Absolute Power
Well Friends, again the present government is flexing its muscle just to see how strong it can become.
George Bush talks a lot these days about spreading freedom around the globe, but here at home freedom and democracy seem to be disappearing.
Bush re-nominated five candidates to federal courts who failed to win approval in his first term because those who examined their records found them to have extreme views and impaired objectivity. Now, with a Republican majority, these judges should win quick endorsement. The Senate Democrats could prevent their appointments using a filibuster, but Republicans have a trick in reserve they call “The Nuclear Option.” They would rewrite the rules to eliminate the traditional right to filibuster.
This is only the prelude. Four Supreme Court seats will likely turn over in the next four years. Radical Republicans want complete power to appoint Supreme Court justices that will favor corporate interests. It will be payback time for corporate dollars that financed the last election.
It does not bode well for American democracy if Bush, Republicans and corporations exercise absolute, unchecked power over all three branches of Federal Government.
What is next?
Suzanne
Claudia Says: April 14th, 2005 at 7:57 am
I definitely don’t find that funny.
Claudia Says: April 14th, 2005 at 8:01 am
Yep. There’s not a lot I find funny about this.
Axel Bavaria Says: April 14th, 2005 at 10:21 am
Dear Suzanne,
why don’t you go and post that on DU ?
Regards.
Richard Menic Says: April 16th, 2005 at 4:19 am
Right on! When will people wake up and realize that Bush is just a coorporation that doesn’t give a crap about you and I? Wake up conservatives! Before you’re all standing there realizing how WRONG you were a year from now!
Anonymous Says: April 18th, 2005 at 5:16 am
Ok Suzanne, this requires a reply also.
1. The Republicans are trying to do away with Judicial Appointment Filibusters, not ALL filibusters. Amazingly enough, the Democrats tried to do this during Clinton’s presidency and used the exact same arguements the Republicans are using now and visa-versa. It’s called politics. Not some conspiracy.
2. You made a statement regarding extreme views of appointees blocked, but I bet you think that some of the appointees from the Clinton Administration were just average Joes like you and I…. right. Again Politics as Usual.
3. The infamous corporate money that financed the election. What are you saying? Are you saying it was bought and paid for? The buyers had an agenda? Whatever. The Democrats actually raised more corporate dollars then the republicans. And dont even get me started regarding MoveOn.Org. To quote thier leader, “..we bought it, and now we are taking it back..”, talking about the Democratic Party. Oh, but that’s ok, because they are mainstream America. No, they are not. They are rich people who want to use you to obtain power. Yes Suzanne, RICH PEOPLE. Don’t beleive me, check out who are the major funders of MoveOn.Org and other groups like them. Names like Soros come to mind. Oh, rich people are good and non-manipulative only if they give their money to good Democratic Party causes. Whatever.
4. Will favor corporations. Ok, what does this mean? Dont you think this is a nebulous statement designed to manipulate and frighten. Exactly what laws could he pass to favor corporations? Spell it out for me. Show me the dangers. The word “corporation” has now been hijacked by the liberal elite to be the new boogeyman. Of course the average liberal elite doesnt have to work for these evil corporations to feed their kids either.
Suzanne Says: April 18th, 2005 at 6:43 pm
Wow, I am amazed; I thought that I would get a bunch of people saying I am just a Liberal,
However, much to my surprise all of you who have made comments so far seem to realize what is going on.
I hope you all know you have made my day.
Now to comment number 3
What is or where is DU
Explain, or am I just dumb?
Just a girl with the name of Flowers
A citizen of the World but first and foremost
An American by birth and by heart
Suzanne
Oh, Anonymous
Yes, the Democrats tried something close, but believe me, if the Religious Right has complete control of the Courts we are in deep doggy doo doo (I would have used more descriptive words but well, I am a lady)
Do not compare the goals of the Democrat Party with the Goals of this government. It would be like comparing a Garden Snake to a Cobra.
