims of the warming alarmists, is it really worth the harm to our economy, lifestyles and way of life? Until the science is more certain, no.
Then throw in the hypocritical limosine liberals flying all over the country, burning absurd levels of fuel, going to their global warming parties, asking us to cut back on toilet paper, switch lightbulbs, use less water in the toilet, having to listen to that c-nt Barbra Streisand lecture us from her mansions about how we should dry our clothes on a clothesline, and all of the other hypocrisy. Top it off with Gore's absolutely absurd "documentary," which serious critics dismissed as an absurdity, and the answer is very easy.
When you add it all up, it's actually very easy to understand why thinking people view the global warming alarmists with extreme skepticism. It's not up to the skeptics to prove Gore & Co wrong, it's up to the global warming crowd to convince rest of us that this is not just another leftwing scheme to slam their hideous agenda down our throats. Gore & Co have not earned the benefit of the doubt; in fact, just the opposite. The burden of proof is on them, and they need to come up with a far more convincing case then they have made so far.
You ask why rightwingers are so skeptical? Has the left given us a single reason why we should trust them on this issue?
A resounding NO.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:51 pmand Al Gore III is a drug addict
July 7th, 2007 at 11:53 pmWhat I don’t understand is why the right is so dead-set against the wole notion of global warming as a threat.
Why? Because liberals are trying to push a ridiculous tax policy!
July 7th, 2007 at 11:56 pmnd Al Gore III is a drug addict
Comment by Mr. President
Yep, just like Noelle Bush...
July 7th, 2007 at 11:58 pmWhy? Because liberals are trying to push a ridiculous tax policy!
Comment by m12 — July 7, 2007 @ 11:56 pm
Specifics please
July 7th, 2007 at 11:59 pmWhy has every single issue the trolls have with the liberal attempts to make this world a better place, come down to taking a little money out of their pockets? Can they really be that one dimentional?
Oh, theres a silly question.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:03 amOh, they are awake. And have been typing for the last 2 hours. Volume does not equal substance.
The science is beyond dispute. You know it, the people you apologize for know it. Your name-calling and broad-brush characterizations leave no doubt.
Fossil fuels are doomed, and insisting that we continue to cling to them in some half-baked partisan defense does nothing for the economic or environmental security of this country. As a proud American I'm sure that you value your independence.
If liberals are "smug" for believing in science and research, so be it. I'm not insulted by the term.
As for the verbose troll-dom, please indulge my simple survey that will determine what core issue leads you to side with the most corrupt and illogical executive branch in recent history (multiple answers allowed and in light of previous responses encouraged):
1) Everyone should have the right to death except the terminally ill and unwanted embryos.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:05 am2) I trust corporations completely with my health, safety and economic security.
3) I hate government regulation, except when it agrees with my church’s corrupted interpretation of the Bible.
4) Guns are neat.
5) Excessive energy consumption is my right.
6) I hate the thought of educated children.
7) This country was a much better place 50 years ago.
8) Science is evil.
9) I don’t like brown people and would prefer to bomb them.
10) Elephants poop bigger than donkeys.
How smug of you Zooey.
Comment by Mr. President
Whatever.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:08 am“no and then�??
I’m sure that’s a typo, yet oddly more effective that way.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
That's my Pennsylvania Dutch coming out, dontcha know?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:09 amWhy has every single issue the trolls have with the liberal attempts to make this world a better place, come down to taking a little money out of their pockets? Can they really be that one dimentional?
Oh, theres a silly question.
Comment by willyloman — July 8, 2007 @ 12:03 am
Your question answers itself. Because every solution the left offers to "make the world a better place" (as the left understands that) comes down to taking money out of our pockets.
See, sometimes -- usually, in fact -- we just don't share your view of a what is a "better world."
July 8th, 2007 at 12:09 amLIVE EARTH ROCKS! The short films are by far the best aspect of the event though, informative and entertaining. GREAT JOB MR GORE!!! THANK YOU AND CONGRATULATIONS!!!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:09 amAnd back on Earth, the Mets have had to take the game to the 17th inning. Damn. Practically a doubleheader.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:10 amYour Left masters must be pleased!
Comment by Mr. President
I enlightened myself as a teen. I didn't need anyone to tell me how to think -- unlike you.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:10 amTrolls suck...
July 8th, 2007 at 12:10 amHey, Schmuck Chuck, what's with the Barbra fixation?
Would this be An Inconvenient Truth? Funny, who are these serious critics? It won an Academy Award and has a 94% rating on RottenTomatoes. I take it you just love to make stuff up in the grand old Ronnie Raygun tradition.
My you are delusional. 99% of peer reviewed science articles confirm the Global Warming hypothesis and you don't seem to find that "proof"? No wonder you think Libby should have walked; your not interested in a reasonable doubt but any doubt at all. I suppose the burden of proof is on the Darwinist and not the Creationists. Hahahaha.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:10 amWhy? Because liberals are trying to push a ridiculous tax policy!
Comment by m12
WTF??? From global warming to tax policy?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:11 amHow smug of you Zooey.
Comment by Mr. President
She gets to be smug. She actually has a life. Unlike, uh, you.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:11 amProgressives out there, I commend you fro trying to civilize the conservative brutes who dilly dally around here. I'm going back to Live Earth. Good luck!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:12 amSee, sometimes — usually, in fact — we just don’t share your view of a what is a “better world.â€
Comment by Chucky Schmucky
You said a mouthful there. And it is truely a shame.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:12 amYou ask why rightwingers are so skeptical? Has the left given us a single reason why we should trust them on this issue?
A resounding NO.
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 7, 2007 @ 11:51 pm
Obviously you never lived near the Passic, Hackensack, and Hudson Rivers in the 50s and 60s. Industry so polluted these rivers that NOTHING could live in them. The "Damn Hippies" pushed for these Right Wing businesses to clean up, and they did. Now at least, there are fish and birds living there.
Even Nixon was pushed by popular demand to clean up the air and water. It was not Rednecks, Suits, and Greasers who wanted this, it was common everyday people and Hippies.
If the the planet was left up to Right Wing Polluters and "Bottom Liners", we would cement everywhere, pollution filling the atmosphere, people working for $2 an hour, and perpetual war.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:12 amComment by Retrogrouch — July 8, 2007 @ 12:05 am
I already did that shit!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:12 amDaaammn!
Chucky Schmucky mopped the floor with you Lefties!!!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:14 amOh, they are awake. And have been typing for the last 2 hours. Volume does not equal substance.
The science is beyond dispute...
I stopped reading after that. Self-righteous, pretend scientific expertise doesn't equal substance either.
You're the same kind of jackass who made the same kind of definitive statements about global cooling in the 70s.
So, I take that for what it's worth, which ain't much.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:15 amZooey,
That should say:
Your Lefty masters must be pleased!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:16 am#338: Apparently you haven't read the IPCC report, which says that the likelihood that anthropogenic climate change is "very likely" and that a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions will be needed in order to avert "dangerous anthropogenic climate change." The IPCC is made up of 3500 of the world's leading researchers in the science of climate change. Sorry, but I tend to think they're more credible than you are on this issue, despite your efforts to derail the conversation with red herrings about Barbra Streisand and Marxism.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:16 amI already did that shit!
Comment by Mr. President — July 8, 2007 @ 12:12 am
You did, Mr. P, and I thanked you for your service as you may recall. Sadly you are only a portion of the sample set - I'm trying to determine what it is you trolls have in common. Early results indicate that it is a love of firearms.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:17 amComment by Jim — July 8, 2007 @ 12:16 am
I’d like to know more about anthropogenic climate change!
Sign the petition to have Al Gore explain it further:
July 8th, 2007 at 12:18 amhttp://www.petitiononline.com/agdgw/petition.html
Obviously you never lived near the Passic, Hackensack, and Hudson Rivers in the 50s and 60s. Industry so polluted these rivers that NOTHING could live in them. The “Damn Hippies†pushed for these Right Wing businesses to clean up, and they did. Now at least, there are fish and birds living there.
Even Nixon was pushed by popular demand to clean up the air and water. It was not Rednecks, Suits, and Greasers who wanted this, it was common everyday people and Hippies.
If the the planet was left up to Right Wing Polluters and “Bottom Linersâ€, we would cement everywhere, pollution filling the atmosphere, people working for $2 an hour, and perpetual war.
Comment by Brain From Planet Arous — July 8, 2007 @ 12:12 am
Why is it lefties always take arguments to an extreme?
So, to you: Skepticism over global warming = no problem whatsoever with dumping garbage in rivers and lakes.
Is that about how it works?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:19 amComment by Retrogrouch — July 8, 2007 @ 12:17 am
No!
