Obama’s First 100 Hours: A Clean Break From Bush
Obama’s First 100 Hours: A Clean Break From Bush
At 4 pm ET today, it will mark exactly 100 hours since Barack Obama became the 44th President of the United States. The first week on the job has been a very busy one for the new White House, as the Obama administration has worked quickly to repair the damage done under the last eight years of President Bush.
As President Obama indicated in his inauguration speech, he is seeking to chart a new way forward in domestic and foreign policy. Obama has made a clean break from the Bush legacy in his early going, undertaking a number of actions that the former President would never have considered. ThinkProgress has compiled a report documenting Obama’s record so far:
REGULATIONS
The Bush Record: In his final months, the Bush administration issued a series of “midnight regulations” that gutted safeguards protecting health, safety, the environment, and the public’s general welfare.
Obama’s Clean Break: Hours after his inauguration, Obama ordered a freeze on new regulations at all government agencies and departments and the withdrawal of all final or proposed regulations not yet published in the Federal Register.
IRAQ
The Bush Record: After using false intelligence to launch the war, Bush “surged” 30,000 troops to Iraq in 2007 and vetoed all attempts to end the war.
Obama’s Clean Break: Two days into his presidency, Obama called on U.S. military leaders to start to plan for a responsible withdrawal.
DIPLOMACY
The Bush Record: In his first term, Bush — in contrast to President Bill Clinton — “generally avoided robust efforts” to resolve the Middle East conflict. Bush demeaned diplomacy with “terrorists and radicals,” likening it to the “appeasement” of Nazi Germany.
Obama’s Clean Break: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton rejected the “rigid ideology” of Bush and pledged to exercise “smart power.” Stressing diplomacy, Obama and Clinton “appointed high-level emissaries to handle the Arab-Israeli issue and Pakistan and Afghanistan.”
TORTURE
The Bush Record: Torture began with the drafting of a secret legal memo holding that Bush could authorize interrogators to violate anti-torture laws. Bush’s senior-most officials approved torture that, in some cases, lead to death.
Obama’s Clean Break: Obama signed executive orders ending the CIA’s secret prisons and ending torture by requiring interrogations to abide by the Army Field Manual.
GUANTANAMO
The Bush Record: Bush created the “legal black hole” that is Guantanamo Bay. He called the harsh treatment of detainees there “an absurd allegation” and was rebuked time and again by the Supreme Court.
Obama’s Clean Break: On his first day, Obama signed an executive order closing Gitmo in one year and suspended all military tribunals for six months.
TRANSPARENCY
The Bush Record: Two out of five FOIA requests filed in 2006 were not processed. The number of exemptions increased 83 percent since 1998.
Obama’s Clean Break: Obama issued new orders instructing all agencies to “adopt a presumption in favor” of FOIA requests. Obama is developing an “Open Government Directive” over the next four months.
REVOLVING DOOR
The Bush Record: Many former Bush officials “joined the ranks of the companies they once regulated where they are highly compensated. In many instances, they have helped their new employers obtain lucrative government grants and contracts.”
Obama’s Clean Break: Obama laid out stringent lobbying limits that will ban aides from trying to influence the administration when they leave his staff and will ban gifts from lobbyists to anyone in the administration.
WOMEN’S RIGHTS
The Bush Record: Bush reinstated the Global Gag Rule, which prohibited aid from going toward any organization that mentioned abortion as an option in family planning. Sixteen countries lost access to birth control.
Obama’s Clean Break: Obama overturned the Gag Rule on Jan. 23.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Just waiting for the first troll to show up and try to taunt us “libs” for electing Obama because he won’t change a thing from BushCo.
What, you think a list of facts will stop them?
Huh. You don’t know trolls, then.
Facts to trolls are like bullets to Superman. They just bounce right off.
January 24th, 2009 at 12:32 pmI can’t wait to see if Obama can repair the remainder of the damage Heri booooosh caused to this country in the remaining 34076 hours.
January 24th, 2009 at 12:35 pm“Goodbye, from the world’s biggest dickhead.”
I’m honestly surprised that more of us aren’t writing more prolifically about Russell Tice’s interview with Olbermann a couple of days ago about the NSA’s illegal wiretapping of the nation.
January 24th, 2009 at 12:38 pmI feel like Alice in Wonderland! Finally, someone who has both common sense and intelligence in the WH. I know I will not approve of everything he does, but just by doing what he has, I think we have our country back. Thank God!
January 24th, 2009 at 12:40 pmend the bullshlt war on drugs.
legalize it & tax it.
January 24th, 2009 at 12:40 pmBye Bye AEI!
January 24th, 2009 at 12:40 pm“Obama’s First 100 Hours: A Clean Break From Bush”
– - And don’t forget Obama did in 24 hours what it took Bush 4 years to do; take the oath twice.
January 24th, 2009 at 12:45 pm…the Bush administration…gutted… the public’s general welfare.
General Welfare? Some dang librul must of thought of that. Good thing Bush gutted it.
January 24th, 2009 at 12:47 pmYeah but he didn’t plug the whole in the ozone layer, end world hunger, solve the problem of cold fusion or make the Cubs win the pennant.
Rock on, Mr. President!
January 24th, 2009 at 12:48 pmlegalize it & tax it.
—
January 24th, 2009 at 12:50 pmand don’t criticize it….
Alecto Says:
I can’t wait to see if Obama can repair the remainder of the damage Heri booooosh caused to this country in the remaining 34076 hours.
Judging from his start, I ain’t as concerned about the if…I am looking forward to the how.
January 24th, 2009 at 12:52 pmdbadass, I’m not one to partake, but I completely agree.
January 24th, 2009 at 12:53 pmJudging from last night’s performance by Daryll, President Obama still can’t fix stupid. Not in 100 hours, not in 100 years. The inauguration obviously pushed the Ruptured One completely over the edge.
January 24th, 2009 at 1:03 pmdbadass, you ask much. Everybody knows how well Prohibition worked so it stands to reason it should work with drugs.
January 24th, 2009 at 1:04 pmI’m impressed with Obama so far; I think he is shoving it right back up GWB’s @ss.
¶ AIO
January 24th, 2009 at 1:04 pmHoodathunk Says:
Yeah but he didn’t … make the Cubs win the pennant.
– - As every true White Sox fan – like Obama (and me) – will attest to. that’s the LAST thing he’d want to happen.
January 24th, 2009 at 1:09 pmlarkohio Says:
I feel like Alice in Wonderland! Finally, someone who has both common sense and intelligence in the WH. I know I will not approve of everything he does, but just by doing what he has, I think we have our country back. Thank God!
And don’t forget his best asset…a spine of steel!
January 24th, 2009 at 1:09 pmgummitch Says:
Judging from last night’s performance by Daryll, President Obama still can’t fix stupid. Not in 100 hours, not in 100 years. The inauguration obviously pushed the Ruptured One completely over the edge.
Actually, it seems to have pushed all conservatives over the edge. I simply can’t believe the things that are coming out of their mouths these days. Whining, crying, tearing out their hair. I’m loving it. And then when the traitor Limpballs openly says he is hoping Obama fails (and thereby the country), well that is certainly another nail in their coffins.
January 24th, 2009 at 1:12 pmIt took a Major depression to reverse the Misguided Prohibition on Alcohal.
Maybe History will Repeat itself with regards to the Prohibition on Drugs.
The Greatest National Security Threat America Faces (aside.,perhaps, from Global Climate Change) are the Islamist Terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan….and they are almost entirely Funded by Poppies and the Illegal Drug Trade.
Ending Prohibition would end the enormous Profits generated by declaring a Flower to be Illegal.
January 24th, 2009 at 1:13 pmHey, I’m a big White Sox fan too. Check out this video, it’s fricking hilarious!
http://hirejimessian.com/2008/12/07/winter-meetings-preview/
January 24th, 2009 at 1:13 pmskarecro Says:
end the bullshlt war on drugs.
legalize it & tax it.
I agree with you when it comes to drugs like pot. Not so sure on the others.
One thing I would love to see Obama do is to legalize growing of hemp. That would go a long ways towards revitalizing our agriculture industry and allow tobacco farmers a way to earn a living while switching from growing tobacco to food crops.
January 24th, 2009 at 1:14 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
dbadass, I’m not one to partake, but I completely agree.
People don’t realize how much an impact this would have on fixing the economy and Chimpy’s ClusterF@ck… If anyone missed it, CNBC did a great show about the other night. Check it out…
http://www.hulu.com/watch/54312/cnbc-originals-marijuana-inc
January 24th, 2009 at 1:14 pmNational Geo did a report on weed too, AMAZING!!!
Something that works so well in so many areas makes complete sense to keep illegal. (please note the sarcasm)
I did see a show the other night, not sure if it was the CNBC one, but there are a lot of places that weed sustains the local economy.
It will eventually legal…. sooner is better than later.
January 24th, 2009 at 1:21 pm“A Clean Break!” Gee, that was the document the neocons wrote for Netanyahu back in the late ’90s.
http://www.iasps.org/strat1.htm
January 24th, 2009 at 1:34 pmAfter an inaugural speech that brought tears to my eyes , which reflected my hopes almost perfectly ,Obama affirmed much of the faith we have hoped is not misplaced in him with these first executive orders .
January 24th, 2009 at 1:35 pmKeep it up , the planet needs to know that the US has rejoined the civilised world.
….. Now about Israel……
Users….are in need of medical attention, not prison, no matter the drug. Our prisons are full of nonviolent, victimless(except for themselves) addicts.
The act of inprisonment is in itself a crime.
January 24th, 2009 at 1:43 pmFred Says:
skarecro Says:
end the bullshlt war on drugs.
legalize it & tax it.
Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
I agree with you when it comes to drugs like pot. Not so sure on the others.
Users….are in need of medical attention, not prison, no matter the drug. Our prisons are full of nonviolent, victimless(except for themselves) addicts.
The act of inprisonment is in itself a crime.
Well Said Fred… We would no longer need to build prisons!
And on that note, we would have all the room for Gitmo detainee’s to have their day in court and face their accusers.
January 24th, 2009 at 1:48 pmgood job with this, TP!
lots to play with here… have a good saturday!
January 24th, 2009 at 1:56 pmGreat point, Fred.
Effective treatment programs are also a lot less expensive than incarceration. You’d think conservatives would be down with that aspect of the program.
Yet more evidence that the right-wing mind isn’t about solving problems, or at least isn’t about solving these same problems that the left wing seeks to solve.
We look at law enforcement and consider how best to lower crime rates and spend collective resources most efficiently.
Conservatives look at law enforcement and consider how to punish wrong-doers most effectively.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:04 pmAnd as an opportunity to make money from the weak and helpless.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:09 pmFred & Ralph Says:
Conservatives look at law enforcement and consider how to punish wrong-doers most effectively.
And as an opportunity to make money from the weak and helpless.
They be big on the whole stick mentality. Probably a result of their upbringing. Sad truth is punishment for the sake of punishment tends to breed the belief it is the only way.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:19 pmOne more thing: Legalize Sex – Get the churches out of our bedrooms.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:21 pmGosh, am I the first one here to rain on the parade?
Perhaps you missed this:
http://digg.com/world_news/Thus_Sprach_Barack_Pouring_Acid_on_Gaza_s_Wounds
Obama was cloistered away in a Hawaiian mushroom patch while the rest of the world witnessed a naked campaign of Terror by The State of Israel?
Instead of calling for the arrest of Israel’s leaders Obama is echoing the zionist line.
So much for Change.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:28 pmhttp://digg.com/political_opinion/Time_Will_Tell
a new troll?
January 24th, 2009 at 2:30 pmsex is 100% legal?
Did I miss something?
January 24th, 2009 at 2:30 pmDon’t go too hard on the troll. He had to give himself a military rank while cheering sending other peoples’ kids into trumped up wars in order to make money. It must be a real bummer for him to look at himself in the mirror so he has to come here and try to make up for his weakness.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:35 pmPresident Obama is doing more in 100 hrs than chimpy did in two stolen terms.
GO PRESIDENT OBAMA
January 24th, 2009 at 2:43 pmThe US and the world love President Obama.
JagPop Says
Are you concerned? Why weren’t you screaming at bush…..he was the pres at the time…….where was he? Oh, yeah.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:43 pmWhen is President Obama going to take a vacation like chimpy?
HAHAHAHA
This is our REAL-ELECTED President.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:44 pmLTdan Says:
You could see it now if you didn’t have that film of shit over your eyes.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:45 pmLTdan Says:
Looks like the libs are getting over worked up again, it will take at least a month until we see any kind of “change”. Then we can judge it.
celtic cynic – Sex is actually 100% legal, moron.
Ltdan that would be sex with the opposite sex… you know something other than your hand… I know that’s an alien concept to you–moron…
Unlike trolls we measure change by the hour not by the month…
January 24th, 2009 at 2:46 pmThat it is, and now if we can get the fundies to be less concerned with WHO we do it with, and HOW we do it in our own bedrooms.
I do believe that is what CC was trying to convey.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:52 pmLTdan Says:
celtic cynic – Sex is actually 100% legal, moron.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
No it isn’t. Not between consenting adults of the same gender in Georgia.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:57 pmshoeless link at 1:13 PM
Thank you! I laughed my ass off through the whole thing. That really was hilarious.
I recommend it even if you aren’t a fan of baseball. You don’t have to be to find it hysterically funny.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:00 pmNow he just needs to get on board with gay marriage, and also warrantless wiretapping:
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/01/obama-sides-wit.html
But he’s off to a good start!
January 24th, 2009 at 3:04 pmThanks TP for keeping a list. It beats the hell out of listing the wrongs for the last 8 years.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:07 pmGot some buddies who have you pegged as an armchair quarterback who gets a rise out of other men smacking each other (in a totally… manly… way… of course *cough*) on the a$s while watching the game. Naturally you’d get upset at anyone who would suggest such a thing, not because they’re wrong, but because you’re confronted with your own inability to understand the feelings you’ve got tucked back there with last year’s Christmas presents.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:14 pmLTdan at 3:07pm
January 24th, 2009 at 3:14 pmSpoken just like a loyal member…. of the Taliban!
suck it up ya big whiner….you aren’t deciding for the rest of us anymore…wait and see.
Even churches are allowing gay folks to be part of their religion…..
bucking an inevitable wind is not noble when you are wrong.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:16 pmLTdan,
January 24th, 2009 at 3:19 pmSex between your parents should have been illegal!
Hey, you got the same views as Hitler. You must be so proud.
Georgia sodomy laws include oral sex between man and wife being illegal—unless they have changed them.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:20 pmWhy is that, LTdan?
January 24th, 2009 at 3:24 pmLTnihilist
I am truly curious to know how you would police same sex SEX. Go from door to door? Knock DOWN doors? Drag them out into the street? Make them wear a mark to denote that they are one of THOSE?
Seriously… if it were illegal in YOUR world, how would you police activity?
January 24th, 2009 at 3:25 pmOh, I see… so we just close our eyes and it goes away?
Sticking your head in the sand makes everything alright in your world.
“Simple” ideas from a simple mind.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:28 pmAnd jeez… for the record, if we take it out of the media… you know, censor the media… that would be quite like Hitler as well.
Your true colors are showing, Dan…
January 24th, 2009 at 3:31 pmThey didn’t leave in the last 250 years, what in the world makes you think they will leave now.
You should move to Iran.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:31 pmLTdan Says:
After a few years they would leave the US.
You don’t live in the real world very much, do you?
January 24th, 2009 at 3:32 pmLTdan Says:
Old Goat, we should simply outlaw homosexuality by ignoring it. Take it out of the media, out of books, everything. Gay couples should be ignored. After a few years they would leave the US.
Yes we see who we are dealing with the — Low IQ Homo Police.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:35 pmGreat answer… Guess what, you lost and Obama Won… Sorry we don’t burn books and ignore Reality! We’ve had eight long painful years of sicking your head in the sand WINGNUT politics… Welcome to the Real World!
LTdan Says:
Wayne, as far as I am concerned, and the majority of America, sex between the same genders should stay illegal IN ALL STATES.
Oh yeah? And just how are you going to enforce that? Commit the crime of trespassing/peeping?
January 24th, 2009 at 3:35 pmA lot of old adultery and fornication laws exist, not even dividing by orientation.
Obviously sex can be a crime if one cannot or does not consent, as it should be.
Even oral sex, see the boy imprisoned for it because of one year in age difference.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:36 pmWhen things lead to death, they have to be investigated on the front burner. Maybe that’s going to happen now. Why isn’t the MSM leading with this story and sticking to it like glue?
January 24th, 2009 at 3:37 pmHey MSM, if it bleeds it leads, remember? How are you gonna top death by torture? What are you waiting for?
tsdivadani Says:
Now he just needs to get on board with gay marriage, and also warrantless wiretapping:
Ok, this is something I have been wondering for a while. Why is it so important to call two gays making a legal commitment to each other “marriage”? What difference does it make if it is called “civil unions” instead of “marriage”. Obama supports civil unions giving gays all the same rights and privileges as “married” people.
So, can someone tell me why it is so important to call it “marriage” instead of “civil unions”?
January 24th, 2009 at 3:37 pmtsdivadani Says:
Now he just needs to get on board with gay marriage, and also warrantless wiretapping:
First of all, I don’t think that Obama is going to be wiretapping anyone without a warrant. He has already said he is going back to the old system of getting FISA warrants. I also believe that he will take care of the current laws to make sure there is no warrantless wiretapping, but since he isn’t going to do it, he can take care of other more important things first.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:38 pmshoeless #20 –
January 24th, 2009 at 3:39 pmThat is hysterical!!
