News-Record.com

"Obama, whose world view shoulders the pain of the black man, shows the love of his free-thinking white mother and understands the Asian world of his stepfather, would be president to overcome bitterness and bring hope and peace to a fractured world."

The Obama phenomena has morphed from a presidential election into a new religion. Kinda like how global warming morphed from a scientific theory into a religion.

This quote is very typical of the new religion, it offers no substance at all, rather only emotion, merely faith that Obama will cure not ONLY our country but the entire world. Obama seems to be running for ruler of the world in the followers minds.

The only key word Ms. Sloan left out is "change".

Not many Obama supporters could tell you specifically how he is going to bring "hope and peace to a fractured world" but it really doesn't matter to them now that it has become a religion. They will blindly support the Messiah of hope and change regardless of any substance or plans.

I'm about 95% convinced Obama will be our next president. It will be interesting to what these followers of the new religion do when they realize Obama is one human being and cannot solve all the problems of the world much less the US.

Speaking of quotes that are "very typical of ... new religion[s] ... offer[ing] no substance at all, rather only emotion, merely faith ... "

Did you know Ann Coulter ... claims ... to sit "in my usual front-row pew ... every Sunday morning, at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago ... " ... which happens to be "one of the largest African-American churches in Chicago, Illinois."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_United_Church_of_Christ

Anyone want to do a truth check on that one? My guess is it depends on how you define the words and phrases "sit", "usual", "front-row pew" and "every Sunday morning."

Hey with potential mis-speaks like that, maybe Ann should run for President!

third paragraph

http://anncoulter.com/

Dan,

"It will be interesting to what these followers of the new religion do when they realize Obama is one human being and cannot solve all the problems of the world much less the US."

They won't realize that. If he is the next president, then after his four or eight years, when things are as bad or worse than they are now, the people who voted for him will not recognize it. It doesn't matter what actually happens; it's just about whether the illusion they chose is the one being projected rather than the illusion they didn't choose. Ditto for if Clinton gets elected.
Ditto for Republicans if McCain gets elected.

Remember how everything was going to be so much better when Clinton got elected? Remember how everything was going to be so much better when the Republicans retook Congress in '94? And even better when Bush got elected?

Remember how everything was going to really, truly, for real be better now when the Democrats retook Congress in '06?

Will anybody ever see through this perpetual hoax?

"would be president to overcome bitterness and bring hope and peace to a fractured world."

More orgasmic testimony from a colorblind "white" woman.

Hussein Obama describing life at Occidental College in Los Angeles:

“There were enough of us (blacks) on campus to constitute a tribe, and when it came to hanging out many of us chose to function like a tribe, staying close together, traveling in packs,” he wrote. “It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.”
“To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists.”

We have yet to see the other side of this socialist, racist presidential wannabee, but Chris Matthews will be unable to carry his water all summer and into the fall.

Neo, I like Obama because he's causing the Clinton machine to implode, which is highly entertaining. I'll gladly support his cause through the NC primary and proclaim to the world my belief that he's the only hope left for humanity.

`

1. Unfortunately this letter has much truth in it.

2. Bitter partisans like Dan, neo and Hugh have no rebuttal, just regurgitated stances of being "AGAINST" something.

3. While humorous, the mention of Ann coulter is dispicable. Talkabout "HATE".
But you won't see "little Dan", neo or Hugh say a word about that---they retort, "She's not running for President"
----but evidently Jeremiah Wright is!! LOL!

`

`

1. Unfortunately this letter has much truth in it.

2. Bitter partisans like Dan, neo and Hugh have no rebuttal, just regurgitated stances of being "AGAINST" something.

3. While humorous, the mention of Ann coulter is dispicable. Talkabout "HATE".
But you won't see "little Dan", neo or Hugh say a word about that---they retort, "She's not running for President"
----but evidently Jeremiah Wright is!! LOL!

