Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
- sursum on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- KSGolfnut on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- outlander on Open thread 11/24
Open thread
- By Phillip Brownlee
- Posted July 2, 2006 at 12:13 a.m.
- Filed under Uncategorized
- Permalink
- Comments RSS
- Both comments and trackbacks are closed
105 Comments
Ok here is one I had been thinking about today. I was going to pose the question and give my opinion. Nice and neat the next time an open blog showed up. I would have worked on it yesterday if I had only knew. But here is the question:
What would happen in this country IF the President were to be impeached? Please no “I would cheer!” I would like an honest opinion as to the real outcome and how it would effect this nation. I know this is a heady subject, one that might take some thought. But hey you were going to think anyway! This is an after the fact question and is not as to if or when it might happen.I will work on my answer today.
WD, you don’t have to look very far back to get your answer. Bill Clinton was impeached.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_ClintonHe wasn’t convicted. The upside was, the idiots in Congress were so tied up trying to impeach the guy, they didn’t have the time or energy to be passing a bunch of stupid laws (Defense of Marriage, Flag Burning, etc).
If Bush were impeached and convicted, the imeadiate BAD result would be that Cheney would become president. That’s a mixed bag. While Cheney being president would really suk, it would probably be a net positive in that it would almost garrantee a Liberal win in ‘08, IMHO.
If the Democrats re-take the Senate in ‘06, impeachment is a strong possibility. But I don’t see a sitting president being impeached and CONVICTED in the near future.
That is a good question, and food for thought because of the real possibility of it happening. The upside of it would be no more Bush; tghe downside Cheney.
However, there is the possibility the whole executive branch could go down. Cheney has put his foot in enough decisions that it raises constitutional questions. Rumsfeld the same.
This is a lame duck administration, and as such, they have little to fear from congress, especially a Republican led congress. I doubt anything will be done unless the Supreme Court makes some drastic rulings against them, or they attempt to defy the rulings.
The same thing would happen. Clinton was not removed from office because it was a Democratically controlled congress, and he knew there were not enough votes to remove him.
Same thing now..there would not be enough votes to remove Bush even if there were enough votes to impeach.
He will most likely go down as “the worst president ever”, impeaching Bush is like beating a dead cat…just a waste of time and energy. If he was forced out of office, which is unlikely, nothing would change with Cheney in office…it would just be more of the same until 2008. I just hope the next few years go quickly so (hopefully) someone more competant can start cleaning up this whole mess.
There are two really good articles on global warming in the WE’s sister KC Star today.
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/front/14949187.htm
Impeaching the President doesn’t do anything but give a lot of fodder to the media.
Presidents come and go all the time, so the government will keep on going.
People give the President to much credit for power than they actually really have.
Impeach Cheney?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364×1548271
History may be repeating itself: I predict Cheney will resign over being up to his elbows in the Plame leak – this will happen before Bush leaves office in disgrace. Which will usher in a period of Democrat control which they will mess up via corruption at all levels, which will set the stage for a Reagan type Republican presidency, and so on ad nauseum…
Wow! What a dream you had last night DD.
“…Clinton was not removed from office because it was a Democratically controlled congress…”
Uh huh. Looks like the history revising has already begun.
Raptor, what little world do YOU live in?
Well, some of us are a little mistaken in terms here.
Impeachment IS “conviction”. It is an old word. Basically it denounces publically the character and reputation of the one impeached.
SO if Congress changes in party power only a very little, impeachment of bush is highly likely. There is no shortage of Republicans who would LOVE the chance to very openly put distance between themselves and the worst president in history.
bush would not, I think resign in the face of impeachment. He is so arrogantly stupid he would probably consider impeachment further proof that everyone but him is wrong and that he must carry on his specially dispensated mission from God.
It is not likely that a vote would follow to remove bush from office, just as it did not with Clinton.
SO Should bush be impeached? DEFINITELY. Will he be? PROBABLY. Will this change much of anything ?No.
I’ll see where this topic goes and come on back. Hypothetical games are interesting in the face of political stagnation.
Quote of the Day:
“Even today I am willing to volunteer to do the dirty work for Israel, to kill as many Arabs as necessary, to deport them, to expel and burn them, to have everyone hate us, to pull the rug from underneath the feet of the Diaspora Jews, so that they will be forced to run to us crying. Even if it means blowing up one or two synagogues here and there, I don’t care. And I don’t mind if after the job is done you put me in front of a Nuremberg Trial and then jail me for life. Hang me if you want, as a war criminal… What you lot don’t understand is that the dirty work of Zionism is not finished yet, far from it.”
Ariel Sharon, 1982
Bush is not going to be impeached, even if the Democrats win the House in November. And that’s unlikely, imo.
