At a fundraiser on Monday, President Bush claimed, “Do you realize that the United States is the only major industrialized nation that cut greenhouse gases last year?” But as the Washington Post notes, this statement isn’t actually true:
Kristen A. Hellmer, the spokeswoman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, acknowledged afterward that the White House was unable to substantiate the claim.
“While it’s very likely to be the case that we are the only industrialized nation that cut absolute emissions, there is not directly comparable data because not all other nations take such a measurement,” she said by e-mail. “We are making sure the president is aware of that.”
Why would it matter if climate change is not an issue?
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:45 pmBush will go down as a great president. So will his successor, Fred Thompson.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:46 pmComment by Larry Lind — September 3, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA… whew… thanks for the cheap laugh, Larry. BTW, yer off-topic.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:47 pmShorter spokestool: We can’t prove nothin’ so it’s okay if the preznit just makes stuff up.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:49 pmMr Bush told an untruth, half-truth? I can’t believe it!
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:50 pmMore unsubstantiated facts (aka downright lies). The only difference is that he’s become a laughingstock and no one listens to his drivel any longer. He’s one huge american embarrassment.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:51 pm“hot air-in chief-”
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:51 pmUnder the cover of darkness speaks to our brave troops..in Iraq..he is such a jack@ss!..Laura bailed on this trip to Australia… Who’d want to be cooped up in a plane with him for a 20 hr flight?-Not Her..! I like the way Laura thinks!
What WOULD be surprising these days if anything Bush said had a shred of truth to it - now that would be surprising!
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:52 pm“Bush will go down as a great president. So will his successor, Fred Thompson.
Comment by Larry Lind”
Bush has already wrapped up worst president ever. Your only hope seems to be to get Thompson elected so bush has the chance of beings the second worst president ever.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:52 pmGlobal warming is the biggest scam ever perpetrated on the world by a strategic connivance of environMENTALists, govt subsidy-seeking corporations, and ideologues like Al Gore. Progtarded zealots here should look at Chris Horner’s PI Guide to Global Warming; that book contains all the real knowledge progtards need in order to stop making themselves look so idiotic with their promotion of global “warming.” Horner’s book–contrary to the Washington Post of leftarded ideology–precisely backs up Bush’s assertion that the US was the only industrialized nation that cut greenhouse gases. In fact, other industrialized nations, such as the Eurotrash ones, routinely emit lots more greenhouse gases than the US because Kyoto actually permits them to via relentlessly changing emission targets. Kyoto was nothing more than a plot agreed upon by Europe to allow the worst polluters (China, India) to get off scot-free to help their third-world economies.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:53 pmGas prices being 2x higher didnt have anything to do with that did it? :roll:
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:53 pmBush has already wrapped up worst president ever.
Comment by Bobwurst —
That honor goes to Jimmy Carter.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:53 pmBill Clinton said he didn’t have sex with Monica Lewinsky.
Comment by Larry Lind
Yeah, he also caught the Islamic terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center on His watch….but what does this have to do with Bush lying about global warming?
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:54 pmKyoto was nothing more than a plot agreed upon by Europe to allow the worst polluters (China, India) to get off scot-free to help their third-world economies.
Comment by globalwarmingistheliberalschicanery — September 3, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
You don’t have to suffer like this. But to be helped, you must ask for help.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:55 pmbut what does this have to do with Bush lying about global warming?
Comment by Bobwurst
That Bill Clinton is the liar, not Bush.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:55 pmComment by globalwarmingistheliberalschicanery — September 3, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
See comment #1
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:56 pmBush won’t be a tough act to follow… especially by a bad actor…Bush will go down in history as the worst president in the history of all nations.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:56 pmThompson would be a close second. He quit the senate…. He’s a joke too!
Not according to 415 prominent historians.
http://hnn.us/articles/5019.html
Of course republicans never let facts, competence, or reality get in the way of ideological fantasy.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:56 pmFred Thompson is going to clean up Washington.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:57 pm“Gas prices being 2x higher
Comment by ummm — September 3, 2007″
Higher than what? Gas prices here in Northern California are the lowest they’ve been in a year! Global warming is a liberal farce!
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:57 pmReagan’s catchphrase was “Morning in America.”
“… the White House was unable to substantiate the claim.”
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:58 pmwill be Bush’s.
“Gas prices being 2x higher
Comment by ummm — September 3, 2007″
Higher than what? Gas prices here in Northern California are the lowest they’ve been in a year! Global warming is a liberal farce!
Comment by michael
And what are they?
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:59 pmWhy is it that the MSM is totally incapable of saying that Bush LIED? It is a real word in the English language but the MSM seems incapable of applying it to Bush. He misspeaks or they say what he said wasn’t “entirely” true.
Bush lied, people died. It’s a fact.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:59 pmComment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
Then why is a Republican pres presenting dubious info about US efforts relative to it?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:00 pm“Fred Thompson is going to clean up Washington.
Comment by Larry Lind ”
More ideological fantasy. Thompson can’t even change his own diaper anymore.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:01 pm“And what are they?