Gotta share that with my Cub fan friends!!
One would wonder why it matters so much that it NOT be called marriage.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:40 pmLTdan Says:
Old Goat, we should simply outlaw homosexuality by ignoring it. Take it out of the media, out of books, everything. Gay couples should be ignored. After a few years they would leave the US.
I’m free to say the same about right-wing ideology, right? I mean, we’re just two people calling the shots.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:41 pmFred Says:
Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
I agree with you when it comes to drugs like pot. Not so sure on the others.
Users….are in need of medical attention, not prison, no matter the drug. Our prisons are full of nonviolent, victimless(except for themselves) addicts.
I totally agree with you. I don’t think any drug user should be put in prison. I just don’t think it’s a good thing to legalize drugs like heroin and meth.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:41 pmOld Goat Says:
BilboHusseinBaggins says:
So, can someone tell me why it is so important to call it “marriage” instead of “civil unions”?
One would wonder why it matters so much that it NOT be called marriage.
It doesn’t matter to me what they call it. But when you have a word like “marriage” that is so deeply steeped in religious views, it is going to be hard to change people’s mind. But by calling “marriage” “civil unions” then minds may be changed and it will become a reality a lot sooner. If you look at polls and people are asked if they favor “gay marriage” many more people are opposed than if you ask if they favor “civil unions” for gay people.
If I was gay I wouldn’t care what they called it as long as it gave me the ability to commit myself to another person, legally, with all the rights and responsibilities afforded “married people”.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:44 pmWhy is it so important to deny it? Are they not citizens? Do they not pay taxes, serve in the military, etc.?
January 24th, 2009 at 3:46 pmLTdan Says:
celtic cynic – Sex is actually 100% legal, moron.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
Wayne A. Schneider Says:
No it isn’t. Not between consenting adults of the same gender in Georgia.
January 24th, 2009 at 2:57 pmLTdan Says:
LTdan Says:
Wayne, as far as I am concerned, and the majority of America, sex between the same genders should stay illegal IN ALL STATES.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
I stand corrected. “Sex is actually 100% legal”.
I did some research and found that the SCTOUS struck down anti-sodomy laws, including the one in Georgia that prompted the ruling. In 1986, Georgian police, while executing a search warrant, broke into the wrong apartment and caught two men having sex. Even though they had nothing to do with why the police were there, they were arrested and charged under the anti-sodomy laws of the time. Since then, that ruling, and all anti-sodomy laws were struck down in 2003.
So, LTdan, you were right and I was wrong.
Gay sex is 100% legal.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:46 pmThe Connecticut Democratic party is demanding a letter of apology from Lieberman.
Cantor’s wife’s private bank made a lot of money with the first half of the bailout.
Repugs are citing a COB study that shows the stimulus won’t help Americans for two years — trouble is, there is no such study!!
The judges denied Coleman’s bid to conduct an expansive new inspection of ballots around the state.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:47 pmHouse of Roberts Says:
LTdan at 3:07pm
Spoken just like a loyal member…. of the Taliban!
Like I’ve said, the afgans have the taliban, america has republicans.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:47 pmMANDATE…7 million strong..TOO MANY TO STEAL
Actually I believe it was over 9 million. A mandate for sure.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/obama-popular-vote-margin-largest-ever.html
January 24th, 2009 at 3:48 pmO/T
A reported windows worm affecting millions of computers (Conficker, Downadup, or Kido) is weighing on my mind. Here is the lowdown. For any technical expert here (Wayne and others) familiar with this, would the free version of virus protection software pack the same punch as software that costs money? Of note, I do have Windows automatic update, which patches vulnerabilities.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:49 pmskarecro Says:
House of Roberts Says:
LTdan at 3:07pm
Spoken just like a loyal member…. of the Taliban!
Like I’ve said, the afgans have the taliban, america has republicans.
That’s a good one. I’ll have to remember it. We all do have our cross to bear and ours is Republicans. Fortunately there are becoming less and less of them. I once knew 7 Republicans, I now only know 2 the remainder are now either Independents or Democrats.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:50 pmBilbo,
Thanks for clearing that up. I can definitely see where you’re coming from, but I think it boils down to just being able to call it what it is. If gays are not allowed to call a legal joining between them marriage, it shuts them out. It discriminates. Blacks didn’t struggle to sit at the front of the bus because the seats were better, or to drink from “white only” fountains because the water was sweeter. It was the principle.
Civil Union is to Marriage as Margarine is to Butter.
They’re kind of like each other, but one ISN’T the other.
Anything worth having is worth the struggle.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:50 pmLogic and science replaces ideology and mythology. Nice.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:50 pmLTdan Says:
Old Goat, we should simply outlaw homosexuality by ignoring it. Take it out of the media, out of books, everything. Gay couples should be ignored. After a few years they would leave the US.
I know plenty of gay couples who would love it if you ignored them. That’s what they want idiot. What they don’t want is self loathing republicans spewing hatred in between trips to the airport bathroom…idiot.
And are you for taking the gay out of the bible? God will be pissed.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:51 pmTrue, and I agree, some common sense is all I’m saying.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:51 pmYou’ll look FABULOUS in the short shorts and sequins!
January 24th, 2009 at 3:51 pmDid I miss it when LTdan explained WHY he thought homosexual behavior should be illegal?
I mean, I assume he thinks it’s icky and maybe even makes him feel funny inside, but that’s hardly a good reason for making something illegal, right?
January 24th, 2009 at 3:52 pmWould you like a job like that, Dan?
Maybe you could even make lieutenant in the department.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:53 pmRalph, LT Dan wants it illegal for the same reason larry craig does: it feels better when it’s “wrong”.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:53 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
I totally agree with you. I don’t think any drug user should be put in prison. I just don’t think it’s a good thing to legalize drugs like heroin and meth.
I agree. If it’s worse than alcohol, it should be out there. The crack/powder (do I have that correct?) sentencing disparities, however, should be addressed.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:53 pm‘ Obama’s Clean Break: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton rejected the “rigid ideology” of Bush and pledged to exercise “smart power.” Stressing diplomacy, Obama and Clinton “appointed high-level emissaries to handle the Arab-Israeli issue and Pakistan and Afghanistan.” ‘
I wonder if this is the same “smart power” that Bill used? It worked so well back then, that it’s clearly worth another go round. Let’s call it “smarterer powerer.” Get it? It’s even more smaterer.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:54 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
Old Goat Says:
BilboHusseinBaggins says:
So, can someone tell me why it is so important to call it “marriage” instead of “civil unions”?
One would wonder why it matters so much that it NOT be called marriage.
It doesn’t matter to me what they call it. But when you have a word like “marriage” that is so deeply steeped in religious views, it is going to be hard to change people’s mind. But by calling “marriage” “civil unions” then minds may be changed and it will become a reality a lot sooner. If you look at polls and people are asked if they favor “gay marriage” many more people are opposed than if you ask if they favor “civil unions” for gay people.
If I was gay I wouldn’t care what they called it as long as it gave me the ability to commit myself to another person, legally, with all the rights and responsibilities afforded “married people”.
The committing part of it is all ready done. The issue is, why should they settle for anything less? Unfortunately the civil union argument is nothing less that a two class system.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:55 pmLiving in the past seems to be a hobby for you guys.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:55 pmjust think, you could run it. You could be overloard of all the homosexuals……just think!!!
January 24th, 2009 at 3:55 pmLtDan, you and Drywall should hook up. You’re both blatantly curious, and you’d both feel much better when you come to grips with your true natures, instead of coming by gripping…
January 24th, 2009 at 3:56 pmFred Says:
Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
Why is it so important to call two gays making a legal commitment to each other “marriage”?
Why is it so important to deny it? Are they not citizens? Do they not pay taxes, serve in the military, etc.?
mar?riage
? ?/?mær?d?/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [mar-ij] Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.
Because that is why. Man and Woman. Not man and man, not woman and woman. Be as gay as you want, it’s nobody’s business but the couple being gay. Its not something i’d do because i find women too beautiful and i have no interest in loving someones hairy ass other than mine… lol! Yes, I do have gay friends and love them. They know how I feel and are cool with it. But I agree that marriage is between a man and a woman and if gay people want to live as husband and husband or wife and wife, then a civil union is how it should stand with the same “benefits” as a married couple.
I guess it depends on what the definition of “is” really “is”…
January 24th, 2009 at 3:56 pmI have no doubt that as a cop on the Homo beat, dan would pursue perpetrators vigorously. He’d play by his own rules, do whatever it took to bury these punks.
dan wouldn’t play “good cop” ever.
But he would wear his uniform proudly, into gay bars and bathhouses, wherever he had to tail these ruffians, all in the name of duty.
You go, dan!
January 24th, 2009 at 3:56 pmskarecro points to a book that has been changed over time, or perhaps two books if you count the Bible.
January 24th, 2009 at 3:58 pmLTdan Says:
” Homo Police “, hmm I like that. We could make a whole police unit that specializes in regulating homosexuality. Think of how many jobs it would create, thus making the economy stronger.
There already is a “homo police”, unfortunately. Certain police officers (suspended w/ or w/o pay, relegated to desk duty while under investigation, or imprisoned) found a creative use for their nightsticks.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:00 pmIs the bible the unchanging word of god? Oh, wait, I had this debate with another narrowminded fool who didn’t get the answer right… you guys never do.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:00 pmLTdan Says:
” Homo Police “, hmm I like that. We could make a whole police unit that specializes in regulating homosexuality. Think of how many jobs it would create, thus making the economy stronger.
And Lt. Dan would be at the phamacy check-out counter, quizzing customers to learn their sexuality, to stop gay men from getting Viagra…
January 24th, 2009 at 4:01 pmLTdan Says:
I want it illegal because the bible says it is wrong, and the United States is a christian nation.
GONNA. NEED. THE PASSAGE.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:01 pmLTdan Says:
Yeah but you are a moron and no one cares what you think and of course you are wrong about the majority thinking same gender sex should be illegal. Only moronic bigots like YOU think that the majority of Americans are NOT for making gay sex illegal
http://www.baptiststandard.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=515&Itemid=131
WASHINGTON (RNS)–A majority of Americans oppose same-sex marriages, but six in 10 believe consensual gay sex should not be illegal.
Just because YOU are a moron and a bigot doesnt mean most Americans are. You just project your stupidity on to others
January 24th, 2009 at 4:01 pmskarecro,
Who was it that used to quote definitions? Anyway, religion can be wrong, no?
Bilbo and others on the drugs, illegal for all but pot but only jail the dealers…..
January 24th, 2009 at 4:02 pmLTdan Says: 59
You are a really ignorant piece of work you fascist punk
January 24th, 2009 at 4:02 pmLT-SWEET-PICKELS says:
I want it illegal because the bible says it is wrong, and the United States is a christian nation.
where does it say this? i’ve tried finding it and found nothing other than jesus hanging out with a bunch of guys all the time… hmmmm. I’m not saying he was gay or anything…
Does anyone know of this part of the bible? I am not religious because… well, its pretty obvious, but where is this part that everyone says its in the bible?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:03 pmre: 97
Skarecro: Blacks used to be defined as 3/5ths human by the US government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_compromise
That definition was changed, why not marriage? Just because you agree that it’s wrong to allow gay men or women to be married, and to use that term is beside the point. If you don’t want to marry a dude, don’t. But don’t stand in the way of somebody else’s happiness.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:05 pmLTdan,
January 24th, 2009 at 4:05 pmThe bible also says eating shrimp or ham is wrong. Our founding fathers thought slavery and women not voting was okay.
LTdan Says:
Perhaps being a stupid bigot like YOU should be illega. For certain moronic fascists like you ought to just get out of our good country
January 24th, 2009 at 4:06 pmWASHINGTON (RNS)–A majority of Americans oppose same-sex marriages, but six in 10 believe consensual gay sex should not be illegal.
And, Eugene, “oppose” can mean anything. They may oppose it because they’re not specifically attracted to the same sex, but they don’t oppose it in concept. People aren’t expected to love gay marriage with all their heart, just not to get their Nazi on (**cough LTdan cought**). Thanks for posting this.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:07 pmI want it illegal because the bible says it is wrong, and the United States is a christian nation.
Eating meat on Friday used to be a sin. Then, it wasn’t. Seems like the whole system is pretty subjective, and open to periodic re-interpretation.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:09 pmLTdan Says:
I want it illegal because the bible says it is wrong, and the United States is a christian nation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No it isnt. This is a democracy which means it is a nation of its citizens ALL of them Christians, Muslims, Atheists Hindus and all the rest you are bone ignorant.
Many of our laws here in America are based out of the bible, that is what our forefathers wanted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
No it isnt our law is based on British common law which predates Christianity there. My GOD you are ignorant
So why should we skip homosexuality when the bible clearly states it is WRONG. At least make it illegal in red states, then I will be happy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No one cares if you are happy or not. You are a stupid bigot and a punk. Go back to your bridge you troglydite troll.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:10 pmLet’s take a look. How about we start with the Ten Commandments, and see how closely they track with current US law, shall we?
1. “I am the Lord thy God; thou shalt have no other gods before me”
US Constitution says, “Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion.”
I’d call that a Big NO.
Number 2: “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy god in vain”
Here we’ve got that pesky “freedom of speech clause”, so strike TWO.
Number 3: Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy.
While the occasional blue laws still apply in flyover country, the NFL might have a problem with making this one the law of the mand.
Strike THREE.
Number 4: Honor thy father and thy mother
Everyone agrees it’s a good value to hold, but part of our laws? Not so much.
Strike FOUR
Number 5: GOLD! “Thou shalt not kill”.
Yep. That’s in our laws.
But then again, it’s in pretty much every nation’s laws, be they Christian, Muslim, Hindu or pagan.
But we’ll give it to dan.
We’ll also give him number 7: Thou shalt not steal.
And a half point for number eight: Thou shalt not bear false witness against ty neighbor. There’s a thing called “perjury” even though former president Bush doesn’t think it’s such a big deal. We’ll still count it.
But the rest are all strikeouts:
Thou shalt not commit adultery? Please. If adultery were prosecutable, half the Republican congressional delegation, and a third of the Democrats, would be in prison.
And as for not goveting thy neighbors wife or goods, hell, our economy is BUILT around coveting our neighbors wives, girlfriends and goods.
Sorry, danny, you didn’t do so well on your claim.
Two and a half out of ten. Gee. if the Founders wanted to establish Christian rule, you think they coulda done better than this.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:10 pmFred Says:
skarecro,
Who was it that used to quote definitions? Anyway, religion can be wrong, no?
who quoted definitions? i have no idea. a bunch of people have i guess. Religion being wrong? I see it almost as a sickness for those who take that crap literally. As far as being gay, being married, being in a civil union, being common-law… whatever. In my opinion and forever will be is that marriage is between a man and woman. EVERYONE knows this. Love is love no matter what brand name its under and it has about as much impact on my daily as a starfish eating a sea urchin in the ocean off of australia. If we are worried this much about letting gay people hook up legally under whatever name, then we must be doing pretty good because I see this as a non-issue other than what to call it, and in MY opinion, civil marriage is it. If not, who cares? How does it affect my daily life? none.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:10 pmLTdan Says:
I want it illegal because the bible says it is wrong, and the United States is a christian nation.
The Bible tells parents in Deuteronomy 21:18-21 to kill their disobedient children with stones?
“18-If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him,
19- his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town.
20 -They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.”
21-Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death.”
Do you agree with this LtDan? Seriously. This is in the Bible. We are a Christian Nation whose laws are based on the bible. Should we kill our disobedient children? If not, why?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:11 pmRight wingers are fervently holding onto this wedge issue even after the election because they’ve officially lost their grip on all else. A small majority of California voters take the wrong message to the polls and the right takes that to mean they’re still viable.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:12 pm#94
My hobbies include hoping, changing, hoping for change and changing for hope.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:13 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
LTdan Says:
Many of our laws here in America are based out of the bible, that is what our forefathers wanted.
Let’s take a look. How about we start with the Ten Commandments, and see how closely they track with current US law, shall we?
1. “I am the Lord thy God; thou shalt have no other gods before me”
US Constitution says, “Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion.”
I’d call that a Big NO.
Number 2: “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy god in vain”
Here we’ve got that pesky “freedom of speech clause”, so strike TWO.
Number 3: Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy.
While the occasional blue laws still apply in flyover country, the NFL might have a problem with making this one the law of the mand.
Strike THREE.
Number 4: Honor thy father and thy mother
Everyone agrees it’s a good value to hold, but part of our laws? Not so much.
Strike FOUR
Number 5: GOLD! “Thou shalt not kill”.
Yep. That’s in our laws.
But then again, it’s in pretty much every nation’s laws, be they Christian, Muslim, Hindu or pagan.
But we’ll give it to dan.
We’ll also give him number 7: Thou shalt not steal.
And a half point for number eight: Thou shalt not bear false witness against ty neighbor. There’s a thing called “perjury” even though former president Bush doesn’t think it’s such a big deal. We’ll still count it.
But the rest are all strikeouts:
Thou shalt not commit adultery? Please. If adultery were prosecutable, half the Republican congressional delegation, and a third of the Democrats, would be in prison.
And as for not goveting thy neighbors wife or goods, hell, our economy is BUILT around coveting our neighbors wives, girlfriends and goods.
Sorry, danny, you didn’t do so well on your claim.
