ThinkFast: February 7, 2008
ThinkFast: February 7, 2008
Influential Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has ordered his Mahdi Army “to maintain its six-month ceasefire as members of the militia clashed with U.S. and Iraqi soldiers in Baghdad.” “Some members of Sadr’s bloc are pressuring him not to extend” the ceasefire, “which expires later this month and has been vital to cutting violence in Iraq.”
Top Pentagon officials yesterday testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee “that the Bush administration’s plan to withdraw some 20,000 U.S. troops from Iraq this summer will do little to relieve the stress on the Army and Marine Corps.”
“The Iraqi government announced Wednesday that it’s taken initial steps to rebuild the famed Golden Dome shrine in Samarra, whose destruction two years ago helped unleash sectarian warfare between Iraq’s Sunni and Shiite Muslims.”
In 2005, when the CIA destroyed videotapes of interrogations, “a federal judge was still seeking information from” the White House “about the interrogation of one of those operatives, Abu Zubaydah, according to court documents made public on Wednesday.” The court documents appear to contradict statements by CIA director Michael Hayden.
$170 billion: Cost of the Iraq war in fiscal year 2009, according to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Gates added that the price tag “will inevitably be wrong, and perhaps significantly so.”
The U.S. Forest Service “has approved a permit allowing a British mining company to explore for uranium just outside” the Grand Canyon. “If the exploration finds rich uranium deposits, it could lead to the first mines near the canyon” in nearly two decades.
“U.S. drivers could enjoy a drop of up to 50 cents per gallon in gasoline prices by this spring as high fuel prices and the threat of a recession force them to conserve, experts said on Wednesday.”
“The crime wave that hit New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina shows little sign of abating, more than two years after city officials said taming the outbreak was among their top priorities.”
And finally: “Sen. Arlen Specter’s one-senator war against the New England Patriots has a big problem: The three-time Super Bowl-winning team has its own Senate patron in Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy.” Specter has been pushing an investigation of “Spygate,” the Patriots’ “surreptitious videotaping of opponents’ signals on the field.” Leahy, a die-hard Patriots fan, so far doesn’t seem to be “giving much credence” to the probe, but promises to “do whatever is correct regardless.”
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Third undersea Internet cable cut in Mideast
(CNN) — An undersea cable carrying Internet traffic was cut off the Persian Gulf emirate of Dubai, officials said Friday, the third loss of a line carrying Internet and telephone traffic in three days.
Ships have been dispatched to repair two undersea cables damaged on Wednesday off Egypt.
FLAG Telecom, which owns one of the cables, said repairs were expected to be completed by February 12.
…Officials said Friday it was unclear what caused the damage to FLAG’s FALCON cable about 50 kilometers off Dubai. A repair ship was en route, FLAG said.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/02/01/internet.outage/
*** The coincidences just keep piling up!
February 7th, 2008 at 9:03 amCity of Angels and Caging
Today, Super Tuesday, a disturbing number of Los Angeles voters were denied a proper ballot. Why? Because some time in the recent past, they received what appeared to be a piece of junk mail and they threw it away.
…Why did they receive it? Who knows. But today, they had to vote on a provisional ballot. That ballot will most likely not be counted. Certainly it will not be included in the first count, the count that gets released to the public and the media – the count that decides the winner.
That’s called caging. It’s a Karl Rove tactic that succeeded in Ohio in 2004, and succeeded in Florida in 2000. Karl had a direct mail business in Texas, you see. He not only knows how to do this, he will do it.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/30802
** Chairman John Conyers has all the evidence of Rove’s caging lists in his file cabinet. He could’ve investigated, brought charges and put Karl Rove in prison long ago for this felony. ALL the blame goes to John Conyers who sits by as blacks, hispanics, native americans and other Democrats have their vote stolen from them!
February 7th, 2008 at 9:08 amDubai ain’t looking like that great a place to live, is it?
February 7th, 2008 at 9:08 amI cannot believe that with our occupation of Iraq, the national debt reaching unprecedented heights, a recession looming, people not able to afford adequate health care, and global warming threatening to destroy the planet that Arlen Specter feels the most important crisis is that A FOOTBALL TEAM MIGHT BE READING THEIR OPPONENT’S SIGNALS??????
February 7th, 2008 at 9:09 amHey, a 50-cent drop in gasoline prices would be really nice. It might even make me forget how much gas has gone UP in the past year…
February 7th, 2008 at 9:11 am“Sen. Arlen Specter’s one-senator war against the New England Patriots has a big problem: The three-time Super Bowl-winning team has its own Senate patron in Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy.â€
Now I understand. Congress can’t stop the Crime-Boss-in-Chief, because a gawd-dayum f-king game is more important that Bush trashing the Constitution, torturing people, starting a war over lies, etc.
Glad I know what their priorities are now.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:17 amSheesh
$170 billion: Cost of the Iraq invasion in fiscal year 2009
$3 trillion: Probable cost of Iraq war in totality
$400 billion: Projected deficit, FY2009, under Bush’s budget
$200,000: Cost to each American, to date, for Iraq invasion
$600: Economic stimulus rebate to each taxpayer
This is Bush math. This is what we have allowed him to do to America.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:18 amHey, a 50-cent drop in gasoline prices would be really nice. It might even make me forget how much gas has gone UP in the past year…
Comment by missmolly — February 7, 2008 @ 9:11 am
Hey, Starbucks is still selling lattes. All is good.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:19 amBush budget plan: ‘Spend it Forward’
February 7th, 2008 at 9:20 amZim,
and the $600 is borrowed money, too. You could compare this to mom and dad borrowing from their kid’s allowance.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:20 amTop Pentagon officials yesterday testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee “that the Bush administration’s plan to withdraw some 20,000 U.S. troops from Iraq this summer will do little to relieve the stress on the Army and Marine Corps.â€
—————————————————-
True — 20,000 is better than nothing, but it’s not enough to maintain combat readiness back home or stay ready for new military emergencies. We have a number of choices:
1) Stay the present course and pretend that the military isn’t eroding. Hope that we don’t need any more troops for anything else.
2) Withdraw our troops from Iraq at a faster rate, so we can put more troops in Afghanistan and have some back-up back home. And then don’t pick any more fights that we don’t have the manpower for.
3) Increase recruiting by increasing signing bonuses and other incentives (essentially making mercenaries of our soldiers). However, there’s only so many more times one can go to this well.
4) Reinstate the draft.
Any guesses on what the current administration will do? Any guesses on what the next president will do?
February 7th, 2008 at 9:22 amand the $600 is borrowed money, too. You could compare this to mom and dad borrowing from their kid’s allowance. -Briseadh na Faire
Good point. How in the Hell can an economic stimulus work with borrowed money? Bush has failed at every business he’s ever been involved with.
Unfortunately, America is his latest failure.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:24 amMiss Molly,
I’m guessing the next administration will face another 9/11 attack within the first year in office.
Building on BUSH II, you can kiss the Constitution good-bye.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:27 am“Go out, hit the malls, and spend some money today and everything will be just fine.”
–GWB
February 7th, 2008 at 9:28 amDubai ain’t looking like that great a place to live, is it?
Comment by 99Luf Balloons — February 7, 2008 @ 9:08 am
It’s great if you have a few hundred thousand dollars to throw around.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:28 amHappy Year of the Rat, TP!
February 7th, 2008 at 9:29 am“Some members of Sadr’s bloc are pressuring him not to extend†the ceasefire, “which expires later this month and has been vital to cutting violence in Iraq.â€
But, but…I thought it was the “surge” that had decreased the violence in Iraq.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:31 amThe U.S. Forest Service “has approved a permit allowing a British mining company to explore for uranium just outside†the Grand Canyon. “If the exploration finds rich uranium deposits, it could lead to the first mines near the canyon†in nearly two decades.
Isn’t that sacred land to the Paiute?
February 7th, 2008 at 9:32 ammissmolly: I feel a draft coming on.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:32 amHappy Year of the Rat, TP!
Comment by toasterhead — February 7, 2008 @ 9:29 am
A change would be nice from the Seven Years of the Chimp that have just passed.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:32 amTop Pentagon officials yesterday testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee “that the Bush administration’s plan to withdraw some 20,000 U.S. troops from Iraq this summer will do little to relieve the stress on the Army and Marine Corps.â€
They must be keeping soldiers in Iraq longer than 15 months, otherwise they would be having to bring a lot more than 20,000 home. How long do they think our soldiers can stand this never ending deployment? They really do view our troops as nothing more than cannon fodder, otherwise they would be worrying about the mental and physical health of our troops under this kind of intense pressure.
I am very glad that most of America has finally gotten it. What “it” is is that they talk the talk about supporting our troops but they don’t walk the walk.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:33 amBut, but…I thought it was the “surge†that had decreased the violence in Iraq.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 7, 2008 @ 9:31 am
No no no – it’s the Awakening councils we’ve paid off, who are now fighting with Baghdad police and planning to attack the Shia after they’ve finished off al-Qa’ida.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:34 amOr maybe it’s possible your assessment of the POTUS is exaggerated and inaccurate.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 9:31 am
Or maybe it’s possibly time for you to wake from your koolaide induced stupor.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:36 amOr maybe it’s possible your assessment of the POTUS is exaggerated and inaccurate.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 9:31 am
Unlikely. The piece of shit president has done more harm to America than Al Qaeda could have dreamed of.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:38 amThe court documents appear to contradict statements by CIA director Michael Hayden.
Gee, that’s a surprise. A Bush appointee lying. Who would have thought that could happen.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:38 amWhy do you feel confident about another attack?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 9:32 am
because Republicans have proven that they suck at national defense and security. Why are you so willfully ignorant of recent history?
