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
- JimJohnson on Let immigrants run
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Let immigrants run
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Late-night laughs
104 Comments
Happy New Year (or the Feast of Circumcision, to be precise) to all! May 2008 bring you good health, prosperity, and happiness!
1. Barack “Rocks”! Vote, “Obama”, Experience the change.
2. Impeach Sebelius, she should not be allowed to appoint her puppets. This is a democracy. She should not have the “Dictator” say so over, Casinos, Budgets and anything/everything else pending. She should not be allowed to appoint the next AG. The AG has Veto rights over the Governor. If she appoints them we the Kansas Residents loose our Veto Rights. Call, E-mail, and mail Kay McFarland at the Kansas Superior Court and demand Democracy. Demand that the Governor not be allowed to appoint a “Puppet”!!!! Herbert West III, Publisher/Journalist Kansas Resident!!!!!!
FOX NEWS DOES NOT INVITE RON PAUL TO THEIR DEBATE. (update)
Mr. G”The New Hampshire Republican Party is sponsoring a forum for Republican presidential candidates on Jan. 6, two days before the state’s first-in-the-nation primary.” Later in the article, the AP stated: “Participating in the forum will be Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson.”
On the evening of December 28, Jared Chicoine and Jordan Brown of our New Hampshire campaign staff met in person with Fergus Cullen the New Hampshire GOP chairman to discuss whether or not Dr. Paul would be invited to participate in the forum. Mr. Cullen confirmed there will be an event on January 6, but he could not confirm whether or not Dr. Paul would be invited. We also learned the event would not be a debate with an audience, but instead would be a forum in a closed studio with the candidates questioned only by Chris Wallace of Fox News.
eorge reported, “Calls and emails to Fox News spokespersons by the Tribune were not returned Saturday evening.
“An official at the New Hampshire GOP, which is co-sponsoring the event with Fox, said that Paul might still be included, but the planning for the debate was still coming together and it was ultimately Fox’s call.”
As of late afternoon today (December 30), we have nothing more to report
Has Fox News Excluded Ron Paul? pt. 3
Fergus Cullen, chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party, issued a press release this afternoon about Fox News’ presidential candidates forum scheduled for January 6. His release is below.
We thank Mr. Cullen for his statement today and for his efforts with Fox News.
*****
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: December 31, 2007
Contact: Fergus Cullen, Chairman, New Hampshire Republican Party
NH REPUBLICANS: DON’T LIMIT DEBATE PARTICIPANTS
CONCORD – New Hampshire Republican Party Chairman Fergus Cullen releases the following statement regarding primary weekend debates:
“Limiting the number of candidates who are invited to participate in debates is not consistent with the tradition of the first in the nation primary. The level playing field requires that all candidates be given an equal opportunity to participate – not just a select few determined by the media prior to any votes being cast.”
“Therefore, the New Hampshire Republican Party calls upon all media organizations planning pre-primary debates or forums for both parties to include all recognized major candidates in their events.”
“The New Hampshire Republican Party has notified FOX News of our position, and we are in ongoing discussions with FOX News about having as many candidates as possible participate in the forum scheduled for January 6.”
Hey, guys! It’s my birthday!
Yup, I’m a “New Year’s baby.”
And, as the first kid born in town I got a lifetime supply of diapers.
It’s kinda sad now, mumble-mumble years later, that I might start needing them again.
Anyway, may 2008 bring prosperity and happiness to you all — even the wingnuts. (Maybe you’ll come to your senses.)
Happy Bday Monkey! May in your old age have a vert sexy nurse to change your diapers. Though of course by then you will hardly notice.
Both Fox News and ABC News, which are sponsoring debates next weekend in New Hampshire, are restricting who can attend.
Fox has invited five of the Republican candidates to a televised forum in Manchester on Sunday, but not Representative Ron Paul of Texas, right, who has placed fourth in some recent New Hampshire polls, or Representative Duncan Hunter of California.
Mr. Cullen also joined the New Hampshire Democratic Party in objecting to criteria for participation in back-to-back debates on Saturday on ABC News. The network says it will include only candidates who finish in the top four in the Iowa caucuses or receive at least 5 percent in New Hampshire or national polls.
The criteria could potentially sideline several of the Democrats, including Senators Christopher J. Dodd and Joseph R. Biden Jr.
David Chalian, the ABC News political director, said that the network was seeking to provide the “best conversation and debate between the candidates who really have a chance to become the nominee
Physicist Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu, the former director of both University of Alaska Fairbanks’ Geophysical Institute and International Arctic Research Center who has twice been named in “1000 Most Cited Scientists,” released a scientific study of the Arctic on March 2007 that concluded the recent warming was likely “natural” and not manmade.
http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~sakasofu/climate.php
Akasofu, an award winning scientist who has published more than 550 professional journal articles and authored or co-authored 10 books, also recently blasted the UN IPCC process. “I think the initial motivation by the IPCC (established in 1988) was good; it was an attempt to promote this particular scientific field,” Akasofu said in an April 1, 2007 interview. “But so many [scientists] jumped in, and the media is looking for a disaster story, and the whole thing got out of control,” Akasofu added. The article continued: “Akasofu said there is no data showing that ‘most’ of the present warming is due to the man-made greenhouse effect, as the members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change wrote in February. “If you look back far enough, we have a bunch of data that show that warming has gone on from the 1600s with an almost linear increase to the present,” Akasofu said. The article concluded: “Akasofu said scientists who support the man-made greenhouse gas theory disregard information from centuries ago when exploring the issue of global warming. Satellite images of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean have been available in the satellite era only since the 1960s and 1970s. ‘Young researchers are interested in satellite data, which became available after 1975,’ he said. ‘All the papers since (the advent of satellites) show warming. That’s what I call ‘instant climatology.’ I’m trying to tell young scientists, ‘You can’t study climatology unless you look at a much longer time period.’”
http://dwb.adn.com/life/story/8756517p-8658008c.htm
OK a little clarification is in order, it seem that it is being spread that Fox had cancelled the debate on the 6th of Jan. And is lampooning the Paul campaign and its supporters for spreading false information. No debate then of course he could not have been ignored, the reality is a game of semantics. They plan on five of the GOP candidates to set around a table and be asked questions by Chris Wallace. But there is no audience, it is not set up in a debate forum and they will be asked only certain questions and allow to answer only these questions. And stating their views on these topics alone, it is to be recorded and broadcasted just before the NH caucus.
First off, “writerdog,” let’s make it clear that Ron Paul is a certifiable nut. He expects the United States of America to live up to it’s professed ideals and those ideals most certainly are no longer in play anymore.
That makes him a nut.
It’s as if the liberals still had Kurt Vonnegut around and put him up as a candidate.
http://tinyurl.com/2xj7hg
Roger Ailes and the Faux Noise Channel absolutely do not want to promote the throughts of genuine American conservatism, they’re in business to promote the Republic Party du jour.
If the polling turned out that dog-on-cat sex would generate a workable Republic Party majority at the polls, the 2008 election (and especially the national election coverage from the Faux Noice Channel) would focus on dog-on-cat sex.
All those other so-called “conservative” issues would fall by the wayside. It’d be, “Hillary Hussein Edwards advocates cat-on-dog sex!!!!” 24/7.