`

From the "Clyde Hunt--We're all victims of liberals" letter:

James D. Rockefeller said:
"Why are conservatives so blind to the liberalism of many conservatives? At bottom, politics for them is praising and honoring and being proud of your team (the team being America or conservatism or the Republican Party). As long as they are in the mode of praising and honoring their team, they are fulfilled, the right is winning, the good battle is being fought against the left. Anything that divides the team or suggests that some members of the team are really allied with the left on key issues, will be most unwelcome. "

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/001679.html
---
While too deep for Dan, and maybe Hugh too, I am just jiggy to see neocon respond to the above! He has avoided it thus far, so I guess one could say, I'm "calling him out"!
The high profile neocons are jumping ship on Bush, seeing the handwriting on the wall--of the Bush legacy.

(Sorry for the double post above)

I, fortunately, don't have to worry about black mens shoulders nor any "Asian world" of his stepfather

(an aside- "Asian world" meaning Muslim? Why won't you just say Muslim? It's not that hard- Muslim, Muslim, Muslim. See?)

Obama has come out against the Constitution:
"Supports national law against carrying concealed weapons, with exceptions for retired police and military personnel"
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html

So on one side we get to vote for a candidate moving against the 2nd Amendment (not to mention the most lawful demographic in the U.S.), and on the other side we get to vote for a candidate who, while reaching across the proverbial aisle, has already moved against the 1st Amendment.

Enjoy this government you're encouraging.

Roger

The Liberal Canadian said:

"3. While humorous, the mention of Ann coulter is dispicable. Talkabout "HATE".
But you won't see "little Dan", neo or Hugh say a word about that---they retort, "She's not running for President"
----but evidently Jeremiah Wright is!! LOL!"

There you go again, LC, putting words in people's mouths.

In defense of Ronald Reagan:

How many of you remember being afraid of the Soviets? Remember when they threatened us with missiles, got footholds in Latin America, and appeared to be well on their way to taking over the world? I remember. I also remember the liberal response to this threat was to put up signs in their yards that said "Nuclear Weapon Free Zone." Yeah, that will sure make those communists stop in their tracks!

The Reagan response was to join with Maggie Thatcher, Pope John Paul II, Lech Welesa, and other champions of freedom to call the Soviets an "Evil Empire." Having identified the evil, we then showed the Soviets they could not beat us in an arms race. We supported everyone who opposed communism, and the Evil Empire crumbled.

Now the communist threat is from our own home grown socialists who want government control over everything (except abortion, which is their most exalted human right) and everyone. The threat is from our own people who want to sit in their government-subsidized housing, eating government-subsidized food paid for by those evil, greedy conservative people who go to work every day and pay taxes.

Well, got to go now and make enough money to pay the next tax bill.

Can anybody explain this to me? Cranky commenters with nothing positive to say about their candidate condemn Obama for being short on specifics then turn around and adamantly assert that an Obama presidency would be bad for America. If Obama is short on specifics how are his critics so certain his plans will be bad for America. Sounds like people talking out of both sides of their drooling mouths to me.

"If Obama is short on specifics how are his critics so certain his plans will be bad for America"

Go ahead and use that criteria anytime you choose a mechanic, plumber, electrician, doctor, attorney, or bank lender then get back with us as to how well it worked for you.

Hugh, I'm not the one using that criteria, Obama's critics are, so thanks for making further advancing my point.

This letter just goes to show you how unpatriotic liberals are. Next they'll be telling us that if you really love your country, you'll hate your country. Running down the greatest nation on earth and--even worse--Ronald Reagan. What was she thinking?

Go America! Go Ronald Reagan! Go Republicans (as the lesser of two evils)! Go Libertarians (as the unrealistic solution to Republican statism)!

MemberName: I'll explain it to you. The negative vibe you're picking up is caused by two things. First, Obama's voting record and stated policy positions are tepid, unambitious, boilerplate big government liberalism. Second, you'll find said record/positions only if you look hard for them. On the stump, he's the "candidate of change" whose orgiastic pronouncements are received ecstatically by the press. Obama is, minus the rhetoric, nothing new. The rhetoric is all about new. So when you hear conservatives complaining about the lack of beef, what they're really complaining about is that the beef is concealed by verbiage and a compliant press.

Hopeful conservatives like me hope that, if elected, Obama's desire to remain a messiah will cause him to transcend altogether the process of governing and messy politics.

