Sarah Palin On The Issues In The Washington Post
Travel A
The Washington Post is publishing Sarah Palin's columns on the issues.
This pretty much debunks the smears of whether she's knowledgeable; the
Washington Post obviously thinks she is.
By the time she's through, the "unqualified" rap will be long gone.

From From the WashingtonPost
.................................................................
Copenhagen's political science
By Sarah Palin
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
With the publication of damaging e-mails from a climate research center
in Britain, the radical environmental movement appears to face a tipping
point. The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change
experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns so
many of us have articulated on this issue.
This Story
Copenhagen's political science
The 'Cap And Tax' Dead End
The climate-change travesty
"Climate-gate," as the e-mails and other documents from the Climate
Research Unit at the University of East Anglia have become known,
exposes a highly politicized scientific circle -- the same circle whose
work underlies efforts at the Copenhagen climate change conference. The
agenda-driven policies being pushed in Copenhagen won't change the
weather, but they would change our economy for the worse.
The e-mails reveal that leading climate "experts" deliberately destroyed
records, manipulated data to "hide the decline" in global temperatures,
and tried to silence their critics by preventing them from publishing in
peer-reviewed journals. What's more, the documents show that there was
no real consensus even within the CRU crowd. Some scientists had strong
doubts about the accuracy of estimates of temperatures from centuries
ago, estimates used to back claims that more recent temperatures are
rising at an alarming rate.
This scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in
Copenhagen. I've always believed that policy should be based on sound
science, not politics. As governor of Alaska, I took a stand against
politicized science when I sued the federal government over its decision
to list the polar bear as an endangered species despite the fact that
the polar bear population had more than doubled. I got clobbered for my
actions by radical environmentalists nationwide, but I stood by my view
that adding a healthy species to the endangered list under the guise of
"climate change impacts" was an abuse of the Endangered Species Act.
This would have irreversibly hurt both Alaska's economy and the
nation's, while also reducing opportunities for responsible development.
Our representatives in Copenhagen should remember that good
environmental policymaking is about weighing real-world costs and
benefits -- not pursuing a political agenda. That's not to say I deny
the reality of some changes in climate -- far from it. I saw the impact
of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our
only Arctic state. I was one of the first governors to create a
subcabinet to deal specifically with the issue and to recommend
common-sense policies to respond to the coastal erosion, thawing
permafrost and retreating sea ice that affect Alaska's communities and
infrastructure.
But while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical
environmental trends, we can't say with assurance that man's activities
cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits
of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their
economic costs. And those costs are real. Unlike the proposals China and
India offered prior to Copenhagen -- which actually allow them to
increase their emissions -- President Obama's proposal calls for serious
cuts in our own long-term carbon emissions. Meeting such targets would
require Congress to pass its cap-and-tax plans, which will result in job
losses and higher energy costs (as Obama admitted during the campaign).
That's not exactly what most Americans are hoping for these days. And as
public opposition continues to stall Congress's cap-and-tax legislation,
Environmental Protection Agency bureaucrats plan to regulate carbon
emissions themselves, doing an end run around the American people.
In fact, we're not the only nation whose people are questioning climate
change schemes. In the European Union, energy prices skyrocketed after
it began a cap-and-tax program. Meanwhile, Australia's Parliament
recently defeated a cap-and-tax bill. Surely other nations will follow
suit, particularly as the climate e-mail scandal continues to unfold.
In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to
"restore science to its rightful place." But instead of staying home
from Copenhagen and sending a message that the United States will not be
a party to fraudulent scientific practices, the president has upped the
ante. He plans to fly in at the climax of the conference in hopes of
sealing a "deal." Whatever deal he gets, it will be no deal for the
American people. What Obama really hopes to bring home from Copenhagen
is more pressure to pass the Democrats' cap-and-tax proposal. This is a
political move. The last thing America needs is misguided legislation
that will raise taxes and cost jobs -- particularly when the push for
such legislation rests on agenda-driven science.
Without trustworthy science and with so much at stake, Americans should
be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference. The
president should boycott Copenhagen.
The writer was the 2008 Republican nominee for vice president and
governor of Alaska from 2006 to 2009.
© 2009 The Washington Post Company
Travel A
da pickle no spam
> The Washington Post is publishing Sarah Palin's columns on the issues.
> This pretty much debunks the smears of whether she's knowledgeable; the
> Washington Post obviously thinks she is.
>
> By the time she's through, the "unqualified" rap will be long gone.
Are you seriously naive enough to believe she wrote that herself?
lol.....................
joeturn
OrangeSFO
the climate or damage the environment.
ChrisRobin
> The Washington Post is publishing Sarah Palin's columns on the issues.
> This pretty much debunks the smears of whether she's knowledgeable; the
> Washington Post obviously thinks she is.
The WaPo has a long history of running columns from unqualified dumbasses
who have kept their jobs despite being consistently wrong about everything
they've ever written � see William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, George
Will, etc. Palin will fit right in.
> By the time she's through, the "unqualified" rap will be long gone.
From this column, it appears that Sarah Palin's plan to address climate
issues consists of running away from the primary venue for discussing the
topic. Kind of like how she treated her governorship. Hey, at least she's
consistent!
_____________________________________________________________________�
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
joeturn
> Sarah's right. It's just not possible that human industry can affect
> the climate or damage the environment.
joeturn
hanks
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Of course she didn't write that herself this woman
thinks it is wimpy to be literate.
Can you hope for anything more than for her to
debate the issues with OBama on live TV without notes?
That would really expose her for the fraud she is.
hank
FL Turbo
<a9d...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>On Dec 9 2009 12:10 PM, Travel A wrote:
>
>> The Washington Post is publishing Sarah Palin's columns on the issues.
>> This pretty much debunks the smears of whether she's knowledgeable; the
>> Washington Post obviously thinks she is.
>
>The WaPo has a long history of running columns from unqualified dumbasses
>who have kept their jobs despite being consistently wrong about everything
>they've ever written � see William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, George
>Will, etc. Palin will fit right in.
>
What has Charles Krauthammer been wrong about?
He is famous for his diagnosis of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome).
Liberals/Leftist have been confirming that diagnosis for at least 5
years already.
>> By the time she's through, the "unqualified" rap will be long gone.
>
>From this column, it appears that Sarah Palin's plan to address climate
>issues consists of running away from the primary venue for discussing the
>topic. Kind of like how she treated her governorship. Hey, at least she's
>consistent!
>
And what primary venue would that be?
CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN ?
Those venues have been totally ignoring the Climategate scandal for
about a month already now.
If they say anything at all, it is to agonize over the evil hackers
that put all that information out into public view.
So yes, she and so many other Conservatives have good reason to get
the news out through other venues.
http://newsbusters.org/
Al Gore Calls Sarah Palin A 'Global Warming Denier'
By Noel Sheppard | December 9, 2009 - 15:56
Nobel Laureate Al Gore Wednesday called former Alaska governor Sarah
Palin a "global warming denier."
Speaking with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, Gore also repeated his false
claim about ClimateGate e-mail messages obtained from Britain's
Climatic Research Unit: "the most recent one is like ten years ago."
As Andrew Bolt reported Wednesday at Australia's Herald Sun, the most
recent e-mail message obtained from CRU was sent less than a month ago
on November 12.
Unfortunately, much like his appearance on CNN earlier in the day,
Gore was playing fast and loose with the facts.
Sadly, his MSNBC interviewer was similarly disinterested in
challenging the former Vice President about his mistatements, and also
never once asked him about his own financial interests in this matter
misanthropic whackjob
> Sarah's right. It's just not possible that human industry can affect
> the climate or damage the environment.
Of course, all climate change is all human caused. The earth has never
ever naturally warmed or cooled on it's own. It's a good thing that we
had factories to spew out CO2 so that we could end that last pesky ice age
and make the earth more habitable again.
--
I don't care about you! Fuck you! - FEAR
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyM4uAJBujA
----�
Alim Nassor 1
> Sarah's right. It's just not possible that human industry can affect
> the climate or damage the environment.
Nope, not what she said. Quote "we can't say with assurance that
man's activities
cause weather changes"
I know reading is hard, but there are probably some night classes you
could attend.
Alim Nassor 1
>
> - Show quoted text -
Debate Obama without a teleprompter? Mark it down for Palin
igotskillz com
> On Dec 10, 3:55�am, OrangeSFO <intangible...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Sarah's right. � It's just not possible that human industry can affect
> > the climate or damage the environment.
>
> Nope, not what she said. Quote "we can't say with assurance that
> man's activities
> cause weather changes"
Everything affects the weather so she should smarten up.
Man doesnt affect it all that much yet but we could.
>
> I know reading is hard, but there are probably some night classes you
> could attend.
________________________________________________________________________�
Travel A
Are you seriously naive enough to believe she wrote that herself?
I wrote:
She posted this article on her Facebook page first. Of course she wrote
it. She was in city council, a mayor, on a state energy commission, the
governor of a state and a great VP candidate.
She knows a great deal about environmental and energy issues.
She's a great communicator and she can certainly communicate in writng
as well as in speech.
And you were the governor of what state?
Read it and weep. They'll be plenty more to come.
Travel A
Sarah's right. It's just not possible that human industry can affect
the climate or damage the environment.
I wrote:
She didn't say that. Try having one of the attendants read to you.
Travel A
Little Chrissy Parrot squawked:
The WaPo has a long history of running columns from unqualified
dumbasses who have kept their jobs despite being consistently wrong
about everything they've ever written � see William Kristol,
Charles Krauthammer, George Will, etc. Palin will fit right in.
I wrote:
Lol, your fear and hate of Sarah is showing. Plus, that's pretty good
company that she's in.
Travel A
Of course she didn't write that herself this woman thinks it is wimpy to
be literate
I wrote:
Sarah Palin has a BS degree in communications/journalism from The
University of Idaho, and you don't think she has the ability to write an
essay? (chortle)
Btw, she criticizes brainwashed education from Marxist infested,
eastern "elitist" schools; she doesn't criticize being literate, lol.
She wrote it herself, alright. That's why it's so good.
