Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

blatham wrote:

[george
Everything about you, other than your personality, infuriates me.

I've followed this issue (editing of findings for political purposes) with some consistency. This administration is unique, at least in the pervasiveness and ubiquity of how it has operated in this area as it has been in others (eg politicization of justice, populating the green zone with untrained political loyalists, depriving funding to traditionally dem voting/supporting entities while increasing funding to, eg, church organizations, K street, etc). Rove and others truly did plan for a thirty year Republican dominance and the strategies included placing personnel (loyal Bushies) in as many critical decision-making points as possible, tightly managing information flows so that they stayed on message, and diverting wealth to facilitate organizational and electoral advantage.

I hope you understand that even attempting to achieve a thirty year dominance (some conservative voices have phrased it as 'permanent' dominance) is fundamentally in opposition to our traditional notions of how a democracy must function so as to remain a democracy.

Well, there is really nothing about you that infuriates me. I generally read your posts carefully (don't do that with many others) and I always appreciate your humor, and even occasionally your invective, however misdirected it may be.

I agree this adminisrtration has planned and organized its political strategies very carefully, if not always successfully. The same of course could be said about most others, including particularly the several Roosevelt Administrations. Indeed in the era of his dominance of American politics, which can be said to have extended from 1932 to 1952, when the Republicans under Eisenhower took over the Presidency (but not the Congress), so-called "Progressive Democrats" dominated the American political scene far more than Bush & his allies ever hoped to achieve. Their dominance was restored in the Kennedy-Johnson years, continuing for nearly another decade. Somehow the political critics of Rove et.al. appear to consider this condition "normal" and the attempt to replace it with any other necessarily the result of a deep, dark conspiracy. Nonsense! It is merely democratic politics in action.

Both sides in our contemporary political contests are equally eager to insert their particular beliefs on social values into the fabric of public discourse, educational programs and laws limiting and regulating our behavior. Indeed there is a very good argument to be made for the proposition that most of the public arousal over so-called conservative 'hot button' issues is the result of previous excesses by "progressive" Democrats (the debates over abortion and affirtmative action are good examples). Conservatives in turn create their own excesses to return the favor. We can all hope the zig-zag will center itself on rational policy.

I suppose that Jimmy Carter can be held up as the model of a non-conspiring President who nobly attempted to solve problems without political conspiracies to alter the way we think and behave. The truth is that it wasn't due to the lack of trying. In many ways his ideas were farsighted, but his persistent attempts to personally control outcomes on issues ranging from energy policy to the Arab Israeli Peace process, revealed the true authoritarian within. This and the cloying, insipid quality of his rhetoric rendered him rather thoroughly ineffective - his virtue in this regard was more the result of incompetence than good intentions.

I have begun to reconcile myself to the prospect of a Democrat government under yet another President Clinton, (We need to rid ourselves of this odd dynastic tendency and show a little more imagination in the selection of our leaders.) I'll rearrange my finances to lessen the expected tax bite, steel myself to cope with more annoying government intrusion in my health care and other matters, and prepare to amuse myself with the plights of Europeans who will discover they still don't like Americans, even with Bush gone, and poor Bernie who will have no one on whom to inflict his conspiracy theories.

0 Replies

george

Agreed as to a broader or more imaginative range of choices for top office. I suggest you folks break the mold. Put a Canadian there.

Of course, the really smart thing to do would be to establish which other nation seems most in opposition, then swap leaders. Bush in Tehran and I'maneedadinnerjacket in Washington and peace will fall across the land.

0 Replies

And...uh...(feet shuffling)...I like you too.

0 Replies

Bernie wrote-

Quote:

Over the last decade, the international scientific community has increasingly raised its voice as research data has been compiled and compared. Increasingly, governments, NGOs, news organizations and independent citizens have been working to push this issue into the spotlight and to push for policies which address it.

And you can bet your boots that every single person who falls within the ambit of those categories spends his or her leisure time in polluting the world to the maximum of their salary's capacity (assuming no credit lines) and at a rate in multiples of a thousand of that of most of the world's population, in some cases at infinite multiples.