Ron Paul emerges as one who seems to actually believe in the crap “conservatives” have long advocated for no other reason than they have been able to win elections bashing gays, calling women baby-killers, and promising that once you make $350,000 a year or so you’ll not have to pay a fair share of taxes.
Every gay-hating, abortion-opposing, angry white male in America sometimes thinks he might someday rise to an income level that might benefit from Republic Party rhetoric.
But the prospect of a true-believer, a Ron Paul who’s fallen for the political rhetoric and actually *believes* the cons have been telling the truth…? Well the Faux Noise Channel can’t possibly let him have a voice in the presidential debates.
Well Monkeyhawk I have heard several time Ron Paul referred to as a nut. But I believe you were the first to actually give an explaining as to why he is called a nut! GMC70 did say it was because of his stance on trade and his ideals as to the economy were “antiquated”.
As to your summation of Fox news, I do find them a bit on the light side of informative. They seemed geared toward a fourth grade mentality and understanding, I expect them to any minute use the term “Pooh-Pooh head” in describing someone they do not agree with.
But them most of the other news organization are lacking too in the level they convey the news. As if the viewers are somehow mentally defiant, but I have always seen Fox as the leading outlet for the Neoconservatives propaganda. LOL my son just was flipping through the channels and Fox News is talking about hangover cures. Last week they were discussing the procedure and cost of breast implants! There was another bombing in Iraq, Pakistan was in turmoil, the Congress was doing nothing at all and there was no foreseeable action in the future. And they were discussing fake boobs! Now don’t get me wrong the surest way to get my attention is to be talking about a woman’s body parts.
There is more to life then politics you know! LOL I was watching Kinky Friedman on book TV last night, I loved his definition of “politic” Poli meaning many or more the one and tic is a blood sucking organism.
Hey, guys! It’s my birthday!
Yup, I’m a “New Year’s baby.”
Posted by: MonkeyHawk | January 01, 2008 at 06:11 AM
Well Happy Birthday MonkeyHawk!
Today is also Mrs XXX’s birthday. She was the only baby born on that New Year in the town where she’s from.
To the rest of the WeBlog crew, Happy New Year!
XXX
Happy birthday and new year to Monkeyhawk and Mrs. XXX!
Happy and hopeful new year to Democrats and liberals!
May the new year bring enlightenment and a change of heart to many who vote Republican.
And for the die hard neocon hangers on of george bush?
Tick,tick,tick….
WOrds of Wisdom from Australia:
http://dingo.care2.com/cards/flash/5409/galaxy.swf
Happy Birthday Monkey and Mrs. XXX!!!
It just so happens that I gave birth to Wichita’s New Year’s Baby in 1972…my oldest son, David Jr, is 36 today!
We have to have a huge party the day Bush leaves office…I can’t think of a better reason to celebrate!!!
Sound a little angry there, no name. You can come to our party we plan to have the day your boy leaves office, that might cheer you up a bit. We’re really not as hateful as you think!
Ron Paul is a nut. First he doesn’t accept the scientific fact of evolution which makes me wonder how someone would bother giving him a medical degree. Another thing, what’s his obsession with the gold standard? Is this 1920? He presents himself as a Libertarian but that only applies to men’s rights since he thinks it’s the job of the state to prohibit medical procedures for women. Being a “libertarian” he supports laws banning free speech when it comes to burning flags. He’s opposed to the Constitutional right to organize peacefully. He thinks government contracts should include kickbacks that increase the cost to taxpayers. He wants to make it more difficult for people to register to vote.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. He’s your typical Republican goon who just happens to want to smoke pot.
Exactly, “Doug” –
Libertarians apparently think the Interstate Highway System is a natural stone formation.
Here’s a birthday gift for my friends (and enemies, for that matter) on WE Blog:
http://tinyurl.com/2xj7hg
Herbert West III, Publisher/Journalist Kansas Resident!!!!!! does not believe in supporting that our wonderful governor should not be allowed to exercise her lawful powers??
WTF is that all about? To call this dictatorial is ridiculous. What is the point of having elected officials if they cannot do what they are elected to do?
Gov. Sebelius has an important choice to make. Whom does Herbert West III, Publisher/Journalist Kansas Resident!!!!!! suggest be appointed?
Happy birthday to the Jan 1 babies. Happy New Year to everyone. We get to elect a new president this year, oh happy day. Mary, count me in for that party the day bushco leave (385 days, 1 hour…)!
A constant tactic of the right is to turn criticisms against them leftward. Hence the word “neolib.” There is no such thing as a neolib. This is a word coined by Republican “stinktanks” to take advantage of the negative connotation they created toward anything “neo.” There is such a thing as a “neocon.” Neocons believed we could project our power worldwide for “good.” Which of course required an overarching evil. I wonder if they still think that?
Happy New Year to the WeBlog. To my liberal friends I wish:
To kfg: A platform to use her formidable energies in influencing Kansas water policy.
To JR: An independent contractor position with the IRS, where he can stick it to the rich guys.
To Monkeyhawk: A happy birthday and some new phrases so he can avoid stereotypes when insulting “Every gay-hating, abortion-opposing, angry white male in America”
To Doug: Realization that he is not just an accident of evolution.
CapnAmerica: A bigger storage area where he can keep half-truths and the old news articles he keeps bringing out.
CF2K: Recognition for his 90% reduction in on-line f-words.
More later….
A constant tactic of the right is to turn criticisms against them leftward. Hence the word “neolib.” There is no such thing as a neolib. This is a word coined by Republican “stinktanks” to take advantage of the negative connotation they created toward anything “neo.” There is such a thing as a “neocon.” Neocons believed we could project our power worldwide for “good.” Which of course required an overarching evil. I wonder if they still think that?
Posted by: Door King
If there are neocons, then there are neolibs. I believe they are both, as evidenced on various boards across the political spectrum. If you have extremes on the conservative side, you also have extremes on the liberal side. How can you have one extreme without the other, regardless of what you choose to call it? The neolibs are as extremist as the neocons and just as dangerous.
I dont think we can, or should, project our power worldwide for good since there are not enough Americans to take on all the evil in this world. America needs to take care of its own first and foremost. We are bleeding to death in a sea of red ink, caused by both parties spending habits. I see people blaming one side or the other, but it has taken both sides to achieve the budget mess. If Dems dont control Congress now (as many Dems claim because they lack 60 votes), then the Reps did not control Congress since they did not have 60 votes.
What I find sad is how the D/Rs dont get a simple concept. There is no real major difference between the two parties. Both take big business and rich monies, both support big business and rich policies, both screw the middle class, both care more about getting reelected than anything else. Europeans notice this about us more than most Americans.
. . . both care more about getting reelected than anything else.
—-
Of course. You forget; that’s the entire point of politics. EVERYTHING else is secondary. In either party.
It has always been so, it is always so, everywhere democracy is practiced.
“To Doug: Realization that he is not just an accident of evolution.”
Not a problem, evolution isn’t an accident, like gravity or the laws of thermodynamics.
“outlander” –
Thanks for the kind birthday thought.
