White House Cites ‘Executive Privilege’ To Block Inquiry On ‘Eviscerated’ Global Warming Testimony
White House Cites ‘Executive Privilege’ To Block Inquiry On ‘Eviscerated’ Global Warming Testimony
Last month, Centers for Disease Control (CDC) officials revealed that the White House “eviscerated” the congressional testimony of CDC President Julie Gerberding on the “Human Impacts of Global Warming.” The deletions included “details on how many people might be adversely affected because of increased warming” and the scientific basis of specific diseases impacted by climate change.
Last week, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) wrote to President Bush “requesting a full accounting of what occurred during that review process.” Appearing on MSNBC today, Boxer said the administration has stonewalled her efforts, claiming executive privilege:
Many pages of it were redacted… And by the way, we wrote the President. He gave our letter to Fred Fielding, the chief counsel over there, his counsel, who said ‘executive privilege, I don’t have to tell you what she wrote.’ … So yes, I think they are hiding this. I think they are hiding a lot of things. It’s their way, it’s their habit, it’s wrong.
Watch it:
Fielding claimed that “the request by its very nature seeks communications involving pre-decisional deliberative materials relating to an inter-agency review process…it is clear that the request implicates core Executive Branch interests and raises separation of powers concerns.”
Fielding added that he may continue to “withhold documents” in the future and redirected Boxer to Vice President Cheney’s office in regards to Boxer’s “request for vice president records.”
A January report found 435 instances in which the administration interfered with the work of government climate change scientists over the past five years. Despite the administration’s refusal to explain what it is hiding, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino maintains Gerberding’s testimony “was not watered down.”
Read the unredacted version of Gerberding’s testimony at Science Progress.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
I’m still trying to figure this one out….what is the proper temperature of the earth?
November 7th, 2007 at 8:55 pmDo something about it or STFU.
November 7th, 2007 at 8:58 pmPerino was right. The testimony was not watered down. That implies diluting it with filler. No, the testimony was in fact, dehydrated. All of the juice and nutrients removed and nothing left but jerky.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:00 pmI’m still trying to figure this one out….what is the proper temperature of the earth?
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 8:55 pm
Well I can understand your dilemna as the complex dynamics of the atmosphere and the hydrosphere are multivarient and best left to those who have invested a lifetime in investigating these interactions. Most of them are very concerned.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:02 pmI suddenly remember Pat Tillman.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:04 pmwhat is the proper temperature of the earth?
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu
Proper for what?
November 7th, 2007 at 9:06 pmI feel bad for the Tillman family but I still prefer the Jessica Lynch fable
November 7th, 2007 at 9:06 pmGod, I love the freedom of hiding things under the ruse of executive privilege.
sarcon
November 7th, 2007 at 9:07 pmwhat is the proper temperature of the earth?
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu
98.6 degrees =)
November 7th, 2007 at 9:08 pmHow in the hell can they claim executive privilege over the issue of global warming?
They are seriously trying to give me a migrane.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:11 pmI read a report from some oil gurus and they say at the current rate and known deposits plus the growing use and declining production, Peak Oil, we have 42 years of oil.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:11 pmWhen we reinforce the Constitution, we need explicit prohibitions against claims of Executive Privilege. All governmentally produced information belongs to the people (except for names and locations of spies, locations of troops, and militarily sensitive information).
Bush’s claims of Privilege are ridiculous.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:16 pmwe have 42 years of oil.
Comment by Xisithrus
That’s too short to learn to walk or use bicycles.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:16 pmGeorge (knowledge is dangerous) Bush strikes another blow against reason. Seriously, how can this possibly be covered by executive privilege? Are temperature readings and atmospheric analysis State Secrets? WTF are you hiding Mr. President.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:17 pmGosh I wish Barbra Boxer was speaker of the house and Russ Feingold was majority leader.
Never doubt that Nancy and Harry are controlled by the powers that be.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:17 pmFrom what I’m told, it’s much warmer than Uranus.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:17 pmexcept for names and locations of spies, locations of troops, and militarily sensitive information.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius
Then there comes a “terrible” threat, a “mighty” foe, an unavoidable war and pum! exec privilege, once again.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:18 pmBush hides lots of things under Executive Privilege, so who knows what stuff he hides about climate-change/global warming.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:20 pmComment by Juan C. — November 7, 2007 @ 9:18 pm
There is no “Executive Privilege” granted in the Constitution (no more than there is a Legislative or Judiciary Privilege). That’s why the prohibition has to be explicit.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:21 pmTRAITOR Bush and his criminals have made a mockery of the US Constitution.
Luckily, when we have a Democratic president, they will be arrested and WATERBOARDED in Gitmo until they DROP DEAD. It’s NOT torture, right?
Then their new MASTER Satan (Darryl’s, too)! can SMASH THEIR FACES IN FOR ETERNITY.
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nutes
November 7th, 2007 at 9:21 pmMarcus, got it.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:27 pmWhere was “executive privilege” when the Bushies outed a covert CIA operative?
It would seem they think they have the right to withhold AND release sensitive data.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:28 pm98.6 degrees =)
As good as any other temp I suppose.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:30 pmLuckily, when we have a Democratic president, they will be arrested and WATERBOARDED in Gitmo until they DROP DEAD. It’s NOT torture, right?
Wouldn’t the democrat president then be guilty of the same crimes you ascribe to the current republican president?
November 7th, 2007 at 9:32 pmFrom what I’m told, it’s much warmer than Uranus.
What is the proper temp of Uranus?
November 7th, 2007 at 9:34 pmwe have 42 years of oil.
Comment by Xisithrus
That’s too short to learn to walk or use bicycles.
Comment by Juan C. — November 7, 2007 @ 9:16 pm
Or figure out how to heat our homes without using wood, coal, natural gas or nuclear power.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:37 pmGosh I wish Barbra Boxer was speaker of the house and Russ Feingold was majority leader.
Careful what you wish for:
Those who survived the San Francisco earthquake said, “Thank God, I’m still alive. But, of course, those who died, their lives will never be the same again.”
November 7th, 2007 at 9:41 pm– Sen. Barbara Boxer, (D, Calif.)
Bush has made clear his dictatorship. He claims that those agencies who are required to report to Congress can only report what the president says to report. Next he will announce prema nocte.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:44 pm“Tear down that wall, Mr. Bushokov”.
Soon to be headline: Bush Waterboards Weather
November 7th, 2007 at 9:44 pmYes, but in this case they would be WARRENTED…..
We MIGHT get them to tell us the TRUTH about 9/11, and that they KNEW at the least that it was coming…
But if waterboarding is torture and torture doesn’t work because the subject will say anything to make it stop, wouldn’t Bush’s testimony while on the board be unreliable?
