Plain English (-only) in America

May 14th, 2008 – 9:28 AM by D.J. Tice

A report from Washington correspondent Conrad Wilson:

WASHINGTON – The English-only debate it back … well, kinda.

Minnesota Reps. Michele Bachmann and John Kline want to see English as the official language of the United States. And their efforts have not been made in vain.

Recently, Bachmann and Kline were recognized by the advocacy group U.S. English for their “efforts to promote English as the unifying language of the United States.”

The Minnesota Republicans were among the 130 House members from 37 states (in both parties) to receive an “A in English” award, based on their votes and work in Congress to help make English the official language of the U.S. .

The group, U.S. English Inc., actually “graded” Congress, including the entire Minnesota delegation.

While both Kline and Bachmann scored the “highest,” honorable mentions included Republican Rep. Jim Ramstad, who received a B+ and Democrat Rep. Collin Peterson, who received a B.

Democrat Reps. Keith Ellison, Betty McCollum, Jim Oberstar and Tim Walz all “failed” — a.k.a., voted against all the proposals.

The grades were based on a series of votes including a bill (H.R. 997 – the English Language Unity Act) as well as a series of measures to reduce multilingual ballots, reduce multilingualism at the IRS, and English in the work-place policies.

“If we were all to come here today and speak only our native tongues, we would be unable to share our thoughts and ideas, let alone make the laws for 300 million Americans,” said Mauro Mujica, the chairman of U.S. English, in a statement. “Through their support of official English legislation, these members are ensuring that government will be on the side of promoting English, not separating groups along language lines.”

But not everyone is giving out passing grades.

Katherine Fennelly, a professor at the University of Minnesota’s Hubert Humphrey School of Public Affairs, called this type of legislation “unnecessary and divisive.”

“The vast majority of individuals in the U.S. speak English, and a number of studies have shown that by the second generation children of immigrants acquire English, but lose their ability to speak their parents’ languages,” Fennelly wrote in an email. “In this age of globalization, bilingualism should be viewed as an asset, not a deficit.”

Fennelly added: “Outlawing the use of other languages will do nothing to promote English learning; instead, it will put many individuals who have not been here long enough to have become fluent at risk. There are also potential threats to public safety of citizens and non-citizens alike if non-English speakers are unable to secure needed emergency services from medical, police and safety personnel.”

Bachmann disagreed, saying a common language provides unity.

“Sharing a common language helps to bring people together and to give new immigrants a faster ladder to success,” Bachmann said in a statement. “I am thrilled to be receiving this award and I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to promote the English language in America.”

-Conrad Wilson

413 Responses to "Plain English (-only) in America"

6th district Jim says:

May 14th, 2008 at 10:30 am

Go MB!
Of course, it is in the national interest to share one common language.
That obvious point is lost in today’s pc world.
Conversely, in a global economy it is imperative to be bilingual.
Hoe about a law that makes English the official, and still makes our schools
require some foreign language class (instead of basket weaving, or my kid just had a “power volleyball” elective;he does take French, however).

Jay says:

May 14th, 2008 at 10:40 am

Someone needs to point our to Ms Fennelly that being ‘bilingual’ is not the same thing as ‘unable to speak English.’ Of course bilingualism is an asset. But if you are living in the US, English needs to be among those languages you are able to use effectively.

Go ahead and teach everyone every language on Earth, but teach them English first if they are here.

parthian says:

May 14th, 2008 at 11:41 am

Just more retributive anti-immigrant nonsense from the White Party. Their stock in trade. A hopeful incitement to the low information voter, the backbone of the GOoP.

As the economy melts down, the national debt soars, the Iraq Quagmire slogs on, the energy crisis implacably proceeds, and the planet’s climate teeters on the brink of irreversible destruction, Darlin’ Michele and Col Klink are getting awards for pushing a bill that makes sure we reduce multilingual help for taxpayers contacting the IRS and outlaws multilingual ballots for elderly immigrant citizens—that’s “conservatism”!

They’ve sure got their priorities straight and know what’s important, by gum! But what have Michele and the Colonel done on the desperately needed Feral Children Punishment Act? How much longer must America wait!?

American history shows that first generation immigrants learn english skills over time, and their children ALWAYS do. There’s no real point in making interaction with the government intentionally difficult, just so native English speakers can feel superior in their language skills and “status”. And I guess more “Officially American.”

This is unneeded legislation, addresses a national “problem” which is phony, and has no real public policy purpose. Its goal is political division and wedge creation among voters. That’s all that can be expected from this failed party at this point.

And I’m sure the BQ moderators will next have a post on the MN delegation’s “scores” from environmental groups, now that we’ve had one on “grades” from a group pushing this crucial national “unity” issue…..

6th district Jim says:

May 14th, 2008 at 11:52 am

“Just more retributive anti-immigrant nonsense from the White Party. ”

Isnt Hillary now the defacto leader of this party?

Jay’s first sentence hit the nail on the proverbial head. I wish it were a phony problem, as I’ve had several restaurant visits where I couldn’t effectively communicate with the worker. Why? They really no almost no English skills, at all (maybe parth would argue I have the same problem ;o)

parthian says:

May 14th, 2008 at 11:54 am

If Darlin’ Michele and the Colonel want to aid immigrants in their English skills, then how about making sure we increase funding for English language (ESL) education in public schools and community colleges, especially in parts of the country with large immigrant populations?

What do you think the Repub view is on that one?

Jay says:

May 14th, 2008 at 12:04 pm

“how about making sure we increase funding for English language (ESL) education in public schools”

How about we make sure people are able to use the level of English appropriate for their age prior to admitting them into the school system? If my kids aren’t able to use the level of English appropriate for 5-6 year olds, I assume they won’t be able to start school. How/why are these individuals any different?

SgtPendleton says:

May 14th, 2008 at 12:23 pm

This is one of those feel-good “common sense” pieces of legislation that’s just not very well thought out (in other words, all kinds of unforeseen bad sh1t will happen if they pass this).

If you can read inbetween the lines of vitriol in Parthian’s post, he makes a very good point: immigrants learn some English, and their children ALWAYS learn it. It’s always been this way — what people notice is there’s always a “static” level of people here that don’t speak english — it’s not the same group of people, though.

In the past few years in my neighborhood, I’ve watched my friendly hard working Mexican neighbors go from speaking mostly Spanish to speaking mostly English. It’s all about the kids.

Jay – 5-6 year olds learn languages faster than any group older. In fact, mostly with kids that young, all they need to do is put them in English kindergarten, and they pick it up fast.

You can’t make English the official language on one hand, then refuse to teach it on the other. In fact that’s a great way to ensure they DON’T learn English.