To that end:
“All too often your predecessors in this area, whose tradition you uphold so well, proved to be nothing more than ax-grinding political reactionary inbred unthinking illogical cerebrally-challenged knee-biter two-bit flame-throwing fight-starting loud-mouthed know-nothing lunatic impotent Tiberius moronic dumbfuc# @sshole loser no-date s#it-for-brains cowardly crass tin-plated-dictator-with-delusions-of-manhood flaccid fatheaded needle-dick wimpy wimply facile Canadian bigoted mean small-minded dull cheap-shot-taking impolite pinheaded idiotic boring asinine oxygen-wasting braindead feeble sophomoric simplistic egocentric never-kissed-a-girl drooling clueless stuffed-shirt weenerbrain dittoheads incapable-of-realizing-no-one-gives-two-yanks-of-a-pig’s-tit-what-their-politics-are black-helicopter-fearing Bircher obnoxious bad-beer-drinking hypocritical unread pesty churlish stupid self-righteous lame childish unlistening rude unquestioning Post-Virus-contributing nightmarishly-ill-informed pabulum-puking cretinous hair-triggered obstinate intellectually-bankrupt unsound childish doltish mouth-breathing armpit-scratching knuckle-dragging hydrocephalic pontificating shrill easily-offended knock-kneed Gawd-help-us dotty puerile juvenile criminally-ignorant sorry loony screwball monstrous priggish fuc#ing total wastes of time. You clearly show yourself to be the most foul-mouthed offensive disgusting misogynistic misanthropic sack-of-pus evil s#it-spewing hellspawn boot-licking ill-mannered trash-talking hate-filled no-sense-making begging-for-an-@ss-kicking scum-sucking trailer-park s#ithole-for-a-mouth make-me-wish-I-had-a-big-fuc#ing-hammer-to-beat-some-sense-into-you white-trash unrepentantly-and-wickedly-perverse hunchbacked socially-inept toadlike maggoty boorish sexually-undesirable invective-spouting Fascist sheet-and-pointy-hat-wearing backwards manic creepy unfit-for-human-consumption worthless crappy ratlike wholly-devoid-of-virtue lacking-in-any-sort-of-grace-or-erudition toejam dingleberry snotty revolting illiterate wannabe (I-would-keep-this-up-all-day-if-there-were-enough-words-in-the-English-language-to-describe-what-a-freakish-monstrosity-you-are) irritating corrupt unredeemable can’t-be-allowed-sharp-objects no-neuron nazi hopeless utterly-incredible-in-your-astoundingly-bad-taste onerous wanker’s-elbow-suffering flame-inviting classless clue-repulsing arrogant trying-on-one’s-patience space-wasting limp fearlessly-posting-disgusting- insults-with-an-anonymous-handle dishonorable filthy debased ordure-eating raving insulting bringing-a-fuc#ing-penknife-of-an-intellect-to-a-nukefest-of-a-battle-of-wits cursed addled whiny sunken-chest humorless name-calling rent-boy hemorrhoidal mucus-dripping vomitous piss-poor pathetic-excuse-for-a-piece-of-s#it painful eye-rollingly-subhuman Neanderthal glassy-eyed living-proof-of-why-cousins-shouldn’t-marry beastly incapable-of-coming-to-terms-with-your-own-wretched-existence inexcusable lobotomized threat-to-the-gene-pool needing-of-professional-supervision vile awful god-damnedest sickeningly-ugly spiritually-devoid reprehensible walking-advertisement-for-a-state-sponsored-sterility-program that ever has ever obtained internet access.”
Strong letter to follow.
;-)
And happy new year!
“If there are neocons, then there are neolibs.”
Check you Wikipedia for “neolib” and you’ll find nothing. Neolib is simply a derisive term without meaning while “neoconservatism” has been a definite movement, with a definite philosphy. Look it up in the Wikipedia. Now then it is true there are extremists in both parties, but that has nothing to do with the prefix “neo.”
And remember, seeing something in a blog signifies little.
“Akasofu said scientists who support the man-made greenhouse gas theory disregard information from centuries ago when exploring the issue of global warming.”
Posted by: Hank | January 01, 2008 at 06:42 AM
Dear Hank,
Is Akasofu saying that these do NOT exist?
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm
Chapter 6 Palaeoclimate (7.7 MBytes)
Chapter 9 Understanding and Attributing Climate Change (5 MBytes)
Hint: See “9.3 Understanding Pre-Industrial Climate Change”
Akasofu: “Satellite images of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean have been available in the satellite era only since the 1960s and 1970s. ‘Young researchers are interested in satellite data, which became available after 1975,’ he said. ‘All the papers since (the advent of satellites) show warming. That’s what I call ‘instant climatology.’ I’m trying to tell young scientists, ‘You can’t study climatology unless you look at a much longer time period.’”
Akasofu is wrong again.
Chapter 4 Observations: Changes in Snow, Ice and Frozen Ground (5 Mbytes)
“4.4.2.3 Longer Records of Hemispheric Extent”
Here’s the type of person that Hank believes is a credible CLIMATE scientist
http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~sakasofu/climate.php
“Although I am not a climatologist,…
…
Since I am not a climatologist,…”
http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~sakasofu/climate.php
“The purpose of my Notes on Climate Change is to point out some serious deficiencies in the recent IPCC Report. I would like to emphasize: (i) natural components are important and significant, so that they should not be ignored,…”
The IPCC does not ignore the “natural components”. See graph
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm
Summary for Policymakers
“Figure SPM.4. Comparison of observed continental- and global-scale changes in surface temperature with results simulated by climate models using NATURAL and anthropogenic forcings.”
Hank’s “NOT a climatologist” says,
http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~sakasofu/misleading.php
It has been widely reported that sea ice in the Arctic Ocean would disappear in the summer of 2040. It is a computer simulation result of one scientist based on a particular theory. There are a number of other results that indicate that sea ice will remain until 2100 or after 2300.
‘Arctic Ice Retreating More Quickly Than [18] Computer Models Project’
http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2007/seaice.shtml
The research, … shows that the Arctic’s ice cover is retreating more rapidly than estimated by ANY of the 18 computer models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in preparing its 2007 assessments.
http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2007/images/arctic_sea_ice_extent6.jpg
Happy Birthday MonkeyHawk.
And may someone give you the ability to construct paragraphs.
I’m not a climatologist, but I did stay at a Holiday in Express last night.
New Year wishes for our liberal friends. (Continued from above)
To Cosmos: Another cause to champion and a warm place in the coming global cooling phase.
To Apophis: The ability to read an MPS post while maintaining normal blood pressure.
“It is not my Wiki. Seeing something on Wiki also signifies little as Wiki is not considered a reliable reference”
Neither is a schiesfilled goose.
Dr. Akasofu does not seem to have stayed at Holiday Inn Express.
MonkeyHawk
Happy Birthday indeed.
Oh, by the way, have you seen any blood in the streets from shootouts at stop signs? In the express line at Dillons? Parking lot at the mall?
That’s what I thought.
Have a SAFE new year as well. Watch out for those snuff snatching teens.
Sisters of Charity Leavenworth Health System is purchasing Exempla Lutheran Medical Center in Wheat Ridge, a suburb of Denver, CO, and the sale could stop abortions at Exempla. State Attorney General John Suthers, whose approval of the deal is required, says he will not oppose it. Carla Murphy, president of the
Exempla Lutheran medical staff, told the Denver Post that doctors [=pro-abortion quacks] are upset because they think that a community hospital should be offering to kill some of the community’s babies.
Well, in the interest of claiming equal time for outlander’s good fun, here’s my 2008 wishes for all our non-liberal friends here on WEblog:
GMC70: Freedom from dragging out a virtual paddle (with holes) each time JR does that fingernails-on-chalkboard thing.