February 7th, 2008 at 9:39 amThe year of the Rat–yup, they named a year after Bush/Cheney
February 7th, 2008 at 9:39 amWhy do you feel confident about another attack?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 9:32 am
Because the first New Pearl Harbor hasn’t quite worked out the way the neocons planned. They’re going to need a refresher.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:40 am$170 billion: Cost of the Iraq war in fiscal year 2009, according to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Gates added that the price tag “will inevitably be wrong, and perhaps significantly so.â€
WTF! That’s double what it cost last year. What in the hell are they doing with that money?
Come on Democrats, do the right thing. Don’t give them one cent for anything permanent in Iraq (embassy, bases, etc) and don’t give them one penny for the contractors. Give them exactly what it will cost to keep our troops safe and not one cent more.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:41 amThe court documents appear to contradict statements by CIA director Michael Hayden.
Gee, that’s a surprise. A Bush appointee lying. Who would have thought that could happen.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 7, 2008 @ 9:38 am
Actually the judge noticed a marked difference in what Hayden said and what the CIA filed with the courts. One or the other was a lie.
Thats the problem with liars, as the lies add up, they can’t keep up with them and always get caught.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:42 amFound this quote over on Dkos…. it’s my new signature in all things ‘e.’ (e-mail, blogs, etc.)
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” –John Kenneth Galbraith
February 7th, 2008 at 9:46 am“U.S. drivers could enjoy a drop of up to 50 cents per gallon in gasoline prices by this spring as high fuel prices and the threat of a recession force them to conserve, experts said on Wednesday.â€
So they are saying that if we conserve by driving less the oil companies will lower the cost of gasoline to encourage us to drive more? If that’s the case, this is a pretty good indication of price gouging by the oil companies. So why isn’t congress doing anything about it?
Hopefully the free ride on the money train for the oil companies will be over once Obama is president.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:46 amThe year of the Rat–yup, they named a year after Bush/Cheney
Comment by Uncle Ho — February 7, 2008 @ 9:39 am
I think you may be right. According to the Chinese Zodiac:
Unapologetic agenda promoters, secretive cabal-builders, manipulators and exploiters, cruel and vengeful – yup! Sounds like the Bush/Cheney crew.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:47 amOr maybe it’s possible your assessment of the POTUS is exaggerated and inaccurate.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
and this guy doesn’t want us to throw him in the same barrell with all of the other trolls…….sheesh…..
cappy you are a troll……you know how I feel……do you want me to post that quote again?
February 7th, 2008 at 9:48 amThe U.S. Forest Service “has approved a permit allowing a British mining company to explore for uranium just outside†the Grand Canyon.
There really is nothing sacred to these greedy neoCons, is there.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:49 amSounds like I’m out of the loop. Is the consensus here that a republican will win this year’s election?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 9:48 am
I think there really is a good chance of that, sure. They have the strongest canidates by far, they offer hope, and have a prove track record. Their policies are by far and away the best for most Americans, and their excellent grasp of the economy and international diplomacy is second to none….. pardon me….
I have to go. The little guys in the white coats are here to take me away.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:50 amThere really is nothing sacred to these greedy neoCons, is there.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 7, 2008 @ 9:49 am
MONEY!
February 7th, 2008 at 9:51 amSo they are saying that if we conserve by driving less the oil companies will lower the cost of gasoline to encourage us to drive more? If that’s the case, this is a pretty good indication of price gouging by the oil companies. So why isn’t congress doing anything about it?
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 7, 2008 @ 9:46 am
Well, that is pretty much a textbook definition of supply-and-demand. If demand for gasoline drops, the oil suppliers will lower the price to try and raise demand to a stable equilibrium..
February 7th, 2008 at 9:51 amBnF was talking about an attack under the next administration. Are you predicting a republican victory in November?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 9:45 am
they have left us defenseless, and any attacks under any administration can be laid at the feet of the deserter-In-Chief and his band of crony losers. And you know it.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:51 amSounds like I’m out of the loop. Is the consensus here that a republican will win this year’s election?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 9:48 am
You are the stupid one.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:52 amtoasterhead; sounds like the perfect description of the rats in the White House. LOL!
February 7th, 2008 at 9:52 am“BnF was talking about an attack under the next administration. Are you predicting a republican victory in November?”
Comment by CaptainMantastic
No, that the Bushies will leave office without informing their replacements of all the secret dangers we face, and one of those will blow up before we have a chance to even discover what it is.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:53 amSounds like I’m out of the loop. Is the consensus here that a republican will win this year’s election?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 9:48 am
No, there’s no consensus on that. But there is a pretty strongly-held belief by many of us that whatever the outcome, the corporatocracy will win this year’s election. As they always do.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:53 amCrapMantic has a reading problem. It comes from having to shove his computer moniter up his a$$ so he can see it.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:53 amSounds like I’m out of the loop. Is the consensus here that a republican will win this year’s election?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 9:48 am
Yeah, you are in your own loop.
The Democrats will probably win despite Republicans cheating. But the PNACers are still running free and out of jail and there is no telling what those maniacs will do.
I suspect if an attack comes, it will be timed right before the elections, when Bush will try to used it as an excuse to suspend the elections, because i put nothing past the criminal f-ks inhabiting the White House. Someone who tries to morally justify torture is capable of anything.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:54 amEveryone knows how petulant Bush is. It would be in character for him to deny the incoming administration information necessary to keep the country safe, if it put his past efforts in a bad light.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:55 am2) Withdraw our troops from Iraq at a faster rate, so we can put more troops in Afghanistan and have some back-up back home. And then don’t pick any more fights that we don’t have the manpower for.
Comment by missmolly
Another great post missmolly. But I have to disagree with #2. It should say
And then don’t pick any more fights period.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:55 amSomeone who tries to morally justify torture is capable of anything.
Comment by Wayne — February 7, 2008 @ 9:54 am
Someone who already allowed massive domestic attacks has proven himself capable of anything except patriotism and leadership. Bush is the world’s #1 terrorist, and America’s biggest enemy.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:55 amSo… If they find uranium in the Grand Canyon, can we PLEASE build some new nuclear power plants in the US?
February 7th, 2008 at 9:57 amOr maybe it’s possible your assessment of the POTUS is exaggerated and inaccurate.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
It’s more likely that CM’s assessment of Bush (I still refuse to call him President) is the assessment of someone with an IQ of 75 who gets all his news from Faux Noise.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:58 amSo… If they find uranium in the Grand Canyon, can we PLEASE build some new nuclear power plants in the US?
Comment by Ike_Skelton
Why? Tired of the cold_hard_ leftovers?
February 7th, 2008 at 9:58 amIke_Skelton is a troll…..
February 7th, 2008 at 9:59 amHey folks -
As a proud progressive, I want to throw something out to the Think Progress community.
Can you cut the childish name calling out? Try to use logic, facts, and arguments to counteract the trolls that come poking around. Trying to be clever and coming up with ‘funny’ parodies of their screen names just seems so childish to me.
A well reasoned, thought out post is going to get more respect than the ‘na-na-na-bob-boo, you big poopy head’ posts. When you actually come at a troll with facts, history, logic, sound ideas, and reason, they scurry away.
Let’s try to use this blog as a place for intelligent discourse. Please?
February 7th, 2008 at 10:00 amFred, STFU, I’m not a troll. You’re a troll as much as I am. What’s your problem? I come in here with a legit comment, and you call me a troll?
February 7th, 2008 at 10:00 amStop trying to thread jack this thread by starting a fight with me about being a troll.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:00 amNasdaq NOW crashing to new lows despite the Fed cutting interest rates 75bp and then an additional 50bp.
Which candidate will dare propose a true economic stimulus package?
- Cut defense budget 25% immediately
February 7th, 2008 at 10:01 am- Bring ALL troops home from Iraq within 1 year
- Return tax rate on income over $10 million to 90%
- Tax hedge funds at regular income rate, not 15%
- Increase corporate tax to 35-50% from 0-9% where it is today
I’m not familiar with your cold_hard_leftovers remark.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:01 am“Ike_Skelton is a troll…..”
Comment by Fred
Duh.
It’s cold_hard_left with a fake beard.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:01 amSo… If they find uranium in the Grand Canyon, can we PLEASE build some new nuclear power plants in the US?
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 9:57 am
Great idea! As soon as we find enough geologically-stable and readily-defensible places to locate them that are near enough to a source of water but far enough away from a population as to not pose a cancer risk. Oh, and we need a geologically-stable and readily-defensible place to house all that nuclear waste that will be toxic for the next 100,000 years. And we’ll probably need some significant private funding, since the government’s already several hundred billion in the red. But otherwise, yeah – go for it!
February 7th, 2008 at 10:02 amAnd then don’t pick any more fights period.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 7, 2008 @ 9:55 am
You’re right — we shouldn’t be picking the fights. Defense should be about defending, not attacking.
There’s an old axiom about picking a fight with somebody smaller than you — it’s a no-win situation. If you win, you’re a bully, and if you lose, you’re a bum. We need to remember that since the end of the Cold War, we’re pretty much the biggest kid on the playground. We need to conduct ourselves accordingly.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:03 amI have seen people be reasonble with trolls and everyone has to decide for themselves how to deal with it. If you try to be reasonable they will shut down your discussion and dominate the thread. A respected member of this forum posted this recently and it sum us how I feel too.
for the trolls………This is you. You are not here for any other reason than to disrupt the thread…you possibly even get paid for it…..god what an embarrasing way to make a living….oh well I digress….
