Global warming modeling explained: If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. 164 times.

by editor on July 17, 2011

If warmists were like normal people, they’d be embarrassed by the series of revelations about their fraudulent science. But, no, nothing seems to embarrass these charlatans.

For example, the most recent IPCC report said, “Close to 80 percent of the world’s energy supply could be met by renewables by mid-century if backed by the right enabling public policies.”

rajendra pachauri chairman ipcc

IPCC Charlatan-in-Chief Rajendra Pachauri

You may be surprised by that rosy prediction, but rest assured that the 80% figure was determined by very precise, highly scientific computer modeling. Well, at least it was very precise and highly scientific by IPCC standards.

National Review reviews the science:

It turns out that to get to that 80 percent number the folks at the IPCC threw out 163 scenarios where their models did not give them the answer they wanted. Only on the 164th try did they finally get an answer they liked. Moreover, the report the IPCC used as the basis for its claim turns out to have been written by Greenpeace activists in conjunction with a lobbying group for renewable energy. No real scientists or engineers were involved. But the story gets even better. For the IPCC model to work, they researchers had to assume the world will be using less energy in 2050 than it is today. By that date there may be 2 billion more people on the planet, all clamoring for their fair share of energy resources. But somehow the IPCC thinks we will be using less energy!

In a similar vein, we went through 164 headlines for this article before we settled on the one above. The first 163 all involved variations of words beginning with the letter F.

Source: National Review

Leave a Reply

303 Comments on "Global warming modeling explained: If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. 164 times."

Notify of

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 29, 2011 5:52 pm

And then there’s this from last month:

Changing Tides: Research Center Under Fire for ‘Adjusted’ Sea-Level Data

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/17/research-center-under-fire-for-adjusted-sea-level-data/

Of course, the usual suspects will claim it’s all just a scam perpetrated by FOX news.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 29, 2011 7:52 pm

See? I told you!

drb
Member
drb
July 30, 2011 2:43 am

OMG…LOL

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 29, 2011 7:54 pm

I bet she didn’t even read the articles.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 29, 2011 8:03 pm

No way she read them. Note that she does not counter the articles just cuts and pastes unrelated (what I think is Wikipedia) content. Naturally, she didn’t cite the source.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 29, 2011 8:14 pm

I don’t think she even looks for any content to post, she just makes this shit up.

drb
Member
drb
July 30, 2011 2:40 am

That’s tough to argue with, Poppa.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 29, 2011 7:54 pm

No kidding

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 29, 2011 7:38 pm

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/17/research-center-under-fire-for-adjusted-sea-level-data/

Of course, the usual suspects will claim it’s all just a scam perpetrated by FOX news.

********************
Certainly not. It’s a scam perpetrated by the fossil fuel industry, aided and abetted by the GMI and its water carrier FOX News……

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 29, 2011 5:19 pm
Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 29, 2011 7:36 pm

More bad news for the AGW crowd:

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/07/29/data-cooling-on-global-warming/

*********************
FOX News isn’t “news,” Kick. It’s right wing policy dressed up as news. 😉

Roy Spencer is indeed a scientist, with a PhD in meteorology. He is also on the board of directors of the George C. Marshall Institute, which is (what else?) is a politically conservative (read: friendly to the fossil fuel industry) think tank:

In the 1980s, the Institute was engaged primarily in lobbying in support of the Strategic Defense Initiative.[1] Since the late 1980s, the Institute has put forward environmental skepticism views, and in particular has disputed mainstream scientific opinion on climate change, although it continues to be active on defense policy. The George C. Marshall Institute has been described by Newsweek as a “central cog in the denial machine.”[2] The institute is named after the World War II military leader and statesman George C. Marshall.

Historian Naomi Oreskes states that the institute has, in order to resist and delay regulation, lobbied politically to create a false public perception of scientific uncertainty over the negative effects of second-hand smoke, the carcinogenic nature of tobacco smoking, the existence of acid rain, and on the evidence between CFCs and ozone depletion.[3] The role of GMI in creating public doubt on these matters and swaying public policy was elaborated in the book “Merchants of Doubt”, which details the motives of the organization’s heads and their interests.[4]…..

In 1998 Jeffrey Salmon, then executive director of GMI, helped develop the American Petroleum Institute’s strategy of stressing the uncertainty of climate science.[15] William O’Keefe, the Institute’s current CEO, was previously Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the American Petroleum Institute, and has also been on the Board of Directors of the U.S. Energy Association and Chairman of the Global Climate Coalition,[19] a business-led anti-climate change action group active between 1989 and 2002……..

Matthew B. Crawford, author of Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Inquiry Into the Value of Work,[16] was appointed executive director of GMI in September 2001.[17] He left the GMI after 5 months, saying that the institute was “fonder of some facts than others”. He contended a conflict of interest in the funding of the institute,[18] In Shop Class as Soulcraft, he stated about the Institute:

“ …the trappings of scholarship were used to put a scientific cover on positions arrived at otherwise. These positions served various interests, ideological or material. For example, part of my job consisted of making arguments about global warming that just happened to coincide with the positions taken by the oil companies that funded the think tank. ”
—Matthew B. Crawford[16]

In 1998 Jeffrey Salmon, then executive director of GMI, helped develop the American Petroleum Institute’s strategy of stressing the uncertainty of climate science.[15] William O’Keefe, the Institute’s current CEO, was previously Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the American Petroleum Institute, and has also been on the Board of Directors of the U.S. Energy Association and Chairman of the Global Climate Coalition,[19] a business-led anti-climate change action group active between 1989 and 2002.

William O’Keefe, chief executive officer of the Marshall Institute, questions the methods used by advocates of new government restrictions to combat global warming.

“We have never said that global warming isn’t real. No self-respecting think tank would accept money to support preconceived notions. We make sure what we are saying is both scientifically and analytically defensible.” [22]
Exxon-Mobil was a funder of the GMI until it pulled funding from it and several similar organizations in 2008.[23] From 1998-2008, the institute received a total of $715,000 in funding from Exxon-Mobil.[24]

Odd how those ties to the fossil fuel industry always seem to crop up whenever you take a close look at scientists who deny global warming……

brm
Member
brm
July 30, 2011 4:40 am

Damn. She was only gone to fill her lungs up with more hot air.

The wind bag is back.

Just checking, Obloviate – do you count the Middle East as part of the “fossil fuel industry”?

Babydoll102187
Member
Babydoll102187
July 30, 2011 9:15 am

Glad your back!

brm
Member
brm
July 30, 2011 9:26 am

I took a quick peek and the first thing I saw was Oblivia. Sigh. It was like I was never gone.

WHACK!

tee hee

drb
Member
drb
July 30, 2011 9:32 am

There may be some ripe turds over on “holy Moly” and “3-in-1” not real sure it’s been a little while since I last looked.

drb
Member
drb
July 30, 2011 11:06 am

LOL 3-in-1, haha, sometimes you gotta laugh at yourself. 😀

drb
Member
drb
July 30, 2011 8:26 am

Hi there, Barb. Where have you been?

brm
Member
brm
July 30, 2011 8:28 am

Hey drb. Got slammed with deadlines. Not a fun week at all. I hope I didn’t miss much …?

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 30, 2011 8:36 am

There have been a few small oblivkriegs in the last 36 hours. Probably a little mop work in a few places. A few extras showed up for auditions, as usual. Same old².

Babydoll102187
Member
Babydoll102187
July 30, 2011 9:17 am

And as usual they were introduced to the fun and ever exciting game of “Whack a Troll”!

brm
Member
brm
July 30, 2011 8:46 am

Turds squared? LOL!

drb
Member
drb
July 30, 2011 8:49 am

More like turds to the nth power. 😀

drb
Member
drb
July 30, 2011 8:33 am

It’s tough being a working stiff!

brm
Member
brm
July 30, 2011 8:35 am

I hear ya.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 29, 2011 8:08 pm

George C. Marshall Institute, which is (what else?) is a politically conservative (read: friendly to the fossil fuel industry) think tank:

Obama’s Oil Spill
Obama says he doesn’t take money from oil companies. We say that’s a little too slick.
March 31, 2008
http://factcheck.org/2008/03/obamas-oil-spill/

Fact check: Obama and oil
From NBC/NJ’s Aswini Anburajan
GREENBURG, Pa. — The Clinton campaign today accused the Obama campaign of “false advertising,” claiming that a recent ad Obama released in Pennsylvania was disngenous because Obama has been the recipient of more than $200,000 from the oil and gas industry.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2008/03/28/4431825-fact-check-obama-and-oil

Obama biggest recipient of BP cash
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/05/05/us-politico-obama-bp-idUSTRE64420A20100505

BP Spent Millions on Lobbying, Campaign Donations
The top recipient overall? President Obama, who got $71,000 from the company tied to the environmental disaster in the Gulf,
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20004240-503544.html

Obama still gets oil money
THE NATION He took in $46,000 in donations from executives and workers last month. In a TV ad, he said he took no cash from companies.
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/24/nation/na-money24

Can you say hypocrite?

perlcat
Member
July 29, 2011 8:24 pm

No, but I can say Barack Obama, and that’s the same thing.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 29, 2011 8:18 pm

Those must be lies perpetrated and spread by those evil Koch Brothers and Rush and Glen and Sean and other far right-wingers who want poor children to breathe dirty air and drink dirty water because the Republicans are in the pocket of the fossil fuel industry.

Did I cover everything? No need for Olivia to chime in.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 29, 2011 8:14 pm

I can’t wait to see her reply to this one!

perlcat
Member
July 29, 2011 7:56 pm

tl;dr

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 29, 2011 7:53 pm

AGW is the issue you moron not the fact that climate changes. You are becoming more and more irrelevant because you are so predictable.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 29, 2011 12:58 pm

OOPS!!
This AGW issue just keeps falling apart every time we turn around!!

Scientist Who Reported Polar Bears Drowning Is Suspended by U.S. Agency

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-28/scientist-who-reported-polar-bears-drowning-is-suspended-by-u-s-agency.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/29/science/earth/29polar.html

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 23, 2011 7:30 am

Why do you think women are stupid and weak, Poppajoe?
****************************

No, not all women, just you and your ilk.
******************************
I see. Just women who haven’t bought into your favorite right wing propaganda.

How about women who are politically conservative, but decide that (for whatever reason) they need to get an abortion? Do you trust THEM to make intelligent decisions about their own uteruses?

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 7:49 am

I see. Just women who haven’t bought into your favorite right wing propaganda.

Wrong again dumbass! Once again you have ignored what I have said because it doesn’t fit your preconcieved notions about me. I already told you I am not anti abortion, just anti abusing abortion, using it for birth control, or because it would be inconvienient for you.