BillB
"Travel A" <nin...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:28818-4B2...@baytvnwsxa002.msntv.msn.com...
> She posted this article on her Facebook page first. Of course she
> wrote
> it.
Surprisingly, I tend to agree with you. It has junior high written all
over it. Maybe Willow helped.
joeturn
rain!
If a larger amount of carbon dioxide in the air has an effect on
global warming,then damaged plantlife has an emense effect on global
warming as with the lumberjacks.
BillB
"joeturn" <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4a432a5f-667e-4a2c...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
Joe, why does it seem like you are always on mushrooms?
Pepe Papon
<aca...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>On Dec 9 2009 11:55 AM, OrangeSFO wrote:
>
>> Sarah's right. It's just not possible that human industry can affect
>> the climate or damage the environment.
>
>Of course, all climate change is all human caused. The earth has never
>ever naturally warmed or cooled on it's own. It's a good thing that we
>had factories to spew out CO2 so that we could end that last pesky ice age
>and make the earth more habitable again.
Strawman alert! Strawman alert! Ding, ding, ding!
--
~ Seth Jackson
MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net
Pepe Papon
>"Travel A" <nin...@webtv.net> wrote in message
>news:28818-4B2...@baytvnwsxa002.msntv.msn.com...
>
>> She posted this article on her Facebook page first. Of course she
>> wrote
>> it.
That's one of the dumbest things Travel has ever written. And that's
saying something.
Jerry Sturdivant
"Alaska feels and sees the impact of climate change more than any other
state and we know that it's real."
-- Sarah Palin on the campaign trail
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LblCg7pIxb4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2IVytlHDcY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viFu7iB02xs
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#34353223
Under Gore Palin share heated exchange
Jerry (lol @ Sahah) 'n Vegas
- Before you find your handsome prince, you've got to kiss a lot of frogs
Travel A
I wrote:
She posted this article on her Facebook page first. Of course she wrote
it.
BillB heehawed:
Surprisingly, I tend to agree with you. It has junior high written all
over it. Maybe Willow helped.
I wrote:
Any idea how many notable people write in places like Facebook and
tweeter, moron?
Sarah Palin can get out her message out to a huge audience without left
wing media interference from the internet, She's been quite efective in
doing so; her posts have made big stories in the news media.
Her Facebook page gets a million hits, (literally).
It'll get more and more.
In fact, Al Gore has been on MSNBC referencing Sarah Palin's column
(from when it was first on Facebook) and was caught lying in trying to
defend himself. He said that the scientist e-mails were from ten years
ago, when in fact, they are recent e-mails. They don't come any dumber
than Al, Biden and you.
Also, Sarah Palin's column is excellent. Best I've seen on the subject.
Her expertise on the subject on energy and the environment from being
the Governor of Alaska is quite clear.
Plus, with the Washington Post publishing Sarah Palin, she has that in
addition to the internet to communicate with the people on a regular,
timely basis.
So, it looks like you're the dumb fuck, once again.
Travel A
Strawman alert! Strawman alert! Ding, ding, ding!
I wrote:
It's not necessary to announce your lame stawman arguments ahead of
time, we'll know.
Travel A
She posted this article on her Facebook page first. Of course she wrote
it.
Peepee Poupon whinnied
That's one of the dumbest things Travel has ever written. And that's
saying something.
I wrote:
Only to an idiot like you. Her Facebook page gets a million hits. That's
why she posts there. Also, the Washington Post published it. Is that
prestigious enough for you, retard?
Her Facebook and Tweeter pages can get exponentially more readers of her
comments than any newspaper, moron.
Plus, she has the respect of one of the major newspapers now. They'll
all want to carry her now. It'll be the only way they can increase sales
of their newspapers, (chortle).
ChrisRobin
> Little Chrissy Parrot squawked:
> The WaPo has a long history of running columns from unqualified
> dumbasses who have kept their jobs despite being consistently wrong
> about everything they've ever written � see William Kristol,
> Charles Krauthammer, George Will, etc. Palin will fit right in.
>
> I wrote:
> Lol, your fear and hate of Sarah is showing. Plus, that's pretty good
> company that she's in.
You're delusional. I think she's an idiot � no more, no less.
____________________________________________________________________�
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
ChrisRobin
> Sarah Palin has a BS degree in communications/journalism from The
> University of Idaho, and you don't think she has the ability to write an
> essay? (chortle)
>
> Btw, she criticizes brainwashed education from Marxist infested,
> eastern "elitist" schools; she doesn't criticize being literate, lol.
>
> She wrote it herself, alright. That's why it's so good.
She definitely wrote this, and the editors at Vanity Fair were nice enough
to clean it up for her:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/07/palin-speech-edit-200907?currentPage=1
Compare the two. Still think she wrote the WaPo article, you slack-jawed
moron?
------�
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
ChrisRobin
Yeah, I hear the University of Idaho offers some really challenging
courses.
-------�
Travel A
I wrote:
Sarah Palin has a BS degree in communications/journalism from The
University of Idaho, and you don't think she has the ability to write an
essay? (chortle)
Btw, she criticizes brainwashed education from Marxist infested, eastern
"elitist" schools; she doesn't criticize being literate, lol.
She wrote it herself, alright. That's why it's so good.
Little Chrissy Parrot cried:
She definitely wrote this, and the editors at Vanity Fair were nice
enough to clean it up for her:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/07/palin-speech-edit-200907?currentPage=1
Compare the two. Still think she wrote the WaPo article, you slack-jawed
moron?
I wrote:
Huh!? Lol, what does the left wing Vanity Fair, (who fears and hates
Sarah Palin) getting hold of some speech notes have to do with Sarah's
excellent Washington Post column, you imbecile. For one thing, speech
notes aren't to be published and they're used as a working guide. Also,
she didn't "definitely" write the speech notes.
That's not even a nice try. Vanity fair looks pretty stupid. You, on the
other hand, have mental problems.
You wackos are really scraping the bottom of the barrel for bogus
criticism, lol.
da pickle no spam
- Hanks wrote: (sort of)
-
- Of course she didn't write that herself this woman thinks it is
wimpy to
- be literate
-
- I wrote:
-
- Sarah Palin has a BS degree in communications/journalism from The
- University of Idaho, and you don't think she has the ability to
write an
- essay? (chortle)
-
- Btw, she criticizes brainwashed education from Marxist infested,
- eastern "elitist" schools; she doesn't criticize being literate,
lol.
-
- She wrote it herself, alright. That's why it's so good
Then why did Lynn Vincent write her book for her? God, you are so
naive. (chuckle)
On Dec 9, 11:18 pm, nine...@webtv.net (Travel A) wrote:
- Hanks wrote: (sort of)
-
- Of course she didn't write that herself this woman thinks it is
wimpy to
- be literate
-
- I wrote:
-
- Sarah Palin has a BS degree in communications/journalism from The
- University of Idaho, and you don't think she has the ability to
write an
- essay? (chortle)
-
- Btw, she criticizes brainwashed education from Marxist infested,
- eastern "elitist" schools; she doesn't criticize being literate,
lol.
-
- She wrote it herself, alright. That's why it's so good
Then why did Lynn Vincent write her book for her? God, you are so
naive. (chuckle)
On Dec 9, 11:18 pm, nine...@webtv.net (Travel A) wrote:
- Hanks wrote: (sort of)
-
- Of course she didn't write that herself this woman thinks it is
wimpy to
- be literate
-
- I wrote:
-
- Sarah Palin has a BS degree in communications/journalism from The
- University of Idaho, and you don't think she has the ability to
write an
- essay? (chortle)
-
- Btw, she criticizes brainwashed education from Marxist infested,
- eastern "elitist" schools; she doesn't criticize being literate,
lol.
-
- She wrote it herself, alright. That's why it's so good
Then why did Lynn Vincent write her book for her? God, you are so
naive. (chuckle)
ChrisRobin
> I wrote:
> Huh!? Lol, what does the left wing Vanity Fair, (who fears and hates
> Sarah Palin) getting hold of some speech notes have to do with Sarah's
> excellent Washington Post column, you imbecile. For one thing, speech
> notes aren't to be published and they're used as a working guide. Also,
> she didn't "definitely" write the speech notes.
>
> That's not even a nice try. Vanity fair looks pretty stupid. You, on the
> other hand, have mental problems.
>
> You wackos are really scraping the bottom of the barrel for bogus
> criticism, lol.
LMFAO! Those aren't "notes" � that's her actual speech, like all written
down and stuff. Apparently even the meaning of the word "transcript"
escapes you. Imagine my surprise.
_______________________________________________________________________�
Travel A
something as meaningless as marked-up notes. Pathetic.
The actual speech was good. You have your head up the ass of the failed
left wing smear machine.
misanthropic whackjob
> On Dec 10 2009 1:55 AM, Travel A wrote:
>
> > Little Chrissy Parrot squawked:
> > The WaPo has a long history of running columns from unqualified
> > dumbasses who have kept their jobs despite being consistently wrong
> > about everything they've ever written � see William Kristol,
> > Charles Krauthammer, George Will, etc. Palin will fit right in.
> >
> > I wrote:
> > Lol, your fear and hate of Sarah is showing. Plus, that's pretty good
> > company that she's in.
>
> You're delusional. I think she's an idiot � no more, no less.
You also think Charles Krauthammer is an idiot, which he is clearly not,
so your opinion carries zero weight.
--
I don't care about you! Fuck you! - FEAR
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyM4uAJBujA
--------�
Travel A
- Hanks wrote: (sort of)
- Of course she didn't write that herself this woman thinks it is wimpy
to
- be literate
-
- I wrote:
- Sarah Palin has a BS degree in communications/journalism from The
- University of Idaho, and you don't think she has the ability to write
an
- essay? (chortle)
-
- Btw, she criticizes brainwashed education from Marxist infested,
- eastern "elitist" schools; she doesn't criticize being literate, lol.
-
- She wrote it herself, alright. That's why it's so good
Some asshole wrote:
Then why did Lynn Vincent write her book for her? God, you are so naive.
(chuckle)
.........................................................................................
I wrote:
On what am I naive, asshole? I know the book wasn't totally
self-written.
