Global Warming Strikes Again!
*cue dramatic villan music*
*Global Warming enters stage left, twisting his moustache, his black cape fluttering behind*
Global Warming: Bwa-ha-ha! I’ll show you how much power I have over you pathetic humans!
Take THIS…
HONOLULU (KHNL) – Spring is nearly upon us, but a chill is sweeping the state.
With temperatures dipping into the 50’s in some neighborhoods people are talking about the cold spell.
…and THIS…
(State College, PA) – The bitterly cold temperatures and heavy lake-effect snow are combining to create chaotic conditions across the eastern half of the nation. An Alberta Clipper on Tuesday will add to the weather mess, bringing snow to areas from the upper Plains to the mid-Atlantic states.
Rail and air travel has been curtailed, highway travel around the Great Lakes is treacherous, schools have been closed, water mains have burst and people and animals run the risk of exposure that could lead to frostbite or hypothermia.
…and THIS!
A bone-chilling cold wave with temperatures as low as 42 below zero shut down schools for thousands of youngsters Monday, sent homeless people into shelters and put car batteries on the disabled list from the northern Plains across the Great Lakes. At least four deaths were linked to the cold weather.
The cold was accompanied by snow that was measured in feet in parts of upstate New York.
GW: Oh wait, that doesn’t make any sense at all. Mother Nature is making me look like a fool!
*leaves stage right with angry look on face while throwing darts at Al Gore’s photo on the wall*
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
148 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
I’ve been torturing myself by hanging out on a blog called Think Progress (which I think is a misnomer).
They had a thread about Americans denying Global Warming. So I said the following.
It’s not “Global Warming” anymore, now it’s “Climate Change” , that way no matter what the weather does, the Leftist Tryannists (I made up that word) can continue thier attempt to destroy Industry.
Comment by Vince P — January 29, 2007 @ 11:09 pm
Then in a newer thread some lefty actually said
I think we all need to stop refering to it as “Global Warming,” and start using the broader name of “Climate Change.” Global Warming is just part of human induced Climate Change. If we use “Climate Change,” it won’t be as easy for Fox News and similar skeptics to say Global Warming can’t be true because it’s 20 below zero in the Midwest, or an ice storm just hit the east coast. Research studies and documents refer to the broader problem as Climate Change, I think it’s time for the media and the public to do the same.
Comment by Dave — February 4, 2007 @ 7:55 pm
Comment by Vince P — February 6, 2007 @ 11:10 pm - February 6, 2007
[...] Original post by GayPatriot and software by Elliott Back [...]
Pingback by Politics: 2008 HQ » Blog Archive » Global Warming Strikes Again! — February 6, 2007 @ 11:43 pm - February 6, 2007
Whatever you call it, it gets more ridiculous as it goes on.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 7, 2007 @ 12:34 am - February 7, 2007
I’m just amazed at how predictable the left is.
There was another instance too.. some Lefty was claiming that Islam does not have violent dogma and that the Jihadis are just upset about imperialism, even though if you read everything the Jihadis write, its clear they are acting on the basis of their religion. So I told Lefty why he refuses to take their word and instead insists on telling them what they really think.
The next day an article about Hirsi Ali said this
She characterises the manner in which liberals sidestep such details as a confusion of facts and strategy. ‘Some people will accept that Islam is backward but they’re not going to say that because Muslims will be offended. “We want them to become liberals, so we’re just going to trick them into a secular humanistic way of thinking.”‘ At this she lets out a giggle, as if tickled by the absurdity of the idea. ‘But people are aware of what’s going on. That’s why many Muslims are suspicious of liberals. Because they know they are not being taken seriously.’
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 12:44 am - February 7, 2007
Although I’ve only read sections of it, I recommend The Skeptical Environmentalist by Danish environmental scientist and author Bjorn Lomborg. That he is from a socialist European country (albeit with a rather unregulated economy — see profile here) and remains dispassionate is significant. He has drawn the ire of many environmentalists, though scientists cannot refute his findings.
Comment by HardHobbit — February 7, 2007 @ 5:04 am - February 7, 2007
Moonbat logic:
- Global Jihad is just a phantom menace created to expand government power and redistribute large amounts of money to corporations who have a stake in fighting it, while silencing all dissent.
- Solution to Global Warming: Expand government power, redistribute large amounts of money to groups that have a stake in fighting it, silence all dissent.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 5:39 am - February 7, 2007
I’m hearing the same things that Vince is reading. Just a couple minutes ago on the radio they were quoting some idiot that claimed scientists have concluded that our unbearably cold weather is just a byproduct of global warming/climate change.
The claims are so idiotic, it makes me wonder if maybe the conventional wisdom that global warming exists, and we are causing it, may go away. If these types of claims continue, the average common sense American has to start seeing global warming/climate change for what it is…a sham. Then it would just be the liberal nutjobs that believe it.
Well, at least I can hope that is what would happen.
Comment by Chris — February 7, 2007 @ 7:15 am - February 7, 2007
Didn’t you know … the cold is a result of global warming.
If it’s warm, it’s global warming; if it’s cold, it’s global warming.
If it’s rainy, it’s global warming; if it’s dry, it’s global warming.
If it’s a bad hurricane season, it’s global warming; if there’s NO hurricane season, it’s global warming.
If the Yankees beat the Red Sox, it’s global warming; if the Red Sox beat the Yankees, it’s global warming.
It called … mythology.
Julie the Jarhead
Comment by Julie the Jarhead — February 7, 2007 @ 7:20 am - February 7, 2007
Given that I was fed a bunch of “global cooling-the next ice age is on the way” BS back in school, I am fairly skeptical of this round of doom and gloom as well.
Comment by just me — February 7, 2007 @ 7:38 am - February 7, 2007
I am skeptical as anyone regarding global warning. From the data I have seen, the average temperature has steadily increased during the past 100 years or so. Does this mean the trend will continue? Is it because of “greenhouse gases” or just natural climactic change? I really don’t know, and don’t know if scientists really have the answer.
But because we have a cold snap in many areas of the country is not even close to proof refuting global warming. In fact, the argument is more absurd than what is ascribed to those on the left here. As wrong as the global warming scientists may be, I don’t believe they ever claimed that we wouldn’t get cold snaps like this again.
Comment by Pat — February 7, 2007 @ 8:19 am - February 7, 2007
As for the Islam discussion, I’m afraid that opinions vary widely on both political spectrums. Most of my liberal friends have low regard for the dogma of Islam.
Comment by Pat — February 7, 2007 @ 8:22 am - February 7, 2007
Check out Michelle Malkin mocking John Edward campaign’s blogger. It’s the funniest thing you’ll see this hour.
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/02/07/hot-air-theater-presentsamanda-marcotte-part-ii/
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 8:27 am - February 7, 2007
Are you guys denying that Climate Change/global warming is happening?
If you are, you are denying a mountain of evidence and appear like those creationists/Intelligent Design windbags….
The only real debate is if it is caused by humans or not.
Comment by keogh — February 7, 2007 @ 9:31 am - February 7, 2007
Um, the climate is always changing. Are you asking me if I believe in gravity next?
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 9:45 am - February 7, 2007
Yeow, how did we go from a witty send up by Bruce on global warming or climate change to Islamic terrorists and the employment of religion to rationalize terminating the West?
Come on.
Climate change ala AlGore is a theory that is maturing and it may or may not be set aside one day. I think it’s more of a pathological science –quackery at its margins (N-rays, polywater, cold fusion, the Piltdown Man, aliens built the pyramids).
Science is far from proving AlGore’s version of Global Warming decisively, if science ever actually does that… like with the BigBang, the origin of life, Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Pluto as a non-planet, black holes, the role of RNA in viral duplication, the missing link in man’s ancestors, the endlessly litany of endangered species in the 1970’s that have made a come back or even Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.
The last scientist to “prove” anything was Newton and his apple. Science isn’t about proof… it’s about speculation and thoughtful consideration of generations of scientists until the notion becomes generally accepted. Climate change is a theory… are we in one? Sure –the Earth changes over tens of thousands of years. Is it worthy of massive public policy reform? Probably not. Have we had climate change before? Yes, the geologic evidence is overwhelming even for Creationists who think Earth is 7,000 yrs old. Should we use global warming theories as a predicate to adopt Kyoto sanctions? Hell no.