Kansasmeadowlark: more flying monkeys, all the better to get those ruby slippers off the MSM.
writerdog: More readers, and more time to write.
Max: a heart to go with your tin ear, a refill for your oil can…and a full-retail scrip for Xanax if Hillary! gets elected.
Heckler: Hinderaker’s mouth to your ear 24/7, man.
econ101: free continuing ed this year. Oh, and a brain.
ksgrm: An understanding of Newton’s “instantaneous rate of change.”
Herbert West III: fewer exclamation points, and an editor. And walking help from Kansasmeadowlark in flushing Gov. Sebelius.
Hank Price: a new mirror (a big one with lights), a stage, some lime lights, a permanent audience that’s interested 24/7 in every little thing you say or do.
Nathan: Ok, first off, what do you believe in? Eh, never mind, you get credit for being less of a prick, since you’ve returned from Iraq, when you’re telling everybody what to think.
outlander: I just hope you can find a way to become more laid back, man.
Best wishes to everybody in 2008!
Hey Heckler!
Since I got my CCH I’ve been quite lucky. I’ve only had to brandish my gun twice, threaten to pull it once and slightly pistol whip two (little) guys not worthy of a bullet.
But then none of the incidents were as serious as a stop sign violation!
Hey Pedant!
Best wishes to you too! Over the past year I’ve started to really like you!
(I already have that big mirror with lights.)
(As far as lime lights go, I’ve turned them in for the more enviromentally friendly CFLs)
Thanks, “Heckler” for the birthday wishes. Happy New Year to you, and all that…
But you asked:
“…have you seen any blood in the streets from shootouts at stop signs? In the express line at Dillons? Parking lot at the mall?”
Nope.
Makes me think all you concealed-carry fanatics were utterly afraid of nothing when you got up on your hind legs and demanded the right to carry handguns to church, to the cleaners, to the mailbox…any time you left the house.
As we have discussed on another forum, I have not problem with people having the right to bear arms, I just wonder about the mental health of those who’re so afraid of society they cannot bear the thought of leaving home without packing heat.
I’ve survived another year (of many) without ever encountering an event where the introduction of more guns would have conceivable improved the situation.
You, “Heckler,” apparently live a much more exciting life than I do. Or you frequent far more dangerous places. That’s your choice.
And the law says if you sign up and pass the background test and prove your competence, you can take out the garbage with a handgun on your person. Fine. No sweat off my nose.
If that’s what it takes to fend off your utter craven fear of the bogey man, fine.
But, golly. I really pity your abject fear of criminals you’re convinced are stalking *you.*
I’ve visited my share of ATMs in so-called “bad” neighborhoods and haven’t been threatened a whit. I’ve been to Dillon’s a lot of times and have not felt the slightest fear of criminals nor the least bit relieved by imagining some law-abiding citizen might be nearby ready to draw and fire at crooks they imagine might be hiding behind the potato chip aisle.
Nope, “Heckler.”
I suspect your passion (as “Hank’s” and “Nathan’s,” et al) fear against all fear of threats real and (mostly) imagined which compels you to not leave the house without a gun is a pretty pathetic example of your utter cowardice. Sure sucks to be you.
But if it cooks for you, solid.
Fraidy-cat.
Hey Pedant, you forgot me. :(
Happy birthday Ms. XXX! And a happy new year to you both!
Hank & Joyce
XXX: Kids! And a S&W Model 500 .50-Cal Magnum!
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=815381050
LOL
MonkeyHawk
Thanks as well.
It’s not about fear. I lived 44 years without carrying a gun on me. It was against the law. Now it’s not(if you jump through the govt. hoops) so I do.
I havent had a serious car accident since I was 15, which only resulted in a minor cut or 2, and I drive 90 miles round trip to work so I log a lot of miles. All that time without the need for seat belts but I cinch up every stinkin time I get in a car. Just because its a good idea.
The seat belts arent about fear and neither is the gun. Just another level of preparedness.
98% OF AMERICANS SAY ‘OH SHIT’ BEFORE GOING IN THE DITCH ON A SLIPPERY ROAD.
THE OTHER 2% ARE FROM MISSOURI AND THEY SAY, ‘HOLD MY BEER AND WATCH THIS.’
Dear Hank,
How do you explain “I am NOT a climatologist” Akasofu’s strategy?
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/01/open-thread-11.html#comment-95490906
It looks like he assumes that people will be so lazy/gullible that they wont bother checking what he says, and learn that’s he’s lying.
I’d consider that insulting… but I guess that lazy/gullible people don’t mind being insulted.
Well Doug stop and think about it, the gold standard means that paper money has real value. Each dollar has a value in gold and is based on the price of gold. Our present system allows for the dollar’s value to be about anything that you want it to have. But the reality is that it is worth no more then the paper and ink used to print it. In some ways that is good but if paper money has no set value. Then the value can be moved up and down at will. a fancy word for that is inflation, if yesterday item “A” was worth 10 dollars, hey today it could be worth 15 dollars! I made a five dollar profit and did not have to add any real value to the item.
It reminds me of that old saying about “its a house of cards”, any wind that blows can cause the house to fall. Some may argue that because our house is build of cards it can rebound more quickly and is easier to rebuild. But if our house is build of bricks it can withstand a far greater wind and be stable and solid.
Now as to his personal views, yes he is pro-life and does not believe in evolution. But there is a trump card, being a strict Constitutionalist means he does not believe the Federal Government has the power to dictate to the states outside of what is granted in the Constitution. That can be a good thing and a bad thing, since he believes that such things as abortion, gay marriage and the like is a matter for the states to be control. The Federal government can not tell them to be for or against. Of course there is the bad things, one is the welfare system. It is not the Federal government’s role to be your nanny, therefore mandating that taxpayer money be give out for something that has little or no return is wrong. IN the beginning this will cause some real problems, but then it will be up to other sources to take up the slack. Welfare as it is now is a trap, the government sets the standard and if you happen to start to improve your position. What ever amount of income you make is then taken away in your benefits. So you gain no leg up and remain at the minimal allowance. I compare it to building a piece of furniture out of a stock of wood. If something goes wrong you patch, realign and rebuild till it is of little use. The welfare system is so messed up that in a real sense there is nothing left to use to repair it. It needs to be scraped and a new better way found.
Doug I am not sure exactly where you got your information on contracts and right to assemble. Right to assemble is guaranteed in the Constitution. As to government contracts I think you are confusing the current system of Government contract with what it would be like under Ron Paul. But no, not only would there be a need to have a balanced budget but also there would be no extra money for kick backs and the like. He wants to do away with the Federal income tax i.e. the cash cow we currently have. Perhaps it was a good idea in the beginning like the welfare system. But it became as messed up as the welfare system. Instead of the extra income for the Federal government from income tax it gave more money to be passed out and the Government became as fiscally prudent as Paris Hilton!
THE OTHER 2% ARE FROM MISSOURI AND THEY SAY, ‘HOLD MY BEER AND WATCH THIS.’
OMG my youngest brother in law never told me he was from Missouri!
There are three levels of cajone testing with XXX’s hand cannon.
Finding the cajones to fire it the first time.
Then even more cajones, firing it the second time.