The point is one can't prove competency on a subject without going into specifics.

Well, duh, Hugh. And the corollary: One cannot prove incompetence without specifics, although that's precisely, what Obama's critics are trying to do.

Brian44, I appreciate your explanation, but it's inadequate. Read this thread. Obama is criticized for lacking specific policy plans, yet you assert that he is a boilerplate liberal because of his specific policy plans.

MN you are partially correct. But if someone is applying for job and dodging questions of competency through omission they are not going to get hired.

That's how a competent employer would assess the situation,IMO.

Based on the hope-lust fawning of Obama followers, the competency of some American voters is questionable.

MN, I see you are committed to your generalization that Obama skeptics lack specifics about Obama's lack of specifics. That's fine. But speaking generally, Obama's own occlusion of specifics leads to the conclusion that he'd prefer messianism to policy. On the latter, he's a sheep for whom few would vote; on the former, he conjures a brave new world.

Thread Hijack: Dan, Neo, have you seen the latest Global warming headlines on Drudge this morning?

BBC: Global warming 'dips this year'
"global temperatures have not risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm

Guardian.UK.Com: Lloyd's warns of a lack of natural disasters
"Lloyd's of London warned yesterday that an absence last year of natural disasters or man-made accidents was putting pressure on firms to reduce premiums in 2008."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/apr/04/insurance.insurance

Reuters: World Bank accused of climate change
"hijack"
"Developing countries and environmental groups accused the World Bank on Friday of trying to seize control of the billions of dollars of aid that will be used to tackle climate change in the next four decades."
http://tinyurl.com/3kbljm

I don't share the view that a nuclear arms race caused the collapse of the Soviet Union. I've always believed it was a terrible economic system.
Sorry, can't give credit to Reagan on that one.

"would be president to overcome bitterness and bring hope and peace to a fractured world."

Not sure about that one either. In recent months, Obama's candidacy has seemed to bring out nothing but the worst in race relations.

Every issue has become black and white. Considering the dwindling population percentage of each race, perhaps we do need to move on. The whole debate is becoming exclusive and irrelevant to many other Americans.

Brain44, you are simply wrong in your characterization of Obama's lack of policy specifics. Just a quick and current example is Obama's proposal to use technology to bring transparency to government and better allow citizens to participate in their democracy. It's not boilerplate, it's specific and it's a good idea.

http://edcone.typepad.com/wordup/2008/04/obama-on-tech-a.html

Hugh says,
"There you go again, LC, putting words in people's mouths."

No. Those words have come from our own "little Dan", as he somehow spins Wright and Obama into "Chang and Eng Bunker".
Have to admit, the little fellow is funny, but he never knows it.

"No. Those words have come from our own "little Dan","

True or not, that didn't stop you from including me as having said it. Like I said, you put words in people's mouths.

If I may, I've already shown my displeasure with his grasp of the Constitution, but if more specifics are needed I've got a few. They consist of magic-wand legislation, but I don't really expect any candidate to know how he'll do anything he promises. I still take any threats seriously, though. And I like looking at their record or prior trends:

--

Minimum wage:
"Let's finally make the minimum wage a living wage. Let's tie it to the cost of living"
(Take Back America 2007 Conference Jun 19, 2007)

All it will do is decrease our buying power through the further cheapening of a dollar's actual value.

Tough luck single mom making $30k/year. You thought you were scraping by before... Tough luck all you people working a crappy job for five years and finally earning $10/hour. You'll soon only make just a few cents more (or maybe even less) than a brand new employee after this is introduced. This will accomplish nothing more than a short-term adjustment so that whatever the "living wage" is deemed to be will mysteriously be worth almost $6.15, $7.25, or whatever else minimum wage currently is soon after it is put into effect.

Put in some '50's minimum wages, '80s minimum wages, and the 1997 minimum wage increase to $5.15 into an inflation calculator.
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/

Compare them all to today's minimum wage.

Pretty much the same regardless of the year. Why should a "living wage" adjustment act any differently?