Even Chris Mathews said that hardly anyone in politics writes their own
book. Even he said it's not a valid criticism.
It's a lot of work and time consuming to write a book, and they give it
to someone who has the time, a lot of experience and writes bios for a
living. Writing a book themselves would be something to do in
retirement.
Plus, she needed to get the book out fast to become a multi millionaire
and piss you off quicker.
One million copies sold in the first two weeks. It doesn't look like
anyone's paying any attention to idiotic, fabricated criticisms from
morons, (lol).
BillB
"Travel A" <nin...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:19875-4B2...@baytvnwsxa001.msntv.msn.com...
> I wrote:
> Any idea how many notable people write in places like Facebook and
> tweeter, moron?
I didn't say anything about Facebook and tweeter. In fact, I've never
even heard of tweeter. Is it like Twitter?
> Sarah Palin can get out her message out to a huge audience without
> left
> wing media interference from the internet, She's been quite efective
> in
> doing so; her posts have made big stories in the news media.
>
> Her Facebook page gets a million hits, (literally).
> It'll get more and more.
There are roughly 25 million adults in the US with sub-85 IQs. To
them, Sarah Palin appears extremely bright. Apparently, you are one of
them.
> In fact, Al Gore has been on MSNBC referencing Sarah Palin's column
> (from when it was first on Facebook) and was caught lying in trying
> to
> defend himself. He said that the scientist e-mails were from ten
> years
> ago, when in fact, they are recent e-mails. They don't come any
> dumber
> than Al, Biden and you.
> Also, Sarah Palin's column is excellent.
No, it isn't. I was surprised to find that it is very poorly written.
The editor has obviously cleaned it up for her, but the underlying
content, logic, phrasing, and vocabulary is at a high school level, at
best. But again, if you are one of those 25 million, which you appear
to be, I am sure it appears to be written by someone with a real grasp
on the subject. To the rest of us, it appears to be exactly what it
is: clich�d, right-wing drivel.
> Plus, with the Washington Post publishing Sarah Palin, she has that
> in
> addition to the internet to communicate with the people on a
> regular,
> timely basis.
I hope they publish some more. I had a good laugh.
"The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change
experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns
so
many of us have articulated on this issue."
lol
ChrisRobin
> You're sucking wind. It's laughable that you're dumb enough to even post
> something as meaningless as marked-up notes. Pathetic.
For f's sake Travel, the word "transcript" is clearly visible on the
damned thing. How is it possible for a human being to be this dense?
ChrisRobin
> You also think Charles Krauthammer is an idiot, which he is clearly not,
> so your opinion carries zero weight.
Krauthammer's an establishment shill who pipes up any time the White House
needs someone to defend their most indefensible policies; for instance, he
continued to parrot the fraudulent motives for the Iraq war for years
after the entire "official" rationale for it had been exposed as a
complete fabrication. You're a fool if you think there's even a kernel of
truth in anything this guy writes.
Perhaps "idiot" is an inaccurate term. Opportunist, propagandist,
chickenhawk, sell-out � all probably fit better. If there's even one shred
of morality or critical thought lurking behind his belligerent,
flag-humping defenses of torture, American/Israeli human rights abuses,
and illegal warmongering (to name just a few), I'll eat my sock. He's the
worst this country has to offer.
------�
ChrisRobin
> On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:13:01 -0800, "ChrisRobin"
> <a9d...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>
> >On Dec 9 2009 12:10 PM, Travel A wrote:
> >
> >> The Washington Post is publishing Sarah Palin's columns on the issues.
> >> This pretty much debunks the smears of whether she's knowledgeable; the
> >> Washington Post obviously thinks she is.
> >
> >The WaPo has a long history of running columns from unqualified dumbasses
> >who have kept their jobs despite being consistently wrong about everything
> >they've ever written � see William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, George
> >Will, etc. Palin will fit right in.
> >
> What has Charles Krauthammer been wrong about?
Iraq. Afghanistan. Torture. Obama (rather than slingling legitimate
criticisms � of which there are many � he always settles on the
disingenuous talking points rather than the real meat). Etc., etc.
> He is famous for his diagnosis of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome).
> Liberals/Leftist have been confirming that diagnosis for at least 5
> years already.
That's quite a resume.
> >> By the time she's through, the "unqualified" rap will be long gone.
> >
> >From this column, it appears that Sarah Palin's plan to address climate
> >issues consists of running away from the primary venue for discussing the
> >topic. Kind of like how she treated her governorship. Hey, at least she's
> >consistent!
> >
> And what primary venue would that be?
Uh, Copenhagen? This would have been abundantly clear had you bothered to
real Palin's op-ed.
--------�
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
FL Turbo
<a9d...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>On Dec 9 2009 7:35 PM, FL Turbo wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:13:01 -0800, "ChrisRobin"
>> <a9d...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >On Dec 9 2009 12:10 PM, Travel A wrote:
>> >
>> >> The Washington Post is publishing Sarah Palin's columns on the issues.
>> >> This pretty much debunks the smears of whether she's knowledgeable; the
>> >> Washington Post obviously thinks she is.
>> >
>> >The WaPo has a long history of running columns from unqualified dumbasses
>> >who have kept their jobs despite being consistently wrong about everything
>> >they've ever written � see William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, George
>> >Will, etc. Palin will fit right in.
>> >
>> What has Charles Krauthammer been wrong about?
>
>Iraq. Afghanistan. Torture. Obama (rather than slingling legitimate
>criticisms � of which there are many � he always settles on the
>disingenuous talking points rather than the real meat). Etc., etc.
>
I think he very succinctly slices and dices Liberal talking points.
I think he hits the mark about 90% of the time.
Now, I don't expect you to agree about that.
The differences of political opinion between me and you are close to
about 180 degrees.
>> He is famous for his diagnosis of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome).
>> Liberals/Leftist have been confirming that diagnosis for at least 5
>> years already.
>
>That's quite a resume.
It's just one example of many.
I'll keep it in mind if you want more examples.
Stay tuned for further issues when he weighs in on the next issue on
which you have an opinion.
>
>> >> By the time she's through, the "unqualified" rap will be long gone.
>> >
>> >From this column, it appears that Sarah Palin's plan to address climate
>> >issues consists of running away from the primary venue for discussing the
>> >topic. Kind of like how she treated her governorship. Hey, at least she's
>> >consistent!
>> >
>> And what primary venue would that be?
>
>Uh, Copenhagen? This would have been abundantly clear had you bothered to
>real Palin's op-ed.
>
Um, er, isn't the whole Copenhagen meeting all about the "climate
change" debate?
Isn't that the whole venue at Copenhagen?
Aren't they using the whole AGW scare to extort money from the USA and
other developed countries?
Personally, I thought she covered the whole ClimateGate scandal very
well.
Look at Alex Jones on PrisonPlanet.
He "gets" it this time.
I even quoted him in one post.
It scared me.
Me quoting Alex Jones?
If that isn't a sign of the Impending Apocalypse, I don't know what
is.
Well, since then the sun has continued to rise in the east, so I'm not
quite as apprehensive as I was.
FL Turbo
It sounds to me like Krauthammer has a long history of goring your ox.
da pickle no spam
- asshole?
-idiotic, fabricated criticisms from
- morons.
I always know when I’ve won the argument when someone who is mistaken
starts name calling. Better luck next time.
PS
Here’s and excerpt from the New York Times book review on GOING ROGUE.
-------------------------------------------------------
All in all Ms. Palin emerges from “Going Rogue” as an eager player in
the blame game, ungrateful to the McCain campaign for putting her on
the national stage.
A CNN poll taken last month indicates that 7 out of 10 Americans now
think Ms. Palin is not qualified to be president, and even as ardent a
conservative as Charles Krauthammer lamented “the paucity of any Palin
record or expressed conviction on the major issues of our time.”
-------------------------------------------------------
If you’d like to read the entire review:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/books/15book.html
By the way if you had a real computer and knew how to check headers
you would know that I am not RiskyBiz (not that I care either way).
But you are showing that you are computer-illiterate.
Travel A
Sarah) syndrome.
It was an excellent article, she's quite intelligent, and the Washington
Post has Sarah on the OP-ED Page; verrry prestigious you know, with the
Virginia "horsey set."
I hope they add pictures of Sarah, because she's so adorable.
Ta ta, from the ohhhh so trendy Beltway, for now.
Travel A
Like I say, Parrot:
Her speech was very good (except for the ducks quacking in the
background;... were you there!?)
Travel A
bogus as you.
Don't wear out Google now.
joeturn
> "joeturn" <joeturn2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4a432a5f-667e-4a2c...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > The Canadians seem to think their forest are being devistated by
> > acid
> > rain!
>
> > If a larger amount of carbon dioxide in the air has an effect on
> > global warming,then damaged plantlife has an emense effect on global
> > warming as with the lumberjacks.
>
> Joe, why does it seem like you are always on mushrooms?
The brainwashed society always think that the posters of reality have
to be on drugs!
You are one of 98 percent Billbo so dont take it personally you fit
the critieria the Government has decieved.
They will not close down the power plants that burn opecs products nor
will they continue with their investigation into acid rain!
There is soooo much money being made from killing the environment that
the EPA wont say that the World Trade Centers were
a health hazard and exposing the whole city of NY to asbestos
poisoning was a direct offense to Government control!
Soo before the paperwork in the Soloman Building got exposed it too
was destroyed by controled demolitian just like tower one and tower
two
and the Morray Building in OK city as it was on the verge of exposing
the Government connection to the CIA plots to create war!
My government took advantage of a bad situation and destoried all
evidence of pollution on an enormous scale and turned it into an
invitation to war!
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
FL Turbo
<a9d...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>On Dec 9 2009 7:35 PM, FL Turbo wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:13:01 -0800, "ChrisRobin"
>> <a9d...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >On Dec 9 2009 12:10 PM, Travel A wrote:
>> >
>> >> The Washington Post is publishing Sarah Palin's columns on the issues.
>> >> This pretty much debunks the smears of whether she's knowledgeable; the
>> >> Washington Post obviously thinks she is.