Two and a half out of ten. Gee. if the Founders wanted to establish Christian rule, you think they coulda done better than this.
Great post Ralph… After reading it I was expecting the Guinness guy to shout out Brilliant!
January 24th, 2009 at 4:15 pmAnd, obviously, masturbating in public.
For god’s sake cover yourself.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:15 pm109 Bobwurst Says:…
wow! that is funny, its amazing that mentality exists even till this day…
i did not know that.
yeah call it marriage or civil union.
if it loos like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, well it must be a canadian goose.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:16 pmThe Bible also says you have to marry your deceased brother’s wife.
You must not eat pork, nor shellfish.
You must not wear clothing of more than one fabric.
People who select passages of the Bible that they like and use them to defend ridiculous arguments may as well include everything the OT forbids.
Why not just stick with Jesus? He embraced everyone.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:17 pmIn fact the only ones he railed against were pharisees (people who pretended to worship but were hypocrites) and he railed against money-changers in the temple (like Robertson, Falwell, Hagee, et al.)
Sacerro says:
I see this as a non-issue other than what to call it, and in MY opinion, civil marriage is it. If not, who cares? How does it affect my daily life? none.
Obviously you care. Otherwise you wouldn’t be saying the word”marriage” is off limits to the gays. Keep in mind that even if our government recognizes the obvious and legalizes same sex marriage, individual churches are still free to choose who can and can not get married in their respective denominations. (That pesky constitution, why didn’t bush kill it when he had the chance?)
January 24th, 2009 at 4:18 pmBasic question, LtDung: If the constitution mandates the separation of church and state, where does “Christian nation” fit? The constitution doesn’t regulate private life, only the conduct of the government in service to the people. Where in the document does the government (centralized) require people (decentralized, private) to observe any religion?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:19 pm#121
The closest I ever came to public masturbation was when your dad and me were in the sauna together, but neither of us were caught, and we didn’t tell your mom, so shhh.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:19 pmmessiah Says:
My hobbies include hoping, changing, hoping for change and changing for hope.
Bro, can you spare a loaf?
And give me a ride across the lake?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:20 pmObama’s First 100 Hours: A Clean Break From Bush»
At 4 pm ET today, it will mark exactly 100 hours since Barack Obama became the 44th President of the United States. The first week on the job has been a very busy one for the new White House, as the Obama administration has worked quickly to repair the damage done under the last eight years of President Bush.
Happy 100 Hours, Mr. President! Thank You!
.
just a reminder…
what’s religion got to do with it…
January 24th, 2009 at 4:21 pmObama’s Clean Break: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton rejected the “rigid ideology” of Bush and pledged to exercise “smart power.” Stressing diplomacy, Obama and Clinton “appointed high-level emissaries to handle the Arab-Israeli issue and Pakistan and Afghanistan.”
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6718124&page=1
-yes he has been quite busy, in many good ways but this CIA covert war BS is just more of the same…..don’t get too excited guys…the Fed & the Pentagon will continue doing the same job they were doing under the Bush/Cheney administration
please consider that voting third party and breaking-up this corporate-funded 2 party cabal is the only way to save this country…and others
January 24th, 2009 at 4:21 pmThank you Katy. And Thank you President Obama.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:21 pmBobwurst Says:
Obviously you care.
ok bobby. whatever u say.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:22 pmAnd if it’s not too much trouble, my garbage disposal hasn’t worked in months.
Thanks in advance, big guy.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:22 pmWhy the Terms “Marriage”,”Husban” and “Wife” are Important.
April 2006
Legislation introduced in the U.S House of Representatives last week would amend the Social Security Act to afford same-sex couples the same benefits, responsibilities, and obligations as others who pay into Social Security. The Equal Access to Social Security Act, H.R. 5152, would add the term “permanent partner” to the Social Security Act in addition to the terms “husband” and “wife,” which are already present in the legal code.
“Same-sex couples are denied more than 1,000 federal benefits that other taxpayers are entitled to,” said Democratic congressman Jerrold Nadler of New York, who authored the bill. “The Equal Access to Social Security Act addresses this inequity. Ultimately, the only way same-sex couples will be treated equally is when they are allowed to marry—but until that can be a reality for the millions of same-sex couples in this country, we should act to make federal law fair to all.”
This bill never became law. This bill was proposed in a previous session of Congress. Sessions of Congress last two years, and at the end of each session all proposed bills and resolutions that haven’t passed are cleared from the books. Members often reintroduce bills that did not come up for debate under a new number in the next session.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:23 pmskarecro Says:
If we are worried this much about letting gay people hook up legally under whatever name, then we must be doing pretty good because I see this as a non-issue other than what to call it, and in MY opinion, civil marriage is it. If not, who cares? How does it affect my daily life? none.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
___________
One could have made a very similar argument for allowing black children to attend separate but equal schools in the 1940s and 1950s. In fact, many did. Thankfully, the Supreme Court saw the error in this way of thinking in 1955. Hopefully, we will soon see similar changes in the way we think about separate but equal institutions of marriage.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:23 pm#127
Dude, I love to help a brother out, but I’m an anti-grainitarian.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:24 pmk Says:
sour grapes?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:24 pmskarecro Says:
Bobwurst Says:
Obviously you care. ok bobby. whatever u say.
Great, then same sex marriage is perfectily ok! Now, let’s get back to Obama’s work of repairing the damage bush did to our country.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:25 pmThanks, messiah. My dad passed away several years ago.
You have a lot of class. And all of it is third.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:25 pm#132
No trouble brother. Just do what I do and get a pig to take care of it. You live with your mom, right?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:26 pmto the remaining repukelican trolls who for the past eight years have been selling doom and gloom, I got one thing to say to you (other than suck it!) and that is,
YES, WE CAN
January 24th, 2009 at 4:29 pmDude, I love to help a brother out, but I’m an anti-grainitarian.
My garbage disposal unit has always processed Christian offal.
Please, oh Lord, restore it’s pristine virginity.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:29 pm#138
My apologies. Just to show you how bad I feel, I’ll go out and buy a llama and call him “daddy.”
January 24th, 2009 at 4:29 pmBobwurst Says:
Great, then same sex marriage is perfectily ok!
of course it is, now THEY have to work out the branding.
yes, obama can start be freeing all the incarcerated non-violent “drug” offenders, condemn israel, prosecute bush, shut out every republican, quit giving money to corporate pirates and get the hell out of afganistan.
he is off to a great start, but he has a LONG way to go….
get em’ O!
January 24th, 2009 at 4:31 pm#141
No need to call me Lord, but I’ll do what I can.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:31 pmYou live with your mom, right?
Yes, but she passed away thirty years ago, praise… you.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:31 pmIt is considerate of wingnuts to announce their partisanship when they call the President “messiah”.
Since no progressive ever does that, it’s a pretty sure signal that anyone who does is an idiot.
Not that we wouldn’t figure it out in a hurry, anyway.
hey, where’d LTdan go? I was hoping we could have a theological/political theory discussion.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:33 pm#145
God bless her soul, and you to Mr. Norman Bates for sitting her up in the window all these past 30 years. Amen.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:33 pmmessiah, your fear is showing. Only the right wingers who are living in fear now use messiah.
Imagine the thought process that you used when picking it for a username….downright depressing and will be a drain on our new health care system eventually.
Can’t you just pull yourself up by your bootstraps and act like a man instead?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:33 pmHuh. Kind of unassuming for someone who shows up here calling himself “messiah”.
I mean, that’s a rather lofty title to bestow on onesself. And then to not back it up with any kind of good works?
Seems like kind of a cheeseball move to me.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:35 pmtroll messiah, Ralph passed the sixth grade a long time ago. Apparently you have a lot of make-up work before you can do the same.
Second, concerning your vicious taunts, not even your hero, former President Botch really cared about going all out on teh gays; he reluctantly shilled the issue for the GOP in 2006 as they picked up flag burning and the marriage amendment in a failed attempt to keep their congressional majorities.
You can stop thinking that there’s a renewed platform awaiting your kind in 2012 and beyond. If civil society keeps what the founding fathers had in mind, you will never regain that platform.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:36 pmNo need to call me Lord, but I’ll do what I can.
So, that trinity stuff isn’t as equal as advertised.
It was ever thus. Remember, “… some are more equal than others?” Who knew, God was a communist?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:37 pmFred Says:
“messiah, your fear is showing”
more like his/her hypocracy. by using the name “messiah” they are elevating themselves to the level of god and jesus. st. peter won’t be happy with them someday.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:37 pmGod bless her soul, and you to Mr. Norman Bates for sitting her up in the window all these past 30 years. Amen.
It was God’s will. You told me that, shortly after she passed. Don’t you remember?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:38 pmWow! You all caught on to me. You know what? From now on, no more fear. Just call me Jesus (Hey-sus).
January 24th, 2009 at 4:40 pmWow! You all caught on to me. You know what? From now on, no more fear. Just call me Jesus (Hey-sus).
Um, I think the Holy Spirit is on, using Jesus’ handle.
The J-man won’t like it, if we rat you out in our prayers, so log off.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:43 pmIf ‘messiah’ were locked in a library he’d probably dial 911 to report he was taken to a concentration camp.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:43 pm#153
I’ve been living a lie. I’ve been through every 12 step program, and even a few 13 steppers, and yet I’m unredeemable. I how I hope Obama can save me from my illness. Can he? Yes he can!
I wonder if I qualify for Federal benefits?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:45 pmdoes anyone else here find it ironic these republiscums fear obama since he preaches hope (like their ever-lovin’ jesus) as oppossed to fomenting death and destruction (like satan and idiot boy bush)?
what kind of christians are these people? that’s right, the kind that bang their brother’s wives six days a week and beg for forgiveness on sundays.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:46 pm#156
Do ya think that would work?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:46 pmI wonder if I qualify for Federal benefits?
Humor Disability?
I don’t think so.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:46 pmYou first have to demonstrate being funny, to qualify.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:48 pmmessiah Says:
#156
Do ya think that would work?
What, are you going to clear your schedule for tomorrow in the basement and give it a shot?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:49 pmCompared to chimpy President Obama is the Messiah.
chimpy is Satan.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:50 pm#161
How’s this?
How many metaphorics could a metaphoric-chuck chuck, if a metaphoric-chuck could chuck metaphorics?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:51 pmmessiah Says:
#153
I’ve been living a lie. I’ve been through every 12 step program, and even a few 13 steppers, and yet I’m unredeemable. I how I hope Obama can save me from my illness. Can he? Yes he can!
I want my government out of the right-wing bull pen. Yes, I do. Yes, I do.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:51 pmmessiah you worthless punk troll. Just go away and let the adults talk. You arent funny. You are a stupid worthless dogturd eating piece of garbage. You arent clever enough to annoy us and you have embarassed yourself enough with your stupidity. Just go away
January 24th, 2009 at 4:52 pmWhat, are you going to clear your schedule for tomorrow in the basement and give it a shot?
No, of course not, basement day is Tuesday.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:53 pm#166
I came to this blog to have a serious discussion. Therefore, let’s have it.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:55 pmLTdan Says: I want it illegal because the bible says it is wrong, and the United States is a christian nation.
Wow, wrong again. The Founding Fathers did not believe the US was a christian nation. PROOF IT IS NOT:
Article 6 of the United States Constitution:
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;
Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli.
… the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…
in 1796 the Treaty of Tripoli was read aloud on the Senate floor and UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED and signed into law by President John Adams. Many Founding Fathers were still around and NONE disputed this.
Care to prove your case about the US being a christian nation? Notice I said prove, not just your opinion. Facts are a bummer for you, huh?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:57 pmWhile I appreciate the effort that the messiah troll is making to put a little pizzaz into trolling, it’s really not panning out for him. the schtick is just as boring as most, and more boring than some.
ah well, I’ve said many times… you don’t play Whack-A-Troll™ with the trolls you want, you play it with the trolls you have.
Who’s up?
January 24th, 2009 at 4:58 pmmessiah Says:
I came to this blog to have a serious discussion. Therefore, let’s have it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No you didnt you are a liar and a fool. You are the lowest form of troll life. Several rungs lower on the evolutionary ladder than pondscum. You troll liberal sites to annoy us like that retarded cousin at the family picnic that wants attention. You know you are too ignorant to have a real discussion so you just try to annoy us.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:58 pmNo, of course not, basement day is Tuesday.
Mon, Wed-Fri you’re Rush Limbaugh’s personal face sitter. Tuesday’s your day off, I take it.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:58 pmYeah. We can tell.
Unfortunately, what you guys call a “serious discussion” is to normal folks a “spastic tantrum”.
So we have a bit of a chasm of understanding to overcome.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:59 pmmessiah, do entertain us. you seem to crave attention, even if it’s negative…..
When children behave as you do we usually tell them to go outside and play…..run along.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:59 pmJK you ignorant loaf. dry up and blow away.
January 24th, 2009 at 4:59 pmI have to admit, ralph, for a while I’ve been rather light on hitting ‘Report Abuse’.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:02 pmTroll John Kerry, I don’t know if dbadass is around to offer you some refreshment, so allow me to suggest an endive salad and some spinach and mozzarella ravioli, with a very dry Washington state Chardonnay. I’ve got some bakery-fresh french bread as well, and a nice garlic-butter spread if you’ll stick around.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:02 pmNice approach, Eugene. Try reverse psychology. I hadn’t thought of that.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:03 pm#172
I did come here to have a real conversation about real issues.
This is my first post:
‘ Obama’s Clean Break: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton rejected the “rigid ideology” of Bush and pledged to exercise “smart power.” Stressing diplomacy, Obama and Clinton “appointed high-level emissaries to handle the Arab-Israeli issue and Pakistan and Afghanistan.” ‘
I wonder if this is the same “smart power” that Bill used? It worked so well back then, that it’s clearly worth another go round. Let’s call it “smarterer powerer.” Get it? It’s even more smaterer.
I’m not going to pretend I wasn’t being a bit tongue-in-cheek, but it was pretty tame. Since that post I’ve been going along to get along.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:03 pmmessiah Says:
#166
I came to this blog to have a serious discussion.
That is like giving your opening statement after the jury’s out.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:04 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
Forget the gloves. Trollstabbing is a moral imperative
January 24th, 2009 at 5:05 pmAnyway, back to The Worst President Part 2. George Does Dallas.
The first weekend after slinking out of Washington finds our insipid ex-leader on an extended round of golf – which abruptly ended when he shanked his last monogrammed ball into the 16th hole rough of the Fort Worth Country Club, where it joined a motley assortment of other, lesser balls – even a couple impudent spray-painted intruders from the local driving range. The sun hung low, like the sag of Babs’ now-useless udders. The Secret Service, deciding on the least conspicuous vantage point, waited in the clubhouse, sipping iced tea…
January 24th, 2009 at 5:05 pmI wonder if this is the same “smart power” that Bill used? It worked so well back then, that it’s clearly worth another go round. Let’s call it “smarterer powerer.” Get it? It’s even more smaterer.
I wouldn’t call that a real issue, but Playskool has already has it in the suggestion box.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:07 pmJohn Kerry
January 24th, 2009 at 5:07 pmWould you like a nice cup of tea? I am sort of short on ingredients
messiah Says:
You are a liar. Your first post was smart alecky idiocy and your very nick is a pointed insults to liberals on a liberal site. Not to mention a really stupid repitition of a Limborg talking point. We arent as stupid as you rightwing trolls. Dont even TRY to pretend you are anything but a punk. Just go away. You are too stupid to be annoying and you dont want a discussion your very nick shows that.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:07 pmYeah “messiah”. So many “serious discussions” around here begin with stale Clinton-bashing. Especially when posted by a troll-friendly handle like “messiah”.
How could we have missed your intent on starting a “serious discussion”?
January 24th, 2009 at 5:09 pmGallup’s Obama poll included 1,591 adults
being a english teacher lord knows math isn’t my strong point but, i do known using a poll which questions .020 of the population cannot be reflective of the population as a whole.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:09 pmI gotta admit, though — “messiah” is putting an interesting little spin on the “attack, then cry victim” tactic from the Tried-and-True Troll (TTT™) Handbook.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:11 pmFor all the criticism against Bush, it would take quite a lot for him to fall below the ineptitude and general “malaise” of Jimmy Carter. Carter is the perfect study in what leadership is not. You don’t stand in front of the nation and talk about it’s inevitable decline.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:13 pmdbadass Says:
John Kerry
Would you like a nice cup of tea? I am sort of short on ingredients
January 24th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
You left him that swordfish on his front porch. It’s still sitting there because SOMEONE won’t come up from the basement.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:15 pm#189
Carter is one of the worst presidents we ever had. He seems to be trying to include on his resume “worst ex-president” as well.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:15 pmmessiah
So much for a serious discussion. Why don’t you just thow gasoline on the fire?
No one cares what you think of Jimmy Carter.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:16 pm““malaise” of Jimmy Carter. Carter is the perfect study in what leadership is not”
are we talking about the same jimmy carter who won the nobel peace prize?
just wonderin’
January 24th, 2009 at 5:16 pm#193
We are.
Are we talking about the same Nobel Peace Prize that Yasser Arafat received? I believe Stalin and Hitler were recommended for said honor.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:19 pmmessiah Says:
Bush criticism is well deserved. He was stupid and inept. Carter is Thomas Jefferson by comparison. He told the country the truth they didnt want to hear. Including the malaise remark cough up the quote about our eventual demise. I think you are lying. Carter set the stage for the stupid and inane feel good mean nothing rhetoric of Raygun. Another lying fool like Bush. I hope the country is sick of dimwitted leaders who speak about policy in bumper sticker slogans. It seems to work on the simpleminded but I prefer to be traed like an adult. Carter was ineffective and deserves criticism for that. He belongs on Mt Rushmore compared to Bush
January 24th, 2009 at 5:19 pmNo, Bozo. he’s talking about the jimmy Carter of the right-wing imagination.