Then, buying the heaviest commercial load with the largest grain bullet and firing it one handed the third time!
Great fun XXX, thanks! Let’s do it again soon!
Posted by: MonkeyHawk;
“I’ve survived another year (of many) without ever encountering an event where the introduction of more guns would have conceivable improved the situation.”
And so do all people that become victims, right up to the time they become a victim, you simpleton.
MonkeyHawk;
“I’ve visited my share of ATMs in so-called “bad” neighborhoods and haven’t been threatened a whit.”
That I can believe, I imagine you spend most of your time in ‘bad’ neighborhoods, that is the impression I come to about your character.
MonkeyHawk;
“I’ve been to Dillon’s a lot of times and have not felt the slightest fear of criminals nor the least bit relieved by imagining some law-abiding citizen might be nearby ready to draw and fire at crooks…”
Dimwit, folks with very limited reasoning ability are incapable of anticipating potentially harmful situations.
MonkeyHawk;
“I suspect your passion…which compels you to not leave the house without a gun is a pretty pathetic example of your utter cowardice. Sure sucks to be you.”
No Monkey, it “Sure sucks to be you”, it even suck to have to read your posts. Heckler’s not displaying his “cowardice”, he is displaying a acceptance of responsibility and self-reliance, something that you, as a lib, consistently are utterly incapable of understanding.
But if it cooks for you, solid. Fraidy-cat.
Hey cosmos!
Happy New Year!
Reading your crap (just for Tom) every day has made me pretty immune from insults.
Aghawk
I have ventured into “bad” neighborhoods for years in my line of work. I have never been harrassed, threatened, or assaulted in any way. I know many of the prostitutes and street people by their first names, and no one has ever bothered me, even going into these areas at night. That doesn’t mean that I’m stupid, I watch my back and keep my car doors locked…but after so many years of doing this, I don’t buy into the culture of fear that the media loves to exploit and sensationalize. A person should be careful no matter what neighborhood they happen to be in..but I don’t think things are so bad in Wichita that carrying a gun is a necessity.
I am not sure how much of the history of the Neocons you are aware of but they did come from the Democratic party. They were the leftist and Socialists but as the Liberals move toward a more social aware stance. The socialist found they no long had a home within the party, so they moved to the Republican party. And brought with them these strange, un-American ideas, their influence upon the party is clear.
Big Government, they love social programs as it tend to enslave and control the populous. And the socialist concept that it is the good of the state that is more important then individual freedom. The citizens are of no importance other then to serve the state. And yes it is true that they believe as the last super power we not only have the right but also the duty to spread Democracy. That thought process is from the influence of the writings of Leon Trotsky. It is the same thought process that so drove the Communists to spread Communism. Except you exchange the word “Communism” with “Democracy”, of course it is their socialist influenced concept of Democracy.
I pointed it out yesterday, but as to the term “Neo-lib” Bill Kristol once threaten G.W. Bush that if he did not do as they wanted the Neoconservatives would pull their support and go back to the Democratic party forming the “Neo-Liberals”. LOL the diehard Neoconservatives argue with the socialist party over who is the true socialist! They actually think of them selves as liberals but with a older definition of the term.
Mary,
Thank you for you reasonable response. I was blowing off steam because of the rather uncivil way in which Monkey writes and responds to people.
You write; “but I don’t think things are so bad in Wichita that carrying a gun is a necessity.”
I respect your decision and your right to not ‘carry’, that is perfectly fine, and I have absolutely no say in that. If you are comfortable in those situation that’s your decision. I hope you respect mine to do so. I do not frequent those type neighborhoods and would not feel street wise. But victims very rarely feel threatened until the become a victim. They simply would not go into situations where they anticipate harm. Harm comes like a thief in the night and catches them unprepared.
Again, thanks for the civil post.
“How could something like that happen here?”
“How could something like this happen in our neighborhood?”
“how could something like this happen to him/her/them. They never hurt a soul. He/she/they were wonderful neighbors.”
“You just don’t expect things like this to happen in a quiet little community like ours”
Sound familiar?
http://projects.kansas.com/crime/
Check daily Mary.
Chicago is set to impose a 5-cent-a-bottle tax on bottled water Tuesday, becoming the first major U.S. city to demand such a surcharge.
The move — which officials predicted will secure an extra $10.5 million annually — will help the city plug a budget hole by building on the growing disdain for environmentally suspect bottles.
In the past year, the tide has turned on bottled water, once admired as a healthful alternative to soft drinks.
Critics of the tax said it could create a black market for water and spur consumers to shop in neighboring towns where a case of water will cost significantly less. While convenience-store or vending-machine water may only increase from $1.25 to $1.30 a bottle, the average cost of a 24-pack will go from $3.99 to $5.19, a 30 percent increase.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2004099457_watertax30.html
I too am puzzled by folks who feel so constantly under threat that they just must have a gun in easy reach.
I have had guns pointed at me on two different occasions by a couple such people.
Heck…most victims know their perpetrator. I’m careful, but not paranoid. No one is 100% safe in any situation..but I don’t let that hold me back from doing the work I feel like I need to do or living the life I want to have.
I’ve been diving the ocean with sharks, flown around the world in airplanes, I drive down Kellogg everyday, and I eat at McDonald’s at least twice a week. If I die from any of these activities, at least I’ll have lived the way I want.
Junior,
I don’t feel constantly under threat at all. However, I’m relatively confident that when/if that threat comes – I probably won’t have much notice.
Meadowlark will have a field day tomorrow.
Heard on the news that our Gov. Seb…. will be in Vogue magazine, modelling some designer dresses.
I agree with you, JR..I’m more afraid of people who feel threatened to the point they have the need to carry a gun than anyone else. To me, they’re just an accident waiting to happen.
Dear Hank,
You insult yourself much, much worse than I EVER could — by doing stupid things, like insisting that “I am NOT a climatologist” Akasofu is a credible climate scientist.
Happy New Year…!
Yep cosmos, you’re right. I’ve pretty much monopolized the BLOG today defending poor ol’ Akasofu.
In a desperate attempt to regain a little self respect I’ll back off.
Please accept my humble apology.
nitwit
Posted by: J R;
“I too am puzzled by folks who feel so constantly under threat that they just must have a gun in easy reach. I have had guns pointed at me on two different occasions by a couple such people.”
Come on JR, first, you appear puzzled by almost everything in life. And anyway, you must be quite accustom to having guns pointed at your with as caustic a personality as you display display on this blog. You are hanging with the wrong crowd by the way.
I don’t feel under threat either, but can read the news and translate that to my own and other’s lives. I know that just as ‘KSGolfnut’ said, “I don’t feel constantly under threat at all. However, I’m relatively confident that when/if that threat comes – I probably won’t have much notice”.
Do you think any of the people killed or injured in the various ‘No Guns’ posted malls, schools or churches have felt threated right up to a few moments before they felt a bullet pierce their bodies?
This is much the same as applies to seat belts, motorcycle helmets, safety glasses, climbing harnesses, and the list goes on almost ad infinitum. Those that elect to exercise their 2nd. Amendment rights do so overwhelmingly out of a since of dedication to independence, self-reliance and a commitment to protect themselves and their families.
The culture of fear perpetrated by the media has been very profitable for the gun industry.