My answers are definitive!!!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:19 amShe gets to be smug. She actually has a life. Unlike, uh, you.
Comment by gummitch
Why thank you, gummitch. You are a friend and a scholar. And I am drunk. :)
July 8th, 2007 at 12:19 amThat should say:
Your Lefty masters must be pleased!
Comment by Mr. President
Same answer, dumb shit.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:20 am#360: You’re the same kind of jackass who made the same kind of definitive statements about global cooling in the 70s.
This is yet another red herring. There was no coherent effort to study global climate before the 1970's. Newsweek ran an irresponsible and poorly sourced article in 1975 about so-called global cooling. Are you seriously suggesting that the IPCC's 2007 report is the modern equivalent of that article?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:20 amSame answer, dumb shit.
Comment by Zooey — July 8, 2007 @ 12:20 am
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow. I feel so enlightened.
"Progressive" indeed.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:21 amI stopped reading after that. Self-righteous, pretend scientific expertise doesn’t equal substance either.
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 12:15 am
So you didn't take the survey. What a shame. You could have enlightened us as to your ideology. Also note that I can conduct a dialogue without calling you a jackass. Try it sometime.
I'm sorry science frightens you. The earth is getting warmer, and humans are a part of the equation. We may not be able to stop it entirely, but we certainly can do a better job of not exacerbating it. And it doesn't have to cost us jobs.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:22 amShe gets to be smug. She actually has a life. Unlike, uh, you.
Comment by gummitch
Why thank you, gummitch. You are a friend and a scholar. And I am drunk. :)
Comment by Zooey
Uh oh. Must have been three glasses of wine. Look out, Moscow!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:22 amSo, to you: Skepticism over global warming = no problem whatsoever with dumping garbage in rivers and lakes.
Is that about how it works?
Comment by Chucky Schmucky
Pretty much. We heard your mindless dribble 30 or 40 years ago. "Blah. Blah. DDT is good for you. . ."
People who put corporate interests ahead of the planet are nothing new. They always couch it as "scientific skepticism". But it's just greed in the same not-very-shiny carapace.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:24 amLive Earth sponsered by Chevy
Funny! BIG Corporate greed
July 8th, 2007 at 12:25 am#371: We may not be able to stop it entirely, but we certainly can do a better job of not exacerbating it. And it doesn’t have to cost us jobs.
A crucial point. Soon Mr. Schmucky will start whining about how liberals and environmentalists want to "destroy the economy." Give me a break.
You know what's destructive to the economy? South Florida under six feet of water.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:27 amWow. I feel so enlightened.
“Progressive†indeed.
Comment by Mr. President
If you want enlightenment, shmuck, I suggest a few years sitting zazen. Otherwise, you know, just f^k off.
It's not the responsibility of the people here at TP to make you feel good about yourself, or to drill holes in your skull sufficient to let anything in. That's your job.
If you want attention, go stand in traffic.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:27 amLive Earth sponsered by Chevy
Flaccido's spelling sponsored by home schooling...
July 8th, 2007 at 12:28 amgummitch, I know a couple of places in Iraq where he could get the drill holes for like, free.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:29 amPeople who put corporate interests ahead of the planet are nothing new. They always couch it as “scientific skepticismâ€. But it’s just greed in the same not-very-shiny carapace.
Comment by gummitch
You are right. The corporate apologists have been sucking up to the status quo ever since "Et Tu Brute" and 30 Pieces of Silver. There is always someone available to sellout cheap. it is human nature.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:29 amWhat's up Flaco?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:29 amWow. I feel so enlightened.
“Progressive†indeed.
Comment by Mr. President
No, you must CHOOSE enlightenment, and you have not.
Stuff your "Progressive indeed" bullshit.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:33 amFrom the New York Times:
WASHINGTON, July 7 — A secret military operation in early 2005 to capture senior members of Al Qaeda in Pakistan’s tribal areas was aborted at the last minute after top Bush administration officials decided it was too risky and could jeopardize relations with Pakistan, according to intelligence and military officials.
The target was a meeting of Qaeda leaders that intelligence officials thought included Ayman al-Zawahri, Osama bin Laden’s top deputy and the man believed to run the terrorist group’s operations.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/08/washington/08intel.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
July 8th, 2007 at 12:35 amMr Pee and his Schmuck don't like science because it deals with reality and not ideology. Apparently Schmuck Chuck Fcuk thinks hundreds of climate scientists are loony lefties pushing Marxism and Streisand memorabilia. And Mr Pee finds this enlightening. But, then, Mr Pee is high on weed tonight by his own admission.
Try reading Turn Up The Heat. Maybe that'll pour a cold bucket of water over your fried out brains.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:35 amUh oh. Must have been three glasses of wine. Look out, Moscow!
Comment by gummitch — July 8, 2007 @ 12:22 am
Only two, I'm afraid. I'm rather hopeless in the alcohol arena.
I've tried and tried.....
:-D
July 8th, 2007 at 12:35 amWhat has become of our discarded foreskin friend?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:37 am#338: Apparently you haven’t read the IPCC report, which says that the likelihood that anthropogenic climate change is “very likely†and that a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions will be needed in order to avert “dangerous anthropogenic climate change.†The IPCC is made up of 3500 of the world’s leading researchers in the science of climate change. Sorry, but I tend to think they’re more credible than you are on this issue, despite your efforts to derail the conversation with red herrings about Barbra Streisand and Marxism.
Comment by Jim — July 8, 2007 @ 12:16 am
The experts were also predicting an ice age 30 years ago.
Nobody questions warming, or that greenhouse gasses are a cause. Again, the questions are: how much, how much is man-made, what are the repurcussions, what can be done about it? And there are legitimate differences of opinion about all of that among reputable scientists--in spite of the "final word" offered by the IPCC. There is so much that is UNKNOWN about global warming that it's foolish to rush into remedies for a problem we aren't sure about, and which we don't even know will work.
And it's no red herring to point out that the people promoting extreme remedies for global warming are the same people who have long expressed hostility to capitalism, business and the American way of life. And I'm not ready to follow Al Gore, Barbra Streisand, Cheryl Crow and all the others over the cliff just yet.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:38 amdavid,
I love science, and of course I'm not high.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:39 amIt is just that I have not seen anything other than appeals to authority by from you guys.
I want to know the data, the methodology, the presuppositions and everything else necessary for a scientific explanation BEFORE I start to freak out about the apocalypse.
Comment by Zooey — July 8, 2007 @ 12:35 am
Oh, go ahead and have three glasses, you're already home so you don't need a designated driver! :D
July 8th, 2007 at 12:39 amOh, there he is.
What cliff?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:40 amAnd I’m not ready to follow Al Gore, Barbra Streisand, Cheryl Crow and all the others over the cliff just yet.
Comment by Chucky Schmucky
So you would rather follow bush, Cheney, Mobil, Goldman Sachs, Halliburton and Blackwater into a cell?
No thanks. i'll take my chances in freefall.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:41 amHere are the organizations that have taken a stance that global warming is real and is caused by human activities. Ok Schmucky, since you say there are numerous scientists on the other side, let's see your list. BTW, organizations with known funding from Exxon are really not scientific organizations.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
Joint science academies’ statement 2005
American Meteorological Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
The American Astronomical Society
American Association for the Advancement of Science
Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
Geological Society of America
American Association of State Climatologists
Australian Medical Association
American Chemical Society
American Quaternary Association
Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia)
And just to cut to the chase, here's the conclusion from the American Meteorological Society policy statement:
"Despite the uncertainties noted above, there is adequate evidence from observations and interpretations of climate simulations to conclude that the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; that humans have significantly contributed to this change; and that further climate change will continue to have important impacts on human societies, on economies, on ecosystems, and on wildlife through the 21st century and beyond. Focusing on the next 30 years, convergence among emission scenarios and model results suggest strongly that increasing air temperatures will reduce snowpack, shift snowmelt timing, reduce crop production and rangeland fertility, and cause continued melting of the ice caps and sea level rise. Important goals for future work include the need to understand the relation of climate at the state and regional level to the patterns of global climate and to reverse the decline in observational networks that are so critical to accurate climate monitoring and prediction."
I guess Schmuck has no choice but to call the weathermen a bunch of Marxists.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:43 amJim,
Just so you know, Chucky Schmucky showed real class in his comment.
I would have called you a Stalinist Islamophile.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:43 amIt takes a lot of balls, or a complete moron to need complete and unrefutable proof that his house is on fire before he determines that maybe, just maybe, something might need to be done about it.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:45 amWhy do Mr Pee and UpChucky hate their grandchildren's future?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:46 amOh, go ahead and have three glasses, you’re already home so you don’t need a designated driver! :D
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
The bottle ran out, and I can't manage the corkscrew.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:47 amIt's just so wrong to ask my son to uncork another bottle for me......isn't it?