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007″
I paid $2.69 a gallon. It hasn’t been that low in over a year.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:01 pm“Higher than what? Gas prices here in Northern California are the lowest they’ve been in a year! Global warming is a liberal farce!
Comment by michael”
So michael, are you willing to bet the future of your children, grandchildren and great grandchildren that you are right? Because if you are wrong, and we do nothing about Global Warming, they won’t have a future.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:02 pm“Bush lied, people died. It’s a fact.
Comment by bilbobaggins — September 3, 2007″
It is? What are the facts?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:02 pm“Then why is a Republican pres presenting dubious info about US efforts relative to it?
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007″
Don’t know! All I know is global warming is a joke!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:03 pmMichael: “Global warming is a liberal farce!”
Yeah, yeah, we know…. yawn. 95% of the world’s climatologists and a broad swath of the scientific community have simply been duped by liberal propaganda. OK, go back to your bag of cheetos.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:03 pm“So michael, are you willing to bet the future of your children, grandchildren and great grandchildren that you are right?
Comment by bilbobaggins — September 3, 2007″
YES!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:05 pmMichael, you don’t want to know the facts. You know Bush and his people have lied about a wide variety of things. It’s documented all over the media. Why should anyone take the time to document them for a cultist like you who refuses to face up to reality?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:05 pmDon’t know! All I know is global warming is a joke!
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Do you know why the insurance industry thinks it is real? I doubt that they are liberal shills but I know my families coastal property is being treated as if it is in jeopardy.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:06 pm“95% of the world’s climatologists
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — September 3, 2007″
Ha ha ha ha ha! And just WHERE did you get that figure?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:06 pm“And what are they?
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007
I paid $2.69 a gallon. It hasn’t been that low in over a year.
michael”
In the Chicago suburbs we’re paying around $3.05 for the cheap stuff. It’s an outrage.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:07 pm“I know my families coastal property is being treated as if it is in jeopardy.
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007″
Because of global warming? Ha ha ha ha ha! I work for an insurance company and that’s pure BS!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:07 pmdbadass, watching what the insurance industry will and will not insure is often instructive. For example, conservatives who push nuclear power often conveniently forget that no major insurance company has been willing to insure a new plant since Three Mile Island.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:08 pm“In the Chicago suburbs we’re paying around $3.05 for the cheap stuff. It’s an outrage.
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007″
Move?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:08 pmDon’t know! All I know is global warming is a joke!
Comment by michael
Do you have anything other than Ideology to back up your knowledge?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:08 pmDidn’t think so.
Ha ha ha ha ha! And just WHERE did you get that figure?
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
Maybe the same place that you got this one…
All I know is global warming is a joke!
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
How do you know?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:09 pmmichael: “I work for an insurance company…”
OK, now I completely get many of your hackneyed, ridiculous arguments. Enough said.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:09 pm“It’s documented all over the media.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — September 3, 2007″
Where? I don’t want someone’s opinion, I want FACTS!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:10 pm“In the Chicago suburbs we’re paying around $3.05 for the cheap stuff. It’s an outrage.
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007″
Move?
Comment by michael
Right, my work is here. A lot of people’s work is here. Besides, do you really want more liberals moving into your neighborhood?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:10 pm“OK, now I completely get many of your hackneyed, ridiculous arguments.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — September 3, 2007″
Let’s see how smart you are, give us an example of my ridiculous arguments that can be attributed to my working for an insurance company?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:12 pmWhere? I don’t want someone’s opinion, I want FACTS!
Comment by michael
now that’s funny. When was the last time you offered a fact for one of your arugments? really. Name the fact.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:12 pmAnother LIE from Bush??
Yup.
But at least not the kind that DIRECTLY get US soldiers and Iraqis KILLED, so I guess this one is a “harmless” lie.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:13 pm“do you really want more liberals moving into your neighborhood?
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007″
God no! We have enough liberal kooks in San Francisco!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:13 pm“When was the last time you offered a fact for one of your arugments?
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007″
My presence here is to challenge your liberal rhetoric and you dopes keep me busy for hours!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:15 pmLet’s see how smart you are, give us an example of my ridiculous arguments that can be attributed to my working for an insurance company?
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
Can we please not waste time with this and maybe instead you can explain to us how you “know” climate change is a liberal farce and a joke. Seems that is much more on topic.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:15 pm“do you really want more liberals moving into your neighborhood?
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007
God no! We have enough liberal kooks in San Francisco!
Comment by michael ”
Then help us fix global warming. help us lower transportation costs. If for no other reason, so that the ice caps will stop melting which will keep you from being flooded out of California. Cuz i don’t want you moving into my neighborhood…
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:16 pm“Can we please not waste time with this
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007″
Well I just knew I wouldn’t get an answer!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:17 pm“Then help us fix global warming.
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007″
Relax? There is none!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:18 pm“When was the last time you offered a fact for one of your arugments?
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007″
My presence here is to challenge your liberal rhetoric and you dopes keep me busy for hours!
Comment by michael
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:18 pmThis is what passes for facts in your world? You are a clown.
http://newsbusters.org/ blogs/ noel-sheppard/ 2007/ 08/ 29/ less-half-published-scientists-endorse-global-warming-theory
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:20 pmWell I just knew I wouldn’t get an answer!