“Happiness is a warm gun, mamma…”
“And anyway, you must be quite accustom to having guns pointed at you”
In one case I was taking out my trash. In the other, I was telling some hunters to get off my granddads land since they had not asked to hunt there.
“as caustic a personality as you display display on this blog.”
I’m only disagreeable with people not worth agreeing with.
There are three levels of cajone testing with XXX’s hand cannon.
Finding the cajones to fire it the first time.
Then even more cajones, firing it the second time.
Then, buying the heaviest commercial load with the largest grain bullet and firing it one handed the third time!
Great fun XXX, thanks! Let’s do it again soon!
Posted by: Hank Price | January 01, 2008 at 06:20 PM
As I recall Hank, both you and Nathan did pretty good on all 3 levels. I don’t remember Nathan trying it one-handed, tho.
For those of you who have never fired a big-bore, it’s a thing you’ll never forget. It’s just an awesome thing to unleash that kind of power with the simple squeeze of a finger.
Hank and Joyce,
Happy New Year from me and the missus. We wish you the best in the coming year. And Mrs XXX says thank-you for the birthday wishes.
Let me know when you’re ready to shoot. My arm will never be right again, but I’m up to shooting the cannon.
Posted by JR,
“I’m only disagreeable with people not worth agreeing with.”
That is simply a part of the your distorted view of things as I mentioned, and includes just about everybody that isn’t a complete flaming liberal. And even some of those.
On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs – Dave Grossman
By LTC (RET) Dave Grossman, author of “On Killing.”
Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age. It does so because honor is, finally, about defending those noble and worthy things that deserve defending, even if it comes at a high cost. In our time, that may mean social disapproval, public scorn, hardship, persecution, or as always,even death itself. The question remains: What is worth defending? What is worth dying for? What is worth living for? – William J. Bennett – in a lecture to the United States Naval Academy November 24, 1997
One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me:
“Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident.” This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another. Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.
Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.
I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin’s egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful.? For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.
“Then there are the wolves,” the old war veteran said, “and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy.” Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.
“Then there are sheepdogs,” he went on, “and I’m a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf.”
If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero’s path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed
Let me expand on this old soldier’s excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids’ schools.
But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid’s school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep’s only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.
The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.
Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn’t tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, “Baa.”
Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.
The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door.
Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?
Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.
Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, “Thank God I wasn’t on one of those planes.” The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, “Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference.” When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.
There is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, but he does have one real advantage. Only one. And that is that he is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population. There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory crimes of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself.
Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that most people can choose which one they want to be, and I’m proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.
Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, “Let’s roll,” which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers – athletes, business people and parents. — from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.
There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men. – Edmund Burke
Here is the point I like to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers I speak to each year. In nature the sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, and so are wolves. They didn’t have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision.
If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior’s path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.
For example, many officers carry their weapons in church.? They are well concealed in ankle holsters, shoulder holsters or inside-the-belt holsters tucked into the small of their backs.? Anytime you go to some form of religious service, there is a very good chance that a police officer in your congregation is carrying. You will never know if there is such an individual in your place of worship, until the wolf appears to massacre you and your loved ones.
I was training a group of police officers in Texas, and during the break, one officer asked his friend if he carried his weapon in church. The other cop replied, “I will never be caught without my gun in church.” I asked why he felt so strongly about this, and he told me about a cop he knew who was at a church massacre in Ft. Worth, Texas in 1999. In that incident, a mentally deranged individual came into the church and opened fire, gunning down fourteen people. He said that officer believed he could have saved every life that day if he had been carrying his gun. His own son was shot, and all he could do was throw himself on the boy’s body and wait to die. That cop looked me in the eye and said, “Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?”
Some individuals would be horrified if they knew this police officer was carrying a weapon in church. They might call him paranoid and would probably scorn him. Yet these same individuals would be enraged and would call for “heads to roll” if they found out that the airbags in their cars were defective, or that the fire extinguisher and fire sprinklers in their kids’ school did not work. They can accept the fact that fires and traffic accidents can happen and that there must be safeguards against them.
Their only response to the wolf, though, is denial, and all too often their response to the sheepdog is scorn and disdain. But the sheepdog quietly asks himself, “Do you have and idea how hard it would be to live with yourself if your loved ones attacked and killed, and you had to stand there helplessly because you were unprepared for that day?”
It is denial that turns people into sheep. Sheep are psychologically destroyed by combat because their only defense is denial, which is counterproductive and destructive, resulting in fear, helplessness and horror when the wolf shows up.
Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: you didn’t bring your gun, you didn’t train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by your fear helplessness and horror at your moment of truth.
Gavin de Becker puts it like this in Fear Less, his superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation: “…denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn’t so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling.”
Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level.
And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes. If you are warrior who is legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be “on” 24/7, for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself…
“Baa.”
This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.
Hey XXX,
When it gets warm one of these weekends. . . the boy has the key to the firing range now!
Hank
. . . the boy has the key to the firing range now!
Hank
Posted by: Hank | January 01, 2008 at 08:49 PM
YEE-HAW!!!!!
Thank you Hank that was….delusional.
I’m always glad to make a fan adhoc.
There’s probably no reason to fear concealed handgun carriers. They’re Barney Fife with bullets. If the chance to pull a gun ever arose they’d probably quiver and shake and s#it their pants before anything of consequence happened.
I swear, when they start off on their dire “what if” scenarios, I imagine they’re the kind of people who don’t put out the garbage on a sunny day without first donning a slicker and galoshes “just it case it might start raining.”
These are probably the twerps who were bullied in third grade and never got over it. They always wear brown pants for fear of a wet fart. They insist on frisking each trick-or-treater on Halloween, just to make sure the little princesses spidermen aren’t threatening their security. (They *really* enjoy that part.)
Can you imagine their craven existence? Reaching for that gun in their jacket every time they encounter a black man or big man or three Mexican kids or two Italian guys (who, of course, *might* be Mafiosos)…
How pitiful their quaking fearful lives must be.
“Yep cosmos, you’re right. I’ve pretty much monopolized the BLOG today defending poor ol’ Akasofu.
In a desperate attempt to regain a little self respect I’ll back off.
Please accept my humble apology.”
Posted by: Hank | January 01, 2008 at 08:14 PM
“nitwit”
Posted by: Hank | January 01, 2008 at 08:14 PM
Did Hank forgot what he posted last night?
“Ah, a preemptive strike! Very good cosmos!
However, when his turn comes tomorrow we’ll learn that Dr. Akasofu understands more about climate change than cosmos is willing to admit!”
Posted by: Hank | December 31, 2007 at 09:50 PM
That was after my post describing “I am NOT a climatologist” Akasofu.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/12/open-thread–27.html#comment-95446356
Hank seems to be gullible, lazy, and doesn’t mind insulting himself.
No one needs to “start off on their dire “what if” scenarios”, all they need to do is read the paper, the internet, listen to the news or watch T.V. But then they have to be able to comprehend, and THAT is where you fall miserably short Monkey.
“They always wear brown pants for fear of a wet fart.” I wouldn’t even know what that is. Is that something that happens to you often?
“every time they encounter a black man or big man” (I take it you are a very very small man) “or three Mexican kids or two Italian guys (who, of course, *might* be Mafiosos)…”
My, my what big prejudices you have there, quite revealing to everyone on the blog. Are there any others you would like to include in your list?
nitwit
Interesting comments monkeyman.