Torture is torture, no matter who it is applied against, correct? Anyone else with me on this?
November 7th, 2007 at 9:45 pmIn that case, for TREASON, I don’t have a problem with the use of waterboarding on TRAITORS in order to FINALLY get to the truth.
Time to drag John Walker Lindh out of his cell and strap him to the board, the traitor!
November 7th, 2007 at 9:49 pmwe have 42 years of oil.
Comment by Xisithrus
That’s too short to learn to walk or use bicycles.
Comment by Juan C. — November 7, 2007 @ 9:16 pm
Or figure out how to heat our homes without using wood, coal, natural gas or nuclear power.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 9:37 pm
OK, here goes…
In the wake of the second “gas crisis” of 1978, President Carter earmarked money for research for Solar, Fusion, Hydrogen technology and shale oil.
When Traitor Ronnie Reagan (see Iran/Contra) got in from BIG OIL, he wiped out ALL of that funding and gave it to OIL and NUCLEAR…
And the OIL companies own the nuclear.
So, 29 YEARS later, we COULD HAVE HAD independence from OIL, but the OIL COMPANIES, with TRAITORS like Reagan and then the Bush
WAR CRIMINALS wouldn’t ALLOW that to happen. No, no…
Sweden, etc. expect to be OIL-INDEPENDENT in less than 10 years.
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nutes
November 7th, 2007 at 9:49 pmAgreed.
And Libby, too.
The TRAITOR…
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nutes
November 7th, 2007 at 9:50 pm“We would not even need to waterboard Bush, just simply show him the room with the equipment and he would start crying and spill his guts as the panzy a$$ he is…..â€
Alright, I agree to change my statement.
Wouldn’t Bush’s testimony out of fear of torture be unreliable? Would you then agree that prisoners in our custody can be strapped to the board or, at the least, be threatened with waterboarding as long as the actual act itself isn’t committed?
November 7th, 2007 at 9:53 pm“Wouldn’t Bush’s testimony out of fear of torture be unreliable?”
It wouldn’t matter because after decades of substance abuse, nothing that comes out of the chimps mouth could ever be reliable.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:57 pmComment by RemoveBush — November 7, 2007 @ 9:50 pm
Do we have a trial first or is some person to be designated to decide on who exactly fits the bill as traitorous?
Why would the information gained from the torture of a “traitor” be any more credible than that gained from a terrorism suspect? Does the label “traitor” somehow make the person less likely to blab-out lies while strapped to the board?
Please explain.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:57 pmIt wouldn’t matter because after decades of substance abuse, nothing that comes out of the chimps mouth could ever be reliable.
So he would be waterboarded merely to inflict torture?
November 7th, 2007 at 9:58 pm“So he would be waterboarded merely to inflict torture?”
Nope
November 7th, 2007 at 10:00 pmI have to take the opposing(?) view on this one. As much fun as it is to imagine the shrub being subjected to “enhanced interrogation”; Torture is, simply, wrong. Period. End of story.
I do, however, wish and hope that Bushco, all of them, face trial. And, should they be convicted they should be punished to the limit of the law.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:01 pmNO!!!! Most could be confirmed by other people……
Comment by RemoveBush — November 7, 2007 @ 10:00 pm
How do you know that? How do you know what Bush or anyone else would say while being waterboarded?
If you already know that what he says would could be corroborated then you have no need to torture, merely to hold a trial like any other criminal suspect.
If he DIDN’T say anything of note that could be verified through other sources then you have just tortured a man for no reason.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:05 pmhow in the hell did you let a trooll named mookie
November 7th, 2007 at 10:07 pmderail this thread to a stupid argument about torture…
…
“how in the hell did you let a trooll named mookie
derail this thread to a stupid argument about torture”
Now that is a great question!
November 7th, 2007 at 10:11 pmFielding claimed that “the request by its very nature seeks communications involving pre-decisional deliberative materials relating to an inter-agency review process…it is clear that the request implicates core Executive Branch interests and raises separation of powers concerns.â€
damn right there are concerns…
what the hell is going on here???
what a bunch of mumbojumbo… “pre-decisional deliberative”…
it gets scarier every day… the constitution means nothing…
November 7th, 2007 at 10:14 pm…
Comment by RemoveBush — November 7, 2007 @ 10:09 pm
Great, so you are advocating basically an eye for an eye, you want to condemn torture while simultaneously agreeing to inflict it on someone just for the he!l of it.
It is a practice that needs to be condemned and gotten rid of with no exceptions.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:18 pmA January report found 435 instances in which the administration interfered with the work of government climate change scientists over the past five years.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:23 pm.
This thread isn’t about torture, so let’s get back to the real subject.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:24 pm“A January report found 435 instances in which the administration interfered with the work of government climate change scientists over the past five years.”
That in itself is proof that climate change is real.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:26 pmThis thread isn’t about torture, so let’s get back to the real subject.
Comment by troll buster — November 7, 2007 @ 10:24 pm
Agreed. What is the proper temp of the earth, I mean before the economy is destroyed and I get taxed for breathing, what temp are we shooting for?
November 7th, 2007 at 10:33 pm“Agreed. What is the proper temp of the earth, I mean before the economy is destroyed and I get taxed for breathing, what temp are we shooting for?”
That question is too stupid to diignify with an answer.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:36 pmFielding added that he may continue to “withhold documents†in the future and redirected Boxer to Vice President Cheney’s office in regards to Boxer’s “request for vice president records.â€
—————–
They referred her to the office of the administration’s official Dragon.
When asked for the documents, he will probably mumble under his breath that they’re safely tucked away in his safe….and that’ll be the end of that.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:36 pmDoctored reports and fake press conferences. All in a days work for the Potemkin President.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:38 pmThat question is too stupid to diignify with an answer.
Comment by troll buster — November 7, 2007 @ 10:36 pm
Then lets try another one, since it is solutions that everyone is looking for: how do we know when global warming is no longer a problem?
November 7th, 2007 at 10:39 pmwell, preserving the secrecy of the decision-making process is vital to national security–because if the terrorists only knew how venal and stupid the leadership of this nation is, they’d be dancing in the streets with joy.
(Osama Bin Laden, of course, knows it all already.)
November 7th, 2007 at 10:39 pm“Then lets try another one, since it is solutions that everyone is looking for: how do we know when global warming is no longer a problem?”
That is even dumber than the last question. Why can’t we get a better quality troll on T.P.?
November 7th, 2007 at 10:46 pmIs it my imagination or does the new troll smell a lot like Mr. P?