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:17 pm
The question is not relevent to the topic and besides I had nothing to do with it. So do you wanna pony up and deal with you and your statements or not?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:20 pm“Then help us fix global warming.
Comment by Bobwurst
Relax? There is none!
Comment by michael ”
This would be a good place to offer a fact. Otherwise you’re just a waste of time.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:21 pm“The question is not relevent to the topic and besides I had nothing to do with it. So do you wanna pony up and deal with you and your statements or not?
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007″
Read post # 50.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:21 pmmichael: “Let’s see how smart you are, give us an example of my ridiculous arguments that can be attributed to my working for an insurance company?”
That’s easy. You’ve been a strong opponent of universal healthcare, obviously because one of the two industries which loses in that prospect is the insurance industry. As Upton Sinclair said, “It’s hard to get a man to agree to something when his paycheck depends on disagreeing.”
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:22 pmAt a fundraiser on Monday, President Bush claimed,
They had a fundraiser in Al Asad that Bush attended? Or was it on the 14 hour flight over there?
Today is Monday, isn’t it?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:25 pmYes, the insurance industry. We all love it. They obstruct millions of Americans from getting universal healthcare, they work tirelessly to avoid paying benefits to people who have plans, they try as hard as they can NOT to pay out on emergency claims… we just LOVE the insurance industry, michael.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:26 pmRead post # 50.
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:21 pm
That’s it?! You expect me to think you are so ignorant as to have this be enough to convince you?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:26 pmOH, it was LAST Monday.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:27 pmmichael’s always ready with a corporate-sponsored misinformation campaign he passes off as real information. That’s the way it is for an insurance salesman. They’ve got a reputation for honesty, you know.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:27 pm“You expect me to think you are so ignorant as to have this be enough to convince you?
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007″
Did you read it?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:28 pmAll I know is global warming is a joke!
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Thanks for discrediting yourself. Again.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:29 pmHey, michael, “scientists” and “doctors” working and getting paid by the “Tobacco Institute” argued for years that there was no link between cigarettes and cancer. Do you think the fact that they got paid by the cigarrette industry had something to do with their arguments? Nah.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:29 pm“They obstruct millions of Americans from getting universal healthcare
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — September 3, 2007″
You can have all the health care you want as long as you are willing to pay for it! Don’t expect, or ask me to pay for it!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:30 pm“Do you think the fact that they got paid by the cigarrette industry had something to do with their arguments? Nah.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — September 3, 2007″
What does that have to do with global warming?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:31 pmDid you read it?
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:28 pm
Of course I did. It would be disingenuous of me not to
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:31 pmhttp://newsbusters.org/ blogs/ noel-sheppard/ 2007/ 08/ 29/ less-half-published-scientists-endorse-global-warming-theory
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
The information at this link grossly misrepresents the scientific literature. It is pure crap.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:31 pm“Thanks for discrediting yourself. Again.
Comment by VerbalKint — September 3, 2007″
You know something that most climatologists don’t?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:32 pmSo he was making it up as he went?
Pretty much just like another day in the WH, isn’t it?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:32 pm“It is pure crap.
Comment by VerbalKint — September 3, 2007″
Explain?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:32 pmYou can have all the health care you want as long as you are willing to pay for it! Don’t expect, or ask me to pay for it!
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:30 pm
Can you explain why we pay twice as much for worse health care than is available in other developed nations?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:33 pm“While it’s very likely to be the case that we are the only industrialized nation that cut absolute emissions, there is not directly comparable data because not all other nations take such a measurementâ€
So in other words, we are the only country that matters that has cut emissions!
You lefties should be praising Bush!!!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:33 pmYou can have all the health care you want as long as you are willing to pay for it! Don’t expect, or ask me to pay for it!
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:30 pm
You said you were in insurance correct? Isn’t this part of the deal with insurance?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:35 pmOf 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers “implicit” endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no “consensus.”
Scientists are by nature unwilling to go out on a limb. they are, by training, cautious and skeptical. That 45% implicitly agree that global warmiing is occuring is pretty conclusive to me. I’m curious as to why the numbers don’t add up by the way. That seems to be a flaw in your facts. But going beyond that, why are you so against stopping global warming? If we, as a nation, work to develop new technologies that are more efficent, that don’t pollute, that we can sell to the world, then our economy will prosper. It’s not like oil, and coal are going to last forever. Let’s get ahead of everyone else. What are you afraid of, michael?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:35 pm“So in other words, we are the only country that matters that has cut emissions!”
Not judging from your continued, gassy rhetoric…
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:35 pm“Can you explain why we pay twice as much for worse health care than is available in other developed nations?
Comment by VerbalKint — September 3, 2007″
Duh! Maybe because in countries like UK, France, etc. the government is subsidizing their premiums! Would you rather go to one of these countries to have major surgery? After waiting 6 months that is.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:36 pmhttp://newsbusters.org/ blogs/ noel-sheppard/ 2007/ 08/ 29/ less-half-published-scientists-endorse-global-warming-theory
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007
“news”busters???
Another rightwing nutjob rag???