( What's also fun is to do the same with gold's purchasing power over the years)

--

On SS:
"we should reject things that will weaken the system, including privatization, which essentially is going to put people's retirement at the whim of the stock market."
(2007 Democratic primary debate at Dartmouth College Sep 6, 2007)

Versus the whim of the government's hey-look-there's-a-big-bag-of-money-no-one-is-using IOU mentality. Pro-choice except when it comes to a citizen's own money.

--

Support (enabling) bad financial decisions:
"I meet families that thought they were getting a low interest mortgage and did not realize that unless their home prices kept on going up they could end up losing their home... we've got to take a portion of the profits and make certain that people have a chance to refinance their home"
(2007 Democratic primary debate on Univision in Spanish Sep 9, 2007)

Tough luck all you folks who didn't buy a home you couldn't afford. Or those who grasped what an ARM meant. Or those who actually read the mortgage terms. Or those who didn't overextend themselves hoping to flip a couple of houses at a profit but, like other investments, don't want to accept the final risks.

If you'd made worse choices you might be rewarded, too.

"we've got to take a portion of the profits"
They're not even hiding it anymore. It's like the other LTE about "unearned" rebate checks. That money is the government's. They're just letting you hold it for a little while.

--

But, as was mentioned, at least he'll get internet access for us all. "By rededicating our nation to ensuring that all Americans have access to broadband"
(http://www.barackobama.com/issues/technology/)

From Obama's site again, just a bit farther down:
"Obama will define "broadband" for purposes of national policy at speeds demanded by 21st century business and communications."

Thank goodness all the serious problems have been solved and the president can focus his energy on what "broadband" really means. Jeez.

When his technology initiative is put into place don't doubt that -not- having internet access will be seen as a violation of rights since the newly oppressed can't participate in the transparent government. Or surf porn.

--

More specifics? Or at least as close as he'll get?
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ seems like a decent place to start. Here's one- "Obama will double fuel economy standards within 18 years." Who needs science or R&D when we can just write new laws? I don't see why we don't write more.

--

I'm beginning to think the best vote is for the minority party in Congress and vice-versa when the time comes. J.D.R. said it more eloquently once, but a government in opposition to itself is the best kind to have.

Roger

P.S.- LTE writer- "bring hope and peace to a fractured world." Hopefully we'll eventually learn who the president is by watching for white smoke above the Capitol Building. And "Minister of Hope" can be an appointed position.

Earnestine talks and bs walks.

"Obama, whose world view shoulders the pain of the black man"

These women writing these letters have their heads up their butt today.

I'm sure it was a tough life growing up in Hawaii and goin to an ivy league school.

The plight of the typical black man continues....

Has anyone noticed the absence of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton lately? It is amazing to me that a country as horrible, backward, and racist as America has as a front running candidate for president a black man. This very fact points out the total lack of progress in race relations over the last 40 or so years. And a big thank you to the Democratic controlled congress for fixing high oil prices and ending the war. And I feel much safer now that we are on the steroid trail. Earmarks=Clinton 297 million, Obama 97 million, McCain=0.

Mr. Bennet, since you hold the constitution so dear, you must be more anxious than most of us to see George Bush leave office. That will certainly be a huge relief for you.

In other news -- I recently re-read the Constitution. Turns out carrying a concealed weapon is not a guaranteed right, so Obama is not anti-Constitution. In case you're keeping score.

Membername: "Obama is criticized for lacking specific policy plans, yet you assert that he is a boilerplate liberal because of his specific policy plans."

Obama does have specific policy plans MN, to which some of us object. As mentioned previously in the thread, you have to look for them.

These plans, for better or worse, are not the reason many people plan on voting for him. They are simply captivated by a young, good looking, smooth talking man who promises hope and change. That's all they need to hear.

Sometimes the election comes up with my students in training classes. If someone supports Obama I pose a few questions. When I ask someone why they support Obama I often hear #1, "he's for change". Ok then, I ask what kind of change, what specifically will he do for the country? He'll unite us!!

Ok, what problems do you have in your daily lives that Obama can help with? Gas prices are too high!! Ok, specifically how will Obama alleviate high gas prices? Silence. Just an example, there are many more.

About the most substantive reply I hear is Obama will get us out of Iraq.