>> >
>> >The WaPo has a long history of running columns from unqualified dumbasses
>> >who have kept their jobs despite being consistently wrong about everything
>> >they've ever written � see William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, George
>> >Will, etc. Palin will fit right in.
>> >
>> What has Charles Krauthammer been wrong about?
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Now, I can't imagine that any National Review article would convince
you about an issue like Prisonplanet could, but here it is.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjA4Y2VlOGU4MDQ3MDc0MWRkN2ExMzIzMjdmZWMwYmE=
December 11, 2009 12:00 AM
By Charles Krauthammer
In the 1970s and early �80s, having seized control of the U.N.
apparatus (by power of numbers), Third World countries decided to cash
in.
OPEC was pulling off the greatest wealth transfer from rich to poor in
history.
Why not them? So in grand U.N. declarations and conferences, they
began calling for a �New International Economic Order.� The NIEO�s
essential demand was simple: to transfer fantastic chunks of wealth
from the industrialized West to the Third World.
On what grounds? In the name of equality � wealth redistribution via
global socialism � with a dose of post-colonial reparations thrown in.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the day Copenhagen opened, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
claimed jurisdiction over the regulation of carbon emissions by
declaring them an �endangerment� to human health.
Since we operate an overwhelmingly carbon-based economy, the EPA will
be regulating practically everything. No institution that emits more
than 250 tons of CO2 a year will fall outside EPA control.
This means over a million building complexes, hospitals, plants,
schools, businesses, and similar enterprises. (The EPA proposes
regulating emissions only above 25,000 tons, but it has no such
authority.)
Not since the creation of the Internal Revenue Service has a federal
agency been given more intrusive power over every aspect of economic
life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
With the Senate blocking President Obama�s cap-and-trade carbon
legislation, the EPA coup d�etat served as the administration�s loud
response to Webb: The hell we can�t.
With this EPA �endangerment� finding, we can do as we wish with
carbon. Either the Senate passes cap-and-trade, or the EPA will impose
even more draconian measures: all cap, no trade.
Forget for a moment the economic effects of severe carbon chastity.
There�s the matter of constitutional decency.
If you want to revolutionize society � as will drastic carbon
regulation and taxation in an energy economy that is 85 percent
carbon-based � you do it through Congress reflecting popular will.
Not by administrative fiat of EPA bureaucrats.
Congress should not just resist this executive overreaching, but trump
it: Amend existing clean-air laws and restore their original intent by
excluding CO2 from EPA control and reserving that power for Congress
and future legislation.
Do it now. Do it soon. Because Big Brother isn�t lurking in CIA cloak.
He�s knocking on your door, smiling under an EPA cap.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There ya go.
Another Krauthammer original: "severe carbon chastity"
Krauthammer.Hammer.Nail.BANG
From what I read of your political opinions, I can't imagine that you
would go along with a massive Federal bureaucracy like the EPA
assuming total control of your life.
I could be wrong, though.
FL Turbo
Hah!
So there, BillB.
I'd like to see you refute that.
BTW
Have you heard enough about Hugo Chavez in Venezuela to determine
whether or not he is a Ruthless Commie Thug like the Castro brothers?
Do you think that Obama read the book that Hugo gave him when they
were doing the Metrosexual Male bonding routine in Venezuela?
Or had Obama already read the book before Hugo gave him a fresh copy?
Inquiring minds want to know.
joeturn
http://www.unexplainable.net/artman/publish/article_12014.shtml
joeturn
How much do you think the federal government can be taxed for their
Global warming project?
Do you think Al gore should be awarded a nobel piece prized for
covering up HAARP damage to the ozone?
Here is the big picture and HAARP is an intensified TESLA creation
not
only for mind control or weather modifications but can create
Katrinas, tsunamis,earthquakes and global warming!
scroll down to 1908 and start reading<I;-)
http://www.frank.germano.com/tunguska.htm
http://us.figu.org/portal/Factoids/HAARPProject/tabid/110/Default.aspx
susan
"Alim Nassor 1"
>Debate Obama without a teleprompter? Mark it down for Palin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KpwHrBnQeE
FL Turbo
<joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>FL Turbo
>
>How much do you think the federal government can be taxed for their
>Global warming project?
>
>Do you think Al gore should be awarded a nobel piece prized for
>covering up HAARP damage to the ozone?
>
Well, I think it was a travesty that he didn't get the Noble Prize for
inventing the Internet.
I think his Prize was mostly just to make up for not getting it when
he should have.
I could be wrong, though.
>Here is the big picture and HAARP is an intensified TESLA creation
>not
>only for mind control or weather modifications but can create
>Katrinas, tsunamis,earthquakes and global warming!
>
>scroll down to 1908 and start reading<I;-)
>
>
>http://www.frank.germano.com/tunguska.htm
>
>
>http://us.figu.org/portal/Factoids/HAARPProject/tabid/110/Default.aspx
>
We certainly have had a whole lot of weather since 1908.
I can't deny that fact.
Some people have problems with ringing in their ears.
The doctors call it like "tintinitus" or something.
Maybe from wearing tinfoil helmuts the wrong side out?
Hmm.
What's the frequency of a Harp, anyway?
It's something to think about.
susan
"FL Turbo"
> Well, I think it was a travesty that he didn't get the Noble Prize for
> inventing the Internet.
> I think his Prize was mostly just to make up for not getting it when
> he should have.
>
> I could be wrong, though.
Are you talking about Al *the North Pole is going to melt in 5 years* Gore?
FL Turbo
wrote:
Yes.
One and the same as Al *the temperature at the earth's core is at
millions of degrees* Gore.
Whatever, I think he still deserves a prize for inventing the
Internet.
Bill T
Yeah, but what has he done for the Internet lately?
FL Turbo
Well, I can't speak for most people on the Inet, but for me he has
provided a lot of comedic moments to exploit.
The artwork on the cover of his latest book has contributed quite a
few.
I often wonder about the people who were like, you know, totally
awestruck by his movie "An Inconvenient Truth".
How many of them have since realized that he is scientifically
illiterate?
Some credible polling organization should conduct an Inet poll to see
how many people out there still consider him a World Class Authority
on global climate.
Maybe that's been done already.
My eyes tend to glaze over when I read something about him, unless he
has just said something incredibly stupid.
I could easily have missed it.
Jerry Sturdivant
"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
news:4jdgi551nn6v4q21t...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:57:42 -0800 (PST), joeturn
> <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>FL Turbo
>>
>>How much do you think the federal government can be taxed for their
>>Global warming project?
>>
>>Do you think Al gore should be awarded a nobel piece prized for
>>covering up HAARP damage to the ozone?
>>
> Well, I think it was a travesty that he didn't get the Noble Prize for
> inventing the Internet.
You still believe Rush Limbaugh and FOX when they said Al Gore claimed to
have invented the Internet?
I still have that bridge for sale....
Jerry (fishing for suckers) 'n Vegas
- Taxidermy Cafe: Let us stuff you.
Tim Norfolk
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:07:58 -0800, Bill T <wct...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >On 12/15/2009 6:50 PM, FL Turbo wrote:
> >> wrote:
>
> >> Yes.
> >> One and the same as Al *the temperature at the earth's core is at
> >> millions of degrees* Gore.
>
> >> Whatever, I think he still deserves a prize for inventing the
> >> Internet.
>
> >Yeah, but what has he done for the Internet lately?
>
> Well, I can't speak for most people on the Inet, but for me he has
> provided a lot of comedic moments to exploit.
>
> The artwork on the cover of his latest book has contributed quite a
> few.
>
> I often wonder about the people who were like, you know, totally
> awestruck by his movie "An Inconvenient Truth".
> How many of them have since realized that he is scientifically
> illiterate?
>
> Some credible polling organization should conduct an Inet poll to see
> how many people out there still consider him a World Class Authority
> on global climate.
>
> Maybe that's been done already.
> My eyes tend to glaze over when I read something about him, unless he
> has just said something incredibly stupid.
>
> I could easily have missed it.
How many politicians and pundits are not scientifically illiterate? My
favourite for ignorance is Lesley Stahl on '60 Minutes'.
FL Turbo
<jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>news:4jdgi551nn6v4q21t...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:57:42 -0800 (PST), joeturn
>> <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>FL Turbo
>>>
>>>How much do you think the federal government can be taxed for their
>>>Global warming project?
>>>
>>>Do you think Al gore should be awarded a nobel piece prized for
>>>covering up HAARP damage to the ozone?
>>>
>> Well, I think it was a travesty that he didn't get the Noble Prize for
>> inventing the Internet.
>
>You still believe Rush Limbaugh and FOX when they said Al Gore claimed to
>have invented the Internet?
>
What??
Are you telling me that Gore DIDN'T invent the Internet?
Well for goodness sake, why didn't he just admit it then?
I've never heard Gore deny it, even once.
Oh well.
Dumb ole me.
But he still can write a damn good poem, can't he?
>I still have that bridge for sale....
>
How much are you asking?
If it's in a good location, I might be interested.
>
>Jerry (fishing for suckers) 'n Vegas
>
>- Taxidermy Cafe: Let us stuff you.
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Turbo Veterinary Clinic/ Taxidermy Studio.
"Either way - You get your dog back."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
susan
Pepe Papon
wrote:
Too bad he never claimed to have invented it.
--
~ Seth Jackson
MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>>> Well, I think it was a travesty that he didn't get the Noble Prize for
>>> inventing the Internet.
>>
>>You still believe Rush Limbaugh and FOX when they said Al Gore claimed to
>>have invented the Internet?
>>
>What??
>Are you telling me that Gore DIDN'T invent the Internet?
>Well for goodness sake, why didn't he just admit it then?
>I've never heard Gore deny it, even once.
You never heard him say anything one way or the other about inventing
the Internet.
>Oh well.
>Dumb ole me.
You said it, not me.
bub
<hitme...@mindspring.dot.com.invalid> wrote:
>You never heard him say anything one way or the other about inventing
>the Internet.
no, he said he took the initiative in creating the internet.