When I said you and your ilk, I meant bullheaded, narrow-minded, idiots that merely post their diatribes in order to attempt to annoy people that aren’t the sheeple you want them to be.

You are a non entity here except for the amusement you bring us by allowing us to annoy you.

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 23, 2011 8:11 am

Completely off topic here, but Poppa, I wonder if you’ve ever been to Whiskey Willy’s in Land o Lakes, or is it Lutz?

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 2:54 pm

No, I’m not much for bars these days. I do have a Sheriff that lives 2 doors down that plays in a band locally, and I do go see him once in a while.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 2:13 pm

Does the far right give out cash prizes for being illogical or gullible?

Not cash, just a prize, it’s called being a registered Democrat.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 22, 2011 5:33 am

Does the far right give out cash prizes for being illogical or gullible?

Not cash, just a prize, it’s called being a registered Democrat.
******************************
Keep up the juvenile name calling, Poppajoe. YOu’re doing a bang-up job of corroborating my comment that far righters are just chronically angry and fearful people. 😉

jwilson07
Member
jwilson07
July 22, 2011 7:56 am

Trollivia, are you always so unhappy? Is it because you like killing innocent babies by the millions?

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 23, 2011 3:50 am

I noticed trolivia saying she does like Christians, its just seems she hates little innocent babies though since she supports killing them by the millions.
***************************
No, I don’t “support” killing anyone. I simply think most women are better qualified than YOU are to make decisions concerning the contents of their own uteruses.

Please explain why you don’t trust women to manage their own bodies without Big Government’s “help.”

Then please explain why you love seeing innocent “post born” children struggle with poverty, hunger and lack of medical care. l)

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 5:19 am

I don’t “support” killing anyone

No, you support their choice to kill. Same thing, just a different shade of grey.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 23, 2011 6:41 am

I don’t “support” killing anyone

No, you support their choice to kill. Same thing, just a different shade of grey.
**********************
And again, you must take an awfully dim view of women’s intelligence and decency, if you think they need Big Government to stop them from making their own medical decisions, assisted by qualified physicians.

Why do you think women are stupid and weak, Poppajoe?

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 6:46 am

Why do you think women are stupid and weak, Poppajoe?

No, not all women, just you and your ilk.

Hat Trick!

brm
Member
brm
July 23, 2011 5:05 am

“Then please explain why you love seeing innocent “post born” children struggle with poverty, hunger and lack of medical care. l)”

I don’t get it. Abortion is already legal and according to you it prevents children from living in poverty, so how can there STILL be children living in poverty? 😉

drb
Member
drb
July 23, 2011 5:20 am

Barb, you need to remember that living in poverty (in America) means the household has only one xbox. The poor children.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/272081/modern-poverty-includes-ac-and-xbox-ken-mcintyre

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 23, 2011 7:10 am

Barb, you need to remember that living in poverty (in America) means the household has only one xbox. The poor children.
********************
Leave it to the Heritage Foundation to try to convince their devotees that the poor are living the life of Reilly, while billionaires are being cruelly mistreated by the government.

First, the far right has an unfortunate tendency to embrace a circa-1930s view of poverty. But that was 80 years ago, and society (along with society’s expectations) has changed enormously since then. Today, a refrigerator isn’t a luxury, but a necessity. Even so, the report takes no account of what kind of refrigerator we’re talking about, how old it is, what kind of condition it’s in, or how the poor person got it.

I’ve known poor people who struggle with a rundown refrigerator that no longer keeps foods adequately cold, but can’t get another one until they find someone with a truck who can help them haul away a free or cheap one that’s offered on Craigslist. Sure they qualify as owning a refrigerator. Does it automatically follow that they’re well off? By no means.

The argument “But they own more than one TV!” is equally bogus. Today, you can pick up an old TV at a garage sale for next to nothing. Add to that the fact that, for kids who live in dangerous neighborhoods while Mom is out working two or three dead-end jobs, the TV is the best and cheapest babysitter possible.

Ditto for the argument about owning a computer or cell phone. For many who are financially struggling, a cell phone is cheaper than a land line (especially if they’re having to move frequently). And, when a family’s future security hangs on a parent being available to answer the phone when a prospective employer calls back, it’s just plain stupid and unrealistic to think of that phone as a needless frill.

I recall, some years ago, my son got a new computer for Christmas. He had a friend who was poor—lived in a trailer, dad out of work, no money for luxuries—and asked if he could give his old computer to that friend. It still worked—sort of—-but it was shabby. So his friend acquired this not-very-good computer, thereby qualifying as a Poor Family That Owns A Computer.

Air conditioners are cheap nowadays, and a necessity during heat waves. A couple of years ago, we picked up four air conditions at Target, at the end of the season, for $27 apiece. Sure, they’re suited only to small rooms, but air conditioning in even one small room can mean the difference between heat exhaustion and being functional. I also remember our very first house, many years ago, came with a dinosaur air conditioner that was so old and noisy we were afraid to use it. But, technically, we qualified as having an air conditioner, even though we couldn’t have afforded to go out and buy one.

One very big factor that this piece of Heritage spin fails to consider is that one can become a poverty statistic but still own nice appliances and luxuries. I guess it never occurred to the writer of that drivel that people can fall into poverty rather quickly by losing a job, or suffering a catastrophic illness/injury? And that refrigerators, TV sets and cell phones don’t magically disappear when that happens?

I get such a kick out of these apologists for billionaires, who keep trying to convince us that the poor are really affluent, but that the nation’s richest need our help. And people like you keep swallowing their nonsense, and regurgitating it. 😀

drb
Member
drb
July 23, 2011 10:37 am

Just because you aledgedly know someone who falls outside these statistics does nothing to indictate that that is the norm. Unless, you can produce evidence that the statistics I supplied are flawed, I’m going to go with the data. Your personal opinion on the validity of this data means nothing to me.

RockingHorseGuy
Member
July 24, 2011 12:12 am

Don’t know what you’re ripping Olivia up over, since I refuse to open the post, but yeah, what she said!

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 23, 2011 4:16 am

So, you have so little regard for minorities as they have the lion’s share of abortions that they, in your view, are capable of only two outcomes: abortion or hopeless poverty. That is the most racist, and progressive, pile of crap you have written yet. Not only is that a false choice but you also have unwittingly laid out the entire progressive agenda, which is clearly anti-life and anti-liberty. Why anti-liberty? Because “people” like you believe that we are not free to move up and down the social ladder. Why do you assume all non aborted babies will live in misery? You are vile.

drb
Member
drb
July 22, 2011 7:04 am

Still trying to label people I see. third.

brm
Member
brm
July 22, 2011 6:44 am

“Keep up the juvenile name calling, Poppajoe. ”

Oh for crying out loud, Oblivia! He called you a DEMOCRAT. I hardly think that qualifies as “juvenile name calling”!

Oh. Wait.

Never mind.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 23, 2011 3:46 am

Oh for crying out loud, Oblivia! He called you a DEMOCRAT. I hardly think that qualifies as “juvenile name calling”!
***********************
Reread the post, Barb, instead of trying to be a comedian. The juvenile insult is there. 😉

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 5:16 am

Hey Oblivious,

brm
Member
brm
July 23, 2011 5:00 am

Nope, sorry, the only insult I can see is that he called you a Democrat. 😉

drb
Member
drb
July 23, 2011 4:09 am

Oh, so it isn’t a juvenile insult when you say it about the right, but when some one puts it back on your doorstep it becomes a juvenile insult. Considering he quoted your post, thanks for clarifying, er confirming your double standards! Winkie, winkie

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 23, 2011 10:48 am

The true essence of a liberal prog commie is just what you say here, drb. Each one is the center of the universe.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 3:21 pm

the center of the universe.

Good! That is where black holes tend to develop, so they will get whisked away first!

drb
Member
drb
July 23, 2011 4:17 pm

Are you sure they aren’t the blackholes??

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 4:23 pm

Are you sure they aren’t the blackholes??

a black hole is a region of space from which nothing, including light, can escape.

Nope, they are a region in space where nothing, including rational thought, can penetrate!

brm
Member
brm
July 24, 2011 5:06 am

RAAAAACIST!!!!!

RockingHorseGuy
Member
July 24, 2011 12:08 am

Allowing no intelligence to enter, nor escape.

drb
Member
drb
July 23, 2011 4:46 pm

Are you sure they aren’t the blackholes??

a black hole is a region of space from which nothing, including light, can escape.

Exactly…they consume everything.

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 23, 2011 4:23 pm

Hey now, don’t y’all go mixing up galaxies with the universes. Wait… Universe is singular until we get a bigger telescope. Galaxies are numerous and well dispersed in the universe.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 22, 2011 5:59 am

Gee, when you say it it’s profound, when I use your words, I’m “chronically angry and fearful” and name calling.
It must be such a burden for you to always be right. 😛

drb
Member
drb
July 22, 2011 7:30 am

It’s ok, Poppa. When I use her words, I’m called juvenile, too. But you know that tactic, slap a label on it then you don’t have to bother with refuting the point.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 22, 2011 7:40 am
CO2Insanity
Admin
July 19, 2011 5:23 pm

Pachauri only tried 164 times. I wonder how many retarded posts Obliva has put on this site?

brm
Member
brm
July 19, 2011 5:24 pm

Oh wow. That’s got to be a BIG number.

I mean BIG like Carl Sagan “billions and billions” big.

RockingHorseGuy
Member
July 19, 2011 8:37 pm

Ok, try to imagine the number of digits in her total thumbs down count. Go ahead, I’ll stand back and watch your head explode.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 21, 2011 1:45 pm

Ok, try to imagine the number of digits in her total thumbs down count. Go ahead, I’ll stand back and watch your head explode.

**********************
Heaven help us, it’s another brain trust who thinks that popularity is a reliable indicator of quality, and vice versa.

Not only that, but he flaunts his confusion like a badge of honor. Does the far right give out cash prizes for being illogical or gullible? Because, if it does, I think there must be a lot of award winners posting on this thread. 😀

MGAP
Member
MGAP
July 21, 2011 2:15 pm

Just curious here sweet hips, where does the line defining “far right” begin, according to Olivia?

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 2:20 pm

where does the line defining “far right” begin, according to Olivia?

Anything to the right of Karl Marx and Josef Stalin.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 22, 2011 5:29 am

where does the line defining “far right” begin, according to Olivia?

Anything to the right of Karl Marx and Josef Stalin.