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:37 pmSo in other words, we are the only country that matters that has cut emissions!
You lefties should be praising Bush!!!
Comment by OCTAVIANVS — September 3, 2007 @ 2:33 pm
So climate change is a real issue which is(?) needs to be addressed by the world’s waning superpower?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:37 pm“waning”? superpower?
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:38 pm“why are you so against stopping global warming?
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007″
Because fools like you are willing to spend trillions without knowing all the facts! A lot of organizations and companies are maneuvering to get as much of this money for studies to support this farce. That’s why!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:40 pmAs my dear, dead uncle used to say (applied to Dumbya):
“He’s about as useful as tits on a hog”.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:40 pm?
Comment by OCTAVIANVS — September 3, 2007 @ 2:38 pm
!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:40 pmmichael: “What does that have to do with global warming?”
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are being intellectually dishonest. Most of the “thinktanks” and “skeptics” which attempt to refute global warming are funded by energy companies which profit off of the burning of fossil fuels. Is that too hare a concept for you to get your little insurance industry brain around?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:40 pmYou can have all the health care you want as long as you are willing to pay for it! Don’t expect, or ask me to pay for it!
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:30 pm
Can you explain why we pay twice as much for worse health care than is available in other developed nations?
Comment by VerbalKint — September 3, 2007
Yup. For-profit middle-man of “insurance” companies, of which the Rapeublicans are in their pocket, as well as drug companies.
Quote from George H.W. Bush to an AMA meeting circa 1991:
The American people DON’T want National Health Care,
and NEITHER DO I.
Actually, the American People DO.
TRAITORS like the Bush Crime Family obviously DO NOT.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:41 pm“Another rightwing nutjob rag???
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Comment by Arn Gunnutes — September 3, 2007″
What in the article don’t you agree with and why? Can’t wait for your answer.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:41 pmmichael: “Would you rather go to one of these countries to have major surgery? After waiting 6 months that is.”
That’s exactly the kind of bull I’d expect from someone who works for the insurance industry.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:42 pm“http://newsbusters.org/ blogs/ noel-sheppard/ 2007/ 08/ 29/ less-half-published-scientists-endorse-global-warming-theory
Comment by michael”
Here’s michael’s “proof”. A post by a website that has as it’s title:
Newsbusters - Exposing and Combating Liberal Bias
Nice try michael, but no cigar for you.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:42 pm“why are you so against stopping global warming?
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007″
Because fools like you are willing to spend trillions without knowing all the facts! A lot of organizations and companies are maneuvering to get as much of this money for studies to support this farce. That’s why!
Comment by michael
That doesn’t answer my questions michael. I’m attempting to have a serious converstion with you, if you want to go back to name calling, fine. You’re just a coporate stooge who is selling your children’s well being so you can drive a gas guzzler. You’d rather be wrong than admit you were conned by bush.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:43 pmThat’s why!
Comment by michael
My theory is that denier dipsh*ts like YOU are still trying to sell land along the coast, one of the hardest hit markets by the “prime” mortgage fiasco! LOL
Yet more substantial, verifiable proof for you in-bred hicks. Sorry if it’s over your little head:
http://www.11thhouraction.com/
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:44 pmNice try michael, but no cigar for you.
Comment by bilbobaggins — September 3, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
——-
Typical lazy-ass Liberal.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:44 pmMichael, how about using a source which is strictly science, not trying to make a political point and not funded by the fossile fuel industry. I don’t think you can find one.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:44 pmOk folks, let’s stop feeding michaels ego and no longer respond to his ridiculous posts. Let’s get back to the subject at hand and show michael how insignificant he really is by ignoring him.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:45 pmMichael:
I realize you are being pulled in several directions but let’s try this again and as I said I don’t think you are as ignorant as to make the basis of such a decision based on a single “news” busters item. Insurance folks in my experience tend to be more concerned with worst case scenarios
how you “know†climate change is a liberal farce and a joke. Seems that is much more on topic.
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007 @ 2:15 pm
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:45 pmExplain?
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:32 pm
Okay, idiot: according to a peer-reviewed survey of peer-reviewed global warming literature published since 2000, not been a single article of 928 found in a Citation Indices search disputed the basic premise of anthropogenic global warming.
The basic premise of the linked propaganda is that article writers who do not “endorse” a general statement about AGW must be taking a
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:46 pm“neutral” position on AGW. This premise is false. To begin with, the papers in question are not taking a “neutral” position at all. The basic outlines of AGW are considered established science, so many authors won’t feel any need to belabor the point. Furthermore, the linked propaganda must somehow morph “neutral” into “no consensus”, which is also a stretch.
You can have all the health care you want as long as you are willing to pay for it! Don’t expect, or ask me to pay for it!
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:30 pm
Actually, “michael” can have all the ILLEGAL WAR he wants as long as he is willing to send HIS kin.
And don’t expect, or ask me to feel sorry for them DYING for the LIES of TRAITOR Bush!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:46 pmOh, now we have two ridiculous trolls to ignore since Mr. Pee has shown up.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:46 pmGod forbid dumba$$ wingnuts get involved and TRY to make a profit in this burgeoning industry.