He’s not their favorite boogeyman, but he does serve a useful purpose now because Clinton does them no good when talking about unpopular presidents.
So, even though his presidency ended twenty-eight years ago, he’s all they got in that department. They of course either ignore his Nobel Prize or disparage it.
I know, it’s pathetic but you gotta have some sympathy for them. They just got nothing else to work with. It’s like we’ve got a whole Lego village and all they’ve got is some dried-out Play-Doh.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:20 pmFor all the criticism against Bush, it would take quite a lot for him to fall below the ineptitude and general “malaise” of Jimmy Carter. Carter is the perfect study in what leadership is not. You don’t stand in front of the nation and talk about it’s inevitable decline.
Carter? The same Carter who created several million jobs despite an intentional recession by the federal reserve and a 15-year cycle of oil shocks that were out of his control?
January 24th, 2009 at 5:20 pm#196
Eventual demise? Are you saying he was talking about centuries later? Anyone can predict that. He was claiming it was imminent.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:21 pmYep, nominations can be made by almost anyone so that means nothing. Arafat was a freedom fighter, obviously.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:21 pmmessiah Says: 193
See you are nothing but an ignorant troll. You slander a good man. A better man than Bush could EVER hope to be because you disagree with him. Slander, baseless assertions these are not serious discussion they are YOU being ignorant and trying to annoy. You dont have the chops for a real discussion that is why you are an ignorant troll. Just go away. Grow up and give us a shot when you obtain a functional cerebral cortex
January 24th, 2009 at 5:23 pmhitler’s recommendation was withdraw and i am sure you can provide a credible link proving stalin was recommended and by whom.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:23 pmI’m afraid we’re gonna need some backup for this claim, Mr. M.
Got a citation? A speech transcription? Some kind of factual support for the claim that Carter said that the nation’s demise was “imminent”?
This would go a long way toward demonstrating your sincere desire for a “serious discussion”.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:23 pm#198
According to the Noble Peace website:
Every year, the Norwegian Nobel Committee sends out thousands of letters inviting qualified people to submit their nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Not anyone.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:24 pmNo dumbass, he’s saying challenging you to prove your assersions…..of course you won’t, you will just retort with another evasive question being the coward you are.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:24 pmmessiah Says:
I am saying I think you are a LIAR either cough up the quote or just go away you moron
January 24th, 2009 at 5:24 pmi know ralph, it’s laughable, especially the best they can come up with is dummya’s receiving a “peace prize” created just for him and had nothing to do with peace but with war.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:24 pmSure sounds like just about anybody to me.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:27 pmmessiah, your quote from the nobel site is so simplistic i am sure even YOU would understand that if a member of the politburo recommended stalin they would consider that ploitburo member “qualified”. here’s a paralell:
kindasleezy rice could have recommended dummya (giving the nobel people a much needed laugh) because they would consider the secretary of state to be credible (which of course we knew she wasn’t).
January 24th, 2009 at 5:28 pm#202
Is Wikipedia credible?
When the past nominations were released it was discovered that Adolf Hitler was nominated in 1939 by Erik Brandt, a member of the Swedish Parliament. Brandt retracted the nomination after a few days.[7] Other infamous nominees included Joseph Stalin and Benito Mussolini.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:29 pm:::::shaking head in sadness:::::::
pretty sad not a single repukelican has been recommended for a nobel prize unlike hitler and stalin. looks like repukelicans have a long way to go until they are as good as dirtbag tyrranic dictators.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:29 pmIn historical rankings of U.S. Presidents, Carter’s presidency has ranged from #19 to #34, not enough one to definitively call him the worst, stupid troll.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:32 pm#209
Joseph Goebbels was a German politician and Reich Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda in Nazi Germany. He must be qualified, right?
January 24th, 2009 at 5:32 pm“Is Wikipedia credible?”
the answer is no since any idiot (you) can edit wikipedia
January 24th, 2009 at 5:33 pmmessiah, Obama will raise your taxes….heh. He will spend it on poor people largly of color…..heh.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:33 pm“Joseph Goebbels was a German politician and Reich Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda in Nazi Germany. He must be qualified, right?”
i guess in the same way of tony snowjob and dana purina dog chow were qualified at dissemintating the propoganda
January 24th, 2009 at 5:34 pmmessiah, I hate starting from scratch with real idiots like you, but anybody can nominate anyone for a Nobel prize. What counts is who makes top consideration.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:35 pmSo, Mr. M… you got that quote from Carter predicting the “imminent demise” of the nation yet?
You seem to know how to find stuff on wikipedia.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:35 pmYay, Obama. Go, go, go.
Now. With regards to other subjects throughout the thread:
1) Sex is indeed illegal. Consensual sex, even. Why, a man or woman can’t legally have sex if they are getting paid for it. If that man or woman is getting dinner, or a vacation, or something else out of it: A-OK. If that man or woman is merely taking clothes off, but not having sex: A-OK. But if money changes hands? Nope. Not to mention the same-sex laws, and the oral and anal sex laws even between married couples. Never mind that legalizing prostitution would allow brothels to be legal, and that income properly taxed. Never mind that people with diseases can be screened, and either not allowed to work in a given brothel, or…get this…allowed to work in a designated brothel, where men or women with AIDS or other STDs can (legally) go to such an establishment, and engage in sexual relations with other consenting adults who share their dilemma, and not SPREAD these diseases further, to a very significant degree.
2) Legalize all drugs. Even the hard-core stuff. Only punish people for their actions, not what they are using. Perhaps…only PERHAPS, have some increased sentences for given actions, such as drunk driving laws. However, legalizing accomplishes manyfold things simultaneously.
First, the prices of drugs will plummet. Absolutely plummet. The price will be comparably scaled to the cost to produce, not horrifically inflated due to the risks involved. Would you rather have a meth-head spend a days salary at a minimum wage job on a month’s worth of their fix, or have to go around robbing people just to be able to afford their fix?
Tax money will go into our coffers. Enormous funds will be diverted AWAY from other countries’ organized crime syndicates, completely gutting their ability to make money almost literally overnight. Drugs will not only be cheaper, but will be regulated such that they shouldn’t be cut with toxic crap.
People will comfortably use pot, coke, heroin, perhaps meth and the like, X, acid, shrooms and so on, without fear of going to jail. They can do so cheaply, comfortably in their own home. If they engage in criminal activity, you punish them for criminal activity.
3) Same sex marriage. Why “allow” gays to call it marriage? Umm. Because their church/religion/etc wants to? Right now, the prevention of gay marriage is denying multitudes of congregations from legitimately marrying couples of the same sex in THEIR CHURCH, in front of THEIR GOD. All instances of the term “marriage” should be removed from the law books, and the contract laws in question should refer to it as “civil union” alone. Why? Because the moment this happens, the fundies LOSE. Badly. Very, very badly. Why? Because once each given church is allowed to dictate whose unions they wish to acknowledge, gay marriage is swept into normalcy so fast fundamentalist heads will spin. Fundies don’t WANT churches deciding which marriages they wish to allow and acknowledge. For the same reason they didn’t want interracial marriage to be left up to the churches themselves, but instead codified in law: They don’t get to dictate what other churches, religions, etc, do in the eyes of their deity (or philosophy) of choice. Thus, they can’t AFFORD to keep government out of it. The ONLY way they can “win” (i.e. continue to oppress those they want to) is with the weight of law behind them.
4) Yes, the hypocrisy of the far right is showing in a huge way. They are imploding. The reaction is really quite staggering, and quite psychologically telling. Talk about a clear display of projection on a massive scale. Sheesh.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:35 pmPresident Carter pushed a Bill thru congress that REQUIRED Utility companies to purchase Energy From smaller Alternative Energy Generation Producers such as wind ,solar,cogeneration etc. These are the NEGAWATTS that earn money by running the Electric meter Backwards.
This led to the Economic Viability of Small start-up wind farms and solar thermal plants which perfected Alternative Energy Technology in California and other states.
Ronald Reagan Rejected this Notion, actually removing the solar Panels from the Roof of the Whitehouse.
Other countries, Such as the Netherlands and Denmark, appreciated the value of this alternative technolgy and ran with it.
That’s why we are Buying a lot of Wind and Solar Technolgy from Europe and Israel.
President Carter doesn’t get much credit for it, but he could be called the “Father of Alternative Energy “.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:37 pmHe’s not the messiah. He is a very naughty boy…
January 24th, 2009 at 5:37 pmHow about the first 100 hours of the Obama adminstation? Amazing, just amazing. Better days lie ahead.
the trolls can whine but they can’t change the reality.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:37 pmmessiah Says:
So then you CANT cough up the quote where Carter talked about America’s immanent decline? Yeah you are a liar. You can show yourself out in disgrace
January 24th, 2009 at 5:40 pmThanks for that, dbadass. My wife is looking at me like I’m an idiot for laughing at my computer screen. (Of course I’m hearing Terry Jones in drag speak the line…)
January 24th, 2009 at 5:47 pmYes, we get it troll, people at the time didn’t want to hear about cutting back and being part of the solution, so they elected a little known actor to be their savior, ahem, messiah to save them from meanie pants liberal concerns. “Go to McDonalds three times a day, shit on your lawn, I won’t let that evil Jimmy Cauta stand in the way!”
Care to know one reason Jimmy Carter’s legacy improved? His plans for environment really did make sense. We realized we couldn’t afford to see it any other way, though that realization took more than 20 years.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:50 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zjz16xjeBAA
January 24th, 2009 at 5:53 pmPerhaps you missed this:
http://digg.com/ world_news/ Thus_Sprach_Barack_Pouring_Acid_on_Gaza_s_Wounds
Obama was cloistered away in a Hawaiian mushroom patch while the rest of the world witnessed a naked campaign of Terror by The State of Israel?
Instead of calling for the arrest of Israel’s leaders Obama is echoing the zionist line.
So much for Change.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:56 pmhttp://digg.com/ political_opinion/ Time_Will_Tell
Jimmy Carter is the poster boy for Presidential weakness. Wind and solar power, whether they’re Carter’s plans or not, only count for a small percentage of our energy production. Maybe countries as small as the Netherlands can survive on such tiny production, but the US won’t.
If wind and solar were such good ideas the markets would promote them.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:01 pmJagOff, perhaps you missed the fact that George W. Bush was president during the period that seems to so concern you.
Did you protest the inaction of BushCo at the time?
January 24th, 2009 at 6:02 pmTell ya what, Jagoff. When President Obama invades a sovereign nation based on fabricated “intelligence”, which he commissioned, we can talk.
Until that time just STFU and let the superior intellects try and fix the messes your idols created.
Thanx.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:03 pmSorry, login should be logic.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:04 pmDamn, using the trolls login (a stretch even calling it logic)there was still one house standing after the hurricane so I guess there was no hurricane!
It took 8 years for the Bush administration to screw things up. After 4 days, Obama is off to a good start to undo those 8 years but it will take a hell of a lot of work to undo the damage. Those that point out a single point and claim a pattern are, well, stupid. Sorry to be harsh but it looks like one has to be blunt with trolls.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:05 pmWind, solar, and other green energy, are one of the few viable industries left in the Western world, stupid troll. “The market” has already spoken but moronic Reichwhiners can’t seem to admit they were wrong. Again.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:06 pmperhaps you missed this:
January 24th, 2009 at 6:06 pmFrightened couple flees talking grizzly, police astonished
Gee, I wonder how much the last twenty-eight years of “drill here, drill NOW!” rhetoric and lobbying have to do with that fact?
Mr. m seems to think that Carter was foolish for calling thirty years ago for the very technologies that are in demand today, and are underdeveloped because of that twenty-eight-year lull in supported research.
And if electricity had been such a good idea, rural areas would have been served by power lines long before Roosevelt’s Rural Electrification Plan built that infrastructure.
And if the internet was such a good idea, the “free market” would have built it long ago, rather than relying on the federal government and military to develop the protocols and infrastructure that makes its commercial exploitation possible.
I GOT IT! He’s the “Free Market Fundamentalist” Messiah!
Now it’s clear!
January 24th, 2009 at 6:08 pmBy the way, Mr. m, still working on that quote from Carter?
“Cause, y’know, we really couldn’t take seriously anyone who fabricates “facts” to bolster his side of an argument and fails to either back them up or admit that they’re fabricated.
If someone did something like that, we’d have to assume he wasn’t here for a “serious discussion”.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:09 pmLiberalVoter:
One need never apologize for being harsh on the willfully ignorant. The defective “thinking” of their ilk has killed more people than plague and smallpox combined.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:10 pmmessiah Says:
Jimmy Carter is the poster boy for Presidential weakness. Wind and solar power, whether they’re Carter’s plans or not, only count for a small percentage of our energy production. Maybe countries as small as the Netherlands can survive on such tiny production, but the US won’t.
If wind and solar were such good ideas the markets would promote them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
My GOD you are stupid. You think things become true just because you post them even when they are just ignorant talking points. Wind and solar work well. Internationally they are working well. In California they work well. There IS a solar plant in the Mojave and it has been working well for SC Edison for decades. The oil companies have tremendous political clout. Just because they DIDNT become an important part of our grid is not in any rational way evidence they couldnt have or shouldnt have. You are a moron. Gonna cough up that Carter quote or admit you are a lying ignorant troll?
Carter had 144 hostages on his watch. They ALL came home not one killed and didnt give Iran a THING. Raygun had about a dozen hostages half of them were killed and he gave Iran tons of weapons. You are a brainwashed troll who just regurgitates what you were TOLD to think and believes it makes sense because you are a moron , not to mention a liar.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:11 pmThe trolls walk in circles to get out of challenging posts.
Troll, plans for restoring our manufacturing sector in the United States centers on one word: Green.
Wind and solar power only accounts for a small percentage of our energy production because right-wingers like you have stood in the way all these years.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:11 pmThe Bush administration is a pinched off loaf.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:12 pmThanks pete.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:16 pmSolar accounts for 100% of my electricity. My electric bill for 2008 was $1.52. Yes, the entire year. My natural gas bill came in at $165 for the year. I need to do better there.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:18 pmOk. Let’s assume that wind and solar do become the next great thing and do solve our energy needs, or at least some of them, and we’re no longer carbon based.
What becomes of the middle east? And I’m not saying that’s a reason not to develop these, but it’s a consideration.
I’m not convinced that alt energy will produce all we need. Does this include new nuclear?
January 24th, 2009 at 6:18 pm#241
Us right-wingers are out of the way. The Left runs government. How long before we see more alt energy?
January 24th, 2009 at 6:20 pmBush could strut and dress up in a flight suit with a much needed cod piece, but his ignorance and arrogance and narrow mind, as well as criminal abuse of power made him a very weak president indeed. The USA has been severely damaged by this wanna-be tyrant.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:20 pmmessiah Says:
If wind and solar were such good ideas the markets would promote them.
_____________
http://www.ecomall.com/greenshopping/solarwhitehouse.htm
In 1980, the Reagan administration removed perfectly good, working solar thermal panels from the White House (these same solar collectors are still working at Unity College in Unity, Maine). The EcoMall spearheaded the Proposal to Solarize the White House, forming “The Solar Campaign” with other solar energy advocates, and posted an alert at our site asking our visitors to e-mail The White House urging them to use renewable energy technologies on the White House grounds. We are happy to report that 23 years after the previous solar panels were removed, two solar thermal systems and a 9 kW photovoltaic (PV) solar electricity system have returned to the White House.
Since September 2002, a grid of 167 solar panels on the roof of a maintenance shed has been delivering electricity to the White House grounds. Another solar installation has been helping to provide hot water. Yet another has been heating the water in the presidential pool.
Hmmmm… tha Messyiah has a point. Solar doesn’t seem to work too well at the WH…
January 24th, 2009 at 6:20 pmMount a turbine on messiah’s ass to capture some of the vast amounts of wind being expelled there.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:21 pmmessiah, you seem to be conscientiously avoiding the now old question of the sentiment you attributed to Jimmy Carter — namely, that he predicted the “imminent demise” of the nation.
Your research turn up anything on that?
He must have said, right? Otherwise you, who came here seeking a “serious discussion” wouldn’t have just thrown it out there.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:21 pmmessiah Says:
We neednt worry about the middle east. These things wont happen overnight and oil will still be a useful lubricant. They need to transition to something else anyway as Iran is trying to do. The oil is FINITE it will not last forever. Eventually the last drop will be gone. The point is not to have wars over those last barrels. There is no alternative to transitioning away from oil and wind, solar and the like are but the first step. Nuclear has too many problems and still needs uranium mining eventually we have to go to hydrogen that is the direction we should go. Maybe still do research toward fission but fusion plants are dinosaurs with too many downsides.
Alternative energy HAS to take care of our needs since eventually there will be no more oil. What part of that dont you understand?
January 24th, 2009 at 6:22 pmmessiah Says:
Ok. Let’s assume that wind and solar do become the next great thing and do solve our energy needs, or at least some of them, and we’re no longer carbon based.
What becomes of the middle east?
___________
Ummm… it becomes a far less politically relevant and dangerous place?
Wiat a minute… were you referring to Ohio and Indiana? Or the OTHER ME?