I can only speak for myself but this was posted by another sensible person who is respected in the forum and I agree.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:04 am
barfly, you have no idea what you’re talking about.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:05 amYou can make the argument that it is self interest that was the engine that drove previous generations to produce, that has given westerners the significant standard of living we enjoy today.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 10:03 am
You can also make the argument that it is self interest that was the engine that drove the centuries of colonization, enslavement, and exploitation of the non-Western world that has allowed Westerners to raise our standard of living while pushing the other five billion people in the world closer to poverty.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:06 amOr maybe it’s possible your assessment of the POTUS is exaggerated and inaccurate.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
Let’s take a look at each point made by Wayne — February 7, 2008 @ 9:17 am shall we:
1-”Trashing the Constitution”
“just a God damned piece of paper”-GWB
2-”Torturing people”
The waterboarding of at least three detainees was admited in Senate hearings this week, destroyed evidence, Canadian Maher Arar etc.
3-”Starting a war over lies”
900 or so lies documented leading up to entering Iraq
Jeez Captain, looks like you’re full of shit AGAIN! Neither point is exaggerated or inaccurate. If anything there are PLENTY more abuses by your pathetic boy king and his traitorous Administration.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:06 amThanks for playing, though.
toaster, your smug anti-nuclear remarks are sad and misguided. Learn more about nuclear power and then we’ll talk.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:07 amWould all you anti-nuclear power people prefer any found uranium be enriched to weapons grade, or be used to generate clean energy?
February 7th, 2008 at 10:07 am“… is that a more high minded ideology of socialism castrates the motivation of self interest;’
Baloney. Socialism doesn’t rewire the brain so that survivalist tendencies are short-circuited. “Self-interest” is an extension of survival instincts.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:07 amA well reasoned, thought out post is going to get more respect than the ‘na-na-na-bob-boo, you big poopy head’ posts. When you actually come at a troll with facts, history, logic, sound ideas, and reason, they scurry away.
Let’s try to use this blog as a place for intelligent discourse. Please?
Comment by bobcat_grad
I guess you haven’t been around here for very long. Facts, history, logic, sound ideas, and reason have absolutely no affect on our resident trolls. They are not capable of understanding facts, history, logic, sound ideas and reason. They are here for one reason only and that is to disrupt this blog. They throw feces on the walls and sit back and watch the people here who like to play “whack-a-troll” go apoplectic. And all they while they are laughing their a$$ off.
The only way to deal with the trolls is to either ignore them or marginalize them. I marginalize them by not responding to them directly. I talk about them not to them. Try it, you might find it works for you.
As far as the name-calling, it’s nothing more than a way to release the stress of having to deal with these cretins on a daily basis. Get used to it or get over it.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:09 am“barfly, you have no idea what you’re talking about.”
Comment by Ike_Skelton —
That’s a given – but you’re CHL, alright.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:09 amComment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 10:03 am
I see you are confusing progressives with “communists”. Probably intentionally.
Standard Chimpy-humper tactics.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:10 amFred, STFU, I’m not a troll. You’re a troll as much as I am. What’s your problem? I come in here with a legit comment, and you call me a troll?
Comment by Ike_Skelton
Troll Ike thinks saying “lets build gobs of new nuclear plants after we rape the Grand Canyon” is a legit comment. It may be a legit comment on redstate, but here them’s fighting words.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:10 amCentral Hockey League? What are you talking about? Want to keep arguing? I’ve got all day kid.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:11 amtoaster, your smug anti-nuclear remarks are sad and misguided. Learn more about nuclear power and then we’ll talk.
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 10:07 am
Misguided? I think not. Nuclear power plants must be located in areas that are not prone to earthquakes, flooding, hurricanes, or tornadoes. They also have to be located near a river. And they need to be located far away from a populated area, for NIMBY reasons if nothing else. That eliminates rather a lot of the continental U.S. and the freak states.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:11 am#65 CaptainMantastic
I see some of what your saying, but you make one very incorrect assumption.
Progressives don’t want pure socialism or communism. It’s a bad system of government – no argument here. I completely agree that the “high minded ideology of socialism castrates the motivation of self interest.” In addition, I agree that self interest is “most likely human beings most effective motivator.”
But there needs to be a balance. Conservatives sole approach seems to be ‘pull yourself up by your bootstrap and deal with it.’ Progressives want to lend a helping hand… up to a reasonable point. I want to help people that want to help themselves. I have no interest in propping up people who don’t want do do anything themselves.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:11 amWould all you anti-nuclear power people prefer any found uranium be enriched to weapons grade, or be used to generate clean energy?
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 10:07 am
“Left underground” is also a nice option.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:12 amWould all you anti-nuclear power people prefer any found uranium be enriched to weapons grade, or be used to generate clean energy?
Comment by Ike_Skelton
Troll Ike thinks that we want to use uranium for weapons. His pea brain is incapable of understanding that we don’t want them to rape the Grand Canyon to find uranium. Let it stay where it is. We don’t need it and we certainly don’t need to destroy a natural wonder in order to get it.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:12 am“I’ve got all day kid.”
Comment by Ike_Skelton
My dad died three decades ago. Your paternalism is misplaced.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:12 amEvil happens when good people do nothing.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
CM is certainly incapable of recognizing irony because what he said is the perfect definition of the Bush Crime Family.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:13 am#63, I’m not as fond of nuclear as an actual backer, but as a physicist interested in practical solutions, I’d like to see a demonstration fast reactor using on-site pyrometallic reprocessing built and tried (and operated by the NRA and not a private company). The technology has the promise of running on existing waste and unenriched uranium metal, as it not only burns the fissile U-235, but the fissionalble U-238 and most daughter products. The advantages are that cuts out the enrichment cycle, produces only low-level waste (which can be doped in glass and stored far more safely than slow reactor waste), and is less amenable to diversion to weapons programs.
If this technology is viable, then we should consider implementing it. But it would need to be by a state-owned utility without the profit motive to externalize costs by skimping on safety.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:14 amKeep it up barfly, lets keep arguing about insignificant shit. We can keep doing this, or you can STFU and get back on topic.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:14 amto the troll mantastic: response to 80
You are criminal scum and will not be debated. You need to learn that your beliefs are not just wrong but criminal and absolutely immoral. You and the scum like you have too long gained a semblance of legitimacy by claiming that they have a right to civil debate. You do not.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:15 am#74 – bilbobaggins
I’ve been around for a long time. sir. And I prefer to use a method where debate is civil. If the trolls can’t debate as such and the community does not react, they will go away when they get bored.
Your approach of name calling and marginalizing them is the reaction they are looking for and keeps them coming back for more.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:15 am“Always makes me think of the addage:
Evil happens when good people do nothing.”
Comment by CaptainMantastic
I was waiting for you to repost this.
The last time you used this phrase was when you took someone’s comments out of context, and then demanded we all condemn the poster for his “unprogressive” tone.
Have you no shame? I seem to remember you were dumbfounded why I wouldn’t confront the poster’s comments, saying “Evil happens when good people do nothing.”
February 7th, 2008 at 10:16 am#73, indeed. Democratic socialist states have, in fact, the highest standards of living on the planet. There is a legitimate debate over which economic sectors should be made part of the commons, and which left to a well-regulated market, but the claim that it stifles the work ethic is rubbish.
Undemocratic “socialist” states have done poorly because of a variety of reasons, mainly that it evolves into something very close to the dying stages of crony capitalism or feudal aristocracy with a socialist veneer very quickly.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:17 amAny mining at the grand canyon will go through a reclamation process.. not a big deal, creates jobs right? They’ll take out the uranium and replace everything else, then after a while do the reclamation.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:17 amKeep it up barfly, lets keep arguing about insignificant shit. We can keep doing this, or you can STFU and get back on topic.
Comment by Ike_Skelton
This is thinkfast numbnuts. Go peddle your stfu’s somewhere else.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:17 amEvil happens when good people do nothing.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 10:11 am
Evil happens when evil f-kers do evil things in spite of good people trying to do good things.
Evil keeps happening when good people do not try to stop it.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:18 amYou’re right they are not the same, but the ideology is a step in that direction. It’s just something to think about.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 10:13 am
Okay, using your logic that progressives are a step closer to communists, I will put forth that the current state of the Republican party is a step closer to theocrastic facism.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:18 amI think what progressives are missing, is that a more high minded ideology of socialism castrates the motivation of self interest; which most likely is human beings most effective motivator.
Great philosophy that doesn’t seem to work in practice.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
This is one big ignorant statement.
First, Marxism explains that the achievement of communism can’t come BEFORE capitalism. Russia couldn’t just jumped from a feudal system to a communist one. China was an feudal agriculture country that has to go through capitalism, which is pretty much what they are doing despite their name or you see distribution of wealth in China?
Second, socialism DOESN’T kill your will of improvement as a human being just like CAPITALISM doesn’t improve your economic status just by trying harder. These are the same propaganda about the economical systems in order to keep the current stablishment while being ripped off.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:18 am“Any mining at the grand canyon will go through a reclamation process.. not a big deal, creates jobs right? They’ll take out the uranium and replace everything else, then after a while do the reclamation.”
Comment by Ike_Skelton
After the radioactive tailings have had a chance to seep into the groundwater. Is this your “big” thought for the day?
Not very impressive.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:19 am#87, btw, by NRA I mean the “Nuclear Regulatory Agency”, not Charleton Heston. Obviously.
But it does generate quite the mental image.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:20 amAny mining at the grand canyon will go through a reclamation process.. not a big deal, creates jobs right? They’ll take out the uranium and replace everything else, then after a while do the reclamation.
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 10:17 am
Is this the same kind of “reclamation” the coal companies are doing to former mountain ranges in West Virginia?
February 7th, 2008 at 10:20 amAhhhh…. a voice of reason and intelligence… Juan C.