SgtPendleton says:

May 14th, 2008 at 12:30 pm

Just as an example of how naive this is: If English is the official langauge, you’d end up denying government services to current American citizens who don’t speak English (there are millions) — this would be a de facto form of discrimination and would violate equal protection under the 14th amendement. Which means (assuming it even passes, which it won’t) as soon as Bush’s pen finishes signing the bill, hundreds if not thousands of discrimination lawsuits would be filed against the US government.

Kline and Bachmann know deep down this bill will never get out of committee — that’s why they can get behind it.

Politics 101 kids.

monty says:

May 14th, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Amen, Sarge. Obviously, Americans need to learn English to really assimilate into our culture. But to REQUIRE English to access government services is discriminatory to those US citizens who do not speak English. Like the flag bills, this one is for show.

Jay says:

May 14th, 2008 at 1:21 pm

Sgt: “Jay – 5-6 year olds learn languages faster than any group older. In fact, mostly with kids that young, all they need to do is put them in English kindergarten, and they pick it up fast.”

First, I agree. Second, I’m wondering why parthian was there with his hand out asking for additional funding for public schools, if the transition is that easy.

I also missed the leap we made from designating English as our official language to denying services to people who can’t speak it effectively. What did I miss there?

monty says:

May 14th, 2008 at 1:46 pm

I havn’t seen the bill, so I don’t know the specifics(as usual), Jay, but I see what you mean. The language used above speaks of reducing multilingual government services, not REQUIRING(my emphasis) English to access government services, although I can see how that would, in practice, end up being the effect.

wishIwuz2 says:

May 14th, 2008 at 1:53 pm

Far-right Representatives are rated highly by a far-right fringe group? Say it isn’t so!

Wouldn’t English be a market-driven commodity? If you can’t communicate with the restaurant staff, leave and let the manager know why. Should fix the problem.

Les says:

May 14th, 2008 at 1:53 pm

SgtP
Just as an example of how naive this is: If English is the official langauge, you’d end up denying government services to current American citizens who don’t speak English (there are millions

But wait! English is a requirement for citizenship in every new immigration bill put forward……

Also, requiring government correspondence to be in english does not prevent the use of interpreters, like those bi-lingual kids you talking about.

So how did you guys come to the conclusion that ESL classes were opposed by conservatives?

Jay says:

May 14th, 2008 at 2:07 pm

As Les more-or-less points out, I don’t think this proposal (or opposition to it) has much to do with services for people who are actually legal citizens.

SgtPendleton says:

May 14th, 2008 at 4:16 pm

I think what Parth is talking about is the underfunding and deep cutting of ESL programs in general — especially adult ESL programs. Bush and the GOP…and Pawlenty for that matter too– have been slicing and dicing ESL and adult ESL monies from the budget for the last 6-8 years.

I believe Parth is saying it’s hypocritical for the GOP to be pushing for this since they’ve been cutting ESL…I agree.

The reality is the people who benefit most directly from ESL and adult ESL aren’t exactly high-profile or big political donors.

Les, yeah there’s a workaround, but it goes back to the 14th amendment and equal protection. If a citizen needs to pay for his own interpreter to get access to government services, it puts the onus on him to get the services that I can get for free, and without paying for an interpreter.

SgtPendleton says:

May 14th, 2008 at 4:23 pm

Jay, if English is our official language, all US government business…documents…proceedings…basically anything the government does using language will be required to be in English. So if I’m an American citizen who doesn’t speak English, I can’t access the same services you can without an interpreter (the government would not be required to provide them). Therefore, our “protection” under the law (i.e. access to government services, like the FDA…FBI…whatever…) would not be the same, and that would be violating rights assigned to me (the non-English speaker) under the 14th amendment…which states: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”

14th Amendment is probably the most important and least understood part of the Constitution.

SgtPendleton says:

May 14th, 2008 at 4:32 pm

Sorry to be rambling — but lots of times you’ll hear people say, “Nowhere in the constitution does it say, ‘Separation of church and state’”

That’s true — it doesn’t say that, but the 14th amendment is interpreted to mean that no one religion is supposed to receive preferential treatment over another.

That is how the law was written back in 1865, and that’s how it’s been interpreted…so all these people who complain about “activist” or “athiest” judges need to go back to 7th grade social studies.

It’s a sore spot for me — talk about conservative and liberal all you want — but there are some things that are very clearly stated in the constitution. If people don’t like it, they should try to change the law, not the judges. It p1sses me off when people don’t take 30 minutes to try and understand the law before shooting their mouths off about it.

Cash N. Carey says:

May 14th, 2008 at 5:59 pm

Who could be against English as the official language of the US? Little surprise here: Keith Ellison, Betty McCollum, Jim Oberstar and Tim Walz.

Why you may ask? Because multilingualism causes a permanent, lower class of citizens. These constituents are then forced to rely on government subsidies. In other words, they become liberals.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 14th, 2008 at 7:15 pm

Cash N. Carey,

Excellent point! These commies have done a lot of damage to the black and other communities by making them even more dependent on our welfare system.

Good for Bachmann and Kline trying to make English our official language. This is just common sense! If it were the official languange, maybe some city councils in Texas and other states wouldn’t be so bold as to hold their meetings in “Spanish Only”.

SgtPendleton says:

May 14th, 2008 at 8:06 pm

I’m not even going to say how this proves my point.

SgtPendleton says:

May 14th, 2008 at 8:12 pm

Actually — lemme ask you geniuses: Let’s assume we did make English the official language today. How do you suppose we should deal with all the non-English speaking citizens who decide to sue the US government?

parthian says:

May 14th, 2008 at 9:53 pm

SgtP gets the adult ESL funding issue exactly right, which proves what hypocrisy these putrid Repub bills are. At one point, Bush’s proposed budget for 2006 cut 64% of the Adult Literacy Act’s funding. After years of prior cuts.

Repubs supposedly want the “unity” of everybody speakin’ English and being punished in various ways if they don’t, but they won’t provide adequate funding for teaching it.

This is just like conservatives cryin’ about the horror of abortion and wanting it prohibited, while opposing Dem sponsered bills which would actually reduce the number of abortions via increased birth control, education and family planning—Repubs are a deeply unserious, manipulative party at this point, completely intellectually bankrupt.

And Darlin’ Michele and Col Klink lead the yowling parade of conserva-clowns.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 15th, 2008 at 3:49 am

“Actually — lemme ask you geniuses: Let’s assume we did make English the official language today. How do you suppose we should deal with all the non-English speaking citizens who decide to sue the US government?”

Sarge,

I’ve been saying all along that we need to stop importing non-assimilating immigrants, AND get liberal trial lawyers under control. Let’s use some common sense here.

I won’t even comment on Partisan’s rediculous statement.

SgtPendleton says:

May 15th, 2008 at 7:31 am

Yes, let’s use some common sense. So we can’t solve all these problems at once, right?

