jerryzflies

I've asked you this before but you have declined to answer: Humans put approximately 30 Billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year. The measured CO2 content of the atmosphere increases annually by roughly the same amount. Explain your belief that human activity has nothing to do with the increaasing CO2. Never took that position. The question is, does it affect global temps. The answer? Yet to be determised but I think no. There are records of more CO2 in the atmosphere than where we are today. Years before mans industrial age. Those same records seem to indicate temps lead CO2 level changes, Not follow. You next. OK, so you don't deny that humans are adding to the CO2 content of the atmosphere. So onto the next question: How do you reconcile humans increasing the CO2 (A KNOWN GREENHOUSE GAS) content of the atmosphere by 30 Billion tons each year with your position that human activity has nothing to do with climate? If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

Does anybody else find it odd that the former VP is expressing concerns about a plan that his administration was part of creating and that was mandated by the Iraqi government? That will present mnealtx with a quandry. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

Of course, he conceded because the state supreme court finally ruled in favor of his opponent. . I believe the state GOP also applied pressure 'cos it was getting concerned that the 2010 election season is fast approaching and Coleman is making them look bad. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

Emphasis mine, since apparently you continue to miss the point by a mile. BTW the hypocrite Sanford (who also condemned others for behavior he exhibits himself) has admitted to more indiscretions today. Par for the GOP course. www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/30/AR2009063001990.html If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

why were US soldiers in Iraq again? oh yeah those deliberate lies by greedy right wingers. thats right, we all forgot about that didn't we? Damn Straight! Just check out these greedy right wingers - in their own words. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCVZlLBchVE&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5p-qIq32m8&feature=related All you've done is show that the right wing liars found a gullible audience among some of the Dems. BUT NOT ALL. PS - who said this? Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don’t oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain. I don’t oppose all wars. After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration’s pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again. I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income - to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

Why expect him to stop now? He's been doing it for years, and has had it pointed out many times previously. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

Should have thought of that before YOU joined in the thread drift (which started with post 9, btw - your participation in the drift was post 34), don't you think? Still sucks to be you....but keep making yourself look as silly as you want, I'm quite enjoying it. If the others had as long a record of whining about distractions as you have, I'd point out their hypocrisy too. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

And, for everyone, when you go to the symphony. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

I've asked you this before but you have declined to answer: Humans put approximately 30 Billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year. The measured CO2 content of the atmosphere increases annually by roughly the same amount. Explain your belief that human activity has nothing to do with the increaasing CO2. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

maybe so but CO is, http://www.epa.gov/iaq/co.html Maybe you should go back to school! No, you mean I need to go back to your school. CO2 is a part of the nature of this planet. Labeling it as a polutant is political So is arsenic. So is mercury. Your statement, as always, defies all logic. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

So you STILL don't have anything relevant to the thread. OK. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

No, it doesn't. In the long run it is worth far more than we are paying for it in the USA. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

And, as I previously pointed out, the cost of said sustainabilty is NOT included in the price of Lawrocket's gas for his guzzler. Hence he is running his SUV subsidized by our children and grandchildren who WILL have to pay the cost of his profligate consumption. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

You are very correct here. But there is a small thing you left out. He would support the government imposing his views and actions on the rest of us. While disagreeing with him, I do not support law that would force him to drive a big SUV. In my view, HE has the choice. The very choice he would have a government take away under the guise of taxes to push energy agendas that as of yet have no way to survice in the open market with out gov incentives (IE taxes) Wind generation is an example. He and billvon can and should live as they please within the laws. But dont force me to live that way under the guise of the faulty premise of man made climate change. That is what this is really about. If the price of gas to run the SUV REALISTICALLY represented the cost of energy sustainability and cleaning up pollution cause by burning said gas, and the extra cost of maintaining the roads damaged by heavy vehicles, I would agree with you. But since it doesn't, I don't. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

Of course, we're using (fresh) water at an unsustainable rate too. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

May the FSM touch you with his noodly appendage. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

The sky is falling! If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

Is Mike not around? Maybe he's "hiking the Appalachian Trail". No, I didn't bother answering - I already covered the STERLING examples of Mssrs Clinton and Edwards upthread, thanks. Neither Clinton nor Edwards is the governor of SC. As was mentioned previously in this thread: To quote mnealtx, "*yawn* Got anything RELEVANT to the thread? thx". Have a tissue. Don't like being hoist by your own petard, do you? (Just like preachy social conservative GOP philanderers who get caught out). Thread drift happens - sucks to be you. Well, next time you think of complaining about someone else being off-topic (which you do frequently when it suits you) I suggest you remember what you just wrote, and refrain from posting your complaint. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

Is Mike not around? Maybe he's "hiking the Appalachian Trail". No, I didn't bother answering - I already covered the STERLING examples of Mssrs Clinton and Edwards upthread, thanks. Neither Clinton nor Edwards is the governor of SC. As was mentioned previously in this thread: To quote mnealtx, "*yawn* Got anything RELEVANT to the thread? thx". Have a tissue. Don't like being hoist by your own petard, do you? (Just like preachy social conservative GOP philanderers who get caught out). If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

Is Mike not around? Maybe he's "hiking the Appalachian Trail". No, I didn't bother answering - I already covered the STERLING examples of Mssrs Clinton and Edwards upthread, thanks. Neither Clinton nor Edwards is the governor of SC. As was mentioned previously in this thread: To quote mnealtx, "*yawn* Got anything RELEVANT to the thread? thx". If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

You are one funny and desperate person sir. Please, respond to the fact that this post references peer reviewed research. Or do you dare. No, you are mistaken as usual. The article is an opinion piece, not a scientific article, and there is not a singe bibliographical reference to peer reviewed research. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

Seems he's the only Supreme Court justice to approve of it. online.wsj.com/article/SB124593034315253301.html Why am I not surprised? If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

No, he wasn't. According to him, he's been sleeping with miss Argentina for a year. He's only been separated for a few weeks. I already posted that once. I am filing it with selective reading, if it doesn't fit with my beliefs, why read it.... Don't bother mnealtx with facts. He'll just do another CDIF. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

That's better than having no values at all, and just being a full-time liar and whore. Who's the most moral person? 1) Someone who lies, cheats and steals all the time, and has no remorse about it, or; 2) Someone who leads a mostly moral life, but on rare occasions makes a mistake? False dichotomy Yes, anyone who is neither a sleaze nor a self-righteous hypocrite, since Sanford is both. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.