You hit the nail on the head.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:20 amThis is thinkfast barfly. Go peddle your numbnuts somewhere else.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:21 amComment by bobcat_grad
everyone has to deal with the problem in their own way…..you will eventually understand bilbo’s stance…..you may never adopt it but you will come to understand.
but at the same time, you don’t seem to understand that your suggestion has been tried…..this is what you will be left with in an unmoderated forumn
bildo did not mandate a way for you to handle it and you shouldn’t either….all bildo did was make a suggestion……you will figure it out.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:21 amGive me evidence of radioactive tailings seeping into groundwater. After that, give me evidence of what harm it has done to anyone. Then when you’re done, take two seconds and think about how much environmental contamination is caused by coal plants. Do you prefer all the pollution that is emitted every day by coal plants to the emission free nuclear plants?
February 7th, 2008 at 10:23 amThis is thinkfast barfly. Go peddle your numbnuts somewhere else.
Comment by Ike_Skelton
Wow, did your mom help with that little insult? Tell her it’s reads like the work of a lazy ten-year-old.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:23 amAnd despite my interest in fast reactors, I agree with the consensus here: no new slow reactors, no more enrichment, and no more high-level long-lived waste.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:25 am#103
And all I did was make a suggestion, as well. And was treated with the ever polite, “Get used to it or get over it.”
Misdirected vitriol.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:25 am#103
And all I did was make a suggestion, as well. And was treated with the ever polite, “Get used to it or get over it.â€
Misdirected vitriol.
Comment by bobcat_grad
excuse me…..was that how my post read?
February 7th, 2008 at 10:26 amYes, my mom did help me with that little insult. She was offended by you saying it read like the work of a lazy ten-year-old. She also wondered why you said “ten-year-old” rather than just simply “ten year old”
February 7th, 2008 at 10:27 amThey’ll take out the uranium and replace everything else, then after a while do the reclamation.
Comment by Ike_Skelton
Can somebody explain to Ike what it takes to make a Fission Nuclear Power Plant in terms of security, space, environment and technical issues?
Oh, wait, toaster did it.
But I would add, nuclear power DOES release CO2 to the environment unless you drill, process and transport the uranium with machines powered by non-fossil fuels. It doesn’t take 100,000 years, like toaster said, just to reduce radioactive hazard, it takes a lot more, however, there is a thing called TRANSMUTATION that converts the radiactive disposals into a less radioactive compound so it could last 1000 years. But it is still on a experimental phase.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:27 amDo you prefer all the pollution that is emitted every day by coal plants to the emission free nuclear plants?
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 10:23 am
No, but nuclear plants are not entirely emission-free. They emit heat pollution which damages river ecosystems. And they create highly-toxic nuclear waste time bombs that must be protected for the next 300 generations.
I’d rather see the time and money investment go to improving the efficiency of renewable energy sources.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:29 amname calling and marginalizing them is the reaction they are looking for and keeps them coming back for more.
Comment by bobcat_grad @ 10:15 am
i’m with bobcat here…
with the first troll post, i groan and think “here we go”…
na na na boo boo…
i don’t understand why that trooll post needs copied either…
it’s bad enough the first time…
focus people…
or at least use your imagination…
g’day…
February 7th, 2008 at 10:30 amComment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 10:23 am
Wow, I guess you have never read a physics or chemistry book in your life….
February 7th, 2008 at 10:31 ami don’t understand why that trooll post needs copied either…
it’s bad enough the first time…
focus people…
or at least use your imagination…
g’day…
Comment by katy
I respect your opinion
February 7th, 2008 at 10:32 am“She also wondered why you said “ten-year-old†rather than just simply ‘ten year old’
Comment by Ike_Skelton
Your mom should study up on hyphenation.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:32 am#108 -
I took it as slightly patronizing based upon your “you will figure it out” comment at the end.
My “misdirect vitriol” comment was pointing out that all I did was make a suggestion about trying civility around here, and I was told to “get used to it, or get over it.”
We’ve already wasted too much time and too many bytes over this. I have seen the civility and discussion go down over the past 18 months around here while the level of name calling and insults have risen.
I was just suggesting we try to turn it around.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:33 amplease let me remind you of captainmastatices first post in this thread:
Or maybe it’s possible your assessment of the POTUS is exaggerated and inaccurate.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
you decide……was this designed to be divisive? Or am I wrong and he’s acutally serious? hmm
February 7th, 2008 at 10:35 am“But, conservatives really believe what they believe, and not simply for their own self interest.”
Comment by CaptainMantastic
More baloney. Conservatives have shown in the last decade that they don’t actually believe in the things they claim to believe.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:35 amYou’re right they are not the same, but the ideology is a step in that direction. It’s just something to think about.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 10:13 am
Wanting the Constitution to be adhered to, including the part that states “promote the general” welfare is a step toward communism?
Yeah right.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:36 amThey emit heat pollution which damages river ecosystems.
Comment by toasterhead
Thanks. I forgot that.
bobcat, you got it.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:37 amI was just suggesting we try to turn it around.
Comment by bobcat_grad
well since this is think fast maybe you would like to make the argument that captainmantasic is actually here for a discussion and not to disrupt.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:37 amI think most progressives would be surprised to learn that conservatives are less concerned about their own self-interest, but convinced that the good in their own lives came from their own motivated self-interest…
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 10:31 am
We know that. We just think it’s a bit naive.
We take a more holistic view of the world and society, and we realize that the good in did not come purely from motivated self-interest, but also from the work of progressive predecessors who gave us compulsory education, freed us from monopolies, stopped child labor, built our infrastructure, and worked to give all of us the right to vote. To name just a few.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:38 amSo Manny where’s the apology, for taking another poster’s comments out of context, to make a bogus point about progressives?
I’m not going away until you deal with your past comments.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:38 am#17 “But, but…I thought it was the “surge†that had decreased the violence in Iraq.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 7, 2008 @ 9:31 am
And indeed, it has….dramatically. You really should read the full articles to which ThinkProgress links and not just the two sentence summaries…
Here ya go:
“Attacks across Iraq have fallen by 60 percent since June 2007 after a series of security crackdowns…”
February 7th, 2008 at 10:39 amBobcat_grad,
February 7th, 2008 at 10:39 amI think people are just letting you know that they have been here and experienced things first hand. They are not children and have developed their own ways of dealing with the problem. We are all adults (I think) and diverse ways of dealing with things are one of the hallmarks of progressive thinkers. I think many people don’t embrace the conservative/republican/troll view on things because it insinuates control over other people. You probably got a less than warm welcome with your suggestions because it could have appeared as controlling. Just my thoughts, I could be totally wrong.
What’d we miss?
Seems the White House is demanding that torture memo author be confirmed to the OLC.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:39 amHarry Reid’s remarks on Bush’s insistance:
“He said that unless I would agree to allow him to recess appoint Steven Bradbury, he wouldn’t make a deal – he didn’t care if that meant no one got confirmed. He was willing to forgo the 84-plus nominees and the offers of recess appointments if he couldn’t install Mr. Bradbury.”
Looks like George is in desperate need of some Bradbury. Why could that be?
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/white_house_insists_on_confirm.php#more
Withdrawing 20,000 is not a bad thing, but it is not only insufficient, it is probably going to be the last draw down of troops for a while, at least according to the last word from the chimp.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:39 amThe 6-month surge is now a year old.
I believe the debate is ‘what’s too far’.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 10:35 am
Too far right or too far left both end up at the same spot. Totalitarianism.
Think of it as a circle.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:40 am#119
I have to agree with you. I’ve been using that pendulum analogy since prior to the 2004 election. At THAT point, I thought it had gone too far right, but it only kept going. The 2006 Mid-terms were the beginning of it swinging the other way, and it’s only picking up speed.
The country is tired of the uber-conservative approach to everything, as well as the conservative movement ignoring things they profess to believe in: i.e. fiscal responsibility.
Regarding the pendulum swinging back, it’s why you see conservative talk show hosts like Limbaugh and Hannity trying in vain to hold the pendulum back. It’s comical. Limbaugh and Hannity… trying to claim to be ‘mainstream’ conservatives. Ridiculous. If you’re so mainstream, why is the candiate you hate leading your nomination race?
February 7th, 2008 at 10:42 amManny, are you going to make me go back and dig up your progressive slurs? Ask Exley if he thinks I’ll do it.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:43 amC’mon Manny; as you said at the time “I thought there was more to you than this.”
February 7th, 2008 at 10:45 amYour mom should study up on hy-phen-ation.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:45 am#123 -
Based on some of his recent comments, yea, I think he’s willing to have a reasonable discussion about issues if he’s not called names.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:47 am128 could it be this?
For more than three years, Steven Bradbury has been the acting head of the Office of Legal Counsel, the crucial Justice Department office that has the power to issue “advance pardons,”
February 7th, 2008 at 10:48 amI’d rather see the time and money investment go to improving the efficiency of renewable energy sources.
Comment by toasterhead — February 7, 2008 @ 10:29 am
Amen to that.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:49 amAny power plant will create heat that could damage a river or lake’s ecosystem. That is what 316(a) and (b) studies are for.
I’m well aware of what goes into permitting and building a nuclear power plant. I’m also well aware of what it takes to do a coal plant. Hey, screw the environment, lets build more coal plants. Sure, renewable like wind are great, but they will only provide a small percentage of our needed electricity.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:49 am“recruiting”??? …ha! pure projection!
old habits die hard…
February 7th, 2008 at 10:50 amWow, I did really make a lot of grammar mistakes…sorry.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:50 amBased on some of his recent comments, yea, I think he’s willing to have a reasonable discussion about issues if he’s not called names.
Comment by bobcat_grad
please reiterate……the statement above is about captainmantastic……is that correct.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:51 ambetter than a lot of english-first-language folks, juan…
February 7th, 2008 at 10:52 am“Conservatives have shown in the last decade that they don’t actually believe in the things they claim to believe.” Comment by barfly — February 7, 2008 @ 10:35 am
Some very good examples of “claims” that have fallen short of reality:
Fiscal responsibility – Runaway spending by the Republican President & Republican Congress. (Not that the Democratic Congress is all that much better, but when you’re in a hole STOP digging!)