But back to your statement. There is much more at stake than the big Corporation, The scary part of all of this is this government seems to think it is not the governments responsibility to protect our rights of freedom, but to do away with these rights. Should the Supreme Court be controlled by this Religious Right President; We will loose our freedoms which are the birth rights of all Americans.
We have already lost way too much now we are so close to loosing our basic rights as American Citizens. Think about this, does the government have the right to take away from you your right to freedom of speech, your right to freedom of religion, your right to decide on issues that belong in the privacy of your home and your family? Well, The government thinks that it does.
Do you realize that all of your medical records are available to almost any government person who wishes to read them, no matter what his or her reason may be? In addition; they may, use these records in any why they so wish? This includes any medication you may take or have taken, any medical problem you may now have or have had in the past. Any private discussion you may have had or do have with your doctor.
This is just on issue out of so many that if you start realizing that nothing you do, nothing you say, nothing that you believe belongs just to you.
The government knows about it, unless you have kept in only inside of your mind and nowhere else.
Your phone calls may be listened to at any time without a reason; your email may be read at any time without a reason. Your home may be monitored from as far as high up in the sky without any reason. You may be out in the middle of nowhere and think you are safe and alone, but hey baby your are not safe and your sure are not alone, you are being watched from why up in the sky, and that which is watching you can see the dandruff in your hair. It can also listen to even you slight whisper. Don’t believe me?
OK, do not; as time will show you that, everything I write is completely true, if it were not I would not write it.
Do I care if I am being monitored, NOPE!
not in the least. Why
Well, that is classified, sorry.
Suzanne
Suzanne Says: April 18th, 2005 at 6:45 pm
Again to Anoymous,
You are missing the point,
EMT907 Says: April 27th, 2005 at 1:35 pm
Suzanne,
You keep whining about your rights, yet you seem perfectly content on having activist liberal judges, who look to Europe and the rest of the world instead of the law or the Constitution, to run your life. The rest of the world doesn’t have the rights that we enjoy. Why should we have liberal clowns dictating our lives based on that? Would you rather have decisions made by the people that you elect into Congress or rabid liberals with life appointments doing what’s popular instead of what’s right? Instead of a vote on your rights, you’ll have your rights determined and finalized with the stroke of a gavel.
If you’re so worried about your rights, this obstruction should scare the hell out of you.
Suzanne Says: April 28th, 2005 at 9:54 pm
Aw, come on, grow up
Bucho Says: April 29th, 2005 at 8:47 am
Not to butt in on a great little slam-fest…
but,
Why is it that every discussion with a leftist, always ends up with either, over-the-top, conspiring paranoid theories, including; “everybodies watching me” and “we’re on the verge of loosing all things good in the world”… or… just a weak self-confused - “come on/ grow up/ wake up” reply?
Is it that they’re all so worn out from taking the ‘facts of politics’ and trying to twist them to fit their own apathetic hypocracies?
…or is it, that left has been just simply knocked so far over the ropes, that they can’t see anything but a doomsday view of the world now?
I used to find it amusing to hear their dizzy replies and poorly backed retaliations… but, now its just become sad and predictable.
bonniem Says: April 29th, 2005 at 4:21 pm
Well, because the majority of the voters voted for our President, they just can’t admit it is because the majority of the voters wants/wanted him in the White House. They simply can’t believe that everyone doesn’t agree with them, so they keep trying to convince us that we just don’t know what we are doing or what is going on and that we were Bad wrong and selling the country out. Frankly, I think we are going more like the country was intended to go. But then that is just me!( & millions of others)
Suzanne Says: April 30th, 2005 at 5:42 am
Hi Bucho
Guess you were making a remark to my reply of
Oh Grow Up.
That was not a dizzy reply it was exactly what I wanted to write.
As that is exactly what is needed.
Grow UP and face life and face the facts.
Suzanne
Oh, just been too busy with things to come and bug all of you but I will be back in a bit.