Huh, what? THAT’S RIGHT, it’s next to impossible, without huge amounts of capitol TO BEGIN WITH.
F-ing MORONS.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:46 pmMichael, how about using a source which is strictly science, not trying to make a political point and not funded by the fossile fuel industry. I don’t think you can find one.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — September 3, 2007 @ 2:44 pm
———-
Neither can you!!! Let’s face it, funding needs to come from somewhere, and those with agendas are more than willing to fund “research” that supports their positions.
Don’t believe me? Ask the Goracle!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:47 pmDuh! Maybe because in countries like UK, France, etc. the government is subsidizing their premiums!
Comment by michael — September 3, 2007 @ 2:36 pm
Michael,
I have explained this to you before. The numbers take account of these government subsidies. Evidently you are unwilling to learn, or perhaps incapable. I have no choice but to assume that you are either really stupid, or a liar, or both.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:48 pmstupid, or a liar, or both.
Comment by VerbalKint
The in-bred, half-retarded wingnuts have blurred the distinction which used to exist between the two.
HECKUVA JOB!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:49 pmBecause fools like you are willing to spend trillions without knowing all the facts! A lot of organizations and companies are maneuvering to get as much of this money for studies to support this farce. That’s why!
Comment by michael
——
Exactly right!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:50 pmAnd they are willing to do so because their god (al-Goracle) tells them what to do!
I go through this same crap about once a month with michael. No amount of explaining seems to reach this cretin.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:51 pmMichael, the study you post about doesn’t support your contention that global warming is a farce. In fact, quite the contrary. Most of the published papers that deal with the source of global warming according to that study support the idea that it is the result of man’s activities. A good number of the papers do not deal with the source of global warming one way or the other but are only papers dealing with one or more aspects of climate change. And the study itself has been done by an endocrinologist, a medical doctor and not an expert on climatology. How do we know this medical doctor can adequately read and interpret the scientific literature in a field not his own?
At any rate, we know one thing for certain about the study: it does not support your statement that global warming is a farce. Only 6% of the papers supported your own weirdo notions about global warming. Very unscientific of you, Michael, to link a paper that does not even support your own beliefs.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:52 pmKristen A. Hellmer, the spokeswoman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, acknowledged afterward that the White House was unable to substantiate the claim.
It’s the rightwing nutjob way, as evidenced by their posts here.
Grover Norquist said (when the Rapeublicans held ALL the power) that their job was NOT to promote bipartisanship, but to
AGITATE in all the State Capitols.
Part of TRAITOR Rove’s strategy, no doubt…
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:53 pmBecause fools like you are willing to spend trillions without knowing all the facts! Comment by michael
And dumbf*cks like you would still be rubbing sticks and stones together to light a cigarette, except someone SMARTER, and more industrious than you came along and invented the match.
mickey -0
humanity -1
Yea, I’m keeping score.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:54 pmBecause fools like you are willing to spend trillions without knowing all the facts! A lot of organizations and companies are maneuvering to get as much of this money for studies to support this farce. That’s why!
Comment by michael
——
Exactly right!
And they are willing to do so because their god (al-Goracle) tells them what to do!
Comment by AVGVSTVS — September 3, 2007 @ 2:50 pm
Why is the military planning contingencies for the tumult which may result from climate change?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:57 pmWhy is the military planning contingencies for the tumult which may result from climate change?
Comment by dbadass
Better not hold your breath waiting for the chickenhawks to respond to this juicy tid-bit!
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:00 pmWhy is the military planning contingencies for the tumult which may result from climate change?
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007
Same reason one of the trolls answered the other day when asked WHY Bush and Cheney refused to TESTIFY UNDER OATH:
Cuz!
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:01 pmWhy is the military planning contingencies for the tumult which may result from climate change?
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007
Link, or it’s a lie.
Your choice.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:01 pmI paid $2.69 a gallon. It hasn’t been that low in over a year.
Comment by michael
WHat was it in 2000?
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:01 pmWhy is the military planning contingencies for the tumult which may result from climate change?
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007
Link, or it’s a lie.
Your choice.
Comment by AVGVSTVS — September 3, 2007
So, if it is TRUE, then YOU are the LIAR, RIGHT???
YOUR choice.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:03 pmUS President George W. Bush said during a surprise visit to Iraq on Monday that security could be maintained with fewer US troops.
Oh boy, what a flip flopper.
More troops! Less Troops!
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:04 pmNow the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us. · Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war · Britain will be ‘Siberian’ in less than 20 …
observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html
How does it feel to be a liar Mr P?
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:07 pmSo, if it is TRUE, then YOU are the LIAR, RIGHT???
YOUR choice.
Comment by Arn Gunnutes — September 3, 2007 @ 3:03 pm
———-
No. I just haven’t seen the information that is being referred to, and I would like to before making a comment about it.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:07 pmThe study’s principal author was Peter Schwartz, former head of planning for Shell Oil,
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:09 pmhttp://www.climate.org/PDF/clim_change_scenario.pdf
No. I just haven’t seen the information that is being referred to, and I would like to before making a comment about it.