The bottom line is that this concert is a great effort to promote the idea of taking care of our planet. The trolls are really bothered by this because it clearly shows they are selfish, money-grubbing, do-nothings that care only about their money.
The concept of Al Gore, or anybody, doing something for the good of mankind is absolutely foreign to them. None of their friends even talk about this. Their only conclusion is that someone doing something good, like Al Gore is doing, must be a complete fraud. For them, self-serving, law-breaking politicians are actually the good guys.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:47 amMr Pee and his Schmuck don’t like science because it deals with reality and not ideology. Apparently Schmuck Chuck Fcuk thinks hundreds of climate scientists are loony lefties pushing Marxism and Streisand memorabilia. And Mr Pee finds this enlightening. But, then, Mr Pee is high on weed tonight by his own admission.
Try reading Turn Up The Heat. Maybe that’ll pour a cold bucket of water over your fried out brains.
Comment by david — July 8, 2007 @ 12:35 am
Sorry--I've seen enough of the left's using "science"--your "science" on poverty, your "science" on crime, your economic "science"-- to know it cannot be trusted.
So while I'm a firm believer in the hard sciences, I'm not ready to hop aboard the global warming train until that science is firmed up beyond mere educated guesses, and being pushed hardest by the extreme left.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:47 amNo, Mistress Z, if your son is capable of it, and you are up for it...
July 8th, 2007 at 12:48 amWhy do Mr Pee and UpChucky hate their grandchildren’s future?
Comment by RUCerious
Ah c'mon Cap, do you really think they have any hope of grandkids?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:49 amVinnie, you got it.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:49 amThey don't get it. The entire concept of doing something other than fu(king over someone to grab more cash is just foreign to them.
#393 - Good point. I use the example that three doctors could diagnose them with a pendicitis. They would whine that three doctors is not a consensus. There could be another doctor with a dissenting opinion. They complain that the doctor is just trying to make money off of them, etc. Only a fool would deny the conclusion of modern scientists.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:49 amThe bottle ran out, and I can’t manage the corkscrew.
It’s just so wrong to ask my son to uncork another bottle for me……isn’t it?
Comment by Zooey
Think of it as on the job training. He'll be in a much better position to find work in the service sector. By the time the Bushies get done, those are the only jobs that will be available without moving to India.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:49 amThe concept of Al Gore, or anybody, doing something for the good of mankind is absolutely foreign to them. None of their friends even talk about this. Their only conclusion is that someone doing something good, like Al Gore is doing, must be a complete fraud. For them, self-serving, law-breaking politicians are actually the good guys.
Comment by Vinnie — July 8, 2007 @ 12:47 am
Al Gore can't even take care of his own son.
You know, the one that was just busted with pills and grass!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:50 amSo while I’m a firm believer in the hard sciences, I’m not ready to hop aboard the global warming train until that science is firmed up beyond mere educated guesses, and being pushed hardest by the extreme left.
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 12:47 am
The American Meteorological Society is not good enough for you?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:50 am[A joint statement issued by the Australian Academy of Sciences, Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for
Sciences and the Arts, Brazilian Academy of Sciences, Royal Society of Canada, Caribbean Academy of
Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, French Academy of Sciences, German Academy of Natural Scientists
Leopoldina, Indian National Science Academy, Indonesian Academy of Sciences, Royal Irish Academy,
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Italy), Academy of Sciences Malaysia, Academy Council of the Royal Society
of New Zealand, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, and Royal Society (UK). ]
The work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) represents the consensus of the
international scientific community on climate change science. We recognise IPCC as the world’s most
reliable source of information on climate change and its causes, and we endorse its method of achieving this
consensus. Despite increasing consensus on the science underpinning predictions of global climate change,
doubts have been expressed recently about the need to mitigate the risks posed by global climate change.
We do not consider such doubts justified.
There will always be some uncertainty surrounding the prediction of changes in such a complex system as
the world’s climate. Nevertheless, we support the IPCC’s conclusion that it is at least 90% certain that
temperatures will continue to rise, with average global surface temperature projected to increase by
between 1.4 and 5.8oC above 1990 levels by 21001. This increase will be accompanied by rising sea levels,
more intense precipitation events in some countries, increased risk of drought in others, and adverse effects
on agriculture, health and water resources.
In May 2000, at the InterAcademy Panel (IAP) meeting in Tokyo, 63 academies of science from all parts of
July 8th, 2007 at 12:50 amthe world issued a statement on sustainability in which they noted that “global trends in climate change …
are growing concerns†and pledged themselves to work for sustainability – meeting current human needs
while preserving the environment and natural resources needed by future generations. It is now evident
that human activities are already contributing adversely to global climate change. Business as usual is no
longer a viable option.
#399 ~ By all that's holy, I'd hope not. But these types tend to not know how to use a condom except to blow then up and make funny animals at children's birthday parties.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:51 amSo while I’m a firm believer in the hard sciences, I’m not ready to hop aboard the global warming train until that science is firmed up beyond mere educated guesses, and being pushed hardest by the extreme left.
Comment by Chucky Schmucky
No you're not, Chucky, or you wouldn't be able to make such an idiotic statement.
Scientific method -- You can look it up later.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:51 amIt takes a lot of balls, or a complete moron to need complete and unrefutable proof that his house is on fire before he determines that maybe, just maybe, something might need to be done about it.
Comment by RUCerious — July 8, 2007 @ 12:45 am
It takes an even bigger moron to think his house is burning down just because some idiot in Hollywood -- who's never been near his house -- told him so.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:51 amOnly a fool would deny the conclusion of modern scientists.
Comment by Vinnie — July 8, 2007 @ 12:49 am
Actually, only a fool would swallow everything that is said.
A healthy dose of skepticism is always a good thing!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:51 amNo, Mistress Z, if your son is capable of it, and you are up for it…
Comment by RUCerious
He is , but I am not. :(
July 8th, 2007 at 12:52 amAnd there are legitimate differences of opinion about all of that among reputable scientists–in spite of the “final word†offered by the IPCC. Chucky
You offered up that you didn't want to take the word offered up by the IPCC. Not enough for you?
How about;
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007
Joint science academies’ statement 2007
Joint science academies’ statement 2005
Joint science academies’ statement 2001
U.S. National Research Council, 2001
American Meteorological Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Astronomical Society
Federal Climate Change Science Program, 2006
Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
Geological Society of America
American Chemical Society
Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia)
from wikipedia Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007
Joint science academies’ statement 2007
Joint science academies’ statement 2005
Joint science academies’ statement 2001
U.S. National Research Council, 2001
American Meteorological Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Astronomical Society
Federal Climate Change Science Program, 2006
Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
Geological Society of America
American Chemical Society
Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia)
from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
July 8th, 2007 at 12:52 amSee, sometimes — usually, in fact — we just don’t share your view of a what is a “better world.â€
Comment by Chucky Schmucky
You said a mouthful there. And it is truely a shame.
Comment by willyloman
Mouthful of what, willyloman? Because clearly Chucky Schmucky has his head up his ass.
Then again since Schmucky relates to a different part of the male genitalia, perhaps his brain is oxygen deprived for another reason.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:52 amopps. sorry. double clicked that one
July 8th, 2007 at 12:53 amPoor UpChucker, wouldn't know science if it bit him on the ass.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:54 amI'll take the advice of the aforementioned scientific community. And do something to try to help mitigate the problem, rather than covering my ears and going blah, blah, blechh.
Think of it as on the job training. He’ll be in a much better position to find work in the service sector. By the time the Bushies get done, those are the only jobs that will be available without moving to India.
Comment by gummitch
Even uncorking jobs....?
That's not supposed to sound dirty, ok?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:54 amAl Gore can’t even take care of his own son.
You know, the one that was just busted with pills and grass!
Comment by Mr. President
Wow! Really! That's hot news! Gosh!
Grass? Wow! That's just so . . . scary. Why that person might be outside your window right now (except your window is below ground) waiting to infect you with his grass addiction! Ooooooh. Run and hide, Ms. P. Run and hide.
You are soooo feeble.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:54 am"Ah c’mon Cap, do you really think they have any hope of grandkids?"
Comment by Zooey — July 8, 2007 @ 12:49 am
Only mutant ones.
Mr. P and your various aliases, enough with "Gore taking care of his son" for jeebus' sake!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:54 amAl Gore can’t even take care of his own son.
You know, the one that was just busted with pills and grass!
Comment by Mr. President — July 8, 2007 @ 12:50 am
Al Gore - Works hard to save the planet.