Proof is for mathematics; science is speculation, detective work, analysis and it takes generations. The good news is AlGore will never have a Presidential Library and his climate change platform is just a mechanism to make money and stay relevant… the phone isn’t ringing much anymore and he’s angry as Hell about that. This is an issue that gets AlGore in front of an eager young college audience, keeps him relevant to his fringe and allows him to ignore he’s just sitting in history’s dustbin.
Let’s leave the jihadists and the perverted use of religion for another day.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 10:06 am - February 7, 2007
It´s awfully hard to sell the concept of global warming when people are standing up to their butts in snow, airports and and schools close due to snow and cold.
Comment by Roberto — February 7, 2007 @ 10:18 am - February 7, 2007
keogh writes: “The only real debate is if it is caused by humans or not.”
Nope, keogh. The only real debate is if we should use the issue as a predicate for massive changes in public policy –both in the US and abroad.
When I was in grade school, our Weekly Reader told us that one day the oceans would be so polluted we could walk across the debris to Europe, suburban sprawl would morph one city into another city and there’d be no open space or farmland left and that computers would control every aspect of our lives… not that they’d become toys of our pleasure and productive utility… no, unchecked technology was evil… but unchecked scientific inquiry was a good. What was that? Separate editors?
Sorry, keogh, to you the only question might be “…if it is caused by humans or not”. For the rest of us, it’s about using junk science as a platform to adopt eco-fanatic public policy.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 10:21 am - February 7, 2007
I believe the Manbearpig Movement is driven more by scienticians than scientists. Science is supposed to embrace skepticism, not seek to silence those who don’t buy into whatever is being hyped at the moment.
Interesting how the media hype anecdotal evidence of Manbearpig (such as This WaPo Story deceptively using an outdated photograph to sell Manbearpig), but dismisses anecdotes of record cold temps as… well, anecdotal.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 10:21 am - February 7, 2007
>When I was in grade school, our Weekly Reader told us … suburban sprawl would morph one city into another city and there’d be no open space or farmland left
Holy hell, I remember that.
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 10:23 am - February 7, 2007
I could have written comment #4, about The Skeptical Environmentalist.
Hat-tipping the Moonbattery blog (and possibly V the K?), I also highly very recommend this presentation: http://ff.org/centers/csspp/docs/gerhardppt.ppt
Accompanying notes: http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/gerhardnotes.pdf
Simply put: what the real (not junk) science finds is this:
(1) We have climate change.
(2) We have always had climate change.
(3) There is nothing “unprecedented” about current climate change.
(4) Even the direction (hot or cold) of our current climate change is difficult to determine, or to state honestly. It depends on what endpoints you arbitrarily select.
(5) We are probably having a minor warm spike, one still LESS than the Medieval Climate Optimum, within a general overall, slow cooling trend. The Earth has been much, MUCH hotter than this, the farther back in time you go.
(6) If we are having a mini-warm trend: The likely contribution of sunspot cycles is high, and the likely contribution of greenhouse gases, particularly CO2, is not high.
(7) Methane and water vapor are also greenhouse gases. They (particularly water vapor) dwarf the amount of CO2 and the likely contribution of CO2 to any “greenhouse effect” (again, if there is one).
(8) Because of (6) and (7), it makes no sense to blame CO2 for the mini-warming of the last 200 years. Again, the mini-warming of the last 200 years is more coincident with natural, multi-century sunspot trends.
Overall – If the moonbats are going to abandon “Global Warming” language for the more open-ended, less definite “Climate Change”, well, I think that’s a tiny step forward. Them coming a tiny step closer to reality.
Comment by Calarato — February 7, 2007 @ 10:24 am - February 7, 2007
Pretty soon they’ll be calling “Climate Change”, “the weather”
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 10:27 am - February 7, 2007
Matt, we read the same Weekly Reader. Also, all the oil would be gone by 1997, and bald eagles, cougars, elephants, and whales would be extinct within ten years. Plus, we’d all be stung to death by killer bees.
Then, later, we got a little older and were told that Reagan would start a nuclear war and destroy humanity in an Apocalypse of hellfire.
Lefties remind me of Dorey in Finding Nemo, with their inability to remember how every previous over-hyped catastrophe, um, didn’t seem to turn out the way we all were told.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 10:28 am - February 7, 2007
P.S. And needless to say: Even if we had an un-natural warming trend that really were caused by CO2, world socialism – or a scheme to burden the U.S. and make it pay and pay – is in no way a logical answer.
Comment by Calarato — February 7, 2007 @ 10:28 am - February 7, 2007
That is so spot-on, I had to frame it!
Comment by Calarato — February 7, 2007 @ 10:30 am - February 7, 2007
You know how lefties are always whining about the cost of the Iraq War? Well, consider the cost of implementing the Kyoto Treaty, which according to even low-end estimates, would cost as much as fighting five Iraq Wars simultaneously. For a century.
And even Kyoto advocates admit that it would only decrease Global Warming by 0.07 degree over a century.
The only countries where carbon emissions were reduced significantly were the Eastern Bloc countries, at the cost of a 50% contraction of their economies. Therefore, that’s the amount of contraction that would be necessary to put a dent in US carbon emissions.
So, Manbearpig fanatics, I ask you: Is the threat of Global Warming so dire that we need to immediately reduce economic activity (i.e. everybody’s standard of living) in the US by 50%?
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 10:35 am - February 7, 2007
#11 – #15 –
Aw Matt, come on. Coming from keogh, that is a stunning admission!!!
Comment by Calarato — February 7, 2007 @ 10:38 am - February 7, 2007
More questions for those who are “Totally Cereal About Combatting Manbearpig:
1. Al Gore, Arianna Huffington, and Bobby Kennedy are so concerned with Manbearpig, they want to outlaw SUV’s. So, why are they flying all over the world in private jets?
2. If Bobby Kennedy thinks fossil fuels are such a horrific threat to the planet, why is he so adamantly opposed to building a windmill farm over the horizon from Cape Cod?
3. If the science behind Global Warming is so irrefutable, why are Global Warming advocates so hell-bent on silencing all skepticism about it? If the science is irrefutable, further inquiry would only support the conclusions, right?
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 10:40 am - February 7, 2007
Thanks Cal, I’ve been working on a concise formulation of that concept for some time.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 10:41 am - February 7, 2007
VdaK, the Weekly reader list I remember about near-extinct species doomed by man were rhino, condor, grey wolf, spotted owl and some animal that was cute and cuddly and appealed to the female readers but I don’t recall it except I did think at the time that it was thrown into the list by the editors to appeal to female students.
Now, it turns out the condor is fair game for hunting. There are so many RINOs running around DC that if you pull out a $20 bill you’ll get gored by them rushing to take it… and the spotted owl doesn’t taste anything like chicken ’cause it’s back to eating natural prey. In Michigan, we’ve got so many grey wolves that it’s presenting a problem for wildlife lovers (I heard one howl while I was camped out on a 4 day hike across the UP… beautiful sound, but I made sure my Beretta 9 mm was in easy access).
Calarato –nice job on the details and comments… again.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 10:50 am - February 7, 2007
Oh, and I guess Nancy Pelosi doesn’t care too much about carbon footprint as she demands her own full-size Air Force passenger jet.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 10:50 am - February 7, 2007
I made sure my Beretta 9 mm was in easy access
I have got to move to a “Will Issue” state.
Is the Beretta nice, by the way? I handled one at a gun show with my kid, but he thinks 9 mm’s are for girls. He likes guns with a little more throw-weight.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 10:56 am - February 7, 2007
#29 – Koala bear? (…I seem to remember)
Comment by Calarato — February 7, 2007 @ 11:12 am - February 7, 2007
Oregon State Climatologist dismissed for heresy. He dared express skepticism about the Dogma of Manbearpig, so the governor is going to replace him with scientician who toes the party line.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 11:26 am - February 7, 2007
Will issue and concealed weapons permit without hassle… just don’t be a felon or loon. Mine goes with me on hikes in the wild just like the GPS and topo maps.
It is a nice, compact, accurate efficient weapon; mine is a full -not a compact. With jacketed soft points, it’d stop a black bear from killing my sons or companions while camping. Honestly, you need to teach your son about respect… “9 mms are for girls”. Where’s the sensitivity in all that? If you’re a marksman, military or law enforcement, it’s the weapon of issue because it’s so reliable.