0 Replies

George: Once again you post a well reasoned and succinct discussion. A work of art! Me hat is off to ya, lad!

Halfback

0 Replies

Re: Choice of Leaders
Blatham:

Considering the offered choices of both major parties.... I am willing to give a Canadian a try! Laughing

Oooops! Can't do it.... against the Constitution.

In reality, I can't remember the last time I was preparing for a Presidential Election and didn't consider it a choice between the lesser of two evils. Sad

Maybe that is why there is so much apathy amongst voters in the exercise of that right in this Country. Embarrassed

Halfback

0 Replies

Incidently, just out of curiosity, what is the average percentage of voter turn out in Canada?

Halfback

0 Replies

You suggest trading one fanatic for another? (Iran vis-a-vis US leaders)

Halfback

0 Replies

Halfback wrote:

Incidently, just out of curiosity, what is the average percentage of voter turn out in Canada?

Halfback

Worldiwde lists, by

- International IDEA

- wikipedia

0 Replies

Isn't it odd how these so called "greens" don't want to discuss their own carbon footprints or how some of them are working on making us all green, perish the thought, to earn money in order to stamp it in deeper.

I am convinced that Global Warming is an abstract concept to them. That old Scotcman in the cabin on the beach in Local Hero was a green.

0 Replies

Hb wrote-

Quote:

I can't remember the last time I was preparing for a Presidential Election and didn't consider it a choice between the lesser of two evils

Have you any idea Hb how pompous that sounds to those of us who don't vote.

And the abstainers win most elections. Your's hands down.

We watch it all with a combination of fascinated horror and wild amusement.

0 Replies

Halfback has of course earned my undying admiration for his kind words - I am at my best when aroused by rank hostility, but I melt quickly in the face of approval. However, his wisecrack about selecting a Canadian to run this country has restored my equilibrium.

Canadians are perpetually annoyed with us, always a bit paranoid about their noisy neighbor to the south, a bit hypocritical in their odd combination of political correctitude and high CO2 footprint (they are uniquely a delinquent signatory of Kyoto and the nation with the worlds highest per capita emitter of GHG), and constant harping about lumber quotas while at the same time they enjoy an enormous favorable balance of trade with us.

Mexicans are much more agreeable (even despite their insistence that Americans who wish to work there demonstrate that they posess unique skills that no Mexican possesses in applying for the required prior government approval, while simultaneously insisting that we accept without question any number of Mexican laborers who wish to work here.

0 Replies

I wish some Mexican labourers would come around here and give me a hand. I've heard that they are happy to graft all day for a bowl of rice with a vanilla topping.

Some of these Yanks want $100K a year for shuffling bits of paper about with big words inserted into the top surface and a reserved car park space with a nameplate just because they majored in some damn-fool subject or other with a threatening name.

0 Replies

george wrote :

Quote:

Canadians are perpetually annoyed with us, always a bit paranoid about their noisy neighbor to the south, a bit hypocritical in their odd combination of political correctitude and high CO2 footprint (they are uniquely a delinquent signatory of Kyoto and the nation with the worlds highest per capita emitter of GHG), and constant harping about lumber quotas while at the same time they enjoy an enormous favorable balance of trade with us.

1) "Canadians are perpetually annoyed with us "

speaking for myself , i am certainly NOT annoyed with americans .
i do find the actions of some american politicians strange and puzzling ,
but i have almost always enjoyed meeting americans from all walks of life . we cross the border several times a year and have always been received well , from the customs and immigration officers that welcomed us at the border, to store clerks and fellow cruisers on the high seas and just about every other american .
i don't know why you think that "Canadians are perpetually annoyed with us " .

2)" the nation with the worlds highest per capita emitter of GHG "

that could easily be rectified by reducing the oil and gas exports from canada to the U.S.
since vice president cheney paid a visit to oil and gas rich alberta this summer and praised the canadian commitment to ensure the supply of those commodities to the u.S. , i don't think the vice president would be very happy if canada started to cut back on the flow . perhaps you might be happy to see the supplies cut and the oil price rising , but i guess you haven't told the V.P. yet .
(not that we mind receiving a fair price for those commodities) .