Mr. Pee - Results to personal family matters that have nothing to do with the topic at hand.
(And if you're going to go there don't you think you should give equal time to the Bush daughters' drinking? Or to George's own drunk driving record?)
The bottom line is despite your whining and inane posts, this project is having a HUGE impact. More and more people are becoming aware of the issue. And the 115 degree heat in the west is a little compelling as well.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:54 amIt is now evident that human activities are already contributing adversely to global climate change. Business as usual is no
longer a viable option.
Comment by trex — July 8, 2007 @ 12:50 am
Even if this was true, how? and why?
We need to know more before we take action, or else we could end up making things worse.
That is why I say let the experts discuss these issues, are you with me?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:54 amhttp://www.petitiononline.com/agdgw/petition.html
Chucky Schmucky mopped the floor with you Lefties!!!
Comment by Mr. President
Oh look, another Mr. P and CompTROLLER circle jerk. Are you two still naked on the bed together sharing one sticky computer?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:55 am#387: There is so much that is UNKNOWN about global warming that it’s foolish to rush into remedies for a problem we aren’t sure about, and which we don’t even know will work.
From the Joint science academies’ (from the G8 nations) statement:
"A lack of full scientific certainty about some aspects of climate change is not a reason for delaying an immediate response that will, at a reasonable cost, prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system."
So the science academies of the G8 nations are saying precisely the opposite of what you're saying. The importance of responding to the climate crisis outweighs the relatively minor uncertainties in the data. And that was in 2005, before the latest IPCC report came out earlier this year (which asserts a greater degree of certainty than the 2001 report did).
I’m not ready to follow Al Gore, Barbra Streisand, Cheryl Crow and all the others over the cliff just yet.
It sounds to me that you're more worried about agreeing with Al Gore and Barbra Streisand than you are about educating yourself in a serious way on this issue. Rather than focusing on politicians and movie stars and singers, why don't you actually read these reports?
If you really want to see us--all of us--go "over a cliff," then we can just continue on merrily the way we're going. Of course, when South Florida is underwater, the Middle East is a pile of fallout from nuclear bombs, and polar bears are extinct, you'll have some convenient reason to blame "lefties" for that.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:56 amI hear they're having a huge sale on Reichwing fiddles. Lessons from a guy named Nero included.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:56 amBy all that’s holy, I’d hope not. But these types tend to not know how to use a condom except to blow then up and make funny animals at children’s birthday parties.
Comment by RUCerious
Well, that would be funny!
But seriously, won't someone think of the children...?
Ok, that wasn't serious.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:56 amEven uncorking jobs….?
That’s not supposed to sound dirty, ok?
Comment by Zooey
Just make sure he says something high-tone about the wine before he uncorks it. And you have to play along by sniffing the cork (ewwwww) and tasting a little splash in your glass (a jelly jar!? ewwwww!) before you really get your snout, er, nose down in there.
Trust me, this will be worth big bucks to **** when he moves to ********.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:56 amNo you’re not, Chucky, or you wouldn’t be able to make such an idiotic statement.
Scientific method — You can look it up later.
Comment by Zooey — July 8, 2007 @ 12:51 am
Were they using the scientific method when they predicted a coming ice age in the 70s?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:57 amSign the petition to have Al Gore explain it further:
Comment by Mr. President
Has anybody told you recently where to stick your petition, shit for brains?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:57 amChucky Schmucky mopped the floor with you Lefties!!!
Comment by Mr. President
good. That's what he is qualified for. Mopping the floor.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:57 amNo UPChuck, that was a single Newsweek article, ya know, trying to sell magazines.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:57 amWere they using the scientific method when they predicted a coming ice age in the 70s?
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 12:57 am
Yes.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:58 amThat is why I say let the experts discuss these issues, are you with me?
Comment by Mr. President
The only one "with you" Ms. P is your thumb and your gff troll.
Do cut back on the amphetamines, though, sweetie.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:58 amSign the petition to have Al Gore explain it further:
Comment by Mr. President
Why? You haven't been able to follow what he has already covered.
Do you ride to the poll-booth in the short bus?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:59 amA lot of name calling tonight from the Left.
"Progressive" indeed.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:59 am#393: I would have called you a Stalinist Islamophile.
That's because you wouldn't know a Stalinist if one bit you in the ass.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:59 amYou are soooo feeble.
Comment by gummitch — July 8, 2007 @ 12:54 am
I think Mr President's mommy took care of him too much.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:59 amEntitlement issues....
Were they using the scientific method when they predicted a coming ice age in the 70s?
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 12:57 am
Yes.
Comment by Mr. President
You weren't even a gleam in the mailman's eye in the 70s, sweetie. How would you know?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:00 amHey hypocrites, lefties, think of all the resources oil, smog, & waste, Live Earth is going to use & produce.
Nah maybe not.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:00 amHey!
Let's try to have a civilized discussion here, Lefties!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:01 amJust make sure he says something high-tone about the wine before he uncorks it. And you have to play along by sniffing the cork (ewwwww) and tasting a little splash in your glass (a jelly jar!? ewwwww!) before you really get your snout, er, nose down in there.
Trust me, this will be worth big bucks to **** when he moves to ********.
Comment by gummitch
Hey, are you spying on me? :D
The sooner **** moves to ********, the better. Oy.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:01 amA lot of name calling tonight from the Left.
“Progressive†indeed.
Comment by Mr. President
Did you think progressives didn't know how to make fun of idiots? Hell, it's our favorite sport.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:01 am“Progressive†indeed.
Comment by Mr. President
Back to the old stand by insults again, Mr. President? It's early. You getting sleepy, or what?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:01 amHey Mr. President
HEyOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooOOO!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:01 amNo, you must CHOOSE enlightenment, and you have not.
Stuff your “Progressive indeed†bullshit.
Comment by Zooey
You go girl. Saturday's all right for fighting!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:02 amYou weren’t even a gleam in the mailman’s eye in the 70s, sweetie. How would you know?
Comment by gummitch — July 8, 2007 @ 1:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because, I know about 20th century developments in the scientific method.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:02 amChucky Schmucky mopped the floor with you Lefties!!!
Comment by Mr. President
I'll be your huckleberry.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:02 amWere they using the scientific method when they predicted a coming ice age in the 70s?
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 12:57 am
ABSOLUTELY!! First, there were some who postulated that global cooling would be a problem in the future. However, there was not a scientific consensus on this as there is with global warming today.
Secondly, the scientific method is all about changing theories should they turn out to be wrong.
BTW, I still haven't see you respond to the posts that lists all of the scientific organizations that think global warming is real and that it's caused by humans. What's up with that?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:03 amFlaco!
You're back!
Good to see you!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:03 amLet’s try to have a civilized discussion here, Lefties!
Comment by Mr. President
Why would anyone bother to have a civilized discussion with you? You've already demonstrated that you're utterly incapable.
Again, we're not responsible for making you feel good about yourself. Find a new shrink if the one your mom is paying for isn't getting the job done.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:03 amWere they using the scientific method when they predicted a coming ice age in the 70s?
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 12:57 am
Yes, they were.
And if you knew any thing about the scientific method, you would understand how that works.
Look it up.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:03 amBecause, I know about 20th century developments in the scientific method.
Comment by Mr. President
Psst. Ms. P.! Psst. Over here.
It's the 21st century, sweetie. Try to keep up.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:04 amBecause, I know about 20th century developments in the scientific method.
Comment by Mr. President
Really? That Dairy Queen employee handbook is getting pretty complicated.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:04 am#409: It takes an even bigger moron to think his house is burning down just because some idiot in Hollywood — who’s never been near his house — told him so.
Agreed. When I want to understand science, for example, I read reports by the National Academy of Sciences, NASA, the joint science academies of the G8 nations, and peer-reviewed science journals. You, apparently, rely mainly on right-wing talking heads.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:05 amFlaco!
You’re back!
Good to see you!
Comment by Mr. President
Please, Flaccido, create a diversion. My tiny useless butt is hanging out here all alone.
Please, Flaccido !!!! Protect my rectum!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:05 amBecause, I know about 20th century developments in the scientific method.
Comment by Mr. President
And yet you choose to ignore the entire concept.
How typical of you, Mr President.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:05 amHey Mr. President
I'm heading to LIVE Earth Concert in my in monster truck with my 2000 watt sound system crankin' Lynard Skynard yea and my confederate flag and my Bush bumper sticker you gave me.
Support out Troops F yea!
Think the hippies there will give me some sh#t?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:06 amChucky Schmucky mopped the floor with you Lefties!!!