So tell me, if Bachmann and Kline’s bill passes, how will we handle all those lawsuits D2? You read my post about the 14th amendement right? So this wouldn’t be “trial lawyers” it would probably be the ACLU.

So should the government pass a law that will open itself up to 1,000s of lawsuits, most of which will be filed at the same time?

Les says:

May 15th, 2008 at 9:14 am

SgtP;

Your scenario requires that the government not provide translators when required free of charge. they do that now. Their availability precludes your 14th amendment argument.

Parth; Your pigeon holing of conservatives is hillarious. Yes, some conservative’s are anti birth control, but most are not. Your statement is akin to conservatives claiming the jack@ss party all concur with the idiot Wright. Or worse yet, that all dem’s and libr’uls agree with you.

SgtPendleton says:

May 15th, 2008 at 9:58 am

Les, the reason they have to provide translators is because we don’t have an official language.

If English is made the official language, the government wouldn’t be required to provide one. The onus would be on the citizen to arrange a translator. This is a key argument that activists for this issue use: it will save millions in translation and interpreter costs.

My point is that the “savings” would be offset by the lawsuits…basically, Bachmann and Kline aren’t serious about passing this law, becuase it’s completely impratical, unrealistic, and meaningless (i.e. political posturing).

Les says:

May 15th, 2008 at 10:23 am

SgtP wrote:
the government wouldn’t be required to provide one. The onus would be on the citizen to arrange a translator.

I beleive that’s an asumption on your part.

Even the UMN Humprey Institute liberal quoted above mentioned nothing about unconstituationality and law suits.

SgtPendleton says:

May 15th, 2008 at 11:19 am

So you’re saying you’d be willing to pay for translators and interpreters if English were the official language?

SgtPendleton says:

May 15th, 2008 at 11:37 am

Just cuz that guy didn’t mention it didn’t mean it’s not an issue.

Here’s a quote from Sen Inhofe’s amendment from last year — sounds pretty clear to me that it’s an “English Only” world they’re after:

“Unless specifically provided by statute, no person has a right, entitlement, or claim to have the Government of the United States or any of its officials or representatives act, communicate, perform or provide services, or provide materials in any language other than English.”

http://www.proenglish.org/issues/offeng/Amdt1151.htm

I’m kind of a libertarian, and I’m generally against any law that starts off, “No person has a right…”

Les says:

May 15th, 2008 at 11:50 am

I’m saying we already are paying for them, and establishing English as the official language of this country does not preclude continued reasonable customer service from Federal offices. Your saying the government will refuse to accomodate legal immigrants, and in fact refuse to even attempt to communicate with them. I dont believe that the intention, or the reality, of the issue.

What ‘proenglish.org” wants passed and what is passed (or isnt passed) is moot. Your quote is akin to me listing an anticonservative “move-on.org goal as national policy.

‘No one has the…’ isnt “the government is not allowed” You missed (or ignored) the “unless specifically provided by statue” In either case, translator availability in immagration service offices can be supported. By good management (customer service) or statute.

Les says:

May 15th, 2008 at 11:56 am

For Example, as written the statute you cite would imply the ambassador to China would not be required to speak or understand Chinese, and if he or she was, no interpreter would be provided by the U.S.. You really think that’s what would happen?? I dont.

SgtPendleton says:

May 15th, 2008 at 1:20 pm

Well, diplomacy is a whole other ballgame…

Anyway Les, “the government isn’t allowed” — those are your words, not mine. The government wouldn’t be REQUIRED, and there’s a big difference in those terms.

The quote I pulled from above is directly from Inhofe’s resolution, it’s not a missive from some political group. You can find that text all over: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:1:./temp/~c109hQmR3E:e877771:

You can I can say, “well, they would provide interpreters because they’re already paying for it.” But if this law passes, it’s no longer required. It is required today, but would not be if they pass this law.

There’s no law that requires government agencies provide resonable customer service.

So while we may think that providing translators it is the right thing to do, and assuming the best of people, they would provide translators and interpreters…but there’s nothing in the law that forces them to.

Now if you think people should learn English before becoming citizens, that’s a different kind of law that’s quite different from declaring English as the “official” langauge.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 15th, 2008 at 6:19 pm

“Now if you think people should learn English before becoming citizens,”

I visited Iceland a few years ago and really liked their immigration policy. They allow in a set number of immigrants, give them all the financial and other help they need for ONE YEAR to learn how to become Icelander’s, and if after one year they can’t speak the language and pass a citizenship test, they are sent back home.

We could learn from Iceland. Our immigratration policy is suicidal.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 15th, 2008 at 9:51 pm

A note on the “Global Warming” lunacy:

Paul McCartney just received an “Eco-Friendly” limosine which was flown in from Asia. This flight used 1000 times more “Carbon Footprints” than if it was shipped by sea.

O.T. says:

May 15th, 2008 at 10:14 pm

if you want to see non english speaking people- come down here to florida. coming home tomorrow, kids, hope nobody missed me too much, going from 90 degrees to , what, 65 and rainy this weekend, great!

dare2sayit.com says:

May 15th, 2008 at 10:26 pm

Hope you’re having a great vacation O.T.!

Cash N. Carey says:

May 15th, 2008 at 10:37 pm

sarge asks: “Actually — lemme ask you geniuses: Let’s assume we did make English the official language today. How do you suppose we should deal with all the non-English speaking citizens who decide to sue the US government?”

Lemme make this clear: If they can’t speak English, how would they ask anyone to help them in English?

If the lawyers are going to take a break from chasing ambulances, they can learn a second language if they want them as clients.

Why would they want to sue the US government? Do they hate the USA?

SgtPendleton says:

May 15th, 2008 at 11:46 pm

Neither of you guys can answer my question directly. Quite a pattern.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 16th, 2008 at 7:15 pm

Having English as the official language is a no brainer, but liberal democrats are against this common sense plan.

How do these liberal idiots get elected anyway? Liberal endocrination in our public schools? Illegal aliens demanding amnesty and illegally voting? Voter stupidity?

John E Iacono says:

May 16th, 2008 at 8:55 pm

My grandmother on my father’s side never spoke one word of English although she lived in this country for over 30 years. She said she could not understand why everyone didn’t speak Italian – it was so EASY!

My father came to this country to become an American. No-one taught him English – he taught himself by reading the newspapers. He was proud the day he became an American citizen, and he voted in every election I can remember, even when he had to lose pay to take time off to vote.

He never considered that anyone should have to speak Italian to him in America, and would have been shocked at the notion a translator should be provided to him. He wanted to be an American.

He married a DAR girl, and his children only learned a few cuss words in Italian. But when his brothers came around, they conversed in their mother tongue.

Speaking basic English is required for citizenship, I believe.