For example, I remember some people writing here a few months ago about a forthcoming “exciting announcement” concerning Rep. Tiahrt’s likely Democrat opponent in November.
Here we are 17 weeks away from the election and I have no idea who’s running against Tiahrt.
This lack of focus does not bode well for Democrats, imo. I suspect the Democrats are in similar disarray elsewhere in red America.
I also expect President Bush will issue a pardon for Scooter Libby late this year, certainly after the elections. This pardon won’t depend on who holds the House, imo (even if Democrats were to win, Bush will pardon Libby). It will be issued after the elections because a pre-election pardon certainly could cost the GOP Congressional seats at the margin.
“Wow! What a dream you had last night DD.”
Yes, Joe, it was sort of like the dreams you have every day while you are “awake”.
The rumor I heard was that Beatty, the guy who wrote the BTK book, was going to run against Tiahrt. He has since announced that he is running for Secretary of State. Having him run for S of S is probably a smart move – no sense in getting him beat up by Tiahrt in his first race ever. The current Democratic candidates against Tiahrt are sacrificial lambs, I would think.
Beatty’s association with law enforcement, via the book, I thought could be a political positive.
JR, impeachment is the proceeding to remove the president. Basically, the trial, not the verdict.
Definition of impeach: 1. in an appropriate tribunal, to accuse of or charge with misconduct of public office.
BTW, I don’t know if any of you have heard about this, but it’s definitely worth noting:
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – The municipal council in the liberal California city of Berkeley plans to give voters a say on a measure calling for the impeachment of U.S. President George W. Bush and U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney, the mayor said on Wednesday.
A number of local governments across the United States have pressed resolutions urging impeachment, but the Berkeley city council’s goal is to be the first to put the issue directly to voters, Mayor Tom Bates said in an interview.
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=2006-06-28T195958Z_01_N28383083_RTRIDST_0_OUKOE-UK-USA-POLITICS-IMPEACHMENT.XML&archived=False
Mea culpa. Not controlled by Democrats, but there were enough votes there to prevent a removal from office.
Better?
Yes, Raptor, thank you. :)
10 Republican Senators voted not to impeach, along with 45 Democrats. As a 2/3 vote was needed, I’d say the less than 50% (55 not to impeach, 45–all Rep.) wasn’t all that close. Not a landslide by any means either.
I have to agree that there will probably never be impeachment proceedings against Bush, not even if the Dems would take control of both houses. Bush and Cheney both have CYA down to a science. Note how neither of them has EVER testified to ANYTHING under oath. I’d say Clinton taught them that. ;)
For a good analysis of the BushdaBum presidency:********************************http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/07/01/worst-president-in-history/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.littleindia.com%2Fnews%2F157%2FARTICLE%2F1106%2F2006-06-28.html&frame=true
Worst President In History?Bush’s most dangerous legacy is the erosion of America’s vaunted traditions of civil rights and liberties.
A reputed historian, representing a profession that is usually very circumspect about making sweeping judgments, recently speculated that President George W Bush could go down as the worst president in U.S. history.
Sean Wilentz, a professor of history at Princeton University, wrote that great presidents, “Presented with arduous, at times seemingly impossible circumstances, they rallied the nation, governed brilliantly and left the republic more secure than when they entered office.”By contrast, “Calamitous presidents, faced with enormous difficulties — James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Herbert Hoover and now Bush — have divided the nation, governed erratically and left the nation worse off.”
***********************************
I love my country. I hate what is being done to it.
The question was “What would happen in this country IF the President were to be impeached?” I think this would provoke a public backlash against the Democrats that they would never again be viewed as a legitimate political party. Those that have made it their personal vendetta to undermine President Bush would be seen as being vengeful and attempting to do to Bush as what happen to Clinton. Watching partisan hearing again would irk the public to turn on the accusers for dragging us into a senseless debacle again. If the Democratic party tried to impeach Bush they would destroy themselves trying to bring him down. This would not be a good thing to have happen.
So, Guss, when the Reps impeach over a blow job it’s legitimate but if the Dems impeach over an unneccessary war it’s cheap politics and vengeful?
Because it’s Congress that funds the war, therefore allowing it to happen and they have the power to stop it.
So if the war is unneccessary in your words and it warrents impeachment, you are going to have to impeach all members of Congress that voted for the funding of the war.
In otherwords, it isn’t just the President who are involved in the decision for war.
That may be true Joe but BushdaBum has Congress in a corner on that. If they don’t vote the funds they “are not supporting the troops” and therefore “hate America”
Americans have really short memories. Remember during the Clinton impeachment how the liberal slant was that we need to look forward, not back; and that this was distracting and dividing our country? Actually, it was a pretty good argument. I’m not hearing that from the libs now. Instead, they are the ones trying to fan a tiny spark. Hypocrisy on the move. But I think cooler heads will prevail.