Personal Responsibility – has Pres. Bush admitted his lies? Not yet.
Work is too busy right now. More later.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:57 am#135
On the same page with you.
Reminds me of when I saw Jon Stewart perform. During his bit he talked about Red America/Blue America and the right vs. left. I’ll paraphrase, but basically he said this:
“80% of the noise is made by 30% of the people in this country. 15% on the right and 15% on the left. That leaves the rest of us sitting in between covering our ears and trying to drown them out. Why? Because we have s**t to do.”
I think the name calling a vitriol gets in the way of any substantive debate. You see it in small scale on threads here and you see it in the large scale in Congress and the White House. Most of the time when I’m watching the back and forth between the two parties, I want to scream, “Just be freakin’ reasonable and compromise!” at the top of my lungs.
Look, getting a conservative and liberal to agree on everything ain’t ever happening. But both sides need to understand that the other side feels as strongly as you do and may have a valid point or two. I’m not always right, and neither are you.
I used to consider myself an independent; social liberal, fiscal conservative. But when the Bush administration took this country so far to the right, I by default became a liberal lefty. And I’m damn proud of what I believe in. I’m tired of this presidency and the division it has created in the country and abroad, and I’m praying that Obama take the election in November and rights the ship.
*hopping off my soapbox now*
February 7th, 2008 at 10:58 am#144 – Yup.
It’s about captain. Take a moment and read some of his last posts and tell me he’s not trying to make reasoned arguments about what he believes. I don’t care if you disagree, he’s just trying to put forth his thoughts.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:00 amSure, renewable like wind are great, but they will only provide a small percentage of our needed electricity.
Really, says who? The coverage required to provide all, between the two, isn’t all that great.
And the cost to build and install solar is now lower per kW-hr than coal – never mind the fact that once installed, the operational costs are negligible. All we need is time to implement, and a storage mechanism (and there are several good candidates).
February 7th, 2008 at 11:01 amSure, renewable like wind are great, but they will only provide a small percentage of our needed electricity.
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 10:49 am
Actually, using both wind turbine farms and solar arrays would provide a large amount of our energy needs. The cost to implement would be similar to the costs of so called clean coal plants and nuclear power plants, but would be less poisonous to the environment. And jobs would be created, because someone has to maintain the wind and solar farms.
Getting that past the corporate whores in Congress isthe only real stumbling block.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:01 amNow, on Captain’s comment in 145… I COMPLETELY disagree with him.
I do not find any statement that includes the words “screw the environment” reasonable.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:02 amInstead of a nuclear plant, let us just litter the country side with around 100 470 foot tall vertical axis wind turbines that output around 9MW each… or lets do 128 413 foot tall 7MW wind turbines. Or perhaps 600 1.5MW wind turbines? And that’s just to offset one average single reactor nuclear plant.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:02 am#152, solar and wind also have the advantage of being distributed, as opposed to centralized. Such a scheme would democratize power generation, after a fashion.
I’d love to see neighborhoods implement solar on all their rooftops, then use pumped water (a la a water tower) to gravitationally store excess energy produced during the day, to be used later at night. The technology and required efficiencies are almost there.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:07 amIt’s common knowledge in the power industry that wind and such will only account for a small percentage of our generation needs. So we build hundreds of thousands of wind turbines and use photovoltaics that often take longer to recoup the installation costs than the hardware is lifetime rated for. Whatever, lets keep polluting our air and water with coal. Maybe the hundreds of thousands of wind turbines will help blow all that pollution away?
February 7th, 2008 at 11:07 amIt’s about captain. Take a moment and read some of his last posts and tell me he’s not trying to make reasoned arguments about what he believes. I don’t care if you disagree, he’s just trying to put forth his thoughts.
Comment by bobcat_grad
you actually think the captainmantastic is a reasonable person…..here for a sensible discussion about our differing opinions? Is that correct?
February 7th, 2008 at 11:08 amIt’s common knowledge in the power industry that wind and such will only account for a small percentage of our generation needs.
Common knowledge among an industry’s competitors that said industry can’t do the job?
Right.
Coming up next, the Tobacco institute…
February 7th, 2008 at 11:09 am“Alright barfly. What did I do? I’ll try to address it.”
Comment by CaptainMantastic
From the Dow thread on 2/5/08:
Is this the new ‘progressive’ or the old Hitler? I’m confused?
Just for the record, do other progressives here share this sentiment about those that disagree with them?
Comment by CaptainMantastic
Now, must I post the comments that you took out of context?
Or would you just like to apologize now?
February 7th, 2008 at 11:12 amPeter, do you have any insight into the power industry? One of the biggest problems with existing wind power IS DISTRIBUTION.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:12 amSure, renewable like wind are great, but they will only provide a small percentage of our needed electricity.
Comment by Ike_Skelton
Oh, here it comes one of the best fossil energy arguments:
Renewable energy is not intensive. That means that you need a lot of volume/space in order to produce the same amount of electricity that a small volume of fossil fuel would do.
Well, in fact, it is correct, but it is not that correct when you think that a PV cell panel on your rooftop (small space) would do the trick. Or a small wind turbine (20 m high).
From Herman Scheer:
February 7th, 2008 at 11:13 am436 atomic power reactors are still working globally. Only for meeting the indispensable goal of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for reducing global greenhouse gas emissions to a level of 40 percent up to 2050 with such reactors, there would be the need of 2500 additional 1000 MW atomic reactors. That would mean: each week a new reactor in the run of the next fifty years! And what about the inherent dangers of atomic weapons proliferation by such a development? From where should come the tremendous amount of water for their steam and cooling processes, in the same time of a running water crisis in more and more countries?
Distribution is an issue either way, as the grid is in decay nation-wide and in need of a serious infrastructure upgrade. That money will have to be spent whatever power methods we design our policy around.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:14 amOr would you just like to apologize now?
Comment by barfly
he will apolgize nicely now…..he doesn’t want to alienate his new ally…….
February 7th, 2008 at 11:15 am#161 -
Ummm… at the risk of ‘repeating’ myself in a blog thread where you could just re-read my previous post… yes:
“It’s about captain. Take a moment and read some of his last posts and tell me he’s not trying to make reasoned arguments about what he believes. I don’t care if you disagree, he’s just trying to put forth his thoughts.”
Oh, and 160 (Captain) You didn’t say it, but you said a post made by Ike was reasonable. That post contained the “screw the environment” statement.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:15 am168 and you’ve been here how long?
February 7th, 2008 at 11:17 am#168 -
Seriously… you’re proving my point with your snarkiness. I’m not Captain’s ally in any real policy discussions. We seem to be on opposite sides of issues. But in your eyes, since I’m not jumping down his throat, we’re allies, now… sigh.
The only thing we agree on is we want to have a real discussion about the issues and dial back the hate.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:19 amMy ’screw the environment’ was sarcasm btw, if anyone didn’t get that.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:24 amI hear that GM, or some such, is working to develop a car that runs on cellulosic ethanol. That offers at least as much promise as could ever be derived from nuclear, as it’s clean, renewable, and very utilitarian, in that anything made of cellulose can be used. It also would mean the formation of tree farms such as poplar, for supply; not a bad thing to be producing, in this environment.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:24 am#174 – barfly
Dude – that sounds awesome… any links about it?
February 7th, 2008 at 11:26 amIf I really wanted to screw the environment I’d be against nuclear and for continuing to rely on coal for our generation needs.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:27 am“Okay, barfly. I was refering to this by JMOHR and Fred:”
And then you cut off the parts that didn’t fit your agenda. Post the whole thing, and let people judge for themselves.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:28 amHere it is:
It is time that we treat good_golly and other similar vermin in the manner that all such subhumans should be treated:
1. There is absolutely no pretense of civil discourse. They are simply wrong. There is absolutely no debate and nothing they say can create a legitimate debate.
2. Let them know that they are criminal scum and will not be debated. They need to learn that their beliefs are not just wrong but criminal and absolutely immoral. These scum have too long gained a semblance of legitimacy by claiming that you have a right to civil debate. They do not.
3. Let them know that we believe they are no better than any other terrorist. They advocate crimes against humanity. They need to know that we will label them as what they are.
4. Let them know that we wish them the fate of all terrorists to include exclusion from civil society, imprisonment and death in a very public execution.
5. If you meet one in public, then I suggest that you help them follow the golden rule – do to them that which they would do a terrorist. They can have no complaint. They set the rules of engagement.
Comment by JMOHR
Apologies?
February 7th, 2008 at 11:34 amThat list is exactly what I was talking about yesterday, and it is sad. Anyone with a differing opinion is scum, and equatable to a terrorist? Nothing they can say will change your mind, and you won’t even listen to them? That is so ignorant it’s sad. You people are no better than the people you so despise.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:37 amYou people are no better than the people you so despise.
Comment by Ike_Skelton
oh yes we are……..you guys are only fooling one person here this morning……….
February 7th, 2008 at 11:39 amFred, your closed mindedness is sad. Please discontinue talking to me. I will no longer tolerate your hate speech.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:40 am#180
That post is disturbing.
Imagine you found it on RedState. You’d be using it as proof positive that conservatives are hate-filled arses.
It’s wrong on so many levels.
Imagine trying to run such a point-by-point mandate past some of better founding fathers that thrived on dissent and debate. You’d be laughed out of the building with such a list. Subhuman? Vermin? Scum? Not having a right to debate? Wishing public execution on them?
