WE Blog

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2008/05/27/a-green-miscalculation.aspx

In short, Britain’s Labour Party has discarded its “progressive” principles for environmental fear-mongering and salvationist rhetoric in the expectation that voters would accept that only government control, central planning and higher taxes could prevent global disaster.

I knew old man price couldn’t resist indulging his obsession with denying global climate change. It doesn’t matter if you label it a “political/financial link”, your denial of credible science is apparent.

……..too predictable!

Picking up from yesterday’s discussion about whether the Supreme Court told American democracy to drop dead so they could install Worst. President. Ever.

They did.

In a widely cited study, the media consortium found that RepubliCONs had stole the election but strangely buried the finding under a host of meaningless “scenarios.”

The bottom line is this: “If all the ballots had been reviewed under any of seven single standards, and combined with the results of an examination of overvotes, Mr. Gore would have won.” — Ford Fessenden And John M. Broder, New York Times, November 12, 2001

Overvotes, in which the hole is punched for Gore and the name of Gore is written in, are legal votes. They should have and would have been counted under the Florida Supreme Court ruling.

Instead the Federal Supreme Court violated its own CONservative vow of non-interference of states’ rights issues (which voting is) and interposed themselves to change the outcome and screw democracy.

The result speaks for itself.

We will continue to see the biggest tell all cottage industry in Washington. But remember, they’ll be selling their books for profit! WPE that served the SPE (stupidest people ever).

Charles Barkley Quote

Short and sweet!!!!

“Poor People have been voting for Democrats
for the last 50 years,……….and they are still poor.”

Since the Eagle has yet to cover McClellan’s book, I do hope they cover it once it’s released. Otherwise majority Kansans won’t know what’s in it. So Eagle, consider it a community service.

So he got the details of an old uncle’s war story obfusicated, big deal. Now, if it’s been his own war story, there might be a story there.

Like Reagan did.

From Scott McClellan

““I still like and admire President Bush,” McClellan writes”

“didn’t learn that what I’d said was untrue until the media began to figure it out almost two years later.

“Neither, I believe, did President Bush.”

So, do we believe only the negatives about the Bush administration in the book, or all of it?

CapnAmerica
Posted May 28, 2008 at 9:34 am | Permalink
Wow, LJ.

What a gaffe!

Next thing you know, we’ll be hearing about how GW said something about a dire threat from Iraq before we invaded . .

********************************************

Maybe not a major point, and I still support Obama, but damn, he can;t even remember what concentration/death camp his great uncle helped liberate? I personally have had enough of stupidity in the past 8 years.

I couldn’t even tell you the names of my Great Uncles.

I’m with you, Phantom! Our family has some genealogists (thank goodness!) and they can tell you the names, birth and death dates, how many children, who they married… back really far. It’s a good thing every family has this person or people who find that fascinating, so those like me don’t have to remember.

I think its a feat that Obamma remembered everything accurately except the name of the concentration camp!

Phantom
Posted May 28, 2008 at 9:34 am | Permalink
So he got the details of an old uncle’s war story obfusicated, big deal. Now, if it’s been his own war story, there might be a story there.

Phantom
Posted May 28, 2008 at 9:43 am | Permalink
I couldn’t even tell you the names of my Great Uncles

8******************************************

If you are going to trot out a story to make a point,which is what he was doing, he shoulda got it right. Why be an apologist?

“And with good reason–they know that neither party is genuinely interested in helping them.”

Hum…maybe if they’d help themselves their situation would improve.
Sounds like a good plan, ‘don’t wait for somebody else to do it for you…get off the porch and do it yourself’.

Heh heh

Priceus Hankus Keptmanus

Late nineteenth cetury man born in the 20th century. Given to primitive beliefs and reactionary politics. While not entirely extinct, the species increasingly is marginalized into insignifigance.

Probably because I accept all of them as being human. I’m not as concerned about remembering a family story and don’t think it unusual to not recall the details. His point was made to those who choose to listen. But for those who choose to pick nits they have another to pick.

He speaks each day, several times a day, and travels and doesn’t have great amounts of down time. I admire ALL of their stamina! Much as I hate bush (and I DO hate him!) I can understand why he spent so much of the first months in office at “the ranch,” relaxing. Campaigning looks exhausting!

“I’m not as concerned about remembering a family story and don’t think it unusual to not recall the details. His point was made to those who choose to listen. But for those who choose to pick nits they have another to pick.”

So, was it a “story” with a good point, or was it a
piece of “family history”? Just because you support or don;t support someone, doesn;t mean you don’t hold their feet to the fire. Bush is a prime example. The outrages over BUsh “mispeaking” on the board, and in the press go on and on. Rightly so. SO, let’s hold them ALL to the same standard. But then, perhaps facts aren;t important, as long as the idea is conveyed?

BTW, the hazards of lead from paint and leaded gasoline were fully known since Austria outlawed leaded gasoline in 1913.

The US continued to use lead paint through the 60’s and leaded gasoline through the 70’s.

So much for “unregulated capitalism is always in your best interest . . . “

CapnAmerica
Posted May 28, 2008 at 10:14 am | Permalink
“BTW, the hazards of lead from paint and leaded gasoline were fully known since Austria outlawed leaded gasoline in 1913.”

so, did Austria outlaw lead paint also?
Did other countries? Was it only AUstria that was so enlightened? Was it only in legal in capitolist
countries? Seriously.

Wikipedia, LJ, is a wonderful thing . . .

Linda-

It was HIS speech, not mine. It was HIS uncle, not mine? It was his misremembering, not mine. I am not running for office. If I were running for office, and I went to make a point like he did, in a prepared speech, I would go to lenghts to make sure it was accurate? Do you not think it important to be accurate? Or just that the right point was made?
It was the Soviets that liberated Auscwhitz, not the Americans. So did he just dream up the entire story, or just the details? Did he just dream up the wrong name? Why would he get that wrong? Sorry, I am not giving him a bye here. I find his “mistake” minor in detail, but much higher in importance. I do not look for perfection. W

HEE HEE HEE!

Read ‘em and weep boys. Gay marriages will begin in California on June 14.

And there isnt a DAMN thing you can do about it!

http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?date=2008/05/27/2

Funny how wingnuts say “love it or leave it” to the gay folks, but for Mexicans, it’s “Stay there and fix it”.

You just cant make this stuff up.

Unless yer a wingnut.

“Still, he doesn;t get a pass. Not from me, nor should he get one from anybody”

So what the Hell do you want him to do? Slash his wrists?

Damn – he corrected the mistake – what else should he do?

Congratulations, KsFarmGrrl, on the gay marriage victory in California.

Now gay folks will get to learn the beautiful thing that marriage is, the eventual ennui and the nagging, the break-up and splitting up of the household in a hate-filled divorce, custody battle of the dog etc.

Enjoy.

(Just kidding with my usual jaundiced view . . .)

Oh, his campaign said he mispoke, so everything is okay. Is that it? How many times must he misspeak or be corrected before we start to take notice?

And gay folks in California can… wait for it…. BE MARRIED IN CHURCH!

HEEEEEEEE!

And no one forced the church to do the right thing.

Advertisements [?]
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/ci_9352923

PASADENA – All Saints Church in Pasadena, one of the largest and most liberal Episcopalian congregations in the country, announced Thursday it will begin performing wedding ceremonies for gay couples starting June 16.