Well it seems an Obama adviser is suggesting we keep 60,000 to 80,000 troops in Iraq through the end of 2010.

http://www.nysun.com/politics/obama-adviser-calls-troops-stay-iraq-through-2010

Don't leave out the black vote, many blacks will vote for Obama for primarily one reason, he's black. The fact that 91% of Mississippi voters chose Obama over Hillary (wife of the "first black president") is telling. I don't think nearly as many white voters are voting for Hillary because she's white, Obama has done well in some states with smaller black populations such as IA, NH, ID, KS, ME, MN, VT & WY.

So there are policies membername, and perhaps your support those policies. If so then good for you. I don't disagree with all of his proposals, for example he has a proposal to simplify tax return filing. Perhaps that will mean I send my entire paycheck to the govt. and they send back what they think I need :)

His website states he will cut pork barrel spending. I'd love to see any politician do that, but they all feed from the same trough in Washington. He also plans to end wasteful govt. spending such as subsidies for the oil companies. I can live with that as well.

At any rate, the race continues and it's fascinating to watch. After the Final Four is over Monday night, the Obama/Hillary tourney will be the best sport in town, since I'm not a baseball fan!!

Howie G,

To your first post-
Very much so.

To your second-
bear- transitive verb, 1 a: to move while holding up and supporting b: to be equipped or furnished with
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary

As a right it, like speech, shouldn't be something that the law abiding must request from the government and, instead, should be something taken away from the unlawful as is done with felons and voting.

There are often local restrictions on "display of firearms" which forces concealed carry onto law abiding citizens. I would say read about Vermont (yeah, it surprised me when I first learned about it, too), but from your tone I'm led to believe that knowledge isn't the point.

Roger

"The South went solidly Republican when Reagan played the race card, condemning busing for school desegregation and calling welfare recipients (meaning poor black women) welfare queens and blaming the poor for their poverty."

In this day of politicians saying "I misspoke", none hold a candle to Ronald Reagan.
He had a speech about a welfare queen, who was proven to NOT EXIST!

Did that stop the Gipper?
Hell no.

He spoke and spoke of a balanced budget, but NEVER proposed one. He could have, but he did not.

He once pointed to a picture of President Grover Cleveland which hung in one of the rooms off the floor of congress, and told some elected officials, "I once played him in a movie" to which one had to correct him. "Sir, you played Grover Cleveland Alexander, a baseball player. You never played Grover Cleveland".

Non existent "welfare queens", bloated budgets, and outright lies, but the Gipper got a pass.
Little Dan is too young to remember that, but I'll bet he's a big Ronald Reagan fan! Too dang funny.

Missed one state by .2%. Dang, almost a perfect match.

http://www.multied.com/elections/1984state.html

mamaboilermaker

I too remember the Soviets .. how “they threatened us with missiles, got footholds in Latin America, and appeared to be well on their way to taking over the world” … OK I do not remember that last one, seems we were always more neck and neck’ of course now we know they were slanting data, but anyway. I also do not remember yards signs that said "Nuclear Weapon Free Zone" .. must have been a local Greensboro thing.

Regardless .. Ronald Reagan:

Read “From The Shadows”, a book written in 1995 by a very long time CIA guy who retired and had no political axe to grind. Robert Gates is currently our Secretary of Defense.

The short story is yea ... Reagan talked big .. but he really didn’t do that much. Lech Welesa and Pope John Paul II were before Reagan; please remind us who was president then. The arms race was well established before Ronnie came on board (stars wars being a noted exception). As Tim Lawrence stated in a later post, it was more their terrible economic system. Afghanistan added a serious crinkle, and I maintain Chernobyl took a bigger bite than anyone has ever guessed. At one point, while still fighting in Afghanistan, the USSR has an additional 350,000 troops the dealing with the mess.

Here’s an Interesting read:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1564784010/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&seller=

and here’s the Gate’s book:

http://www.amazon.com/Shadows-Ultimate-Insiders-Story-Presidents/dp/0684810816/ref=sr_oe_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1207347191&sr=1-1

PS .. in a word .. the real reason for the fall of the Soviet Empire:

Perestroika

"Thread Hijack: Dan, Neo, have you seen the latest Global warming headlines on Drudge this morning?"