English has in fact been our “official” language from the beginning of this republic (e.g. The Congressional Record and the language of the court.) Generations of non-English speaking immigrants have learned it in order to participate in our national community.

I have more than once had to leave a store because not a single clerk could understand my English, French, or German.

That said, a helping hand in the form of ESL community ed classes, and in the schools, seems not uncalled for.

John E Iacono says:

May 16th, 2008 at 8:59 pm

And by the way, those classes should not be for Hispanics only — in our community we have immigranst whose native tongue is Russian, Vietnamese, Chinese, and some Indian dialect I do not recognize.

SgtPendleton says:

May 16th, 2008 at 9:50 pm

D2, apparently YOU are a no-brainer because you never answer my questions!!!

John, those Indian folks probably speak english — most people in India study english pretty much from the time they’re about 4 years old until adults…In fact, India has about 300 different languages, so usually English is the language of business.

Interestingly, the Russians will go to English classes with other Russians, but they won’t go with any of the other folks. Never could figure that out.

Cash N. Carey says:

May 16th, 2008 at 10:51 pm

Poor sarge. So worried about how folks are going to be able to sue the USA if they can’t speak English. I hope you aren’t losing any sleep over it

On a more important note, it seems that fat people are to blame for global warming.
http://tinyurl.com/3t56dg

We should start taxing folks according to their weight to save the planet!

O.T. says:

May 16th, 2008 at 10:52 pm

if you go to another country, there is not the same outcry for interpreters paid for by the govt. they expect you to know their language, except for the touristy areas that just want your money and they accomadate you.

if i moved the fam to russia and demanded they have an english speaking tutor for my children, they would laugh in my face if not take behind the schoolhouse and shoot me.

SgtPendleton says:

May 17th, 2008 at 7:46 am

Well D2, you’ve proven that it’s tough to compete with stupid aphorisims.

OT, first off, no one comes here and demands english tutors (my wife is an ESL teacher). Most of the people getting that kind of help literally cry tears of joy when they find out that help is availble to them — mostly because they’re not used to being treated with a basic level of human dignity that we Americans practice.

Kids get help in school because — unlike Russia — we actually give a sh1t about our kids’ learning.

And where’s this big “outcry” for interpreters you’re talking about? The government pays for interpreters and translation services, yes…I know a few interpreters (they’re my wife’s students) – you probably also think they’re getting rich off providing this valuable service, right? Wrong – they get about $15/hour, and it’s never full time.

You guys confuse the he11 out of me. You get pissed off that we pay an interpreter a modest wage — where’s the outcry about $57 per plate charge we pay to give our soliders in Iraq crappy food?

dare2sayit.com says:

May 17th, 2008 at 9:21 am

We need to get rid of the liberal concept of multiculturalism, it’s hurting our country. There is noting wrong with celebrating your heritage, but immigrants need to assimilate and become and AMERICANS before anything else. If not, they shouldn’t be coming here.

O.T. says:

May 17th, 2008 at 1:48 pm

sarge, if the kid is here illegally, then he/she is not our problem in teaching them.

go down to hcmc and see how many interpreters they have there. all paid for by the taxpayer and all for mostly illegals there getting free health care.

i know it sounds inhumane but maybe if we didn’t give all these perks, maybe people wouldn’t want to come here illegally.

SgtPendleton says:

May 17th, 2008 at 3:15 pm

I’m sorry OT, did the topic suddenly change to illegal immigrants? Because I’m talking about American citizens and legal immigrants.

…and do check the documents of those people down at HCMC? If not, how do you know they’re illegal?

dare2sayit.com says:

May 17th, 2008 at 3:46 pm

Sarge,

Thanks for bringing up the topic of illegal aliens and hospitals. Illegals have forced many emergency rooms to close because they don’t pay.

SgtPendleton says:

May 17th, 2008 at 7:50 pm

I didn’t bring it up D2 – you did. I’m talking about American citizens who don’t speak English.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 17th, 2008 at 7:58 pm

How can someone become an American citizen without speaking our language? That make no sense at all!

You certainly shouldn’t be allowed to vote if you can’t speak the language. How can a voter understand what a candidate is saying? The immigrant would have to rely on potentially politically biased translations.

O.T. says:

May 17th, 2008 at 8:35 pm

I agree with dare- how can you be a legal citizen and speak or read english? I would think that would be the number one requirement for citizenship.

O.T. says:

May 17th, 2008 at 8:39 pm

just like we thought:

Language
Applicants for naturalization must be able to read, write, speak, and understand words in ordinary usage in the English language. Applicants exempt from this requirement are those who on the date of filing:

have been residing in the United States subsequent to a lawful admission for permanent residence for periods totaling 15 years or more and are over 55 years of age;
have been residing in the United States subsequent to a lawful admission for permanent residence for periods totaling 20 years or more and are over 50 years of age; or
have a medically determinable physical or mental impairment, where the impairment affects the applicant’s ability to learn English.

See Also INA 312

United States Government and History Knowledge
An applicant for naturalization must demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals of the history and of the principles and form of government of the United States. Applicants exempt from this requirement are those who, on the date of filing, have a medically determinable physical or mental impairment, where the impairment affects the applicant’s ability to learn U.S. History and Government
Applicants who have been residing in the U.S. subsequent to a lawful admission for permanent residence for at least 20 years and are over the age of 65 will be afforded special consideration in satisfying this requirement.

so, fess up, sarge- we are correct in saying they must not be legal citizens if they need interpreters or cannot speak any english.

O.T. says:

May 17th, 2008 at 8:52 pm

Anyone else see the hypocrisy?

Reports that the Obama campaign is circulating a pamphlet in Kentucky with Barack Obama standing in the pulpit with a gleaming cross behind him, and she wonders where all the media fuss is, compared to the hoots and hollers when Mike Huckabee put a slightly subliminal cross image in one ad and said he was a “Christian Leader” in another.

On Thursday, the Washington Post ran a brief item:

The pamphlet has circulated in other primary states and is striking for its overt appeal on religion. The words across the top read “Faith. Hope. Change.” Obama is pictured at a church pulpit, with a large illuminated cross in the background. A quote at the bottom reads: “My faith teaches me that I can sit in church and pray all I want, but I won’t be fulfilling God’s will unless I go out and do the Lord’s work.”

dare2sayit.com says:

May 17th, 2008 at 9:07 pm

O.T.,

The liberal media will let Barack Hussein Obama get away with anything he wants to.

I find it hard to believe he’s much of a Christian though. After all, his church gave a radical, racist, and anti-America Muslim a lifetime achievement award.

John E Iacono says:

May 18th, 2008 at 5:08 pm

Sarge,

Thanks for the reminder (which I did know) about India migrants. They LOOK like people from India, but must be from some neighboring nations in the far east. Now that I think of it, no spots on foreheads, either.