Comment by Mr. President
Actually, Al Gore has done a HUGE job mopping up you global warming deniers tonight. First, read this:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070707/ts_alt_afp/entertainmentmusic_070707182408
Secondly, he has put on an amazing show that has brought awareness to this problem to millions and millions of people. Mr. P, let's see you start a concert and see what bands you could get. Come on, we're waiting. What's the problem?!
To put it in words you can understand:
HA! HA! YOU LOSE!! AL GORE WINS!!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:06 amIf you really want to see us–all of us–go “over a cliff,†then we can just continue on merrily the way we’re going. Of course, when South Florida is underwater, the Middle East is a pile of fallout from nuclear bombs, and polar bears are extinct, you’ll have some convenient reason to blame “lefties†for that.
Comment by Jim — July 8, 2007 @ 12:56 am
First of all, I am not saying that nothing should be done. While I'm not convinced that we're head for Armegeddon, neither do I believe we can (or WILL) stay on our present course.
I simply don't believe we need to be rushing into the remedies offered by false profits like Al Gore and his Kyoto Protocol. I do believe that we will make technological advancements that will offer cleaner, more efficient energy, and, hopefully, lose our dependence upon oil--not just for environmental reasons, but for political reasons as well (let the mid-east choke on their oil).
And I believe that we should give such technologies the time and opportunity to make a difference before taking extreme measures.
I simply see the current fanatical movement as being about much more than just the environment. Sorry, but I do.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:07 am*Gag* I come home from a gig and there is troll sh*t all over the boards.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:07 amBut I see Zooey, gummitch , vinnie and rest of the crew are playing whack-a-troll pretty well LOL
Think the hippies there will give me some sh#t?
Comment by Flaccidoo
No, stupid. You have to buy your sh#t.
No one rides for free.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:07 amIt’s the 21st century, sweetie. Try to keep up.
Comment by gummitch — July 8, 2007 @ 1:04 am
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know.
But we were talking about 1970, remember.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:08 am#449: Were they using the scientific method when they predicted a coming ice age in the 70s?
First of all, who are "they"? The people in the 1970's hypothezing about global cooling represented a tiny fraction of the scientific community studying climate. The "they" who were really pushing this idea were the people who wrote the article for Newsweek in 1975. That's hardly a scientific or credible source.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:08 amWhy do Mr Pee and UpChucky hate their grandchildren’s future?
Comment by RUCerious
Ah c’mon Cap, do you really think they have any hope of grandkids?
Comment by Zooey
Hey RUCerious is just an extemely generous, charitable guy. It could happen, if they are earthworms.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:08 amI’m heading to LIVE Earth Concert in my in monster truck with my 2000 watt sound system crankin’ Lynard Skynard yea and my confederate flag and my Bush bumper sticker you gave me.
Support out Troops F yea!
Think the hippies there will give me some sh#t?
Comment by Flaco
Who do you think you are kidding?
You drive what your wife lets you drive. And she has to approve any and all bumper stickers, or you know you'll be outside in the driveway and midnight scraping that thing off.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:08 amAnd yet you choose to ignore the entire concept.
How typical of you, Mr President.
Comment by Zooey — July 8, 2007 @ 1:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How so?
I don't bring it up because most people here do not want to be lectured on science.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:09 amBut I see Zooey, gummitch , vinnie and rest of the crew are playing whack-a-troll pretty well LOL
Comment by Wayne
Some of us have been drinking (Zooey!!!).
Others (ahem) are more mature.
And others of us don't require finding someone else to open the wine bottle.
Hint: screw tops!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:09 amI found Al Gore III he looked wasted man!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:10 amDoobies and Vicodan will do it every time :|
Think the hippies there will give me some sh#t?
Comment by Flaco — July 8, 2007 @ 1:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, they probably smoked too many doobies to care!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:10 amChucky Schmucky mopped the floor with you Lefties!!!
Comment by Mr. President
I’ll be your huckleberry.
Comment by Retrogrouch
What, nothing?
Consider yourselves toast, trolls. You've had and declined ample opportunity to make a salient point.
Goodnight all.
-RG
July 8th, 2007 at 1:10 amI don’t bring it up because most people here do not want to be lectured on science.
Comment by Mr. President
You are not qualified to lecture a child on how to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich
July 8th, 2007 at 1:11 amYes, they were.
And if you knew any thing about the scientific method, you would understand how that works.
Look it up.
Comment by Zooey — July 8, 2007 @ 1:03 am
That was a rhetorical question; the point being, if they could be so wrong only 30 years ago, how can they be so positive now?
Again, I'm not disputing warming, or that man is a contributor--I'm questioning the mad rush to do something about it without further, more concrete study. And again, in the meantime, I expect that we will make huge strides in technology in the coming decades to produce cleaner, more efficient energy that will make the present "global warming" movement look silly.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:11 amwiilyoman my first hippie Dude you got an iPod ?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:12 amFirst of all, I am not saying that nothing should be done. While I’m not convinced that we’re head for Armegeddon, neither do I believe we can (or WILL) stay on our present course.
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 1:07 am
Typical troll behavior - "I'm actually an environmentalist. I just disagree with the tactics that Gore is suggesting".
BULL!! You are reacting to this thread because you don't want to see anything done. Why didn't you come into the debate talking about the specifics of what Gore has proposed as opposed to attacking the whole concept of Global Warming? If you're such a global warming denier then why should anything be done? Which is it?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:12 amAnd others of us don’t require finding someone else to open the wine bottle.
Hint: screw tops!
Comment by gummitch
lmao
July 8th, 2007 at 1:12 amI am close to being toasted from the free beers the bar was giving us.
I found Al Gore III he looked wasted man!
Doobies and Vicodan will do it every time :|
Comment by Flaco — July 8, 2007 @ 1:10 am
HEYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:12 amMr. President
July 8th, 2007 at 1:14 amYou are the greatest!
Thanks for your service to our country.
Sorry so many ingrates here.
Were they using the scientific method when they predicted a coming ice age in the 70s?
Comment by Chucky Schmucky
So you are unable to comprehend the post that debunked the one study about the coming ice age? You're still working on that whole evolution think aren't you?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:15 am#457: First of all, I am not saying that nothing should be done.
This is a little dishonest. Presumably you think that everything should be handled by the free market, and that government should not play a role. If that's the case, change will happen much too slowly to make any difference. Moreover, the oil companies will use their substantial resources to maintain the status quo.
I simply don’t believe we need to be rushing into the remedies offered by false profits like Al Gore and his Kyoto Protocol. I do believe that we will make technological advancements that will offer cleaner, more efficient energy, and, hopefully, lose our dependence upon oil–not just for environmental reasons, but for political reasons as well (let the mid-east choke on their oil).
You have an almost religious faith in the free market. While some may see this as admirable, I think it's pretty naive.
And I believe that we should give such technologies the time and opportunity to make a difference before taking extreme measures.
I'm all for technological advances. But technology alone will not solve this problem.
I simply see the current fanatical movement as being about much more than just the environment. Sorry, but I do.
Take out the word "fanatical," and I agree with you. It's not only about the environment, but about national security, human health, economics, and politics. It's about lifestyle choices and priorities. You think that's fanatical; I think it's sane.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:15 amwiilyoman my first hippie Dude you got an iPod ?
Comment by Flaco
"hippy dude". Where do they get you idiots from? When was the last time you left the damn house and went out into the yard and spoke to another living human being?
I'm not your anything, child. Pack up your moronic make believe truck and go out to the "mall" or something. fast. because you need some new lines. I mean,...damn.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:15 amI don’t bring it up because most people here do not want to be lectured on science.
Comment by Mr. President
Especially by someone who doesn't respect science, such as yourself.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:16 amAgain, I’m not disputing warming, or that man is a contributor
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 1:11 am
Again, absolute BULL!! You touted the standard right-wing "deny global warming" line. Only when absolutely trounced by the lengthy list of scientific organizations do you back off from this.
If this is real, as you are now stating, don't you see that the future of our planet is on the line?! Do you have any idea what the consequences are if we don't work to mitigate this? Have you read any of the scientific reports on this? With all of this evidence your idea is that we should sit back and DO NOTHING. Sorry, I care about the future of this planet and think that we should take positive action to do something to preserve it.
And it's not a coincidence that all of you trolls have the same general conclusion about what to do about this - DO NOTHING.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:16 amI am a member of the VRWC!!
Vast Right Wing Conspiracy YEA
July 8th, 2007 at 1:16 amThanks Flaco!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:17 amSome of us have been drinking (Zooey!!!).
Others (ahem) are more mature.
And others of us don’t require finding someone else to open the wine bottle.
Hint: screw tops!
Comment by gummitch
What was the number of that bus...?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:17 am"I simply see the current fanatical movement as being about much more than just the environment. Sorry, but I do."