Per RD’s link, the Berkeley City Council is setting up an advisory vote for impeachment of the president. They evidently have nothing better to do than pursue their left-over agenda from the 60’s. Dude; make love, not war.
Peace. I’m out.
Joe’s right. It isn’t just the president who is involved in the decision for war. He’s just a brain-pickled, not very bright mouthpiece.
Everyone who hasn’t done so needs to see “An Inconvenient Truth”. Terrorism vs. global warming is Twain’s lightning bug vs. lightning.
Illegal immigrants from Mexico? When Kansas turns to desert in the next 40 years, maybe your kids can get Canada greencards. Or they may have to become illegal aliens to seek relief from the heat.
The movie cites a Science journal article. All that media crap about “divided scientific opinions” on humankind’s having, or not having an effect on the climate? Wrong. It is true that Bush’s Environmental Policy officer, who was previously a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute, falsified a scientific panel’s report, and when he was caught doctoring the data, he left the office to work for Exxon.
It is also true that Bush, Cheny, and company are scientific ignoramuses, and that the media, trying to be “fair and balanced” doesn’t understand science either, so what they perceive to be “fair and balanced” reporting on a scientific issue is ignorance.
I don’t think Gore should run for President. I do think that he should keep doing what he’s doing. Those of you who are open-minded and see this movie, will see that Mr Gore is an extremely intelligent, articulate man, the antithesis of the man who almost defeated him, in the 2000 election, but got to take office through chicanery.
Are you going to wait until government does something or are you doing to do something yourself?
It doesn’t do anything to praise Gore. What are you doing to reduce your carbon footprint? Gore isn’t reducing his.
Heartlander,
You might be able to articulate a much more valid point if you would just leave out all the snide little comments you make:
“He’s just a brain-pickled, not very bright mouthpiece.”
Things like that just show you to be the partisan hack you really are.
Clearly you do not read many of hearts posts Nathan. He is far from a “political hack”. That desription better fits you.
Joe? If Gore burns some aviation fuel to spread his message and it results in a significant change in attitudes about the Earth I think we can skip the hypocrisy charge don’t you? I saw a new poster here just the other day say that after she saw this movie, her and her husband are making major changes to their lifestyle.Multiply that by even a few million Americans and I think you will need to apologize to Gore.I intend to see Gores movie soon.
outlander – there is a BIG difference between lying about a blow job and lying to get America into a war.
Ben Huie,Pay attention to the original question, as I had repeated it, ‘What would happen…’ Clinton was impeached because he lied during a congressional hearing. People were pretty fed up with the whole hearing gambit plus the recent judicial hearing farce and another impeachment trial would backfire against the Democrats.I don’t care to set through Gore’s slide show that he been doing for 30 years by his claim. It could be the right message, just the wrong messenger.
Sorry JR, but Gore doesn’t get a pass, just because he is a messenger. He is getting a pass, because he is a celebrity.
It’s like the Christian Televangelist. They make millions and have lavish lifestyles and they keep on asking their sheep to send them money to help people, yet they don’t do it themselves. They pray on the poor and niave.
Gore is going the same thing. He rakes in millions in speaking fees and his movie box office reciepts, but you can’t tell me if he will donate a single dollar to a cause or R&D for alternative energy. Nope! He is keeping it for himself.
Just another opportunist who saw $$$ in the enviromental cause. He cares enough about it just for it to be believeable to the sheep flock. But all his is going is making $$$ off of you.
Sorry! I place my faith in industry to come up with the products and energy alternatives to make our planet less polluted and reduce greenhouse emissions. Gore’s movie isn’t going to do anything but enrich him and his friends.
Would that be the same “industry” you are placing your faith in Joe that you are even now advocating for outsource on another thread?
Why don’t you see Gores movie before you trash it.
Gore is not asking for a pass nor exploiting his status as a celebrity to make money. He has plenty. He did not do it for money when he wrote “Earth in the Balance” He IS using his name to bring attention to a cause he feels important. It is important. It may be the most important thing in human history.
Oh that’s right you have posted such gems like” Why would global warming be so bad?”
It may be that you are ignorant Joe. It may be that Gores movie might show you something. Are you afraid of learning something?
No! I’m not ignorant. I just see through the BS. I don’t deny Global Warming, but it is hysteria. And from what I know about the Gore Doom, he forgot to add one important fact to his money making endevour, and since he didn’t mention this fact, then it is propaganda.
FACT: The sun is getting hotter.
I’m not saying that there are a whole host of factors that contribute to global warming, just they forget to add that fact, which they believe challenges their agenda of anti-industry.
I’ll watch his movie once it comes out on DVD. No need to watch it in the theaters. I have Netflix service.