Jerry Sturdivant
"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
news:v62ji5526g2qaola6...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 05:23:24 -0800, "Jerry Sturdivant"
> <jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>>news:4jdgi551nn6v4q21t...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:57:42 -0800 (PST), joeturn
>>> <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>FL Turbo
>>>>
>>>>How much do you think the federal government can be taxed for their
>>>>Global warming project?
>>>>
>>>>Do you think Al gore should be awarded a nobel piece prized for
>>>>covering up HAARP damage to the ozone?
>>>>
>>> Well, I think it was a travesty that he didn't get the Noble Prize for
>>> inventing the Internet.
>>
>>You still believe Rush Limbaugh and FOX when they said Al Gore claimed to
>>have invented the Internet?
>>
> What??
> Are you telling me that Gore DIDN'T invent the Internet?
See what you get for only watching FOX?
> Well for goodness sake, why didn't he just admit it then?
> I've never heard Gore deny it, even once.
I have. But then, I don't watch FOX.
> Oh well.
> Dumb ole me.
Don't feel bad. Many right wingers still believe that; it's part of the cool
aid.
Jerry (drinking wine) 'n Vegas
- It said "insert disk #3" but onty two will fit...
Jerry Sturdivant
"susan" <hotd...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:Q0gWm.1$8e...@newsfe03.iad...
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnFJ8cHAlco
>
>>>You still believe Rush Limbaugh and FOX when they said Al Gore claimed to
>>>have invented the Internet?
"Creating the internet." You do know the difference between inventing and
creating, right? We actually do have him to thank for seeing the Internet's
potential and creating additional funding for it's expansion. He was a
visionary then and still is.
Jerry 'n Vegas
- File not found. Should I fake it? (Y/N)
FL Turbo
<jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>"susan" <hotd...@charter.net> wrote in message
>news:Q0gWm.1$8e...@newsfe03.iad...
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnFJ8cHAlco
>>
>>>>You still believe Rush Limbaugh and FOX when they said Al Gore claimed to
>>>>have invented the Internet?
>
>
>"Creating the internet." You do know the difference between inventing and
>creating, right? We actually do have him to thank for seeing the Internet's
>potential and creating additional funding for it's expansion. He was a
>visionary then and still is.
>
Is your concept of a visionary one who declares that the temperature
at the earth's core is in the Millions of degrees?
I spose you think that RGP's very own Skillz and Joeturn are also
visionaries.
"Earth to Jerry !! "
"Come in, Jerry !! "
FL Turbo
<jer...@cox.net> wrote:
Well, I certainly am dumb today.
>
>Jerry (drinking wine) 'n Vegas
>
>- It said "insert disk #3" but onty two will fit...
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lady to computer help line:
"My computer doesn't work any more."
Help line to lady:
"Well, first check to see that it's still plugged in to the wall
outlet."
"I can't see down there, the lights all went out about 5 minutes ago."
Pepe Papon
Yes, that's exactly what he said, and it happens to be true.
Jerry Sturdivant
"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
news:uqjli51109vr99uj3...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 06:32:10 -0800, "Jerry Sturdivant"
> <jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"susan" <hotd...@charter.net> wrote in message
>>news:Q0gWm.1$8e...@newsfe03.iad...
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnFJ8cHAlco
>>>
>>>>>You still believe Rush Limbaugh and FOX when they said Al Gore claimed
>>>>>to
>>>>>have invented the Internet?
>>
>>
>>"Creating the internet." You do know the difference between inventing and
>>creating, right? We actually do have him to thank for seeing the
>>Internet's
>>potential and creating additional funding for it's expansion. He was a
>>visionary then and still is.
>>
>
> Is your concept of a visionary one who declares that the temperature
> at the earth's core is in the Millions of degrees?
No, you once again dodge the facts. I believe Al Gore drove through a stop
light once. And he misspelled a word when writing one of he speeches. Are
you under the impression that would mean he didn't help expand the Internet?
Al Gore did not 'invent the Internet.' He saw it's potential and worked to
expanding it's funding. Please feel free to dodge this and change the
subject; it will, in fact, change nothing.
Jerry 'n Vegas
- Raise your own dope! Plant a fundamentalist.
joeturn
> "FL Turbo" <noem...@notime.com> wrote in message
>
> news:uqjli51109vr99uj3...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 06:32:10 -0800, "Jerry Sturdivant"
>
> >>"susan" <hotda...@charter.net> wrote in message
> >>news:Q0gWm.1$8e...@newsfe03.iad...
> >>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnFJ8cHAlco
>
> >>>>>You still believe Rush Limbaugh and FOX when they said Al Gore claimed
> >>>>>to
> >>>>>have invented the Internet?
>
> >>"Creating the internet." You do know the difference between inventing and
> >>creating, right? We actually do have him to thank for seeing the
> >>Internet's
> >>potential and creating additional funding for it's expansion. He was a
> >>visionary then and still is.
>
> > Is your concept of a visionary one who declares that the temperature
> > at the earth's core is in the Millions of degrees?
>
> No, you once again dodge the facts. I believe Al Gore drove through a stop
> light once. And he misspelled a word when writing one of he speeches. Are
> you under the impression that would mean he didn't help expand the Internet?
> Al Gore did not 'invent the Internet.' He saw it's potential and worked to
> expanding it's funding. Please feel free to dodge this and change the
> subject; it will, in fact, change nothing.
>
> Jerry 'n Vegas
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Why does Al Gore not mention HAARPs effect on global warming Jerry?
Jerry Sturdivant
"joeturn" <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4be8e61c-f6ae-4d5a...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
I though that was some sort of rock band. What are you getting at?
Jerry 'n Vegas
- Please save the above drivel for future reference!
joeturn
> "joeturn" <joeturn2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
This proves you think like Andy
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_thread/thread/8e089345a1fcaf32
Travel A
Too bad he never claimed to have invented it.
I wrote:
Maybe he did. Maybe Katie Couric asked Al if he's ever heard of the
internet.
And Al said, (just blowing-off a dumb question from the evil midget)
"Heard of it! hahaha, I invented it! hahaha"
Doesn't it just suck out loud when the right wing twists the substance
of quotes around to make Al look bad, Peepee?
We all know that YOU wouldn't do anything that towards a notable
conservative, don't we Peepee. You have waaay too much integrity to
misrepresent the truth like that, don't you Peepee.
Jerry Sturdivant
"joeturn" <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4eb6c585-7bb1-4b41...@d20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
Well; I don't know Andy; and the HAARP is kind of interesting (I took part
if a few aspects of it. many years ago under an different name. As to it's
ability to start floods, etc, I don't think so. Did Gore talk about this?
Jerry 'n Vegas
- Read the dictionary backwards and look for secret messages.
joeturn
>
> Well; I don't know Andy; and the HAARP is kind of interesting (I took part
> if a few aspects of it. many years ago under an different name. As to it's
> ability to start floods, etc, I don't think so. Did Gore talk about this?
>
> Jerry 'n Vegas
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
No he like yourself is trying to guide the herd away from its
potentual!
Just like the jetstream.tradewinds there are rivers of water in our
atmosphere that can be diverted causing drought or floods in
designated areas!
What was your funtion at haarp Jerry?
Jerry Sturdivant
"joeturn" <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:21974d6b-08a3-4d78...@d21g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 18, 8:16 pm, "Jerry Sturdivant" <jerr...@cox.net> wrote:
>> "joeturn" <joeturn2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:4eb6c585-7bb1-4b41...@d20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>> >> > Why does Al Gore not mention HAARPs effect on global warming Jerry?
>> >> I though that was some sort of rock band. What are you getting at?
>> >> Jerry 'n Vegas
>>> This proves you think like Andy
>> >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_thread/threa...
>> Well; I don't know Andy; and the HAARP is kind of interesting (I took
>> part
>> if a few aspects of it. many years ago under an different name. As to
>> it's
>> ability to start floods, etc, I don't think so. Did Gore talk about this?
> No he like yourself is trying to guide the herd away from its
> potentual!
Do you often make up stuff when you're in a corner? what the hell makes you
think I try to 'herd' anybody? Show your work. Quote me. Show where Gore
"herded" people from HF testing. Is this something you hear from that weado,
Rush Limbaugh?
> Just like the jetstream.tradewinds there are rivers of water in our
> atmosphere that can be diverted causing drought or floods in
> designated areas!
Okay, never mind, just don't bother replying. It's obvious you're just
another right wing weardo.
Jerry (obviously wasting him time) 'n Vegas
- If they come with a warrant, let them in. G. Gordon Liddy
joeturn
You fell to acknowledge the effect HAARP has on Global Warming by side
stepping the issue!
I heard a polititian once say when he was asked if he would seek
reelection> His reply was "no politics is poison"
So I also dont do politics left or right as I can see past the drivel.
I expect you still believe in the vote, how elementary?
Gore did not expose the HAARP connection to Global Warming at all and
this is actually the only contributing factor that should have been
discussed!
They wont come with a warrant they send lightning bolts via HAARP to
my address but I have the tesla shield around me!
Start reading the last paragraph of Figure 6. It will explain the
rivers of water in our atmosphere!
http://www.climatesci.org/publications/pdf/quante.pdf
This link will help you understand why our Reptilian Government does
not want to associate Tesla to Haarp.
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=96968
Tesla owned this one!
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/esp_ciencia_tunguska02.htm
FL Turbo
A most excellent article.
I highly recommend it to anyone who doesn't want to get bogged down in
the math and highly technical details, but wants to understand the
work of Tesla.
FL Turbo
<jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>news:uqjli51109vr99uj3...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 06:32:10 -0800, "Jerry Sturdivant"
>> <jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"susan" <hotd...@charter.net> wrote in message
>>>news:Q0gWm.1$8e...@newsfe03.iad...
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnFJ8cHAlco
>>>>
>>>>>>You still believe Rush Limbaugh and FOX when they said Al Gore claimed
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>have invented the Internet?
>>>
>>>
>>>"Creating the internet." You do know the difference between inventing and
>>>creating, right? We actually do have him to thank for seeing the
>>>Internet's
>>>potential and creating additional funding for it's expansion. He was a
>>>visionary then and still is.
>>>
>>
>> Is your concept of a visionary one who declares that the temperature
>> at the earth's core is in the Millions of degrees?