Take a step back, folks. Geesh.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:41 am“Some members of Sadr’s bloc are pressuring him not to extend†the ceasefire, “which expires later this month and has been vital to cutting violence in Iraq.â€
If it expires and is not renewed, the success or failure of “the surge” will be readily discernible.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:43 amOh wait, you have a right to debate, and to even exist… But only if your points coincide with their points. Otherwise get out and die in a terrorist attack.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:43 ambobcat, you haven’t seen good golly’s posts then, I assume.
I must admit that those adjectives may be out of line, but when people are being bombed mercilessly and every 3 seconds dies a person from starvation, then I would say that adjectives are the least we can worry about.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:44 am184 it’s a new troll tactic…..it’s called being a concern troll……..it’s an act dummy.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:45 amAlthough Ike is an ignorant when it comes to energy sources, I would say that I agree with him: Fred, you are getting boring.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:46 am“Sen. Arlen Specter’s one-senator war against the New England Patriots has a big problem: The three-time Super Bowl-winning team has its own Senate patron in Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy.â€
I’d be more interested in seeing some of Arlen’s Philly enthusiasm unleashed on corrupt practices in, and undue WH influence on, DoJ practices and investigations!
February 7th, 2008 at 11:47 amHey, I’m far from ignorant on energy topics. Our positions are different, but that does not make me ignorant.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:49 amAlthough Ike is an ignorant when it comes to energy sources, I would say that I agree with him: Fred, you are getting boring.
Comment by Juan C.
get involved and do something to help or stay out of the way……..if you’re helpless against them…..why should I take you seriously……they play their little game and you want to just let them…….kofa
February 7th, 2008 at 11:50 amOur positions are different, but that does not make me ignorant.
Comment by Ike_Skelton
Ok, I´m sorry.
You want nuclear plants when the energy from the sun is free!!!! I just don’t get it.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:51 amI’ve seen good golly’s posts and I ignore them for what they are : content-free rants.
To respond to them with the same such helps nothing.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:51 amWhatever, Fred.
Keep the guard up. Don’t let that hate of yours fade away.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:52 amYou people are no better than the people you so despise.
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 11:37 am
People who condemn people who support torture (waterboarding as golly_goofy was when JMOHR posted that ) than the fascists that support torture, huh?
Not everyone accused of being a troll is one, but if you are chimpy-humping torture lover that cheers at the death of women and children in another country, JMOHR’s list applies to you.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:56 am“get involved and do something to help or stay out of the way……..if you’re helpless against them…..why should I take you seriously……they play their little game and you want to just let them…….kofa”
Fred – Juan C. has been offering constructive and good arguments this entire thread regarding clean energy while debating Ike.
You, just keep beating the “troll troll troll troll” drum. What have you done to “get involved and help”? I would maintain that you are playing ‘their little game’ by your drum beating.
And what’s ‘kofa?’
February 7th, 2008 at 11:56 amWell, either way, the conservative ideology is bankrupt and harmful. Conservatives have, for centuries, done everything in their power to collect the power among themselves: the few, the rich, the mean. No matter what era or culture, the conservatives are sure to resort to mass-murder, violence and subterfuge. They have been against anybody but white male landowners voting, they were against Child Labor laws, they killed people who wanted to form unions; the list is quite long. Reaching out to them almost always involves drawing your bloodied hand back, missing a finger or two. Their self-interest and greed are legendary, and they are proud of their lack of compassion. I find that they are the enemy of progress and human dignity, for thousands of years. And any of them that speak reasonably are simply manipulating those that will be drawn in to trust them. On top of that, they have gotten worse over the years, more violent and less reasonable. so while the captain pretends to be reasonable, don’t forget that he supports the crew trashing the USA and its Constitution, all for the sake of some oil money.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:58 amAnd what’s ‘kofa?’
Comment by bobcat_grad
kiss old freds ass
February 7th, 2008 at 11:58 amget involved and do something to help or stay out of the way……..if you’re helpless against them…..why should I take you seriously……they play their little game and you want to just let them…….kofa
Comment by Fred — February 7, 2008 @ 11:50 am
Fred, you need to step back from your computer and chill. Get a smoke, drink or something.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:00 pmYour way out of line.
Fred – Juan C. has been offering constructive and good arguments this entire thread regarding clean energy while debating Ike.Comment by bobcat_grad
uh, he started the thread with a recomendation that we mine the area around the grand canyon for uranium…….can we draw a distintion between bullshit and honest discusssions please?
February 7th, 2008 at 12:01 pmFred, you need to step back from your computer and chill. Get a smoke, drink or something.
Your way out of line.
Comment by Wayne
ok you got it…….i’m done trying
February 7th, 2008 at 12:02 pm#203 -
I’m not a fan of Nuclear energy at all, but I prefer it to the vast comsumption of fossil fuels that is occuring for both the impact to global warming and our ridiculous reliance on Middle Eastern oil. That damn oil is causing problems on so many fronts it’s ridiculous. If we didn’t need it so bad, we wouldn’t be so damn interested in trying to ’spread democracy’ there. (Which is a complete joke… you can’t force democracy on any society. By definition, it is a bottom-up movement.)
I’m going to support clean energy research until I’m green in the face (hah! get it?). But if nuclear energy is used as a bridge to gap fossil to clean, I’ll grudgingly accept it.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:07 pmI’m not sure what you’re talking about Fred, but if you’re talking about me, then I think you mean that I started out in this thread suggesting we use any uranium that is found in the Grand Canyon area for new nuclear plants. I never proposed mining in the Grand Canyon, a British mining company did.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:07 pmThird undersea Internet cable cut in Mideast
*** The coincidences just keep piling up!
Comment by 2MillionLightYearsToAndromeda — February 7, 2008 @ 9:03 am
Now a total of FIVE cables cut, perhaps nine, and Iran Oil Bourse opening delayed from February 11 to February 18, where speculation abounds that they will be using Euros instead of dollars.
Also, countries not effected are Israel and Iraq in the Middle Eat.
Egyptian Maritime security reports no ships dragging anchors in the vicinities of cut cables for 12 hours before and after.
It’s great being a Coincidence Theorist isn’t it!!!
http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/ConnectingTheDots.htm
February 7th, 2008 at 12:09 pmWayne. What you don’t see is that noone here fits that description.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
Didn’t say any did =)
February 7th, 2008 at 12:11 pmNot everyone accused of being a troll is one, but if you are chimpy-humping torture lover that cheers at the death of women and children in another country, JMOHR’s list applies to you.
Comment by Wayne
Well said, Wayne.
To me, it’s kind of silly to tag people as troll or not troll, we in this blog tend too much to make premature judgements about everybody, which is not a good way to debate, however, there are people who post who DESERVES JHMOR’s list by all means. People who murder or cheer on the murder of people need to be called on. People who defended Iraq invasion need to be labeled as murderer supporters.
We tend too much to worry about form, when what matters is content.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:11 pmholy cow…
fred – juan’s name is not associated with any “grand canyon” comment…
jeesh…
and bobcat_grad @ 11:56 am was correct again…
maybe you ARE just doing your job here after all…
yesterday i wanted to ask you if you’d marry me – but only if you
enjoy gardening… today, ehhh, not so much…
back to my project…
February 7th, 2008 at 12:13 pmFred, I gotta stand up for the Cap’n here. He says some off-the-wall things at times, but in my opinion, he’s not a troll. He’s genuinely here for discussion and is mostly respectful. Sure, he occasionally makes some outlandish statements, but that’s to be expected; he’s a conservative. For the most part, I take his remarks seriously enough, but with a sense of humor.
Ike, on the other hand, veers toward trolldom, particularly concern-trolldom, a little too frequently for my taste. Like yesterday, when he complained about name-calling on the threads, and then immediately followed up that comment with:
You’re a little slow aren’t you? Learn the internets homo.
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 6, 2008 @ 3:40 pm
and
You slowtards assume that I’m a republican because I’m annoyed by the immature name changing that goes on in here?
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 6, 2008 @ 4:06 pm
I’m just saying.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:13 pmNuclear power plants have failed to deliver cheap, clean energy. This technology is not the answer to our energy problems. Moreover, the known reserves of uranium are quite small. Were we to build enough plants to replace oil consumption, it would deplete the known reserves within a few decades. Also, nuclear power plants are extremely capital and material intensive to build because of the huge amount of concrete needed for containment. I suggest reading “The End of the Age of Oil” by CalTech Professor David Goodstein for more information on why nuclear power is a bad idea.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:14 pmOK, I didn’t complain about name calling, I complained about name changing. There is a difference. And way to bring that up again. So, who wants to get into it with me now? Is there something about my name that says I’m here looking for a fight, or what?
February 7th, 2008 at 12:16 pmbut first:
Brain From Planet Arous @ 12:09 pm – i found this from the google news:
http://government.zdnet.com/?p=3644
for what it’s worth…
February 7th, 2008 at 12:17 pmThe Sun would be the best alternative for energy, but you’re right when you suggest that it won’t be enough, for the foreseeable future.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
It won’t be enough?
You realize that energy from the sun produces the weather (hurricanes, winds, sea currents, FOSSIL FUELS…?
The whole world consumes 450 EJ per year. The sun insolation per year is 7500 times greater than that.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:17 pmWe tend too much to worry about form, when what matters is content.
Comment by Juan C. — February 7, 2008 @ 12:11 pm
I agree. I also submit that most of the time when someone begins to discuss style and form at this site, it is a concern troll trying to derail the thread. Not always, but often.
I also am glad that Wonder Llama pointed out Ike’s hypocrisy about the name calling. This severely undercuts Ike’s credibility in any discussion about form.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:18 pmFrom what I recall, Stalin wasn’t conservative and their was plenty of ‘mass-murder, violence and subterfuge’ under his watch.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
No, he was a liberal… hahahahahaha.