You dare to call me ignorant. I’m planning to turn a car into an electric vechile. Since you drive that large SUV or Truck, you feel exempt, because you are a leftist Democrat. Sorry! All talk and no action. I’m way ahead of you.
Haven’t seen the movie yet but plan to in the near future. From what I have read it is too conservative and optimistic compared to the literature I have been reading.
Nathan,
Bush IS brain pickled. It is not a secret that he was an alcoholic for more than 20 years. He admitted it. His failure to enunciate English words is on the record, because it is recorded. His failure to accomplish anything until his father’s friends bought a baseball team for him, and that team’s lousy record are matters of record. He ran his first candidacy saying he would be “the education president” and overcome the tyranny of low expectations for minority students, is a matter of record. So, we have compulsory standardized testing, and slightly improved test scores because teachers teach to the test, which is NOT even an approximation to sound educational restructuring. And for that matter with multiple choice tests, you can game scores by altering the answer choices to make more wrong answer choices obviously incorrect, even to substantially confused students.
Bush said he wouldn’t engage in “nation building” as Clinton did in the Balkans. He said that America cannot be “the world’s policeman”? What do you think “democratizing” Iraq represents?
Joe . . . get back to us when you actually convert the vehicle to electricity.
Until then, it’s just wishful thinking.
What are you going brown? Or are you going to sit in your chair and drink more beer.
Doing rather. Seems like I have a habit of typing going for doing.
Heartlander: That must have been a really pursuasive movie. Otherwise you wouldn’t seriously claim that there isn’t legitimate scientific disagreement on the global warming issue. Here’s another example, from a Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008597
There are any number of such opinions from extremely qualified scientists who disagree with “professor” Gore.When I was a kid, and a movie scared me, my mother told me to repeat; it’s only a movie, it’s only a movie…
I did NOT call you ignorant Joe. I said you may be ignorant of some things Gore presents in his movie.
Sigh………
See how far a lie can go.
Joe just because Nathan once posted that he knew for a fact I drive an SUV doesn’t make it true. Maybe you missed the clarification on that? I drive a 4 cylinder truck.
Good on you for your playing your part to make things better.
Your posting: “It may be that you are ignorant Joe.”
That is a statement. Nice spin! You must of learned that from Ann Coulter.
Joe?
I followed that statement you are taking offense at with:
“It may be that Gores movie might show you something.”
Please do not pretend offense where clearly none was meant.
“Clinton was impeached because he lied during a congressional hearing.” -Guss
You neglict to add that he was questioned about sex with an intern in an inquiry for the Whitewater investigation. An investigation about possible SEC violations in cattle futures. The two things weren’t related but it was all the repukes could find to hold against him.
For the record, I never said I knew for a fact that you drove an SUV JR.
And here you are talking to us about telling lies.
Nathan is probably right JR. He parses his words carefully – like “I bet JR drives an SUV” so he can then duck. Kind of like “I didn’t have sex” when a blow job has been defined for the purposes of deposition as not being sex.
Your attack back then was worded badly Nathan. The implication that I was hypocritical in my choice of vehicle vs. my personal efforts for the environment clearly took hold at least with Joe Williams.
Actually it was very well worded JR. IMPLIED strongly enough for the desired result but just enough wiggle room to get out. Nathan excels at that.
Call it the best of politics. Maybe we are learning bad habits.
Yeah Ben.
Called on this same matter (what I drive) awhile back, Nathan issued a half hearted apology long after the fact.
JR – I can just imagine you drunkenly careening down the road in your Hummer right now …
Notice that I never really said any of that was true, just ‘implied’ a bit. Context, you know …
Here kfg would say “this is not a pipe” lol
Well I hope Joe Williams was the only one who bought into the “JR is an SUV driving limousine liberal” I can deal with Joe being deluded. I am used to that.
Yes JR,
I apologized for the confusion. My statement was never meant to say you drive an SUV. My statement was directed at that other person (don’t remember the name now)
Either way, like it really matters.
I could come to your house, get on my knees on channel 10 news and apologize while kissing your feet and it wouldn’t be good enough for you.
It does illustrate how posting baseless assertions can color others opinions Nathan. I had considered the matter closed until Joe brought it up. YOU made that happen not me.
LOL
JR, you KFG, and who knows who else were the ones who made it a big deal, not me.
Joe said SUV or Truck. You do drive a truck don’t you?
You didn’t consider the matter closed. You sit here talking about half hearted apologies and whatnot. You never let it go.
You will probably bring this up again a month from now if you get the chance.
I never said you drive an SUV. I never posted a baseless assertion either.
You are still sitting here trying to say I did something I did not.