3)"enjoy an enormous favorable balance of trade with us."

i'm sure you realize that at least part of the reason is the "socialized" health care system in canada . the "big three" automakers make no bones about enjoying the benefits of having many of their automobiles being built in canada and not being saddled with the high cost of "private" insurance .
(however , to even things out , i drive an oldsmobile built in kansas - performing well after eight years on the road)

imo there is nothing wrong at all with the vast majority of the american people - we are getting along just fine .
(having just purchased US $ 500 for CAN$ $488 was a nice surprise , but we were visiting the U.S. even when we had to pay CAN1.30 - and more -for US$1) .
no need to be unhappy with the CANUCKS , george !
hbg

0 Replies

Hey hammy-

You wouldn't dare say that if Ghengis Khan was in the White House.

No siree.

Mrs Thatcher might have been a problem too.

0 Replies

Halfback wrote:

Incidently, just out of curiosity, what is the average percentage of voter turn out in Canada?

Halfback

halfback

As of 1997, it was at 67% which reflects a declining trend. http://www.elections.ca/eca/eim/article_search/article.asp?id=105&lang=e&frmPageSize=&textonly=false

The switch of leaders was an idea I bumped into somewhere years ago during the cold war. It's not realistic but that's unfortunate because it would work like a charm (if one wishes peace, that is, and not everyone does).

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

george

Agreed as to a broader or more imaginative range of choices for top office. I suggest you folks break the mold. Put a Canadian there.

Of course, the really smart thing to do would be to establish which other nation seems most in opposition, then swap leaders. Bush in Tehran and I'maneedadinnerjacket in Washington and peace will fall across the land.

I was thinking more of something like Hillary for Canada and Harper for the U.S. I was saving Imaneedadinnaja for Sweden; Kim Jong Il for Italy; and Chavez for France. (That would free up Sarkozy for Quebec.) I was also thinking of Putin for the UK (after his term was over, he could become Queen), and, of course Browne for Russia (they need a modern socialist.)

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

blatham wrote:
george

Agreed as to a broader or more imaginative range of choices for top office. I suggest you folks break the mold. Put a Canadian there.

Of course, the really smart thing to do would be to establish which other nation seems most in opposition, then swap leaders. Bush in Tehran and I'maneedadinnerjacket in Washington and peace will fall across the land.

I was thinking more of something like Hillary for Canada and Harper for the U.S. I was saving Imaneedadinnaja for Sweden; Kim Jong Il for Italy; and Chavez for France. (That would free up Sarkozy for Quebec.) I was also thinking of Putin for the UK (after his term was over, he could become Queen), and, of course Browne for Russia (they need a modern socialist.)

Hillary for Harper is a deal. He'll be free shortly in any case. Italy just got rid of its own Kim and won't want another. I'madinkyjar would find Sweden too blonde and too sane but a switch with william bennett would work perfectly for both of them. Sarkosy would be more suited to mayor of New York city after a few more divorces and Quebec yearns for a British Queen. Gordon Brown clearly ought to be touring with the "Chicago" company being born to sing Mister Cellophane. Putin? Something to do with The Ritz.

0 Replies

What's this then?

Displacement therapy?

0 Replies

WHAT IS CAUSING THE EARTH TO WARM NOW?

WHAT CAUSED THE EARTH TO WARM IN THE PAST?

WHAT CAUSED THE EARTH TO COOL IN THE PAST?

WHAT IS CAUSING MARS TO WARM?

WHAT CAUSED MARS TO WARM IN THE PAST?

WHAT CAUSED MARS TO COOL IN THE PAST?

Sunspot density cycles?

Changes in eliptical orbit of earth around the sun?

Changes in distance of earth from sun over successive summers in its northern hemisphere?

Changes in eliptical orbit of Mars around the sun?

Changes in distance of Mars from sun over successive summers in its northern hemisphere?

Increase of CO2 in earth's atmosphere over the last 100 years?

Number of volcanoes erupting over the last 100 years?

Why is the Antarctic icepack expanding, while the arctic icepack is shrinking?

0 Replies

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know