They don’t converse with each other in English in the store aisles, though.

John E Iacono says:

May 18th, 2008 at 5:12 pm

OT,

Thanks for the research on language requirements for citizenship.

I suppose those McD employees and ER visitors could all be studying American history to prepare for the citizenship exams — just haven’t got to the English part yet.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 18th, 2008 at 6:07 pm

I was in a McDonalds in Plymouth a while back, and they were actually playing Mexican music throughout the restaurant to cater to the immigrant employees (not sure how many were legal). The must have had a lot of complaints because they stopped doing it after a short time.

SgtPendleton says:

May 18th, 2008 at 8:29 pm

D2 and OT — you know I actually like you guys quite a bit…but I have to say, this demonstrates a degree of ignorance on the subject of citizenship.

I’m not talking about immigrants…and I’m not even talking about natrualized American citizens. I’m talking about people who were born here, whose parents are American citizens, and they don’t speak English.

There are MILLIONS of American citizens like this. There are Mexican-American families that have been citizens for generation after generation and they don’t speak English.

There are wealthy Mexican-American land owners in Texas who’ve been on their land for 175 years or more — who became Americans when they re-drew the US border after the Mexican-American war.

English is not required to be an American citizen.

And D2, just because you’re Mexican doesn’t mean you’re an immgrant, or an illegal immigrant. That’s quite prejudiced of you to make that assumtion.

O.T. says:

May 18th, 2008 at 9:22 pm

i think you are waaaaaay overexaggerating your number there sarge. got any evidence at all to the contrary?

if they were born here and are legal citizens, then they were required to attend school until the age of 16, 18 if the new law goes through.

the they came legally, then they needed to pass the english test.

your argument holds no water.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 19th, 2008 at 4:43 am

“English is not required to be an American citizen.”

If not, it needs to be. Also, we need to get rid of the anchor baby loophole in which non-citizens illegally enter American soil and pop out American babies. This is insane and costs us billions in welfare and other social service costs.

parthian says:

May 19th, 2008 at 9:08 am

To get back to some facts, the US census bureau recently released data that showed that around 5% of US households currently speak little or no english at home. These households are mostly Asian or Latino, no surprise.

These conservative “english only” mandates pose an unnecessary burden on these families in their dealing with government. And they’re strictly punitive, so jingoist bigots like 2D can feel that groups he personally dislikes are being made to have a harder time of it and thus maybe won’t come to live in America.

As to birthright citizenship, I’ve informed 2D before that it’s “anchored” on language in the 14th Amendment to the constitution (1868) and has been clearly interpreted as such since 1898. The “loophole” can’t be changed except by amending the constitution. Period.

But 2D can’t understand english, so I have to keep telling him the same things over and over. He’s technically an english “speaker”, just not an english “understander”.

Repubs ran the entire gub’mint for six year under Bushco–why didn’t they advance any of these “reforms” then, 2D and OT? Because they advance them purely as election year “wedge” issues for nitwit voters? Ya think?

Les says:

May 19th, 2008 at 10:28 am

SgtP;

Doesn’t this (from above):
Katherine Fennelly, a professor at the University of Minnesota’s Hubert Humphrey School of Public Affairs, called this type of legislation “unnecessary and divisive.”

“The vast majority of individuals in the U.S. speak English, and a number of studies have shown that by the second generation children of immigrants acquire English, but lose their ability to speak their parents’ languages,” Fennelly wrote in an email. “In this age of globalization, bilingualism should be viewed as an asset, not a deficit.”

Invalidate your statements of 8;29 on the 18th? If not, then isnt the above argument invalid?

SgtPendleton says:

May 19th, 2008 at 11:02 am

My post got blocked…

2% of US-born citizens speak english “less than very well”

http://tinyurl.com/6bznmo

SgtPendleton says:

May 19th, 2008 at 11:07 am

It’s about 1/3 the way down the page.

Les, that’s 6 million people. I agree that the vast majority of us speak English, but we’re a nation of almost 300 million people — that leaves room for a few million here and there.

If you look in that same table, 20% of US households (citizens only) speak a language other than English at home — that’s 1 out of 5 people.

To suggest that America is predominately English-only speakers is ridiculous.

I remember back in 2000 thinking how cool it was that George W Bush gave a speech in Spanish – but I guess that’s no longer in vogue for the GOP.

Les says:

May 19th, 2008 at 11:20 am

Your GOP comment aside, I think your misreading the table.

a total of 19.4% speak “other than english” at home. That doesnt say they cant or dont speak english in dealing with the government. Only 2% of Native citizens speak english “not very well” whatever that means.

The table also revelas that about 40% of naturalized citizens did not meet the english requirements…… Not a good result, seems we should emphasize the requirement a little more eh?

I hate to do it, but it seems likely that O.T. and D2 have about a 70% chance of being right concerning those not speaking english not being a citizen.

Les says:

May 19th, 2008 at 11:21 am

And no, not being a citizen doesnt automatically mean “illegal”

Les says:

May 19th, 2008 at 11:23 am

OOPs, rereading your comments, I see we are on the same page with the numbers, 20% and 2%…..

SgtPendleton says:

May 19th, 2008 at 12:46 pm

Les, the point of my post was to prove there are millions of native-born US citizens who don’t speak english very well. OT suggested my estimate was off — and this proves that it was pretty close to accurate.

For me, this all comes down to painting an accurate picture of what’s going on in the US — D2 would have us believe that anyone with a Hispanic-sounding name is probably here illegally. That’s B.S., and so is the assertion that all American citizens speak English.

Being “American” is about our freedoms and values – it’s not about what language you speak. The stuff they wrote in the declaration of independence and the constitution — those principles transcend culture and language. Even if Spanish predominates 50 years from now, we’ll still be the US.

Les says:

May 19th, 2008 at 1:12 pm

OK, I see your point. Dont necessarily agree with it.

It does leave a question in my mind.

Assume you were immigrating to France with your family, and you do not currently speak French.

Would you expect (demand) a right to all French government paperwork to be given to you in English? Why or Why not?

BTW, the way things are going, 50 years from now we will be speaking Arbic and under Shia law. The Constitution will be a discredited archaic document. the Defeatocrats will ensure it.

Les says:

May 19th, 2008 at 1:17 pm

Another question to ponder, Why are you against an “official” language that affects 2% of the population, but not up in arms against social engineering conducted by “progressives” that affect 20 to 30% of the population. i.e. anti-smoking bans and “sin” taxes?

Jay says:

May 19th, 2008 at 3:09 pm

Sgt: “millions of native-born US citizens who don’t speak english very well”

Correct. I would assert that this number is much bigger than you think because it includes millions of kids whos families have been here for generations. “Not speaking English well” is different from not being able to communicate in English at all. There are inner city kids in Detroit, and white hillbilles in West Virginia who speak English “not very well.”

