President

[FUTURESTRADER]

Maybe it’s just me, but I want our next President to have the capacity to orate a proper sentence.

I cringe when I hear 'nuceular'. It's crazy. And this man is ostensibly our boss.
I shake my head ruefully when I walk on to a military base and see the obligatory chain of command photos with Dubyah at the top. The same exists at most fed agencies, I know. But I voted for him.

 

[JTH]

Maybe it’s just me, but I want our next President to have the capacity to orate a proper sentence.

 

[rokid]

Actually, budnipper1 came up with an interesting site. Check it out. http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/index.jsp

Per the National Academies (the owner of the site), Global Warming is happening and "Global warming affects many different facets of life on Earth. There will be winners and losers, even within a single region. But globally the losses are expected to far outweigh the benefits." (my emphasis)

Incidentally, I've done some work with the National Academies and they're anything but "tree huggers".

Therefore, risk takers will take a "wait and see approach" and conservatives will want to mitigate the negative consequences. Interestingly, on this issue, the risk takers are Conservatives and the conservatives are Liberals! Whoda think it! :laugh:

 

[nnuut]

Over population will be the scourge of all humanity!:worried: Who said that; me?

 

[Show-me]

My rant on Global Warming.

My opinion: We will debate global warming until we are blue in the face and nothing will get done. Our elected knuckle heads can't fix Social Security or Medicare. What makes you think they will "fix" GLOBAL warming? LOL Check out the post that Robo posted about the GAO General on 60 Minutes. Were screwed!

IMO, mankind IS a problem. The planet will only support so many people, like your garden will only support so many plants. Ya gotta have good climate, air, water, and nutrients for both. Screw one of those up and your done.

We are the big fossil fuel burner since the Industrial Revolution. Now China and India are experiencing their "Industrial
Revolution".

China and India are doing everything possible to pollute the air and water while gobbling up all the nutrients they can to put more "plants" in the garden. By the time the "world" realizes the harsh reality the we can only support so many people it WILL me to late.

Simply put, trees make Oxygen from Carbon Dioxide. People breath Oxygen. People cut down trees that make Oxygen to make room for more people that breath more Oxygen. Ya don't have to be a genius to know how this one will end. It is like compound interest, give it time.

Is a Ice Age coming? Sure. Will a asteroid strike the earth and cause havoc? Sure. Will the caldera at Yellow Stone explode? Sure. It happens every so many years. How arrogant or stupid of us to think it will not ever happen again. Just because we developed civilizations and tools the natural occurrence of things stops. NO! Tectonic plates are moving every day. Volcano's erupt every day. Earthquake happen every day. Magnetic North Pole moves every day.

The longer we live the more we learn.

 

[budnipper1]

For readers who like to see data on charts:

This graph is based on ice cores drilled in Vostok, Antarctica. It shows temperature changes near the South Pole, which were more extreme than in the middle latitudes.

http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/historical02.jsp
As recorded in ice cores from Vostok, Antarctica, the temperature near the South Pole has varied by more than 20 degrees Fahrenheit during the last 350,000 years. There have been peaks of warmth approximately every 100,000 years. The temperature and the carbon dioxide concentrations at the south pole parallel each other. The rise and fall of temperatures gives rise to the ice age/interglacial cycle.

Conclusion: (MHO)
Looks like a normal pattern in nature to me.

*************************************************************
This graph show the variability in temperature for the Washington, DC area during the twentieth century. A warming trend similar to the global average can be seen. The year-to-year variability(the spikiness)of the record at any one location is generally greater than the global average.

("Hot air" in Washington, DC)
I'm not an expert at chart analysis, but I see the highest peak of temperature on this graph at the year,1948.(the year that both Al Gore and Howard Dean were born) Coincidence? I don't think so.

Illogical conclusion? Yes, similar most other so-called "scientific conclusions" on global warming. Maybe, after another 100,000 years we should look at this again.

Your Global Warming Test is as much hype as Al Gore's garbage. There are so many inaccuracies, opinions and deceptions that it qualifies as poor propoganda at best. Most everyone with formal training from a reputable college agree's with the vast majority of the following:

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

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

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

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

In general, most non-politically affiliated scientists agree that we should be in a cooling phase. That doesn't mean that everywhere on the planet should be getting colder (or hotter). The change in temperature isn't the problem - it's the resulting changes in average rainfall, wind direction, forest fires (frequency of lighting events) and hurricane/typhoon frequency in local ecologies that cause systemic collapse.

Starving polar bears with there big dooey eyed innocense capture the hearts, but it's the rapid change of vegetation types and habitat in a forest which disrupt the food chain, especially if the animals and insects can not migrate fast enough to keep up.

PS - I agree with Bush on the Koyoto accords...they were designed to help China and punish the US.