Lefty Says: April 30th, 2005 at 12:32 pm
Bucho,
I honestly don’t remember the last time I heard a republican support their opinion with even a shred of factual information. They confabulate, habitually lie, and distort any element of truth that inadvertently slips into their worldviews.
Lefty Says: April 30th, 2005 at 8:07 pm
For all you right-wing kooks who have been betting that human-generated pollutants were not causing serious global warming, guess what? You, your president, and your talk show hosts scoffed at the smart guys and that was a mistake. nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/earth_energy.html if you have the capacity to learn.
Paul Says: April 30th, 2005 at 10:04 pm
Hey Lefty, go to JunkScience.com and that will tell you all you need to know. I especially like the header for the website. “All the Junk that is fit to Debunk”. Like your previous statement.
Paul Says: April 30th, 2005 at 10:23 pm
Suzanne, that Anonymous post was from me. I entered it in at a different computer and didnt remember to put my name in the appropriate place.
But still haven’t answered my questions. I get much more about this than you think I do. I personally despise the Un”Patriot”ic Act because the powers given to the government by this embarrasing piece of rush legislation are frightening.
However, I wont tolerate people running around blaming it all on “the horrible Christian Right”. I refuse to let things like what you have been posting on this site regarding Christians go unanswered. History has been full of examples where slowly but surely public mass hysteria unfounded by facts has been built up against a group of people. The results have never been pretty.
Paul Says: April 30th, 2005 at 10:34 pm
Lefty, when you get to JunkScience.com, you might want to read the part called JunkScience Judo. That’s where it talks about how average Joe American can determine whether or not data is being skewed to back up the desired outcome of the scientist.
If you talk to engineers, they will tell you that ALL data can be skewed. You should be more skeptical and not just believe everything you hear or read, especially if it comes from a college proffessor as they are just plain skewed!!
Lefty Says: May 1st, 2005 at 1:09 am
Paul,
I assure you that I know a vast amount about science, statistics, and reasoning. I don’t have to ask an engineer about science. I am a scientist my friend and I know how to judge good science from bad because that’s what I do for a living. I know that the “average” american (no such beast exists, by the way) does not understand science worth a shit and many have given up and, like you, just throw out the good with the bad. If you think all college professors are “just plain skewed” then you are hopelessly skewed yourself.
Lefty Says: May 1st, 2005 at 3:08 am
Paul,
I visited the web site you mentioned in your post. Wow, it should be called junkwebsite.com. Holy crap are is this web site full of shit or what? back to your previous post - I find it hillarious that a Bush supporter could ever accuse anyone of not being skeptical enough. That takes the cake.
Lefty Says: May 1st, 2005 at 3:15 am
Paul,
Milloy is a Fox News hatchet man. And you trust him? Practice a little critical thinking man. The Fox News folks have zero credibility.
Lefty Says: May 1st, 2005 at 12:44 pm
Hey Paul,
You should go read up on your pal Milloy at PRwatch.com. Turns out he is a scam artist who isn’t so much interested in debunking junk science as in hatcheting anything that doesn’t support the right-wing kook point of view (aka, the FoxNews strategy). Don’t be such a sucker man.
Lefty Says: May 1st, 2005 at 12:47 pm
Hey Paul,
You should go read up on your pal Milloy at PRwatch.org. Turns out he is a scam artist who isn’t so much interested in debunking junk science as in hatcheting anything that doesn’t support the right-wing kook point of view (aka, the FoxNews strategy). Don’t be such a sucker man.
Lefty Says: May 1st, 2005 at 12:59 pm
Paul,
Since you are a fan of skepticism, as am I, I suspect that you are a long time reader of the Skeptical Inquirer. If you aren’t, it is a wonderful journal and you should read it. I just found a delightful review of Milloy’s book at the Skeptical Inquirer’s web site that you would benefit from reading. It is entitled “A blunderbus approach to criticism of statistics.” They didn’t let Milloy off easy, however.