November 7th, 2007 at 10:48 pmIs it my imagination or does the new troll smell a lot like Mr. P?
Comment by troll buster — November 7, 2007 @ 10:48 pm
It doesn’t smell like teen spirit, that’s for sure.
You have a good nose.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:50 pmThis thread isn’t about torture, so let’s get back to the real subject.
Comment by troll buster — November 7, 2007 @ 10:24 pm
Agreed. What is the proper temp of the earth, I mean before the economy is destroyed and I get taxed for breathing, what temp are we shooting for?
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 10:33
pm
First, one must understand the difference between heat and temperature. The, misnamed, Global Warming issue is about HEAT. Heat, is the measure of energy expressed, in America, in BTU.
The greenhouse effect is stated, simply, as: a thickening of the atmosphere results in a larger amount of retained heat. This may, or may not, result in increased temps.
Other factors, in global climate change, include; cloud cover and replacing forests, plains, icecaps and even deserts with; concrete, asphalt and, at the poles, open water. All of these things absorb more heat.
All of this information is readily available and, despite the ravings of energy industry shills, is not in dispute. Yet, the Bush administration is concealing the conclusions of experts. Why?
And, once again, HOW THE HECK CAN HE CLAIM EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE FOR NON-STRATEGIC INFORMATION?
The most likely explanation is that the truth is worse than we feared and the policies of the right wing have made it worser still. (Sorry, when one discusses idiots…)
So, to answer your question, we are not shooting for a particular temp. What we need to accomplish is to restore the rate of heat retention to it’s former value. A value which was remarkably constant for, at least 800,000 years, notwithstanding brief “ice ages”.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:53 pmComment by pete — November 7, 2007 @ 10:53 pm
Oops! I forgot the Psyco-Christians, like Bush, who believe “God will fix it”. Which is, of course, stupid to the point of insanity.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:56 pmFor them, there is NOTHING that is beyond limits to be performed on them for their destruction of this country, the Constitution, and their TREASONIST acts.
Sorry to continue the OT.
Alright then, if nothing is off limits then why stop at waterboarding? If we are going to torture someone just for torture then why not move on to the really bad stuff such as burning, amputating, skinning, breaking on the wheel, etc. etc.?
If no one volunteers to do the torture, will you step forward?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:08 pmWe just can’t seem to stop questining this can we? Bush is king. That’s it. He is royal and can do whatever he wants, to whomever he wants, regarding whatever he wants, whenever he wants - for no discernible reason except that he wants it. Period. End.
It’s time for torches and pitchforks, folks.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:11 pm“If no one volunteers to do the torture, will you step forward?”
Please stick to the subject of this thread or move on.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:12 pmSo, to answer your question, we are not shooting for a particular temp. What we need to accomplish is to restore the rate of heat retention to it’s former value. A value which was remarkably constant for, at least 800,000 years, notwithstanding brief “ice agesâ€.
Thanks, so how do we restore the rate of heat retention to its former value without destroying the economies of the world?
The Kyoto Protocol certainly won’t succeed so will it be necessary to implement more drastic measures?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:14 pmPlease stick to the subject of this thread or move on.
Comment by troll buster — November 7, 2007 @ 11:12 pm
You forgot to include RemoveBush in your request, a minor oversight I’m sure.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:15 pmThe Kyoto Protocol certainly won’t succeed becuase the Bush administration did ratify it.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:16 pmOK, who said this:
The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society;
and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret
societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long
ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of
pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify
it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a
closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today,
there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our
traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that
an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those
anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official
censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the
extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration,
whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should
interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to
stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press
and the public the facts they deserve to know.
No, it wasn’t Bush… (yeah, like he’d say that!)
November 7th, 2007 at 11:17 pmcorrection: The Kyoto Protocol certainly won’t succeed because the Bush administration did NOT ratify it.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:19 pmIt’s time for torches and pitchforks, folks.
Comment by Marie — November 7, 2007 @ 11:11 pm
We can meet up your house so you can lead the way, or is this merely more soapbox ranting and then off to bed? Take charge or quit advocating.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:19 pm“I don’t recognize the speech.”
JFK
November 7th, 2007 at 11:22 pmWhy can’t we get a better quality troll on T.P.?
Comment by troll buster — November 7, 2007 @ 10:46 pm
why can’t it just be IGNORED?
eh?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:25 pmThanks, so how do we restore the rate of heat retention to its former value without destroying the economies of the world?
That is unclear, however, we can try: reduced consumption through more efficient fuel use, investment in alternative energy, population control, low impact agriculture and a host of others.
I don’t think any of these would harm anything but the short term profits of the fossil fuel industry. In fact, it will create new industries and may even return manufacturing jobs to our shores. But, none of this can/will happen without breaking our insane addiction to excess.
Now, MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu, I have a question. What in the world would motivate this administration to claim climate studies are covered by “executive privilege”? For the life of me, all I can assume is that they are hiding info that damages their credibility.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:25 pmAnd this:
I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers–I
welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors;
for as a wise man once said: “An error does not become a mistake until
you refuse to correct it.” We intend to accept full responsibility for
our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.
Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no
November 7th, 2007 at 11:26 pmcountry can succeed–and no republic can survive. That is why the
Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink
from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First
Amendment– the only business in America specifically protected by the
Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize
the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply “give the public what
it wants”–but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers
and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to
lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.
How do YOU know????
There are only 2 or 3 countries who have not signed it……
Care to guess which one of those countries might be?????
Because the Kyoto Protocol, if fulfilled by every signatory, would reduce global warming by 0.07 degrees Celsius per half-century.
That’s too small to measure because the earth’s temperature varies by more than that from year to year.
Yes, the United States is one of the non-signers but other polluters (including the biggest-China) are not required to adhere to it as they have been labeled “developing economies”. Other signers cheat the system or buy credits from nations which have almost no real industry.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:26 pmI’m still trying to figure this one out….what is the proper temperature of the earth?
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 8:55 pm
I can see they’ve let the b!!!tch RORY back on under yet another name.
TP, can you please remove this troll and her droppings?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:28 pmDing Ding Ding, we have a winnah. #80 Wins the stuffed Chimp..err, Teddy Bear.
It was a speech JFK gave to the American Newspaper Publishers Association, at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in NY on April 27, 1961
The text and audio can be found here:
http://www.jfklibrary.org/ Historical+Resources/ Archives/ Reference+Desk/ Speeches/ JFK/ 003POF03NewspaperPublishers04271961.htm
Thought it was appropriate since Executive Privilege (i.e., secrecy) is so prominent now.