I’m an old retired submarine sailor. I play ‘what if’ a lot. Old training dies hard.
When I go into a restaurant or store I subconsciously check things out. Where’s the exits? Phones? light switches, etc.
Now that I have my CCH I try and set in places that I can observe people approaching.
I practice with my hand gun, probably more than most police officers. I take professional weapons courses to stay proficient.
Haven’t been afraid of anything in years.
Hopefully we’ll get that little trip to the firing range arranged this year for the BLOG folks that want to attend.
Carrying a gun is a responsibility that I don’t take lightly. Hopefully I’ll never need it. But if I do. . .
Cosmos,
We continually see your comments about “…not a climatologist”, so I have a few questions for you.
What exactly defines a “climatologist”? If it is a degree, what exactly are the academic requirements for such a degree? Is it by certification by some national or international body? If so, what exactly are the requirements for certification? How long has the profession of “climatologist” existed?
After you answer these questions (if you can), I will have more…
These are probably the twerps who were bullied in third grade and never got over it.
Don’t worry about those bullies MonkeyHawk, the government is going to take care of them too.
The government will take care of all your needs.
I have speculated in the past that Hank may be working covertly in FAVOR of addressing global warming.
Certainly the links he brings us daily seem to work to that end.
More?
“When I go into a restaurant or store I subconsciously check things out. Where’s the exits? Phones? light switches, etc.”
Well surely a person SO concerned about his immediate environment must also be concerned as to the environment at large?
“We continually see your comments about “…not a climatologist”,…”
Posted by: swallow my nickel
You’re confused ‘nickel’. Those comments were made by Hank’s hero, Dr. Akasofu, not me.
Akasofu’s link and quotes are here,
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/12/open-thread–27.html#comment-95446356
Jr asks; “Well surely a person SO concerned about his immediate environment must also be concerned as to the environment at large?”
Jr, if you’re so concerned yourself, and concerned with what everybody else is doing as well, I want to know what you personally are doing alleviate called global warming.
I’m not trying to be nasty here, I really want to know what you think we individually can do to make one iota of difference. I’m not going to stop driving, I have to drive to earn a living. I’ve replaced as many incandescent bulbs with those slow to start fluorescents as I can, and big deal, the heat the incandescents were putting out were simply going to add heat to my home when it is <20* outside. No real savings there until summer. I’ve added extra insulation. So lets have it, what are you doing other than simply flapping your gums?
Big Government’s Waste of Taxpayer Dollars:
$1.8 Million to See if Shit Stinks
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,319408,00.html
Purdue University Students Sniff Livestock Odors for Research
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
E-Mail Print Digg This! del.icio.us
WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. — Purdue University students are making some extra cash through a project that might turn some of their classmates’ stomachs — by sniffing livestock excrement. Students earn $30 per session as they take whiffs of a variety of smells collected from barns filled with hogs, cows and chickens for odor research being conducted by Albert Heber, a Purdue professor of agricultural and biological engineering.
http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/2005/050112.Richert.odor.html
The current projects to study the impact of diet on odor, excretion and air emission, and to establish baseline emission data for swine facilities, are funded by USDA and EPA grants totaling $500,000 and another grant from the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service for $1.3 million.
I post often as to my own efforts there AgHawk. And recently too. But maybe you are new and have not seen. I also post ideas that I encourage for others.
Check out a recent global warming thread.
Oh and by the way “Aghawk”?
Your appelation of “Jr” to me betrays that you are either not a new poster or are just trying to demean me.
My nic is J R.
J R,
Hank does not seem to be able to understand that the list of 400 “prominent scientists” from Sen. Inhofe’s pet weasel, Marc Morano, has negative crediblity.
http://www.desmogblog.com/400-prominent-scientists-dispute-global-warming-bunk
Maybe they should require intelligence tests for CC applicants?
Next up is… Gerhard Gerlich!
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gerhard_Gerlich
About 1/2 of Gerlich’s recent, long, and very UNscientific, NON-peer-reviewed paper was strange rantings about the differences between “glass greenhouses”, and greenhouse gases in Earth’s atmosphere.
So why didn’t you answer my questions, cosmos?? (and you have made comments in the past about who is not a climatologist).
Aghawk:
Yes, the nic is JR. Only the thinking is Jr., but I can understand the confusion.
BTW – the ego is supersized.
Sorry, JR. Couldn’t resist. It was just so juicy a target.
And I hope a very good 2008 for you. I especially hope you broaden your horizons just a bit, and see the world less as “us vs. the enemy.” Bitterness just makes you cranky and unpleasant to be around.
‘nickel’,
You should email Hank’s hero, Dr. “I am NOT a climatologist” Akasofu, and ask him to answer your questions.
His email address is in his link, at link that I gave upthread,
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/12/open-thread–27.html#comment-95446356
no, cosmos, I want YOU to answer my questions…you are the one who cintinually drags in the red herring of who is qualified and not…
Thanks for respecting my nic there GMC.
I have done the same for you.
Ego?
Geez GMC I could go that rout and claim I made you. Or let the air out of you.
Half the posts you make here are back to me.
Broaden my horizons? I’m a liberal now. Tell that to the other side to broaden their horizons.
I made you a better poster. I’ll take your advice to make me one under consideration.
“I made you a better poster.”
Again, a good laugh. You’re always good for a laugh, JR, though I suspecy you don’t intend or realize it.
YOU made me a better poster? Really????? All by yourself??? You even feel the need to puff your ego on MY writing????
As I think about it, perhaps you should market those skills, JR. I can see it now -
“You too can have internet fame and fortune, just like JR, in only ten easy lessions. But wait, there’s more! If you call in the next ten minutes, you’ll receive a bonus CD of pointless quips, all brought to you by the brilliant, erudite, and incomparable JR!”
Better get started on that infomercial, dude. There’s a fortune to be made here; just give me my cut for coming up with the idea. Of course, it is entirely due to your “making me a better poster” that I came up with the idea, so I suppose that should be credited to you too.
I suspect you even take credit for the sun rising in the morning . . .
Again, JR, you’re just too casy a target.
Hank that piece is the reality we live in, it sums up people in this world and this society. “The thin blue line” as it is called in cop speak. those that take all the guff and heart ach to protect the rest from seeing the realities of life. My wife as a birthday present offer to pay for my CCL, so far I have not done it. I could and have had both the training and the experience to be a excellent candidate. But I have not, it is true the odds are in the favor of a person that they would never need a firearm to protect themselves or other. The general statistic is that only 10 percent of all LEO ever fire their weapon off the firing range. And of that ten percent only one percent ever take a human life. But then it would be nice if there was a calendar that one could look at and see the date and time you may. FBI statistics show over two million crimes are stopped every year by private gun ownership. That does not take into account those that are not reported or known of by the private citizen.
The general statistic is that only 10 percent of all LEO ever fire their weapon off the firing range. And of that ten percent only one percent ever take a human life.
Which boils down to 75,000 off range firings and 7,500 human lives. The assumption is that one of 400 Ameicans is a cop.
Hey writerdog,
Dave Grossman’s book “On Killing” is a pretty good read. I highly recommend it to anyone that is thinking about CCH.
There is some truth in some of MonkeyHawk’s and other’s concerns when it comes to actually pulling the trigger on another human being. Grossman’s book addresses those concerns.