>
>No, you once again dodge the facts. I believe Al Gore drove through a stop
>light once. And he misspelled a word when writing one of he speeches. Are
>you under the impression that would mean he didn't help expand the Internet?
>Al Gore did not 'invent the Internet.' He saw it's potential and worked to
>expanding it's funding. Please feel free to dodge this and change the
>subject; it will, in fact, change nothing.
>
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/1999/03/18390
No Credit Where It's Due
03.11.99
WASHINGTON -- It's a time-honored tradition for presidential hopefuls
to claim credit for other people's successes.
But Al Gore as the father of the Internet?
That's what the campaigner in chief told CNN's Wolf Blitzer during an
interview Tuesday evening. Blitzer asked Gore how he was different
than other presumptive Democratic challengers, such as Bill Bradley.
"What do you have to bring to this that he doesn't necessarily bring
to this process?"
Replied Gore: "I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins, and
it'll be comprehensive and sweeping, and I hope that it'll be
compelling enough to draw people toward it.... I've traveled to every
part of this country during the last six years."
Then came the kicker: "During my service in the United States
Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
Huh?
Preliminary discussions of how the ARPANET would be designed began in
1967, and a request for proposals went out the following year. In
1969, the Defense Department commissioned the ARPANET.
Gore was 21-years-old at the time. He wasn't even done with law school
at Vanderbilt University. It would be eight more years before Gore
would be elected to the US House of Representatives as a freshman
Democrat with scant experience in passing legislation, let alone
ambitious proposals.
By that time, file copying -- via the UUCP protocol -- was beginning.
Email was flourishing. The culture of the Internet was starting to
develop through the Jargon File and the SF-Lovers mailing list.
Of course, politicians weren't completely unaware of the Internet.
According to one account, when Senator Ted Kennedy learned in 1968
that Massachusetts-based BBN had won the ARPA contract for an
"interface message processor," he sent a congratulatory telegram. It
thanked the upstanding folks at BBN for their ecumenical spirit in
devising an "interfaith message processor."
Blitzer, unfortunately, didn't appear to know any of that. After Gore
took credit for the Internet, Blitzer simply moved on talk about polls
showing Texas governor George W. Bush and Elizabeth Dole ahead of the
vice president.
Gore has taken credit for popularizing the term "information
superhighway" and around 1991 penned related articles for publications
such as Byte magazine. But the term "data highway" has been used as
far back as 1975, before Gore entered Congress.
In 1990, Gore introduced a bill that would allow the federal
government to enter the business of crafting software for teachers to
use. Another Gore plan would create a new federal research center for
educational computing to support an "information systems highway."
But the system he envisioned bears little resemblance to the
PC-dominated Internet.
"Supercomputers are the steam locomotives of the information age,"
then-Senator Gore was quoted as saying in one article published in
1990. "In the Industrial Age, steam locomotives didn't do much good
until the railroad tracks were laid down across the nation. Similarly,
we now have supercomputers going into the seventh generation of
supercomputers, but we don't have the interstate highways that we need
to connect them.
"Within four years, the top-of-the-line US$20 million supercomputers
will cost less than $400,000. A few years after that, they will be in
the $10,000 to $20,000 range."
But the development of the Net has resembled less a government-managed
industrial project -- such as the orderly interstate-highway systems
Gore hoped for -- and more an anarchic sprawl.
"Gore played no positive role in the decisions that led to the
creation of the Internet as it now exists -- that is, in the opening
of the Internet to commercial traffic," said Steve Allen, vice
president for communications at the conservative Progress and Freedom
Foundation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not that I would want to call AlGore a "liar".
A "serial exaggerator" is what he is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milwaukee, WI - "I'm very familiar with the importance of dairy
farming in Wisconsin. I've spent the night on a dairy farm here in
Wisconsin.
If I'm entrusted with the presidency, you'll have someone who is very
familiar with what the Wisconsin dairy industry is all about."
(Sources: Sunday, June 18, Atlanta Journal Constitution and The
Washington Post, June 14, 2000)
joeturn
Can you explain why your Reptilian Government covered up free energy,
yet Is concered with Global Warming?
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=98589
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=96968
I mean they stripped Tesla to the bone instead of giving him a Nobel
Peace Prize$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Jerry Sturdivant
"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
> Replied Gore: "I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins, and
> it'll be comprehensive and sweeping, and I hope that it'll be
> compelling enough to draw people toward it.... I've traveled to every
> part of this country during the last six years."
>
> Then came the kicker: "During my service in the United States
> Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>
> Huh?
Correct. He got the funding and pushed for it. And got it. Now ask who
INVENTED the Internet.
> Of course, politicians weren't completely unaware of the Internet.
Until Gore saw it's potential and pushed for it's expantion.
> Blitzer, unfortunately, didn't appear to know any of that. After Gore
> took credit for the Internet ....
Give it up. He never said he invented it because he didn't.
> In 1990, Gore introduced a bill that would allow the federal
> government to enter the business of crafting software for
> teachers to use. Another Gore plan would create a new federal
> research center for educational computing to support an
> "information systems highway."
As I said, he pushed for it. He did not invent it and he never said he did.
> Not that I would want to call AlGore a "liar".
You can't because he didn't lie.
Does it really bother you that much that a Democrat noticed something a
great as the Internet and pushed for it? Does it really bother you that much
that Gore helped notify the world about global warming and won an award for
it?
You're a political hack
Jerry 'n Vegas
- Reagan came to power because his predecessor was weak, not oppressive.
FL Turbo
FL Turbo
wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:09:18 -0800, "Jerry Sturdivant"
><jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>>
>>> Replied Gore: "I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins, and
>>> it'll be comprehensive and sweeping, and I hope that it'll be
>>> compelling enough to draw people toward it.... I've traveled to every
>>> part of this country during the last six years."
>>>
>>> Then came the kicker: "During my service in the United States
>>> Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>>>
Oooops.
Pushed the wrong button once again.
I've been playing on the computer too long today.
Stay tuned for further developments tomorrow in the Legend of AlGore.
(Truly a Legend in his own mind.)
Jerry Sturdivant
"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
news:0d4ri557f5uhqcdt8...@4ax.com...
And, as much as you obviously hate to admit it, in his own time.
Jerry 'n Vegas
- Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.
FL Turbo
<jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>
>> Replied Gore: "I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins, and
>> it'll be comprehensive and sweeping, and I hope that it'll be
>> compelling enough to draw people toward it.... I've traveled to every
>> part of this country during the last six years."
>>
>> Then came the kicker: "During my service in the United States
>> Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>>
>> Huh?
>
>
>Correct. He got the funding and pushed for it. And got it. Now ask who
>INVENTED the Internet.
>
>
>
>
>> Of course, politicians weren't completely unaware of the Internet.
>
>Until Gore saw it's potential and pushed for it's expantion.
>
Yeah.
Him and about 10,000 other people.
But he was the only one who was "instrumental", eh?
That's about like one single violinist in an orchestra claiming that
his playing was the thing that made them sound so good.
>
>
>> Blitzer, unfortunately, didn't appear to know any of that. After Gore
>> took credit for the Internet ....
>
>Give it up. He never said he invented it because he didn't.
>
>
>> In 1990, Gore introduced a bill that would allow the federal
>> government to enter the business of crafting software for
>> teachers to use. Another Gore plan would create a new federal
>> research center for educational computing to support an
>> "information systems highway."
>
>As I said, he pushed for it. He did not invent it and he never said he did.
>
>
>> Not that I would want to call AlGore a "liar".
>
>You can't because he didn't lie.
>
>Does it really bother you that much that a Democrat noticed something a
>great as the Internet and pushed for it? Does it really bother you that much
>that Gore helped notify the world about global warming and won an award for
>it?
>
It bothers me when politicians are successful in pushing some Myth or
the other.
Here, for your reading enjoyment, is an opinion from someone writing
about the Myth of Green jobs that Obama is pushing.
Be patient reading it.
He gets around to Algore after a while.
http://www.theblogmocracy.com/2009/12/20/green-jobs-and-other-fairy-tales/
Green Jobs, and Other Fairy Tales
by snork ( 101 Comments � )
Filed under Barack Obama, Economy, Global Warming Hoax, Progressives,
Science, Technology at December 20th, 2009 - 5:00 am
From Ron Bailey at Reason Magazine, this piece dissects what �green
jobs� (remember Van Jones?) has meant for Germany where it�s been
tried.
Proponents of renewable energies often regard the requirement for more
workers to produce a given amount of energy as a benefit, failing to
recognize that this lowers the output potential of the economy and is
hence counterproductive to net job creation. Significant research
shows that initial employment benefits from renewable policies soon
turn negative as additional costs are incurred. Trade and other
assumptions in those studies claiming positive employment turn out to
be unsupportable.
Well, Golly. That didn�t work out like it was supposed to, did it? Who
knew that if you try to force decisions on the market that the market
wouldn�t have made on its own, that there might be side effects?
Despite the fondest hopes of Kerry, Pelosi, Markey, and other
Democrats in Congress, carbon rationing has not noticeably sparked a
technological revolution in Europe yet.
One might argue that a cleantech takeoff is just around the corner and
that the energy revolution is just at the same stage as the Internet
revolution was in 1991. Maybe.
But the Internet analogy deployed by Kerry and co. misses the mark in
another way�the Internet and cell phone boom took off as a result of
deregulation and was largely financed by private capital.
By contrast, the Capitol Hill denizens now haunting the Copenhagen
conference imagine they can spark a similar technological revolution
by passing a massive 1,400-page bill, laden with subsidies, tax
breaks, and fine-grained regulations for all aspects of energy
production.
Let me dispose one myth right here and now about the internet. The
internet, as we know it, was not created by the government; US or
otherwise.
The DoD created an ad-hocish patchwork of military and academic
minicomputers connected by an assortment of serial links of the sort
that were leading-edge at the time of the creation. They were roughly
like RS-232 links. Comparing that to today�s internet is like
comparing a bicycle to a Saturn V rocket.
The internet didn�t really come into its own until the World Wide Web
(WWW) was placed on top of it by the private sector.
The infrastructure was in the hands of private telecommunications
firms at that point.