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 1:07 am
Only in that there is a bigger attack on the environment in the last 6 1/2 years by the Bush administration and its bedfellows in the fossil-fuels industries than ever before.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:18 amEspecially by someone who doesn’t respect science, such as yourself.
Comment by Zooey — July 8, 2007 @ 1:16 am
I love science.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:18 amwillyoman finally cut your skullet?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:18 amdude turn your iPod off once in a while.
Quit listening to Air America they're toast
I’m questioning the mad rush to do something about it without further, more concrete study.
-- Chucky Schmucky
Dude, you need to read a book. The consensus is in with an overwhelming majority of scientists saying that excess CO2 is a major cause.
the caps are melting, Polar bears are drowning, the weather system is in havoc all over the world.
You want us to wait untill the major currents of the oceans get disrupted and the seas start having a major die-off before we do anything?
Your post borders on total stupidity.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:18 amA lot of name calling tonight from the Left.
“Progressive†indeed.
Comment by Mr. President
We're warming up for the big Whack'O'Troll party we're having tomorrow. You don't like it, get the hell out of here.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:18 amThanks Flaco!
Comment by Mr. President
So desperate for attention that even recognition from the Stupidest Troll is enough to get your attention, Ms. P?
"Over here! Oooooh OOooooh. I'm over here! Look at me!"
Are there no programs for people like you where you live?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:19 amFlaco and Mr. Pee,
You can stop now. You've adequeately demonstrated that you have absolutely no capacity to add anything constructive to the conversation.
And I'm still waiting on the list of bands that you're going to get for your "Global warming is BS" concert.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:20 amThat was a rhetorical question; the point being, if they could be so wrong only 30 years ago, how can they be so positive now?
Again, I’m not disputing warming, or that man is a contributor–I’m questioning the mad rush to do something about it without further, more concrete study. And again, in the meantime, I expect that we will make huge strides in technology in the coming decades to produce cleaner, more efficient energy that will make the present “global warming†movement look silly.
Comment by Chucky Schmucky
Bull -- shit!! Look up and study the f*cking scientific method.
Why am I more competent while drunk than this guy is allegedly sober?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:21 amWhat was the number of that bus…?
Comment by Zooey
Uh oh. Cut her off! Hey, ****. Do not open that bottle! Find a job outside the service trade.
"I'm sorry, madam, but we can not continue to pour demitasse of wine for you."
July 8th, 2007 at 1:21 amComment by Vinnie — July 8, 2007 @ 1:16 am
No one is disputing climate change! That is a fact based on empirical data.
It is the explanations of the phenomenon that are debatable.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:22 am"We’re warming up for the big Whack’O'Troll party we’re having tomorrow."
Comment by shane — July 8, 2007 @ 1:18 am
Sounds like fun, am I invited?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:22 amI love science.
Comment by Mr. President
But you don't respect science, and that's one of your problems.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:22 am#470: That was a rhetorical question; the point being, if they could be so wrong only 30 years ago, how can they be so positive now?
Again, who is "they"? There was never, at any time, anything approaching scientific consensus on so-called global cooling. Since the 1970's, there have been literally thousands of peer-reviewed studies on global climate change. THAT'S why there's a high level of certainty on this issue.
Again, I’m not disputing warming, or that man is a contributor–I’m questioning the mad rush to do something about it without further, more concrete study.
Face it, friend. If you're dissatisfied with the science that's been done so far, you'll never be satisfied--much like the "skeptics" on the hazards of smoking tobacco in the 1970's and 80's. You're uninterested in science; you're interested only in obfuscating the issue. You're too scared by the imagined threat of environmentalist communist terrorist bogeymen to pay attention to actual science.
And again, in the meantime, I expect that we will make huge strides in technology in the coming decades to produce cleaner, more efficient energy that will make the present “global warming†movement look silly.
Blind faith in technology will not solve the problem of global climate change. There is absolutely no evidence to support your claim that technology alone will solve the problem.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:23 amAnd I’m still waiting on the list of bands that you’re going to get for your “Global warming is BS†concert.
Comment by Vinnie
I think they signed Ted Nugent. And, uh . . . Whitesnake.
If they're not able to find other gigs, that is.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:23 amZooey is doing a science experiment on herself right now with alcohol.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:23 amDrink and you get real stupid.
Real science is repeatable.
Your post borders on total stupidity.
Comment by Wayne
Dude, thank for the backup. :)
Although I dispute your use of the word "borders."
July 8th, 2007 at 1:24 amBut you don’t respect science, and that’s one of your problems.
Comment by Zooey — July 8, 2007 @ 1:22 am
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I give it the respect it deserves.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:24 amAgain, I’m not disputing warming, or that man is a contributor
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 1:11 am
Again, absolute BULL!! You touted the standard right-wing “deny global warming†line. Only when absolutely trounced by the lengthy list of scientific organizations do you back off from this.
If this is real, as you are now stating, don’t you see that the future of our planet is on the line?! Do you have any idea what the consequences are if we don’t work to mitigate this? Have you read any of the scientific reports on this? With all of this evidence your idea is that we should sit back and DO NOTHING. Sorry, I care about the future of this planet and think that we should take positive action to do something to preserve it.
And it’s not a coincidence that all of you trolls have the same general conclusion about what to do about this - DO NOTHING.
Comment by Vinnie — July 8, 2007 @ 1:16 am
I've never denied global warming--read my original post (338 -- I'm getting tired of repeating myself). Bottom line: I'm not ready to jump on Al Gore's bandwagon because I don't trust him or his political agenda as far as I can throw him -- and that's not very far these days.
And I also believe that yes, industry in this country can, and will, come up with far better solutions than Al Gore can. If that takes some gov't intervention, then so be it, though I suspect it won't. But I'll take the free market over Al Gore any day.
Good night.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:25 am"But you don’t respect science, and that’s one of your problems."
Comment by Zooey — July 8, 2007 @ 1:22 am
Yeah, Mr. P already screwed science, and he didn't respect her in the morning.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:25 am“We’re warming up for the big Whack’O’Troll party we’re having tomorrow.â€
Comment by shane — July 8, 2007 @ 1:18 am
Sounds like fun, am I invited?
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Guest of honor, provided you bring a big bat. David Wright would be a good start!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:25 amAnd Chucky Schmucky turns into Flaco when the going gets tough. It doesn't matter what the name CompTROLLER, your dumbass loser and your little dog, Mr. Ptroll too.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:26 amUh oh. Cut her off! Hey, ****. Do not open that bottle! Find a job outside the service trade.
“I’m sorry, madam, but we can not continue to pour demitasse of wine for you.â€
Comment by gummitch
I've been 86'd?
B*stard!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:26 amOff subject, I know, but what the hell:
I played a show with a friend's band tonight here in Austin ( southern rock )
He wanted me to show to play a song I wrote that he liked and it went over pretty well with the bar crowd tonight, standing ovation and requests to play it again, so I decided to post it here, see what you guys think ( minus the trolls, yes that means you too PiPpy )
Think we may end up recording it, hehe.
To the tune of "A Good Hearted Woman", my apologies to Willie Nelson and the late Waylon Jennings
Chords D, D7, G, A7
----------------------------------------
"A Once Good Country"
( verse 1 )
A long time forgotten, the promises Bush made along the way.
The good life he promised ain't what we're living today.
With cackling laughter, he wreaks havoc across the land.
A once good Country being wrecked by Crazy man.
(chorus )
A once good Country being wrecked by a Crazy Man
Why Pelosi won't Impeach him, is something that we don't understand.
With cackling laughter he wreaks havoc across the land
A once good Country being wrecked by a crazy man.
( verse 2 )
He spies on us daily and torture rules the day
That "goddammed Piece of Paper" just seems to get in his way.
People speak out against him, he thinks they are just out of hand.
A once good Country being wrecked by a Crazy Man.
(chorus )
A once good Country being wrecked by a Crazy Man
Why Pelosi won't Impeach him, is something that we don't understand.
With cackling laughter he wreaks havoc across the land
A once good Country being wrecked by a crazy man.
( verse 3 )
The news reports on bimbos while ignoring whats really going on.
Our wounded comming home from war are being shat opon.
Discarded, told to shut up, not speak or be out of hand
A once good country being wrecked by a Crazy Man.
(chorus )
A once good Country being wrecked by a Crazy Man
Why Pelosi won't Impeach him, is something that we don't understand.
With cackling laughter he wreaks havoc across the land
A once good Country being wrecked by a crazy man.
( repeat verse 1 )
A long time forgotten, the promises Bush made along the way.
The good life he promised ain't what we're living today.
With cackling laughter, he wreaks havoc across the land.