January 24th, 2009 at 6:23 pmEugeneDebs Says:
What part of that don’t you understand?
All of it. Anything that takes a fully evolved human brain is just a roaring noise to these mental defectives.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:24 pmjb Says:
Mount a turbine on messiah’s ass to capture some of the vast amounts of wind being expelled there.
_________
Put turbines on both ends and double the energy output…
January 24th, 2009 at 6:24 pmmessiah Says:
Jimmy Carter is the poster boy for Presidential weakness. Wind and solar power, whether they’re Carter’s plans or not, only count for a small percentage of our energy production. Maybe countries as small as the Netherlands can survive on such tiny production, but the US won’t.
They count for such a small percentage precisely because the country (especially the incoming Republican administration) failed to pay attention at the time. Cheap gas, live in the moment and FAIL.
If wind and solar were such good ideas the markets would promote them.
Here, let me fix that for you.
If oil and gasoline were such good ideas the government wouldn’t have to subsidize them.
If mining was such a good idea the government wouldn’t have to sell mineral rights for pennies.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:26 pm#248
Is solar energy supposed to be self-contained? Every housing or business unit has its own panels?
January 24th, 2009 at 6:28 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
jb Says:
Mount a turbine on messiah’s ass to capture some of the vast amounts of wind being expelled there.
_________
Put turbines on both ends and double the energy output…
Or we could squeeze the grease out of Lush, Bill Krystal, and other assorted Reichwhiners.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:28 pmmessiah Says:
#241
Us right-wingers are out of the way. The Left runs government. How long before we see more alt energy?
Are you sure you guys are out of the way? Because the share of proposed spending of the economic recovery package on infrastructure, including green initiatives, seems to be getting smaller all the time. One wingnut senator after another chiseling away, it may just turn into a tax cut bill for people making over $250,000 a year.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:30 pmmessiah Says:
Us right-wingers are out of the way.
Maybe you could find someone to read the news to you. The Right isn’t out of the way, unfortunately, and they’re doing everything they can to create obstructions for the new administration and the new Congress. Ultimately, this will only succeed in biting them on their own asses, but Right Wingers have never understood the concept of consequences.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:30 pmgummitch Says:
If mining was such a good idea the government wouldn’t have to sell mineral rights for pennies.
___________
Actually, I believe the low royalty rates the Fed charges on mining claims is a hold over from the 18th century when it was seen as way of developing the country faster. Don’t know if it was a good idea then, but it sure isn’t now.
I know… I know… GOOPers LOVES themselves some 19th century values… but there are no more buffalo herds to slaughter for cheap sport, or endless virgin forests to clear cut as fast as possible. Time to move into the 21st century, fellahs. Women get to keep their vote… and NO MORE SLAVERY!!!
January 24th, 2009 at 6:32 pmYou guys are cracking me up. :-D
January 24th, 2009 at 6:33 pm#255
Oil and gas are allowed write-offs not subsidies.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:34 pmmessiah Says:
Is solar energy supposed to be self-contained? Every housing or business unit has its own panels?
Yes and no. Large plants can be set up in suitable areas and every roof should have solar generating panels. Solar would get a tremendous boost from having “two-way meters” for each end user. When an excess is being generated, energy would be supplied to the grid. When extra is needed it would draw from the grid.
Your empty house could supply the energy for your workplace computer, for example. Every vacant roof is a loss of generating potential.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:35 pm#260
Women get to keep their vote… and NO MORE SLAVERY!!!
Yes, thanks to Republicans.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:35 pmgummitch Says:
… but Right Wingers have never understood the concept of consequences.
___________
Well… mebbe some of them… the Dukester and Bob Ney are in the can, and Larry Craig and Mark Foley are out of jobs… heh..
January 24th, 2009 at 6:37 pmNo, stupid troll. The GOP lost it’s claim as “the party of Lincoln” when they took in the Dixiecrats.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:39 pmmessiah Says:
Ok. Let’s assume that wind and solar do become the next great thing and do solve our energy needs, or at least some of them, and we’re no longer carbon based.
What becomes of the middle east? And I’m not saying that’s a reason not to develop these, but it’s a consideration.
I’m not convinced that alt energy will produce all we need. Does this include new nuclear?
I don’t expect it to produce all we need in the near future. Gasoline, I expect, will remain relevant for at least 10-20 years. Right now, diversifying the energy landscape as a greater percentage of alternatives will reduce the stranglehold dependence on foreign oil as well as the price monopolies and OPEC.
The middle east, the right wing obsession if there ever was one, will do just fine sending us less of their oil. I’m sure that beats displacing millions of its people. Maybe.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:40 pm#263
So there’s a back and forth with the grid. How does this get priced and who controls the grid?
January 24th, 2009 at 6:41 pmmessiah Says:
I already TOLD YOU Edison has a Solar Generating plant. Here in Flagstaff AZ power has a photovoltaic generating plant. Are you an infant?
January 24th, 2009 at 6:45 pmmessiah Says:
Oil and gas are allowed write-offs not subsidies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You are an idiot. The oil industry is HEAVILY subsidized. By direct subsidies and our military is in Iraq fighting a war right now for access to their oil. If you think we would be in Iraq if their major export was artichokes you are even a bigger idiot that I thought. You really are just a walking talking point arent you?
January 24th, 2009 at 6:47 pmmessiah Says:
265
You are a liar and a fool. Both of those were progressive programs. Neither the abolitionists NOR the sufferagettes were conservatives. You really dont know anything that you werent programmed with by some moronic AM hateradio screechmonkey do you?
January 24th, 2009 at 6:50 pmObama hit the ground running.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:50 pmmessiah Says:
#260
Women get to keep their vote… and NO MORE SLAVERY!!!
Yes, thanks to Republicans.
__________
Actually, wasn’t this one of the reasons Roosevelt LEFT the GOOP?
In 1912, Theodore Roosevelt’s Progressive (Bull Moose) Party became the first national political party to have a plank supporting women suffrage. The tide was beginning to turn.
___________
As far as the slavery thingy goes, the GOOP lost the high ground on that end a LOOOOOOONG time ago. The current crop of Repubs are a FAR CRY from the ones in 1862. The current GOOP rode into power on the Southern Strategy…
January 24th, 2009 at 6:52 pmSigh. The “new” troll is either home”schooled” or unschooled. And ignorance is so easy to cure if the victim just accepts treatment. Alas, the “new” troll is in denial. Another hopeless case that will always be part of the problem and never part of the solution.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:53 pmIn fact, I’m quite certain that Lincoln would literally, happily, beat the crap out of any of the creatures who currently follow their name with an (R). At least the ones who didn’t hide in Mommy’s basement.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:57 pmSigh again.
Utilities would “control” the grid. Prices would be driven by the market, as they are now. Switching between drawing power and providing power would be automatic. Power provided would be deducted from one’s bill and power drawn would be added.
I can’t believe this even needs elaboration.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:00 pmwiley Says:
Obama hit the ground running.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
George W. Bush went on vacation.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:00 pmmessiah Says:
#255
Oil and gas are allowed write-offs not subsidies.
___________
No subsidies?
http://environment.about.com/od/environmentallawpolicy/a/end_oil_subsidy.htm
U.S. House Votes to End Subsidies and Tax Breaks for Oil Companies
January 19, 2007 – The U.S. House of Representatives, under new Democratic leadership, yesterday passed legislation that would end more than $14 billion in subsidies and tax breaks for oil companies and earmark that money to help develop renewable energy, alternative fuels and conservation technologies.
Despite strong opposition from the oil industry and the Bush administration, which argued the measure could increase U.S. dependence on foreign oil, the bill passed by a vote of 264 to 163, with many Republicans joining Democrats to ensure an easy victory. House passage of the bill to end oil subsidies and tax breaks is only the most recent indication that Congress will give energy and environmental issues more substantive attention now that Democrats control both houses following the 2006 elections.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:01 pmThanks, TRoS. Saved me the trouble of answering that stupid remark.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:04 pmpete Says:
Sigh. The “new” troll is either home”schooled” or unschooled…
________
Heh… well, I think we can all be sure that the troll is getting schooled today, period.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:05 pmIt doesn’t, pete.
The troll just has nowhere to go with its argument and so is throwing chairs in front of us to try to slow us down.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:06 pmSaaay… where’d the Messyiah go?
On the Batphone to KKKarl, trying to get some Talking Points™???
January 24th, 2009 at 7:07 pmYeah, but Ralph, ya gotta give him credit…
He was trying to play… heh…
January 24th, 2009 at 7:09 pmRalph,@ 115 Beautiful,top coment!
TP forgot one comparison that Morlock mentioned.
THE WAR ON SCIENCE HAS ENDED!!!
And since you’re on the subject, Jimmy Carter is one of my most admired CIC’S. The man was truly ahead of his time on energy issues. HE BROUGHT PEACE to the middleast before W brought war and destruction. Thank fsm intelligence has prevailed.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:10 pmZooey Says:
George W. Bush went on vacation.
___________
Again… and again… and again… and again…
January 24th, 2009 at 7:12 pmWell, I’m heading out to make beautiful music.
G’night good people.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:15 pmYou too, stupid trolls.
The Republic of Stupidity Says:
Zooey Says:
George W. Bush went on vacation.
___________
Again… and again… and again… and again…
January 24th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Now he’s on PERMANENT VACATION!!! Woo hoo!
January 24th, 2009 at 7:16 pmOne more parting remark.
The Republic of Stupidity Says:
Zooey Says:
George W. Bush went on vacation.___________
Again… and again… and again… and again…
When bad things happened, Chimpy went on vacation. Then he came back and worse things happened.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:16 pmGoodnight, pete!
January 24th, 2009 at 7:17 pmYou got that right, pete. Yikes…
January 24th, 2009 at 7:19 pmBoner was so dull in his address on the GOOP economic proposal. Coulda swore he was about to cry.
America’s GOP
January 24th, 2009 at 7:19 pmWhen did we start giving a damn about low income people?
Zooey Says:
Now he’s on PERMANENT VACATION!!! Woo hoo!
____________
Too bad it’s not PERMANENT DETENTION…
January 24th, 2009 at 7:21 pmMcWars Says:
Boner was so dull in his address on the GOOP economic proposal. Coulda swore he was about to cry.
__________
You’re pronouncing his name wrong, McWars.
It’s bOOOOOOOOOOhner. Emphasis the “OOOOOOOOOOs”.
John bOOOOOOOOOOOhner.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:22 pmHmmm…
Where’d the Messyiah go?
Has the Rapture begun, and was he called up to active duty?
January 24th, 2009 at 7:24 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
Zooey Says:
Now he’s on PERMANENT VACATION!!! Woo hoo!
____________
Too bad it’s not PERMANENT DETENTION…
January 24th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
All things in good time….
At a minimum, it’s likely he’ll be staying home and getting more drunk.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:24 pmIt’s likely he’ll be getting a LOT MORE drunk.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:27 pmHippie_crusher Says:
BUT HAVE NO ISSUE AT ALL WITH STOPPING A VIABLE FETUS IN A BIRTH CANAL, DRILLING A HOLE IN HIS/HER HEAD AND SUCKING HIS/HER BRAINS OUT. THAT’S NOT TORTURE?
January 24th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Not for me.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:30 pmHippie_crusher Says:
____________
Gee… that sure is a self-serving, and pointless, set of generalizations.
Love the mullet, BTW.
Try making a “real point”. I know… I know… it makes your head hurt.
But you’ll be a better, huh, troll for it afterwards.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:32 pmHippie_crusher Says:
You ignorant punk. Go pour yourself a nice steaming hot cup of STFU
January 24th, 2009 at 7:34 pmRepublic. HippyLicker is just a very VERY stupid troll and a stupid trolls gotta do what a stupid trolls gotta do. Its not like they were capable of higher brain function
January 24th, 2009 at 7:36 pmI think the troll is trying to change the subject…
I hate to tell you this, troll, but abortion will never go away. Your Republican masters will make sure of that, because if they ever succeeded in eliminating abortion — they’d never get sheep like you to the voting booth again.
Abortion is here to stay. Don’t like it? Don’t have one.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:36 pmI get a real kick outta how HIppie_Crusher thinks anyone cares what the sick f@ck posts.
I mean, seriously — anyone who brags about “crushing” what he considers “easy pickings” is definitely someone to be trifled with.
But it’s gotta be an indication of how desperate they are for arguments when they try to go OT to bring in abortion.
Whew? Can anyone else smell that desperation coming from H_C’s direction?
(sniff)… that IS desperation we smell, init, H_C?
January 24th, 2009 at 7:36 pmYeeeah, I know, Eugene.
And I’d say, from all appearances, h_c is a bull troll. Must be troll mating season, ’cause h_c smells like he’s been dousing himself w/ his own urine again. Kinda weird what attracts female trolls, huh?
Cie la troll!!!
January 24th, 2009 at 7:39 pmThere’s defintitely more to that smell than desperation, ralph.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:40 pmralph, I’m pretty sure that’s desperation with a large dose of pee.
Yeah….I can smell it from here….
January 24th, 2009 at 7:40 pmTHAT’S what I smell!
You nailed it, TRoS. You’re much better at that natural science stuff than I am.
To be fair, though, troll desperation and troll urine smell almost exactly the same.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:41 pmHeh. I love it when TRoS and I are on the same track. :-D
January 24th, 2009 at 7:42 pmSee #304…
January 24th, 2009 at 7:42 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
To be fair, though, troll desperation and troll urine smell almost exactly the same.
__________
Same base chemicals and organic compounds in both.
Comes from their diet… the steady intake of BS from Limbaugh, Rove, Hannity.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:44 pmSo it wasn’t just me.
Everyone smelled it as soon as H_C shuffled through the door… still, you gotta give it up for him. Trousers spreading a slow stain and he still stood up proud and tried to change the subject.
H_C is for sure a “troll’s troll”.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:44 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
H_C is for sure a “troll’s troll”.
____________
Yeah, but if he had acting for ONE INSTANT like he was gonna open that greasy, ragged trench coat, so help me Dog…
January 24th, 2009 at 7:47 pmPoint and laugh…?
January 24th, 2009 at 7:50 pmZooey Says:
Point and laugh…?
_____________
Oooooooooo… good answer. As they say in Scotland… Ooouch’mon.
January 24th, 2009 at 7:54 pmhttp://www.dickipedia.org/dick.php?title=John_Boehner
TRoS, READ UP!
January 24th, 2009 at 8:00 pmHippie_crusher Says:
BUT HAVE NO ISSUE AT ALL WITH STOPPING A VIABLE FETUS IN A BIRTH CANAL, DRILLING A HOLE IN HIS/HER HEAD AND SUCKING HIS/HER BRAINS OUT. THAT’S NOT TORTURE?
You have that confused for a GOP lobotomy.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:03 pmMcWars Says:
http://www.dickipedia.org/dick.php?title=John_Boehner
TRoS, READ UP!
____________
Gawd… that’s funny.
So I have been pronouncing it wrong. The “h” is silent…
bOOOOOOOOOner. John bOOOOOOOOOOner. heh…
January 24th, 2009 at 8:05 pmOn a serious note, that type of abortion is very rarely undertaken in relation to the mothers health. It almost never comes to that.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:05 pmMcWars Says:
You have that confused for a GOP lobotomy.
___________
Why does h_c always have to bring up its sex life?
January 24th, 2009 at 8:07 pmMcWars Says:
On a serious note, that type of abortion is very rarely undertaken in relation to the mothers health.
_________
Trolls never let “facts” get in the way of a dishonest, self-serving screed, McWars.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:08 pmWhy does h_c always have to bring up its sex life?
You wear the Trajan during sucking out the brains.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:10 pmjurassicport.
Olbermann puts a lot of faith in Tice’s allegations and insinuates that Tice was demoted due to his whistleblowing. But, Tice was asked to take a psych eval in 2003 after raising concerns about a co-worker being a Chinese spy because she traveled abroad, spoke sympathetically about the Chinese and lived beyond her means. After he wouldn’t let the allegation go, he was demoted. He didn’t bring up the wiretap whistleblowing until Dec of 2005. Two years after his reassignment to the motorpool.
After a failed psych eval and 2 years of washing the agencies cars, is Tice really the most credible source Olbermann could find to prove illegal wiretapping?
January 24th, 2009 at 8:11 pmMcWars Says:
You wear the Trajan during sucking out the brains.
____________
I have just one word to say about that… EWWWWWWWWWWWWW…
January 24th, 2009 at 8:12 pmmy bad. jurassicpork.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:12 pmWhat a difference a Day makes.
It’s called the Constitution, repugs.
Deal with it!
January 24th, 2009 at 8:13 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
Trolls never let “facts” get in the way of a dishonest, self-serving screed, McWars.
I move to outlaw abombtion! Those Iraqi babies would agree!
January 24th, 2009 at 8:13 pmbackup Says:
January 24th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Your evidence? From a reliable source, please.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:14 pmPresident Obama is restoring our Constitution, you echo-brain.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:14 pmPoor HippyLicker just cant escape his past. All those cool hippies who kicked his butt got all the good girls were on the sports teams he couldnt make. Went on to have good lives good marriages with hot chicks and he is still stuck in his mommy’s basement with that well used rubber doll in his closet he keeps praying his mommy wont find. Then he comes in here and gets slapped around. Too bad HippyLicker was just destined to be a loser
January 24th, 2009 at 8:15 pmNorthrop Grumman wants abombtion on demand, opposes any measure.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:16 pmmessiah Says:
Jimmy Carter is the poster boy for Presidential weakness.