Sgt: “The stuff they wrote in the declaration of independence and the constitution”

I would point out that both documents were written in English, eventhough there were other languages being spoken here at the time.

Jay says:

May 19th, 2008 at 3:11 pm

perhaps we should all just learn Latin again.

SgtPendleton says:

May 19th, 2008 at 3:57 pm

Les, I’m against proclaiming an official language because I see it an government inserting itself unnecessarily into our lives.

Jay, the survey is people who self-identify as not speaking English well. I’m sure the people in Detroit and West Virginia have no problem communicating with each other, so in their mind, they speak it just fine, and likely would not self-identify as not speaking it very well.

You also left out the last part of my sentence, which read: “The stuff they wrote in the declaration of independence and the constitution — those principles transcend culture and language.”

In other words, our exisistence as a nation is not absolutely intertwined with the use of English.

Jay says:

May 19th, 2008 at 4:23 pm

“In other words, our exisistence as a nation is not absolutely intertwined with the use of English.”

Correct….those unable to understand English were free to learn it, or find an interpreter if they wished to actually read those official documents you mentioned.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 19th, 2008 at 5:16 pm

Partisan says:

“As to birthright citizenship, I’ve informed 2D before that it’s “anchored” on language in the 14th Amendment to the constitution (1868) and has been clearly interpreted as such since 1898. The “loophole” can’t be changed except by amending the constitution. Period.”

This was amended to protect slaves. I don’t think we need that anymore, do you Partisan? The only thing it’s doing today is hurting America, and it needs to be removed now.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 19th, 2008 at 5:46 pm

From Anti-Strib blog

**********************Petition************************

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

31,072 American scientists including 9,021 with PhDs have signed this petition. Odds that this will be published in the Star Tribune: slim.

John E Iacono says:

May 19th, 2008 at 6:03 pm

Sarge says:
“Even if Spanish predominates 50 years from now, we’ll still be the US.”

“Les, I’m against proclaiming an official language because I see it an government inserting itself unnecessarily into our lives.”

Sarge, I think here you have hit upon the basic reason why people are threatened by those who don’t or won’t speak English in our country.

While it it true that English does not make the US, it is also true that what DID and DOES make the US is a body of tradition, both cultural and legal, which has it roots in the English political experience.

Other places of origin have no or little sharing in that history. Those who wish to share in the accumulated benefits of that history are unlikely to contribute to it unless they also absorb those roots.

Unless one learns to think in terms of the values which those roots have produced, one is unlikely to embrace the values needed to sustain the American experiment.

We know this: how often has it been said that Iraqi’s cannot adopt a system so alien to their historical culture.

Similarly, many who come here seeking wealth or freedom are not themselves culturally ready to embrace the traditions and values that support it.

For many, these people by their rejection of our common language, signal that they refuse to adopt our culture, and so pose a risk to that culture.

My grandmother, who came because her family came here, never did adopt American culture — or speak a word of English. Her son, on the other hand, did — and worked hard to learn the language on his own.

For those who perceive this link, the threat that “America” may indeed be at risk is very real: without its supporting history and culture, the Constitution would be just as dead here as in Saudi Arabia.

For my part, I believe it was and is very wise of our government to insist that persons seeking citizenship participation (including benefits) in our country learn our history and our language. And I would help them learn both.

John E Iacono says:

May 19th, 2008 at 6:13 pm

An afternote:

We seem more tolerant of the language of smaller minorities. I suspect it is because we do not feel culturally threatened.

After all, the cultural environment of Mexico and South American countries is what produces their political systems.

In the case of the huge and growing hispanic minority, I believe the fear is that unless that culture is replaced with our culture, we will likely revert to their poltical environment as well.

Looking at the past, however, and at what happens to the second and third generations, I expect both language and culture will change in these populations unless it is discouraged by misguided efforts to allow them to keep insulated within their own “old” culture.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 19th, 2008 at 7:02 pm

If Americans would stop voting in liberal democrats and RINO republicans, we could start taking control of the illegal alien invasion.

O.T. says:

May 19th, 2008 at 8:33 pm

Sarge- you ignored my point that f they are indeed citizens, then they should be able to speak and write english. They either had to pass the citizenship test or also they legally had to attend school until they were 16. I would hope they would pick up some english after 10 years of school.

Here is another complaint- I saw that feinstein added an illegal immigrant amnest clause to the next war funding bill. when will we start doing line item vetos!!!!!!!! this is exactly why congresses rating is so fricking low.

Jay says:

May 19th, 2008 at 8:52 pm

John: “We seem more tolerant of the language of smaller minorities. I suspect it is because we do not feel culturally threatened.”

I would agree that we tend to be more tolerant, I’ll leave it up to everyone to determine for themselves as to why that is. For me, its not as much a matter of feeling ‘threatened’ as it is a level of disgust for the attitude of entitlement that the larger groups seem to exhibit. And let’s be honest…..we’re really talking about one group in particular, and possibly a second group here in the Twin Cities area.

The multitude of other languages and cultures that live here are small enough in number that they don’t attempt to publically leverage (ie demand) special treatment.

6th district Jim says:

May 19th, 2008 at 9:04 pm

D2:
If you find some global warming, could
you please post directions so I can go there.
Thanks

Dora says:

May 19th, 2008 at 9:04 pm

Of course no reputable media will carry anything about that petition DTSI because it’s nothing more than a rehash of a widely discredited petition from 1999. You global warming deniers are so gullible!

O.T. says:

May 19th, 2008 at 9:15 pm

Dora- what about the 31000 scientists that decried gw as a myth. it was presented to the national press club today and I wonder if somehow the press will say they didn’t get the memo.

from strata:
Pitching his message to Oregon’s environmentally-conscious voters, Obama called on the United States to “lead by example” on global warming, and develop new technologies at home which could be exported to developing countries.

“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,” Obama said.

“That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen,” he added.

SInce when is leadership kowtowing down to the world’s biases (usually generated by a malicious and liberal news media)? America is not killing the planet. As noted in another post if you look at where the global warming IS, it is not over the American continents – it is over Asia where most of the human population lives.

O.T. says:

May 19th, 2008 at 9:17 pm

“What it says is that I’m not very well known in that part of the country… Sen. Clinton, I think, is much better known — not only because of her time in the White House with her husband — but also coming from a nearby state of Arkansas.”

Barack Obama
Telephone Interview with the Lexington Herald-Leader
Friday- May 18, 2008

Kentucky is one of two states that borders 7 different states:
Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia, Tennessee and Missouri all border Kentucky.

Arkansas does not border Kentucky- Illinois does.

