This is the party of no, no to the President, this is childish and immature.

>>FreeMarketLiberal Says:

>>But Al Gore is GOD to these people…they also worship the likes of Micheal Moore and Rosie O’Donnell..”

I’m a liberal on most issues, and I know a lot of liberals.

None of us “worship” Gore, Moore or O’Donnell.

I have high respect for Gore and all that he has accomplished in his many years in government service and since then.

Moore? Ah, he stirs up the water some. O’Donnell? I don’t have a clue about her… her tone of voice and attitude send my fingers to the remote a heck of a lot faster than I can type.

Mr. Free Market Liberal: One thing I’ve noticed in many political discussions is that some folks are more caught up in pyschological projection than they are in actual discourse.

One example of psychological projection: people who lie a lot (and I am NOT suggesting you do … I’ve only read the one message from you) almost always think that everyone else lies a lot- they project their own thoughts and attitudes and habitual actions onto others.

From my vantage point, it seems that there are a lot of people who “worship” Limbaugh and some of the public figure citizens of Limbaughstan. (I submit the loud, insistent noises that arise whenever a Republican suggests Limbaugh might have erred on some issue as evidence of the fervor of the Limbaugh fans.)

May I suggest that, given the relative lack of interest in Moore and O’Donnell and the like among liberals, that perhaps you too hold the Limbaughistas in such high regard as to approach worship, and that your view of liberals and our attitudes towards some media figures is really more a matter of projection?

Of course, this is just an educated guess. Maybe I’m wrong. And maybe your mileage may vary.

Stranger things have happened….

If you like to discuss real issues and not imaginary fixations, feel free to stop in: http://rjw-progressive.blogspot.com

http://blahgblog.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/direct-action-by-the-left-and-right-online/

Unions will cost jobs. Health and safety regulations will cost jobs. Environment protection will cost jobs. Stopping forrest clear cutting will cost jobs. Unpaid maternity/paternity will cost jobs. Food safety inspection will cost jobs. Same old broken record.

The Europeans and Japanese are already ahead on green energy.
If they can do it, why can’t we ?

Yet Republicans rail against cap and trade because it will increase our taxes.

I assume everyone agrees that something needs to be done about global warming gases like CO2, so doesn’t that mean that at some point, Americans are going to have to pay for the transition to clean energy?

If we do not pay for it now, aren’t we pushing that cost onto future generations.

This whole thing reeks of contradiction.

Said much better here.

http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=440

It is a study of the effect of humankind on the actual physical geography of certain regions. It’s primary focus is on the rapid pace of industrialization and building of new cities in China.

The scientific consensus is clearly expressed in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environmental Programme, IPCC’s purpose is to evaluate the state of climate science as a basis for informed policy action, primarily on the basis of peer-reviewed and published scientific literature (3). In its most recent assessment, IPCC states unequivocally that the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth’s climate is being affected by human activities: “Human activities … are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents … that absorb or scatter radiant energy. … [M]ost of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations” [p. 21 in (4)].

IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members’ expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. For example, the National Academy of Sciences report, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions, begins: “Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth’s atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise” [p. 1 in (5)]. The report explicitly asks whether the IPCC assessment is a fair summary of professional scientific thinking, and answers yes: “The IPCC’s conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue” [p. 3 in (5)].

Others agree. The American Meteorological Society (6), the American Geophysical Union (7), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling (8).

June 26th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
____________

There’s no consensus on the Holocaust, either. What’s your point?

morons!

By the way, his skin is looking more and more liked cured tobacco.

ok… i’ll ask again… this time a little louder:

would a TP staffer please answer this question:

has this information been forwarded to the reps ASAP?!???

thanks.

Not to mention, that after we’ve desecrated our mountains, we can promote tourism to see the scalped mountains. While on the other hand, no one would ever come to see a natural area.

June 26th, 2009 at 11:44 am

DITTO THAT – “NEW WORLD ORDER FASCIST TRAITORS!

that’s cute

sort of like a Detroit Lions cheerleader calling a Pittsburgh Steeler linebacker “weak”