For practical intents and purposes, the government agencies that
originally organized the internet had lost control of it a decade
earlier.
There are many other examples floating the internet of government
taking credit for what was substantially done by the private sector:
the transistor, the integrated circuit, the jet airplane, even the
original digital computer was a Navy project. So technology can�t
possibly get out of the nest without a government incubator, right?
These examples all ignore the technologies that were launched with no
government sponsorship; the television, the telephone and telegraph,
electrical power, pretty much every of over 1000 inventions Edison
patented. The point being, when the time is right, it will appear.
So what does this have to do with green jobs?
1. As the German study indicates, they displace other jobs.
2. If the technologies were ripe, they�d happen anyway.
3. If the technologies aren�t ripe, as is the case with most of this
green tech, its a forced fit.
In other words, you can�t push on a rope.
Central planning never worked when the Soviets tried it, and Obama
isn�t magically more able than Stalin.
>You're a political hack
>
Shhhh
If you start talking like that, somebody is going to start the rumour
that you're my Evil Twin.
>
>Jerry 'n Vegas
>
>- Reagan came to power because his predecessor was weak, not oppressive.
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How do you tell a communist?
Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin.
And how do you tell an anti-Communist?
It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin."
-- Ronald Reagan
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>>
>>Until Gore saw it's potential and pushed for it's expantion.
>>
>Yeah.
>Him and about 10,000 other people.
>
>But he was the only one who was "instrumental", eh?
How many of those supposed 10,000 were in a position to champion
funding measures in the Senate?
>That's about like one single violinist in an orchestra claiming that
>his playing was the thing that made them sound so good.
Actually, it's nothing at all like that. It's more like the patron
who sees the need for a symphony orchestra, puts together a
fundraising team, and raises the capital so that the musicians can get
paid to make the orchestra sound so good.
>>
>>
>>> Blitzer, unfortunately, didn't appear to know any of that. After Gore
>>> took credit for the Internet ....
>>
>>Give it up. He never said he invented it because he didn't.
>>
>>
>>> In 1990, Gore introduced a bill that would allow the federal
>>> government to enter the business of crafting software for
>>> teachers to use. Another Gore plan would create a new federal
>>> research center for educational computing to support an
>>> "information systems highway."
>>
>>As I said, he pushed for it. He did not invent it and he never said he did.
>>
>>
>>> Not that I would want to call AlGore a "liar".
>>
>>You can't because he didn't lie.
>>
>>Does it really bother you that much that a Democrat noticed something a
>>great as the Internet and pushed for it? Does it really bother you that much
>>that Gore helped notify the world about global warming and won an award for
>>it?
>>
>
>It bothers me when politicians are successful in pushing some Myth or
>the other.
Then you must be bothered an awful lot, since that's what politicians
do.
>Here, for your reading enjoyment, is an opinion from someone writing
>about the Myth of Green jobs that Obama is pushing.
>
>Be patient reading it.
>He gets around to Algore after a while.
>
>http://www.theblogmocracy.com/2009/12/20/green-jobs-and-other-fairy-tales/
>
>Green Jobs, and Other Fairy Tales
>by snork ( 101 Comments � )
>Filed under Barack Obama, Economy, Global Warming Hoax, Progressives,
>Science, Technology at December 20th, 2009 - 5:00 am
>
>From Ron Bailey at Reason Magazine, this piece dissects what �green
>jobs� (remember Van Jones?) has meant for Germany where it�s been
>tried.
>
>Proponents of renewable energies often regard the requirement for more
>workers to produce a given amount of energy as a benefit, failing to
>recognize that this lowers the output potential of the economy and is
>hence counterproductive to net job creation. Significant research
>shows that initial employment benefits from renewable policies soon
>turn negative as additional costs are incurred. Trade and other
>assumptions in those studies claiming positive employment turn out to
>be unsupportable.
>
>Well, Golly. That didn�t work out like it was supposed to, did it? Who
>knew that if you try to force decisions on the market that the market
>wouldn�t have made on its own, that there might be side effects?
The article you cite is what's commonly known as an "opinion". What
a surprise that a writer from a Libertarian publication would oppose a
government program!
>Let me dispose one myth right here and now about the internet. The
>internet, as we know it, was not created by the government; US or
>otherwise.
>The DoD created an ad-hocish patchwork of military and academic
>minicomputers connected by an assortment of serial links of the sort
>that were leading-edge at the time of the creation. They were roughly
>like RS-232 links. Comparing that to today�s internet is like
>comparing a bicycle to a Saturn V rocket.
>
>The internet didn�t really come into its own until the World Wide Web
>(WWW) was placed on top of it by the private sector.
>The infrastructure was in the hands of private telecommunications
>firms at that point.
>For practical intents and purposes, the government agencies that
>originally organized the internet had lost control of it a decade
>earlier.
In other words, it was created by the government and developed by the
private sector.
>There are many other examples floating the internet of government
>taking credit for what was substantially done by the private sector:
>the transistor, the integrated circuit, the jet airplane, even the
>original digital computer was a Navy project. So technology can�t
>possibly get out of the nest without a government incubator, right?
Nice strawman. "The government can create new technoligies" is a
heckuva lot different from "New technologies can't possibly be created
without the government".
>These examples all ignore the technologies that were launched with no
>government sponsorship; the television, the telephone and telegraph,
>electrical power, pretty much every of over 1000 inventions Edison
>patented. The point being, when the time is right, it will appear.
>
>So what does this have to do with green jobs?
>
>1. As the German study indicates, they displace other jobs.
>2. If the technologies were ripe, they�d happen anyway.
>3. If the technologies aren�t ripe, as is the case with most of this
>green tech, its a forced fit.
>
>In other words, you can�t push on a rope.
>Central planning never worked when the Soviets tried it, and Obama
>isn�t magically more able than Stalin.
Of course, Obama isn't attempting anything remotely resembling the
central planning that the Soviets tried.
Jerry Sturdivant
"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
news:jt00j518dob5uv1b2...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:09:18 -0800, "Jerry Sturdivant"
> <jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>>
>>> Replied Gore: "I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins, and
>>> it'll be comprehensive and sweeping, and I hope that it'll be
>>> compelling enough to draw people toward it.... I've traveled to every
>>> part of this country during the last six years."
>>>
>>> Then came the kicker: "During my service in the United States
>>> Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>>>
>>> Huh?
>>
>>
>>Correct. He got the funding and pushed for it. And got it. Now ask who
>>INVENTED the Internet.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Of course, politicians weren't completely unaware of the Internet.
>>
>>Until Gore saw it's potential and pushed for it's expantion.
> Yeah.
> Him and about 10,000 other people.
How many of the 10,000 arraigned for funding?
>>Does it really bother you that much that a Democrat noticed something a
>>great as the Internet and pushed for it? Does it really bother you that
>>much
>>that Gore helped notify the world about global warming and won an award
>>for
>>it?
> It bothers me when politicians are successful in
> pushing some Myth or the other.
What does that have to do with Gore pushing for expansion and funding of the
Internet?
> Here, for your reading enjoyment, is an opinion from someone writing
> about the Myth of Green jobs that Obama is pushing.
Being it's not a myth, you'll have to excuse me for not bothering to read
some person's take on it being a myth,
Jerry 'n Vegas
- If there is no God, who pops up the next kleenex?
FL Turbo
Yes, I am bothered an awful lot.
I am certainly not alone on that one.
Most people are indeed bothered by politicians and their doubletalk.
People need to pay attention to the evidence, and not just accept or
reject it based on who says it.
Hell, I even quoted Prisonplant when they pointed out what a scam the
"Global Climate Warming/Change" is.
When they're right, they're right.
Look up Spain's experience with pushing "green jobs" for similar
results.
Look at our very own USA for similar results as in the corn-based
ethanol system.
Yet we keep trying, don't we?
>
>>Let me dispose one myth right here and now about the internet. The
>>internet, as we know it, was not created by the government; US or
>>otherwise.
>>The DoD created an ad-hocish patchwork of military and academic
>>minicomputers connected by an assortment of serial links of the sort
>>that were leading-edge at the time of the creation. They were roughly
>>like RS-232 links. Comparing that to today�s internet is like
>>comparing a bicycle to a Saturn V rocket.
>>
>>The internet didn�t really come into its own until the World Wide Web
>>(WWW) was placed on top of it by the private sector.
>>The infrastructure was in the hands of private telecommunications
>>firms at that point.
>>For practical intents and purposes, the government agencies that
>>originally organized the internet had lost control of it a decade
>>earlier.
>
>In other words, it was created by the government and developed by the
>private sector.
>
Yes, "developed".
Gore was just a minor factor in its development.
>>There are many other examples floating the internet of government
>>taking credit for what was substantially done by the private sector:
>>the transistor, the integrated circuit, the jet airplane, even the
>>original digital computer was a Navy project. So technology can�t
>>possibly get out of the nest without a government incubator, right?
>
>Nice strawman. "The government can create new technoligies" is a
>heckuva lot different from "New technologies can't possibly be created
>without the government".
>
>>These examples all ignore the technologies that were launched with no
>>government sponsorship; the television, the telephone and telegraph,
>>electrical power, pretty much every of over 1000 inventions Edison
>>patented. The point being, when the time is right, it will appear.
>>
>>So what does this have to do with green jobs?
>>
>>1. As the German study indicates, they displace other jobs.
>>2. If the technologies were ripe, they�d happen anyway.
>>3. If the technologies aren�t ripe, as is the case with most of this
>>green tech, its a forced fit.
>>
>>In other words, you can�t push on a rope.
>>Central planning never worked when the Soviets tried it, and Obama
>>isn�t magically more able than Stalin.
>
>Of course, Obama isn't attempting anything remotely resembling the
>central planning that the Soviets tried.
Are you sure about that?
He's only had 1 year at it so far.
The domestic auto makers have been nationalized.
The EPA has made a power grab by classifying CO2 as a "pollutant",
giving itself even more power to regulate our personal energy usage by
bureaucratic decree.
We are now on the "precipice" of nationalizing the health care
industry.
Stay tuned for further developments.