A once good Country being wrecked by Crazy man.
(last chorus )
July 8th, 2007 at 1:26 amA once good Country being wrecked by a Crazy Man
Why Pelosi won't Impeach him, is something we don't understand.
Law and Order used to rule across this land
Before A once good Country was totally f*cking trashed by a crazy man.
It is the explanations of the phenomenon that are debatable.
Comment by Mr. President — July 8, 2007 @ 1:22 am
Well, your right-wing gurus often do dispute climate change. I guess you're not up on the latest troll talking points. To be a good gw denier you should do as much as you can to throw doubt into the issue.
You must have missed the line from the American Meteorological Society policy statement I posted earlier. Why don't you post a dissenting opinion from another scientific organization?
"Despite the uncertainties noted above, there is adequate evidence from observations and interpretations of climate simulations to conclude that the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; that humans have significantly contributed to this change; and that further climate change will continue to have important impacts on human societies, on economies, on ecosystems, and on wildlife through the 21st century and beyond."
BTW, The Police are rockin'!!! This concert is really good. THOUSANDS of people in the crowd and MILLIONS more watching on TV.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:26 amwillyoman finally cut your skullet?
dude turn your iPod off once in a while.
Quit listening to Air America they’re toast
Comment by Flaco
Very clever. "skullet, Ipod, and Air America". yeah, that bout sums us up. your observation skills have clearly been honed by many years of beating off in the bathroom with a picture of your sister.
Is that what a liberal is to you? You forgot "treehugger"? and "commielover", "n---erlover", "f--got","h--b", and all the other little words that flowed from Daddy's little scared mind. how nice. An Ipod and a radio station is all you need to know. but at one time it was the color of their skin; or the name of their religion. Or do they still come into play?
you stay just the way you are, little man. We wouldn't want you any other way. ignorant and over there.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:27 am#490: Why am I more competent while drunk than this guy is allegedly sober?
Because when you are sober, you vaporize trolls like Mr. Schmucky.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:27 amZooey is doing a science experiment on herself right now with alcohol.
Drink and you get real stupid.
Real science is repeatable.
Comment by Flaccido
Ah, so that's the explanation. Flaccido = fetal alcohol syndrome
July 8th, 2007 at 1:27 am"David Wright would be a good start!"
Comment by gummitch — July 8, 2007 @ 1:25 am
Yes, he would, and then afterwards we can go whack some trolls!;-)
July 8th, 2007 at 1:28 amZooey is doing a science experiment on herself right now with alcohol.
Drink and you get real stupid.
Real science is repeatable.
Comment by Flaco
I could be in a vegetative state and be smarter than you, limpdick.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:28 amNo problemo.
Blind faith in technology will not solve the problem of global climate change. There is absolutely no evidence to support your claim that technology alone will solve the problem.
Comment by Jim — July 8, 2007 @ 1:23 am
Oh, but the government's track record in solving problems has been stellar. Gimme a fcking break.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:28 amMr. President,
July 8th, 2007 at 1:29 amI bought my carbon offsets, and planted a tree today so I could drive my monster truck to the Live Earth concert.
Man it feels great doing my part.
Chucky,
This was in your first post,
"And when you also consider that many serious scientists view the extreme doomsday scenarios painted by advocates with great skepticism"
You can't deny that this implies that the problem of warming is overstated. In other words (all together now) there is no real problem and we can just DO NOTHING.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:29 amWhy don’t you post a dissenting opinion from another scientific organization?
Comment by Vinnie — July 8, 2007 @ 1:26 am
Because I don't appeal to authority.
I don't have masters feeding me info, like others do (I'm not going to say names... ah, what the hell, e.g. YOU).
I think for myself.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:30 amI give it the respect it deserves.
Comment by Mr. President — July 8, 2007 @ 1:24 am
That defines who you are, Mr President.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:30 amYou have intelligence, but you are stupid.
Such a waste....
"Oh, but the government’s track record in solving problems has been stellar. Gimme a fcking break."
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 1:28 am
The CURRENT administration's track record in solving ANYTHING has been abysmal. Don't base the next administration's performance on the current shite-hole version.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:31 amI think for myself.
Comment by Mr. President
That is the funniest thing I have heard all night. And that comes from the guy who invented Cheese Flavored Condums tonight. patent pending
July 8th, 2007 at 1:32 amif they could be so wrong only 30 years ago, how can they be so positive now?
Comment by Chucky Schmucky
And if you had read the (many) posts to you, you would know by now that 30 years ago there was no consensus on the so-called global cooling. One more time: The "global cooling" term was popularized by Newsweek in an article published in 1975 (you might not be aware of this, but Newsweek is not a scientific publication).
The rest of your blather about not having enough evidence, is just that: Blather. There is enough evidence that many scientific organisations have agreed that global climate change is real, that humans activity plays a part, and that something needs to be done. Once again, if you were intellectually honest you would have read the many posts listing all the scientific bodies that agree global warming is real.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:32 amwillyloman,
July 8th, 2007 at 1:32 amyou do look much better without the skullet, at least that's what your girlfriend/cousin thinks
Comment by Wayne
Southern rock?
Aw, jeeze. Weak spot for me. Allman Brothers perhaps the greatest rock & roll band of all time. I don't want to ever be a southron, but some of the best music ever was on Capricorn.
Arrggggh! Free Bird! Free bird!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:32 amFlaco,
Al Goracle wants you to smoke doobies to do your part.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:33 amThat is what he told his son to do!
#501: Bottom line: I’m not ready to jump on Al Gore’s bandwagon because I don’t trust him or his political agenda as far as I can throw him — and that’s not very far these days.
And I also believe that yes, industry in this country can, and will, come up with far better solutions than Al Gore can. If that takes some gov’t intervention, then so be it, though I suspect it won’t.
So let me get this straight. Mr. Schmucky doesn't deny that the globe is warming, he doesn't deny that humans are a major cause, and he doesn't oppose government intervention to address the problem. His real issue, apparently, is that he's paranoid about Al Gore and his imaginary army of commie pinko Islamofascist tree-hugging print-dress-wearing dreadlocked unshaven liberals.
It's OK, dude. I haven't done this in years, but I'll hug that first tree with you. It's liberating!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:33 amBecause when you are sober, you vaporize trolls like Mr. Schmucky.
Comment by Jim — July 8, 2007 @ 1:27 am
So sweet....!
I better go to bed now, because I'm starting to well up. :)
July 8th, 2007 at 1:33 amAnd I also believe that yes, industry in this country can, and will, come up with far better solutions than Al Gore can.
Comment by Chucky Schmucky — July 8, 2007 @ 1:25 am
This is even more ridiculous than your other post. Which 'industry' is going to come up with better solutions? Exxon? Are you aware of the tight link between the energy industry and the current administration? Do you remember that Cheney was so secretive he wouldn't even say who he discussed the nation's energy policy with?
As noted, your trust in the free market is scary. If you really believe in the free market, then you'd argue that polluters should be forced to pay the full costs to society for their polluting. Currently, they are not being asked to pay for the effects of global warming.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:33 amI give it the respect it deserves.
Comment by Mr. President — July 8, 2007 @ 1:24 am
That defines who you are, Mr President...
Comment by Zooey — July 8, 2007 @ 1:30 am
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have no problem with that, it is the sign of a Just and Righteous individual to give that which is deserved.
As for your insults, those, I do not care for.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:35 amyour response to this;Very clever. “skullet, Ipod, and Air Americaâ€. yeah, that bout sums us up. your observation skills have clearly been honed by many years of beating off in the bathroom with a picture of your sister.
Is that what a liberal is to you? You forgot “treehuggerâ€? and “commieloverâ€, “n—erloverâ€, “f–gotâ€,â€h–bâ€, and all the other little words that flowed from Daddy’s little scared mind. how nice. An Ipod and a radio station is all you need to know. but at one time it was the color of their skin; or the name of their religion. Or do they still come into play?
you stay just the way you are, little man. We wouldn’t want you any other way. ignorant and over there.
was you do look much better without the skullet, at least that’s what your girlfriend/cousin thinks
that is beyond pathetic. like a one legged dog in a horse race.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:35 amArrggggh! Free Bird! Free bird!
Comment by gummitch
No! Don't you put that in my brain! Arrrgghhhh!
Goodnight all!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:35 amOh, and Schmucky,
The scientific organisations that other posters have listed for you, agree that global warming is real regardless of what Al Gore and his son do, so stop trying to make this whole debate into an Al Gore-centered argument -that is a lame & transparent attempt at obfuscating.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:35 amI give it (science) the respect it deserves.