Hugh, gotta love the part where they plan to put global warming 'on hold' for about 5 years while we go through the cooling period.

Global warming will resume in 2013.

" Global warming will resume in 2013."

That makes absolutely no sense Neo, as President Obama will have already solved global warming in his first term, along with bringing hope and peace to a fractured world.

Damn, I just booked a car on enterprise.com yesterday and paid the extra $1.25 to reduce my carbon footprint and assuage my guilt. Maybe I can get a refund.

"El Nino warms the planet when it happens; La Nina cools it. This year, the Pacific is in the grip of a powerful La Nina.

It has contributed to torrential rains in Australia and to some of the coldest temperatures in memory in snow-bound parts of China.

Mr Jarraud told the BBC that the effect was likely to continue into the summer, depressing temperatures globally by a fraction of a degree.

This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 when El Nino warmed the world."

The above not from Rush Limbaugh, rather the BBC.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm

algore has GOT to hate this news, especially after he spent mega bucks on solar panels for his mansion.

You two are something else. You take a small part of one news story - from a source you would normally diss' as TOTALLY unreliable - and you make rhetorical hay ad nausium, ignoring also the dozens of other articles linked from the same web page.

I can hear you at a party or at work: "No Way, we are in the grip of a powerful La Nina, and having the coldest temperatures in memory in snow-bound parts of China. Algore has GOT to hate this news, especially after he spent mega bucks on solar panels for his mansion." You'll sound so smart whomever will be drop jawed. You'll win!

Dan: Regarding your 4:59 PM about how non-specific Obama is .. Hillary is very specific. Maybe you should start supporting her if lack-of-specifics is your issue.

Wait .. I see, you want it both ways. Got it!

Maybe I'll start using the screen name .. Drop Jawed.

You want specifics? maybe a good book, I dunno:

http://astore.amazon.com/pstw-20/detail/0393330877

"For those who claim that society will not accept the financial cost of Plan B alternatives Brown offers an analysis of the costs and reveals they are by no means beyond our capacity. One sixth of the world's current annual military expenditure would cover them. Some nevertheless say it is politically impossible to turn around the industrial juggernaut. Brown counters by pointing to the government-ordered change, during the wartime 1940s, of the whole US economy within months to an entirely different type of production, with attendant gains in vitality."

"True conservatism stems largely from the works of John Locke's 17th Century "Second Treatise on Government" upon which he lays the foundation for economic property rights. The thesis which has served Old-conservatives well for 300 years is simple. A mans physical property (land and such) can never be secure until a man is secure in his persons. "Self-ownership"; the right to possess, sell, trade, or buy "ideas" or "thoughts" is the premise of all true conservatism. Mans "thoughts and ideas" are his property just the same as a piece of land. Thats why we have copyrights and trademarks! Yet, modern quasi-conservatives, instigated by phonies such as this author, want to purvey their "new conservative" agenda by controlling mans ideas and thoughts through law (i.e. anti-porno laws, anti-seditious speech laws, anti-whatever-else-is-immoral-today type of laws)... and if a man cannot control his own body and do with it what he will, then he'll never be secure in his physical property,... which is why we have rampant emminant domain laws which take away peoples houses and give them to corporations so they can build your local strip-malls, not to mention "property seizure" laws which dump on peoples Constitutional rights."

JDR: Sorry, I should have mentioned that I was living in Evanston, Illinois, when people put up the "Nuclear Weapon Free Zone" signs. Evanston probably has more communists per capita than most U.S. cities, so perhaps those signs were a local thing. I was fresh out of a cornfield in Indiana when I moved there, and I was shocked to meet people who actually hated their country and thought communism was a good thing.

Lighten up JDR, can't you appreciate some humor? Perhaps not, any guy who is up at 4 am on a weekend may have some issues. I just got up :)

And just for fun-

"Obama will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation and reinvigorate enforcement"
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/civilrights/#hate-crimes

Is in opposition to the 14th Amendment's, "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".