“9 mms are for girls”… who’s raising that boy to be a man anyway?
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 11:28 am - February 7, 2007
Calarato, koala is a good guess but I’m thinking it was some fox or deer or otter… probably a wallaby. Or maybe a baby seal? Just waiting to be slaughtered by evil men.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 11:45 am - February 7, 2007
Yeah, kids today. What are you gonna do? He insists I should get a 45 hand cannon. Foolishness, I tell him. Foolishness.
Hey, have you ever been to Jay’s Sporting Goods in Clare? Nice place. We’re going to roadtrip there this summer and buy some long guns.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 11:49 am - February 7, 2007
Great store… so is Williams’ Guns up in Davison area.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 11:57 am - February 7, 2007
I’m gonna repeat myself here but, if liberals and socialists are convinced of global warming. And man’s to blame for it. All liberals should start now to moderate their behavior and have a positive impact.
1. Never fly again.
2. Park your vehilcles unless u have a hybrid and WALK or bike.
3. Don’t cut your lawn.
4. Don’t use A/C in your homes.
5. Wash your clothes by hand.
6. Hand carry your groceries in canvas bags don’t waste paper or plastic.
7. Don’t use toilets use outhouses.
Start with these…we’ll submit more great ideas. Great ways for liberals to set the pace, show their committment and get started saving the planet.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — February 7, 2007 @ 12:40 pm - February 7, 2007
Just my $0.02, for what it’s worth (as Paul Harvey says):
I cannot take any meteorologist seriously who predicts global warming/cooling/whatever in the next 500 years. These jackasses can’t even get the next day’s weather prediction correct.
Match, set, game.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 7, 2007 @ 12:50 pm - February 7, 2007
Global warming is Junk Science?
Is this your next cry:
“Humans are intelligently designed!!”
9 mm vs 45’s
If RudyG is our pres he will take them both away!
Comment by keogh — February 7, 2007 @ 1:38 pm - February 7, 2007
keogh, o’cheerleader of the lower case clan, nope… I wouldn’t be so inclined to argue about intelligent design. Nice try to shift the discussion, but have you really changed your tune? If so, neat.
So we agree the use of climate change by political operatives like AlGore et al is just to create a platform for advocacy and personal gain. That climate change is real but it’s always been there –as the Earth continues to cool, continental plates drift and the atmosphere changes due OVERWHELMINGLY to factors not within man’s control.
In short, climate change is just another silly topic –oh, like breaking America’s dependence on foreign oil by increasing ethanol production. We won’t call it pathological science yet… maybe pathological politics? Yeah, that’s the ticket.
(Side note, btw keogh, did you know that we could take every single kernel of corn produced in the US annually, convert at an considerable energy cost to ethanol, and it would still only provide about 6.5% of America’s daily gasoline consumption? Oh, and we’d use up more natural gas in the process than we can produce in energy from the converted ethanol? Yeah, the liberals love to talk about ethanol… heck, in Michigan, we’ve got a certifiable moonbat governor and she’s leading the charge for the eco-fanatics nationally on this issue).
Terrific. You’ve proven yourself to be open, thoughtful and accepting of reasoning and rational discourse. Your lower-case-clan card has been revoked… please don’t pass it along.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 2:06 pm - February 7, 2007
#40
Whose comment are you referring to there? But for my part, I already gave an explanation at #20. Kindly see it.
The parts of the GW hysteria that (a) exaggerate it or claim it’s in any way “unprecedented”, (b) blame it definitively on CO2, and/or (c) suggest that immediate world socialism / U.S. punishment, a.k.a. Kyoto Protocol, would be effective in stopping it, are all indeed junk science.
Comment by Calarato — February 7, 2007 @ 2:13 pm - February 7, 2007
and keogh, on the issue of guns… Rudy used the gun control laws in NYC to arrest the deadly crime spree that Democrats had allowed to run rampant and take over the city so that tourists stayed away in droves… and citizens used cabs for 3-4 block transits.
Right, Rudy will take away all the guns.
Only from the terrorists, criminals and drug dealers, bubba.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 2:14 pm - February 7, 2007
I think he’s referring to mine, Calarato… I referred to climate change as pathological science… he read that as junk science. You’re right, he ought to read your earlier post for enlightenment.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 2:19 pm - February 7, 2007
Matt, on your point about ethanol, the existing mandates for ethanol use are consuming so much of the US corn crop it’s driven up the price. Good for corporate farmers and Archer Daniels Midland, I guess, but horrible for Mexican peasants who’ve seen the price of basic staples jump 55% in the last year.
And that’s just for starters, as Deroy Murdock points out:
Of course, if the environmentalist whackjobs would get out of the way and let us extract oil from that barren hellhole on the North Slope of Alaska, or from the Gulf of Mexico, we could be spared those consequences.
Global Warming may or may not be “junk science,” but given the track record of LLL apocalypse-mongering (mass famines in the 1980’s due to overpopulation, petroleum supplies exhausted by 1997, killer bees, whales extinct by the end of the 20th century, nuclear war by the end of the 80’s), a healthy skepticism is probably the best approach.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 2:31 pm - February 7, 2007
V, Matt, Cal, et al:
I’m still laughing about 401k’s assertion that “Humans are intelligently designed!!” and compares it to the THEORY of global warming/cooling/whatever.
For starters, he got the spelling right. (Nice cut-and-paste job there, 401k ol’ pal.)
Second, the words “intelligent” and “keogh” seem rather oxymoronic when placed side-by-side, dontcha think?
401k talking about intelligent design…now that’s rich. Nobody I know could be less intelligently designed, except for maybe Rosie O’Donnell.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 7, 2007 @ 2:54 pm - February 7, 2007
Seriously, guys, if you just scroll past the silly person’s comments… you really won’t miss anything; least of all an original or intelligent idea that adds insight to the discussion.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 3:16 pm - February 7, 2007
VdaK, it’s not just that the Liberals’ drive to harp govt involvement in ethanol production/research that’s driving up the price of corn… until the private sector finds a viable way to make ehtanol using the corn stalk and not the kernel, we ain’t getting to the HappyLand. It’s the corn stalks.
Even then, even if we DO start using corn stalks instead of the kernel, there’s still the eco-fanatic idiocy to overcome… and that’s that it takes more natural gas BTUs to produce a smaller barrel of ethanol than there is actual energy in the barrel of produced ethanol to begin with!! Making the stuff uses more energy than it saves as combustible fuel in engines!
We’ll stop having to import foreign oil (maybe up to 12% of our present daily use) and start importing foreign natural gas… and there goes the price of natural gas… unless we all agree that our natural gas heating bills still have room to go up 35-45%.
But you’re right… ethanol is great for ADM and others… including the politicians who hype it for political benefit… but it’s bad for all of us. Just doesn’t make sense… like adopting silly-assed public policies and taxes in order to affect climate change trends.
Or taxing the oil companies.
The answer is to invade a middle east country and take over the oil production… maybe a small one like Kuwait? Yemen? UAE? Iraq? Iran. Anyone try that lately?
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 3:19 pm - February 7, 2007
V, I often do. But I read that one by accident, and wanted to rinse out the bad taste. (coming up with an answer does that for me)
Comment by Calarato — February 7, 2007 @ 3:21 pm - February 7, 2007
Fundamental Global Warmists will become embolden when their high priest, the Reverand Gore, is awarded his Academy Award for Best Documentary in a few weeks. Next will be mandatory incarceration and re-education for non-believers and burning at the stake for heretics.
Comment by Tom — February 7, 2007 @ 3:25 pm - February 7, 2007
True, Matt. Of course, this is once again about left-libs wanting to feel good about themselves rather than doing anything that would actually help, like expanding domestic fuel supplies, building more nuclear power plants, and building more highways so traffic can move more efficiently and spend less time idling.
Beyond that, the liberal left is focused on making this a moral crusade. Environmentalism is what the left has instead of religion, Global Warming is its Dogma, and consumption of fossil fuels is its “sin.” As such it becomes a tool to force human beings to adopt “moral behavior” in line with leftist doctrine: reject capitalism, recycle, accept a lower standard of living so that Gaia may prosper.