FL Turbo
<jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>news:jt00j518dob5uv1b2...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:09:18 -0800, "Jerry Sturdivant"
>> <jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>>> Replied Gore: "I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins, and
>>>> it'll be comprehensive and sweeping, and I hope that it'll be
>>>> compelling enough to draw people toward it.... I've traveled to every
>>>> part of this country during the last six years."
>>>>
>>>> Then came the kicker: "During my service in the United States
>>>> Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>>>>
>>>> Huh?
>>>
>>>
>>>Correct. He got the funding and pushed for it. And got it. Now ask who
>>>INVENTED the Internet.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Of course, politicians weren't completely unaware of the Internet.
>>>
>>>Until Gore saw it's potential and pushed for it's expantion.
>
>> Yeah.
>> Him and about 10,000 other people.
>
>How many of the 10,000 arraigned for funding?
>
The Usual Suspects, of course.
The
FL Turbo
<jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>news:jt00j518dob5uv1b2...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:09:18 -0800, "Jerry Sturdivant"
>> <jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>>> Replied Gore: "I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins, and
>>>> it'll be comprehensive and sweeping, and I hope that it'll be
>>>> compelling enough to draw people toward it.... I've traveled to every
>>>> part of this country during the last six years."
>>>>
>>>> Then came the kicker: "During my service in the United States
>>>> Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>>>>
>>>> Huh?
>>>
>>>
>>>Correct. He got the funding and pushed for it. And got it. Now ask who
>>>INVENTED the Internet.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Of course, politicians weren't completely unaware of the Internet.
>>>
>>>Until Gore saw it's potential and pushed for it's expantion.
>
>> Yeah.
>> Him and about 10,000 other people.
>
>How many of the 10,000 arraigned for funding?
>
The Usual Suspects, of course.
The CongressCritters who, along with Gore, have the power to spend
taxpayer money on whatever they damn well feel like doing.
You could probably say they all took the "initiative" in creating the
Internet.
>
>
>>>Does it really bother you that much that a Democrat noticed something a
>>>great as the Internet and pushed for it? Does it really bother you that
>>>much
>>>that Gore helped notify the world about global warming and won an award
>>>for
>>>it?
>
>> It bothers me when politicians are successful in
>> pushing some Myth or the other.
>
>What does that have to do with Gore pushing for expansion and funding of the
>Internet?
>
Because Global Warming is a myth, just like Gore's gross exaggeration
of his importance.
Not so with global climate change, however.
The globe has seen massive changes in climate over millions of years.
An overwhelming amount of time compared to mankind's appearance on the
planet.
Didn't you ever hear about the glaciers that once covered Green Bay?
Didn't you ever read about why Minnesota has those 10,000 lakes?
>
>
>> Here, for your reading enjoyment, is an opinion from someone writing
>> about the Myth of Green jobs that Obama is pushing.
>
>Being it's not a myth, you'll have to excuse me for not bothering to read
>some person's take on it being a myth,
>
Don't bother you with any facts, eh?
Okeedoke.
>
>Jerry 'n Vegas
>
>- If there is no God, who pops up the next kleenex?
>
She knows that when you start sniffling, you're gonna need more than
one kleenex.
Jerry Sturdivant
"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
news:3ma0j5lbs8cc27uq7...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 17:32:25 -0800, "Jerry Sturdivant"
> <jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>>news:jt00j518dob5uv1b2...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:09:18 -0800, "Jerry Sturdivant"
>>> <jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> Replied Gore: "I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins, and
>>>>> it'll be comprehensive and sweeping, and I hope that it'll be
>>>>> compelling enough to draw people toward it.... I've traveled to every
>>>>> part of this country during the last six years."
>>>>>
>>>>> Then came the kicker: "During my service in the United States
>>>>> Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>>>>>
>>>>> Huh?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Correct. He got the funding and pushed for it. And got it. Now ask who
>>>>INVENTED the Internet.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Of course, politicians weren't completely unaware of the Internet.
>>>>
>>>>Until Gore saw it's potential and pushed for it's expantion.
>>
>>> Yeah.
>>> Him and about 10,000 other people.
>>
>>How many of the 10,000 arraigned for funding?
> The Usual Suspects, of course.
> The CongressCritters who, along with Gore, have the power to spend
> taxpayer money on whatever they damn well feel like doing.
Jeez! It really bothers you that Gore was the major drive behind developing
the Internet. Is it just because he's a Democrat? It's the Democrats behind
developing healthcare reform. If only counts if it's done by a Republican?
Perhaps you should go find a Republican that backed Gore on the development
and expansion of the Internet and claim it as a Republican Victory!
Jerry (lol) 'n Vegas
- Garden: Rows of vegetables to keep the weeds apart.
FL Turbo
<jer...@cox.net> wrote:
I'm sure that there were many Repos who voted right along with Gore on
the appropriations.
I would be highly critical of any one of them who used that to tout
their own self-importance like Gore has done.
Especially someone who is as scientifically illiterate as Gore is.
They don't call him a Serial Exaggerator for nuthin'
http://notasheepmaybeagoat.blogspot.com/2009/12/al-gores-latest-exaggeration.html
15 December 2009
Al Gore's latest 'exaggeration'
The Times reports an intersting story from Copenhagen about the
tireless Climate Change profiteer:
"There are many kinds of truth. Al Gore was poleaxed by an
inconvenient one yesterday.
The former US Vice-President, who became an unlikely figurehead for
the green movement after narrating the Oscar-winning documentary An
Inconvenient Truth, became entangled in a new climate change �spin�
row.
Mr Gore, speaking at the Copenhagen climate change summit, stated the
latest research showed that the Arctic could be completely ice-free in
five years.
In his speech, Mr Gore told the conference: �These figures are fresh.
Some of the models suggest to Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski that there is a
75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the
summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven
years.�
However, the climatologist whose work Mr Gore was relying upon dropped
the former Vice-President in the water with an icy blast.
�It�s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at,� Dr Maslowski
said. �I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact
as this.�
Mr Gore�s office later admitted that the 75 per cent figure was one
used by Dr Maslowksi as a �ballpark figure� several years ago in a
conversation with Mr Gore."
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>>>Well, Golly. That didn�t work out like it was supposed to, did it? Who
>>>knew that if you try to force decisions on the market that the market
>>>wouldn�t have made on its own, that there might be side effects?
>>
>
>>The article you cite is what's commonly known as an "opinion". What
>>a surprise that a writer from a Libertarian publication would oppose a
>>government program!
>>
>
>People need to pay attention to the evidence, and not just accept or
>reject it based on who says it.
If that's what you're shooting for, then try presenting some actual
evidence. What you posted is nothing but some ideologue's spin on the
issue.
>Hell, I even quoted Prisonplant when they pointed out what a scam the
>"Global Climate Warming/Change" is.
>When they're right, they're right.
And when they're not, they're not.
>Look up Spain's experience with pushing "green jobs" for similar
>results.
>
>Look at our very own USA for similar results as in the corn-based
>ethanol system.
>
>Yet we keep trying, don't we?
The ethanol thing was one of those ideas that sounded good at first
glance, but was deeply flawed upon further analysis. That doesn't
mean that we just give up.
>
>>
>>>Let me dispose one myth right here and now about the internet. The
>>>internet, as we know it, was not created by the government; US or
>>>otherwise.
>>>The DoD created an ad-hocish patchwork of military and academic
>>>minicomputers connected by an assortment of serial links of the sort
>>>that were leading-edge at the time of the creation. They were roughly
>>>like RS-232 links. Comparing that to today�s internet is like
>>>comparing a bicycle to a Saturn V rocket.
>>>
>>>The internet didn�t really come into its own until the World Wide Web
>>>(WWW) was placed on top of it by the private sector.
>>>The infrastructure was in the hands of private telecommunications
>>>firms at that point.
>>>For practical intents and purposes, the government agencies that
>>>originally organized the internet had lost control of it a decade
>>>earlier.
>>
>>In other words, it was created by the government and developed by the
>>private sector.
>>
>
>Yes, "developed".
>
>Gore was just a minor factor in its development.
There would have been nothing to develop had it not initially been
created.
>>>There are many other examples floating the internet of government
>>>taking credit for what was substantially done by the private sector:
>>>the transistor, the integrated circuit, the jet airplane, even the
>>>original digital computer was a Navy project. So technology can�t
>>>possibly get out of the nest without a government incubator, right?
>>
>>Nice strawman. "The government can create new technoligies" is a
>>heckuva lot different from "New technologies can't possibly be created
>>without the government".
>>
>>>These examples all ignore the technologies that were launched with no
>>>government sponsorship; the television, the telephone and telegraph,
>>>electrical power, pretty much every of over 1000 inventions Edison
>>>patented. The point being, when the time is right, it will appear.
>>>
>>>So what does this have to do with green jobs?
>>>
>>>1. As the German study indicates, they displace other jobs.
>>>2. If the technologies were ripe, they�d happen anyway.
>>>3. If the technologies aren�t ripe, as is the case with most of this
>>>green tech, its a forced fit.
>>>
>>>In other words, you can�t push on a rope.
>>>Central planning never worked when the Soviets tried it, and Obama
>>>isn�t magically more able than Stalin.
>>
>>Of course, Obama isn't attempting anything remotely resembling the
>>central planning that the Soviets tried.
>
>Are you sure about that?
You seem awfully sure that he's the next Lenin.
>He's only had 1 year at it so far.
>
>The domestic auto makers have been nationalized.
No, they've been bailed out.
>The EPA has made a power grab by classifying CO2 as a "pollutant",
>giving itself even more power to regulate our personal energy usage by
>bureaucratic decree.
>
>We are now on the "precipice" of nationalizing the health care
>industry.
Not in the slightest. The current bill does nothing of the sort.
>Stay tuned for further developments.
Jerry Sturdivant
"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
news:har2j5t97cm07n0kj...@4ax.com...
Whoa! He has not 'touted' his 'self importance.' He was questions and he
answered. YOU admit now, that he didn't 'invent' the Internet.
[Whimpering and crying from some right-wing site, deleted]
Jerry 'n Vegas
- Have I found God? What? Did you lose him AGAIN?!