In what All Saints Rector the Rev. Ed Bacon called a “historic vote,” church officials adopted the “Resolution on Marriage Equality” unanimously Thursday, after a special meeting of the 3,500-member congregation’s lay leadership.

The church’s action came in response to the California Supreme Court’s May 15 ruling overturning the ban on gay marriage approved by voters in 2000.

All Saints has performed blessings for same-sex couples for the past 15 years.

But Bacon described the church vestry’s vote as showing “stirring courage to move beyond lip service” to the church’s commitment to equality by extending marriage rights to gay members.

“Today’s decision is consistent with All Saints Church, Pasadena’s identity as a peace and justice church,” Bacon said in a statement Thursday. “It also aligns us with the Scriptures’ mandate to make God’s love tangible by `doing justice and loving mercy’ (Micah 6:8) and with the canons of our Episcopal Church that forbid discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”

Those against same-sex marriage have vowed to overturn the appeals court’s decision by putting a constitutional amendment initiative on the November ballot.

“it’s a little difficult to move a farm.”

Damn. I truly wish you could take a quick flight to LA – get hitched – and come on home and have a HUGE celebration.

Man, I’d even make up a batch of my world famous deviled egg ‘tater salad for the occasion.

Maybe one day, Ms. Grrl………………….

He must be calling his pastor to find out what to say next. Or perhaps…

He’ll appear shortly as john stone?

I’m so happy for the GLBT community, horray!
That’s how many states now? And more will soon follow.

I read that conservative SCOTUS judges were also siding more with worker’s rights, which is a very good thing.

Thanks Clark.

But given that more than seventy percent of kansans hold their bigotry dear, the marriage wouldnt be recognized in dear old kansas.

Kansas… as bigoted as you think!

“The reference to ‘…story in our family…’ could lead one to believe that the story could’ve easily been related to him incorrectly, or it was just something he’d heard as a wee lad. ”

And perhaps not true at all.

farmgrrl has obviously never been to California because she does not realize that California is one of the most agriculturally active states in the 50. Just about every produce you can buy in the supermarket is grown in California.

So I am shocked.
You mean farmgrrl is not leaving? After being denied her right to marry for so long while living in “bigoted and wingnutty” Kansas, one would think that she sould jump at a chance to enjoy equal treatment with man/woman marriages in wonderful California.

I wonder what farmgrrl’s partner has to say about this. I am sure that she is bummed to have to endure being treated as a single person simply because of a farm that apparently can not be sold.

OR, maybe her life in “bigoted and wingnutty” Kansas is not so miserable afterall.

Can’t figure this one out. If being gay in a state that does not recognize gay marriages is so bad, than why does farmgrrl stay?

The lush farms in California are calling you farmgrrl.

KFG, Didn’t Jenna say Degeneres (however you spell that) could get married on daddy Bush’s farm on Ellen’s show?
Does a Cali marriage certificate transfer to Texas or is that a special dispensation from the Prez?

I thought NJ had gay marriage too.

THE UN – OBAMA WANTS TO SEND $68 BILLION MORE to this Corrupt and Incompetent Organization. See how wunnerful Big Government works!!!

UN Probe Says Procurement at Its $5 Billion Anti-Poverty Agency a Shambles
Wednesday, May 28, 2008

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,358953,00.html

The multibillion-dollar procurement business of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the U.N.’s flagship anti-poverty agency, is a gigantic shambles, according to UNDP’s own investigators.

Moreover, UNDP’s management has privately acknowledged that fact and is scrambling to fix the mess — even as it loudly denied concerns of a procurement scandal that have been raised by FOX News, among others.

In a confidential report obtained by FOX News, UNDP’s auditors have described the UNDP procurement organization that is spending well over $2 billion annually as:

— overwhelmed by its caseload at headquarters and in the field, while procurement ballooned from $800 million in 2003 to $2.5 billion in 2006 and $2.2 billion last year;

— often failing to provide plans to support its buying activities, which the report says causes many purchases of goods and services to be carried out on an “ad hoc basis” (in fact, more than $595 million worth of non-existent purchases were recorded, although the audit notes that they were not paid for);

— wallowing in shoddy paperwork and faulty bidding processes, which contributed to a “high number of waivers of the competitive process and to quality problems in the procurement process in general”;

— lacking the expertise to evaluate hundreds of millions of dollars worth of its most expensive and important purchases in civic construction and high-tech communications;

— drastically unqualified: Fully half of the organization’s procurement staff around the world were not certified for the basic requirements of their jobs, while the auditors also found the six-hour course for those who were certified to be “inadequate.” Additionally, the auditors noted, “there are entire offices without a single certified buyer”;

— suffering from an “apparent” conflict of interest at the top, where the people charged with vetting the procurement process for flaws are also members of the procurement office staff.

The same potentials for conflict of interest apparently dog local staffers, who, the report says, had not received official guidelines for disclosing their finances and interests, even though a policy demanding those declarations had been issued a year earlier.

Even more ominously, the same auditors point out that UNDP:

— has no sure way of knowing whether it is doing business with organizations that the U.N. itself has condemned for terrorist ties and says UNDP country offices find the current manual system of cross-checking with U.N. terrorist sanctions lists to be “cumbersome and inefficient”;

— has no formal policy for suspending or removing vendors for poor performance or corruption;

— and doesn’t ask new vendors for the identity of their owners or other corporate ties. This raises the possibility that vendors caught out for corruption or poor performance could simply switch names and reapply for approved status.

RFL you once again prove the idiocy of wingnuts in kansas. Why sell farm land here for a price that wouldnt buy a HOUSE much less a farm in California?

You are forgetting a word here. Lush CORPORATE farms in California.

Or are you so stupid you dont understand that?

Mostly, I just stay here to piss you off.

I see it’s working….

The sentiment is mutual farmie.

Again, have a safe trip to California!

And some lighter news….which cannot possibly be made up:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1256483,00.html
It is not clear how long officers will need to examine the photograph.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1311447,00.html
Realising his car was being broken into, the cop burst out of the door holding nothing but his torch.

RE: “P-mom feigns sympathy ”

Really, I read that as her seeing little difference between the two (but I can’t get into her mind, so I’m Prolly mistaken). Whereas you don’t seem to see the similarity of aborting at 6 weeks and working people to death or shipping them to a fraudulent war in order to pad your coffers.

Here’s the UN Millennium Commitment – $$$$.

Obama’s Global Poverty Act will mandate the US Taxpayer to meet this commitment.

http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/docs/UNSD_MDG_Report_2007e.pdf

Success in achieving the MDGs in the poorest and most disadvantaged countries cannot be achieved by these countries alone. Developed countries need to deliver fully on longstanding commitments to achieve the official development assistance (ODA) target of 0.7 per cent of gross
national income (GNI) by 2015.

It requires, in particular, the Group of 8 industrialized nations to live up to their 2005
pledge to double aid to Africa by 2010 and European Union Member States to allocate 0.7 per cent of GNI to ODA by 2015.