 

[rokid]

The change in temperature isn't the problem - it's the resulting changes in average rainfall, wind direction, forest fires (frequency of lighting events) and hurricane/typhoon frequency in local ecologies that cause systemic collapse.

It's my understanding that "Global Warming" may cause unpredictable changes (floods, storms, climate change, species extinction, disruption of the food chain, mass migrations etc.) that we would find painful and expensive to cope with. In addition, once a "tipping point" is reached, the changes may accelerate and become irreversible (in the short term).

Consequently, dealing with it seems like decision making in an uncertain environment. In other words, calculating the probability of Global Warming's consequences occurring and estimating the resulting costs/benefits (flooding Boston, New York, and Washington DC may be a bad thing; year around shipping in the Arctic may be a good thing) versus the cost of reducing carbon emissions now and mitigating the possible negative future consequences.

I suspect most people, world-wide, would rather push costs into the future. In other words, continue to emit carbon at ever increasing rates and let future generations deal with the consequences. Seems irresponsible but what can you do?

 

[Show-me]

Headline:
For the second time while in office, President Bush will hand presidential power to Vice Pres. Cheney while undergoing a colonoscopy.

There has to be a joke here some where. lol

 

[Griffin]

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

Your Global Warming Test is as much hype as Al Gore's garbage. There are so many inaccuracies, opinions and deceptions that it qualifies as poor propoganda at best. Most everyone with formal training from a reputable college agree's with the vast majority of the following:

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

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

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

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

In general, most non-politically affiliated scientists agree that we should be in a cooling phase. That doesn't mean that everywhere on the planet should be getting colder (or hotter). The change in temperature isn't the problem - it's the resulting changes in average rainfall, wind direction, forest fires (frequency of lighting events) and hurricane/typhoon frequency in local ecologies that cause systemic collapse.

Starving polar bears with there big dooey eyed innocense capture the hearts, but it's the rapid change of vegetation types and habitat in a forest which disrupt the food chain, especially if the animals and insects can not migrate fast enough to keep up.

PS - I agree with Bush on the Koyoto accords...they were designed to help China and punish the US.

 

[mlk_man]

MM, perhaps a week or two on a misplaced floating piece of melting ice with a couple of hungry polar bears would result in a different point of view......

GGAL

Why would it? At least the ice would be floating in water and the planet wouldn't be covered in it so there would be no polar bears.........or me...........now don't start crying because of that thought............

 

[GGal]

This is for anyone who believes all the global warming hype. Let's hope it keeps warming, I hate to think about the consequences of it getting colder..........

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

MM, perhaps a week or two on a misplaced floating piece of melting ice with a couple of hungry polar bears would result in a different point of view......

GGAL

 

[mlk_man]

This is for anyone who believes all the global warming hype. Let's hope it keeps warming, I hate to think about the consequences of it getting colder..........

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

 

[Griffin]

I agree 100%, but these are middle class values, and the midle class has no champion - we can't buy our candidates and we can't use "our plight" to tug on the heart strings of America.

I want a leader who will:

1. keep taxes down (which means keep undue spending at bay)
2. keep us safe
3. take global warming seriously
4. support stem cell research
5. keep social security safe
6. make sure that employers pay SS and Med taxes on any and all illegals they employ
7. limit welfare to the truly needy who are poor, elderly, disabled and unable to work (I don't want to hear some able bodied guy proclaim "we gonna bbq tonite" after picking up his foodstamps - I paid for those fkn food stamps.
8. stimulate the economy (incentives for small business)
9. support the IRS and congress' attempt to close the tax gap (stamp out tax shelters for the rich, tax the underground economy)

Tell me who this is!!!!!!!!!!!

GGAL

 

[James48843]

So now we got a "Fred Thompson vs. Birch Bahy" race .

Great.

Except neither one is on any ballots yet.

Thompson's positions:

2008 SelectSmart.com
Presidential Candidate Selector
Candidate Positions
Former Sen. Fred Thompson - Republican
(Born August 19, 1942) Lawyer, lobbyist, character actor)
Iraq War Issues: Voted YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq. (Oct 2002) Source \
Supports President Bush's decision to increase troops in Iraq. "Wars are full of mistakes. You rectify things. I think we're doing that now," he said. "Why would we not take any chance, even though there's certainly no guarantees, to not be run out of that place? I mean, we've got to take that opportunity and give it a chance to work." Source
Security/liberties: Would pardon former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's conviction for perjury and obstruction of justice now, rather than waiting until all his appeals are exhausted.
Thompson is a fundraiser for Libby's defense. Source
Social Security: Voted YES on Social Security Lockbox & limiting national debt. (Apr 1999) Voted YES on allowing Roth IRAs for retirees. (May 1998) Voted YES on allowing personal retirement accounts. (Apr 1998) Source
Stem cell research: ?
Same sex issues: Opposes gay marriage, but would let states decide whether to allow civil unions. "Marriage is between a man and a woman, and I don't believe judges ought to come along and change that." Source
Trade issues: Voted YES on extending free trade to Andean nations. (May 2002) Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001) Voted NO on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001) Source
Budget issues: Voted YES on prioritizing national debt reduction below tax cuts. (Apr 2000) Voted NO on 1998 GOP budget. (May 1997) Voted YES on Balanced-budget constitutional amendment. (Mar 1997) Source "Reagan showed what can be done if you have the will to push for tough choices and the ability to ask the people to accept them." … "Lower marginal tax rates have proven to be a key to prosperity now by Kennedy, Reagan and Bush. It’s time millionaires serving in the Senate learned not to overly tax other people trying to get wealthy." Source
Business & labor issues: ?
Abortion issues: Is "pro-life," and believes federal judges should overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision as "bad law and bad medical science." Source
Capital punishment: Voted YES on limiting death penalty appeals. (Apr 1996) Source
Marijuana: Voted YES on increasing penalties for drug offenses. (Nov 1999) Source
Gun control: Opposes gun control, and praised last week's 2-1 federal appeals decision overturning a long-standing handgun ban. "The court basically said the Constitution means what it says, and I agree with that." Source
Minimum wage: Voted YES on killing an increase in the minimum wage. (Nov 1999) Source
Health care: ?
Prescription drugs: Voted NO on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002) Voted YES on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Apr 2001) Voted NO on including prescription drugs under Medicare. (Jun 2000) Source
Environmental issues: Voted YES on confirming Gale Norton as Secretary of Interior. (Jan 2001) Voted YES on more funding for forest roads and fish habitat. (Sep 1999) Source
Immigration issues: Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998) Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998) Source
Mostly opposes amnesty/permanent legalization for illegal aliens and temporary legalization for illegal aiens as guestworkers Source Education issues: Voted YES on school vouchers in DC. (Sep 1997) Source

STILL A MINEFIELD HERE.

 

[budnipper1]

Fred Thompson describes himself as a conservative.

Thompson supports free trade and low taxes.
He says that Roe v. Wade was a wrong decision that ought to be overturned,
but he also believes that states should decide not to criminalize young women for early term abortions.
Thompson is skeptical that humanity is to blame for global warming.
He generally supports the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
His position on immigration is that U.S. borders need to be secured before considering comprehensive immigration reform.
Thompson supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq, but believes that mistakes have been made since then.
He also believes that Iran's threats of war should be taken seriously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_thompson#Political_positions
Fred Thompson was also instrumental in exposing the crooked politics of former TN Gov. Ray Blanton.(1979)
On this last point alone, he wins my vote, if he runs...

 

[James48843]

Birch Bayh, U.S. Senator from Indiana, pulled a badly injured Senator Ted Kennedy from the wreckage of a small plane in which two others were killed.

Hmmmm..

I better not comment on that one.....

Senator Bayh was the principal architect of the 25th and 26th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Senator Bayh was also the principal architect of the Equal Rights Amendment, which was not adopted.

Senator Bayh intended to run for the 1972 Democratic nomination for president, but his wife was diagnosed with cancer and he put his plans on hold. Before her death in 1979, Marvella Bayh became a leading cancer activist. (I guess you could say that John Edwards is no Birch Bayh.....)

In the 1980 election, Senator Bayh was defeated for reelection to the U.S. Senate by future vice president Dan Quayle. :nuts:

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

He's 79 now, and would be 80 if elected.

I suppose he's got enough experience.

Is he ready to announce his candidcy for "Ought Eight"?

 

[James48843]

Good point. We better make this official: ​

ATTENTION ALL THREAD LOUNGE VIEWERS:

This thread is hereby officially posted. ​

DANGER

READ PAST THIS POST AT YOUR OWN RISK​

 

[James48843]

Okay, that one gave me Duncan Hunter and Tom Tonredo......since they won't be nominated, I guess I don't vote.

Never count votes before they are cast. We don't know if Hunter or Tancredo will fade away, or will become the front runners after the first round of primaries.

Vote what you think is right, and let's hope everyone else out there votes what THEY think is right, rather than voting for who the media elite or the party insiders tell everyone to expect to win.

It's your vote.

Lots of Americans gave their lives in order to bring you that right. Please exercise it with due care and caution, but, by all mean, DO exercise it.

We may not all agree on who to vote for, but I'll step out on a limb and argue that we all DO agree that you should exercise your right to vote.

 

[GGal]

And here is another one- lots of fun to click on and see who matches your values. Maybe this one can get you closer:


http://www.speakout.com/VoteMatch/senate2006.asp?quiz=2008

Okay, that one gave me Duncan Hunter and Tom Tonredo......since they won't be nominated, I guess I don't vote.

 

[mlk_man]

You might want to fill your other moderator in that calling someone's post "garbage" is being biased. A good moderator shouldn't be biased.......

Which is why I had to resign..........