*****************
Nonsense. The far right is that part of the political spectrum that wants to go backwards (usually into some fictitious past that exists only in old John Wayne movies and 45 year old TV reruns).

The far right is the faction that believes it’s patriotic to be xenophobic, and clever to stereotype.

It’s the faction that worships the Bible and the Constitution, but never seems to get around to reading or comprehending either of them. (Their primary interest in them is as weapons.)

It’s the faction that wants to enshrine THEIR beliefs and lifestyle as THE belief system and lifestyle that all Americans ought to emulate.

It’s the faction that boasts about hating and fearing and distrusting their own government…..but are perfectly fine with trusting giant corporations to do right by the nation without any regulation.

It’s the faction that tends to oversimplify complex issues, by blaming selected scapegoats instead of identifying the problem and looking for solutions. Over the years, far righters have blamed immigrants, black Americans, liberals, “Hollywood types” (except for Ronald Reagan), Russians, labor unions, homosexuals, suffragettes, atheists, NOW, abolitionists, intellectuals, artists, teachers and Mexicans for the nation’s ills.

It’s the faction that believes in unfettered freedom (as in “freedom from societal responsibility”) for themselves, but oppressive theocracy for everyone else.

It’s the faction that makes political stars out of loudmouths, misfits and assorted ignoramuses, based on the notion that mediocrity is a much more desirable quality in a political leader than intelligence, education or multicultural experience.

It’s the faction that boasts about “American exceptionalism” (as a euphemism for “We shouldn’t have to follow the rules we set down for everyone else.”)

And, finally (I know how much you all love being reminded of this) it’s the faction that believes and agrees with every piece of BS that issues from Rush Limbaugh’s mammoth cave of a mouth. It’s like that (equally obnoxious) Religious Right bumper sticker: “Rush said it, I believe it, that settles it.”

Now, you can try to dress that up as ordinary conservatism, but it’s not, any more than a hedgehog is the same as a bluebird. Extreme right wing mentality is nothing new under the sun, and the characteristics mentioned above are present in almost any reactionary right wing movement in the world.

MGAP
Member
MGAP
July 22, 2011 9:51 am

That’s a beautiful cut and paste job you did there hon. Pretty much anyone who doesn’t fit your ideals of what this country should look like rolled into one neat little package. Seems to me that you have a lot of animosity towards Christianity and seem to feel that all conservative right wingers are “really religious.” I’m not. Last time I went to church was for a funeral. Guess what else, I like gay people and have a few transgender friends. Guess what else… I like Hispanics and all minority groups. Surprised? I do listen to Limbaugh and agree with damn near everything he has to say, no bumper sticker though. Did I mention I’m a Teamster? Yup, hate their politics, but pay the dues and go to work. I don’t feel they are bad for the company I work for either. We have a no strike clause. I enjoy the consistent work rules, other than that, meh. Hold on to your panties here….. I think George W was a relatively shitty POTUS. I like the part where he bombed the heck out of Iraq and Afghanistan. He stood his ground and never lowered himself to respond to the insults that were delivered to him. Economically, he sucked.
Let’s see, what else? Immigration? No problem with legal immigration. I grew up overseas and understand the importance of follwing the laws of countries in which i am a visitor or guest. Just wish the folks that are coming here would do the same is all. Learn the language like I did over there. Everyone benefits when you do.
I do not like our current POTUS. Not because of his race either. I don’t agree with most if his agenda is the reason. I feel that spending more than you make is dumb. Simple as that. I handle my financial matters in a careful responsible manner, please do the same with my taxes and I will stand behind you. Giant corporations do need regulation. we need to take care of our environment and preserve as much wilderness as possible. I don’t think global warming is something we can control and I think anyone who believes they can has a grandiose sense of self importance. Guns, I have some. Only because I inherited them and have never shot them. They are locked away in th closet until i figure out what to do with them.
Ultimately the line is blurred and your broad brushed analysis might need some re-thinking. Sure there are people that fit your description to a tee, just as there are liberals that fit the same stereotypes.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 22, 2011 8:08 pm

That’s a beautiful cut and paste job you did there hon. Pretty much anyone who doesn’t fit your ideals of what this country should look like rolled into one neat little package.
***********************
No, I didn’t cut and paste it. All are observations that I’ve made about people posting right here on this board. And, no, those observations are not common all Americans who don’t fit my “ideal.” They’re behaviors that have been fostered by right wing propaganda.
*************************
Seems to me that you have a lot of animosity towards Christianity and seem to feel that all conservative right wingers are “really religious.”
************************
No animosity toward Christianity (that’s one of those threadbare old canards about liberals).
************************
I’m not. Last time I went to church was for a funeral. Guess what else, I like gay people and have a few transgender friends. Guess what else… I like Hispanics and all minority groups. Surprised?
**************************
No. Even a dyed-in-the-wool racist (and I’ve known a few in my life) will make exceptions for certain members of the target group, if s/he likes or respects them as individuals.
*************************
I do listen to Limbaugh and agree with damn near everything he has to say, no bumper sticker though.
*************************
Of course you do. I’ve yet to see a poster on this board who DOESN’T agree with what he says (even though it seems to be trendy to claim not to listen to his show). As Brooks so aptly put it, Rush gets paid big bucks to stroke your pleasure centers, which has nothing whatsoever to do with being a real political analyst.
***********************
Did I mention I’m a Teamster? Yup, hate their politics, but pay the dues and go to work. I don’t feel they are bad for the company I work for either.
*************************
That hardly astonishes me. I’ve known quite a few far right wingers who don’t practice what they preach. It’s the old “I’ve got mine” mentality. Remember that famous line, “Keep your socialist hands off my Medicare”? Same thing. 😉
**************************
We have a no strike clause. I enjoy the consistent work rules, other than that, meh.
*************************
Meh or not, you’re still in a union, so clearly it’s doing something for you.
************************
Hold on to your panties here….. I think George W was a relatively shitty POTUS.
***********************
That’s what they all say, my boy. You know how they say that every elderly person in France claims to have worked for the Resistance, and NONE of them admit to having supported Pétain’s Vichy regime? Well, after Bush left Washington, it was incredible how many Republicans suddenly claimed not to have really, actually wholly, 100% supported his policies. Odd how none of them thought to mention it untll after the economy crashed. 😀
***********************
I like the part where he bombed the heck out of Iraq and Afghanistan. He stood his ground and never lowered himself to respond to the insults that were delivered to him.
*************************
What do you mean, he “stood his ground”? He spent most of that time riding a bicycle around Crawford. He also avoided speaking in public, except before hand-picked audiences that could be counted on to applaud whatever he said. Those who questioned the wisdom of his foreign policy were relegated to “free speech zones.” Some bravery!
***************************
Economically, he sucked.
***************************
Hindsight has 20/20 vision. As I recall, we liberals who objected to his lavish spending sprees were ridiculed for our “doom and gloom” outlook. Did you not remember that his administration expected the war to (1) be over within a few weeks, and (2) pay for itself? I don’t recall many Republicans speaking up then, and saying it was a bad idea to wage a war on credit, and cut taxes at the same time. Odd how they all suddenly surfaced in 2009. 😉
***************************
Let’s see, what else? Immigration? No problem with legal immigration. I grew up overseas and understand the importance of follwing the laws of countries in which i am a visitor or guest. Just wish the folks that are coming here would do the same is all. Learn the language like I did over there.
***********************
What language did you learn, and how fluent did you become? I ask that because most Americans, who claim to have “learned” a language as an adult, learned only basic conversational skills, if that. And, let’s face it: many of those immigrants whom they rail against CAN speak basic conversational English, but get hopelessly lost in a business or technical conversation.
*************************
Everyone benefits when you do.
I do not like our current POTUS. Not because of his race either. I don’t agree with most if his agenda is the reason.
***********************
Well, duh. If you agree with everything Rush Limbaugh says, OF COURSE you’re not going to like Obama. A big part of Rush’s shtick is endlessly b*tching about both Obama AND his wife. That doesn’t take any thought or intelligence on your part. 😉
********************
I feel that spending more than you make is dumb. Simple as that.
*********************
So do I. But the fact remains that we’re grossly overdrawn, and it was Bush who got us into the mess. Obama had no choice but to spend, whether or not we had the money, just as you’d have to do if your house caught fire and you didn’t have the funds handy to repair it afterward.
*********************
I handle my financial matters in a careful responsible manner, please do the same with my taxes and I will stand behind you. Giant corporations do need regulation. we need to take care of our environment and preserve as much wilderness as possible. I don’t think global warming is something we can control and I think anyone who believes they can has a grandiose sense of self importance.
***********************
Correction: you don’t want to think there’s anything we can do about it, because giant corporations are shelling out billions to keep the right wing compliant with their wishes. 😉
********************
Guns, I have some. Only because I inherited them and have never shot them. They are locked away in th closet until i figure out what to do with them.
Ultimately the line is blurred and your broad brushed analysis might need some re-thinking. Sure there are people that fit your description to a tee, just as there are liberals that fit the same stereotypes.
*************************
I didn’t say the line wasn’t blurred, my boy. I was answering a question, describing some characteristics I see in far righters.

MGAP
Member
MGAP
July 23, 2011 12:17 pm

MGAP
Member
MGAP
July 23, 2011 12:15 pm

*Sigh* i’ll give you a thumbs up for at least taking the time to write.

brm
Member
brm
July 23, 2011 4:57 am

Jwilson, not to mention that since a woman has complete control over the contents of her uterus, Obliviate completely supports sex-selection abortions. After all, it is a woman’s FREE CHOICE to abort only the XX contents of her uterus.

jwilson07
Member
jwilson07
July 22, 2011 11:46 pm

I noticed trolivia saying she does like Christians, its just seems she hates little innocent babies though since she supports killing them by the millions.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 22, 2011 9:08 pm

MGAP
Member
MGAP
July 22, 2011 10:30 am

Olivia,
I forgot to ask again,” where does the line defining right wing begin, according to Olivia, not the cut and paste party rhetoric you posted up earlier?” Use your words, not the party line please….

MGAP
Member
MGAP
July 22, 2011 2:10 pm

****crickets******

drb
Member
drb
July 22, 2011 7:05 am

hat trick.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 22, 2011 5:37 am

Citation(s), please.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 22, 2011 5:55 am

Closest you will get to a citation from her is when she puts on her meter maid uniform and starts ticketing everyone outside a TEA Party event!

perlcat
Member
July 29, 2011 8:28 pm

I bet she secretly dresses up like Rush Limbaugh, looks at herself in the mirror, and says: “I feel *so* intelligent!”.

drb
Member
drb
July 21, 2011 3:16 pm

You know how it is Poppa, she has to try to slap a label on anyone who disagree with her. So anyone who disagrees with her is a “far righter” even if they are just slightly right of center.