In spite of these commitments, ODA declined between 2005 and 2006 and is expected to continue to fall slightly in 2007 as debt relief declines.

farmgrrl, I am looking out for happiness and well being. How is that being caveman like? You describe being gay in a state that does not recognize gay marriages as a violation of your civil rights.

sooooo, what stay? seriously, your caricature of state approved marriage must not be grand equalizer which you describe it to be.

Unemployment rate in Wichita falls in April
BY DAN VOORHIS
The Wichita Eagle
The Wichita area unemployment rate was 3.5 percent, not seasonally adjusted, in April, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That is better from 4.1 percent in March and the 3.8 percent rate in April of 2007.

The national unemployment rate was 4.8 percent in April, up from 4.3 percent from a year earlier.

——————————

What an economy. If someone isn’t working now it’s because they don’t want to work.
————————————————-

Gosh Observer, who is it that is constantly complaining about not being able to find a job that will pay him what he is truly worth?

Or what he is truly worthless?

Ksfrmgrl don’t know you well but after reading several of your posts I am curious why you think it is a big deal that a church in CA is now going to be doing same sex marriages. I got the idea that you were an atheist.

Just curious – is it equality you are after or are you wanting to rub it in someones face?

Farmgirl, married in a church!

Heeeeeeee! Heeeeeeeeee!

HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Obama’s $68 BILLION Global Poverty act will cost Every Man, Woman, and Child in the USA $227 per year, just to start with.

If you live in a home with 2 Parents and 2 Kids, YOUR SHARE is $908 per year, just to start with.

And some of you Libs complain about High Gas Prices……..

I spoke with Barack this morning, Max, and he told me that you were personally going to foot the bill for the global poverty initiative, since you are such a “compassionate conservative.”

He told me to thank you.

Good morning all of you happy bloggers.
Here’s my take:

The Democrats suck and are a bunch of liars (if you’re a Republican).

The Republicans suck and are a bunch of liars (if you’re a Democrat).

Am I fair and un-balanced, or what?

Ok, here’s something very interesting that I ran across this morning.
Them damned Jews are burning Bibles!
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/05/28/bible.burning/index.html

Where’s the outrage????

My favorite disclosure from Scott McClellan’s book……………….

McClellan heard Bush on the phone in 2000 tell someone that he couldn’t remember if he had ever used cocaine.

He couldn’t freakin’ REMEMBER!?!?!

Say what?

Damn, I knew the man had a drinking problem, but he drank so much that he couldn’t remember if he had used cocaine?

Poor people get abortions at the clinic with pro-lifers ranting at the doors.

Rich pro-lifers get a “D&C” *wink, wink* and their doctor drops an extra 50 grand in an off-shore account.

Same ol’, same ol’.

THE EAGLE HAD AN ATTACK TOPIC FOR HILLARYY ON HER RFK COMMENTS, CAN WE PLEASE HAVE A TOPIC FOR OBAMA SEEING DEAD PEOPLE ON MEMORIAL DAY?

http://www.slate.com/id/2192229/

Obama’s forgettable Memorial Day: Conservative bloggers are fired up over Barack Obama’s Memorial Day speech, in which he said, “On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes—and I see many of them in the audience here today—our sense of patriotism is particularly strong” and talked about how his uncle helped liberate Auschwitz, a task actually accomplished by the Red Army. (Late Tuesday, Obama’s camp clarified that the candidate meant to say Buchenwald, not Auschwitz.)

Ed Morissey at Hot Air sighs: “Does Obama see dead people? Coming from Chicago, one might be tempted to joke that they would form a natural portion of his constituency, but obviously Obama confused this with Veterans Day, which honors our living veterans of war. Unfortunately, most of the nation makes the same mistake, and small wonder when its leadership can’t distinguish between the two.” Conservative Jimmie at the Sundries Shack says: “I’m going to call his verbal boners ‘Duh-bamas’ in honor of the man who graces us with them so very, very often.”

“MaxGrobnik
Posted May 28, 2008 at 12:12 pm | Permalink
LittleJohn, Every Penny spent in the Iraq War was approved by your little Democrat buddies in Congress.

George couldn’t have done it without ye.”

I am not a Democrat. But I do have a few Democrat buddies. (None in Congress—turn all the bass turds out, of both parties)

And how about that, Obama’s Uncle in the Red Army saving those Germans.

And a Slave Owner Great Grandfather too!

What a perfect Global Candidate for President of the United Nations of the World!

Obama = King of the World!

Remember Obama’s comments about establishing his Kingdom on Earth? Where did I put those….

KBR being sued over troop electrocutions in showers… Yipppeee!!!! Maybe this will get to the bottom of these terrible tragedies!!

of course, fish… LOL

Chas
Posted May 28, 2008 at 12:37 pm | Permalink
KBR being sued over troop electrocutions in showers… Yipppeee!!!! Maybe this will get to the bottom of these terrible tragedies”

*************************

Good. about frickin time

Obama’s forgettable Memorial Day: Conservative bloggers are fired up over Barack Obama’s Memorial Day speech, in which he said, “On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes—and I see many of them in the audience here today…

No doubt the Senator is hoping for the ‘dead people vote’ in the upcoming election.

as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes—and I see many of them in the audience here today

I thought Bush and McCain were in audience.

Give our business to those ethical Eurpeans! Boeing should be more like them.
“Former EADS (EAD.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) co-chief executive Noel Forgeard was detained in Paris police custody for questioning on Wednesday as part of a probe into possible insider trading at the European aerospace giant, French police sources said.

So you came around and finally agree airbus is as good as Boing,Boing?

You have a right LJ.

Then again, I don’t count you as a republican, sorry.

(honestly, that’s a compliment)

Looks like another democrat smiles and winks.

“Burnett seemed relaxed as he talked with his lawyers minutes before the verdict was announced. At one point, he smiled. Burnett winked at the gallery as he left the courtroom in handcuffs.”

Nathan,

And you stupidly believe that failing to correctly implement the needed solutions proves that the problem does not exist.

That’s like saying that a sick person is not really sick, if s/he refuses to take the medication that would cure their illness.

WichiWomn–
man, I got so busy I forgot! Okay, thanks for reminding me. I will be out of town this Friday, but I am going to pick a date and bethere!

KFG, there’s a festival in your neck of the woods (sorta) this weekend in Russell. Check out flatlandblues.org if you’re interested.

OOPS! I got the title wrong on my post, the name of the book is RETRIBUTION. I’m reading another history with the title wrongly attributed in the above post.

Why don’t you two (Nathan and cosmo) admit it.
You both are people of faith. Both of you believe in what you believe through faith alone. Period.
The End.

fleettwood,

Nathan relies on the “faith” of hoping that the lies he stupidly believes, like from Dennis Avery, will not be exposed.

‘Outrage in the Climate Science Community Continues Over the “500 Scientist” List’
http://www.desmogblog.com/outrage-in-the-climate-science-community-continues-over-the-500-scientist-list

“Here’s some more quotes:

“I am very shocked to see my name in the list of “500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares”. Because none of my research publications has ever indicated that the global warming is not as a consequence of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, I view that the inclusion of my name in such list without my permission or consensus has damaged my professional reputation as an atmospheric scientist.”
Dr. Ming Cai, Associate Professor, Department of Meteorology, Florida State University.