If we and the world had listened to Jimmy Carter and acted on his ideas, we would all be in a lot better position today than we are right now. Peak oil has come and gone and soon there will be wars fought for what little is left.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:18 pmSorry, about that TRoS. After reading my post again I think I’d rather hit report abuse.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:18 pmWe ain’t following your lying ass repugs!
“I Won!” Oh, Yes We Can!
“you lost” back in 2005 for the majority, for me it was much earlier.
repugs please shut up so we can start believe in your once…(snicker)…(LOL)…greatness. Amen.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:20 pmbackup Says:
Hard to prove but Tice was on the inside and had reason to know. Those things you listed seem to me like the normal CYA smears the Bush administration always seems to trot out when an insider blows the whistle on them. Like Treasury Sec Snow or Richard Clark. Yeah always its the disgruntled employee claim. We obviously cant PROVE what is classified but let me ask you WHY wouldnt Bush just get warrants? IF he was REALLY only after foriegn terrorists its not like the compliant FISA court was going to stand in his way. They turned down like five or six requests out of more than19000 BEFORE 9/11. The most logical reason to NOT have a warrant paper trail is to deny he was doing something exactly like this. That isnt proof but perhaps you can tell ME what the problem was with getting a darn warrant, up to 72hrs AFTER the wiretap if he really WAS going after people calling al Queda? OK so the accusation has been made. Lets subpoena everyone involved and every scrap of paper on this subject and see. THIS is the reason to have warrants coming from outside the executive branch. So we KNOW there is oversight and we dont have to WONDER if things like this are happening.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:22 pmHere’s some more information on Russell Tice’s Phych Evaluation.
Interesting that it was ordered after her started making waves.
http://www.gopusa.com/news/2006/january/0125_nsa_abusep.shtml
January 24th, 2009 at 8:26 pmbackup Says:
I’m honestly surprised that more of us aren’t writing more prolifically about Russell Tice’s interview with Olbermann a couple of days ago about the NSA’s illegal wiretapping of the nation.
_____________
Well it is O/T, but i did find these little nuggets…
In reaction to Tice’s claims, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly, two prominent figures in conservative media, launched an offensive against his credibility. On his Fox News broadcast of January 11, 2006, O’Reilly said that Tice should be jailed for his whistleblowing activity. But Tice told ABC News that “As far as I’m concerned, as long as I don’t say anything that’s classified, I’m not worried… We need to clean up the intelligence community. We’ve had abuses, and they need to be addressed.”
____________
I mean, you can rest assured, once Limbaugh and O’Reilly weigh in on the matter, you’ll get to the truth, toot sweets!
_____________
On January 08, 2008 a Whistleblower named Dave Larson[3] made significant disclosures to the Dept. of Defense Office of the Inspector General and to Senate members substantiating allegations made by Tice and which detailed unlawful criminal acts committed under Special Access Program (SAP) provisions. This matter remains pending and current with the Dept. of Defense Inspector General as case #103586.
______________
So backup… how are we going to discredit this one?
Druggie? Kiddie porn… no, no that’s Limbaugh… heh.
Ooooooooo… mebbe suicide, or plane crash…
January 24th, 2009 at 8:26 pmSo backup is RUSH where you got that info about the psych evaluation?
January 24th, 2009 at 8:29 pmRe Tice, from Bilbo’s link:
Glad we cleared that up. :)
January 24th, 2009 at 8:30 pmYou can find it in Tice’s Wiki entry. It’s pretty detailed and well footnoted.
It would appear that backdoor wants to spread the discrediting bit.
Funny how that came out of nowhere, huh?
Totally unrelated to the the thread.
Geez, h_c never came back. Mebbe some she-troll gave him a “come-hither” look.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:31 pmOr maybe h_c troll found out just a few minutes ago he was a Madoff victim. “What happened to my cans!?!”
January 24th, 2009 at 8:35 pmSummary of the First 100 Hours
January 24th, 2009 at 8:38 pmObama’s ban on torture allows the Pentagon 180 days to develop new means of interrogation beyond the Army Field Manual (an open door for potential torture)
Gitmo remains OPEN for another year and Obama has suspended all of the military trials of the “detainees” for 90 days. He could transfer them overhight to Federal prisons and grant them habeus corpus and a speedy trial. Apparently not.
He has left open the door to extrordinary renditions in violation of international laws but a specialty of Israel.
At this moment we are bombing Pakistan and Obama is planning expansion of war in Afghanistan and I bet my money he will be in Iran soon.
He has backed away from his support of EFCA so the unions are worried.
He has gone completely silent on his promise to raise taxes on the super rich and now repeats the Bush policy of tax cuts. As if 8 years of tax cuts helped.
His statements on Gaza echo precisely the rhetoric of the Bush Administration.
I see some difference in his position on diplomacy, at least offering to speak to our “enemies”.
But doesn’t h_c have all his green stamps and match books to fall back on?
Literally, like a pile of leaves?
And that giant ball of rubber bands?
What say you, h_c?
January 24th, 2009 at 8:39 pmThe timing seems suspect to me:
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2650/
And he didn’t come up with the wiretapping allegations until December 2005.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:41 pmMcWars, i was just about to describe that Hippie_Crusher as the geek who showed up at the party and before he’d gotten his coat off, had knocked over the wall of beer cans assembled by the football players.
And you trumped me with another comment about cans.
Weird.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:41 pmOr that USB Toaster and leg lamp..
January 24th, 2009 at 8:42 pmAnd unless I’m reading it wrong – this initial ‘whistleblowing’ was in regards to his belief that his co-worker was a spy – not that the government was illegally wiretapping. The wiretap whistleblowing didn’t surface until late 2005, after he had threatened to talk with the press and lost his job over the spy concerns.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:43 pmGreat minds think alike …
… or McWars crossed the path of a great mind?
I’d assume the latter. Sorry, ralph.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:45 pmbackup Says:
The timing seems suspect to me:
___________
So? Who cares what you think? Or what limbaugh and O’Rally have to say either?
___________
Tice’s story is complex.
___________
Indeed, it is complex. And what about Dave Larson’s story? It is waaaaaaay beyond any of us to pass judgement on Tice or Larson here. I doubt if any of us could begin to understand all the ultra-sophisticated technology mentioned in the wiki entry I read.
This is the sort of material it takes unbiased experts to sort out. Kinda leaves Limbaugh and O’rally out, huh?
I won’t come to a conclusion, one way or the other, right now. I can wait, and learn more.
One does wonder why backup seems to be pushing the “psycho” meme so much here.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:47 pmbackup,
That article is pro-Tice, and you cherry picked the thing to make it look like he was a loonie tune.
See my above comment where it shows Tice was cleared by psychologists.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:47 pmbackup Says:
The wiretap whistleblowing didn’t surface until late 2005, after he had threatened to talk with the press and lost his job over the spy concerns.
_____________
Hmmm… I recall this kind of behavior w/ backdoor before.
Present a “fact” that screws his carefully coiffed narrative to the wall, and he just seems… to… NOT HEAR you.
HEY!!! TWIT… what about Larson’s story?
Where’s there’s smoke, there does tend to be fire.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:50 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
Yeeeah, I know, Eugene.
And I’d say, from all appearances, h_c is a bull troll.
Speaking of bull trolls…
Check about four minutes into it…
January 24th, 2009 at 8:50 pmAGAIN Backup ANY insider that comes out with info that makes the Bush administration look bad is immediatly smeared and portrayed as a disgruntled employee. Lets just do the investigation and see. We HAVE the accusation and Tice isnt the only one making it so lets get to ALL the facts.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:53 pmWayne A. Schneider Says:
Speaking of bull trolls… Check about four minutes into it…
___________
And, while generally one takes off his jacket because he is hot, Grenrock Woods believes O’Reilly taking his jacket off at the end of the clip signifies that he is “in heat,” “ready to mate,” and “probably about to troll the halls of ‘Inside Edition’ for a mate, a woman to dominate…
____________
Here comes the kick… and it’s GOOOOOOOOOOD!!! SCOOOORE!!!!
GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAL!! GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAL!!!
January 24th, 2009 at 8:55 pmbackup has dropped back to an earlier thread to try to push the same bullshit as it is doing here.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:56 pmZooey. He got his own shrink to say he’s not crazy. Maybe he’s not. But, bringing the allegation up in December of 2005 after he was let go for something unrelated to wiretap whistleblowing makes him seem less credible.
Tice seemed upset about losing his security clearance. Upset about being relegated to the motorpool and being dismissed about his spy concerns. When he brought up the spy concern the second time, he questioned the competency of the FBI. Then he threatens to go to the press unless he gets reinstated with his security clearance. All of that has nothing to do with wiretapping. He wasn’t fired or demoted for that. But, it does give a possible motivation for his allegation.
Tice’s allegation could be true. But, because they were brought 2 years after his demotion and 1 year after his firing (on unrelated grounds) it causes them to be suspect.
Additionally, does anyone here have any info on Tice’s involvement with the wiretapping program before his demotion? I have seen some info that he was not involved with communications programs.
January 24th, 2009 at 8:57 pmSo let’s see. Tice became concerned about moles, after the story of Robert Hanssen became public in Feb. 2001. And he didn’t mention wiretapping until 2005, and was rewarded for his efforts with unionizing charges, by the already-proven, hyperpartisan Bush DIA.
Is that about it, backup?
January 24th, 2009 at 9:00 pmActually, TRoS, I think they cut that off short. At the end, Keith revealed the gag that she was actually a stand-up comedian brought in to say that everything about Bill’s “performace” indicated hostility toward women.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:01 pmbackup is conducting a smear campaign. Nothing more.
Frankly, if it turns out Tice is nutzoid, it won’t be backup who convinces me. I’ll take the word of the psychologists over smear-mongers.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:01 pmEugeneDebs Says:
AGAIN Backup ANY insider that comes out with info that makes the Bush administration look bad is immediatly smeared and portrayed as a disgruntled employee.
_______________
If not outright dead… like the DC Madam or Republican operative & IT expert Michael Connell.
Naaaah… this is just tin-foil hat nonsense.
HEY, backdoor, what about Dave Larson? Or did you already google him and couldn’t find anything convenient to discredit him w/?
And then, there’s always this:
“Former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio, who was convicted of insider trading in April 2007, alleged in appeal documents that the NSA requested that Qwest participate in its wiretapping program more than six months before September 11, 2001. Nacchio recalls the meeting as occurring on February 27, 2001. Nacchio further claims that the NSA cancelled a lucrative contract with Qwest as a result of Qwest’s refusal to participate in the wiretapping program.[9]”
Hmmm… more smoke…
January 24th, 2009 at 9:04 pmJust because Tice didn’t expose the illegal wiretapping until 2005, doesn’t mean he didn’t know about it long before.
Sheesh, trolls are gullible…
January 24th, 2009 at 9:04 pmWayne A. Schneider Says:
Actually, TRoS, I think they cut that off short.
___________
And it’s still funny as Hell.
O’rally isn’t right in the head. Didn’t he actually make threats against Franken?
January 24th, 2009 at 9:05 pmI wonder if the next troll will barge in and claim, “Obama wants a tax cut for pedo philes!”
January 24th, 2009 at 9:05 pm“Obama wants a tax cut for pedo philes!”
That would certainly get him Limbaugh’s support!
January 24th, 2009 at 9:06 pmZooey Says:
Actually he had to disclose it before 05 since he was the source for the 05 NYTimes article that they ADMITTED they sat on for over a year. Who knows how long before he became their source he was complaining to his bosses. Usually whistleblowers START with their bosses then become whistleblowers when they find no one will do anything.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:07 pmZooey Says:
Sheesh, trolls are gullible…
____________
I wouldn’t underestimate backdoor, or his intentions. He’s very good at rooting his sound bites where he’s knows people will see them. If nothing else, he appears to be planting grounds for dismissing Tice’s story.
But what about Larson, backdoor? Can’t find anything useful on him?
January 24th, 2009 at 9:10 pmbackup,
Tice is telling the truth. He had to be very careful about what he said publicly while Bush was still president because Bush was the type who would jail someone for revealing that he (Bush) was doing something illegal. Bt he also knows that it was wrong.
The problem was that Bush classified his illegal operations, and could easily get someone jailed for revealing classified information, which would almost certainly forestall any investigation into whether or not what was classified was even legal to do in the first place. If anyone spoke up and said it was wrong, they would face charges of revealing classified information. It was illegal for Bush to do that, but that never mattered to him in the first place.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – The Republican Party has no respect for the truth, and no respect for the law.
Any reasons that you come up with for disbelieving Tice are products of your imagination (or someone else’s, perhaps someone who would be the type to have ulterior motives, and thus suspect them in everyone else, which describes a lot of conservatives in the media.)
January 24th, 2009 at 9:21 pmkassandrasduplex lied:
I was going to do a point by point on your lies, then I got interested on how many people/groups/organization love President Obama.
I found this very nice article and this one Catholic Bishops.
But what do Generals and Bishop Howard J. Hubbard, Chairman of the Committee on International Justice and Peace of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) know.
Thanks trolls!
January 24th, 2009 at 9:23 pmjust like he said he would…
Obama Takes Stimulus to the People
ABC News – 1 hour ago
By JOHN HENDREN President Obama went directly to the public today in his first weekly address since moving into the White House, making the case for his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package that he hopes to sign next month.
Obama tells US of his radical new agenda guardian.co.uk
Obama Fleshes Out Further Details of Stimulus Plan Washington Post
NPR – Reuters – USA Today – CNN
all 1,111 news articles »
http://news.google.com/nwshp?ned=us&ncl=1296772579&hl=en&topic=h
“radical”! w00t!
January 24th, 2009 at 9:24 pmThe trolls certainly do flock to any post that praises Obama. Poor pathetic fools.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:29 pmOh… why Shane… so, uh, “nice” to see you…
And unexpected… heh…
January 24th, 2009 at 9:40 pmShayne, I couldn’t agree more. It ticks them off to no end that he’s actually DOING something instead of wagging his willy. They have to find anything to pull a Tonya Harding on him.
One of their favorite tactics is to say “Where is the change?” “Why isn’t it here yet?”
Well… I do believe Obama himself said that it wasn’t going to happen overnight… and we would ALL have to help. THAT is the American way.
I know the conservatives are big fans of “hard work and saving” (or at least they like to crow it when they make up lies about liberals being lazy and living off the system). Obama’s plan should be right up their alley, but they are too shortsighted and self-interested to help.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:43 pmOld Goat Says:
Shayne, I couldn’t agree more. It ticks them off to no end that he’s actually DOING something instead of wagging his willy. They have to find anything to pull a Tonya Harding on him.
________________
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/daily-show-fox-news-fear-imbalance
If you haven’t seen this j Stewart bit, it’s worth watching. Kind of sums up Week 1 of the Obama Admin, thru wingnut eyes, quite well.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:50 pmWell they’re all for somebody else working hard. And now they’re saying that we all need to spend money, that saving it is what’s causing the credit crisis. What they’re afraid of is that people who actually do the work will make the money instead of the people who sit in their ivory towers talking about taking advantage of others.
January 24th, 2009 at 9:51 pmWhy hello TRoS, how are you this evening?
January 24th, 2009 at 9:54 pmTRoS… now THAT last image of Limbaugh… I am going to have to do a VIGOROUS brainscrub! LOL!
GREAT piece though, what panic! Quick, cons, bury your head… the end is nigh!
January 24th, 2009 at 9:55 pmLet’s not be so quick to disparage wagging the willy. ;)
January 24th, 2009 at 9:56 pmld Goat Says:
TRoS… now THAT last image of Limbaugh… I am going to have to do a VIGOROUS brainscrub! LOL!
___________
Oh yeah… heh… it does END that way, huh? No if, ands, or BUTTS…
___________
GREAT piece though, what panic! Quick, cons, bury your head… the end is nigh!
___________
Ya gotta wonder… do the GOOPers really intend to spend the next 4 years wringing their hands and wetting themselves over every little detail, over and over and over? And do they really think THIS will get them back into power?
January 24th, 2009 at 10:01 pmFine, Shayne, fine…
We were just talking about, huh, what “noble” creatures wolves are…
January 24th, 2009 at 10:03 pmNo they’re probably looking for some way to frame him for some imaginary BJ even as we speak.
January 24th, 2009 at 10:04 pmYeah, I’m sure “we” were TRoS.
January 24th, 2009 at 10:05 pmI’m hurt, Shayne… no, really… I am.
***sniff… sniff…***
If I didn’t know better, I’d be thinking you don’t believe me…
January 24th, 2009 at 10:11 pmWhy would I doubt you. Wolves are noble.
January 24th, 2009 at 10:17 pmRiiiiiiiiiiight… indeed they are…
Why just the other day a lemming told me so… heh…
January 24th, 2009 at 10:24 pmDo you have a point Dynamo or are you just trying to show everybody how stupid you are?
January 24th, 2009 at 10:41 pmPersonally, I’m impressed with the level of stupidity in this troll.
January 24th, 2009 at 10:43 pmDynamo Says:
Do you even read the articles you post, or do you just get excited and have an ‘accident’ in your pants?
A Baltimore weatherman?
“Wong’s take is that melting arctic ice is responsible for the cooling of the oceans.”
January 24th, 2009 at 10:47 pmMy money’s on the “accident.”