MGAP
Member
MGAP
July 21, 2011 3:10 pm

Hehe, ‘sweet hips’ never fails to shut up the dumb ones.

MGAP
Member
MGAP
July 19, 2011 5:13 pm

Love global climate science. I stood on a glacier last week. The people that put me there sadly explained that this particular glacier was losing 10 feet a year. Signs were posted on the approach to the foot of this glacier showing where it was for the last 150 or so years. So sad….. wait, that’s what glaciers do and have been doing since the ice age. I took a look around and noted the entire valley I was in was formed by receding glaciers. All that work had been done before man walked on the earth. F-cking dinosaurs and their flatulence ruined it for all of us before we even got here. MAybe a diet with less roughage would have slowed that down a bit. Al Gore was clearly born 200 million years too soon. He could been a dietician to the dinos and stopped global warming before it got started.

JohnnyAmerica
Member
JohnnyAmerica
July 19, 2011 9:27 am

It’s funny to listen to the alarmists. We could do nothing to stop them pre-Angola hacking. Now their house of cards has fallen and can’t get up. They still tell us bad warming but have not corrected past errors, have not held anybody accountable for fraud and Alinsky-like press forward with the truth wrapped in a million lies.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 18, 2011 3:24 pm

A Railroad Engineer , and a Washed Up Politician , What Part Of Science Did I Miss ? Maybe That is Why Big Ass Gore , Didn’t Even Win His Own Home State in the Presidential Election . Tennessee Even Knows that He Is An Greedy , Lieing , Piece Of Elephant Dung . Bet Ya , Oblivia Didnt Know That Gore Owned Stock In The Oil Company , Which Bought Elk Hills Navel Oil Reserve , For Pennies on the dollar from the Clinton Administration , Under Gores Recomendation . You Know the Navel Oil Reserve , that We Used To Fuel The Battleships and Aircraft Carriers , so Oblivia Wouldn’t actually be a Nazi , Instead Of A Liberal Socialist
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=468

************************
What has any of this ranting and name calling got to do with the fact that big industries pay scientists to discredit unwelcome data?

brm
Member
brm
July 18, 2011 4:24 pm

BTW, did you even bother checking out Tracy’s link?

It’s about the Gore-acle’s cozy relationship with Occidental. Makes for a good read. I’m sure you would enjoy it.

danybhoy
Member
danybhoy
July 18, 2011 5:00 pm

That is old news, & what sucks is very few know about it. Besides, Gore does’nt care. He has his, was born into it, & is trying to take away the ladder so others can’t compete with him. Wannabe authoritarians don’t like compitition.

brm
Member
brm
July 18, 2011 5:03 pm

Sad, but true, danybhoy.

brm
Member
brm
July 18, 2011 4:19 pm

“What has any of this ranting and name calling got to do with the fact that big industries pay scientists to discredit unwelcome data?”

Good point.

And what does the “fact” that big industries pay scientists to discredit unwelcome data have to do with the first 163 scenarios that did not fit the IPCC’s model? I guess industry can just put their money away because the IPCC is discrediting itself for FREE. Such a deal.

tracycolorado
Guest
tracycolorado
July 18, 2011 2:56 pm

A Railroad Engineer , and a Washed Up Politician , What Part Of Science Did I Miss ? Maybe That is Why Big Ass Gore , Didn’t Even Win His Own Home State in the Presidential Election . Tennessee Even Knows that He Is An Greedy , Lieing , Piece Of Elephant Dung . Bet Ya , Oblivia Didnt Know That Gore Owned Stock In The Oil Company , Which Bought Elk Hills Navel Oil Reserve , For Pennies on the dollar from the Clinton Administration , Under Gores Recomendation . You Know the Navel Oil Reserve , that We Used To Fuel The Battleships and Aircraft Carriers , so Oblivia Wouldn’t actually be a Nazi , Instead Of A Liberal Socialist
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=468

Doomdummy
Member
Doomdummy
July 18, 2011 8:01 am

Follow the MONEY! These fools put “Garbage in”, and get “Garbage out”. The ones paying them to get this bogus info, should be put away for a few centuries. The ones making this crap up, maybe only a couple of centuries. The ones that come along later and want to do the same crap, get to sweep the remains of the previous fools into a pile in the middle of the cell. Why these fools don’t understand the earth can heal itself is beyond belief after all these centuries. Get a clue! Liberals, can’t live with them, can’t send them to re-education camps.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 19, 2011 5:08 pm

Follow the MONEY! These fools put “Garbage in”, and get “Garbage out”. The ones paying them to get this bogus info, should be put away for a few centuries.
**********************
You’re referring, of course, to the fossil fuel industry? 😉

David Bishop
Member
David Bishop
July 21, 2011 8:37 pm

Hey Olivia, Al Gore is operating at a 17% profit margin across the board on all investments. The oil companies are averaging 7%. Who’s the evil rich bastard?

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 22, 2011 5:04 am

Hey Olivia, Al Gore is operating at a 17% profit margin across the board on all investments. The oil companies are averaging 7%. Who’s the evil rich bastard?
*******************
Your words, not mine, David. I’ve never used the word “evil” in reference to a wealthy person, simply because s/he has a big income. That’s one of those canards foisted on you by the right wing media.

See what trouble you get into, by letting them tell you what liberals think and how they feel, instead of simply asking us directly?

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 22, 2011 5:41 am

Yet you continuously tell us what “far right wingers” think. See your “manifesto” below for an example: Olivia July 22, 2011 at 5:29 am. I have never seen cognitive dissonance to such a high degree.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 8:43 pm

David, she has abandoned this argument, no point in posting when you can’t refute the facts.

RockingHorseGuy
Member
July 23, 2011 9:12 am

“no point in posting when you can’t refute the facts.”

If I hear you correctly, you’re saying there is never any point in her postings?

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 23, 2011 4:27 pm

Her point is to be pointy, like thorns, not sharp like a person with a point to make and able to make it without pissing on your shoes at the same time.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 3:13 pm

EXACTLY!!

drb
Member
drb
July 22, 2011 3:40 am

You use facts?? I thought we just hurled childish insults and parrot Rush because we listen to him by proxy.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 22, 2011 4:21 am

I’m sorry drb, I didn’t mean to disappoint you!
Let me go to my special “Find the Rush Quote” program that all of us right wingers are issued at birth, and see what I can find to fit this line of discussion.
I so envy all those independent thinking libs, that all have come to the same conclusions as George Soros and his propoganda machine, all by themselves! It must be so difficult sharing a brain!

drb
Member
drb
July 22, 2011 4:58 am

😀

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 19, 2011 6:43 pm

No, the carbon credit industry. The one that Al Gore profited greatly from when he was co-owner of a company that sold carbon credits/offsets.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 18, 2011 12:01 pm

Liberals, can’t live with them, can’t send them to re-education camps.

WELL……. Yes we can, but we choose not to. I’m afraid that if we put them all together in one place, they’ll invent another crisis that will have the college puke crowd protesting something else as stupid as global warming.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 18, 2011 8:10 am

Why these fools don’t understand the earth can heal itself is beyond belief after all these centuries. Get a clue! Liberals, can’t live with them, can’t send them to re-education camps.
***************************
The earth is not a living being with an immune system, Doomdummy. (Good screen name, by the way.) I simply can’t imagine where you’re getting the notion that an inanimate object can “heal itself.”

Oh, wait, yes, I can. You’re getting it from big industries, who are paying a bundle to selected scientists and “think tanks,” to convince gullible followers that repeatedly polluting our air, our water and our soil won’t hurt it a bit.
And you swallow it unquestioningly, because your favorite right wing media heroes (many of whom are millionaires, with a personal interest in keeping those corporate profits as high as possible) are feeding it to you 24/7.

jwilson07
Member
jwilson07
July 21, 2011 2:01 pm

I admire liberals like Trollivia, they can easily keep two thoughts in their head at the same time. ” Save the earth and kill the innocent children” makes for strange bedfellows but her mop job brain easily handles them at the same time, pretty amazing!

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 22, 2011 11:27 am

I admire liberals like Trollivia, they can easily keep two thoughts in their head at the same time. ” Save the earth and kill the innocent children” makes for strange bedfellows but her mop job brain easily handles them at the same time, pretty amazing!
**********************
Please produce one post, in which I encouraged anyone to get an abortion.
Either that, or admit that you’re desperately trying to spin my position on this issue.

drb
Member
drb
July 22, 2011 1:35 pm

thrids once more

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 22, 2011 12:15 pm

“Please produce one post, in which I encouraged anyone to get an abortion.”

You have stated that you are pro-choice, which we have decided as a group (we don”t care what you think) is the same thing as pro abortion. You may not actively encourage abortion but you have no problem with the “legality” of the act.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 22, 2011 7:39 pm

“Please produce one post, in which I encouraged anyone to get an abortion.”

You have stated that you are pro-choice, which we have decided as a group (we don”t care what you think) is the same thing as pro abortion.
********************
You didn’t “decide” anything of the kind. You’re merely parroting a hoary old ploy that the right wing has been using for decades. 😀
*********************
You may not actively encourage abortion but you have no problem with the “legality” of the act.
*********************
I believe in keeping abortion legal, because I believe that the woman herself, with the help of her physician, is better equipped to make medical decisions concerning the contents of her uterus than government bureaucrats or nosy laypeople.

Apparently the far right is still living in the Middle Ages, when it was believed (by men, of course) that women were too weak and featherbrained to make intelligent decisions.

No wonder you can’t find any intelligent women to run for high office. 😉

brm
Member
brm
July 23, 2011 4:51 am

Holy Tumblin’ Tumbleweeds, I got TURDS!

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 24, 2011 12:00 am

I now have the theme from Rawhide running in my head. Not sure how the Holy tumbleweeds invocation did that. Fact of the matter, I don’t mind it a bit. I’ll shift it to Walking After Midnight in a minute… There. Patsy Kline… Now to the key change… Excellent! I am not a country or western fan, but Garth Brooks did a helluva rendition of this classic. Somehow, Garth Brooks tend to make me roll back to Rawhide. This is a viscous cycle which I may need to employ external input via headphones and nondescript audio permutations to get around, plus a dram of decent American Whuskey, yes, the u was intentional. I’m feeling Extr-American and whusky, the Scotch type lacking the E, or otherwise, any with the E, can be pronounced whuskey and your bartender will know exactly what you probably meant. At this particular moment my bartender and I are one in the same. This is whuskey time! Yeah, Jack Daniels Whuskey. Not Scotch lacking the the E. I’ll need a bottle of Pinch to accommodate that soon.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 24, 2011 6:53 am

I’ve got the Blues Brothers singing the theme from Rawhide running through my head now.

brm
Member
brm
July 24, 2011 5:08 am

Ha! You think you have it so bad. Try having a never-ending ear worm with the theme song for Gilligan’s Island running on a loop.