Comment by AVGVSTVS — September 3, 2007
Right…
So if THEY are WRONG, they are LIARS, but if YOU are WRONG, you are NOT a LIAR, right??
Same old Rapeublic double-standard.
http://www.gbn.com/ ArticleDisplayServlet.srv?aid=26231
The entire report, PREPARED FOR the DoD, is linked in the article.
So, the military IS planning contingencies based on CLIMATE CHANGE.
So, Augustus IS a LIAR.
Gee, a BIGGER SURPRISE than Bush being a liar!!!
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:09 pmArmy Transforming for Future Conflicts
Army News Service | Sgt. Sara Wood | August 15, 2007
Security experts around the country believe that the world will soon face an era of “persistent conflict,” or drawn-out confrontations between state, non-state and individual actors, Gen. Casey said. These conflicts will be fueled by the impacts of globalization, competition for energy, demographic trends, climate change, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and failed or failing states that can provide safe havens for terrorists, he said.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:10 pmComment by BORe Ink — September 3, 2007 @ 3:07 pm
From your article (which does not show what I asked for, by the way):
Classic ;)
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:11 pmSo easily played, stupid trolls:
By David Stipp
February 9, 2004
(FORTUNE Magazine)
LINK
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:12 pmLink, or it’s a lie.
Your choice.
Comment by AVGVSTVS — September 3, 2007 @ 3:01 pm
This may be a dumb question but why is the issue being discussed by this administration if it is not an issue. Are they the liars?
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:12 pmClassic ;)
Comment by AVGVSTVS — September 3, 2007
And Augustus is once again SHOWN TO BE A LIAR…
Classic! ;)
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:13 pmjust another lie. no big deal.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:14 pmAnd since I don’t trust half-retards to read my link, here’s the crux:
The PENTAGON, IS, CONCERNED ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:16 pmThis may be a dumb question but why is the issue being discussed by this administration if it is not an issue. Are they the liars?
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007 @ 3:12 pm
————————————
They want to be prepared for anything. As the links have shown, this is just another scenario. They are treating the “threat” of global warming as if it were a “threat” of an attack from Canada!
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:17 pmmichael I’m waiting for a link on CA gas prices, since 2000, or your a liar.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:18 pmWhy is the military planning contingencies for the tumult which may result from climate change?
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007
Link, or it’s a lie.
Your choice.
Comment by AVGVSTV
Your original stance has been DEBUNKED.
Now run along BEAVIS.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:18 pmComment by Not Canadian — September 3, 2007 @ 3:16 pm
Sure, they’ve considered what might happen. But the report,
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:19 pmThis may be a dumb question but why is the issue being discussed by this administration if it is not an issue. Are they the liars?
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007 @ 3:12 pm
————————————
They want to be prepared for anything. As the links have shown, this is just another scenario. They are treating the “threat†of global warming as if it were a “threat†of an attack from Canada!
Comment by AVGVSTVS — September 3, 2007
Now that you have been PROVEN to be a LIAR, you are on my IGNORE list, a la “jake”.
And Bush is a COXUCKER punk TRAITOR to the USA who sux dixx of Saudi OIL FINANCIERS of Al Queda.
And he blows “Jeff Gannon” and dead dogs, too…
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:19 pmYour original stance has been DEBUNKED.
…
Comment by Not Canadian — September 3, 2007 @ 3:18 pm
————
My original stance was a request for a link. Some were provided.
What was there to be debunked?
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:21 pmAGAIN, a Bushista misses EVERY RELEVANT FACT about the Pentagon’s contingency:
i.e. THE POTENTIAL FOR GLOBAL CALAMITY RESULTING FROM GLOBAL WARMING EXISTS.
And even from their perspective, it ain’t pretty.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:21 pmComment by Arn Gunnutes — September 3, 2007 @ 3:19 pm
Typical Lefty Cop-out
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:21 pmWhat was there to be debunked?
Comment by AVGVSTVS
F*CK OFF. DON’T ADDRESS ME. YOU ACCUSED HIM OF LYING.
THE NERVE, YOU FECKLESS PRICK.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:22 pmThey want to be prepared for anything. As the links have shown, this is just another scenario. They are treating the “threat†of global warming as if it were a “threat†of an attack from Canada!
Comment by AVGVSTVS — September 3, 2007 @ 3:17 pm
Sort of like beng prepared for a strike by terrorists using commercial airplanes? You seem like a fool driven only by ideological rather than critical thought. Either climate change is or is not an issue. Choose one.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:22 pmMSNBC spoke on Monday with Rep. Jason Altmire (D-PA), who recently returned from a trip to Iraq. Hey Look Jake D Konservo, a Dem landed in Iraq!!
“Our troops are amazing. They have done what has been asked of them,” Altmire began. “But the flip side of that, unfortunately, the Iraqi government is in complete disarray. And the purpose of the surge was to allow the Iraqi government … the opportunity to move forward. I think we’re worse off … today than we were six or eight months ago.”
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:22 pmYOU ACCUSED HIM OF LYING.
No, I didn’t.
I merely demanded that he substantiate his claim.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:23 pmIdeas are subjective!
Morals are objective!
Everything is subjective!