When you get serious about your CCH class I have someone to recommend. I also highly recommend that your wife take it too if only for the information.
Everyone in my family is a better shot than I am! My wife is deadly and Nathan is an instructor in the Marines. (I still know more parrot jokes though)
Physicist Dr. Gerhard Gerlich, of the Institute of Mathematical Physics at the Technical University Carolo-Wilhelmina in Braunschweig in Germany, and Dr. Ralf D. Tscheuschner co-authored a July 7, 2007 paper titled “Falsification of the Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within the Frame of Physics.”
The abstract of the paper reads in part, “(a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects; (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet; (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 C is a meaningless number calculated wrongly; (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately; (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical; (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.” Gerlich and Tscheuschner’s study concluded, “The horror visions of a risen sea level, melting pole caps and developing deserts in North America and in Europe are fictitious falsification of the consequences of fictitious physical mechanisms, as they cannot be seen even in the climate model computations. The emergence of hurricanes and tornados cannot be predicted by climate models, because all of these deviations are ruled out. The main strategy of modern CO2-greenhouse gas defenders seems to hide themselves behind more and more pseudo explanations, which are not part of the academic education or even of the physics training.”
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Falsificaion_of_CO2.pdf
“no, cosmos, I want YOU to answer my questions…you are the one who cintinually drags in the red herring of who is qualified and not…”
First, let’s be clear on what is going on here. Swallow here is trying to get cosmos on the defensive. He (I assume the poster is a he) already indicated that when cosmos answered these questions, there would be more.
Second, the whole bit here is to try to find a means to argue against cosmos’ posting questions about the qualifications of the people on the list that Hank is posting. Hank doesn’t appear to get it, and neither, I suspect, do you. A very large body of peer reviewed professional research on world climate, and the ONLY comprehensive meta-analysis of that research, provides massive evidence that a) global warming is occuring and b) that human activity is the major factor in that warming.
Three, cosmos is now easily anticipating who Hank will post next on the list, because he has access to the same list. But it is also important to consider how that list was generated. To be blunt, James Inhofe is the biggest idiot in the Senate, a living example of the kind of people who make up their mind about something early and then try to find people to support their position. That is exactly how this list that Hank is using was generated. Inhofe and his fellows searched for global warming “skeptics”, and if you haven’t notice, look at what these yahoos are saying on an individual basis. Some are saying well sure, global warming is happening but humans aren’t causing it or it’s actually a good thing. Others are still denying that there even IS global warming. This is because Inhofe’s list is nothing other than a list of people with Ph.D.’s after their name, and their only qualification is that they question global warming. As cosmos has repeatedly pointed out, it’s the peer reviewed RESEARCH, replicated and now analyzed, that indicates that global warming is a serious concern. It does not take being a climatologist to realize that. Cosmos is representing the emerging and increasing consensus on this subject. Those who don’t like that position, and their reasons almost invariably have to do with a knee jerk political or philosophical position that government intervention in business is a) always bad, b) always unnecessary, or c) environmentalism is a “liberal” position, therefore it is wrong. Some of the people who prescribe to these position, whether they be rock hard communist under the bed ohmygod the socialists are trying to ruin our country, or just anti-government anarcho-capitalist libertarians, also ha e Ph.D.’s after their names.
Oh, and Hank.
Cosmos, the most unjustly abused poster on this blog, is not the nitwit here.
“no, cosmos, I want YOU to answer my questions…you are the one who cintinually drags in the red herring of who is qualified and not…”
First, let’s be clear on what is going on here. Swallow here is trying to get cosmos on the defensive. He (I assume the poster is a he) already indicated that when cosmos answered these questions, there would be more.
Second, the whole bit here is to try to find a means to argue against cosmos’ posting questions about the qualifications of the people on the list that Hank is posting. Hank doesn’t appear to get it, and neither, I suspect, do you. A very large body of peer reviewed professional research on world climate, and the ONLY comprehensive meta-analysis of that research, provides massive evidence that a) global warming is occuring and b) that human activity is the major factor in that warming.
Three, cosmos is now easily anticipating who Hank will post next on the list, because he has access to the same list. But it is also important to consider how that list was generated. To be blunt, James Inhofe is the biggest idiot in the Senate, a living example of the kind of people who make up their mind about something early and then try to find people to support their position. That is exactly how this list that Hank is using was generated. Inhofe and his fellows searched for global warming “skeptics”, and if you haven’t notice, look at what these yahoos are saying on an individual basis. Some are saying well sure, global warming is happening but humans aren’t causing it or it’s actually a good thing. Others are still denying that there even IS global warming. This is because Inhofe’s list is nothing other than a list of people with Ph.D.’s after their name, and their only qualification is that they question global warming. As cosmos has repeatedly pointed out, it’s the peer reviewed RESEARCH, replicated and now analyzed, that indicates that global warming is a serious concern. It does not take being a climatologist to realize that. Cosmos is representing the emerging and increasing consensus on this subject. Those who don’t like that position, and their reasons almost invariably have to do with a knee jerk political or philosophical position that government intervention in business is a) always bad, b) always unnecessary, or c) environmentalism is a “liberal” position, therefore it is wrong. Some of the people who prescribe to these position, whether they be rock hard communist under the bed ohmygod the socialists are trying to ruin our country, or just anti-government anarcho-capitalist libertarians, also ha e Ph.D.’s after their names.
Oh, and Hank.
Cosmos, the most unjustly abused poster on this blog, is not the nitwit here.
From this very thread:
Hank’s first expert: “Physicist Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu, the former director of both University of Alaska Fairbanks’ Geophysical Institute and International Arctic Research Center who has twice been named in “1000 Most Cited Scientists,” released a scientific study of the Arctic on March 2007 that concluded the recent warming was likely ‘natural’ and not manmade.”
Hank’s second experts:
“Physicist Dr. Gerhard Gerlich, of the Institute of Mathematical Physics at the Technical University Carolo-Wilhelmina in Braunschweig in Germany, and Dr. Ralf D. Tscheuschner co-authored a July 7, 2007 paper titled “Falsification of the Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within the Frame of Physics.”
The abstract of the paper reads in part, “(a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects; (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet; (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 C is a meaningless number calculated wrongly; (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately; (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical; (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.” Gerlich and Tscheuschner’s study concluded, “The horror visions of a risen sea level, melting pole caps and developing deserts in North America and in Europe are fictitious falsification of the consequences of fictitious physical mechanisms…”
Let’s be clear here.
One says global warming is not man made,the others say that you can’t even say that global warming is occuring, and that those who try to claim that it is and CO2 emissions are the cause are promoting a fictitious cause for a fictitious effect. Those who argue for global warming, much less a human cause, are simply dismissed as “pseudoscientists”. Now, I am not saying that this contradiction necessarily discredits one or the other, except that it is clear that both a) contradict the IPCC report and b) don’t agree with one another. What this speaks to is the selection criteria for experts used by the Senate minority report spearheaded by Inhofe was, and that was simply, they oppose the emerging consensus on global warming. The nature of their opposition was entirely unimportant.
BTW, sorry for the double post above.
no, ksagnostic, you don’t understand my motivations at all. I really do want to know what makes one scientist a climatologist and another one not a climatologist, and the best way to understand that is to see the differences that create the distinction. But maybe cosmos is afraid to answer because it would reveal there is NO diffference…