What the Gaiaists will not do is look at the question from an “amoral,” practical angle. For example, what if the question were asked, “How can we cope with living on a warmer planet?” rather than making futile, symbolic “Canute ordering back the sea” type gestures to stop it? The question of how to cope opens the door to science and technological solutions. But the Church of Gaia doesn’t want that. It wants to impose a moral vision. So, the question is not allowed to be asked.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 3:56 pm - February 7, 2007
I don’t think that we can ignore global warming.
Something is causing it and we don’t know it.
We have to do something about it before something serious happens.
Comment by houseofpolitics — February 7, 2007 @ 4:26 pm - February 7, 2007
Let’s see if Algore can contain himself and his hissy-fits with a global audience in attendance when he gets his little statuette.
BTW – wasn’t it Billy Crystal back in 1996 who threw this one out to the crowd when he hosted the Oscars: “A lot of people here are imagining going to sleep with a statue in bed. If you want to know how it feels, ask Tipper Gore.”
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 7, 2007 @ 4:59 pm - February 7, 2007
VdaK, fair points all.
You write: “… feel good about themselves rather than doing anything that would actually help, like expanding domestic fuel supplies, building more nuclear power plants, and building more highways so traffic can move more efficiently and spend less time idling.”
Guess who led the effort to stop any nuke power plant development through the 1970’s? The Liberal Left represented by groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council… what groups literally stopped the expansion or refurbishing of America’s oil refineries? The Liberal Left using activist courts and federal red tape mostly -not entirely– put into place by JimmineyCricketCarter… he’s the “gift” that keeps on giving.
It’s been 31 years since the last oil refinery in the US was licensed. We have about 18 nuke facilities ready to go COL in 2007-2009 but at a regulatory cost which makes electricity by nuke very expensive.
And gosh, who is behind the anti-suburban development… they call sprawl… I call getting out of the city? Why the Liberal Left again.
I’m willing to do my part for conservation… I’d like to use my Hummer to run over some eco-fanatics… less methane from the vegans that way.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 5:08 pm - February 7, 2007
Peter… I didn’t recall the Billy Crystal line! That’s funny; rich. Thanks.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 5:09 pm - February 7, 2007
This shouldn’t be a liberal vs. conservative issue. When we learned that Mercury was bad, we cut down. When we learned PCP’s were bad, we cut down. When we learned asbestos was bad we cut down. When we learned DTD was destroying our wild life, we cut down. When we learned that wetlands are vital to clean water we tried to protect them. And on, and on and on.
Why shouldn’t we look into phasing out CO2? Even if you don’t think it contributes to global warming, (which many scientists do) its still pollution and its still something to regulate.
Comment by keogh — February 7, 2007 @ 5:55 pm - February 7, 2007
This shouldn’t be a liberal vs. conservative issue. When we learned that Mercury was bad, we cut down. When we learned PCP’s were bad, we cut down. When we learned asbestos was bad we cut down. When we learned DTD was destroying our wild life, we cut down. When we learned that wetlands are vital to clean water we tried to protect them. And on, and on and on.
Why shouldn’t we look into phasing out CO2? Even if you don’t think it contributes to global warming, (which many scientists do) its still pollution and its still something to regulate.
Comment by keogh — February 7, 2007 @ 5:55 pm - February 7, 2007
And gosh, who is behind the anti-suburban development… they call sprawl… I call getting out of the city? Why the Liberal Left again.
Libs hate sprawl because it rubs in their failure to responsibly govern our nation’s cities. Taxes go ever hire, while quality of basic services — police, fire, and education — get ever lower.
Look at Detroit, if you can without vomiting, a city run entirely by far-left liberals for two generations. If liberal governance were great, Detroit should be paradise. Instead, it’s a sewer hole. But donks like it that way because the only people left are city employees and people on welfare, both whom get government checks for doing nothing.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 6:17 pm - February 7, 2007
Meanwhile, you have Nazi Pelosi whining to President Bush about how she needs to have a military jet to take her around the country.
Nice way to show your concern for global warming and your carbon footprint, eh Madame Speaker? Great example you are showing there.
Of course with libs, it’s “do as I say, not as I do.”
Why does she even need a jet in the first place?
Wait – let me guess. Her broom is in the shop, right?
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 7, 2007 @ 6:31 pm - February 7, 2007
Dennis Haster had a military jet, the practice was instituted for security reasons after 9-11-2001. But Hastert used a small executive model that sat 12. What Queen Pelosi wants is a Boeing 757, a plane normally configured for 255 passengers, but this one seats 42, incorporates a bedroom and an entertainment center, costs $300,000 per hour to operate (while producing 12,000 lbs of CO2 per hour of operation) and she wants to be able to fly with guests of her choosing on it. i.e. She wants to turn into a flying Lincoln Bedroom for fat cat Democrat donors like her buddies at Star-Kist/Del monte.
Can anyone say cleanest and most ethical Congress in history without laughing?
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 6:51 pm - February 7, 2007
Pretty soon she’ll be wanting a A380.
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 6:56 pm - February 7, 2007
How long before one her ever-reliable lefty shills shows up to tell us it’s all right because she’s a democrat?
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 7:08 pm - February 7, 2007
#60-62: SHUDDER – “a flying Lincoln Bedroom for fat cat Democrat donors??”
AAUGH!! I just had a vision of Madame Speaker in her own “mile-high club” complete with Teddy Kennedy and Chris Dodd making another waittress sandwich with Botox Nancy as the stuffing!
ERASE, ERASE, ERASE….okay…calming down now…visions of peace and serenity…sitting in tranquil waters in Lauderdale…hunky guys in speedos…ah, much better now.
Whew, that was close.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 7, 2007 @ 7:21 pm - February 7, 2007
keogh 56, I gotta offer that the list of known cancer causing contaminates you suggest were reduced because they could immediately improve the quality of life/health… but on the point of asbestos in the schools for instance, here in Michigan, we wasted $283m in clean-ups and containments that weren’t necessary but were done by litigation scared school districts… and then the “companies” that did the work turned around and lobbied the state govt to “clean up lead paint” even though the last gallon of lead paint in Michigan was produced in 1964 and is –according to the experts– safely entombed behind layers of latex paint applied by successive years of normal maintenance.
It’s the trial lawyers and chicken-little-liberal legislators that are feeding the frenzy in those two instances.
How about Alar? Remember the apples that were going to literally kill babies across America?
And as far as PCBs go… here in Michigan we had the largest bovine exposure via feed and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of cattle –beef and dairy– and buffalo and bison and ostrich. For what? Turns out that the background levels of naturally occuring PCBs in our enviroment is higher in some of the river sediment in Michigan than were present in the beef!
I think the point is, keogh, that we’ve over reacted before based on scare tactics from the Liberal Left and scientific community pushing pathological science and pathologic public policy.
Again, here in Michigan we had a big mercury scare and the usual clucking from the politicians of liberal bends recently and it resulted in HazMat suited eco-terrorists hitting the schools to torture school nurses until they gave up their last mercury filled thermometers… and the last science lab teachers coughed up their hidden vials of the dreaded poison to the HazMat boys.
Does anyone here remember as a high schooler taking mercury out of the vials, spreading it in your hands and coating a quarter? Today, that’s a felony! Good grief.
Come on… enough. Lets start pursuing prudent, informed policy rather than the chicken little nonsense typical of the climate change ranters. And the point of Bruce’s post is that global warming is one of those issues we should be suspect of and treat with some common sense instead of playing chicken little with AlGore.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 7, 2007 @ 7:34 pm - February 7, 2007
I erred. The costs of flying Air Pelosi are $15,000 per hour. Or, enough to pay the hourly wages of over 2000 samoan tuna workers (the ones she tried to get exempted from minimum wage laws).
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 7:42 pm - February 7, 2007
#52
OMG. Just think about that, folks. “Something, we don’t know what”, is causing it. The logical action to take in response to WE DON’T KNOW WHAT is… ???? Al Gore??? Kyoto?? Mass suicide? Burning the witches? Human sacrifices to Quetzlcoatl?
Seems to me we darn well better know, BEFORE trying to do anything. As physicians say, “First, do no harm”. If you don’t know what is causing something, and hence, DON’T know if your invasive and destructive action has a rat’s chance of helping, you’d better do nothing.