January 24th, 2009 at 10:48 pmDynamo Says:
Poll: “Global warming” dead last on As Barack Obama takes office,
___________
Seeing as GOOPer economic policies have pretty much helped tank the WHOLE WORLD’S economy at the moment… I kinda understand why folks are focusing on STAYING ALIVE in the immediate future.
Or was that your point? That BotchCo was such a COMPLETE disaster that Obama has an incredible range of problems to solve, and he hasn’t solved them all in ONE WEEK!
GASP!!!
HE’S. A. FAILURE!
If only Sarah Palin were President… we’d be SOOOOOO much better off, already.
January 24th, 2009 at 10:52 pmZooey Says:
My money’s on the “accident.”
__________
Unfortunately for “Dymbnamo”, the trolls have already gone thru the supply of complimentary Depends we set aside for them, and it’s not even February yet…
I, on the other hand, am SOOOOOO glad I bought that block of Kimberly-Clarke stock before the election. Rich, I tell ya… RICH!!!
January 24th, 2009 at 10:54 pmArticles like this water down the global warming argument.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/science/earth/01climate.html?%3ENew%20York%20Times%3C/a%3E,%20%3Ca%20href=
We’ve been scared into believing that our world is rapidly warming, probably to an extent beyond our control. In the face of new evidence to the contrary, we’re now being told that the temporary cooling period is just a pause in the warming trend. That explanation just seems convenient to the skeptic.
January 24th, 2009 at 10:55 pmSorry backed up but it’s you people who don’t understand science that are scared. So afraid you might actually have to pay taxes if you ever got a decent job. Like that’s going to happen.
January 24th, 2009 at 11:00 pmbackup Says:
Articles like this water down the global warming argument.
______________
Actually, they really don’t. Much like your fellow troll, Dymbanmo, do you even read the article, or do you just get all a flutter when you see the headline?
“The authors stressed that the pause in warming represented only a temporary blunting of the centuries of rising temperatures that scientists have projected if carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases continue accumulating in the atmosphere.”
January 24th, 2009 at 11:04 pmTRoS,
Not only that, but didn’t it say that these forecasts were among their first attempts to forecast decades into the future? It is not yet an exact science, and they are learning more all the time, mainly due to the technological advances in measuring equipment (and satellites, too).
What the “global warming deniers” complain about is that to do the things we suggest need to be done would put an “unfair burden” on businesses. This is bullsh!t logic, and they know it! Everybody will have to make sacrifices and changes to their lives, and if corporations want to be treated like people (which was a gross misunderstanding of the 14th Amendment), then they can make sacrifices, too, just like the rest of us.
At some point, these capitalists just have to understand that there are more important things in life than simply making money. I know they don’t understand such a life, but it exists.
January 24th, 2009 at 11:37 pmAt the very least, the temporary cooling trend puts man’s role in climate change in a more plausible perspective: insignificant in relation to other factors.
If (by all accounts) we have been increasing emissions of green house gases that result in warming and that is the predominate factor in global warming – how can there be cooling?
The answer is that warming trend data as well as cooling trend data are more likely the result of other factors more significant than man’s activities.
If you want to argue that we should limit emissions to be more friendly to the environment – I’m on board. That makes sense to me. But, the weather predictions only confuse the issue and strain the credibility of the environmentalists who have to spin contrary evidence into a conjured global warming template.
January 24th, 2009 at 11:38 pmbackup Says:
At the very least, the temporary cooling trend puts man’s role in climate change in a more plausible perspective: insignificant in relation to other factors.
If (by all accounts) we have been increasing emissions of green house gases that result in warming and that is the predominate factor in global warming – how can there be cooling?
___________
You didn’t even bother to read the article, did you?
January 24th, 2009 at 11:44 pmWayne A. Schneider Says:
What the “global warming deniers” complain about is that to do the things we suggest need to be done would put an “unfair burden” on businesses.
____________
That is always their first, last, and only concern… the Almighty Dollar.
January 24th, 2009 at 11:45 pmWhy is science so hard for the trolls to grasp? Then there are the ones that are just disingenuous like backup. It tries to sound reasonable while making such twisted statements. I wish them a very long life, so they can be around when it hits the fan. Of course, when the worst of it hits they will be long gone so it seems their point is it won’t really cause them a problem. So screw the future, it’s all about them. Very sad how self-centered they are.
January 24th, 2009 at 11:49 pmLiberalVoter Says:
Why is science so hard for the trolls to grasp? Then there are the ones that are just disingenuous like backup. It tries to sound reasonable while making such twisted statements…
___________
Yep… that’s the guy. I’d recognize that MO in an instant. Feller used to wear a bow tie w/ his smoking jacket when he came by here. I think he thought it made him look smart, kinda like a cross between George Will and Hugh Hefner.
January 24th, 2009 at 11:57 pmThis science is hard for me to understand:
Man’s emissions of greenhouse gases are causing global warming at an alarming rate.
Man has been emitting greenhouse gases at an increasingly alarming rate.
There is a strong correlation of man’s emissions of greenhouse gases and the alarming rate of global warming.
We haven’t slowed our emissions, but now we expect a temporary cooling period.
I don’t understand that if man’s role is the predominate factor in warming – why do we anticipate cooling, if we haven’t curbed our emissions?
I read the article – but maybe someone here can ’splain it simple’.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:05 amWhen the glaciers melt too quickly (because of the warming caused by greenhouse gases) into the oceans, the oceans cool in an unnatural fashion, causing a temporary period of cooling.
Got it?
January 25th, 2009 at 12:09 amNow there’s an understatement.
AND, you’re off topic. We’re talking about the things Obama has accomplished in a few days that W couldn’t even comprehend.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:10 amThat, and there are normal fluctuations in the climate with or without manmade emissions. And if the study you cite had any credibility it would be in an actual science journal. When a newspaper picks up one study it doesn’t mean squat. Got it?
January 25th, 2009 at 12:12 amNothing ever goes in a straight, non-stop line.
There are fluctuations in everything.
Even the folks who did the research and came to the conclusion you got so excited about said “that the pause in warming represented only a temporary blunting of the centuries of rising temperatures that scientists have projected if carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases continue accumulating in the atmosphere.”
What is so hard to understand about that?
Read this last QUOTE from the article verrrry carefulllly…
“Too many think global warming means monotonic relentless warming everywhere year after year,” Dr. Trenberth said. “It does not happen that way.”
January 25th, 2009 at 12:13 amBut Shayne, President Obama hasn’t cleared ANY brush. /snark
January 25th, 2009 at 12:14 amhttp://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7191/abs/nature06921.html
January 25th, 2009 at 12:18 amLiberalVoter Says:
But Shayne, President Obama hasn’t cleared ANY brush. /snark
January 25th, 2009 at 12:14 am
Thank FSM, no more fake cowboy — rejoice in a President who is comfortable with who he is!
January 25th, 2009 at 12:18 amI feel I am wasting my time but… backup, if you are serious about really learning do as Shayne suggests. Pick up a real science journal. It is not someone’s blog or rantings. It is actual science that has been peer reviewed, that is, vetted by experts in the field. If on the other hand you are just being obtuse on purpose then your deserve ridicule and scorn.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:20 amZooey, amen to that and pass the pasta sauce :-). It is amazing what a real president can accomplish.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:22 amLiberalVoter, imagine what he could accomplish if he didn’t have to clean up after GWB.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:26 ambackup claims to come here to learn — but he doesn’t comprehend.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:28 amI read the article, backup, and their conclusions are based solely on ocean surface temperature measurements, and an incomplete set at that.
Their conclusions are nothing more than a wild guess.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:28 amAnd now he’s moved on to what they’re predicting like that has any validity. I think he’s passed obtuse.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:37 amMath is hard too. If you don’t want to make a fool of yourself, don’t comment on subjects which are too hard for you to understand.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:42 amWayne A. Schneider Says:
I read the article, backup, and their conclusions are based solely on ocean surface temperature measurements, and an incomplete set at that.
Their conclusions are nothing more than a wild guess.
____________
Not only are their conclusions just guesses, both the NY Times article and the one in nature say the same thing. Any cooling is temporary and WILL NOT STOP the longer term warming…
From the Times article:
“The authors stressed that the pause in warming represented only a TEMPORARY BLUNTING of the centuries of rising temperatures that scientists have projected if carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases continue accumulating in the atmosphere.”
From the Nature letter:
Our results suggest that global surface temperature may not increase over the next decade, as natural climate variations in the North Atlantic and tropical Pacific TEMPORARILY OFFSET the projected anthropogenic warming.
And one more time, since you didn’t seem to get it before:
Read this last QUOTE from the Times’ article verrrry carefulllly…
“Too many think global warming means monotonic relentless warming everywhere year after year,” Dr. Trenberth said. “It does not happen that way.”
_______________
No matter what the subject matter, this is ALWAYS backdoor’s MO…
Take an article, then very carefully cherry pick the parts that support the conclusion he wants to come to, whilst deliberately anything that doesn’t fit his predetermined agenda. Kinda why the whole”conservative movement” just crashed and burned so badly.
You’re entitled to your own opinion, backdoor, but not your own facts.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:51 amCan you imagine what the future would look like if McCain/Palin was in their 100th hour?
Cringe. I still feel like we’ve just escaped a harrowing disaster upon disaster.
Sigh of relief.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:51 amI dropped in after a few hours away, and I was struck by how the Dynosaur troll blew in, dumped a change of subject on the carpet, and backup immediately started rolling around in it.
Nice teamwork.
January 25th, 2009 at 1:02 amMcCain/Palin would be scarier than Bush/Cheney. Palin a heartbeat from the Oval Office. Puhlease.
January 25th, 2009 at 1:03 ammessiah Says:
Jimmy Carter is the poster boy for Presidential weakness. Wind and solar power, whether they’re Carter’s plans or not, only count for a small percentage of our energy production. Maybe countries as small as the Netherlands can survive on such tiny production, but the US won’t.
If wind and solar were such good ideas the markets would promote them.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
This is one of the least-informed comments I’ve ever seen. Is the crazy-haired lady from “Obama…we can’t trust him…he’s, he’s an Arab…” fame related to you, messiah?
January 25th, 2009 at 1:08 amObama has not disappointed us in the early going as many of the naysayers claimed. I think he is off to a great start, both in terms of what he has done and the priorities he has set. Great going Barack Obama. This is why I donated to your campaign and why I voted for you.
January 25th, 2009 at 1:09 ammessiah Says:
Jimmy Carter is the poster boy for Presidential weakness. Wind and solar power, whether they’re Carter’s plans or not, only count for a small percentage of our energy production. Maybe countries as small as the Netherlands can survive on such tiny production, but the US won’t.
If wind and solar were such good ideas the markets would promote them.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
It’s this kind of ignorance that is keeping us dependent on foreign sources of fossil fuels.
I really don’t know what universe you’re living in, but “the market” does not promote the best ideas or even good ideas, it only promotes the most profitable ideas. The idea that the only acceptable solution to our looming energy crisis has to be an extremely profitable one is selfish, greedy, and completely anti-social. If businesses are so worried about making money, then maybe they should concentrate some of their efforts on keeping their customers alive.
January 25th, 2009 at 1:20 amSo much for Obama’s “clean break.” This piece stinks of propaganda. And it flies in the face of an earlier post right here on TP.
All that aside, the real question here is: on whose authority did Blair disregard his orders?
Obama’s DNI nominee won’t say if waterboarding is torture.»
By Satyam Khanna on Jan 22nd, 2009 at 7:55 pm
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/22/dennis-blair-waterboarding/
Report: Intel Nominee Adm. Dennis Blair Knew of ’99 East Timor Church Killings Before Crucial Meeting
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/22/report_intel_nominee_adm_dennis_blair
Blair was ordered to tell Wiranto to stop the killings, and he did the opposite instead. On whose authority?
January 25th, 2009 at 2:30 amThe Republic of Stupidity@370
Holy shite! In one Day?
January 25th, 2009 at 2:39 am#
backup Says:
Articles like this water down the global warming argument.
http://www.nytimes.com/ 2008/ 05/ 01/ science/ earth/ 01climate.html?%3ENew%20York%20Times%3C/ a%3E,%20%3Ca%20href=
We’ve been scared into believing that our world is rapidly warming, probably to an extent beyond our control. In the face of new evidence to the contrary, we’re now being told that the temporary cooling period is just a pause in the warming trend. That explanation just seems convenient to the skeptic.
I know you know this is science.
You will never understand such logic.
It takes very little to cause an imbalance on earth.
You should start with watching the Discovery Channel.
January 25th, 2009 at 2:53 amI bet these 3rd rate trolls lurk on vegetarian blogs and type about how to bbq meat.
All trolls are cutting and pasting the same tired bs. Just like faux news regurgitate their lies and scare tactics.
President Obama is presidential! The world knows this. Slow pokes.
HE WON.
Fair and squared.
Gawd you repugs are opposite for the sake of being opposite. Dumbasses.
You’re still shouting your same OLD tired failed policies. Unbelievable!
I pity your state of mind. It has stagnated.
5 repugs left. (ROTFL)
January 25th, 2009 at 3:17 amAnts
sesli chat
January 25th, 2009 at 3:30 amsesli sohbet
sesli chat
LTdan Says:
I want it illegal because the bible says it is wrong, and the United States is a christian nation.
“18-If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him,
19- his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town.
20 -They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.”
21-Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death.”
I talked back to my mother and had a fierce argument with her a few weeks ago. When shall you have my mother stone me to death? I also ate shrimp, does this mean that I should be stoned to death?
January 25th, 2009 at 6:02 amAll references are from the New King James Bible)
25 ” If you lend money to any of My people who are poor among you, you shall not be like a moneylender to him; you shall not charge him interest.
26 “If you ever take your neighbor’s garment as a pledge, you shall return it to him before the sun goes down.
27 “For that is his only covering, it is his garment for his skin. What will he sleep in? And it will be that when he cries to Me, I will hear, for I am gracious. (Exodus 22:25-27)
Oh LT Dan, usury is also forbidden in the Bible. When will you take your crusade over to Delaware to the credit card companies?
January 25th, 2009 at 6:04 amReally goes to show what an “instant-tea” society we have become. Guys, 100 hours is NOTHING.
I see it this way:
First, 100 hours just a little more than 4 days in time, where a normal person would sleep 8 hours per day, so now we are only at 68 waking hours.
Second, the legislative branch was deliberately programmed to go SLOWLY and DELIBERATELY (read what our forefathers had to say about how the legislative is supposed to work and notice that the legislative branch comes BEFORE the executive branch in the US constitution: this is no accident). This means that noone expects legislation in 100 hours.
Third, the fact that Obama has already enacted a number of orders this quickly is already pretty amazing. It is somewhat faster in pace than Bush moved in the first week of his first term. And once again, Obama remains calm and pretty unflappable in spite of a Chief Justice who can’t memorize 39 words.
But all of these things are artificial: real legislation requires thought and time. And we already know that the right is going to shout from the rooftops. Let ‘em! With this very behaviour, they scared the shit out of independents and moderates on both sides of the aisle in the last two cycles; we can only benefit from their childish behaviour. Their party is in danger of becoming a regional party and I can back this claim up with hard statistics: the GOP only has dominance in the deep south and a tenous lead in the mountain states. The GOP is completely shut out of the NE, beaten badly in the midwest (when the GOP loses IN, you know that something is afoot) and moving in on being completely shut out of the west coast. Not only that, the rural vote is changing. Yes, McCain won the rural vote, but the reduced margins tell a story all on their own.
Obama is not a perfect person, nor do I expect him to be. But he is serious and thoughtful about what he does, he is and will work like a workhorse day (and night, if necessary) to achieve the agenda that he ran and WON on, and he has assembled a pretty good team, I think. So, he has good cards in his hand during bad economic times and the GOP is shooting with blanks. Now, it is up to the DEM party to remain unified and not dissolve into bickering splinter groups. The DEMS need a little of that old GOP wisdom: “DEMS fall in love, GOPers fall in line”. Well, for a while, I hope that DEMS fall in line, for the sake of our party.
January 25th, 2009 at 6:15 amThe comments here suggest good news is very threatening to some people. ;)
January 25th, 2009 at 8:15 amAbleCluster Says:
——————————————————————————–
Yey! I clean break from Dictator Bush is exactly what we need!
—-
January 25th, 2009 at 8:24 amHow long does it take to come up with the trite noncomments that serve as cover for the dumb ass privacy crap?
backup Says:
We haven’t slowed our emissions, but now we expect a temporary cooling period.
I don’t understand that if man’s role is the predominate factor in warming – why do we anticipate cooling, if we haven’t curbed our emissions?
I read the article – but maybe someone here can ’splain it simple’.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:05 am
________________
Here it is, dumbed-down for your benefit.
There is not a one-to-one correlation between human activity and temperature. Human activity is one of the contributing factors to the global climate. There are others – volcanic activity, El Nino/La Nina phenomena, Malenkovitch cycles, orbital eccentricities, etc. Some of these are cyclical, some not.
Human activity alone does not control climate by itself. However, human activity in creating an imbalance of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will have – and is already having – an effect in conjunction with these other factors.
Think of it as a bunch of water waves bouncing around a pool. Sometimes they will cancel each other out – anthropoegenic warming will conflict with cooling effects of an El Nino event. At other times, they will magnify each other.
When you look at one data point – temperatures from one year, an average over three years – you won’t see the trend. But when you take a larger view, you’ll see that even over short-term cooling cycles, there’s an overall 100-year warming trend.