Really miss JFK. It would be interesting to hear his thoughts on Bush43 and where we’re going now. Talk about prescient…
T
November 7th, 2007 at 11:31 pmThat is unclear, however, we can try: reduced consumption through more efficient fuel use, investment in alternative energy, population control, low impact agriculture and a host of others.
It would be difficult to invest in alternate energy sources when those viable sources either require us to burn our food supply, produce nuclear waste or generally piss-off those who would thwart such efforts. I’m with you on the premise, but having it happen within the window which we have been told is closing fast seems unrealistic.
The term “population control” is a bit stickier and bit scarier, images of Chinese agents forcing abortions on women come to mind.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:31 pmBecause the Kyoto Protocol, if fulfilled by every signatory, would reduce global warming by 0.07 degrees Celsius per half-century. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:26 pm
Really? SAYS WHO? Care to cite a SCIENTIFIC RESOURCE? Compared to WHAT BASELINE? Current values, or PROJECTED ONES BASED ON PRE-EXISTING GROWTH CURVES?
That’s too small to measure because the earth’s temperature varies by more than that from year to year. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:26 pm
And your POST is too irrelevant to DEBATE, because it’s CRAP, the SAME STUFF YOU ARE MADE OF!
Yes, the United States is one of the non-signers but other polluters (including the biggest-China) are not required to adhere to it as they have been labeled “developing economiesâ€. Other signers cheat the system or buy credits from nations which have almost no real industry.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:26 pm
So now CHINA is your EXAMPLE TO FOLLOW? Wow, you really are ‘tarded!
November 7th, 2007 at 11:31 pmWe can meet up your house so you can lead the way, or is this merely more soapbox ranting and then off to bed? Take charge or quit advocating.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
When you enlist you can talk like that and have some standing. In the meantime, you’re just a pansy coward erecting straw men that are knocked down in record time. Just another wingnut loser, with nothing but air for brains and a handful of morons beside you to continue defending the lies and treason of the worst president in American history. Waterborading, by the way, would be superb punishment and very educational for those who advocate its use. Or any other form of torture, for that matter. That includes most of the Bush administration. It’s not about confessions, it’s about justice, an unfortunately foreign concept to rightards. You’re such a loser.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:32 pmwhy can’t it just be IGNORED?
eh?
Another good question.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:32 pmIt would be difficult to invest in alternate energy sources when those viable sources either require us to burn our food supply, produce nuclear waste or generally piss-off those who would thwart such efforts. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:31 pm
WRONG, WRONG and WRONG.
I’m with you on the premise, but having it happen within the window which we have been told is closing fast seems unrealistic. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:31 pm
Well, as long as you WINGNUTS BLOCK PROGRESS, that COULD be true! So GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY!
The term “population control†is a bit stickier and bit scarier, images of Chinese agents forcing abortions on women come to mind.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:31 pm
Or, maybe EDUCATING WOMEN, something YOU COULD HAVE USED!
November 7th, 2007 at 11:33 pmWe can meet up your house so you can lead the way, or is this merely more soapbox ranting and then off to bed? Take charge or quit advocating.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
And WHAT EXACTLY have YOU taken charge of, other than playing CHIEF WHINER?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:33 pmNow, MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu, I have a question. What in the world would motivate this administration to claim climate studies are covered by “executive privilege� For the life of me, all I can assume is that they are hiding info that damages their credibility.
I suppose I would conclude the same thing, though the more intricate machinations behind such concepts as ‘executive priviledge’ are beyond my ability or want to really care about.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:35 pmI suppose I would conclude the same thing, though the more intricate machinations behind such concepts as ‘executive priviledge’ are beyond my ability or want to really care about.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:35 pm
ANY MACHINATIONS are BEYOND YOUR ABILITY to THINK ABOUT, as for what you CARE ABOUT, if you’re as STUPID AND SELFISH as MOST REPUBLICANS - it’s probably ONLY ABOUT YOUR PERSONAL TAXES! RIGHT B!!!TCH?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:37 pmI suppose I would conclude the same thing, though the more intricate machinations behind such concepts as ‘executive priviledge’ are beyond my ability or want to really care about.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:35 pm
Pretty much all anyone needs to know about the “patriotism” of wingnut tools. Either too lazy or too stupid to understand the concepts America was founded on. Typical.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:38 pmAnd WHAT EXACTLY have YOU taken charge of, other than playing CHIEF WHINER?
My own life, as far as government intrusion allows me at this point. I guess I’m just one of those guys who gets really tired of the chants about revolution from people who enjoy the opportunity and excess that the country provides.
Quit yelling about torches and pitchforks if you aren’t willing to lead the pack, torch in hand.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:38 pmEither too lazy or too stupid to understand the concepts America was founded on. Typical.
I volunteer myself as too lazy; I have better things to do than try to understand the small details which politicians use to make their case about anything. Too much of it tends to be a chest-puffing contest about who has more authority over this or that.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:41 pmThanks, so how do we restore the rate of heat retention to its former value without destroying the economies of the world?
The Kyoto Protocol certainly won’t succeed so will it be necessary to implement more drastic measures?
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:14 pm
———————
By following the example of CIVILIZED and rich countries such as Norway which will be free of carbon emissions in a few years. They follow the advice of their scientists and do not censor them. They know that doing nothing about carbon emissions will be worse for the world’s economy in the long run.
And please, do not come back with your childish question about temperature. You’ve already been taught the difference between temperature and heat balance. Don’t let your poor retention of facts show.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:44 pmMy own life, as far as government intrusion allows me at this point. I guess I’m just one of those guys who gets really tired of the chants about revolution from people who enjoy the opportunity and excess that the country provides. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:38 pm
OK, so you’ve learned how to be a JUVENILE, when do you plan to BECOME AN ADULT and extend your concern to OTHERS? That’s what HUMAN BEINGS DO - YOU SHOULD TRY TO BECOME ONE!
Quit yelling about torches and pitchforks if you aren’t willing to lead the pack, torch in hand.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:38 pm
Then perhaps you WINGNUTS should STOP WHINING about how the COUNTRY IS BEING DESTROYED? Otherwise your HYPOCRISY is just GRATING and ANNOYING!
OK? Torch B!!!tch?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:45 pmThe term “population control†is a bit stickier and bit scarier, images of Chinese agents forcing abortions on women come to mind.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:31 pm
Agreed, it’s a scary concept. And none of the other options are cheap or easy. However, doing nothing, or willfully worsening the situation, aren’t great options either. Personally, I’m more concerned with all the synthetic chemicals we are spewing out. There are lots of new (50 years or less) compounds which could have unforeseen effects. We simply don’t know what they can do.