“Just because you document natural climate variability doesn’t mean anthropogenic global warming is not a threat. In fact I would venture that most on that list believe a natural cycle and anthropogenic change combined represent a greater threat.”
Peter F. Almasi, PhD Candidate in Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Columbia University

“Why can’t people spend their time trying to identify and evaluate the facts concerning climate change rather than trying to obscure them?”
Dr. James P. Berry, Senior Scientist, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute

“They have taken our ice core research in Wyoming and twisted it to meet their own agenda. This is not science.”
Dr. Paul F. Schuster, Hydrologist, US Geological Survey

“Please remove my name IMMEDIATELY from the following article and from the list which misrepresents my research.”
Dr. Mary Alice Coffroth, Department of Geology, State University of New York at Buffalo “

Cosmos many are starting to believe as the Chez President said in the article I posted earlier. There isn’t enough evidence to prove otherwise and the direction we are taking will put the world into a financial downturn. What is wrong with taking a longer look before rushing headlong into a fix that might be unnessecary?

What If a Republican Called, Like Obama, for God’s ‘Kingdom on Earth’?
By Mark Finkelstein | October 8, 2007 – 08:20 ET

“This is Anne Jones, reporting live from the headquarters of the ACLU, where the organization has issued a ‘DEFCON 1 Threat-to-the-Constitution Alert’ in the wake of a Republican presidential candidate’s call for the creation of God’s ‘kingdom on earth.’ We’re speaking with ACLU representative Amanda Rogers. Ms. Rogers, now that a Republican candidate has brought the wall that separates church and state crashing to the ground, can our constitutional system be saved?”

“Anne, I’m afraid the answer is a resounding ‘no,’ at least, not if someone who thinks like this, and who sadly reflects the thinking of his entire party, is elected president. Fortunately, there are candidates from another party who respect the constitutionally decreed separaration of church and state.”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2007/10/08/what-if-republican-obama-called-gods-kingdom-earth

fleettwood,

Scientific methodology is not “faith”.

okobserver,

If there “isn’t enough evidence”, why do deniers like Dennis Avery falsely claim that scientists who believe that AGW is happening do not believe it?

See my 4:17 pm post.

Where are the credible, peer-reviewed science papers refuting AGW? Why do the deniers publish(sic) only on web sites, op-eds, and books?

Compare the deniers science(sic) to the science here,
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm

RFL
Posted May 28, 2008 at 11:01 am | Permalink
P-mom feigns sympathy for the attempted murder of a 6 week old baby while holding fast to the position that an unborn child can be murdered with impunity.

P-mom knows that there is no biological difference between a 6 week old baby and one that is unborn. Therefore a society which can justify abortions as a mere medical procedure can also justify the dumping of a baby in a dumpster.

Keeping abortion legal allows the cancerous belief the humans are only valuable if they are wanted by their mother. A mother did not want her 6 week old. She tossed the baby in a dumpster. A logical pro-choice decision.

————-

There is quite a lot of biological differences between a 6 week old baby and unborn, depending on the age of the fetus.

What I was referring to is that you have cut off every place for help that these women can turn to without some sort of negative consequence. They can’t just sign their babies over to be adopted, the father must be involved. They can’t get a late term abortion if they found out too late, they can’t go to the doctor if they’re on drugs for fear of being locked up, they can’t get on welfare or get help with a drop off place when they’ve been up for 24 hours with a crying baby and they’re at their wits end without them being tried for abandonment. They don’t get decent sex education to teach them where to go or what to do to keep from getting pregnant in the first place.

And if they were raped and DON”T want to have to talk to the police, they’re just SOL. I guess they can deal with it, because anyone they tell is going to report it.

The number of abortions in Scotland has risen for the third straight year, up by 4% to an all-time high of 13,081 abortions in 2006, despite the touted easy access for women and schoolgirls to the dangerous Plan B morning-after abortifacient, which is proven to increase the spread of venereal diseases rather than to decrease surgical abortions. The number of repeat abortions is increasing in Scotland, as well, as is the number of abortions committed upon underage girls. Furthermore, Plan B is only 72% or less effective, rather that the 89% claimed by Barr Laboratories.
- – -

Germans are reeling over a recent string of cases involving mothers accused or convicted of killing their babies. The grisly killings have come at a time when the country’s low birthrate has left the government searching for ways to encourage people to have more children. Many of the mothers have been struggling single women who hid their pregnancy from friends and family, gave birth alone and killed the newborn out of fear or desperation.
Lately, a 20-year-old woman confessed to putting her newborn infant in the freezer about three or four weeks ago, claiming it was dead. An autopsy showed the child was alive when placed in the freezer and the woman was arrested.
In April, a woman received the maximum sentence of 15 years for killing eight newborns between 1992 and 1998 and burying them in flower pots on her parents’ property.
Earlier this month, a teenager scrounging for a frozen pizza at his home in western Germany found the bodies of three infants–his siblings–in the family’s deep freezer. The mother was arrested. Also this month, a 22-year-old-woman was convicted of killing her three newborns by stuffing them into plastic bags. The bodies were discovered in 2007 in cartons in her parents’ garage.
82 young German children were killed by a parent in 2006. Mothers in the USofA kill more children each year than German mothers, in spite of safe abandonment laws enacted in every state, providing for the legal abandonment of unharmed newborns in hospitals, clinics, fire stations, and police stations.

Anyone who doesn’t agree with Max Grobnik is probably at least SOMEWHAT sensible.

Dear Nazi,

Lots of postings today. Do you EVER work?

Superbug
http://health.yahoo.com/news/ap/deadly_bacteria.html

Meanwhile, “parkay” –

During the administration of Governor Kathleen Sebelius, the abortion rate in Kansas has been reduced by 8%.

So where are your priorities?

Sure seems like you embrace the political rhetoric and ignore the real-world effects of rational policy.

You people pull out inflammatory memes such as “the abortion industry and shout “Baby Killer!!” and shoot doctors and bomb clinics while those of us who are pro-choice (and pro-reality) are forced to fight you to keep abortion legal, safe, and rare.

The “Shouting ‘Baby Killer!’ Industry” has lost track of its stated goal. They’re taking your money, “parkay,” and getting fat on it while they ignore their purported cause.

Banning abortion will not get you laid “Max”

Try a hood and the red light district.

Ahhh, BJ is back.

With 3.5% unemployment now in Kansas even you can surely find a job and earn enough money to pay for your child’s healthcare, and food, and housing, and clothing.

Go for it BJ.

cosmos_originally
Posted May 28, 2008 at 4:17 pm

“Just because you document natural climate variability…”
Peter F. Almasi, PhD Candidate in Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Columbia University

Abrupt changes in the Arctic never happened before eh cosmos?

A Pervasive Millennial-Scale Cycle in North Atlantic Holocene and Glacial Climates
Gerard Bond, * William Showers, Maziet Cheseby, Rusty Lotti, Peter Almasi, Peter deMenocal, Paul Priore, Heidi Cullen, Irka Hajdas, Georges Bonani

Evidence from North Atlantic deep sea cores reveals that abrupt shifts punctuated what is conventionally thought to have been a relatively stable Holocene climate. During each of these episodes, cool, ice-bearing waters from north of Iceland were advected as far south as the latitude of Britain. At about the same times, the atmospheric circulation above Greenland changed abruptly. Pacings of the Holocene events and of abrupt climate shifts during the last glaciation are statistically the same; together, they make up a series of climate shifts with a cyclicity close to 1470 ± 500 years. The Holocene events, therefore, appear to be the most recent manifestation of a pervasive millennial-scale climate cycle operating independently of the glacial-interglacial climate state. Amplification of the cycle during the last glaciation may have been linked to the North Atlantic’s thermohaline circulation.