Lefty Says: May 1st, 2005 at 1:06 pm
Paul,
More bad news on Milloy, your self-proclaimed scientific reformer. He got his start as a behind-the-scenes lobbyist for the tobacco industry, which has arguably done more to corrupt science than any other industry in history. It just gets loopier and loopier when you look into what the “junkman” is all about.
Paul Says: May 2nd, 2005 at 5:19 pm
Lefty, I checked out your website PRWatch. It leaves alot to be desired. There are a few things I noticed:
1. The money behind the website is a series of no-name foundations. However, when you do some research, you can determine those foundations politics. They certainately are NOT unbiased.
2. The books being pushed by the editors of the website are extreme left wing, indicating their personal support for such things.
3.This website is actually endorsing a petition to silence “false media”. Wow, that’s scary.
I also looked at your Skeptical Inquirer. Science debunking paranormal events. Neat. Not sure what this has to do with mass hysteria scares but I am sure you will point it out for me.
So tell me Lefty, I should ignore Milloy, whom you have determined to be biased, and believe PRWatch, which is just as biased but in the other direction? Right!!
Oh, and as to you being a scientist, I will say to you what I have said to others….don’t bring it up unless you are willing to prove it.
Lefty Says: May 2nd, 2005 at 6:23 pm
Paul,
So you want to visit my lab and see my Ph.D. hanging on the wall. How the fuck am I supposed to prove to you that I am a scientist? You want me to walk you through a lesson in biophysics, immunohistochemistry, fMRI, neuropharmacology? You dumb shit, in a forum like this, how is one supposed to prove their identity? I can tell that you aren’t a scientist easily enough.
Lefty Says: May 2nd, 2005 at 6:39 pm
Paul, I made the mistake of going to the library to get Milloy’s book and pissing away a perfectly nice day yesterday. My university library didn’t have the book so I had ended up going to two different public library branches to track it down. The book isn’t about Junk Science after all. It’s about how the media and some attorney’s have interepreted evidence from scientific research. Milloy isn’t just biased, however. He doesn’t appear to understand how science works. His grasp of statistical reasoning is particularly poor. My undergraduates understand statistics much better than he appears to. The thing that worries me the most is that there are people out there who are so scientifically illiterate that they may think that Milloy’s book is actually decent. But that speaks to the sad state of scientific training provided in general population.
Paul Says: May 2nd, 2005 at 7:43 pm
Now, now, Lefty, try to control your temper and your foul mouth. Or foul posting. Whatever.
Why do you get angry when I question you? You ought to realize that I have a right to question that when you throw that into the post to make yourself look better.
You know what is so funny about College Professors teaching us “dumb” people to not beleive everything we hear or read? When we then then question them, they get angry. Touchy, touchy.
So tell me, professor Lefty, do you think the Kyoto Protocols are having the slightest measurable effect on the current “catastrophe” of Global Warming?
If not, what exactly do we need to do to fix the problem?
Do you have a solution?
I am actually kind of curious what kind of “prescription” you would provide for our current ills.
And before you decide to cuss me out again you ought to realize that cursing is a sign of an uneducated mind that does not have the capacity to use better synonyms in which to verbally abuse people.
Paul Says: May 2nd, 2005 at 9:19 pm
Hey Professor Lefty, how do you get the time to post right now. Aren’t you supposed to be helping your students prepare for finals?
I find it interesting that you summarily dismissed all that the website had to say regarding false interpretation of data.
In the interest of (very limited) research, I just web searched a phrase, “Global Warming is False”, and received more pertinent sites than I could list here. Really, on an intelligent level, we both realize that the global mean temperature has been rising since the late 1800’s with which all the available scientific data agrees. But we also have to agree that prior to that earth’s climate system was in a cooling phase. Honestly now Professor Lefty, do we have any concrete data that supports the current theories of human causation or is it all hypothetical. Certainately the only way it can be scientific “law” is if it is verifiable and that would require you to do a global experiment. Which would require you to control all global systems. Which would require you to know what all effects weather has on a local, regional and global scale. Since we (and our super computers) are barely able to predict weather 10 days in advance, I am at a loss as to how this is possible.