Equal protection and a more-protected status can't coincide. One of the best lines written in modern times comes to us from ninth grade English: "...some animals are more equal than others."

So, if anyone decides to keep score, that's two. And with hardly any effort at all.

Roger

James,
You are NOW seeing what I've been talking about for quite sometime.
Yes, I'm a little more caustic than you when I see it, but I saw it a loooong time ago!
Dan is about an inch deep but tries his best to keep up with the big dogs in a discussion. When the top is blown off of his ridiculous posts, he retorts:

"Lighten up JDR, can't you appreciate some humor?".

That is his "backing off" mechanism whereby he can (in his mind) back away and come back again in some feigned apology.

" Lighten up JDR, can't you appreciate some humor?"

There was never ANY humor expressed about the subject, just a total off the wall argument over an article with zero credibility.
Note how he deflects and then blames it on YOU for "not getting" his sophomoric humor.

Yeah, yeah, Dan.
If you think the remark about Enterprise and the carbon footprint was funny, so be it.
The only funny things you say, are when you are dead serious. : )

`

Oh, and James, here's what you can expect next---it's his makeup dance!

"James, at least you and I can agree to disagree without the terrible, hurtful words of the Demon Deacon"

Translated:
I "need" this blog! I "need" you! Be my friend, puhleeeze!

or the Fredo complex:

"I'm smahhrt! I'm smahhrt! Not like everyone says....I'm smahhrt!"

`

oh I have a sense of Humor, Dan .. but when you & Noe spend a couple years diss'ing even the possibility of "Global Warming", then finally concede it's happening but only due to sun spots the jump all over a faint hint of support for your previous positions, what's a fellow to think?

As for getting up at 4 am .. yep. I work for a living and that means being somewhere early and staying late to get stuff done .. which is why I get so upset at Clyde Bozo's "Liberal agenda is root cause of most crime" bullshit:

"Anyone who accomplishes more, acquires more, attains a higher standard of living, etc., has somehow accomplished this only at the expense of others."

I - like countless others - will never have the money of Anna Nicole Smith (and a hundred-thousand other "producers") ... but I am as smart, work smarter, take more risks, have more initiative, and - as evidence by 60 hour work weeks - and inclined to work a little harder.

Unfortunately I'm not not a 38D slut ... who works "hard" ...

50 posts, we used to do 100 on a few threads.

JDR, I have never dissed the possibility of global warming, in fact I have acknowledged that it exists. The earth cools and warms.

What I haven't done is bought into the fold that it's entirely man made and we have to surrender to algore and the Europeans and let them decide our lifestyle.

Here is one of your typical far left wackos, on the subject. Dang, I'm getting hungry!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSlB1nW4S54

"Unfortunately I'm not not a 38D slut ... who works "hard"

Hey but at least you are alive.

http://www.deadoraliveinfo.com/dead.nsf/snames-nf/Smith+Anna+Nicole

I work 60 hour or more weeks regularly also, that's why I'm sleeping at 4 am.

didn't watch the video .. but agree there are lots of wacko's that make the reasoned hard to hear.

Speaking of reasoned .. I have news for you. Few I know say it "entirely man made" .. but many - including you - infer that and say "we have to surrender to algore and the Europeans and let them decide our lifestyle" ... 'cause that's NOT the only alternative ... but pissing at it polarizes reasoned conversation.

Here's the difference .. to show me a "wacko" you post a youtube link .. all I gotto do is turn on FOXX - any evening there are a string of them, one after another .. wait ... they are "entertainers" ... mea culpa.

JDR, watch the video, it's hilarious. Ted Turner predicting in 30-40 years our living standard will be on par Somalia and we will be cannibalizing each other.

Please link whom you have seen on FNC on climate change that is as wacked out as Ted Turner.

"...but many - including you - infer that and say "we have to surrender to algore and the Europeans and let them decide our lifestyle" ... 'cause that's NOT the only alternative ..."

Agreed that's not our only alternative, but that's not what the world order wishes, i.e. Kyoto. Frankly I don't want pinheads from the EU and IPCC dictating what we can and cannot do. The US govt. is bad enough already, dictating what kind of light bulbs we have to buy.