I didn’t bring what I drive up Nathan. Joe did that. He did it because of what YOU posted. You called me a hypocrite and dishonest. AND you did so based on “personal observation”. That some caught your dishonesty and others bought it is your doing not mine. Don’t make me do a bonedig. You were wrong. Say so again for Joe and let it go. I will as well.
JR,
I never made any claims about you like that. It was about the other person. I have said that several times.
Please go do a bonedig.
The apology was for the confusion over my wording, not for my supposed “dishonesty” or calling you a hypocrit.
How many times do I need to explain it to you?
Explain it to Joe Williams Nathan. Where else but from you did he get
“Since you drive that SUV or truck”
As I posted back when you made the assertion that I was a hypocrite, I call on you now to clear the record. Just say for the record again that you were wrong. Joe Williams is a little slow on the uptake. Set it straight for him and anyone else you “unintentionally” misled.
JR,
Your arrogance in calling for me to admit something I did not do is asinine.
Have a good night.
You have a good night too Nathan. Consider more carefully your posts in the future. I get tired of putting out fires that others start about me. And Joe’s posts earlier prove that you did burn me. You can call my appeal for you to be honest assinine. Says more about you than me.
“I could come to your house, get on my knees on channel 10 news and apologize while kissing your feet and it wouldn’t be good enough for you.”
How bout instead you kiss his ass at the corner of Douglas and Main and give him 20 minutes to draw a crowd?
HELLO EVERYBODY!
I’m back from Colombia!My sister got married down there.
Anything interesting happen while I was gone?
Geez just when I was going to try and sleep.
Well “compromise” I need no such accomodation. I’d just like if Nathan corrected the misperception he caused about me.
Crusader X!!!!! I was wondering about you! Anything interesting happen in your absence? Well only 2meetups (one “organized” by the eagle) a left side “civil” war, many new posters,and the emergence of a blogfarter that makes you look like Mary Poppins. Also Rage is not here for ahwile to hit you while I hold you should that become necessary again.
Welcome back Crusader X!
Dammit! All the juicy stuff happens when Im on R&R! It’s nice to see your still ridin that high horse of yours JR. Just who is this blogfarter of whom you speak?
No good topics. What the hell.
KFG, note Nathan’s posts and check #13 and #2 on the list. ;)
Nice to see you here again, CruX. Best wishes to your sister.
awww… it appears I was missed. Thank you, and she married a worthy man I’m happy for the both of them.
Hey Ian,
Why did Hitler kill himself?
Cuz he got the gas bill. ;)
Sorry I got in on this late!flike:The four Democrat challengers to Tiahrt will debate 7 PM Tuesday, 7/25 on KCTU channel 5. (if you have Demon Cox, it’s one more reason to pull the plug and wait for ATT U-vers).
“The same thing would happen. Clinton was not removed from office because it was a Democratically controlled congress, and he knew there were not enough votes to remove him.”
Raptor I was just reading about the Clinton impeachment. The book states it was a Republicans ran house and the impeachment failed by one vote. But you have a point, the Republicans run both house and senate. The Congress would have to draw up the articles of impeachment, then the senate is where the trial would be held with the chief Justice of the supreme court as the arbitrator of facts.
A move to impeach could be stop at any point, also there is not law that state they have to act on a impeachment. Little alone what constitutes an impeachable offense, Clinton was impeached for lying about his affair with the intern under oath. Regan had violated several laws during the Iran/Contra affair and only one Congressman made a move to file the articles of impeachment and could not get a second.
I read the WSJ commentary by Prof. Lindzen. You don’t get to be an MIT professor without being brilliant. Lindzen is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences, reflecting extremely high respect in his specialized community.
Nevertheless, it is somewhat disturbing to see in a number of his published reports, repeated reference to his use of the term “simple” modeling methods. To a layman like me, they do not look simple. But, to an expert readership, does Prof. Lindzen mean what he says, i.e. that he is using simplifying assumptions, and if so, may they be OVERsimplifying atmospheric phenomena? His publication list shows that he has engaged in some, shall we say, enthusiastic defenses of an “atmospheric iris” theory he proposed, having to do with longwave (infrared radiation’s) escape, which would mitigate global warming.
His WSJ commentary pointed out a gross error in Gore’s stated 928 surveyed articles showing 100%agreement on global warming. Time will tell who is right, or more to the point, to what degree (no pun intended).
These things being said, the National Research Council’s Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate has issued a report (this is under the aegis of the National Academy of Sciences), that affirms a global temperature rise in the past three decades that is higher than anything seen in the past 400 years, and the data, with less confidence, still suggest higher temperatures than at any time in the last 1100 years.
http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11676.html
It is notable that the report contained the same graphic information presented in the movie–Gore didn’t make these scientific data up. Secondly, the movie’s photographic demonstrations of glacial retreat are recorded FACTS. Indeed, you can go to Glacier National Park and see the old photos versus current conditions. You can go to the Birch Aquarium at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and read display statements about coral bleaching and warming sea temperatures. Frankly, I have faith in SIO, because its scientists have been making measurements for the past half century.