And I still can’t figure out how concealing data, behind “executive privilege”, helps anyone.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:45 pmANY MACHINATIONS are BEYOND YOUR ABILITY to THINK ABOUT, as for what you CARE ABOUT, if you’re as STUPID AND SELFISH as MOST REPUBLICANS - it’s probably ONLY ABOUT YOUR PERSONAL TAXES! RIGHT B!!!TCH?
Comment by republicans hate facts — November 7, 2007 @ 11:37 pm
Still with the anger problem, what gives?
Yes, for me it is about my personal taxes and government intrusion into my life. I don’t care who marries who, what religion you belong to, how you dress or who decide to sleep with, just get out of my life and quit taxing every single thing I do.
Protect me and my family, pave the roads and provide a police force (among other things) and I will happily pay for it; quit taxing me when I get married, quit taxing me for a social benefit that I will never receive and quit taxing me for my habits.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:47 pmAccording to the Pentagon (those crazy left-wing kooks) the greatest threat in the future is from wars over water and food, and the hundreds of millions of refugees due to GLOBAL WARMING.
Global warming increases the number and severity of hurricanes (Do you remember the loss of New Orleans?), the number of wildfires, and droughts (Atlanta may actually be out of water in 75 days).
Do you have the want or ability to care about such intricate machinations behind such concepts, Mookie?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:48 pmComment by pete — November 7, 2007 @ 11:45 pm
Agreed, open the books and have an honest debate about it, there can’t be any national security tripwires in a report like this.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:50 pmToo much of it tends to be a chest-puffing contest about who has more authority over this or that.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:41 pm
So, no different from the garbage you post and the greed and selfishness you espouse. Got it.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:50 pmAgreed, open the books and have an honest debate about it, there can’t be any national security tripwires in a report like this.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:50 pm
Republicans have an HONEST DEBATE? Sorry, but I think I might just die laughing at the improbability of this EVER happening!!!! BAHAAHAHAHAHAA
November 7th, 2007 at 11:54 pmProtect me and my family, pave the roads and provide a police force (among other things) and I will happily pay for it; quit taxing me when I get married, quit taxing me for a social benefit that I will never receive and quit taxing me for my habits.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:47 pm
Shorter Mookie: It’s all about me!
Who do you think pays for your community college classes?
But, seriously, it really isn’t about you at all. It’s about what’s good for the entire society, for the entire species, for the entire planet. Your petty whining about getting married (as if!) and your family (ha!) are only evidence of your self-obsession.
Seek professional help. The universe really doesn’t revolve around you, no matter how much you try to make it so.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:56 pmStill with the anger problem, what gives? Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:47 pm
Still the PROJECTIONS!!! YAWN!!!
Yes, for me it is about my personal taxes and government intrusion into my life. I don’t care who marries who, what religion you belong to, how you dress or who decide to sleep with, just get out of my life and quit taxing every single thing I do. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:47 pm
Ah, an ANARCHIST, otherwise described as a RON PAUL LIBERTARIAN!
Protect me and my family, pave the roads and provide a police force (among other things) and I will happily pay for it; quit taxing me when I get married, quit taxing me for a social benefit that I will never receive and quit taxing me for my habits.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:47 pm
How do you plan to pay for all of those INFRASTRUCTURE issues without those taxes? You don’t receive a SOCIAL BENEFIT for your FELLOW MAN NOT DYING or BEING SICK?
Like I said, try becoming an ADULT some day, poor little ‘tard!
November 7th, 2007 at 11:56 pmI believe in giving credit where credit is due. Interspersed with the mud-slinging, Mookie and I have had a nice, civil, discussion. Perhaps we have even learned something?
If this country, and the human race, are to survive we need to reduce the widening gap between ideologies. I think it’s fair to say that extremism is driven by people who do NOT have our best interests at heart. We all need to start concentrating on our similarities rather than our differences.
And, on that note, I bid you all G’night.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:58 pmGlobal warming increases the number and severity of hurricanes (Do you remember the loss of New Orleans?), the number of wildfires, and droughts (Atlanta may actually be out of water in 75 days).
There were less hurricanes last year than the year Katrina occurred, not to mention this year also, and New Orleans almost died because of a failed levee system designed to protect a city that has always been below sea level. Part of the flooding problem also had to do with the destruction (by human development) of the wetlands which historically slowed down tidal surges.
Wildfires weren’t even on the radar until the recent Cali fires and then everyone seemed to jump, ignoring the forest detritus which eco-groups have lobbied to save from thinning practices and were the main cause of the fire’s severity.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:58 pmGood night pete, thanks for the decent convo.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:00 amComment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:58 pm
you packed a lot of lies into that post, mook. A good handful. Nice to see that rightards still adhere to the lowest possible standard.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:05 amAh, an ANARCHIST, otherwise described as a RON PAUL LIBERTARIAN!
No, an anarchist would believe in no government or law whatsoever, obviously you didn’t read the rest of my post.
Whoop, wait, maybe you did read the post:
How do you plan to pay for all of those INFRASTRUCTURE issues without those taxes?
Ok maybe you read the post but didn’t comprehend the words. You must have missed the part (even though you italicized it) where I said I would happily pay for the infrastructure but I don’t want to be taxed unneccesarily for failed programs, taxed regressively or taxed for bridges to nowhere and hippy museums.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:07 amMookie, just because the graph of hurricane number and severity is not going perfectly straight up, does not mean it is not going up due to global warming.
Under your very limited government, money does not get spent on New Orleans levee repair/maintenance; and wetlands do not get protected from development. Those are liberalism. Holland does not have a problem with being below sea level.
Your sentence on the wildfires is totally false. They have been increasing in number and severity for years. Eco-groups are not running the country—conservatives are!
November 8th, 2007 at 12:10 amProtect me and my family, pave the roads and provide a police force (among other things) and I will happily pay for it; quit taxing me when I get married, quit taxing me for a social benefit that I will never receive and quit taxing me for my habits.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:47 pm
————
How about borrowing money from foreign countries to wage war? Or do you think those should also be charged to the national credit card?
If the social benefit you’re referring to is Social Security and Medicare, it has been falsely claimed that the system is broke as part of the campaign to privatize the system.
After this president has squandered away 3 trillion dollars in taxbreaks for the rich, it will be more difficult to balance the books but it can be done, as long as it is not left in the hands of the proponents of Darwinian economics who hate the Roosevelt legacy and would like instead to live according to the law of “survival of the fittest”.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:18 amMookie, do you know more than the Pentagon study, or was it done by left-wing tin-foil hat, eco-kooks?