Just sit right back
And you’ll hear a tale
A tale of a fateful trip,
That started from this tropic port,
Aboard this tiny ship.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 24, 2011 4:49 am

Gee, thanks Dean, now I have the theme from the Rifleman running through my head! It was aided in getting there by the fact that it is in perpetual reruns on 8 prime and on weekends on TCM. Plus I have to TiVo them all because my Father in law loves them, and I sit with him an watch them because he doesn’t know how to operate the remote.
Worst part of it is that I have seen the same episode 4x this week because he doesn’t remember seeing it.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 5:21 am

It’s about time, I got 2nd’s hours ago!

drb
Member
drb
July 23, 2011 4:55 am

Thanks for getting rid of that stench.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 23, 2011 4:00 am

Once again you bring nothing but unsubstantiated bs and opinion. Hilarious. I especially like the part about the informed decision between a patient and her doctor. I posted a link on the most recent thread about racism/abortion where it read that 1/3 of all abortions are performed on 13% of the female population (black girls or women). You are now going to try to tell me that each and every one of those abortions were thoughtfully considered? You are a MORON. Oh, and in that same thread we did decide that pro choice = pro abortion.

You simply need to cite and back up your refutations and claims. It will help you gain credibility and possibly respect.

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 23, 2011 11:45 pm

Here is where you began to falter, isn’t it? Refutation of fact to prove a negative is not required of libcomms. Credibility equates to truth which has absolutely NO bearing to libcomms. Saying one thing with the first half of a breath the contradicting it with the remainder is de rigueur per Alinsky.

Remember this simple procedure; ignore and thumb down. It is easy. Also, ask not what your troll can do for you, just thumb it down.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 23, 2011 5:30 am

Once again you bring nothing but unsubstantiated bs and opinion. Hilarious. I especially like the part about the informed decision between a patient and her doctor. I posted a link on the most recent thread about racism/abortion where it read that 1/3 of all abortions are performed on 13% of the female population (black girls or women). You are now going to try to tell me that each and every one of those abortions were thoughtfully considered?
********************
No, I’m going to tell you that each and every one of those abortions is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.

It sounds suspiciously as if you’re trying to insinuate that black women are more incapable than other women of making appropriate decisions concerning their own bodies.

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 23, 2011 6:18 am

Disgusting.

drb
Member
drb
July 23, 2011 6:15 am

Sounds an awful lot like being pro-eugenics. Here, I’ll just add both 😀 😉

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 23, 2011 5:44 am

No dumb ass, but it so happens that 1 in 3 abortions are performed on black women and girls and progressives like you enable it.

drb
Member
drb
July 23, 2011 5:40 am

But it isn’t a decision concerning their own bodies, it is a decision in regards to the little bodies inside their bodies.

Or is there some other “contents in their uteruses”?

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 3:20 pm

And just exactly what is the difference between that, and let’s say, your average liberal troll?

Simple, the troll’s mommy didn’t abort it. Had she done so, I think the troll would have been happier, then her mommy wouldn’t be a right winger!

RockingHorseGuy
Member
July 23, 2011 9:09 am

“The contents of their uteruses are not people, they are merely a mixture of chemicals, fluids, and DNA”

And just exactly what is the difference between that, and let’s say, your average liberal troll?

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 6:07 am

Yes, 😉
But those fluids and DNA aren’t a fully functioning human, able to live without outside assistance! Therefore, they can be scraped from the womb without actually killing anything of value! 😉

“aren’t a fully functioning human, able to live without outside assistance”
HMMMM, sounds like many adults I have seen at Wal-Mart using EBT cards! Does that mean we can “abort” them too?

OOPS! I almost forgot to add the last winkie-smiley thingie! 😉

drb
Member
drb
July 23, 2011 6:02 am

Yes but it’s the DNA that determines what an organism is, so if it’s human DNA then it’s a human organism…Is this where I’m supposed to include the winkie or the happy smiley face???

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 5:55 am

“The contents of their uteruses are not people, they are merely a mixture of chemicals, fluids, and DNA”

Isn’t that the party line?

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 5:36 am

It sounds suspiciously as if you’re trying to insinuate that black women are more incapable than other women of making appropriate decisions concerning their own bodies.

WOW! You are really willing to go way out on a limb to make the racist accusation, aren’t you?

Take your little troll azz out of here and get help, you really are delusional.

I do have a new suspicion about Oblivious, she’s not really a nurse at all, she’s a professor at a liberal arts college! That would explain her totally wacky ideas and immovable rockheaded opinions.

perlcat
Member
July 24, 2011 6:38 pm

Hmmm, FDH. Looks like someone had the smell of C. Diff on their thumb when they thumbed you down.

C. Diff.

C.Diff Run.

Run, C. Diff, run!

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 23, 2011 11:36 pm

That might also explain that c.diff stench emanating from her posts, not her, umm, other end. I didn’t know how to put that, sorry…

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 22, 2011 8:02 pm

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 18, 2011 12:03 pm

Doomdummy. (Good screen name, by the way.)

Wishing you would have thought of it first? It would be more fitting.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 21, 2011 1:09 pm

Boy, you really are stupid!
Please showme a college that only teaches the courses for your major and none of the core cirriculum. History, English, Philosophy, etc were included in the core at UTSA, and there were enough profs teaching their liberal philosophy for me to be able to know who I needed to stay away from.
***********************
Dragging in a bunch of qualifications about “core courses” is irrelevant. I repeat: if the professors at your college were spending class time “teaching their liberal philosophy” rather than focusing on course material, then your school wasn’t very serious about education.

I suspect that what you call “teaching their liberal philosophy” was nothing more than challenging you to back up your claims, if and when you used class time to spout right wing platitudes. That’s what professional educators DO: They push you to use facts and logic, rather than parroting the latest talking points.

That, in fact, is one reason right wing propaganda constantly sneers about “intelligentsia” and “the elite”—-to persuade its listeners that they’re smarter and better informed than anyone else, including professors. And that’s also why most of right wing propaganda’s heroes aren’t very well educated themselves.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 21, 2011 1:37 pm

Dragging in a bunch of qualifications about “core courses” is irrelevant.

Wrong again, but it doesn’t surprise me.
I did notice however, that you refuse to acknowlege what school you went to, that doesn’t surprise me either.
**************************
Nor should it. Where are you getting the idea that I’m obligated to answer all personal questions, just because you feel like asking them? I’m afraid that a lot of you far righters have very poor social boundaries. 😉
**************************
Stop trying to divert and just accept that it is common for teachers/profs to include their personal feelings into a subject. You will feel much better when you stop the denial and accept the truth.
*************************
Wrong again, my boy. GOOD teachers focus on teaching the student to think for himself, and to recognize the difference between objective fact and subjective opinion.

If you didn’t learn even that much in college, then either you slept through most of your classes, or you had some really poor teachers.

brm
Member
brm
July 22, 2011 10:44 am

“Wrong again, my boy. ”

Do you mean “my boy” in the racist sense, or “the contents of your uterus” sense?

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 22, 2011 11:26 am

“Wrong again, my boy. ”

Do you mean “my boy” in the racist sense, or “the contents of your uterus” sense?
*********************
Netiher. I use it in the same way you use the terms “honey” and “sweetie.”

drb
Member
drb
July 22, 2011 1:32 pm

thirds.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 2:07 pm

Where are you getting the idea that I’m obligated to answer all personal questions, just because you feel like asking them?

What’s the matter? Ashamed of the school?

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 2:03 pm

GOOD teachers focus on teaching the student to think for himself

Right, but those kind of teachers are few and far between.

drb
Member
drb
July 21, 2011 1:28 pm

Oh looky there, I got a hat trick today after all

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 1:17 pm

Dragging in a bunch of qualifications about “core courses” is irrelevant.

Wrong again, but it doesn’t surprise me.
I did notice however, that you refuse to acknowlege what school you went to, that doesn’t surprise me either.
Stop trying to divert and just accept that it is common for teachers/profs to include their personal feelings into a subject. You will feel much better when you stop the denial and accept the truth.

brm
Member
brm
July 18, 2011 10:27 am

Interesting theory, Obliviate, but unfortunately those big corps you were talking about? Like GE and Samsung? They’ve got billions at stake in the green industry and their next fortune depends on the lefty-greenie cult falling hook, line and sinker for the big AGW lie.

You and your fellow greenies swallow it unquestioningly, because your favorite green heros, like the Gore-acle and other millionaires like him, have a personal interest in keeping those corporate profits (carbon trading companies, curly bulbs, windmills) as high as possible and are feeding it to you 24/7.

Hook, line and sinker. Poor gullible greenies.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 19, 2011 3:14 am

Interesting theory, Obliviate, but unfortunately those big corps you were talking about? Like GE and Samsung? They’ve got billions at stake in the green industry and their next fortune depends on the lefty-greenie cult falling hook, line and sinker for the big AGW lie.

**************************
Let me remind you, Barb, that it was the right wing that balked at that ridiculous scientific claim, almost 50 years ago, that smoking is a serious health hazard. Claimed it was a rumor put about by crooked doctors. And they pointed to studies financed, set up and directed by the tobacco industry, to “prove” that those doctors were lying. How did that work out?

Now, you can keep arguing that right wing think tanks know better than scientists who aren’t being paid by the fossil fuel industry, but the fact remains that the right wing’s agenda is always the same: protect Big Business profits by pooh-poohing ANY suggestion that their practices ought to be monitored or regulated in any way.

Kick and scream and balk at it all you like, just as you righties kicked and screamed and balked at desegregation of schools in the fifties, cigarette warning labels in the sixties, safe food and drug regulations and safe workplace practices a century ago. Pretending it isn’t happening, or that the Earth has some magical ability to repair itself, isn’t going to make this issue go away. Like desegregation, taking steps to protect the planet and its atmosphere is inevitable. If you can’t handle that, and insist on living in a country that takes no such precautions, there are quite a few polluted third-world countries you could go to. Just don’t drink the water, and try not to breathe too much. 😛

RockingHorseGuy
Member
July 19, 2011 1:11 pm

“it was the right wing that balked at that ridiculous scientific claim, almost 50 years ago, that smoking is a serious health hazard.”