Typical Mr P Righty Wacky Professor [Asperger] cop-outs
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:25 pmEither climate change is or is not an issue. Choose one.
Comment by dbadass — September 3, 2007 @ 3:22 pm
——
For me, it is. But you made a claim about the govt, so I needed to see some proof before I answered your question.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:25 pmHas brave Sir Michael chickened out and run away yet again?
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:26 pmI merely demanded that he substantiate his claim.
Comment by AVGVSTVS
Bwah, more, copouts from Mr P.
And if didn’t give you a link, then you wouldn’t look for yourself before assuming someone is lying?
Your a righty clod.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:27 pmFor me, it is. But you made a claim about the govt, so I needed to see some proof before I answered your question.
Comment by AVGVSTVS — September 3, 2007 @ 3:25 pm
Thank you for the reply. Climate has serious implications to us all.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:29 pmYou shouldnt assume. Mr Pervservor, that a lack of a link means one is lying.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:29 pmhttp://www.californiagasprices.com/retail_price_chart.aspx
This chart shows that the price of california gas went from 1.28 in 2003 to 3.46 in 2007.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:35 pmSo since 2002 the price of gas in CA was .98 cents. Today its 2.80 in Ca.
Go team Bush!!!
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:40 pmThe problem is once he says it the bushbots and the “liberal” media believe it.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:41 pm“We are making sure the president is aware of that.â€
nice to know that chimpy knows when he’s lying blatantly. But lying comes naturally and easily to bush that whether or not he is aware of his lying makes no difference at all. That’s for all the fine work bush administration.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:45 pm.
“That’s for all the ….”
Was supposed to be: “THANKS for all the …”
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:46 pm.
Comment by Arn Gunnutes — September 3, 2007 @ 3:19 pm
Typical Lefty Cop-out
Comment by AVGVSTVS — September 3, 2007
Then ONE MORE TIME–
YOU asked for PROOF that the DoD was planning for GLOBAL WARMING, saying that if a LINK was not found, they were a LIAR.
Since SEVERAL LINKS have been found, YOU are the LIAR.
Just like WAR CRIMINAL Bush the COXUCKER punk TRAITOR to the
USA.
Typical Nazi LIAR…
Back on IGNORE, as LIARS like YOU provide NO PROOF, just like Bush and Rush…
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:03 pmHellooooooh? Michael, Sybill…..???
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:09 pmBottom feeding Trolls = Knuckle dragging troglodytes.
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:12 pmDo you realize you are a DUMBASS?
The WH later reports those claims ARE substantiated!!!
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:17 pmHellooooooh? Michael, Sybill…..???
Comment by dbadass
___________________
Couldn’t be Sybil. She only had 13 different personalities.
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:33 pmThe Year the Global Warming Hoax Died. (h/t to Global Warming Skeptics.
Global Warming: R.I.P.
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:59 pmI wonder if anyone has shown this video to the monkey in the White House. Not that it would make any difference to him or even to those who provide it for him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgvnqv1-_D4
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:02 pmThey say he misspoke, or he was misinformed, or he didn’t know, or his facts were inaccurate, or any euphemism they can conjure up instead of simply saying the Prez lied in public again.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:05 pmhat doesn’t answer my questions michael. I’m attempting to have a serious converstion with you, if you want to go back to name calling, fine. You’re just a coporate stooge who is selling your children’s well being so you can drive a gas guzzler. You’d rather be wrong than admit you were conned by bush.
Comment by Bobwurst — September 3, 2007 @ 2:43 pm
You will never get a serious answer from p’s sockpuppet michael; he is here to show the liberal establishment why the right wing needs to be neutered, that’s his only reason for existing. he is the proof of the pudding that rightards are underdeveloped mentally and emotionally, and have not reached the advanced evolutionary state of liberals. p, octavi-anus, r-, jake, etc. are all one deluded freak on a meth binge. they are here to distract, to waste time and energy, to show the world how miserable the right wing traitors everywhere really are.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:17 pmGlobal Warming: R.I.P.
Comment by muckdog — September 3, 2007 @ 4:59 pm
This is getting tiresome. See #1 thru whatever. Why would so much of the world be planning for the possible consequences of something some no one on some electronic nothingness claims to be nonexistent?
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:17 pmmuckdog is still by the fireplace, waiting for Santa.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:22 pmThe Pentagon’s Weather Nightmare The climate could change radically, and fast. That would be the mother of all national security issues.
By David Stipp
February 9, 2004
(FORTUNE Magazine)
In the trolls’ view, which is the leftist moonbat—The Pentagon or Forbes Magazine?
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:24 pmMuckdog? Is that Romney’s poor pooch? The one that was covered in its own muck after a 6 hour trip on the car roof?
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:25 pmHas anyone considered that were we to seriously take control of our own contribution to global warming, we could create an entirely new economic base?
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:28 pmThe oil barons would be angry, but a lot of people could be employed in a industry that fosters conservation.
In the 1992 campaign, gas in NC was 99 cents per gallon. Clinton proposed a nickel a gallon tax. The Republicans squealed like crazy “gas will be $2.00 a gallon if Clinton is elected”! Eight years later, gas in NC was 99 cents a gallon.