It is also noteworthy that the scientists Dr. Lindzen criticizes are field scientists (paleoclimatology pioneers) who have made measurements of physical specimens, as well as analyzing others’ measurements of physical specimens. Dr. Lindzen appears, according to his published online-available papers, http://eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen/PublicationsRSL.html to be an armchair theoretician. Einstein was an armchair theoretician. Brilliant. One of the greatest physicists in history. But he was totally wrong about quantum mechanics, as he belatedly admitted. Performing experiments, and making direct observations, creates different perceptions from secondary analysis, as brilliant as it may be, of other people’s primary data.
Oh, one last thing. Richard Lindzen is the ALFRED P. SLOAN Professor of Earth, Planetary and Atmospheric Sciences, which is to say, he gets a lot more money, as an endowed-chair recipient, than ordinary professors. If the name doesn’t ring a bell to readers, Alfred P. Sloan was CHAIRMAN OF GENERAL MOTORS 1937-56. Oops, there may be some bias on Prof. Lindzen’s part. An Inconvenient Truth has a great quote, which I hope I don’t butcher in paraphrasing: “It may be impossible to understand something when understanding something reduces your income.”
CrusX–
You’ve missed nothing.
It’s the same 25 people circle joiking themselves with delusions of changing the world.
Thanks for your update heartlander. As an MIT grad myself (1969) I recall that the Sloan school is BUSINESS there and, in the past, didn’t have science professors.
Right wing bloggers urge readers to target the CHILDREN of NYTimes editors–
“UPDATE III: Another upstanding, patriotic blogger — after linking to the blog which posted the address of the Times photographer — has now posted this:
‘So, in the school of what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, we are providing this link so YOU may help the blogosphere in locating the homes (perhaps with photos?) of the editors and reporters of the New York Times.
‘Let’s start with the following New York Times reporters and editors: Arthur “Pinch” Sulzberger Jr. , Bill Keller, Eric Lichtblau, and James Risen. Do you have an idea where they live?
‘Go hunt them down and do America a favor. Get their photo, street address, where their kids go to school, anything you can dig up, and send it to the link above. This is your chance to be famous -grab for the golden ring.”
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/07/conservative-pundits-reveal-murderous.html
Maybe The Eagle editors will get a clue of what the right-wing is capable of when they egg them on like they do (e.g. Cal Thomas).
interesting video …
http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/07/02/video-proof-that-9-11-didnt-happen-as-we-think-it-did/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.google.com%2Fvideoplay%3Fdocid%3D-8260059923762628848%26q%3D9%252F11&frame=true
Ben! I haven’t checked out your video link, but if it’s the same one that circulates around the net saying the 9/11 was a planned event by the Bush Administration, then I would have to say that something has to be seriously wrong with you to believe that.
But if it’s something else, then I’ll watch it. But you are going to have to give me a synopsis on it. Because I’m thinking it’s the 9/11 conspriacy video. That it was a missle that blew up the Pentagon and the WTC was brought down by demolition charges.
God I hope that isn’t the video for your sake Ben.
Ben, I checked out your Link. Some interesting stuff there.
Joe, don’t watch it. Too much information that won’t jibe with your smiley-face view of the world.
Interesting change of perspective for the usually uber conservative gertie. Posting like a lib today? Well, keep it up… I guess…
“Since you drive that large SUV or Truck, you feel exempt, because you are a leftist Democrat. Sorry! All talk and no action. I’m way ahead of you.”
So here, we see for ourselves, the republican, conservative strategy for lying in your face and then denying any consequenses OF the lie.
Nathan saw what JR drove at the first meetup. Then he lies in JR’s face about driving a gas guzzling SUV. Facts? For the little people. The lie and the spin must go on. Oh, in retrospect, there is a weasle word or two to give a literalist an out. A way to deny what he said. (this is not a pipe). But the damage is done with the lie in the face of the facts.
So… next damage of the lie? Williams writes the above. Now, he probably doesnt even remember who said it (history of no credibility) or where he heard it (again, at the end of a losing thread for nathan) but it just stuck in joe’s mind that “JR drives a gas guzzler”.
Now nathan can come back and deny all accountability for the first lie, williams can just attack jr with a pipe he found lying around, and nathan can say, “this is not a pipe”.
And poor ol’ truth? Lying on the ground forgotten.
JR drives a very fuel efficient truck. But if you polled the bloggers here? They’d only remember discussions about JR and his gas guzzling ways. The truth is forgotton.