As a separate point of fact: We do have some idea what is causing climate change, and the leading or single largest candidate is natural sunspot cycles. That we can do nothing about. And that have always been with us: again, our current warming cycle is still LESS than the Medieval Climate Optimum they had around the 1100-1300s.
At least, that’s what leading real scientists say – as opposed to junk scienticians. See #20 for reference.
Comment by Calarato — February 7, 2007 @ 8:18 pm - February 7, 2007
The Global Warming Leftists are the first ones to pretend there is no current existenstial threat from Islam.
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 8:25 pm - February 7, 2007
#56….you may be right 401(k) get your liberal buds to start. Cut back.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — February 7, 2007 @ 9:07 pm - February 7, 2007
#52 I’ve heard an “expert” say that this is an increased perod of solar flares which may be causing a warming of not only Earth but Mars as well. So we should do something about this eh? Let’s get the sun to cut it out and stop flaring so much. Is it possible that mother Earth is warming slightly to compensate for a lower level of solar flares the next 100 years when the Earth may start to cool excessively? Just a theory.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — February 7, 2007 @ 9:11 pm - February 7, 2007
I always find it amusing when non-scientists prognosticate about a scientific issue about which they know next to nothing. They can’t even get their non-facts straight e.g. Bjorn Lomborg is not an environmental scientist. You can always tell the scientifically-illiterate by the foolishness they spew. Apart from a few cranks and Exxon-paid shills, the scientific community agrees that human activity is causing global warming that will result in changes to our climate that will be costly in terms of money and suffering.
Comment by Ian — February 7, 2007 @ 10:03 pm - February 7, 2007
#60:
No, what Speaker Pelosi wants is a plane that, like the one used for Fat Hastert, can take her back to her district without refueling. The plane used for Fat Hastert can’t do that except under the most advantageous conditions. There apparently is a choice of only four planes, only two of which have the required cruising range. Yes, one is a version of a 757 but the other is much smaller and almost certainly the one Pelosi will get. So another wingnut smear bites the dust.
Comment by Ian — February 7, 2007 @ 10:24 pm - February 7, 2007
So you’re saying they’re saying that changes to the climate will result in changes to the climate?
These are smart men indeed!
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 10:24 pm - February 7, 2007
Julie Jughead
Didn’t you know … the cold is a result of global warming.
If it’s warm, it’s global warming; if it’s cold, it’s global warming.
If it’s rainy, it’s global warming; if it’s dry, it’s global warming.
If it’s a bad hurricane season, it’s global warming; if there’s NO hurricane season, it’s global warming.
If the Yankees beat the Red Sox, it’s global warming; if the Red Sox beat the Yankees, it’s global warming.
It called … mythology.
Oh that’s right. Everything starts and stops at your door.
I appreciate it’s difficult to wrap your head around such a big issue but mocking statistics and sticking your head in the sand won’t make it go away, whatever the reasons it’s happening and whatever the outcome might be.
Or would you be more likely to accept an invitation on the Ark before the 40 days than consider the possibility that the weather systems are becoming unstable due to human activity?
Comment by Just A Question — February 7, 2007 @ 10:52 pm - February 7, 2007
#72:
Smarter than you obviously. Global warming refers to an increase in the earth’s mean temperature. That increase in mean temperature will cause changes in the earth’s climate that will be manifested in many ways not all of which directly involve temperature changes either positive or negative. Nor will climate change be uniform throughout the world.
Comment by Ian — February 7, 2007 @ 11:00 pm - February 7, 2007
And the prophecy is fulfilled. (Because I guess the thought of Queen Pelosi having to stop and refuel is just too horrible to contemplate.)
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 11:02 pm - February 7, 2007
And from past experience, I know that with Ian’s entry, the intellectual, moral, and informational (as in information that’s actually true) qualities of the discussion are now to degenerate drastically.
Comment by Calarato — February 7, 2007 @ 11:12 pm - February 7, 2007
It is funny, isn’t it? How lefties bash Republicans who stray like Newt Gingrich, because supposedly supporting family values while cheating on your wife (or gambling, or having a drug problem) is the worst most horrible thing ever.
So now, Queen Nancy, who lectures all on environmentalism and Manbearpig, demands access to a jet with a carbon footprint of 12,000 lbs per hour and arrives at Global Warming meetings in full-sized chauffeur-driven SUVs (the kind her buddies at the Sierra club would like to make it illegal for mere peasants to own). But, it’s okay because she’s a Democrat.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 11:12 pm - February 7, 2007
Cal, that’s because Queen Pelosi’s behavior can’t be defended reasonably, so it’s time to attack and smear the people who are pointing it out.
Comment by V the K — February 7, 2007 @ 11:14 pm - February 7, 2007
BELIEF WATCH
2/7/2007 1:24 AM
* Most Americans believe in God.
* Most Americans believe in miracles.
* Most Americans believe in the literal truth of Old Testament stories.
* Most Americans believe in creationism.
* Most Americans believe in ghosts.
* Most Americans believe in angels.
* Most Americans believe in global warming.
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 11:15 pm - February 7, 2007
#77:
She never demanded any such thing. Just another wingnut smear. As second in line to the Presidency, she should have the same security as Fat Hastert had and if that means a jet capable of flying her non-stop to her district just as Fat Hastert had then so be it.
Comment by Ian — February 7, 2007 @ 11:18 pm - February 7, 2007
This one is fun
Hmm.. Global warming refers to the temperature of the Globe getting more warm. *taking notes*
The increase of temperature (which is not global but is called global anyway) will cause the tempertaure-induced disturbances in the atmosphere to increase.
Wow.. I would never have reached that conclusion! Thanks.
So only portions of the world will have the weather change and only a portion of that will involve a change of temperature, but yeah, it’s planetary wide global warming.
This theory is so dumb one would have needed to have gone to college to learn it.
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 11:22 pm - February 7, 2007
Just as I said!
Um, Hastert had a military jet of a much smaller footprint. I believe I heard it seated 12.
Queen Pelosi has way upped the ante – but hey, with Ian here, facts are unimportant to the discussion now.
Comment by Calarato — February 7, 2007 @ 11:26 pm - February 7, 2007
Ian: Do you rename people in real life to and call them by their new clever ™ name?
Comment by Vince P — February 7, 2007 @ 11:32 pm - February 7, 2007
Yeah, we saw a similar blog like this last year – yawn. Check out temperatures for hte last 2 decades…they’ve been steadily going up. Like last year, moderate temperatures stayed with the country for much longer than is normal and the cold lasted a lot less longer. Temperatures in the summer are steadily increasing too.
Of course, the only scientists conservatives will listen to are the ones who’ll let conservative business people and politicians edit their work before making the findings public.
Comment by Kevin — February 7, 2007 @ 11:34 pm - February 7, 2007
Kevin: On Mars NASA has been recording Global Warming as well…. how are conservatives causing that too?
Comment by Vince P — February 8, 2007 @ 12:49 am - February 8, 2007
Temperatures in the summer are steadily increasing too.
Well, here in Florida the temps have been pretty steady the last couple of years. When it gets into the 90s, folks complain about how hot it is. I lived in Houston for 8 years and 90s makes for an average summer day. In Laredo, 90s is a cool summer day.
Speaking of Houston, a few years ago, they would have a month or so of consecutive days where the temperature was 100+. To my knowledge, and I do check the weather there frequently, they haven’t had that in the past year or so. I’m no scientist with an agenda and a grant, but I’d say that there’s some cooling going on there.
Of course, the only scientists conservatives will listen to are the ones who’ll let conservative business people and politicians edit their work before making the findings public.
Evidently, it is possible to get more asinine as you go along. In reality, the only scientists conservatives will listen to are those who actually USE science, can back up their claims via the scientific method, and don’t rely on guilt to get their point across. Nor do they hope like h*ll that you’re too d*mn stupid to dispute it.
And speaking of Florida, where’s all those hurricanes we were promissed for last season? I’d REALLY like for you to explain THAT one.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 8, 2007 @ 1:42 am - February 8, 2007
Furthermore, Kevin
Of course, the only scientists conservatives will listen to are the ones who’ll let conservative business people and politicians edit their work before making the findings public.