Comment by Mr. President
I have a feeling your Jason M Hendler (the teacher) who drops his beliefs, and science, as he sees fit.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:36 amLater drunk go sleep it off
July 8th, 2007 at 1:36 amI think for myself.
Comment by Mr. President — July 8, 2007 @ 1:30 am
No, the real answer is that you can't find any scientific organizations that take your side and you know it. You say you believe in science but you discount scientific organizations?! WTF?!
BTW, I think there are A LOT of things that you do by yourself.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:37 amArrggggh! Free Bird! Free bird!
Comment by gummitch
We covered Allman Brothers and yep, we played Skynard's Freebird on request too =)
Hell we even covered some Stones tunes ( not southern rock, unless you count Honky Tonk woman =)
was a fun night all in all
July 8th, 2007 at 1:37 amAt some point Flaco, you had better realise to take the advise of people who know more than you. Because you will meet alot of them in your life. And it may make your life a little better, in the long run.
Tah tah
Too bad Mr. President didn't call me an islamo-Stalinist. Now I will never sleep
July 8th, 2007 at 1:38 amCarbon offsets is strange idea to me. Paying money to somebody to offset your pollution does not solve anything. Emissions have to be reduced broadly by cutting back on usage of oil across the board. Meaning cutting back on number of automobiles on the roads and increasing gas mileage
July 8th, 2007 at 1:39 amfor cars and trucks. Plus more mass transit systems nationwide.
They're showing the highlights now as the concerts in NY are over.
Mr. Pee, aren't there an amazing list of bands that showed up for this? I know that "musical consensus" isn't as important as "scientific consensus" but it appears that we now have both. Even the good, old Beastie Boys were there.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:39 am"your my blue sky
July 8th, 2007 at 1:39 amyour my sunny day.
Lord you know it makes me high
when you turn your love my way"
Vinnie,
I look at the facts, the theories, the laws of physics that are pertinent, the math, the experimental methodology, in short, I want to know all that I can before I make a judgment.
Remember we are not arguing about the phenomenon, we are trying to determine the best explanation.
I do not look for any scientific organizations, because I do not have to.
Again, I can think for myself.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:40 am#513: Oh, but the government’s track record in solving problems has been stellar. Gimme a fcking break.
That's no way to talk about the Bush administration.
Well, actually, it is.
Governments can be surprisingly effective when the people (...of the people, by the people...) demand it. That's why the U.S. has the best military in the world, a great national parks system, good law enforcement, the Peace Corps, and numerous other successful government programs. To say that government, by definition, cannot be a part of solving problems simply denies reality.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:41 amHey Mars is warming up too.
What is causing that?
Does not matter anyway...
July 8th, 2007 at 1:42 amYou say you believe in science but you discount scientific organizations?! WTF?!
Comment by Vinnie — July 8, 2007 @ 1:37 am
That is the standard brain dead Bush cultist MO: They claim to "believe" in science -which is a weird claim in itself since you cannot "believe" in science or the scientific method. But I digress- all the while discarding any scientific finding that doesn't agree with their own prejudices, and cherished notions. As for the organisations, the cultists will accuse them of "elitism" or "liberal bias" -must be due to that well known liberal bias in reality and the scientific method /sarc off
July 8th, 2007 at 1:42 amLater drunk go sleep it off
Comment by Flaccido
As Churchill said to Bessie Braddock: "But in the morning I'll be sober."
You, on the other hand, Flaccido, will be still be useless.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:42 amHey Mars is warming up too.
What is causing that?
Does not matter anyway…
Comment by Flaco
That idiot was discredited 40 hours after he opened his mouth. Did you notice that no other trolls mentioned it? I guess they didn't want to look stupid.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:43 amI think for myself. Comment by Mr. President
And then try to leverage your authoritarian think on others. How peculiar this 'you must learn' rational of yours.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:44 amPlus more mass transit systems nationwide.
Comment by Jay Randal
You and I are often on different pages, but on this?
Two thumbs up, Jay. (Only we like to call it "public transit", because "mass transit" gets the wingnuts all worked up. "Masses"? Commies!)
Public transit is not enough, though, unless communities are planned around it.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:45 amGregor Samsa,
Well, actually, all studies are theory-laden and therefore they are all biased.
If they are politically biased or not... that is another question.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:45 amHey Mars is warming up too.
What is causing that?
Does not matter anyway…
Comment by Flaco
It's called a change in albedo. (reflectivity)
July 8th, 2007 at 1:46 amI do not look for any scientific organizations, because I do not have to.
Again, I can think for myself.
Comment by Mr. President — July 8, 2007 @ 1:40 am
That's fine. And it explains why you are so out of touch with reality. It's pretty arrogant as well. However, that is absolutely NOT how the scientific method works. So please don't claim that the thinking that you're doing is scientific.
"I look at the facts, the theories, the laws of physics that are pertinent, the math, the experimental methodology, in short, I want to know all that I can before I make a judgment."
This is just laughable!! I could make all sorts of sarcastic comments but it's getting late.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:46 amGood night, Zooey. Glad you had fun with us tonight.
Tune in again tomorrow!
Same "moonbat" time!
Same "moonbat" channel!
:D
July 8th, 2007 at 1:47 amLive Earth is a manifestation of God With Us! These neo-con idiots need to self-exile to Dubai or anywhere other than here, where intelligence and logic are taking the place of laziness and greed. Impeach their leader(s) and send these SOB's packing. Enough is enough.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:47 amI think --- Mr. President
Don't hurt yourself there, boy.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:47 amWell, actually, all studies are theory-laden and therefore they are all biased.
If they are politically biased or not… that is another question.
Comment by Mr. President
You really do not understand the scientific method at all.
I know you like to spout this kind of crap because you think it makes you look smart, but it actually makes it clear you haven't the vaguest idea what you're talking about.
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" and, in your case, a teeeeeeeeny weeeeeeenie bit of knowledge is essentially useless.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:47 amVinnie,
Okay.
Do your master's bidding if you so choose.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:47 am#545: Public transit is not enough, though, unless communities are planned around it.
True to a degree, but remember, public transit works great in Europe, where communities existed for hundreds of years before they ever did here!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:48 amgoodnight fellow watchmen. the sport is all but gone from this whack-a-troll game. Remember, if you can't be smart, be repetitive.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:48 amTune in again tomorrow!
Same “moonbat†time!
Same “moonbat†channel!
:D
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
LMAO!!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:48 amWell, actually, all studies are theory-laden and therefore they are all biased.
If they are politically biased or not… that is another question.
Comment by Mr. President — July 8, 2007 @ 1:45 am
You keep using that word "biased".
I do not think it means what you think it means.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:49 amLive Earth is a manifestation of God With Us!
Comment by Larry Seiferth Jr. — July 8, 2007 @ 1:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saaaaaaaaaaaaay whaaaaa'?
July 8th, 2007 at 1:49 amGoodnight, willyloman!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:50 amWell, actually, all studies are theory-laden and therefore they are all biased.
Comment by Mr. President — July 8, 2007 @ 1:45 am
Exactly!! Can we next discuss atomic and gravitational 'theories'? These are definitely left-wing wacko ideas. Maybe I'll go do my own thinking, using math and physics and everything, and figure out if there are actually atoms or not. Give me a couple of hours on this and I'll figure this out on my own. The prior few hundred years of scientific work that's been done on this is not important to me. I'll figure it all out on my own.
Mr. Pee, you are so stupid that you can't even see it yourself. I would say that's funny. But in fact it's very sad.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:51 amWell, actually, all studies are theory-laden and therefore they are all biased.
Comment by Mr. President — July 8, 2007 @ 1:45 am
Yeah, they're biased: they take reality into account. How dare they?
Not to mention that the IPCC -that organisation your brother-in-arms troll pooh poohed- represents the largest coordinated effort at a multi-national level to study global climate change, and has produced what is probably the single most comprehensive research on the subject.
For you (and your trolling buddies) to cast the findings aside because you "can think for yourself" is the height of arrogance.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:52 amTrue to a degree, but remember, public transit works great in Europe, where communities existed for hundreds of years before they ever did here!
Comment by Jim
Look at the communities in question, and you'll see that they are concentrated in small geographical areas (largely because of geography). There's no question that the Europeans have developed a better transit network, but it's not a model that translates well to the US, where sprawl is often the standard. It's extremely difficult to provide efficient public transit, after the fact, in areas where SOV have been the standard.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:52 amComment by gummitch — July 8, 2007 @ 1:47 am
I agree. He's just throwing words together that sound impressive, but the totality makes no sense.
All studies are "theory-laden" and therefore "biased"? If it measn anything, it means they are biased toward the truth, something discovered through rational, reproducible scientific experiments. Not just some crap from a Rush Limbaugh talking point.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:52 am