In any case, if we are correct that the 1470-year climate cycle is a pervasive component of Earth’s climate system, it must be present in previous glacial-interglacial intervals. If that turns out to be true, the cycle may well be the pacemaker of rapid climate change.

(source from me: registered user of Science Magazine: http://www.sciencemag.org

Guess that cosmos “will now be ‘agin’ Peter F. Almasi, PhD before he was ‘fer’ him.

Hey Hank,

Please do forward me Junior’s real name and address, so that I might keep postings Junior’s name on the blog like he does mine and accusing me of being other posters.

I can attribute Junior’s name to every pro-Obama post there is and see if he likes to be accused of posting other than what is under his nic.

Heartwarming story, or heart breaking story?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080528/ap_on_re_us/iron_lung_death_10

“Science is not based in absolutes.” [Naathanial]

Hmmmm … guess its made up of variables, and not absolutes… amazing…

Nathaniel
Posted May 28, 2008 at 6:27 pm | Permalink
KFG,

Once again, merely opposing homosexual marriage doesn’t make me a bigot.
========================================

So, what DO you call it??

Chas
Posted May 28, 2008 at 6:41 pm | Permalink
Nathaniel
Posted May 28, 2008 at 6:27 pm | Permalink
KFG,

Once again, merely opposing homosexual marriage doesn’t make me a bigot.
========================================

So, what DO you call it??
———————–
It has interpreted through his faith denomination that homosexual marriage is not allowed.

That is not being a bigot.

I, on the other hand will accept whatever the state dictates that ‘gay marriage’ will be legal.

However, I qualify that and have always qualified it as the teaching of my faith denomination interpretation of the bible does not allow the marriage of gays.

I am a citizen of the United States and if I was a citizen of California, I would abide by their laws.

My spiritual convictions do not make me a bigot. My understanding of the law make me a pragmatist and in understanding that I cannot use my beliefs from my personal convictions to force them upon others.

With all of that said, I pray for brave stances on both sides of those with convictions as it is not an easy issue to comprehend nor be flippant about.

MrC — How do you spell Cover Up??

Nathaniel posted May 28, 2008 at 5:47 pm

“All the scientist are doing is “predicting” global warming in a computer model which doesn’t account for all the variables.”

False.

They’ve shown that the observed temperature changes in the past cannot be explained by only natural factors,

http://environment.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11649/dn11649-1_688.jpg

And they have successfully predicted the future,
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/hansens-1988-projections/

Nathan: “Science is not based in absolutes. The way people like you hold up scientists as if what ever they say is beyond reproach is more of a blind faith than anything I believe.”

Science is not based in absolutes — that’s why they use ranges, error bars, etc.

I do not hold science in a “blind faith”. But I do consider lying about AGW science, which the deniers do, very wrong and irresponsible.

Excellent point PMama — You beat me to it!!

Political Mama,

What is society? What is law and who makes that law?

If marriage is and has been defined as one man and one woman for who knows how long, how is that my imposition on homosexuals?

They are choosing a lifestyle and I ahve no problem with that.

I have no problem with them even getting access to things which have been attached to marriage.

Now, not even that is enough. They want official government recognition of being married.

Sorry, there is no reason they should be given that for a lifestyle choice which many disagree with.

They can live and be as gay as they want to be. When you start wanting to make others recognize that, they are the ones imposing themselves on the rest of us.

I am not a bigot. Constantly calling me that is no better than when KFG and others said I hated gay people.

Neither are true. Both are simply attacking me instead of engaging in discussion.

Another interesting tidbit about Sunrise FL’s arena:
http://www.miamiherald.com/466/story/549530.html

MrC — CapN or PMama have it

Nathan — Since you renot gay, how is it that a gay couple being married infringes on you?? Its not like they are competing with you for anything… Carer to explain that??

MrC — I dont seem to have it LoL

Whatever. By ANY definition, nathan, I think you fit the bill.

A rose by any other name and all.

Why do you care if anyone calls you a bigot? It’s what you are. Changing the NAME isnt going to make you NOT a bigot.

Well Reg, despite some things you’ve posted in the past, no, by your posts on this thread, I dont think you are a bigot.

I dont care how you feel or follow your faith. Just leave the laws free of religious intolerance. And I think that is what you are saying here.

“Nathaniel” pontificates –

“If marriage is and has been defined as one man and one woman for who knows how long….”

That’s significant, “Nathaniel.” Since most states’ laws didn’t mention gender in marriage laws, at least in imposing genders on participants. (There are various ages of consent — i.e., 16 for females, 18 for males — but until twice-born homophobes got up on their hind legs and wrote genders into marriage laws.)

Ah, but there are plenty of tax breaks (and penalties — assuming the Cons weren’t lying when they were bitching about the so-called “Marriage Penalty” in the tax code a few years back. Okay, bad assumption. But I digress.) which are awarded to married couples.

The courts, which might — just might — be better at interpreting laws than you are, “Nathaniel,” simply noted that all those laws affecting two consenting adults who enter into a marriage contract don’t address gender. And never have.

But you can’t restrain yourself, “Nathaniel.” You go on with –

“…there is no reason they should be given that for a lifestyle choice which many disagree with.”

Hey. I might “disagree” with a skinny guy marrying a fat chick. So let’s outlaw that, “Nathaniel.”

“I am not a bigot.”

Yeah, right.

Please, “Nathaniel.” Four out of ten Iraq War veterans are afflicted by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Because I respect your military service and I see how you present yourself in this forum, I worry that you need treatment.

Go ahead and prove me wrong. Please see a mental health professional and prove me wrong if that’s how it turns out.

Nathan — Since you’re not gay, how is it that a gay couple being married infringes on you?? Its not like they are competing with you for anything…

Carer to explain that??

Pope I don’t usually but into private conversations but you don’t seem to have a problem with that so I will. No where did I see Nathaniel say he felt threatened by gay marriage. Care to show that to me.

Careful Chas, you might be a bigot because you are obstinately or intolerantly devoted to your own opinions and prejudices; especially one who regards or treats the members of a group (religious denominational faith) with hatred and intolerance.

Chas,

It doesn’t. What is your point?

Nathan, if it doesnt infringe on you, and you’re not competing with gay couples for anything, then what is your disagreement??

Chas,

I believe that marriage is and should be between a man and a woman.

Simply because someone chooses to be different doesn’t mean they deserve special privledge and recognition for that.

WS Clark,

Written and documented history and tradition for starters.

Chas,

They have equal rights. And as I said before, marriage has become so linked to other things that I have no problem with those other things being afforded to other couples as well.

Chas,

Sure it does. Congress and the liberals have been doing it for the last 50 years.

Ever heard of CAFE standards? There are all sorts of laws in place to protect the environment at the cost of others individual liberties.

Who determines your ability to get married, Nathan?? Do you have to seek permission from the State?? or from an attorney?? Who is it that determines your ability to APPLY for a marriage license??