Isn’t it interesting that liberals won’t listen to ANY scientists that don’t bow to their global warming god? Not only that, but they’ll suppress dissent such as the letter Snowe (she’s not a Republican) & Reid sent to Exxon Mobile? Or that babe on the Weather Channel?
Why, do you suppose, Algore won’t debate Bjorn Lombourg? It doesn’t seem that liberals want to hear anything from anybody who doesn’t worship their god.
BTW, given how were’ supposed to believe that libs give a red baboon’s a$$ about the poor, why would they support increasing poverty as much as 30% with asinine proposals like Kyoto (Tokyo’s favorite anagram)?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 8, 2007 @ 1:50 am - February 8, 2007
Not only that, but they’ll suppress dissent such as the letter Snowe (she’s not a Republican) & Reid sent to Exxon Mobile?
Sen. Rockefeller, rather (what’s the difference?)
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 8, 2007 @ 5:37 am - February 8, 2007
#17 – I remember all that. The coming global ice age was supposed to have us freezing to death by the mid-90’s, oil was supposed to be gone by 1997, the urban sprawl would squash all of nature, there would be no more trees or birds, or other wildlife.
So-called “global warming” is just the latest in chicken little-esque fear mongering. So much so that the current liberal cannard is that “global warming” will cause us to freeze to death.
Comment by Vic — February 8, 2007 @ 6:37 am - February 8, 2007
83, Vince, I don’t like it myself, such as the Chimp and Bushitler garbage, but usually keep my mouth shut about it. I’m just wondering why you also didn’t point it out when Nancy Pelosi’s renaming was more prominent in this post.
Comment by Pat — February 8, 2007 @ 8:03 am - February 8, 2007
Vic at 89, it’s amazing to me how much the media back then –right down to the innocent, impressionable children in classrooms across America– were literally brainwashing and spoon-feeding the latest popular culture crap parading as “science”. At least today there’s a fighting chance that those presentation of issues might get some balance or counterpoint from other venues.
Just like in Darwin’s day, we still have the far Left projecting “Science” as a pure, immutable, dispassionate, truth-seeking endeavor and religion as evil, brutal, repressive and backward looking. Disagree with “Science” as determined by the Liberal agenda and you’ll get blasted as backward thinking… belittled as uninformed.
I’m not disagreeing with science. I’m in strong disagreement with the Liberal’s agenda to use science for political ends and to advance their limited, suspect agenda.
Of course, publications like Weekly Reader and some of the textbooks did a great job of pushing the Liberal, secular agenda of Ivory Towered America… until they simply pushed too far and left most Americans in the mainstream and the Liberals out of the mainstream.
Global warming or climate change –like predicting suburban sprawl consuming all farmland while simultaneously arguing that private cars would be replaced by well run, well managed mass transit– is another one of those “useful” concepts for implementing Liberal agenda items.
And if one strays from the Liberal agenda implementation…. oh my goodness, guys like Ian start to foam and spit and call you scientific illiterates… lol. And this from the DemocratTalkingPts spewfest manager who was last whining about patriots calling people like him a traitor for undermining the WOT.
Don’t get me wrong. Like others here have noted… I think cliimate change is occuring. I just don’t buy the DemocratLeft’s use of the issue to help impress or implement their suspect public policy initiatives.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 8, 2007 @ 8:24 am - February 8, 2007
90: Maybe because she hasn’t been speaker for 6 years and the names are still being said as if it’s new and fresh and edgy 6 years on.
Comment by Vince P — February 8, 2007 @ 8:53 am - February 8, 2007
oh, and I dont watch TV.. so if folks on TV have been calling her names all this time, I guess I wouldn’t notice it. I dont see anti-Pelosi types in the Internet cicles I hang out use those phrases very often.
So my exposure to broadcast media trends is lacking.
Comment by Vince P — February 8, 2007 @ 8:55 am - February 8, 2007
Disagree with “Science” as determined by the Liberal agenda and you’ll get blasted as backward thinking… belittled as uninformed.
Or, if you are the Oregon State Climatologist, fired .
When I refer to “scienticians,” I’m specifically referring to people whose “science” is agenda-driven. (And they can exist on either side of the debate).
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 9:22 am - February 8, 2007
Looks like Queen Nan got slapped. She gets the smaller plane (even if it means she has to make a refueling stop on her free flght to San Fran {Boo Freakin’ Hoo}), she needs approval from the Ethics committee before she can transport other congresscritters, her family members will have to pay to fly with her… and no lobbyists or campaign contributors.
OUCH!
No wonder she suddenly decided to push for the anti-troop resolution in the House. Hell hath no fury…
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 9:34 am - February 8, 2007
#86 – TGC, you are correct. Living deep in the heart of (southeast) Texas here, we haven’t seen 100+ degree pure temperatures in quite a while.
Note for the record – this does not include the so-called “heat index” which also takes humidity into account.
Right now, we are approximately 5 degrees BELOW average for this time in the past few decades or so.
Global warming, my a$$.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 8, 2007 @ 9:55 am - February 8, 2007
#95 – V, I hear you. Also – did you know that Madame Speaker is having a bit of a PR problem in explaining the use of a jet? Apparently, according to ABC, she is trying to shift the blame onto her staff for this request!
Uh, note to Queen Botox: when both NBC and DAVID GREGORY, of all people, suggests that this is turning into bad PR for you and your party, it is time to come in for a landing!
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 8, 2007 @ 9:58 am - February 8, 2007
This is not a misprint above. It was in fact both NBC and ABC who called Nazi Pelosi on the carpet.
Just in case you-know-who wanted to raise a non-issue.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 8, 2007 @ 10:00 am - February 8, 2007
#81:
Temperature doesn’t get “more warm”, it increases. BTW, in English, we use “warmer” not “more warm.”
When it’s the increase in mean temperature of the entire earth, it’s accurate to refer to it as “global.”
Not at all what I said. You might wish to check out some remedial reading course.
Actually, I heartily recommend going to college and it’s never too late – even for you.
Comment by Ian — February 8, 2007 @ 10:00 am - February 8, 2007
Ian would be better served by giving his lecture to people like lester, 401k and other lower-case-libtrolls, who all appear as if they’d flunked remedial English.
Seems to be an inverse relationship between intelligence levels and rudimentary grammar skills – especially among those of the lower-case persuasion.
Checkmate.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 8, 2007 @ 10:03 am - February 8, 2007
#90:
Well, Pat, don’t hold your breath waiting for an answer to that one. I did not embellish Hastert’s name until after the usual suspects had done the same to Pelosi’s name. At least my modification was accurate.
Comment by Ian — February 8, 2007 @ 10:05 am - February 8, 2007
Ian: Why are you imposing your nasty Standard English Language culture on my south side Chicago unique and charming dialect?
Imperialist !
Comment by Vince P — February 8, 2007 @ 10:08 am - February 8, 2007
#90 – “I did not embellish Hastert’s name until after the usual suspects had done the same to Pelosi’s name. At least my modification was accurate.”
Oh, and “Botox Betty” isn’t?
I rest my case.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 8, 2007 @ 10:34 am - February 8, 2007
100, It was finally addressed in 92,93, although lame. But why continue the idiotic name calling because others do it? The problem is the other offenders think their asinine names are accurate as well.
92,93, Okay, I missed the memo on the etiquette and proper use of name calling. If I have it right, it’s okay if it’s new and if it’s changed around, to get in as many different names as possible. Bonus points if you use offensive terms like Nazi, and if it is misogynist. But if you think someone used an established name for someone, then only that offender must be pointed out.
Comment by Pat — February 8, 2007 @ 10:36 am - February 8, 2007
#103 Actually, the best rule of thumb for anything you might say around here is IOKIYAR.
Comment by Ian — February 8, 2007 @ 10:47 am - February 8, 2007
While I object to name-calling generally, I tend to make an exception in the case of politicians, because I have so little respect for anyone who would choose a career as a politician in the first place.
And even then, there are rules. I don’t think allusions to Nazism are ever fair unless the person literally does want to commit genocide. (Sorry Pete).
Names based on personal appearance, I don’t like them personally and try to avoid them, but they are not as offensive as the allusions to Nazisms.