The problem is that we dont know enough to justify a GOSPlan style control of our industries and economics. Don’t get me wrong, I would love to see America get off her Oil dependency and graduate to better energy technologies such as nuclear power. I would also like a super smart scientist like yourself to figure out cheap fusion, so that we can not only permanently fix our problems but also get to the stars, but at the moment it hasnt happened.
Unfortunately media fueled mass hysteria about “Global Warming” is not going to get us anywhere. Except maybe government controlled industry (which is a recipe for disaster). And maybe if we are really lucky extreme poverty. But that’s ok with the green types isn’t it. After all extremely poor people leave a much smaller footprint on beautiful “Gaia” dont they?
Lefty Says: May 2nd, 2005 at 10:14 pm
Paul,
You are right about two things. First, I really don’t have time for this sort of stuff. I thought it might be interesting to try to communicate with people who are outside of my usual circle. But perhaps my time is better spent elsewhere. Second, I shouldn’t curse so much. It’s a bad habit but you must understand, I am a passionate individual. If I had time, and if another forum were available that was more conducive to elaborate discussions, I would like to talk to you about science (your tax dollars, afterall, support my research. And I believe that your life is ultimately enriched by the work that I do on your behalf.) It is important for you to understand that the aim of global warming research is not, as you characterized it, to establish new scientific laws. Nor is it necessary to control all global systems in order to develop useful models of climate change and the pertinent variables. The question is, which models best explain the observed data? I gather from your last post that you don’t like multivariate models of phenomena. Rather than taking up our time any more, let me just refer you to something that is already published on the topic. You may reject it as “biased” and if you do, such is life. In any case here is a link to it if you wish to read it.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/edu/gwdebate/
it’s back to the lab - where I belong. Adios.
Paul Says: May 2nd, 2005 at 11:28 pm
Hey Lefty, I actually enjoyed that link. That had some cogent points brought out in a nonconfrontational manner. I think I will bookmark this site and keep an eye on it. I also think I will do some more indepth research regarding Hansen, including that PDF article he has connected to that page.
This was actually much better than the mass hysteria scare tactics which have made me sick and tired of “global warming” and the accompanying green activists.
I did find it interesting that Hansen indicated that the proof of the information will be determined within the next decade.
Hopefully someone can add to this kind of level headed approach and come up with a viable and workable solution if there is indeed a problem. Why not push for more fission reactors? Or better yet, pour money into a workable fusion reactor. Why aren’t we putting money into making fuel cells economically feasible? The impact of such new technology on our economy would be staggering..in a positive way. Instead the perpetrators of this scare only seem to be able to talk about “evil” corporations needing to be managed.
If we are convinced global warming is the threat that the media makes it out to be, why aren’t we trying to advance ourselves and our techonologies? No, all the greenies seem to talk about is how we need to limit ourselves.
Anyway Lefty, I just wish that people came up with visionary solutions to go with thier mass hysteria causing scientific problems. I guess that is too much to ask for.
Lefty Says: May 3rd, 2005 at 1:05 am
Paul,
I am glad you liked the site. Hansen was the author of the article that I originally posted (the one that started our exchange). The article you just read was written in 1998 and was based on his 1988 model. For a summary of his most recent work see http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/earth_energy.html.
Lefty Says: May 3rd, 2005 at 2:40 am
Paul,
The US government provides a nice clearinghouse for information on the global warming issue at the following link.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
I realize that government scientists, like Hansen, are a primary target of ridicule but if you look at it objectively you might find that it is high quality work done by objective scientists. We do get tired of working our asses off and then having the public learn about our work from the Limbaughs and Milloy-types who do none of the hard work but undermine the public’s understanding of our work with their caddy, uneducated remarks.