“Nathaniel” claims –

“If I was [sic] intolerant of your lifestyle or opinion I wouldn’t let you have either.”

You wouldn’t let them have either?!

And who or what gives you the right, “Nathaniel,” to “let” others have a “lifestyle or opinion?!”

What would you do if you lived up to your personal opinion of being tolerant?

Do you really think the measure of your “tolerance” is that you’ve chosen to “let” others have a different opinion or lifestyle?

We who read WE Blog know full well that you don’t like to step outside your home without a handgun strapped to your side. We’ve heard how you’d react to a civil tort (i.e., someone killing your dog) with a bona fide felony (i.e., murdering them).

Given your record on this forum, we know that you, “Nathaniel,” think you are the judge of who is “Christian,” who lives an “acceptable” lifestyle, and who you think is subject to your judgment of what you should “let” happen.

This isn’t an attack. It’s a plea.

Please seek psychological help, “Nathaniel.”

Nathan, I wish I could get you on video tape stating that marriage is not right… Cause after all of the outrage, you would need to find some place to hide!!

Nathan, NOBODY determines your ability to get married… NOBODY can tell you you cant get married to a consenting adult of your choice, so long as it is a female… NOBODY has the right to deny you a marriage certificate, so long as you are legal to get married… Laws about marriage are not laws allowing marriage… Therefore, Marriage IS a right… Only in your mind is marriage a privilege…

And once again, if a gay couple is not infringing on you, as you stated, and if they are not competing with you for anything, as you stated…

Then on what BASIS do you object to gay couples having the same right to get married as you have??

Clark, there is also written, and documented history and tradition for the existence of Multiple Gods as well… No “compelling evidence for those either!! Just saying…

According to this definition(Wikipedia) and the definiton of license from Black’s law, a marriage is a privilege and not a right.

Black’s Law Dictionary defines “license” as, “The permission by competent authority to do an act which without such permission [...] would be illegal.” The authority to license implies the power to prohibit . A license by definition “confers a privilege” to do something. By allowing the state to exercise control over marriage, it is implied that we do not have a right to marry; marriage is a privilege. Those born in the US receive a birth certificate, not a birth license. Most would object to a birth license as it would imply that people must gain permission to be born. Following that same logic, many refuse to accept a marriage license and exercise their right to marry without obtaining permission from the state.[1]

Some groups believe that needing to obtain a marriage license from the State in order to be married is unnecessary or immoral. The Libertarian Party, for instance, believes that all marriages should be civil, not requiring sanction from the State.[2] Some Christian groups also feel that, since marriage is believed to be a contract between two people and God, no authorization from the State is required.[3]

So who “grants” the privilege, McCluer? Given unrelated, consenting adults of the opposite sex, what would be the criteria for denying the “privilege” to marry?

Given that it cannot be denied, it is a RIGHT.

I mentioned that march of society earlier.

I’d like to go back to that.

You know, people who oppose that march? Maybe they aren’t very smart.

The trend in society is toward tolerance and away from intolerance.

Sometimes though, once a tide starts moving?

It just keeps on going. Maybe even eventually at odds with itself. As to tolerance I mean?

People notice when they see deliberate meanness.

So, as the wave toward tolerance moves on. And goal after goal is washed over?

Maybe a bit up the beach, some idea of getting a little back for past grievances comes into play.

Then the folks who have fought change at every step might find themselves on defense not for what they are against. But maybe having to defend what is their deepest core beliefs.

I hope it would stop short of that.

But I wouldn’t count on it.

I believe what everyone is looking for is a definition under rights to marry.

Answer.com provides one solution under Civil Rights.

(which btw is what happened in California with the decision)

Civil Rights
Rights protected by the U.S. Constitution. These rights can be enforced by court action. Among them are the right to own property, to utilize the courts, to marry, to contract, and to obtain other benefits set out by law, including all rights set out in federal statutes.

So, in essence, it’s not a matter of licensing rights, it turns out to be a matter of Civil Rights as defined by the Constitution.

Further explanation:

The rights belonging to an individual by virtue of citizenship, especially the fundamental freedoms and privileges guaranteed by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and by subsequent acts of Congress, including civil liberties, due process, equal protection of the laws, and freedom from discrimination.

Which btw, was part of my decision acknowledging the legal affirmation by the California Courts.

Spiritually, I struggle with one eye blinded with the decision, but “render unto Caesar…blah blah” trumphs my spiritual convictions.

Actually, Regular, AFTER I perform a marriage ceremony, the State issues a Certificate of Marriage… License before… Certificate afterwards…

As I have stated often, Marriage IS a Right!!

As one who performs marriages, I certainly already knew that before… But thanks for the Civil Rights posting, Regular…

Cosmos,

Is all that you can do is mischaracterize what people say to make your arguments?

The Church only approves the marriage licensed and recorded by the state… approves for benefit of the the CHURCH not the state!!

Oddly enough, obtaining a license from a state still remains a privilege. Finding the opportunity of a right under the Constitutional definition of Civil Rights, is not serendipity, but fundamental argument by Locke that that the natural rights of life, liberty and property should be interpreted as civil rights and protected by the sovereign state as an aspect of the social contract.

This social contract was further defined by our founding fathers to be part of the natural right.

Ironically and to the chagrin of progressive Liberals, Marx, Nietze and Freud thought the social contract violated principles because it places the individual rights over the structural order of the state.

ksfarmgrrl
Posted May 28, 2008 at 6:13 pm | Permalink
“OMG, too funny! Amway bitches about a poll of 1000+ voters and wonders how representative it is…”

Umh, FarmGirl, the poll came from YOUR link.
In the same news article you used to lead posters
to believe:

“Majority of voters in California do NOT favor a constitutional hate amendment.”

By my taking the time to read YOUR link, I saw how really stupid your post was, and the heading which reflects how the MEDIA tells us, by their heading – WHAT people think.

By your own measure, the title of the article COULD have read:

“Majority of voters in California DO favor a constitutional hate amendment.”

Because another meaningless rinky-dinky poll shows voters are opposed.

I cited the 750+ to show how silly your 1000+ post is.

Again, I wish you well in gaining some kind of “officially” recognized Unity arrangement, which will provide you and yours the financial security you seek. But as I’ve said before, you are part of a very tiny minority, and not worth the political risk for candidates fighting 50-50 split races.

But my reading your post, taking the time to read your link, and providing you feedback really does not lead to being a bigot.

You gays are too, well sensitive, me thinks.

You know I keep saying it and nobody listens. I bet that if we started going after Nathan and other anti-gay marriage people’s driver’s license, they’d feel their rights were being violated too.

Driving is a true privilige not a right. and I’m sure we can find many traffic infractions if we only watched them closely enough and petitioned the state to have their licenses removed.

Pope you perform marriages! Well shiver me timbers you really are a pope. Sorry I was making fun of you. Is Benedict your last name. And you sure had me fooled. I had you filed with the atheist on this board. Wow.

AmWay — just because people vote for a law, doesnt mean that what they vote for is Constitutiional… That is why we have Courts!! CA has said the law in CA ws unconstitutional… So, do you want to throw out the Law of the Land in favor of mass bigotry??

Arrgh I see pirate lingo.

Who else posts here that does that? Let me think.

Chas, you are jumping on the bandwagon.