Jay says:

May 19th, 2008 at 9:44 pm

“Arkansas does not border Kentucky- Illinois does.”

I don’t mean to jump to Obama’s defense here, OT, because I am certainly not an Obama supporter, BUT….if you’ve ever spent much time in Illinois, you would find that it is even more Chicago-centric than we are Twin Cities-centric here. In a nutshell, the attitude of many is that Illinois consists of the Chicago metro, and nothing else really counts for much. Therefore, to millions of people “Illinois” borders Indiana and maybe Wisconsin. That’s about it…..regardless of what the map says.

So in that twisted sense, Arkansas is probably a lot more ‘near’ Kentucky than Illinois is.

Jay says:

May 19th, 2008 at 9:53 pm

I also can’t resist weighing in on the global warming thing again. I was just at a workshop last week where a speaker presented a laundry list of various info pertaining to agriculture production, including global climate trends. He had a chart from some NASA department-of-something-or-other (not the Goddard Institute that parthian is so in love with, but under the unbrella of NASA nevertheless) that plotted historical and forecasted global climate trends going back a couple hundred years and going forward about the same. Obviously, I question the accuracy of anything going back that far, but the point was as follows:

The chart clearly showed a gradual warming trend, broken by several dips and runs. This group had basically identified several 25-30 year cooling periods followed by 40-45 year warming periods, but the net effect over the entire period was definately toward warming- which I have always been very clear that I agree with.

Bottom line is that this group is projecting that we are at the beginning of a 30-year cooling period, after which they predict we will start warming again. Should make for a neverending debate on this issue, with plenty of scientific data for each side to use as ammo, for basically the rest of my life.

I can hardly wait. Luckily I can post here to get lit up by D2 and 6DJim for allowing that global warming exists in the first place. And somehow get lit up by parthian and Dora for claiming (correctly) that we are cooling right now.

Jay says:

May 19th, 2008 at 9:59 pm

Joe Mauer is a God, by the way…

Cash N. Carey says:

May 19th, 2008 at 10:14 pm

God bless Katherine Kersten!

The Education Department said it was concerned about TiZA, accommodating prayer and providing transportation to a religious program.

“In an attempt to report about the new findings from the Department of Education, 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS went to TiZA. While on school grounds, our crew was attacked by school officials. Our photographer was injured while wrestling with the two men over the camera.”

http://tinyurl.com/4o3wx9

The Trib’s token conservative strikes gold. You have to love it.

Jay says:

May 19th, 2008 at 10:32 pm

Cash:

Two comments about this:

As a parent, I’d be pleased if the administration at my kids’ public school roughed up a media camera crew that entered school grounds. They should do that to protect my kids. If they wouldn’t, I assure you I would.

However, I think any rational person can admit that if a public school made accomodations to say the Hail Mary and provided transportation to weekday mass, you’d be able to hear the public outcry all the way from Rome.

There is a very good reason that we have private schools that are allowed to have a religios bias/ciriculum in this country. If that’s your thing, that’s fine. But we can’t allow it to masquarade as a public school (and pay for it).

Jay says:

May 19th, 2008 at 10:34 pm

sorry…..”Rome” s/b “Vatican City.” Shows just how good of a Catholic I really am…..

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 4:20 am

I’m sorry OT, I didn’t mean to ignore your comment.

I don’t know why native-born adult Americans don’t speak English after (presumably) 10 years of public education — but the census data tells us that they do exist.

Your assumption is that English is required of all public school children in the US – I don’t know if that’s true or not.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 20th, 2008 at 4:44 am

“News crew attacked during report at TiZA Muslim charter school”

Thanks Cash N. Carey!
I just saw this story myself. No wonder Katherine Kerstin has such a successful blog!

O.T. says:

May 20th, 2008 at 6:54 am

Sarge says:
Your assumption is that English is required of all public school children in the US – I don’t know if that’s true or not.

??????WHAT?????????

O.T. says:

May 20th, 2008 at 7:16 am

according to the No child left behind act:

Help for Students to Learn English

Understanding, speaking, reading, and writing English are critical skills for all students. Students who are new to this country or come from homes where a language other than English is spoken may need special help to learn English. Under NCLB, parents of students who are limited English proficient (LEP) will get more information about bilingual education and English as a second language (ESL) programs for their children.

so. it appears there is a program for children in school and since EVERY CITIZEN is required to attend school through age 16, it is covered.

Jay says:

May 20th, 2008 at 7:57 am

OT: “??????WHAT?????????”

Well put. C’mon, Sarge….you “don’t know” if English is a requirement in public school? That’s like me claiming that I’m not sure if math is a requirement.

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 9:21 am

Just being honest – I don’t like to make assumptions about things I don’t know.

OT and D2SI also thought it was ridiculous that there are US citizens who don’t speak English. I made my point with real census data – I don’t need to explain WHY that’s the case.

O.T. says:

May 20th, 2008 at 9:49 am

I still cannot believe that, sarge, since ALL US citizens have to pass the citizenship test before becoming legal and ALL people have to attend school until the age of 16, a school that does indeed require the use of english.

This is just theory but some of these people you refer to may be illegals. it is illegal for the census bureau to use their data inquire on legal status, most illegals know this, and some people are counted into the totals that are not legal US citizens.

I was once at a oriental restaurant when the census taker came in, they were noticably worried until the taker told them the info was basically anonymous and would not be used for immigration purposes- then they cooperated fully.

O.T. says:

May 20th, 2008 at 9:55 am

It is not unreasobable to believe that of the estimated 13-15 million illegal aliens in the US, that maybe 1-2 million participated in the last census.
After all, if they had jobs or homes, the bureau would have had contact with them.

O.T. says:

May 20th, 2008 at 9:57 am

From the Census Bureau website:

We Protect Your Information
The surveys we conduct provide information about social and economic conditions in the country, including employment, housing, manufacturing, trade, and many other topics. The questions we ask are used only to produce statistics, and you are never identified individually. For more information on how we protect your information, please see our Data Protection and Privacy Policy website.

Les says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:18 am

31,000 signatures, 9000+ PHd, and it’s discredited.

I think Dora meant they were disenfranchised, not discredited.

Try reading it Dora, come down from your Gore-aid high.

http://www.oism.org/pproject/

BTW, did your plants freeze in last nights frost??

Les says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:20 am

Cool, they removed the defetocrat 3.1 filter they had running this AM. posts are now going through.

SgtP; I would really like you take on what you would expect if you immigrated to France.

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:32 am

What was a census taker doing in a restaurant? I thought they only went to residences?

I think the margin of error for that particular statistic was something like +/- 135,000. The fact is we can speculate all we want to, but we don’t know the actual number.

As far as some of your other questions…I don’t know OT. I do know that there’s a substantial list of exceptions to the English requirement for new citizens – like if you’re over 50.