November 8th, 2007 at 12:18 amNo, an anarchist would believe in no government or law whatsoever, obviously you didn’t read the rest of my post. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:07 am
Well what you described is pretty close to that!
Ok maybe you read the post but didn’t comprehend the words. You must have missed the part (even though you italicized it) where I said I would happily pay for the infrastructure but I don’t want to be taxed unneccesarily for failed programs, taxed regressively or taxed for bridges to nowhere and hippy museums.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:07 am
You really don’t understand how DEMOCRACY works do you? See, in a CIVIL SOCIETY sometimes you pay taxes for things you DON’T USE, just like people that don’t generally ride in freeways or take planes or go on boats or use infrastructure that they pay for that YOU probably use!
See, that’s the problem with you being able to OPT OUT of CIVIL SERVICES, the CHEAP STUPID SELFISH PEOPLE like you would rather live in a THIRD WORLD COUNTRY with MINIMAL GOVERNMENT. May I suggest that you MOVE to one of them? I hear IRAQ fits your needs quite nicely!
November 8th, 2007 at 12:19 amWildfires weren’t even on the radar until the recent Cali fires and then everyone seemed to jump, ignoring the forest detritus which eco-groups have lobbied to save from thinning practices and were the main cause of the fire’s severity.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 7, 2007 @ 11:58 pm
Actually it was largely URBANIZATION that cause these fires to be so constructive - and that was in fact something the environmentalists fought. The same folks you CLAIM are ALL POWERFUL - ah the irony!
November 8th, 2007 at 12:20 amMookie, just because the graph of hurricane number and severity is not going perfectly straight up, does not mean it is not going up due to global warming.
Nor does it mean global warming is the cause.
Under your very limited government, money does not get spent on New Orleans levee repair/maintenance; and wetlands do not get protected from development. Those are liberalism. Holland does not have a problem with being below sea level.
Read it again, I will happily pay for infrastructure and there would be more money for such things and less taxes on me if we weren’t spending the money on useless bridges, hippy museums and empty buildings named after the politicians who provide the money to build it. Those costs are liberal and conservative, hand in hand at the trough.
Holland survives because they have always fought the sea, they have literally nowhere to run. New Orleans ignored its tenuous grip and developed the marshland which has, since time immemorial, served as a buffer against the sea. Combine that with an improper levee system and the clock was ticking on its demise.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:25 amYour sentence on the wildfires is totally false. They have been increasing in number and severity for years. Eco-groups are not running the country—conservatives are!
The areas which survived the worst of the fires were those who had the foresight to thin out the fallen timber and brush which eco groups sought to thwart. The California Dept. of Forestry even admitted that such debris was a major contributor to the severity and size of the fires.
Throw in the Santa Ana winds which have ALWAYS been there and you have the disaster which were the recent fires.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:28 amGlobal warming is happening. It raises sea temperatures. This increases the severity of hurricanes. There is no ifs, ands, nor buts about it.
There are records kept of acreage lost due to fires. It has been greatly increasing before the latest in California. Eco groups are not in control.
There are records kept of rainfall. The US is quickly heading for serious trouble. It’s not going to be forty years down the road. Again, Atlanta may actually be out of water in 75 days.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:32 amActually it was largely URBANIZATION that cause these fires to be so constructive - and that was in fact something the environmentalists fought. The same folks you CLAIM are ALL POWERFUL - ah the irony!
Do forest and wildfires normally start and spread in urban areas? Why do we not see regular reports of wildfires burning their way through Chicago or Detroit?
The houses and neighborhoods that survived fires which spread all around them were those that took steps to thin the forest of dead trees and brush prior to the fires. Nature has always taken its own hand in doing just that; forest and wildfires are normally natural occurrences in which all that dead stuff is burned away.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:34 amThe areas which survived the worst of the fires were those who had the foresight to thin out the fallen timber and brush which eco groups sought to thwart. The California Dept. of Forestry even admitted that such debris was a major contributor to the severity and size of the fires. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:28 am
Link? Shall we also find their references that showed unchecked development also caused the fire problems - despite environmentalists’ warning?
Throw in the Santa Ana winds which have ALWAYS been there and you have the disaster which were the recent fires.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:28 am
And building homes in DANGEROUS areas were in fact forecast by environmentalists to be likely to experience just such a disaster!
It takes a GOP LIAR to turn a situation that Environmentalists warned would happen, into an excuse to blame them! Tisk Tisk, you are one dishonest little girl!
November 8th, 2007 at 12:34 amComment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:28 am
More lies. the eco groups sought to thwart Bush’s rape of the land by turning it over to logging companies for pennies on the dollar. You are one simpleton.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:34 amDo forest and wildfires normally start and spread in urban areas? Why do we not see regular reports of wildfires burning their way through Chicago or Detroit? Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:34 am
Do environmentalists have the power to not prevent development but to control the after affects? You’re post is idiotic!
Neither Chicago nor Detroit gets 2 inches a year in rain, and Chicago burned down multiple times without any greenery to speak of!
The houses and neighborhoods that survived fires which spread all around them were those that took steps to thin the forest of dead trees and brush prior to the fires. Nature has always taken its own hand in doing just that; forest and wildfires are normally natural occurrences in which all that dead stuff is burned away.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:34 am
Like I said, SHOW YOUR LINKS where the ENVIRONMENTALISTS BLOCKED CLEARING? You’ve confused the CLEAR SKIES (COUGH) PROPAGANDA with SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MIGHTY APHRODITE!
November 8th, 2007 at 12:37 amComment by Keith — November 8, 2007 @ 12:32 am
Yes, I agree it is happening but to what extent human involvement is to blame is the argument, and what to do about it.
If you believe the doomsayers, we have ten years to radically change just about everything, the problem is that we heard such things ten years ago and if true today, we couldn’t do a fracking thing in ten years to save ourselves anyway.
Adhering to Kyoto won’t make a difference and cutting ourselves off from oil will collapse the global economy.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:40 amAll rolled up in one post.
Mookie, not only would I start the parade with the pitchfork, I would have you prominantly impaled on its end.
As for Bush and Waterboarding. I would be MORE than happy to perform it on any of the mofos in the cabal, and the purpose would be to DOCUMENT (scientific terms, be careful) the EXTENT that waterboarding is UNSUCCESSFUL. You know get him (them) to admit to and and everything. JFK murder (oops Pappy did that), Help the Nazis (oops Grad Pappy did that) Shoot Ronnie Raygun (oops Pappy did that through family friend) Oh man what can we get them to inapporpropriately give testimony to, AHHH I Got it, that they Edumacated you. There you go, THAT will be our halmark admittance.