Paul Says: May 3rd, 2005 at 8:16 pm
My question then is why are scientists leaving the solutions to the green weenies? Let us discuss some of thier solutions and why it causes your average American (yes, we do exist) extreme discomfort.
1. Problem-We need to find a different main supply for energy other than oil.
Green Weenie Solution: Fight all oil exploration, fight all oil companies, decrease available stocks of oil, etc., all so that the price of oil will go up to the point where it is prohibitive to use it, causing our industries to seek other materials. To say that this would hurt everyone but the rich, which is the class that most green weenies come from, is putting it mildly.
2. Problem: Dependence on Coal
Green Weenie Solution: The Kyoto Protocols. As a scientist, you have to admit that this ignorant treaty was not an attempt to stop the “greenhouse effect” of the earth, but instead and attempt to distribute money to third world countries. This was an economic treaty, an attempt to stick it to America. Everyone knew we would not be able to bring all our coal fired electrical power plants off line and replace with more green friendly forms of power generation in time. Thus we would have been forced to buy “carbon credits” from all these “poor” third world countries (who are usually poor because their leadership is corrupt, or worse). Let’s forget the fact that these countries like China are catching up with us when it comes to the amount of CO2 produced, that is not really what it was about. Oh yeah, that’s real intelligent. NOT! Instead what we need to do is bring on nuclear plants to replace coal fired plants, but oh wait, the green weenies dont want that either, we might have a “China Syndrome”. Is that good science? I don’t think so, but maybe you can correct me.
3.Problem: All our internal combustion engines in our Car Crazy Society.
Green Weenie Solution: Do whatever it takes to cause the price of gasoline to go through the roof. Your average American will stop using so much. The stupidity of this one should be obvious. I wish all these people that donated to Green Weenie causes would instead donate directly to an independent science lab which specialized in alternative fuels from hydrogen to fuel cells. Unfortunately the science is not there yet and so the only solution anyone can think of is making it illigal to drive. Meanwhile Green Weenie supporters like Soros will continue to fly around in his fuel guzzling jets and fuel guzzling limos. Right.
Instead of giving so much money to Washington Lobbyists and fringe EcoFreak groups who only know how to burn down homes, why dont people give money to people who can actually FIND A SOLUTION!!
Why? I’ll tell you why. People get rich by creating such public mass hysteria.
The science involved is too based on uncontrolled variables to justify the extreme measures being pushed by some of these people.
Answer me this Lefty. Do we have an accurate reading on the degree or percentage of human causation? Do we have enough control of the variables to be able to determine the full percentage of human causation? And if not, who benefits the most by a public scare?
Paul Says: May 3rd, 2005 at 8:38 pm
I checked out the second website Lefty, I found some things in there which were disappointing.
1. The scientist who put this together constantly put the worst case scenario info in. Yes, I understand data is data, but we haven’t hit the worst case targets now, as admitted by the previous article, why include it in what is obviously a media style info release for the uneducated public.
2. I did not read it 100% (only about 98%) but I did not see where he acknowledged that there could be partial causation from another source.
3. I see nothing in there acknowledging the potential for future advancement which would radically shrink the amount of future gas input into the system. Yes, we MUST advance.
On the other hand, I did find this informative. Reading information such as this is helping me formulate my stance, especially in relationship to the extreme Green Weenies who want to turn this into an excuse to institute a Command Economy.
Lefty Says: May 3rd, 2005 at 9:09 pm
Paul,
I am not familiar with the Green Weenies and thus am not qualified to comment on their positions. If you are refering to environmental activists, it is my impression that they are a minutely small group with virtually no impact on anything. The environmental movement died a decade ago. I am not interested in fighting with ghosts.