RD, I saw the points, and I saw the wake of this meme coming.
This is how they work. Lie, repeat the lie, turn it into a meme, and then deny any responsibility.
If you cant see that here… and else where? You are being willfully stupid. Ignorance can be fixed by knowledge. You know, facts?
But, in the immortal words of Ron White “you caint fix stuuupid.”
Nathan says:
“You didn’t consider the matter closed. You sit here talking about half hearted apologies and whatnot. You never let it go.”
heheheheh
Ben must be ROFLHAO!! Sounds like nathan and his refusal to let go some minor point about the red cross! That was SO long ago, yet at then end of yet ANOTHER losing thread, nathan can say to Ben, “yeah, but my point about the red cross..”
I wonder how long he will continue to bring THAT up?
I love yer posts Ben!
Wish I could see that video. I’ll have to remember to look it up later when I upgrade. I’ll take the word of Ben and XXX that it merits study.
Joe? Ben presented a link. You can click it or not. He does not have to convince you to have intellectual curiousity or an open mind. That burden is yours.
Oh!…..nevermind.
hee hee hee… still laughing here.
Isnt there a weasle word phrase about “plausable deniability”?
hehehehehe. I think that is the main defense around here. Some crumb of plausable deniablility. Or in other words?
“This is not a pipe.”
Joe – I never said I believed it, I frankly don’t know. I simply stumbled across if (the new Netscape format) and found it intrigueing.
Remember the burning of the Reischtagg in the 30s? Or of some draft boards in New Jersey in the 70s? Things are not always as they appear.
No JR. Because I’ve seen that video several times and frankly, if you believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy from the Bush Administration, I would have to question your rationality.
I can provide you links to Snopes that debunk the tin foil claims.
We were attacked by Islamic Terrorist. That is what happen. Not missles and paid pilots to kill themselves just so Bush can go to war in Iraq to steal their oil.
Yup kfg the seed of “J R is a demonstrable hypocrite” was planted in the fertile soil of Joe Williams mind. Wish other things grew there!
Let me step on the next one before it pops up!
At the most recent meetup, I DID drive a not too feul efficient vehicle…..my late fathers truck. It was a luxury he afforded himself and drove little these last few years. I only drove it because it gets little use these days and needs to run occaisonally in order to maintain optimum engine efficiency.
Next?
I never close my mind to any possibility Joe.
Well! Here is something for you. I’m a big advocate for electric vehicles, because I frimly believe it is the way to go. Not ethonal or bio-diesel.
http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/?detectflash=false
Tell me what you think?
Ben,
Is that the Loose Change video? I just thought I’d ask before I click through all the links and jump through all the hoops to get to it. Not that I wouldn’t watch it. I have. And, like you, I believe it was thoughtful, at the least. At the most? *shiver*
Yes RD – loose cvhange 2 (updated)
Joe – the problem with electric (and hygrogen for that matter) is still the question of where to get the energy. My answer to that includes nuclear. Another interesting possibility would be to modify existing hybrid technology to plug it in so it becomes ‘mostly’ electric.
Joe,
Interesting link on the electric car.
The one thing I find troubling about hybrids is the battery. Now, I don’t know how long a battery on one lasts, nor how many charges it will take, but I have heard (sorry, no link) that after so long, a new battery is needed. The problem is, no replacement batteries are being manufactured. So where does that leave a hybrid car user?
If I slap on my tinfoil hat, what that means to me is hybrid car manufacturers have done this so that owners would then have to purchase a new car. Good for the car manufacturers, not so good for the buyers.
But then I DO NOT KNOW if this is true. Therefore, if I intended to buy a hybrid, I would definitely check into it beyond asking the dealer or checking the manufacturer’s comments.
This is so ugly, it’s cute.
http://www.theaircar.com/
Compressed air – same problem – where are you going to get the energy to compress it?
The urban myth I have heard about hybrid cars is that EMS personnel are reluctant to use the jaws of life on them for fear of getting shocked. Any one else hear that?
Ben,
From what I read about the MDI Air Car (btw, it’s French), it’s a hybrid, using both fossil fuel and compressed air.
You’d have to check out the site. There’s motor design info there and other “stuff” that you’d understand much better than I. I am totally science poor. I have a brick wall put up by my 6th grade science teacher when science becomes anything more than common sense. Math is the same. :((
Yes, I’ve seen Loose Change2. Very chilling, very informative.
In the beginning, I laughed off conspiracy theories. Not that I thought government was the be all, end all. But truly villanous? Nah.
And then a kind gentleman gave me a link to the Operation: Northwoods document. After reading through it, I then understood what the government was capable of. If not for those who could and did say NO to it, it might have happened. And that is VERY SCARY.