Tell that to Trotsky.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:19 pmOT, sorry..For all Washington state voter’s..Our caucus is Saturday…Because of the caucus all the (can-de dates )are coming to the state by Saturday. Time to run out and catch a view of them in person cause after the election’s they will be in office or retired never to be seen in person again..LOL…You may now return to you usual program….Blessings
February 7th, 2008 at 12:20 pmkaty. ;)
I know you hate bad grammar. Believe me, when it comes to Spanish I can’t stand it. I would write slower now.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:21 pmThe whole world consumes 450 EJ per year. The sun insolation per year is 7500 times greater than that.
Comment by Juan C. — February 7, 2008 @ 12:17 pm
Juan is correct about these numbers (I again refer you to Goodstein’s book for an excellent exposition on this subject).
We can provide for all the earth’s energy needs without adding nuclear power plants. We need to develop a variety of alternative energy sources to solve the energy puzzle. What we really need is to find a way to manufacture photovoltaics cheaply and in a scalable way. Conventional semiconductor-based photovoltaics aren’t promising in this regard. Something based on conducting polymers or electrolyte solutions might be the answer. But there is no magic bullet, no single source that will solve the problem. Especially not nuclear.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:21 pm#217 -
Thanks for the book recommendation. I’ll check it out.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:22 pmChrist. I didn’t complain about name calling, I did name calling. I complained about stupid name changing and wordplay.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:22 pmfred – juan’s name is not associated with any “grand canyon†comment…
Comment by katy
it was directed at Ike….
ok guys, you can’t have it both ways…….mantastic is not a troll? WTF? One day they are worthless scum to you and now they are reasonable? When did that happen……..could it be……when it was convienient for them to garner sympathy…….ok. whatever….I bow to the majority..
February 7th, 2008 at 12:22 pmConventional semiconductor-based photovoltaics aren’t promising in this regard.
I’ve been trying to say this. Current photovoltaic technology will be a reasonable answer. Many large scale systems cost more than they will save in the life of the system and will never recoup the cost.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:24 pmIs there something about my name that says I’m here looking for a fight, or what?
Comment by Ike_Skelton
Nah, it’s your piss-poor, victimized, over-reacting attitude.
Fred, STFU, I’m not a troll. You’re a troll as much as I am. What’s your problem? I come in here with a legit comment, and you call me a troll?
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 10:00 am
Stop trying to thread jack this thread by starting a fight with me about being a troll.
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 10:00 am
Yup, that’s it. Then two whiny posts in a row, all because someone called you a troll. How typical, and reeks more of thread-jacking than Fred’s comments.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:24 pmJuan is correct about these numbers (I again refer you to Goodstein’s book for an excellent exposition on this subject).
Comment by VerbalKint
Forgot my source: World Energy Council.
But there is no magic bullet, no single source that will solve the problem.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:26 pmComment by VerbalKint
BINGO.
Christ. I didn’t complain about name calling, I did name calling.
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
Alright, then name calling is back on. There is a bit of a wild west element to this place, and frankly I like it. It is a safe way to blow off steam.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:27 pmYeah, so I got into it with some troll yesterday about him calling me a troll, big f’n deal. I can’t defend my good name?
February 7th, 2008 at 12:27 pmCurrent photovoltaic technology will be a reasonable answer. Many large scale systems cost more than they will save in the life of the system and will never recoup the cost.
Comment by Ike_Skelton
Well, what about small wind turbines? It has the lowest payback time.
The solutions are there…
February 7th, 2008 at 12:27 pmIs there something about my name that says I’m here looking for a fight, or what?
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 12:16 pm
Nope. Something about your behavior.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:27 pmForget my behavior in that thread yesterday, I got attacked and became defensive. Should I revert back to that today? Will that make you happy? Or should I continue to discuss energy policy civilly?
February 7th, 2008 at 12:30 pmIke Skelton. 12:22: “Christ. I didn’t complain about TOMAY-TO, I complained about TOMAH-TO.”
Thanks for clearing that up.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:30 pmIs there something about my name that says I’m here looking for a fight, or what?
Comment by Ike_Skelton — February 7, 2008 @ 12:16 pm
Nope. Something about your behavior.
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — February 7, 2008 @ 12:27 pm
Yeah, I didn’t get your “veering toward” comment above. Troll behavior is obvious.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:31 pmWho needs photovoltaics?
http://www.stirlingenergy.com/whatisastirlingengine.htm
or
http://www.californiasolarcenter.org/solareclips/2003.01/20030128-6.html
Wake up people. The energy crisis answer has been flying over your heads for hundreds of thousands of years.
Hell, even fossil fuels owe their caloric energy output to the Sun.
WAKE UP.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:32 pmFred -
So everyone that disagrees with the progressive take on issues = troll?
How do you ever hope to get people to see our side on issues if you attack them the moment they ask a question? Are there trolls that pop in here? Hell yea, there are. But some people really do like debate and are capable of accepting other’s points of views. Re-read something Captain said:
“I have been wrong about many things in my life. I change my mind slowly, but I do try to have an open mind and listen to people. I am trying to have a better appreciation for what progressives think, because I don’t naturally think like they do.
I don’t believe in God, but I will say you are a godsend. It is refreshing to have a new take on the discourse here. I think the focus has been on overcoming opposition so long, it’s gotten perverted. Sometimes it’s hard to see the forest through the trees. Thank you.”
I want you to tell me that you would have received such a response from someone who really does want to get a better understanding of what divides us by calling them names and attacking their very existence.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:33 pmForgive me for intruding, Ike. Continue with your discussion of energy policy.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:35 pmI’m through. You’re in here to cause trouble. Good job. Is that not trollish behavior?
February 7th, 2008 at 12:39 pmLefty Patriot. There is no doubt their has been some evil conservatives, but maybe your painting with too broad a brush.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — February 7, 2008 @ 12:12 pm
I would like to join this “conversation”. Let’s be realistic. The term left and right are becoming meaningless, especially in the November election. Ron Paul is more progressive than Hillary in many ways. Kucinich was pushed out because of the “liberal” (LOL!!!!!) media. We have Obama saying he might bomb Iran or go into Pakistan. We will probably see Hillary vs McCain in November. Both sides will try and “Out macho” the other. Meanwhile does anyone notice there really is not a lot of difference between them. Hillary leaps up when Bush talks about more wars at the State of the Union. The Conservatives are ready to vote for her, and dislike McCain. The vast majority of this country and a super majority of the rest of the planet (except Israel and the mullahs) want peace.
I know phonies that call themselves liberal, and I also know phonies that call themselves Conservative. I know heavy stoners from the 60s who say they too like Clinton “Did not inhale”. I know Conservatives that would jump in and save a drowning person or animal. I know Conservatives that would use a homeless person as a door mat, and liberals who will scoop up an injured pigeon and nurse them to health.
Historically, Let’s look at Democrats. FDR pushed us to war with Germany. Truman (Democrat) dropped the A bombs against Eisenhower’s (Republican) wishes. JFK did not want Israel to have nukes, and he did not want to escalate Vietnam. LBJ allowed the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, encouraging it. He also wanted an escalation of Vietnam, contrived by the false flag Gulf of Tonkin. Clinton was bombing Kosovo, and gleefully signing NAFTA and GATT, which Ross Perot warned us about.
Now Republicans are the same. Reagan destroying Unions, and pushing the debt based economy, as well as invading Grenada. Bush Sr and his “New World Order”, invading Panama, trying out new weaponry, and killing 3000 innocents, and finally attacking Iraq based on the false flag Kuwaiti incubator hoax. There is so much written about Bush Jr, that I do not need to list his highlights as that would take too long.
I think there are decent people are both sides, and in my opinion, the elite of the One Party System with Two Illusionary Branches want to eliminate the middle class. To blanket statement “All Conservatives are fascist idiots” or all “liberals are Un-American Commies”, is exactly what the Upper Crust wants us to do.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:40 pm#229, your knowledge is obsolete. A startup (of which Google is a major investor) is now producing photovoltaics “printed” on sheets of aluminum for half what it costs to build a coal plant with the same power output. Even adding installation costs, you’re still marginally beating coal – and that’s before you’ve bought your first ton of coal that will actually be burned.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:41 pm#229, your knowledge is obsolete. A startup (of which Google is a major investor) is now producing photovoltaics “printed†on sheets of aluminum for half what it costs to build a coal plant with the same power output. Even adding installation costs, you’re still marginally beating coal – and that’s before you’ve bought your first ton of coal that will actually be burned.
Comment by PeterW — February 7, 2008 @ 12:41 pm
Do you have references for this? It’s a fascinating approach and I’d like to read more.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:45 pmNeeds to be repeated, ad nauseam:
the elite of the One Party System with Two Illusionary Branches want to eliminate the middle class. To blanket statement “All Conservatives are fascist idiots†or all “liberals are Un-American Commiesâ€, is exactly what the Upper Crust wants us to do.
Comment by Brain From Planet Arous
And thus the “third parties are a waste of votes” argument as well.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:48 pmCurrent photovoltaic technology will be a reasonable answer. Many large scale systems cost more than they will save in the life of the system and will never recoup the cost.
Comment by Ike_Skelton
It costs more than building a nuclear power plant and storing the nuclear waste for the next 300 generations?
February 7th, 2008 at 12:48 pmI really doubt that.
243 I think this country is divided…..I think the conservatives have divided us….remember republican legislators telling democrats to sit down and shut up….that they were in power now……look at the last 7 years before 2004….were there any republicans who were bipartisan?
it’s like the cristians standing quietly as bush wages war in thier name…..
there will be few compromises…..for 40 years the conservatives were marginalized in the legislature……yet you never say the types of partizan bickering you have seen since the conservatives gained power…..
Things will be different when the conservatives are the minority again….probably for a long time….