Notice how the righties always look at how Bush has improved something slightly (after taking it to the depths) as being wonderful: the federal deficit, price of gasoline, unemployment, Dow Jones, approval rating, jobs created, etc.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:31 pmRomney’s poor pooch? The one that was covered in its own muck after a 6 hour trip on the car roof?
Comment by Starve-A-Bush_Feed-A-Beaver — September 3, 2007 @ 5:25 pm
That’s also how Romney treats some of his extra wives!!
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:32 pmGermany gets 30% of its energy from renewables. The US is being left behind.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:33 pmDobya wouldn’t recognize Global Warming, even if it flooded the WH up to his inflatable codpiece!
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:54 pmthe farting fool has spoken and as usual- it’s a lie
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:05 pmneeds repeated:
Has anyone considered that were we to seriously take control of our own contribution to global warming, we could create an entirely new economic base?
The oil barons would be angry, but a lot of people could be employed in a industry that fosters conservation.
Comment by Marie — September 3, 2007 @ 5:28 pm
yep! … that’s my main argument…
to repeat:
… a lot of people could be employed in an industry that fosters conservation.
a whole ‘nuther economy… why fight it???
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:09 pm…
The truth comes out in England on “global warming.”
Brits believe government using “global warming” to raise taxes.
h/t: Newsbusters
Ah, the real Al Gore agenda. Figure out how to raise YOUR taxes by any means, including hoaxes!
It’s all about the money, folks. And, our friends across the Pond know it.
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:46 pmIn physics class we learned you cannot create or destroy energy- it has a net sum zero. Algore want us to plant and eat more vegetables to stop global warming- wont that make us deficate more, thus more toilet flushes, thus more carbon released, more water sent to the treatment plant, more energy used to treat sewage blah blah blah
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:53 pmWhen libs stop driving gas guzzlers, I will take them seriously. Edwards wants evryone to give up the suv, but he wont, same with Travolta, but he has 5 jet planes he flys by himself, Sheryl Crowe wants us to use one sheet of toilet paper, why do the hollywierdos have huge homes, huge water bills(barbara) as well as lib politicians having big homes and more than one . How many trees did it take to build the 28000 sq foot ‘home’ that edwards has, what about the 10x average electric bill that gore has, blah blah blah- do what i say not as i do
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:58 pmEdwards uses hybrid SUV’s which get twice the mpg as regular SUV, therefore saving energy, less global warming, cheaper gas, and less reliance on the Middle East.
Sheryl Crowe said no more than one square ot toilet paper. She thought this was so outrageous that everyone would realize it was a joke. She forgot how dumb conservatives like Limbaugh (and apparently you) were.
Every single day, truly massive amounts of energy from the sun, winds, and waves are wasted. They should be harnessed. As I said above, Germany now gets 30% of its energy from renewables. They are leaving the US behind.
Do you think the Pentagon is a looney left-wing organization.
Do you think it makes no difference that practically everyone in the Bush White House came from the oil-selling industry?
September 3rd, 2007 at 7:09 pmkeith - don’t remember who, but i listened to a guy talk about the solar technology we, the US, had in the 70s… how it started to take off, but never did catch on - basically sabotaged… guess who gobbled up that technology and refined it and improved on it, and now most rooftops have their own solar cells… even selling the power back to the grid… yea, that would be germany…
September 3rd, 2007 at 7:27 pm…
27 mpg for a suv, big deal, why not drive a diesel car that gets 40-50 mpg, then i can get on board with that. i totally agree with the suns energy crap, problem- the number of batteries it would take to store the suns energy as well as the batteries for a hybrid. the one guy in hollywood who lives by what he says is that ed guy. the problem is the energy conversion factor for the cost of manufacture still isnt efficient. i am sure there are companies out ther trying to find a better conversion rate. it wont be done by the government. if people really wanted to save energy, rock stars should have their concerts via web link so they arent hauling dozens of truck all over the country as well as fans driving hundres of miles to go see the concerts. people should buy homes by their jobs or do their jobs from home, or convert their car to a dual fuel vehicle themselves- no one is stopping them
September 3rd, 2007 at 7:27 pmbilly,
Instead of many billions of taxpayers’ dollars going to the oil corps, a smaller amount should go into solar panels and solar batteries.
One company claims revolutionary breakthrough today:
http://enews.earthlink.net/ article/ gen?guid=20070903/ 46db86c0_3ca6_1552620070903838685091
Gore should put a windmill on his farm and solar panels on his house.
I like the Ford Reflex, Chevy Volt, and Honda Remix. But with any technology—you don’t have it until after you begin the research.
September 3rd, 2007 at 7:54 pmAh, the real Al Gore agenda. Figure out how to raise YOUR taxes by any means, including hoaxes!
It’s all about the money, folks. And, our friends across the Pond know it.
Comment by muckdog — September 3, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
Aptly stated, considering the great wasteful spending of corrupt republicans. The difference between republicans and democrats is that we as a country get something back from our spending when Dems spend, whereas we get raped by you and your fellow Repugnants.
September 3rd, 2007 at 10:27 pmThe difference between republicans and democrats is that we as a country ge