Now I know that anything can happen. Whether it did or not, I don’t know. People ask for proof. Maybe someday we’ll have all we need. Unfortunately, it may be too late. The info on the JFK assasination was sealed for 75 years.
Leftist Presidential candidate defeated in Mexico. Yah! :D
OH NO. NOT THE HARD HATS VS. THE HIPPIES AGAIN.HAVEN’T WE BEEN OVER THIS ALREADY?
The effects of an impeachment on the United States would be a blow to the country. Even in a time of peace to remove the chief officer of the Government, will cause a ripple that runs through the country. The wound left by the action in a time of war would cause a weakening of the drive to fight the terrorists. Unless it can be done with the forethought to replace the chief officer and his cabinet with a standing team of motivated people. In a sense they would have to be like minded to those being replaced, so that the team would not be lost in the task to be taken. Though it would need to have a true understanding of where the prior administration went wrong and the cause of the impeachment. Else being like minded would cause them to simply follow the path that lead the prior administration to its downfall. Nor should they have the misunderstanding that they should follow the path to ruination by taking a path that runs beside it.This maybe the most difficult for all concerned in that in order to complete the mission the replacements would need to understand the direction that the prior administration was going and trim a similar line.To do otherwise would allow any good that has been done to be lost. But they would need to depart from the prior administration in it implementation that lead to the impeachment.
The effect upon the people of the United States would be to remove a object that has not allow a wound to heal. But the wound would still be there, it would be a time for some to take the path of salving over the wound. Those that supported the prior administration and those that knew a need for them to be gone, will need to be brought together for the good of the country. Like the two sides and the top and bottom of a gash, it heals only when the edges draw together and the wound closes. The gash in this country’s people is wide and deep, not since the civil war has this country been so divided.
It has been said that this is a mirror image of the impeachment of President Clinton, in the case of Clinton he was a popular President with the public at large. But was unpopular within the Congress to the point that impeachment articles came easy for them. But it is said that G.W. Bush has the opposite in that within Congress he is a popular President, but unpopular with in the public at large. The polls would say that it is correct, but an impeachment would be a truer telling of the real opinion of this issue.
There would be a need for an concurrence reached between the different sides. Perhaps the full disclosure of an impeachment would help. But it may just take time for the wound to heal as it is so wide and deep.
As to the world view, this is a balancing act as most of the world see it as we have not been practicing what we preach. They will hold us to a higher standard then they hold their own government. But then they do not live in a country renowned for being better then most. As painful as it would be, this would help to restore the integrity that this country once held in the eyes of the world. Do we need their approval? In a word yes, in a world that gets smaller all the time we are not an island nor would the world at large stand for us to be a bully on the block. A world turned against us would turn the United States into a armed camp, seeing everyone as an enemy, only causes more isolation within the planet. If you wish to be the example then one must not stand alone in the dark.
It is said we are the last super power, but unlike the role seen by a certain group. Instead of the use of our power to spread our will. We should spread that which is our greatness, it is that that made us the last super power over those that thought using their power was the answer. To forget that lesson would only lead us to our extinction as was the fate of the super power that failed. Part of that greatness, is that once we have made a great mistake. we do what it takes to fix the mistake as painful as it may be. That is our greatness, our power not our military might. It was foolish to think otherwise, never in the history of the world has it been the military might of a nation that was the sole means of its survival.
“There would be a need for an concurrence reached between the different sides.”
The 2006 elections will hold the key to that.
The Eagle ran a story today about a meteorite festival in Haviland. It will feature some creationist guest speakers, a couple of videos a la “The Privileged Planet,” and stargazing through IDcreationist lenses.
See http://www.havilandkansas.com/id4.html .
And weep.
Welcome to the forum Ugh.
Clearly, the Eagle story on the Haviland meteorite fest is incomplete and uninformed
Your link does not tell the whole story either. A quick search at some of the films to be presented at the Haviland meteorite fest namely “The Priviledged Planet” is more telling.
I initially had some interest in this meteorite fest. That has changed.
I’ve no interest in a fundie forum that uses science to advance religious dogma. What? “God” is throwing rocks at us? Was this event intentionally not fully explained?
Bad on the Eagle for not telling the whole story here.
Oh and good on you for catching it Ugh.
This is the Creed of Creation Research Society, one of the featured speaker’s organization. Doesn’t look like the astronomy taught in mainstream science:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/crs-creed.html
Too bad there is not truth in advertising here.
Good find DD.
Wow the Eagle really missed the story on this one. This isn’t a science oriented event. It’s masqerading as that to draw an unsuspecting crowd for a revival! Alotta people are gonna show up and be real surprised.
At least Haviland is a SMALL town. (Small town, small minds?) According to the 2005 Rand McNally Road Atlas, the population is 587.