January 25th, 2009 at 9:33 amhussein toasterhead Says:
Think of it as a bunch of water waves bouncing around a pool. Sometimes they will cancel each other out – anthropoegenic warming will conflict with cooling effects of an El Nino event. At other times, they will magnify each other.
Decreased ocean salinity, and changing ph levels are two ancillary effects that they never deal with. Why are these changing globally, if there is no net decrease in ice?
January 25th, 2009 at 9:47 amtoasterhead. That’s a good explanation that significantly answers my questions about this one study. Which, I admit is not scientific consensus.
But, many global warming alarmists have given the impression that the Earth’s climate has been relatively static over time and that it is only man’s burning of fossil fuels that is responsible for a recent warming trend. You, do an excellent job of explaining that man’s role is not the sole factor, but one of many factors. Many things contribute to the temperature of the Earth.
I believe the question becomes; how much of an impact does man have?
I don’t think we know. I also believe that just as you understand that you can’t get useful trend information from measurements of 5 or 10 years, I believe there are those that believe trend data we are using to explain a 100 year warming trend is also too short, on a geologic time scale, to get meaningful information.
It’s prudent to err on the side of caution. And producing less fossil fuel emissions to ensure a cleaner planet should be a priority. But, when you consider the Nature study predictions, the myriad of factors that effect climate, the ongoing cyclical nature and variation of global climate (over a broader time frame); the study of global climate seems to be in it’s infancy. I find it hard to understand the level of confidence of many climate change proponents, when you take into consideration all the factors, variables and exceptions.
January 25th, 2009 at 10:38 ambackup
You still trying to be relevant by pushing negatives?
Real, objective scientists say it is happening and we are contributing. Only scientists on the oil and gas payroll say different.
Stop shilling for oil and gas here.
January 25th, 2009 at 10:51 amName one.
See, this kind of cpasule summary of an “impression” that “many global warming alarmists have given” is bullshit, B’cup.
What you’re really saying is “what my mind have deduced from certain news reports is the following simplistic misunderstanding of what scientists really say, and I will use this misunderstanding to criticize the science”.
Every study I have ever seen or read on climate change is cautious in its language and fully mindful of the incredibly complex interplay of factors in climate. Human impact is one of those factors.
Yet the truth remains that it is a factor that is fairly simple to comprehend; there are certain gases that are known to be greenhouse gases — that is, they trap heat in the atmosphere so that the planet is habitable. Human industrial activity has been adding to the concentration of several of these greenhouse gases for over a century, and that rate of addition has only increased with increased population and industrial development of the world’s populations.
When you simplify this question in as crude and partisan a manner as you just did, B’cup, you raise once again questions about your seriousness as a contributor here.
January 25th, 2009 at 11:29 amThat’s because you cling to the life raft of “uncertainty” as an escape for you, rather than as a factor in the whole calculus.
In the first part of your comment, as I pointed out, you crudely and inappropriately simplify the message that you’ve gotten from “global warming alarmists”, even though the science is complex, crosses many disciplines and is difficult to express with certainty — and has been presented that way.
This complexity and uncertainty only comes into your ken at the point where it becomes useful to you — when it can serve to discredit the conclusions of the scientific community that has already factored in all of these unsettled elements, and has still decided that the threat is too great to ignore.
That’s why you find it hard to understand the level of confidence of “climate change proponents”.
(Side note — would Peter Schiff’s consistent warnings in 2006 and ‘07 of an impending financial collapse have made him a “recession proponent”?)
January 25th, 2009 at 11:46 amralph. Here’s Al Gore, a leading climate change proponent (alarmist):
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5441976
He doesn’t seem to be ‘fully mindful of the incredibly complex interplay of factors in climate’, he seems pretty convinced: “it is us”.
January 25th, 2009 at 11:54 amJeezus, B’cup, I didn’t realize you were talking about Al Gore. I thought you were talking about, y’know… scientists
I thought it was the science of global warming you were talking about when you raised issues of uncertainty about the research.
You sounded like you had done some investigating of your own. Apparently, all you did was watch An Inconvenient Truth — probably with your panties in a bunch the whole time.
My apologies for treating you as if you were actually serious about the issue.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:04 pmAl Gore is not a scientist. He has taken the personal role of raising awarness of the crisis we face. He uses credible scientific study from independent scientists with no agenda. Contrary to the deniers like you who use oil company employees to push your illegitimate message.
stop shilling for oil companies.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:04 pmFred, I guess we can James Inhofe as a credible spokesman for the forces arguing that “everything’s fine with the climate”, huh?
January 25th, 2009 at 12:09 pmRalph, slap yourself with a fish. inhofe and cobern are senators from the reddist state in America and I live there. We have campained against them for years and the idiots here just won’t wake up.
You’re right in one respect. inhofe is the one captain mantastic would listen to over any credible source that made contradictory statements to inhofe.
I’m really sick of being force fed the right wing fixes for the things they screwed up or ignored.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:20 pmOh, Fred, I’m sorry. I didn’t realize you had the misfortune of being saddled with those two. I’ll try to be more sensitive to your pain in the future.
But, as you note, Inhofe is as close as the Right has to an Al Gore in this debate, and since B-cup insists on basing his argument on Gore’s public presentation rather on the actual science that underlies it, it’s only fair that we can contrast Gore with Inhofe.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:27 pmcome on, ralph.
My point was: “I find it hard to understand the level of confidence of many climate change proponents, when you take into consideration all the factors, variables and exceptions.”
If you’re honest, you would admit that Al Gore is a leading (if not the most significant) climate change proponent.
He’s not considered a quack or a snake oil saleman. He won the Nobel Prize for his efforts.
If you examine his comments and consider his standing within the community, my point is that subject has been driven by alarmism.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:31 pmYou could just as easily be talking about inhofe here captain, why no criticizm of his extremism if you are so objective?
January 25th, 2009 at 12:36 pmCome n yourself, B-cup.
You’re criticizing the uncertain science behind the conclusions that Al Gore has brought to the wider world.
You’re basing those criticisms ON the statements of Al Gore. That’s ridiculous.
There is sound science behind all of these conclusions, and more research is done every day. Yes, it’s uncertain, as any prediction of this kind will be. But the scientific community is resounding in its confidence that the earth is warming and that the potential for catastrophic impact is great.
As I said, every single responsible scientific report I have read or seen includes cautionary language about the limits of each report — its methodology, its scale, its applicability to wider climactic events — but they express confidence that the accumulating evidence indicates that the treat is real and our activities have a significant impact.
But you pretend that Al Gore is the only source of information on this subject, and you ignore the cautious language of the scientists themselves, until it becomes useful to your argument.
The scientific community recognizes the uncertainties inherent in this kind of research and prediction, yet they regularly reach confident conclusions based on the data. Then you take the uncertainty that they’ve taken into account and use it to dismiss science that you probably don’t understand any better than I do.
January 25th, 2009 at 12:44 pmJust a little dig there captain? It puts your agenda into perspective, really.
You take the side of corprate shills and speak of honesty?
January 25th, 2009 at 12:51 pmAgain, B-cup, you use the term “proponent” as if those who argue that position want to see it happen.
In the example I linked to above, Peter Schiff was among those in 2006 and 7 who were warning of an impending financial collapse, based on his reading of the dependence of our economy on consumption, the level of debt required to maintain tat consumption, and the artificial wealth created by the housing bubble that was supporting that debt. He was literally laughed at on some financial news programs.
Would you have described him as a “recession proponent”?
January 25th, 2009 at 12:57 pmFred. you make a good point that there are extreme views on both sides of the debate. Inhofe, however, didn’t get a Nobel Prize for his myopic views.
I don’t consider myself a shill for the oil companies. If I am unwitting doing that; it’s for free. I like to consider myself a shill for reasonable skepticism.
Reasonable people here would admit that there are many factors that determine global climate. That the science is relatively new and imperfect. Although it’s prudent to err on the side of caution and be kind to environment regardless of the thermometer; there is still room for questions on an issue that has implications outside the environment.
January 25th, 2009 at 1:44 pmralph. Maybe you’re right about the scientific findings being cautionary. But, you have to admit that Gore, rightly or wrongly, has been the poster child for the climate change issue. His less than cautionary views have been embraced by proponents out of expedience. And that message, for those not digging through scientific journals, is misleading.
January 25th, 2009 at 1:53 pmYes, backup, there is room for questions — that’s what makes it science. But don’t come here claiming to be open to learning, and then do your “but but but” routine.
Several commenters have tried in good faith to give you excellent information (I discount my own snark), and I hope that next time they will remember the futility of it.
January 25th, 2009 at 1:55 pmI’ll give you that, point, B-cup, if it’ll move you off your insistence on criticizing the science based on how Al Gore presents it to the world.
Your original argument wasn’t that Al Gore was distorting the issue; it was that there’s too much uncertainty to reach any conclusions, and thus we should wait. You were ostensibly talking about THE SCIENCE.
When pressed, you somehow fell back to blaming Al Gore for being too certain.
“Reasonable people here” can do whatever the fu(k we want — admit or not admit anything that serves your or our purpose. In the end, that doesn’t matter because not one poster in a thousand here is qualified to actually offer authoritative opinions on the subject. The best we can do is evaluate the information that out there and make the best judgments we can about it. If you stop with what Al Gore says, you’re not really evaluating the BEST information that’s out there.
Zooey’s right. You come here claiming to be open to learning, but when it comes down to it, you always find a way to avoid it.
… okay, you usually find a way to avoid it.
January 25th, 2009 at 2:16 pmralph. I’m very interested in science, but I go under the assumption that you probably understand the science much better that I do.
I trust science, but I think were I part ways is my level of confidence in scientists.
I think scientists are cool. But, scientists are human. The have ideology, just like anybody else. Just like soldiers, priests, journalists, businessmen, etc; they bring preconceived notions to the table. When they are presented with findings, they have the same human propensity to support information that advances their worldview and dismiss information that contradicts it. There could also be a hesitation to advance findings in disagreement with the consensus of their peer group.
Science is reality. Scientists, like everybody else, are human. It’s okay to ask the question: If man is the cause for global warming, and we haven’t changed our behavior, why do we anticipate a cooling period? It’s also okay to point out that there has been continual warming and cooling periods throughout Earth’s history and that there are many non-human factors at play; probably more significant factors. How sure are we that it is man causing the latest warming trend? And if we are considering tradeoffs, what level of intervention is appropriate to address our impact?
January 25th, 2009 at 2:17 pmralph. the point I was making was a reaction to the Al Gore ‘debate is over’ type of confidence that I disagree with. The kind of confidence that reacts to anyone with a dissenting view or question on the subject to be greeted with ’shut up, you’re real stupid’. I’m open minded to scientific findings laid out as toasterhead explains above. And if your view is that most scientists believe we are probably having significant long term effect on the climate – I believe that view is reasonable, and considering the information we have today, the most appropriate.
January 25th, 2009 at 2:28 pmZooey. we disagree on a lot, but I appreciate your snarks.
January 25th, 2009 at 2:31 pmB-cup, this is just more evidence of your insistence on focusing on uncertainty as an escape hatch. Whether it’s to allow you to support the “do nothing” camp or whether it just gives you permission to not think very hard about it because “we don’t really know”, I have no way of knowing.
But when you claim that “scientists are human” you imply that we have no reason to put confidence in any conclusions drawn from scientific research, ever. What makes this issue any different from, say the impact of DDT on the reproductive cycles of raptors, or the impact of cigarette smoking on the incidence of lung cancer? After all, scientists are human. they make mistakes.
Tobacco companies prolonged the propsperous life-cycles of their industry by highlighting exactly this kind of “well, we don’t really know for sure” appeal to “reason” and by funding and publishing their own research intended to enhance the debate by further muddying the waters.
My point is that you don’t seem to be anylizing the data honestly. You put great stock in anything that casts doubt on the widespread conclusions being drawn, and you allow this doubt to undermine solid scientific understandings.
I am not convinced that the disastrous scenarios painted by Al Gore and others, even real practicing climate scientists will come to pass — or, rather, I am aware that they don’t really know very much and that these pictures will change as the body of research grows.
But I trust the bulk of the scientific community to know what it’s talking about when it speaks of this phenomenon as a real threat to our survival on this planet. I trust they are looking at broad trends over long periods of time and are sufficiently well trained to be able to factor out noise and irrelevancies and come to a responsible conclusion.
You don’t seem to have that same level of trust.
January 25th, 2009 at 3:00 pmbackup, please do not interpret my last comment as snark.
January 25th, 2009 at 3:08 pmralph. your sentiment is reasonable. I trust science. The findings of scientists should carry a lot of weight. But, it is not gospel. It’s not an excuse to do nothing, but it’s reason to keep healthy skepticism.
The findings of scientists that we are going to use to shape policy should easily withstand any of my (or any other) skepticism.
I think as long as we continue to question, our decisions will more likely be based on the deliberate science that you champion, and less on the fear based decision making favored by alarmists.
I agree with your sentiment on the subject.
January 25th, 2009 at 3:14 pmOkay. considered not a snark.
I’ll let you go. I’ve got a full plate of red state activities planned.
I’m going to church, then to a Nascar race. Later on, I’m getting married (to my niece’s mother) with just enough time left to teach my class on Intelligent Design. Hopefully, before I turn in, I’ll drink some moonshine with some kinfolk over at the Knights of the Southern Cross.
Good night y’all.
January 25th, 2009 at 3:15 pmAgreed. That’s the way science works, and the way it’s supposed to work. that’s the essence of the Scientific Method.
But that process only works properly when the skepticism is honest, and driven by a desire to reach the truth, not when it’s driven by a desire to reach a predetermined outcome.
I’m not saying you fall into that latter camp — I suspect you do seek the truth, B-cup. But what concerns me is that you seem to be unduly influenced by that camp’s interpretation of the research and its tactics in evaluating the issue.
January 25th, 2009 at 3:35 pmB-cup… I hope that’s your brother’s ex you’re marrying, right? Otherwise that would be creepy.
Ah, well, at least it’s not your niece. Best wishes to the blushing bride.
January 25th, 2009 at 3:37 pmObama reverses Bush strategy in Pakistan…
January 25th, 2009 at 4:27 pmKills 14 civilians in a missile strike. Reports are that 5 terrorists were also killed in the attack.
Ah! More global warming debate. Here are a few facts that can’t be challenged.
1. Atmospheric CO2 has risen in direct proportion to measured human output.
2. Average global temps have risen in direct proportion to human CO2 emissions and atmospheric CO2 levels.
3. The last hundred years has seen the most rapid climb in average global history in, at least, 160,000 years.
4. Polar and glacial ice are melting at unprecedented rates.
5. We humans must reduce the release of ALL toxins into the environment.
Those are really the only relevant facts. The simple fact that we have limited the impact of many human activities proves that ingenuity can solve these issues. The fact that new technologies are needed ensures that reducing emissions will not destroy the world economy. The ONLY things standing in our way are greed and fear.
January 25th, 2009 at 6:42 pmbackup Says:
I’ll let you go. I’ve got a full plate of red state activities planned.
I’m going to church, then to a Nascar race. Later on, I’m getting married (to my niece’s mother) with just enough time left to teach my class on Intelligent Design. Hopefully, before I turn in, I’ll drink some moonshine with some kinfolk over at the Knights of the Southern Cross.
Good night y’all.
_______________
Wow… now that’s livin’ large. And I’ll bet that li’l sweetie yer gittin’ hitched to still has all her teeth too! Or at least someone’s teeth… keeps in a jar… by the bed.
January 25th, 2009 at 7:20 pmThe good news: It is my brother’s ex.
The bad news, my brother’s ex is also my sister.
Hey, she’s good enough for family, she’s good enough for me.
: }
January 25th, 2009 at 7:37 pmGlobal warming is real. Virtually ALL the real science backs this up. The OVERWHELMING consensus of REAL scientists NOT working for oil companies and doing science the way it is done with studies submitted to peer review agree. You dupes carrying water for industry are helping to destroy the world. For WHAT? To give more comfort to the most comfortable and to help afflict the most afflicted. You should be ashamed. The oil companies said in internal memos at the very beggining of this debate they would win by sewing doubt among the public. Good little sheep bought into it hook line and sinker. I would be ashamed to be so easily led
January 26th, 2009 at 7:27 amEugeneDebs.
Why should someone be ashamed if they say what they really believe?
I think the adage is ‘evil happens when good men say nothing’, not ‘evil happens when someone disagrees with the majority’.
And you would be ashamed to be so easily led? Okay. From conversations we’ve had in the past, I believe you said you believe in God.
I’m questioning how much impact man has when the Earth is trapped in the orbit of a star with a mass a million times greater that burns at a couple of million Celsius. An Earth that has recorded evidence of continual warming and cooling cycles before the arrival of man. With a multitude of factors that effects its climate. I may not be right, but is the question really that outrageous? Is it really more naive than believing a Santa Claus type patriarch created the world, reigns over us, judges us and decides our eternal fate?
Eugene. Why not let it suffice that skeptics or deniers are at odds with the majority and the scientific consensus. Naive sheep that should be ashamed of themselves, might be a little over the top.
January 26th, 2009 at 10:35 amEugeneDebs, Time to give up trying to be rational with this troll. It is being willfully obtuse. It must be getting paid to waste time.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:49 pmOf course Obama will deal with many problems caused by Bush.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
“GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
ONLINE ANTI-BUSH SCHOLASTIC RESEARCH: LISTING OF MAJOR ISSUES
http://andrewyu-jenwang.blogspot.com/2008/10/bush-is-worst-president-in-american.html
February 1st, 2009 at 3:06 am