The majority of people throughout the United States have voted to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

Do you really believe these people are all bigots?
I hardly think so.

The courts aren’t throwing out a law because it was approved by bigots.

Actually, AmWay, Yes I do!! Gay marriage threatens NOBODY!! It competes with NOBODY!! It has nothing to do with traditional marriage…. It doesnt effect it in any way but in the minds of Bigots!!

On that note, I am heading for bed… poacking here for another move… Gotta get some sleep…

Good night; Good luck; God bless –
Whatever you conceive God to be!!

Blessings ALL!!

Blessings on Gay Marriage!!

for all you typo freaks…

poacking = packing

“Personally, I think the government should never have gotten into the OFFICAL MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE act to begin with. It has it’s roots in religion and probably social behavior of yesterdays society.”
[AmWay]

That is just SO WRONG… Marriage has always been in the hands of the State… NOT in religious roots… NEVER was!! In fact, in the society of yesterday, people would get married by the magistrate… later, the marriage was blessed by a priest/minister/rabbi… in Western society…

In primitive tribal society, there wasnt a difference…

Most community colleges offer an entry level course in Marriage and Family… perhaps you should look into taking one of those, AmWay…

Seriously!!

Nathaniel posted May 28, 2008 at 9:38 pm
“Cosmos,

Is all that you can do is mischaracterize what people say to make your arguments?”
———-

Nathan, exactly how did I “mischaracterize” what you’ve said?

Nathan posted Dennis Avery’s PR news release here,

Nathan posted September 15, 2007 at 1:30 am
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/09/open-thread-915/#comment-185927

Later,
Nathan posted September 15, 2007 at 1:51 am
“Kansas, [aka 'Regular']

Lets save cosmos the time…

They are all liars and hacks!”
——–

I debunked Avery here,
cosmos posted September 15, 2007 at 1:12 pm
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/09/open-thread-915/#comment-185980

And also on other threads,
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/avery-and-singer-unstoppable-hot-air

So Nathan… do you have a link to where you admitted that Dennis Avery was not a credible climate scientist?

Or did you lie when you said that I “mischaracterize[d]” you?

Remember, it’s not “Christian” to lie.

Actually, gay rights are not on my list of must do for our country. We have plenty of big problems to resolve, and the tiny number of gays is not going to be on the national agenda – despite the blog power of a few gays.

I took issue with FarmGirl making it SOUND like all of California was turning in favor of Gays, when in fact her article concerned 1026 telephone polled voters. She laughs at another poll in the same article which was negative toward the gay agenda by 750 polled voters.

It’s called hype. And if you can get people excited and make them THINK that everyone ELSE is up in arms,

you have succeeded and are deserving of the Joseph Goebbels Propaganda Award.

Well Pope I get it now. Everyone else says in my opinion. You say it’s right because I say so. Those poor californians. They just needed you to straighten them out.

I personally don’t care who marries who. You can marry your boyfriend I really don’t care. Legally we need to define marriage before a whole new set of problems surface. In my opinion.

Okay, here is the old California marriage law. It is as I suspected that the 4.6 million people voted for holding a strict constructionist view of what California law stated:

“From Findlaw:

FAMILY.CODE SECTION 300-310

300. Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman, to which the consent of the parties capable of making that contract is necessary. Consent alone
does not constitute marriage. Consent must be followed by the issuance of a license and solemnization as authorized by this
division, except as provided by Section 425 and Part 4 (commencing
with Section 500).

300. (a) Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman, to which the consent of the
parties capable of making that contract is necessary. Consent alone does not constitute marriage. Consent must be followed by the
issuance of a license and solemnization as authorized by this division, except as provided by Section 425 and Part 4 (commencing
with Section 500).
(b) For purposes of this part, the document issued by the county clerk is a marriage license until it is registered with the county
recorder, at which time the license becomes a marriage certificate.

…

308.5
Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

Pope wrong once again. When will the fringe get tired of making fools of themselves by spouting over things they know nothing about. You sure are an uninformed pope.

Thanks Reg for the clarification.

Pope I am proud of you. Now if we can just educate you.

Regular,

Libs don’t care what the people vote for. What matters is having a handful of well placed judges to overrule the people.

It matters not that in 24 states, the voters in mostly large majorities – voted to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

Like Chas says – all them thar people are bigots!

One judge to rule them all.

Them Texas boys are preparing the ‘rail, tar and feathers’ for Chas as we speak, so he has to pack. (joking…(chortles)

Yep yep yep the Right Wing stands proud for over throwing the Constitution of the United States, and tearing down the Court System…

How UNAmerican can you get?? Maybe we were wrong to get rid of the UnAmerican Affairs Committees in Congress… They could find a whole lot of fuel on this Blog!!

Pope what are you ranting about. Some strict constitutionists like to cross their ts and dot their is. Do you have a problem with this?

Yep there goes that right wing again not agreeing with the pope and he of course is always right.

Unamerican, give us a break and go pack.

Chas my friend?

You are debating James in 3 nics.

WS you know you really don’t have to read between the lines in my posts. I say exactly what I mean. I don’t care if gay/lesbians marry whoever they wish but if the majority of people think there needs to be a strict definition of marriage then I don’t think the courts have the right to overturn that by inserting ‘civil rights’. The ammendment/referrendum simply defined marriage as between an man and woman.

Jaybird you are really denser than I gave you credit for.

I think it is the moron thing.

Gotta go.

BlueJay
Posted May 28, 2008 at 8:55 pm | Permalink
Blah, blah,
“There is no reason to oppose gay marriage. It doesn’t hurt anyone.” Blah, Blah.
——
Look at the marriage stats in the USA. If I was gay I would be thrilled marriage was generally illegal. I could keep all of my things if the relationship went south. If it was legal that would mean I would only have a 50% chance of keeping 50% of MY property and only have visitation rights to my dog!!
(purely for humor)

Nice try James.

It was just last night you bragged about your “bot” posts?

You did this to yourself.

All you have to do to prove me wrong is put you me and one of your puppet nics in the same room.

I do this because you invited it on yourself. And for fun. You wanted nics to be irrelevant.

Well for YOUR side? They now mostly are.

“but if the majority of people think there needs to be a strict definition of marriage then I don’t think the courts have the right to overturn that”

Yes, they do. That is their job. The Founding Father defined the government with three separate but equal branches of government. It is the responsibility of the Judicial branch to protect the rights of minorities.

In 1950, the MAJORITY of Americans were just fine with “separate but equal.” The courts rules that it was unconstitutional.

Today, only the most bigoted among us would accept a “separate but equal” policy.

The courts are there to protect the minority.

Thank God.

Obama is a smooth talker, Hillary hasn’t a clue on how to speak the truth. Niether one has the experience to hold the office. Boy you dummy crates sure need leadership…

Whatever floats your boat, just keep your boat out of my pond.

Clark, I am simply saying if you are gay fine, want to get married fine. Just don’t force your lifestyle or flame it up any more than the rest of us. When there are flamboyant hetero parades ect. maybe I will change my mind. Bending most threads you(KFG) post on into a “gay issue” doesn’t help your cause.

“ANTI” declares –

“…When there are flamboyant hetero parades ect. maybe I will change my mind.”

“WSClark,” do you want to tell “ANTI” about the Mummers or shall I?