I think names should have some basis in fact, should reflect the behavior, mannerisms, and belief system of the person described. Referring to Andrew Sullivan as Andrianna Sullington or St. Andrew of the Hissy-fit is okay because it lampoons his behavior and writing style. Queen Nan, the Botox Bolshevik, Prince Albert (Gore), Sandy Burglar, Harry GReid, and Dhimmi Carter all work because they are based on behavior and politics. Shrillary is okay (because she can be shrill), but Hitlery goes too far.
And finally, names should at least be a little bit clever, not lame.
But those are just my personal guidelines, and if other people see rules differently, that’s okay, too.
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 11:13 am - February 8, 2007
Hey Ian, check the meds… your getting as snarky as raj or Gryph used to be in their former weblives here… that #99 is pure snide and snark.
VdaK, I was surprised that NancyP would have handled the matter of her “Imperial Jetliner at Taxpayer Expense” as badly as… as… well, as badly as the former Speaker handled the Mark Foley-page scandal. Let’s just chalk it up to slipping on a steep learning curve.
Hey, maybe Senator Clinton still has the names and taxpayer ID numbers of all those White House Travel Office staff she fired when they questioned her royal status on the runway? Given Senator Clinton’s track record, I bet all that personal contact information for the WH Travel Staff is still in a file next to the WhiteWater Development files. Maybe they’re free to help out Queen NancyP?
NOW I understand what the Democrats meant when they said being in the minority is fun ’cause you get to throw rocks at the windows all day long… and nobody can throw em back.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 8, 2007 @ 11:25 am - February 8, 2007
#95 WT article:
Sweet. That’s one climbdown. Now someone should work on her new taxpayer-funded limo fleet.
Comment by Calarato — February 8, 2007 @ 11:27 am - February 8, 2007
I was surprised that NancyP would have handled the matter of her “Imperial Jetliner at Taxpayer Expense” as badly as… as… well, as badly as the former Speaker handled the Mark Foley-page scandal.
I was surprised that her shills defended on the basis that “If she takes a smaller jet, she’ll have to stop and refuel.” Poor Nan. The next time I’m stuck in coach in a middle seat between two people whose hygiene is of Anti-War protestor caliber, I’ll be sure to shed a little tear for poor Queen Nan having to make a stopover in Denver to refuel on her taxpayer-provided executive jet.
Maybe surprised is too strong. Incredibly lame defenses of Democrat behavior are par for the course.
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 11:47 am - February 8, 2007
And make a political point that deserves making.
I mean, “Fat Hastert”, come on. It’s the comment of an 11-year old girl. It fails as a metaphor, since others on the other side of the aisle have doubtless been as bad or worse at whatever Hastert’s horrible violations are supposed to have been. Thus, it self-reduces to a simple, dumb ‘fat comment’. Even the ultra-lame “Chimpy McHitler” stuff had a touch more wit.
Now, “Botox Bolshevik” works because (1) she is a quasi-socialist, and rich, hypocritical one at that; and (2) she does have a botox-deadened face. With (3) the distinct possibility of some type of moral or spiritual connection between (1) and (2). So a lot of information is captured in one small, alliterative phrase.
Comment by Calarato — February 8, 2007 @ 11:52 am - February 8, 2007
P.S. To make it explicit, I think a high information density is a large part of what we call “cleverness”.
Again, contrast to “Fat Hastert” – very low information content. (So Hastert isn’t buff. Whoopee.)
Comment by Calarato — February 8, 2007 @ 11:59 am - February 8, 2007
Update: Queen Nan’s Pal, John Murtha is threatening the Pentagon over their failure to provide Queen Nan with her royal air-barge:
“Late Wednesday afternoon, one of Pelosi’s closest allies in the House, Rep. John Murtha, D-Penn., chairman of the key Appropriations Committee subcommittee on defense, told CNN that the Pentagon was making ‘a mistake’ by leaking information unfavorable to the speaker ’since she decides on the allocations for the Department of Defense.’”
Presumably, the only safe Pentagon budget allocations will be those that go to firms represented by Murtha’s brother, the “consultant.”
Let’s see how the shills defend a Democrat threatening funding for our troops because his queen was denied a perq.
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 12:04 pm - February 8, 2007
Well, V da K, feel free to disagree with me on this, but if you look at the basic definition of Nazism (which is technically termed “National Socialism”), you can see why I give Botox Betty her due. She truly believes in (a) Party trumping over Nation, (b) redistribution of wealth and (c) superiority of certain segments of the community.
That, and when you hear George Soros pronounce her name, it comes out as “Nazi Palosi.” So I’m only doing it based upon how Soros does it out of respect for him and his works.
Okay, I lied about that last reason. I do it because I find it enjoyable.
Genocide was not part of the entire “ethic cleansing” of the Nazi party until after 1936, when Hitler used the word “Vernichtung” to describe the fate of the Jews in Europe. It translates into “annihilation.”
I recall this vividly because raj was being such a dummkopf about European history. Hence it is branded upon my consciousness.
But as a nod to you, I won’t refer to her as Nazi Pelosi until she starts talking about things like partial-birth abortion and fetal stem cell research. Then the moniker comes out again.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 8, 2007 @ 12:08 pm - February 8, 2007
Wait. So Murtha is threat to cut the DOD budget – playing with the nation’s security – because the Botox Bolshevik didn’t get a 757 with full rights to bring dozens of cronies and lobbyists on every trip?
Comment by Calarato — February 8, 2007 @ 12:11 pm - February 8, 2007
V da K, I gotta hand it to you – that quote is rich in hypocrisy on the part of the Murtha Focker.
So “leaking information unfavorable to the Speaker” is a mistake in his beady little eyes?
So is leaking classified anti-terrorism measures to the NYT. But obviously, since Murtha does not support the troops, it’s no skin off of his thick rear end.
Hypocrites all.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 8, 2007 @ 12:12 pm - February 8, 2007
Sure looks that way, Cal.
I’m thinking the shills will probably wait until a “Murtha spokesman” denies it or claims the remarks were “misinterpreted,” then they’ll say, “he denied it, therefore it can not possibly be true.”
And then I’ll tell them the word “guillible” isn’t in the dictionary.
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 12:16 pm - February 8, 2007
As someone clevererer than me put it, “Thats how they support our troops. ‘Give me a bigger plane or screw the troops’”
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 12:25 pm - February 8, 2007
More mishandling of the Pelosi One debate, this one courtesy of Lou Dobbs of CNN.
And hence another media lie is born. I’m chalking this one up next to the one about Mama Cass Elliot’s death.
Ethical Congress, my Aunt Fanny.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 8, 2007 @ 12:25 pm - February 8, 2007
#113: Pete Hughes. In a strict academic sense, you are correct on all counts. In addition to the feminazis who want to make sure the maximum possible amount of abortions happen, you could also throw in the extreme environmentalists (Eco-Nazis), who are willing to sentence millions to death by denying them genetically modified foods, denying them DDT to combat malaria, and denying them the opportunity for economic development all in the service of their own sense of superiority.
The reason I treat allusions to Nazism and Hitler like plutonium is because they are such charged, inflammatory words that are rapidly losing meaning because they’ve come to be applied toward anyone one disagrees with, and that is a dis-service to the millions who perished under them.
It’s almost like the word racist, which now has no more meaning than “someone a liberal doesn’t like.”
When words lose their power, all that’s left is using the f-word like punctuation, as Amanda Marcotte does.
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 12:36 pm - February 8, 2007
Okay, V. Point well taken. No more “Nazi” references on my part. You have a deal.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 8, 2007 @ 12:47 pm - February 8, 2007
Thank you for the civil discussion, Pete. It’s a rare and much appreciated commodity, hereabouts.
And, speaking of civil discussion, I am just geeked that the Breck Girl has decided to keep around his two foul-mouthed, Christian-bashing blog-skanks. This election needs as much comic relief as it can get.
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 1:36 pm - February 8, 2007
Murtha has said a lot in his life… most of it is meaningless and marginal at best. Threatening the military budget and pimping for NancyP’s “Imperial Airline at Taxpayer Expense” is par for the course.
Just like MarkFoley was the posterboi for the GOP Congressional excesses, Murtha is the posterboi for Democrat “ethics”.
God bless him; I hope he keeps it up.
I wonder if he has any unmarked bills in his Frig?