As for understanding Wether we SHOULD or SHOULD not do anything about Global Climate change (by the way please explain how the earth is supposed to handle 7 billion humans, since it HAS NEVER HAD THAT MANY ON ITS FACE BEFORE?) Try reading a book, other than the weekly reader given out in current events, and even if you watch some youtube you can see that it is evident, that ANYONE with a smattering of interest for even their own family, recognizes that SOMETHING must be done, because the RISK associated with doing NOTHING is TOO BIG.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:45 amhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF_anaVcCXg
Yes, I agree it is happening but to what extent human involvement is to blame is the argument, and what to do about it. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:40 am
The IPCC already laid out the roadmap, the problem is that you GOP HACKS are OBSTRUCTING PROGRESS!
If you believe the doomsayers, we have ten years to radically change just about everything, the problem is that we heard such things ten years ago and if true today, we couldn’t do a fracking thing in ten years to save ourselves anyway. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:40 am
We have? Were they from the SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY? Where did we hear 10 years ago that we only have 10 years to RADICALLY CHANGE?
You spout a lot of sh!!!t, but you never back up your lunatic fringe outrageous claims with facts. As is typical of the flat earthers!
Adhering to Kyoto won’t make a difference and cutting ourselves off from oil will collapse the global economy.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:40 am
You sound like the whiners that complained about industrialization and AUTOMOBILES! You’re a FOOL!
November 8th, 2007 at 12:57 amDo environmentalists have the power to not prevent development but to control the after affects?
Yes and yes. Eco groups routinely sue cities and states from developing, witness ANWR. They prevented logging companies from harvesting the dead trees and wood debris from forested areas, claiming it was nature’s way, except that nature uses fire to do the same thing and the results were catastrophic by human measures.
Neither Chicago nor Detroit gets 2 inches a year in rain, and Chicago burned down multiple times without any greenery to speak of!
When was the last time Chicago burned? If you said 1871 then you are correct. That’s “18″71, when most of Chicago was made of…you guessed it…rickety wooden tenaments and row buildings. Real urbanization, i.e. paved roads and permanent hard-slab buildings, put an end to such possible natural conflagrations.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:58 amLike I said, SHOW YOUR LINKS where the ENVIRONMENTALISTS BLOCKED CLEARING?
This is a GAO report.
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=12401
November 8th, 2007 at 1:00 amYes and yes. Eco groups routinely sue cities and states from developing, witness ANWR. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:58 am
FROM DEVELOPING, I’m still waiting for when and how the environmentalists prevented the cleanup you claim.
Please CITE A LINK, or STFU liar.
They prevented logging companies from harvesting the dead trees and wood debris from forested areas, claiming it was nature’s way, except that nature uses fire to do the same thing and the results were catastrophic by human measures. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:58 am
You’re saying that there are FORESTS in MALIBU that COULD BE LOGGED?
BAHAHA, you are one STUPID HACK!
When was the last time Chicago burned? If you said 1871 then you are correct. That’s “18″71, when most of Chicago was made of…you guessed it…rickety wooden tenaments and row buildings. Real urbanization, i.e. paved roads and permanent hard-slab buildings, put an end to such possible natural conflagrations. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 12:58 am
Probably because the have a FUNDED FIRE DEPARTMENT, unlike San Diego that’s SO FULL OF ANTI-TAX REPUBLICANS (I’m guessing you live there based on your 1-track stupidity), so the fire department is so UNDERFUNDED it has to rely on bake sales!
THANKS FOR PROVING MY POINT, LOSER GIRL!
November 8th, 2007 at 1:01 amLike I said, SHOW YOUR LINKS where the ENVIRONMENTALISTS BLOCKED CLEARING?
This is a GAO report.
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=12401
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:00 am
Those are links to FORESTS, like I said, what FORESTS HAVE LOGGING IN MALIBU?
BHAAHA, you are one STUPID little b!!!TCH!
November 8th, 2007 at 1:02 amHere’s a RELEVANT and TOPICAL link for you, stupid.
http://cms.firehouse.com/ web/ online/ News/ Report-Said-Underfunded-Public-Safety-Heightens-San-Diegos-Fire-Risk/ 4656885
Turns out that the ANTI-TAX REPUBLICANS are largely responsible for the out of control fires, not the environmentalists!
TRUTH HAS A LIBERAL BIAS, so it’s expected you would lie!
November 8th, 2007 at 1:04 amThe IPCC already laid out the roadmap, the problem is that you GOP HACKS are OBSTRUCTING PROGRESS!
What, Kyoto? Sorry it won’t work. Nor will such dreams as wind energy because “GOP HACKS” such as Ted Kennedy won’t allow any windfarms where they will do the most good, especially when they block his view.
We have? Were they from the SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY? Where did we hear 10 years ago that we only have 10 years to RADICALLY CHANGE?
I guess it depends on what you view as the scientific community; Al Gore is preaching the same ten year window today (actually two years ago which means we are down to eight), do you believe him?
You sound like the whiners that complained about industrialization and AUTOMOBILES! You’re a FOOL!
You don’t really know anything about this subject, do you?
November 8th, 2007 at 1:06 amAnd then we have this little FACT, poor stupid little girl.
This summer, the Republican mayor, Jerry Sanders, tried to slash the number of brush clearance officers to two, in a city that covers 330 square miles. On Oct. 22, all of San Diego’s fire engines were outside the city fighting the wildfires, save one. Before the arrival of large-scale relief from the outside, putting out a grease fire in a downtown restaurant would have seriously strained city resources.
Another ANTI-TAX republican from the party that REFUSES ANY PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ANTI-TAX VALUES!
November 8th, 2007 at 1:07 amWhat, Kyoto? Sorry it won’t work. Nor will such dreams as wind energy because “GOP HACKS†such as Ted Kennedy won’t allow any windfarms where they will do the most good, especially when they block his view. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:06 am
Sorry, I said IPCC, and specifically it was released this year. I’m not surprised you’re ignorant of this.
I guess it depends on what you view as the scientific community; Al Gore is preaching the same ten year window today (actually two years ago which means we are down to eight), do you believe him? Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:06 am
You said TEN YEARS AGO, where’s your link, or are you LYING AGAIN?
I’ll take your LACK OF LINKS as an ADMISSION OF YOUR GUILT.
You don’t really know anything about this subject, do you?
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:06 am
Funny coming from you!
November 8th, 2007 at 1:09 amComment by republicans hate facts — November 8, 2007 @ 1:02 am
I provide the facts, you dismiss them as propaganda, most likely because you can’t understand them though that itself is very understandable.
Turns out that the ANTI-TAX REPUBLICANS are largely responsible for the out of control fires, not the environmentalists!