February 7th, 2008 at 12:53 pmI think there are decent people are both sides, and in my opinion, the elite of the One Party System with Two Illusionary Branches want to eliminate the middle class. To blanket statement “All Conservatives are fascist idiots†or all “liberals are Un-American Commiesâ€, is exactly what the Upper Crust wants us to do.
Comment by Brain From Planet Arous — February 7, 2008 @ 12:40 pm
Well Said!
February 7th, 2008 at 12:54 pm#245: The company is called Nanosolar. This NYT article should help with details:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/18/technology/18solar.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
For some parsing of the meaning, where I found the link:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/12/18/17382/194
Their production is apparently sold out for the next 12 monts minimum.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:55 pmComment by PeterW — February 7, 2008 @ 12:55 pm
Thanks for the links =)
February 7th, 2008 at 12:57 pmDunno if this particular solar plant has popped up in the previous 250 posts
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6616651.stm
but it is totally awesome! I just can’t get the image of these things surrounding Las Vegas out of my head – all the lights would be free and they would fit perfectly with the glam of the city.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:58 pmComment by Brain From Planet Arous — February 7, 2008 @ 12:40 pm
You earned a rare recommend from me. Well said Brain.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:59 pmI think part of the reluctance to embrace wind and solar (and the eagerness to parrot discredited excuses as to why they can’t do the job) is that they’re passive forms of energy.
On one level, there’s a failure of imagination – people think, “they’re just sitting there – how can they possibly compete with something that burns!”
On another, destructive energy methods are inextricably linked in our culture with notions of male sexual virility. Call for the obsolescence of the internal combustion engine, as Gore once did, and you’re guaranteed to be called slang for the female sex organ. Same goes for nuclear – in many minds, it’s manly.
I count myself lucky that my own attributes are sufficient to establish my own virility in my own psyche, and don’t need proxies from the outside world to do it for me.
February 7th, 2008 at 1:03 pmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/ 2/ hi/ science/ nature/ 6616651.stm
Comment by Keltoi — February 7, 2008 @ 12:58 pm
That is so cool. I have read about the design but I didn’t know anyone had implemented it yet.
That is awsome.
February 7th, 2008 at 1:03 pmCaptainMantastic may be trying to turn over a new leaf, but as to a post where he was being trollish, I submit:
Boycotting Fox is pathetic and weak. If you can’t stand up to a news network, how will you lead the free world. I would be embarrased to be a Democrat. Get some balls or go home.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — May 26, 2007 @ 10:20 pm
I’ll be willing to cut you a little slack, Mantastic, as I did have to dig all the way back to May 2007, but please be aware that you DO have a history of trollish behavior.
Now, from this thread, I see you’re being reasonable. OK, as a social liberal and fiscal moderate, I can say that there are a few core conservative ideals that I can agree with. Not constantly feeding money into people who would rather suck at the government teat than work and earn their own money. Approaching things deliberately and calmly, with an eye towards the engineering principles of KISS and IIABDFI (’Keep it simple stupid’ and ‘If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’). Libertarianism does have a bit of an appeal to me, though the excesses of completely eliminating government programs makes me wonder how we’ll avert a repeat of the Great Depression.
Todays conservatives, however, do have an issue with mating Fiscal Libertarianism/Liberalism (root: Liberty, means Right-Wing fiscal policy) with Social Authoritarianism — telling my wife what she can do with her body, what stuff I can put in my body, nosing into my wife and my private business, etc. One of the hallmarks of Fascism (Right-Wing Totalitarianism) is mating this ‘We tell you how you must live your life’ with allowing businesses free reign. Throw in some theocracy for good measure, and you have the US as Bush wants it to be. These are the people with whom you keep your company, Mantastic, and this is why you do catch flak for being a ‘troll’. Since you have worked hard to turn over a new leaf from last May, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and will try to work hard to keep from trashing you simply because you have some of the same beliefs as Good_Golly, Exley, USA_Patriot/Bigfoot, etc.
February 7th, 2008 at 1:26 pmso, a slick troll is ok……it’s just the dumb one’s that you can abuse.
February 7th, 2008 at 1:32 pmFred, trust me, the MOMENT Mantastic starts acting trollish, I’ll come down on him like a ton of bricks….flagging the hell out of him like I did O.Bigfoot and USA_Patriot. But having a conservative viewpoint isn’t a trolling offense, much as we wish it should be. ;)
February 7th, 2008 at 1:42 pmSigh… again Fred: just because they disagree with you does not make them a troll.
February 7th, 2008 at 1:43 pmHere is an example from his first post in this thread of his so called “conservative viewpoint”
Or maybe it’s possible your assessment of the POTUS is exaggerated and inaccurate.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
February 7th, 2008 at 1:47 pmFred, I see nothing wrong with that post. Yes, he thinks your assessment of Bush is exaggerated and inaccurate…and he’s entitled to his opinion. Until he throws out something like:
, though, I think we should cut him some slack. :)
February 7th, 2008 at 1:52 pmFred, can you please give us your definition of troll?
February 7th, 2008 at 1:55 pmI think part of the reluctance to embrace wind and solar (and the eagerness to parrot discredited excuses as to why they can’t do the job) is that they’re passive forms of energy.
On one level, there’s a failure of imagination – people think, “they’re just sitting there – how can they possibly compete with something that burns!â€
Comment by PeterW — February 7, 2008 @ 1:03 pm
You remember HG Wells “War of The Worlds?”. It was bacteria that saved us from invading Martians after all of the most sophisticated weaponry failed. I see an analogy here. What you say about Passive Wind and Solar is correct, and Hydrogen Fuel cells currently need petroleum to extract hydrogen fuel.
Bacteria are changing that now. Read carefully, as Wind, Solar, and Bacteria-Produced Hydrogen are poised to eliminate the environmentally and politically dangerous Oil industry:
http://www.wired.com/cars/energy/news/2007/11/hydrogen_bacteria
February 7th, 2008 at 1:59 pmFred, as I made clear above, I have a certain amount of respect for the Cap’n, and for Keltoi too. They are certainly not in the same class as GiGi, Troll JK, O’Bigfool… the usual suspects.
I think we degrade the meaning of any term when it’s used indiscriminately (like the way Republicans use terms like “traitor” or “socialist”) and “troll is no different. It has a clear meaning we all understand; a pest who clogs up threads with the sole intention of self-amusement.
Neither Cap’n nor Keltoi fall into this category. There are a couple of others, too, but the true trolls far outnumber them.
February 7th, 2008 at 2:03 pmRalph, yes, and that is a problem. Mind you, Mantastic is not lily white, but at least in this thread, he’s behaving himself.
It’s a tragedy that the good must suffer for the actions of the bad, but that is the way of life, it seems. :(
February 7th, 2008 at 2:18 pmyou make choises you have to live with……I’m fine with it.
I just look at them like herp lipped whores….if you’re going to kiss one you might as well kiss them all……
February 7th, 2008 at 2:25 pmIt’s not hard to dig up ugly posts by people if you’re willing to take the time and your google-fu is up to it. But yes, I cut you some slack based on how many items I had to search through to find it.
Sorry you have to suffer the consequences of others actions….
February 7th, 2008 at 3:48 pmDaniel Ellsberg, the man who leaked the Pentagon Papers during Nixon’s presidency in 1971, fears that before the Bush administration leaves office, it will try to attack Iran. In an interview with Truthout, Ellsberg discusses Bush’s plans to begin a war with Iran and the role of the press to give whistleblowers exposure. He emphasizes that, no matter how much time is left, impeachment is one thing that must happen for the sake of preserving American democracy
but in the meantime……..while we’re waiting…..we need to be civil to the other side…..the ones that supported this man getting elected…..mantastic will be sure to have somthing worth discussing with us about how to fix the mess he is a part of creating……I don’t get it.
country is split like no other and the conservattives are responsible for that…..so now we are expected to sit down in the same room with this vermin and be civil to them…..after all they are responsible for……
mantastic supported the people who torture…..and want us to accept it…
mantastic supported the people who are shredding your constitution and all you can think about is how civil you are behaving…….it is time for the gloves to come off……..why should these people have any input whatsoever in repairing what they so maliciously destroyed….
February 7th, 2008 at 3:58 pmSenate breaks stimulus stalemate
By ANDREW TAYLOR and JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON – Senate Republicans and Democrats agreed Thursday to add rebates for 20 million seniors and 250,000 disabled veterans to a House-passed economic aid package, ending a partisan stalemate over the plan.
The key breakthrough came when Democrats, under pressure from party colleagues in the House, agreed to drop their insistence on adding jobless benefits, heating aid for the poor and business subsidies, and said they would allow a vote on a plan that merely extends the tax rebates to Social Security retirees and disabled veterans.
The package would rush tax rebates of $600 for individuals and $1,200 for couples to most taxpayers and grant businesses tax cuts in hopes of reviving the economy. Individuals earning up to $75,000 a year and couples earning up to $150,000 would get rebates. People who paid no income taxes but earned at least $3,000 a year would get a $300 rebate.
The turnaround came after Democrats on Wednesday fell just one vote short of pressing their larger, $205 billion plan past a GOP filibuster.
Democrats huddled Thursday and opted not to continue the battle and instead speed the bipartisan measure to President Bush.
The retreat came after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi split with Reid to side with Republicans, including McConnell, and called on the Senate to stop its infighting and pass the bill.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:21 pm“And you’re asking me for an apology. Sounds a little thin skinned.”
Comment by CaptainMantastic —
As I thought, you can dish it, but you can’t take it. You’re a hack.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:11 pm“We can agree to disagree on that. Peace. Honestly.”
Comment by CaptainMantastic
Until the next time you take someone’s word out of context…
February 7th, 2008 at 8:37 pm