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 8, 2007 @ 2:05 pm - February 8, 2007
NR asks: “Did Pelosi know that the smaller C-37A was just as capable of flying non-stop to California as the lavish C-32, yet request the more expensive C-32 anyway?” (hat tip Instapundit)
Comment by Calarato — February 8, 2007 @ 2:31 pm - February 8, 2007
(answer: Well, duh! Gotta stuff those dozens of lobbyists / cronies / contributors someplace!)
Comment by Calarato — February 8, 2007 @ 2:32 pm - February 8, 2007
“Did Pelosi know that the smaller C-37A was just as capable of flying non-stop to California as the lavish C-32, yet request the more expensive C-32 anyway?”
Duh. You can only fit so many Del Monte lobbyists into a C-37.
And I still fail to see what the freakin’ hardship is in having to stop to refuel when the taxpayers are paying to fly her botoxed heiney in the first place. Maybe Queen Nan should dip into her $25 Mil. net worth and buy her own freakin’ jet.
Also, question for the freak jury: Can I refer to Amanda Marcotte as a “Sperm-burping gutterslut” in this forum, or just on Cap This?
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 2:54 pm - February 8, 2007
Your Amanda question: Personally I’d rather you didn’t. Over on CapThis, it’s OK because it’s your space I know what I’m getting into.
Comment by Calarato — February 8, 2007 @ 3:05 pm - February 8, 2007
I can agree with that, Cal, although it is a behavior and attitude based epithet in her case, it does lack that panache of something like, Amanda McSkank.
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 3:14 pm - February 8, 2007
#127 – But it invokes bodily functions – a pretty cool one, in fact – in a way designed to sound gross, or in connection with a gross person.
Comment by Calarato — February 8, 2007 @ 3:31 pm - February 8, 2007
It was funny reading this stuff made today.
Comment by Vince P — February 8, 2007 @ 4:58 pm - February 8, 2007
A lot of the opposition to the man made global warming hysteria is because of the sheer illogic of it. In 60 years mankind has horribly and possibly irrevesibly damaged mother earth. The latest study says we probably can’t save ourselves at this point it’s so bad. The earth was warmer in the 1200 when they were regularly planting mucho crops in Scotland that won’t grow today. As has been stated above, why is Mars currently suffering “global warming”? The alarmists all have alterior motives. Scientists who want millions in funding. Polititians who want the successful to feel guilty. “you ‘re succeeding but killing the planet. Live like people do in Somalia or Darfur and we will all be misrably the SAME. No successful people.” Oh except the elite liberals. They never practice what they preach. The examples are legion. Pelosi, Striesand, Gore, Kerry , Edwards. All, when asked what they do THEMSELVES to save the planet get mad, jump in their SUV’s and head for their private jets and fly across the country to their airconditioned mansions. Check out Edward’s new 28,000 sq ft mansion. Huge. For a family of 4. Wonder if it is green. Check out the clear cutting of the surrounding rain forest. Thinking people can’t take these folks seriously.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — February 8, 2007 @ 7:21 pm - February 8, 2007
#122, Matt Remember years ago during ABSCAM,Murtha (D)said “check with me later” when offered a bribe. Your instincts maybe correct. Time to check all the Democrats freezers. Why is the FBI only picking on African American Mr. Jefferson’s (D)freezer?
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — February 8, 2007 @ 7:25 pm - February 8, 2007
#128: Calarato: Re: Amanda McSkank. I think actually Amanda McSkank has just had her fifteen minutes, and Silky Pony is just a speed bump on Hillary’s road to the nomination. So, we probably won’t need to talk about her again.
Still, for as long as Silky Pony and Amanda McSkank are in the campaign together, we’ve got ready-made jokes to whatever he says. It’s win-win.
Comment by V the K — February 8, 2007 @ 7:30 pm - February 8, 2007
You forgot Schwarzenegger.
Comment by vaara — February 8, 2007 @ 10:16 pm - February 8, 2007
#102
Ian: Why are you imposing your nasty Standard English Language culture on my south side Chicago unique and charming dialect?
Because he’s more compassionate and tolerant than you are.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 9, 2007 @ 2:55 am - February 9, 2007
You know, none of this would be necessary if America had just allowed Dan Rather to declare AlGore the President in 2000. None of this.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 9, 2007 @ 9:28 am - February 9, 2007
Have you read the latest: Econuts establish giant vault to store seeds as a hedge against Manbearpig.
Nutty though this is, it’s actually less nutty then the usual econuts demands to commit the USA to economic suicide in order to fight Manbearpig. Making plans to deal with a warmer planet on practical terms is a more rational response than moralizing about SUV’s.
Jonah Goldberg makes a good point:.
Comment by V the K — February 9, 2007 @ 10:42 am - February 9, 2007
What an idea. Let me make sure I got this.
- The feared disaster is that the Earth will get dramatically WARMER – melting the polar icecaps and permafrost.
- Somehow, in a way never explained, that will destroy all seed stocks.
- “Solution”: Massively violate the polar icecaps with a huge seed-storage facility, where the disappearing permafrost will be completely unable to protect the seeds from global warming, once the disaster strikes.
Oh-kay………………..
Comment by Calarato — February 9, 2007 @ 12:48 pm - February 9, 2007
Now C… quit using logic.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 9, 2007 @ 1:04 pm - February 9, 2007
Here’s more.
Given that there has been some slight warming the last 200 years… And given that people are so worried about it…
Why aren’t the environmentalists proposing a small orbital heat reflector?
We have the technology. It wouldn’t have to “blot out the sun”; it would only need to reflect maybe 0.01% of sunlight to make just the right difference. Something maybe 50 x 50 km ought to do it. Its orbit would be designed so no one on Earth is “discriminated against”. The Sun would dwarf it, so that people literally would not notice the few minutes they were directly under it. The cost would be maybe several billion $; in other words, hundreds of times less than the trillions Kyoto is expected to cost the world economy.
But, we’re not discussing it. Even though it would bring temperatures back to historical averages within a year of its completion, Global Warming nuts aren’t proposing it. All they care about is Kyoto. In other words: the method of Kyoto – costing the world trillions, setting back global development and punishing the United States – is far more important to them than solving global warming (or the perceived problem thereof).
Comment by Calarato — February 9, 2007 @ 7:58 pm - February 9, 2007
Also, with a giant space mirror, lefties also don’t get to posture and self-righteously moralize against people who don’t drive hybrids … (then bend over and smell their own farts).
Comment by V the K — February 9, 2007 @ 10:05 pm - February 9, 2007
I don’t think I am hip enough
Who or what the hell is Manbearpig?
I can only guess its someone righties don’t like.
Comment by keogh — February 10, 2007 @ 12:14 am - February 10, 2007
Come now keogh, surely you can look it up. (Hint: It’s actually something lefties don’t like.)
Comment by Calarato — February 10, 2007 @ 2:22 pm - February 10, 2007
While you’re at it keogh, look into this too: “Two days before the day after tomorrow”. LOL
Really: with modern search engines, you should be able to manage it.
Comment by Calarato — February 10, 2007 @ 3:07 pm - February 10, 2007
C, keogh is used to being spoon fed… if you won’t do it for him, he won’t do it for himself. It’s why others here slam him for the cut & paste comments presented as his own… get him beyond the MyDD talking points and he’s lost.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 10, 2007 @ 6:39 pm - February 10, 2007
You guys are forgeting in the movie “Day After Tomorrow” the real devastation came when the “atmosphere” opened up and space spewed down into our atmosphere and temperatures plummeted from 50 degrees to like minus 1000. And the Queens helicopters were frozen instantly and fell from the sky. And then….one day….in band camp…..
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — February 11, 2007 @ 8:04 pm - February 11, 2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manbearpig
Here, for the benefit of short bus passengers.
Comment by Attmay — February 12, 2007 @ 11:34 am - February 12, 2007
#141 – That first line says it all, as far as I am concerned.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — February 12, 2007 @ 1:18 pm - February 12, 2007
I’ve just sat and read all of the comments here and come to the conclusion that Americans – Rightwingers and liberals alike -have gone insane. Either that all all the comments were made by under 16s high on too much fizzy pop.
Comment by Darren — March 6, 2007 @ 4:32 pm - March 6, 2007