Lefty Says: May 3rd, 2005 at 10:08 pm
Paul,
Time is short, I have work to do, but I will try to briefly respond to your complex, multifaceted question. You asked why scientists leave the solutions to the greens. I know a number of scientists who have devoted their entire adult lives to working on alternative energy sources, transportation, nuclear physics (including fusion). I don’t know any scientists working in this area who are leaving the job to the activists. One obvious problem, howeever, is that their has been little investment in alternative energy research. Reagan nixed it and it never made a come back. The private sector will eventually pursue alternative energy research but probably not until the market demands it (i.e., much higher fuel prices) or government incentives stimulate it (unlikely). There are creative, intelligent Americans out here who like challenges, are not scared of hard work, and we would enjoy the challenge of creating cleaner and more efficient systems. I predict that the important energy innovations will come from India and Asia. Your main question was this: “Answer me this Lefty. Do we have an accurate reading on the degree or percentage of human causation? Do we have enough control of the variables to be able to determine the full percentage of human causation? And if not, who benefits the most by a public scare?” We certainly do understand the variables well enough to make reasonable predictions about the climate. Here is the question that I think you should be asking: what mistakes do I want to avoid? It’s a matter of risk assessment and we should set the risk threshold that we are willing to accept according to the consequences that could potentially follow certain courses of action. Would you agree that there is at least some possibility that humans are altering the climate in ways that could produce grave consequences? If so, it seems reasonable to me that you would want to take steps to minimize such a risk. In this debate, if I am wrong, nothing is lost. If you are wrong, the loss could be significant. There is nothing to lose by being cleaner and more efficient. We ALL benefit from better efficiency and a cleaner environment. It’s a win, win, win, win situation. But if you are wrong and the story that Hansen’s work suggests is correct, future generations of humans will suffer from our willingness to take chances with their rightful inheritance.
Paul Says: May 3rd, 2005 at 10:27 pm
Ouch, thou sayest, not I.
However, would you be able to answer my questions regarding human causation? Or direct me to a pertinent article on the web or in a scientific magazine.
And unfortunately the Environmental movement is alive and well, it just doesn’t care about the environment half as much as it cares about becoming a mouthpiece for the Socialist..er..Democratic Party.
Lefty Says: May 4th, 2005 at 1:07 am
Paul,
I recommend James Hansen’s Scientific American article (March 2004, I think) entitled “Defusing the Global Warming Time Bomb.” You should know that Hansen, the person whose research started the entire global warming debate is a conservative Republican. Ironic huh? He has been ruthlessly attacked as a mouthpiece for the Democrats, by people like you, and he is actually a conservative Republican.
Lefty Says: May 4th, 2005 at 2:29 am
Paul,
A question for you. Where have you been getting your information about global warming from? Is it possible that you are relying too heavily on the opinions of people with a particular political agenda? Earlier you pointed me to Milloy. But surely you must have better sources than the Cato/FoxNews hacks. If you are really interested, why don’t you become a scientist or engineer yourself? Join us. Be a part of the solution.
Suzanne Says: July 17th, 2005 at 2:49 am
Just a few quick comments to some of those above, you who wrote the comment will know it is for you. First I talk about Global Warming, if anyone does not belive this is true, go visit Glaycier National Park, guess what friends, the Glayciers are almost all gone, by by ice.
Wonder why this took place? Global Warming.
Next, someone above made a comment that I blame every thing on the Christian Right, If I have given this impression, I am sorry, as I do not.
I blame only on specific people be they Christian Right, Liberals, Christian Left, Christian up or down. I blame on only those whom need the blame, The majority of the Christian Right people are Honest, Good, Moral wonderful humans, so, accept my “I am sorry if that is what I have made anyone think.
Those who are to blame know who they are, and so do you. I cannot, you cannot, no one cannot put an entire group of people into a catagory and them blame this entire group of our problmes, and for sure this has never been my intention.
Suzanne
I do not have word open so my spelling is more than not terrible as I am a terrible speller, you know the problem of people with Attention Deficit Disorder Problems, no we can spell!!!!