“Just don’t force your lifestyle”

How is it that you figure that gays “force their lifestyles” on anyone?

And for the record, not that it matters, I am straight, Anti.

For the record Clark, I don’t care what you are, doesn’t matter to me. For the record.

Cosmos,

Are you really this dumb or do you just pretend to be? Here is how you mischaracterize me and is an example of the tactic you use in almost every one of our discussions:

“Nathan Price is also the judge of what is credible science.”

When have I ever claimed such a thing? Never.

You are the one who labels everyone as credible or not. I do not attempt to argue that Climate scientists are not “credible” unless I am making an example of how you do it to any scientist whose funding comes from some company.

I simply disagree with some of the conclusions that scientists come to. I think most of them are probably pretty smart people who work hard and are credible.

You on the other hand? As I have asked you before, you have said that there are no credible scientists who oppose AGW.

“When an agricultural economist lies about what climate scientists believe, Nathan says that we should respect the lying economist.”

I have never said any such thing.

“Nathan believes that the lying economist is a honest, credible scientist.”

I never said any such thing.

“And Nathan will say that you are a “believer in the holy religion of AGW, not science” if you disagree.”

No, I say that about you cosmos. Just you. Maybe a few others here, but only those who declare with absolute authority that AGW is real and there can be no dissent.

Monkeyhawk
Posted May 28, 2008 at 11:58 pm | Permalink

“ANTI” declares –

“…When there are flamboyant hetero parades ect. maybe I will change my mind.”
——-
Douche, you broke up the sentence for your benefit. It read “Just don’t force your lifestyle or flame it up any more than the rest of us.”

Why are you going to gay pride parades anti?

Cruising? Looking for folks you know so you can out them at work? Filming for your local church so THEY can out folks and tisk tisk at the antics?

Or… could it be… anti is looking for a little action on the down low?

Hint: If you dont like the parades, dont go. Dont watch. It’s really quite simple.

And have you ever seen thirty thousand “irishmen” puke in New York on St Paddy’s day?

I have. Let’s not talk about parade outrages. And how about the Christopher Columbus Day parades where you cant find a sober or virgin italian in the tristate area?

Oh yeah. LETS talk about “celebrations”.

I dont go to the ones that offend me.

Why do you?

KFG,

My life will go on either way.

Your life? ROFLMAO

Come back here when you GET a real life!

“But I assume you have the “B” word lined up for me.”

Are you suggesting that you are BUTCH, Anti?

Dang.

Oh and, um, could you keep your crosses and nativity scenes off the courthouse lawns. I HATE when you flamboyantly (lights, colors, graven images and live animals) push your lifestyle on ME!

And could you tone down the 10000 flamboyant mega church crosses. I HATE when you ruin the city skyline just to push your lifestyle on others.

Oh and another thing, about that religious jewelry and those “christian flags”. COULD you please not offend the rest of us by pushing that lifestyle?

I mean, why do you have to be so PUBLIC about something that even jesus said should be done in private.

But I dont mind chritians, just dont ACT like one in public.

And I really dont mind straight people as long as they ACT gay in public!

Geez, pride parades are held one day a year. Now… what are the odds anti was in those cities on those pride parades and just happened to drive by on business.

Most pride parades are held on Sundays. WTF were you doing “driving downtown” for business on Sundays? Do you sell bibles?

I call bullshit.

And even if your long odds were true? Turn around. Find another route. You dont HAVE to go or watch if the parades offend you.

Sounds to me like someone schedules their “downtown business travel” with pride parades in mind.

Maybe I was right the first time. Maybe he attends those FLAMBOYANT parades because he’s a cruisin’ on the down low.

That would explain why he wants the parades under wraps.

Downtown? Do you even KNOW where the Denver, Topeka and KC parades are held? WHEN they are held?

Tell me the streets and when they were held. I can check it out if you are not lying.

Which I think you are.

Also, I have seen them on Saturdays. The Point still stands.

“G.C. drive to K.C or Topeka for early Monday meetings.”

So you were there in the morning or early afternoon? And you just happened to be there on pride day?

What month are pride parades held?

And again, what are the odds you were places for business on THREE pride parades?

KFG, are you that ignorant?- for early Monday meetings.

And of course there was not an event every single time I went.

Put your feathers down please, you look desperate.

Must be using the google franticly to find the pride dates.

Or… he took his sore and bruised ass to bed.

That’s what happens when you get it kicked.

I am not going to leave at midnight to be in NE KS by 7 or 8 AM. I made a weekend out of it.

“Put your feathers down please, you look desperate”

Uh no, I’m not the one desperately trying to spin my way out of a statement that is the equivalent of having your alligator mouth overload your tadpole ass.

Your hatred has caused you to completely missed the point. Unbelievable!

Again-I am fine with gay marriage. I was at a “Union” Saturday in your neck of the woods. I have a good friend that is a cattle man that is gay…not a big deal to me. What bothers me is people baiting others with race,sex, ect. issues to start shit. Flaunting in the face of others for the only purpose to get a reaction. This doesn’t help your cause!!! It further divides people!

Nathaniel posted May 29, 2008 at 12:04 am

“You on the other hand? As I have asked you before, you have said that there are no credible scientists who oppose AGW.”

That’s a misquote. I’ve basically said that the credible climate scientists have said that there are no credible scientists who refute the AGW theory.

Science is about the science, not the scientist(s).

“When an agricultural economist lies about what climate scientists believe, Nathan says that we should respect the lying economist.”

Nathan: “I have never said any such thing.”

So why did Nathan post the lying agricultural economist Dennis Avery here?

September 15, 2007 at 1:30 am
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/09/open-thread-915/#comment-185927

And then post,
September 15, 2007 at 1:51 am
“Kansas, [aka ‘Regular‘]

Lets save cosmos the time…

They are all liars and hacks!”
——–

Nathan has said tonight that he was not being sarcastic in that old 1:51 am post.

Nathan was actually admitting that Avery, and the other posts upthread were “all liars and hacks!”.

Thank you Nathaniel Price, for being honest.

KFG, again OVER YEARS, I also stumbled on a phelps parade/protest—-I was amazed at the hate from those idiots. Same with a White National Socialist (?) thing (I wouldn’t call it a parade). If you move off the farm you see different things…..not a secret any more.

And KFG, you have a baseless argument, other than attack and hate. Good night.

But — you didnt disagree with this either >>

“The above illustrates that the will of the people, the voters in the vast majority of states – have voted in favor or protecting marriage as between a man and a woman.”

If you didnt speak against it, that could mean you are FOR what was voted erroneously in CA…

Nathaniel posted May 29, 2008 at 1:04 am

“So why did Nathan post the lying agricultural economist Dennis Avery here?”

What lie did he tell cosmos?

I posted a link to his list here as evidence that there are scientist who have studies which do not neccisarily go in line with the so called “concensus.” ”
————

Nathaniel, WHY are you unable to understand simple facts?

Avery has told many lies.

Dansgaard-Oeschger events are not global warming, and do NOT refute the “concensus”.

Most (probably all) of the scientists Avery lists AGREE with the “concensus”

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2007/09/13/unstoppable-hot-air/

A good “Point-Counterpoint” of Avery’s lies are here,

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/avery-and-singer-unstoppable-hot-air