Sounds like something from Algore’s family album.

And no, Olivia my dear. I didn’t unhide your post to read that. I copied and pasted from Poppa Joe. I read his posts, and thumb them up. I thumb yours down and move along.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 19, 2011 5:14 pm

“it was the right wing that balked at that ridiculous scientific claim, almost 50 years ago, that smoking is a serious health hazard.”

Sounds like something from Algore’s family album.
*********************
Of course it does. That’s because Big Industry has waged all-out war on Gore, aided by their loyal propaganda arms, FOX News and right wing talk radio. And you far righters have no better sense than to fall for their efforts to ridicule and discredit him.

They couldn’t ask for more compliant pawns than the far right, to enable their efforts to rake in as much profit as possible, while taking as little environmental responsibility as possible.

jwilson07
Member
jwilson07
July 21, 2011 2:04 pm

Another mop job liberal who uses electricity like water but complains about the Earth 24/7. I have an idea, practice what you preach and stop using electricity to post here, thats a good start to cleaning up the earth.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 19, 2011 6:48 pm

They couldn’t ask for more compliant pawns than the far right

Don’t you mean the far left college students? Nobody is more compliant, marching in lockstep with their leftist masters, than the sheeple that inhabit the post secondary indoctrination centers that we call college.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 21, 2011 6:14 am

They couldn’t ask for more compliant pawns than the far right

Don’t you mean the far left college students? Nobody is more compliant, marching in lockstep with their leftist masters, than the sheeple that inhabit the post secondary indoctrination centers that we call college.
*******************
I’m beginning to think you never set foot inside a college, Poppajoe. Certainly you haven’t spent much time around college professors, if you’re repeating such silly stereotypes about them.

You do realize, don’t you, where most of this anti-university drivel is coming from? From Rush Limbaugh (the guy you claim you never listen to), who failed every class in his freshman year except ballroom dancing, and Glenn Beck, who also ditched college after his freshman year.

Ever stop to think there might be some sour grapes rationale there? Or, more likely, that these two have learned that bad-mouthing formal education (to quote Charles Brooks) “strokes the pleasure centers” of their less educated (and defensive about it) disciples?

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 21, 2011 6:40 am

Yea, you’re right, I never set foot in a college classroom. I got my degree in electronic engineering from the same Crackerjack Box you got your nursing degree.
What you fail to realize is that when they speak your language, it’s not indoctrination, it’s being your soul-mate. If the professors you had were all conservatives, you would be screaming about the right wing indoctrination in our colleges
************************
You know, I can’t remember ANY of my professors ever talking politics in the classroom or lecture hall. In most cases, they just lectured, according to the course syllabus. What’s more, I never regarded any of them as my “soulmate.” I was there to learn, not to look for best buddies or political role models. 😉

That must indeed have been a “crackerjack box” you went to, if your electronics professors spent valuable classroom time expressing political opinions, instead of teaching about electronics.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 12:31 pm

Boy, you really are stupid!
Please showme a college that only teaches the courses for your major and none of the core cirriculum. History, English, Philosophy, etc were included in the core at UTSA, and there were enough profs teaching their liberal philosophy for me to be able to know who I needed to stay away from. Maybe you went to Kaplan, or one of the other schools that only taught nursing, and that would explain why you are so sorely lacking in knowlege of the facts of college life.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 6:18 am

Yea, you’re right, I never set foot in a college classroom. I got my degree in electronic engineering from the same Crackerjack Box you got your nursing degree.
What you fail to realize is that when they speak your language, it’s not indoctrination, it’s being your soul-mate. If the professors you had were all conservatives, you would be screaming about the right wing indoctrination in our colleges.

BTW, for about the 1000th time, I don’t listen to or read Rush!

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 21, 2011 1:45 pm

As is common among many IHTMers I don’t listen to or read Rush either. Don’t spend much time with the TV or the radio. I also don’t read or listen to trolls.

brm
Member
brm
July 19, 2011 5:26 pm

TURDS!!

“And you far righters have no better sense than to fall for their efforts to ridicule and discredit him.”

Heck no, Oblivia. Mega Corp doesn’t have to lift a finger to discredit him. He opens his mouth and all the work is done for them!

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 21, 2011 1:30 pm

Can’t understand how the radical far-uppers think? Of course not, no one with any sense can! Their sphincters are too tight around their necks. The lack of oxygen causes atrophy of the large turd they use for a brain.

Funny how anyone not a commie is dubbed ‘far-righter’. Center-right moderate type? No way! During the 90s the bezel of the compass politic was rotated so far out of whack that anyone that was politically right down the middle suddenly became a right wing extremist. Funny that conservative by definition excludes any radical extremist.

I hate these misguided sewer spewers. I really do.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 21, 2011 1:41 pm

Funny how anyone not a commie is dubbed ‘far-righter’. Center-right moderate type? No way!
*******************
“Center right moderate types” don’t parrot Rush Limbaugh/Glenn Beck theories as if they were Holy Writ, my boy. 😉

I’m sorry if you’re ashamed to be associated with right wing extremists (I would be, too)—but, if you don’t want to be taken for one, stop walking, talking, arguing and reacting like one.

drb
Member
drb
July 22, 2011 3:36 am

third!!!!!!!

drb
Member
drb
July 21, 2011 3:18 pm

spoken like a true far far far lefty

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 2:09 pm

I’m sorry if you’re ashamed to be associated with right wing extremists

According to your definition of moderate, JFK would be a right wing extremist!

brm
Member
brm
July 19, 2011 5:40 am

“just as you righties kicked and screamed and balked at desegregation of schools in the fifties”

LOL! Revisionist history at its finest! Nicely done, my little dumpling.

perlcat
Member
July 19, 2011 6:21 am

Yeah, I sure remember that Republican governor saying “Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever” at his inaugural speech — oh — wait. That was a democrat, wasn’t it.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 19, 2011 6:37 am

No, he must have been a Republican, he was a segregationist!!

George Corley Wallace, Jr. (August 25, 1919 – September 13, 1998) was the 45th Governor of Alabama, serving four terms: 1963–1967, 1971–1979 and 1983–1987. “The most influential loser” in 20th-century U.S. politics, according to biographers Dan T. Carter[1] and Stephan Lesher,[2] he ran for U.S. president four times, running officially as a Democrat three times and in the American Independent Party once.

brm
Member
brm
July 19, 2011 6:55 am

And don’t forget the KKK Grand Pubah (or whatever title he had), the HIGHLY ESTEEMED ‘REPUBLICAN’ SENATOR BYRD!!

Now THERE’s a great example of inclusiveness and compassion. He never turned away anyone wearing a white sheet. /snork

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 19, 2011 8:09 am

And don’t forget the KKK Grand Pubah (or whatever title he had), the HIGHLY ESTEEMED ‘REPUBLICAN’ SENATOR BYRD!!

Now THERE’s a great example of inclusiveness and compassion. He never turned away anyone wearing a white sheet. /snork
********************
Actually, he did, Barb. I guess your right wing “sources” forgot to tell you that he left the KKK over 60 years ago. In fact, he so thoroughly renounced that mistake of his youth, and showed it through his actions, that he was eventually acclaimed by the NAACP for his work as U.S. Senator.

But there were other racists in the Democratic party at that time, and not all of them wanted to turn their back on racism. Yet the Democratic party was pushing for civil rights at the federal level, and racists were becoming increasingly unhappy with that goal. So, in 1948, a group of them splintered off into the anti-integrationist “Dixiecrats.” That party was short-lived, but, eventually, those avowed racists were welcomed into the GOP. Where they and their followers remain to this day….. white sheets and all.

Next time, better get your facts straight before you barge in here with your smarmy remarks. I thought you might have learned after your serial mistakes regarding Muslim women’s dress, but apparently not.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 20, 2011 12:54 pm

The National Black Republican Association(NBRA) claims that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. registered as a Republican in 1956. NBRA Chairman Frances Rice writes that “It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.”

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 20, 2011 12:42 pm

While he may not have been a ‘right-wing extremist’, like us libertarians, Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican mostly because of the KKK-democrat party affiliations.
*********************
Another lie fed to you by the right wing propaganda machine, via King’s niece, the ultra right wing conservative Christian (and three times divorced) Alveda King.

No evidence exists that King ever declared his party affiliation (if he had one). It’s also extremely unlikely that King would have embraced Republicanism, given the fact that the GOP presidential candidate in the previous election, Barry Goldwater, was strongly opposed to federal Civil Rights legislation.

During the last few years of his life, King said, “For the last twelve years we have been in the reform movement (but now) we have moved into a new era, which must be an era of revolution.”

No matter how you slice, dice or spin it, that doesn’t sound like Republican talk to me. 😉

Obviously, somebody must have seen you coming. 😉

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 19, 2011 10:26 am

P.S. Obliviate, the eye holes go TO THE FRONT.

But, which is her front?

brm
Member
brm
July 19, 2011 8:26 am

“In fact, he so thoroughly renounced that mistake of his youth”

Yes, of course he did. And I have no doubt he meant it. 😉

I think it’s marvelous that you lefties can find it in your hearts to forgive a former KKK Grand Pubah, but you can’t find any forgiveness for all of those “right-wing racists” you keep talking about.

tsk tsk

P.S. Obliviate, the eye holes go TO THE FRONT.

Sententia
Member
Sententia
July 19, 2011 7:30 am

Don’t forget Al Gore Sr. (D) who voted against equal rights.

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 20, 2011 11:57 am

The commie style that he took up after getting tight with the Kennedys showed his affiliation was always adjustable to fit his agenda. I was making a point more about the demoKKKrat party.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 20, 2011 11:46 am

Dean, I was a little suspicious of that claim, so I looked it up. There was an article in the Huffington Post (ugh) that claimed he was non-partisan, which considering the source is as good as saying he was to the right of Reagan!
Then, there was this article:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_richard__060824_republicans_claims_m.htm
Which seems to verify that he was a Republican in his early lifee, but didn’t seem to support any party later on, however, it does chronicle the facts that Republicans are not only not racist, but were the driving force in helping end descrimination.

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 20, 2011 11:02 am

While he may not have been a ‘right-wing extremist’, like us libertarians, Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican mostly because of the KKK-democrat party affiliations.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 19, 2011 10:09 am

right wing racists.

You mean ones like Abe Lincoln?
Yea, all Repubs are racist in Obliviousland!

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 19, 2011 8:14 am

Don’t forget Al Gore Sr. (D) who voted against equal rights.
******************
You mean he voted against the Civil Rights Act. Yes, the vast majority of southern Democrats—-and ALL southern Republicans—-did. They were products of their era, unfortunately, and lacked the vision that we have and take for granted today.