Sorry but the fires would not have been nearly as severe if it weren’t for the piles of debris that the eco groups wouldn’t allow to be harvested. Perhaps if San Diego didn’t have to pay for backward liberal programs like illegal immigrant welfare, it might have more money to devote to the real needs of the city.
November 8th, 2007 at 1:14 amThis is a GAO report.
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=12401
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu
UH excuse me. The link you provided WAS NOT A GOA report. It was a poor LIE of a supposed summary of a fictitious GAO report. Event the search hint at the bottom of your stupid link, leads back to the same posting, not to the GAO report as promised.
November 8th, 2007 at 1:18 amBut then taking it even further and GOING to GAO and searching for the MAY 15, 2003 report, we find NONE that match.
http://www.gao.gov/ docsearch/ app_processform.php?app_id=docdblite_date&page=All
So, once again MORE PROOF that you are FULL OF SHIIT!
I provide the facts, you dismiss them as propaganda, most likely because you can’t understand them though that itself is very understandable. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:14 am
Sorry, but the only FACT you posted was one about FORESTS, and MALIBU doesn’t qualify or even RELATE to that. So no you CAN’T and DIDN’T provide FACTS.
Sorry but the fires would not have been nearly as severe if it weren’t for the piles of debris that the eco groups wouldn’t allow to be harvested. Perhaps if San Diego didn’t have to pay for backward liberal programs like illegal immigrant welfare, it might have more money to devote to the real needs of the city.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:14 am
BAHAHAHA, so now you excuse your UNWILLINGNESS TO TAX on OTHERS!!! Like I said NO PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY!!!!
You F***KErs first blame people from preventing you to remove debris, and when I point out it was not because of the environmentalists but your CHEAPNESS, you don’t acknowledge your LIE, and you turn it into a WHINY LITTLE RANT about ILLEGALS! Sorry, but it’s YOUR PRIORITIES, the Mayor is GOP - so it’s YOUR FAULT - LYING GIRL!
November 8th, 2007 at 1:18 amSo, once again MORE PROOF that you are FULL OF SHIIT!
Comment by Bush is a TRAITOR — November 8, 2007 @ 1:18 am
Not surprising she’d use heartland, they’re one of the MOST DISHONEST of the GOP PROPAGANDA OUTLETS!
November 8th, 2007 at 1:20 amSorry, I said IPCC, and specifically it was released this year. I’m not surprised you’re ignorant of this.
Sorry, you said GOP HACKS. Do you have a problem remembering your own words? Perhaps a glass of water would help? Take a break if you need to, I’ll understand.
November 8th, 2007 at 1:22 amSorry but the fires would not have been nearly as severe if it weren’t for the piles of debris that the eco groups wouldn’t allow to be harvested. Perhaps if San Diego didn’t have to pay for backward liberal programs like illegal immigrant welfare, it might have more money to devote to the real needs of the city.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:14 am
Sorry but that’s your typical bullshit. Nobody was tasked with clearing the dead debris, ever. that’s another straw man, burned to a crisp. Logging old-growth areas was the real reason, for pennies on the dollar. We’re not as stupid and gullible as you, so give it up.
November 8th, 2007 at 1:22 amOH and BTW, BUSH IS STILL A TRAITOR AND USES EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE WAYYY BEYOND THE TERMS SET BY THE “ACTIVIST JUDGES” GAVE HIM THE POWER IN THE FIRST PLACE.
And BTW, who gives the Corporation ANY of their rights?
November 8th, 2007 at 1:23 amHint: it isn’t the constitution.
Yup you guessed it ACTIVIST JUDGES.
Where is my can of Troll-be-gone?
November 8th, 2007 at 1:27 amGotta get me a backup.
Sorry, you said GOP HACKS. Do you have a problem remembering your own words? Perhaps a glass of water would help? Take a break if you need to, I’ll understand.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:22 am
But you ARE A GOP HACK, WTF does this piece of sh!!!t post even supposed to mean? It’s illogical and rambling, take a break if you need it, I’ll understand little girl! After all you did come here unprepared to debate! You posted the wrong link, to an irrelevant post, that referenced materials that don’t exist - and you didn’t even aware that your own Mayor was the one responsible for the thing you blamed others on.
Poor little girl, how embarrassing it is to be you and be that stupid!
November 8th, 2007 at 1:27 amYou F***KErs first blame people from preventing you to remove debris, and when I point out it was not because of the environmentalists but your CHEAPNESS, you don’t acknowledge your LIE, and you turn it into a WHINY LITTLE RANT about ILLEGALS! Sorry, but it’s YOUR PRIORITIES, the Mayor is GOP - so it’s YOUR FAULT - LYING GIRL!
Logging companies pay for the priviledge of removing the timber or they do it for free because they WANT the wood…ya see the logging industry sells the wood to paper mills and such…and the paper mills make paper products…ah, its capitalism, you wouldn’t understand.
And getting back to my tax stand, as I’m sure you have already forgotten, I am willing to pay for infrastructure but not for hippy museums and certainly not to provide free healthcare to every illegal that manages to squirm across the border.
Hint: illegal means “illegal”. Oh sorry, I forgot who I was talking to, national sovereignty doesn’t mean much to the left.
November 8th, 2007 at 1:27 amLogging companies pay for the priviledge of removing the timber or they do it for free because they WANT the wood…ya see the logging industry sells the wood to paper mills and such…and the paper mills make paper products…ah, its capitalism, you wouldn’t understand. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:27 am
There aren’t timber companies in MALIBU, stupid little girl! Neither are their FORESTS!!
And getting back to my tax stand, as I’m sure you have already forgotten, I am willing to pay for infrastructure but not for hippy museums and certainly not to provide free healthcare to every illegal that manages to squirm across the border. Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:27 am
Yet, here we are, with the REALITY that in true GOP FASHION, San Diego is NOT willing to pay for infrastructures.
Hint: illegal means “illegalâ€. Oh sorry, I forgot who I was talking to, national sovereignty doesn’t mean much to the left.
Comment by MookieJoeAndAGirlNamedLuLu — November 8, 2007 @ 1:27 am
Hint, GOP MAYOR means that tried to CUT BUDGET means your PREVIOUS CLAIM is bogus.
Hint, UNDERBRUSH is NOT TIMBER!
As for your OFF TOPIC TROLLING and RAMBLING RANT about illegals, wow you really are stupid! What GREEDY GOP BUSINESSES do you think HIRE those illegals, stupid little girl?
November 8th, 2007 at 1:31 amand you didn’t even aware that your own Mayor was the one responsible for the thing you blamed others on.</