That, of course, doesn’t explain why today’s GOP still won’t take action to disassociate itself from right wing racists.

drb
Member
drb
July 19, 2011 4:56 am

thirds #4 of the day

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 19, 2011 4:36 am

“it was the right wing that balked at that ridiculous scientific claim, almost 50 years ago, that smoking is a serious health hazard.”

Got proof?

“you righties kicked and screamed and balked at desegregation of schools in the fifties”

Um, that would be Southern Democrats!

“cigarette warning labels in the sixties, safe food and drug regulations and safe workplace practices a century ago.”

Proof?

“try not to breathe too much.”

Which reminds me, did I tell you that you could stop holding your breath yet?

brm
Member
brm
July 19, 2011 5:42 am

” … and try not to breathe too much.”

Pretty much impossible when we are all wearing those long, loose black traditional garments, aye?

RockingHorseGuy
Member
July 18, 2011 8:23 am

Finally! I got another turd.

trackback
BMF
Member
BMF
July 18, 2011 3:15 am

The following is the United States Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in describing Hitler’s psychological profile during WWII:

“His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.”

Does this remind you of some people currently in the news?

History never tires in repeating itself.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 19, 2011 2:52 am

“His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.”

Does this remind you of some people currently in the news?
********************
Why, sure. It sounds exactly like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly. Following those tactics (which are merely high pressure propaganda techniques, and not invented by Hitler) certainly paid off for them, didn’t it? 😉

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 19, 2011 4:58 am

“It sounds exactly like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly.”

Speaking from the posterior again Oblivious? How can you comment on them if you don’t have a TV, or listen to them on the radio? Or are you taking your Daily KOS pill again?

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 19, 2011 5:07 pm

“It sounds exactly like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly.”

Speaking from the posterior again Oblivious? How can you comment on them if you don’t have a TV, or listen to them on the radio? Or are you taking your Daily KOS pill again?
*********************
No. As I’ve explained to you a couple of dozen times already, I check out Rush’s recent transcripts, whenever I see a bunch of right wingers all suddenly parroting some brand new talking point or buzzword. And, 9 times out of 10, there it is on Rush’s most recent broadcast, repeated a bunch of times, as is his wont, to ensure that his loyal dittoheads absorb it.

The others are easily available on Youtube. I check them out from time to time, especially whenever someone refers to a particular broadcast in which they said something outrageously false or illogical.
(Which happens quite often.)

Speaking of Rush, by the way, I read an interesting—and apt—- description of his technique, written by conservative commentator David Brooks:

“The talk-radio jocks are not in the business of promoting conservative governance. They are in the business of building an audience by stroking the pleasure centers of their listeners.” http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2015662219_brooks20.html?syndication=rss

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 19, 2011 6:41 pm

conservative commentator David Brooks

LMFAO!!!!
David Brooks, the token “conservative” columnist on the NY Slimes staff!
He’s about as conservative as FDR!
Anyone stupid enough to believe the Slimes would hire an actual conservative to write for them, is beyond help!

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 19, 2011 5:34 pm

You are taking an opinion piece as fact. How “right winger” of you.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 20, 2011 7:35 pm

You are taking an opinion piece as fact. How “right winger” of you.
**********************
Not at all. Brooks didn’t say anything I didn’t already know. He just put it very succinctly (and, in most cases, entertainingly).

Which parts do you doubt, Kick?

drb
Member
drb
July 21, 2011 4:46 am

turds!

drb
Member
drb
July 19, 2011 4:55 am

And the hat trick!

perlcat
Member
July 18, 2011 7:06 am

This reminds me of a certain troll.

perlcat
Member
July 17, 2011 9:32 pm

Hey, don’t mock Rajendra Pachauri too much. I saw him just the other day, outside the library fighting with some other wino for a shopping cart. The poor guy lost.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 19, 2011 4:55 pm

Hey, don’t mock Rajendra Pachauri too much. I saw him just the other day, outside the library fighting with some other wino for a shopping cart. The poor guy lost.
**********************
It’s not nice to brag. What did you do with the cart once you succeeded in getting it from him?

perlcat
Member
July 19, 2011 8:09 pm

Gave it to you — don’t you remember? I thought you could use a place to keep your stuff while you were doing tricks for heroin.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 19, 2011 6:32 pm

What did you do with the cart once you succeeded in getting it from him?

He filled it with the printouts of all those emails that proved the IPCC was lying.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 23, 2011 6:37 am

What did you do with the cart once you succeeded in getting it from him?

He filled it with the printouts of all those emails that proved the IPCC was lying.
********************
You mean those anonymous “Pass this on to everyone you know!” e mails, sprinkled with exclamation points, that you far righters regard as “evidence” that Rush is always right in his pronouncements? 😀

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 6:44 am

You mean those anonymous “Pass this on to everyone you know!” e mails, sprinkled with exclamation points, that you far righters regard as “evidence” that Rush is always right in his pronouncements?

No, I mean the emails from the IPCC scientists that proved all the data was manipulated to make GW seem real.
I guess that wasn’t reported on the Daily KOS.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 17, 2011 7:16 pm

Global warming?
Do me a favor.
Next January, when I’m here in Central Florida freezing my ass off, send these “scientists” down this way to explain to all the people that can’t afford the electric to heat their homes, that this is global warming.
Then duck!

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 18, 2011 4:31 am

Global warming?
Do me a favor.
Next January, when I’m here in Central Florida freezing my ass off, send these “scientists” down this way to explain to all the people that can’t afford the electric to heat their homes, that this is global warming.
Then duck!

********************
Not too long ago, I had a patient who needed an IV. As I set up the equipment and put the tourniquet on her arm, she asked me, “Will it hurt?”

To put her at her ease a bit, I jokingly answered, “Nah—-I won’t feel it a bit.”

That’s what your (unfortunately, NOT joking) rationale reminds me of: I won’t feel hot in MY area of the world in January; therefore, those who are enduring tsunamis, flooding, wildfires, dehydration and ruined crops in other parts of the world must be imagining things.

Of course, I can see why it might be hard to believe global warming is a reality, with all those scientists being paid by the fossil fuel industry to tell you it’s all a hoax…..

http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2285

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 19, 2011 3:54 pm

And none of those phenomena are climate related. Weather maybe but not climate. Big difference, you see. As for tsunamis, they are largely caused by earthquakes. The AGW hoax is in the open and that is as they say is that.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 23, 2011 6:35 am

And none of those phenomena are climate related. Weather maybe but not climate. Big difference, you see.
********************
Tell that to Poppajoe. He’s the one who’s yapping away about 7 cold winters in central Florida, and trying to use it as proof that global warming is a myth. 😉

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 23, 2011 6:42 am

Interesting how you left out the part he was responding to:

tsunamis, flooding, wildfires, dehydration and ruined crops

Because they show your point is pointless!

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 19, 2011 4:54 pm

And none of those phenomena are climate related. Weather maybe but not climate. Big difference, you see. As for tsunamis, they are largely caused by earthquakes. The AGW hoax is in the open and that is as they say is that.
********************************
Why, that’s EXACTLY the same attitude that right wing know-it-alls took about the tobacco controversy 40-odd years ago. Claimed that cigarettes don’t kill; that it was all a hoax generated by do-gooders and crooked doctors. And they KNEW this for a fact, because the cigarette companies spent a lot of money proving it to them. 😉

Of course, the biggest lapse in logic in their entire refusal to accept the idea of global warming is their utter rejection of taking ANY precautions, just in case they’re wrong. Odd how their position on this issue always happens to dovetail perfectly with the position that’s most attractive to the fossil fuel industry…..and they don’t even recognize it. 😉

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 24, 2011 4:36 am
brm
Member
brm
July 20, 2011 7:48 am

“Odd how their position on this issue always happens to dovetail perfectly with the position that’s most attractive to the fossil fuel industry…..and they don’t even recognize it.”

Odd that the lefties’ position on this issue always happens to dovetail perfectly with the IPCC/U.N.’s position that’s most attractive for the global redistribution of wealth … and they don’t even recognize it.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 20, 2011 7:57 am

Odd how their position on this issue always happens to dovetail perfectly with the position that’s most attractive to the fossil fuel industry…..and they don’t even recognize it.”

Odd that the lefties’ position on this issue always happens to dovetail perfectly with the IPCC/U.N.’s position that’s most attractive for the global redistribution of wealth … and they don’t even recognize it.
*******************
That’s a rather far fetched interpretation of my position, Barb, when the only position I’ve stated here is that we shouldn’t pooh-pooh the data on global warming, just to appease the fossil fuel industry.

I believe in being prepared. Apparently you far righters would rather blindly trust the oil industry to put the well-being of humanity before profit potential. Does that sound like a intelligent plan to you?? 😀

brm
Member
brm
July 20, 2011 12:22 pm

“when the only position I’ve stated here is that we shouldn’t pooh-pooh the data on global warming, just to appease the fossil fuel industry. ”

What a co-inky-dink! We “almost” agree.

The only position I’ve stated here is that we shouldn’t blindly accept the data put forth by Greenpeace, WWF, and other assorted charlatans that global warming is caused by human activity.

RockingHorseGuy
Member
July 20, 2011 9:49 am

Two turds in a row. I’m having a good morning.

brm
Member
brm
July 20, 2011 8:01 am

“I believe in being prepared. Apparently you far righters would rather blindly trust the oil industry to put the well-being of humanity before profit potential. Does that sound like a intelligent plan to you??”

Being prepared? What would have happened if we had all gotten “prepared” for the ice age in the 70s? I was young, so I did that “blind trust” thing back then. You’re not young anymore, Obliviate, so what’s YOUR excuse? 🙂

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 20, 2011 12:21 pm

“I believe in being prepared. Apparently you far righters would rather blindly trust the oil industry to put the well-being of humanity before profit potential. Does that sound like a intelligent plan to you??”

Being prepared? What would have happened if we had all gotten “prepared” for the ice age in the 70s? I was young, so I did that “blind trust” thing back then. You’re not young anymore, Obliviate, so what’s YOUR excuse?
***********************
Well, you were more naive than I was in the seventies, apparently, because I had no ‘blind trust” over the ice age thing. As I recall, it was merely speculation, and passed rather quickly, once those two unusually hard winters were past.

Now, explain again—-without dragging in irrelevancies—-why you think it’s a bad idea even to consider the possibility of manmade global warming.

drb
Member
drb
July 20, 2011 1:13 pm

11th third.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 20, 2011 12:48 pm

“I had no ‘blind trust” over the ice age thing.”

Yet, you’re all gung-ho to jump on the global warming bandwagon! Now who looks naive?

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 20, 2011 7:36 pm

Now who looks naive?
*******************
You do, because you flatly refuse to consider ANY possibility that isn’t personally endorsed by your left wing media heroes. And they, of course, are all about pooh-poohing ANY suggestion that isn’t designed to enhance the profits of Al Gore.

There! That looks better! Now, what did I do with Oblivious’ post?

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 20, 2011 7:33 pm

“I had no ‘blind trust” over the ice age thing.”

Yet, you’re all gung-ho to jump on the global warming bandwagon! Now who looks naive?
*******************
You do, because you flatly refuse to consider ANY possibility that isn’t personally endorsed by your right wing media heroes. And they, of course, are all about pooh-poohing ANY suggestion that isn’t designed to enhance the profits of Big Business.

brm
Member
brm
July 20, 2011 12:36 pm

“Now, explain again—-without dragging in irrelevancies—-why you think it’s a bad idea even to consider the possibility of manmade global warming.”

What’s there to “consider”, Oblivia?

The science is settled. The Gore-acle said it, so it must be true. After all, we KNOW Democrats would never lie to Congress.

So you just go ahead and sit in the dark and save the world. We thank you for your sacrifice. I mean, we think you’re dumber than a box of rocks, but we thank you nonetheless.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 20, 2011 10:07 am

She just hit a new level of stupidity. Good lord, how can someone say something that dumb!?

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 20, 2011 11:08 am

She just hit a new level of stupidity. Good lord, how can someone say something that dumb!?

Practice, practice, practice.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 19, 2011 6:26 pm

So Oblivious, do you remember the ice age we were going to have back in the 70’s? We were all going to die from the cold.

Those same scientific principles that promised us a glacier in every backyard are the ones promising us 200 foot deep water in Manhattan.

Are you capable of comprehending the possibility that they are wrong again, or is your head stuck in Al Gore’s colon?

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 20, 2011 12:17 pm

So Oblivious, do you remember the ice age we were going to have back in the 70′s? We were all going to die from the cold.
*************************
I don’t remember anyone saying that we “were going to have” an ice age. I remember some people asking if 1978 portended a new ice age. They stopped asking that, as I recall, around 1980, one those two severe winters had passed.
*************************
Those same scientific principles that promised us a glacier in every backyard are the ones promising us 200 foot deep water in Manhattan.
************************
Not true, PoppaJoe. You’re just assuming it’s “those same scientific principles,” because you’re not very familiar with either situation, and choose to pooh-pooh both out of hand.
**************************
Are you capable of comprehending the possibility that they are wrong again, or is your head stuck in Al Gore’s colon?
*******************
There’s a difference here, Poppajoe. I merely advocated preparing for the worst. You, on the other hand, want to let Big Business decide what the risks are, and set the kind of government regulations they want. That’s like asking a four year old to choose between going to the dentist and spending $30 at the candy store.

If I (and the vast majority of the scientific community) were wrong, it would mean that we made some unnecessary preparations. If YOU were wrong (and, considering that the vast majority of “authorities” on your side are in the pay of, or in bed with, the fossil fuel industry, that’s a distinct possibility), it could mean disaster. At the very least, it would mean a tardy (read: expensive) last-ditch attempt at damage control.

I think it’s touching, but incredibly foolish, that you have such debonair trust in the fossil fuel industry to do right by the American people, even at the expense of profit. But you really need to think about getting a brain, and learning to use it. 😉

drb
Member
drb
July 20, 2011 1:12 pm

10th 3rd of the day!

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 20, 2011 12:45 pm

“I think it’s touching, but incredibly foolish, that you have such debonair trust in the fossil fuel industry to do right by the American people”

No, I trust history, and the fact that climate cycles, and there is nothing we can do to change that.

“But you really need to think about getting a brain, and learning to use it.”

Really? I will gladly put my brain up against yours any day of the week. Just because I disagree with you doesn’t make me less intelligent than you, in fact it makes me exponentially smarter.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 20, 2011 7:27 pm

I think it’s touching, but incredibly foolish, that you have such debonair trust in the fossil fuel industry to do right by the American people”

No, I trust history, and the fact that climate cycles, and there is nothing we can do to change that.
********************
When it comes to rapidly increasing technology and its effects on the environment, “I trust history” is basically akin to sticking one’s head in the sand and pretending not to see what’s going on.

Most of mankind’s greatest innovations and discoveries came about because people chose to work to solve a problem, rather than just sitting on their haunches “trust(ing) history.”

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 19, 2011 7:17 pm

I think it is funny how she assumes that the tobacco lobby was a right wing cabal. Let’s see most cigarette tobacco is from NC, which in the 1960s was solidly Democratic with hard working Southern Democratic farmers dependent upon favorable legislation from Democratic politicians who were installed thanks to southern headquartered tobacco companies run by wait for it…Southern Democrats. Check out the Duke family and their political affiliation. Olivia, must I say it again? You’re an idiot.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 20, 2011 7:23 pm

I think it is funny how she assumes that the tobacco lobby was a right wing cabal. Let’s see most cigarette tobacco is from NC, which in the 1960s was solidly Democratic with hard working Southern Democratic farmers dependent upon favorable legislation from Democratic politicians who were installed thanks to southern headquartered tobacco companies run by wait for it…Southern Democrats. Check out the Duke family and their political affiliation. Olivia, must I say it again? You’re an idiot.
********************
I’m not talking about tobacco farmers, Kick. Obviously, they’re going to be in favor of whatever government policy enables them to make the biggest profit. I’m talking about those of the general public, who boasted that they didn’t believe any studies or statistics that were endorsed by the U.S. government.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 5:45 am

they didn’t believe any studies or statistics that were endorsed by the U.S. government.

Did you ever consider that “endorsed by the U.S. government” is the death knell to anything?

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 21, 2011 5:50 am

they didn’t believe any studies or statistics that were endorsed by the U.S. government.

Did you ever consider that “endorsed by the U.S. government” is the death knell to anything?
*******************
Well, gosh, Poppajoe, if I hated and distrusted the U.S. government as much as you seem to, I wouldn’t be sitting around on my butt arguing politics. I’d be searching high and low for a new country to live in.

Why stay in the U.S., if you’re so sure the government is that destructive?

drb
Member
drb
July 21, 2011 6:10 am

YAY, First hat trick of the day. Thanks to those who assisted.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 21, 2011 5:56 am

Why stay in the U.S., if you’re so sure the government is that destructive?

Because there is still hope, if we can wrestle control out of the hands of the leftists and czars.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 21, 2011 5:20 am

Citation please. You bring NOTHING except opinion and wishful thinking. That will not advance your argument.

drb
Member
drb
July 21, 2011 4:39 am

Good morning, thirds!

FormerlyDeanH
Guest
FormerlyDeanH
July 20, 2011 10:13 am

She’s a radical ‘far-upper’, reference cranial-colon convergence.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 19, 2011 5:01 pm

Nice deflection. You lose again. I called your post BS and you confirmed it for me by talking about tobacco. Apples and oranges. Olivia, you are slipping.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 20, 2011 12:03 pm

Nice deflection. You lose again. I called your post BS and you confirmed it for me by talking about tobacco. Apples and oranges. Olivia, you are slipping.

****************
No, Kick, I was making an analogy. I forgot momentarily that you’re not too swift at grasping parallels or symbols.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
July 21, 2011 7:28 pm

It is generally useful for a comparison to be factual and relevant. Neither applies. Really, you need to cite some of your “facts”. Your endless stream of unsubstantiated BS and opinion gets you nowhere. I actually gave you a thumbs up over at the fat kid thread because you wrote something valid, IMO. Then you went and ruined it by adding your normal ration of idiocy throughout the rest of the thread. You were ahead but you just didn’t know when to quit. I suspect that is a trait that figures prominently in the rest of your life.

drb
Member
drb
July 20, 2011 1:10 pm

third hat trick. ooooo, two days in a row!

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 20, 2011 12:40 pm

“I forgot momentarily that you’re not too swift at grasping parallels or symbols.”

Interesting statement from the queen of “I don’t understand your hypothetical”.

brm
Member
brm
July 18, 2011 7:08 am

I think Oblivia’s just mad because she didn’t take advantage of buying waterfront property on Vanuatu after the IPCC caused the displacement of the native population by claiming rising sea levels were going to wipe them out.

Hahahahaha! Oh, those silly natives! Move ’em out and bring in the celebs and jet setters. Look up! The sky is falling! Hahahahaha! Boy, I bet they sure feel stupid now!

Don’t worry, Obloviate. Maybe you can cash in on the next disaster-de-jour.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 19, 2011 2:49 am

I think Oblivia’s just mad because she didn’t take advantage of buying waterfront property on Vanuatu after the IPCC caused the displacement of the native population by claiming rising sea levels were going to wipe them out.
*********************
Don’t be ridiculous, Barb. If I were interested in buying waterfront property for a second home—which I’m not—-I’d be looking for it in France. 😉

I love the way these righties defend the rights of Big Business to pollute the air, the water, the land and its peoples….and arrogantly ridicule anyone who suggests that their position might be motivated more by self-interest than honest scientific findings. 😀

brm
Member
brm
July 20, 2011 7:45 am

“If I were interested in buying waterfront property for a second home—which I’m not—-I’d be looking for it in France”

Oh, now I understand! The ocean levels will rise in the South Pacific, but NOT in Europe.

How convenient.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
July 20, 2011 11:04 am

“If I were interested in buying waterfront property for a second home—which I’m not—-I’d be looking for it in France”

Oh, now I understand! The ocean levels will rise in the South Pacific, but NOT in Europe.

No Barb, you missed the point. She wants to live among her own kind, rude, American hating, snobs.

Olivia
Member
Olivia
July 20, 2011 12:00 pm

No Barb, you missed the point. She wants to live among her own kind, rude, American hating, snobs.
*************************
Apparently somebody doesn’t know a danged thing about France, but wants to pretend he does.

French people don’t hate “America,” PoppaJoe. Oh, the far righters are as xenophobic as far righters anywhere else in the world, but, for the most part, French people like Americans.

You should test it out for yourself sometime. As I’ve always told friends who asked for input, the quickest way to win a French person’s liking and respect is to show that you love their culture. And, in my (considerable) experience, it’s a VERY easy culture to love.

(Assuming you can leave the chip on your shoulder at home, and—as one French friend once put it—-resist the temptation to “play the conqueror” when abroad.) 😉