Regardless, there are still American citizens who don’t speak English. Aside from the emotional aspects of it, no one here or in the media have made a compelling case for me to believe there’s any reason to make English the official language.

Language doesn’t matter – the principles behind our society and government do.

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:39 am

Oh Les – if you want to debate climate change, be my guest, but please don’t start in with the “weather = climate” cracks.

Without taking sides in the argument either way, the earth is a very complex system. We’re experiencing a La Nina summer — basically the warm water of the pacific is farther west than normal. This just happens to make our weather cooler – it makes other areas hotter.

And that’s all I’m going to say :)

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:44 am

Les, I have no idea what France has to do with this discussion, but I’ll answer your question anyway.

The French are freakishly neurotic about losing their language – simply because they borrow so many words from us. (I don’t know why it’s such a big deal to them – 1/3 of the words in English come from French)…Regardless, it’s an example of making silly, stupid rules to try and control natural behavior – it’s a form of social engineering, and I don’t like it.

Les says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:46 am

The info on global climate change was directed at the attempts to discredit anyone who keeps piping the PC Gorish line, and ingnores creditable scientist who do not agree with the idiot exveep no matter how many times he screams the sky is falling…Witness the unsubstantiated claim the ‘reputable” media would not cover the petition. Pure hyperbole.

You still havent addressed your hypothetical move to France. I expected more from you.

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:48 am

The world’s most prominent climatologist could come out and say global warming was BS, and it wouldn’t make the paper; but Mike Fairbourne calls it “squishy science” and it’s front-page news.

Am I the only one who thinks that’s ridiculous?

Les says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:51 am

OK…

make it Germany, or Vietnam, or Cuba, or Brazil. You pick.

Social engineering… Which laws do you identify as not social engineering? Anti murder is social engineering, anti death penalty is social engineering.. anti smoking is social engineering. School lunch programs are social engineering.. Which laws are not?

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:54 am

Les, I’ll never emigrate to France, so the question is moot.

However, if I did, I would expect that in order to become a French citizen, I’d need to recite Molière or all the lyrics to La Marseillaise…

Les says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:55 am

Ah,,, but global warming isnt BS. It’s been occuring since the last ice age.

What’s BS is the idea that by curbing emissions, man can stop or alter global warming.

Just like if we all moved to the moon, we could alter the worlds ocean tides…eh?

Les says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:57 am

We continue to avoid the question..

The answer would reveal our contradiction.

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:57 am

By definition any law is social engineering, Les. It’s a question of degrees…and priority, for that matter.

I had my share of sociological debates this decade already – not to be rude, but I’m going to pass on this one.

Jay says:

May 20th, 2008 at 12:17 pm

Sgt: “…but Mike Fairbourne calls it “squishy science” and it’s front-page news. Am I the only one who thinks that’s ridiculous?”

Probably not. But then again, I think that’s his point. The thing that global warming fanatics refuse to recognize is many people agree that the phenomenon exists, but to a lesser degree than what is being portrayed and due to causes that have yet to be determined to the satisfaction of many scientists in that field. Again, there are more sides to this issue than simply “yes it exists” or “no it doesn’t.”

Dora says:

May 20th, 2008 at 2:19 pm

No Les, I meant discredited. OISM is a junk science outfit. That petition has been around for about 10 years now. Why cover it now and not the last two incarnations of that petition? Fairbourne said he signed it 5 years ago! Read some of the links that were provided in the comments section of that article about that place and the guy who started it. It’s crap, plain and simple.

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 2:43 pm

Dora, you are by far my favorite poster – you are a scrappy fighter who has more guts than most of these guys you tussle with.

That said, this climate change thing is just one of those issues — no one’s changing their mind on it. I can appreciate your frustration with the rhetoric — but it’s kind of pointless with this crowd, and there’s just too much data that supports either side.

Guys, in Dora’s defense, go into any major University campus – invariably, you’ll find labs, classrooms, and facilities that are paid for by major chemical or petroleum companies. The U of M has a major chem lab that was paid for by Dow chemical.

Now if you believe a liberal journalist can’t report the news fairly…then how can a scientist with a lab, office, and classroom paid for by an oil company be expected to accurately report climate change?

…not to mention the scientists that work directly for the oil companies.

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 2:50 pm

..and by the way…for the record, OISM IS a junk science outfit. These are the same people as D2SI’s American Association of Physicians and Surgeons, who claim that immigrants are spreading leprosy.– they’re pseudo-scientific organizations that pursue political agendas.

One of their “Doctors” — Dr. Madeleine Cosman — has a PhD in English and Comparative Literature — not exactly what I’d call a “climate scientist.”

Dora says:

May 20th, 2008 at 2:54 pm

SgtP, I’m not trying to change anybody’s mind about global warming but to use that stupid petition that was first discredited years ago is just dumb. The guy that started that “project” is a hack. Just like those ridiculously false chain emails that go around, this one just keeps popping up fed by the rw blogosphere.

Oh, and thanks for the compliment.

Dora says:

May 20th, 2008 at 2:58 pm

Did she sign it before or after she died SgtP? Because a few signatories on that petition had been dead for several years before they supposedly signed it. Not to mention the fictitious people that signed it as well.

O.T. says:

May 20th, 2008 at 3:38 pm

what about scientists who rely on grants to continue stduies of gw? wouldn’t they have a reason to continue a farce if they wanted their money?

Jay says:

May 20th, 2008 at 4:01 pm

“The U of M has a major chem lab that was paid for by Dow chemical”

I don’t know that to be a fact, but I have no reason to doubt you, Sgt. I do know that a major interest in the UofMN on the part of Dow Chemical (as with DuPont and Monsanto) is in the area of agricultural pesticide R&D. Sales of these products is escalated by promotion of these crops for renewable fuels. Thus the movement toward “green” fuels that are environmentally friendly, spurred by the global warming debate, directly impacts the bottom line of those companies.

Perhaps there is some merit to your contention that University research is motivated by the companies funding that research.

SgtPendleton says:

May 20th, 2008 at 4:07 pm

Jay I do know it to be a fact because up until a couple weeks ago, I walked past it two days a week.

OT the difference is those grants are usually for pretty small dollar amounts — they’re given by non-profits organizations, or by endowment funds, not big companies (that make accordingly big profits).

dare2sayit.com says:

May 20th, 2008 at 5:37 pm

“what about scientists who rely on grants to continue stduies of gw? wouldn’t they have a reason to continue a farce if they wanted their money?”

Exactly! You eithert support the “Global Warming” hoax or don’t work if you’re a climatologist.

parthian says:

May 20th, 2008 at 6:32 pm

The only people left who doubt the existence of man-made global warming are conservative white people in America.

They are complete dead-enders at this stage of the game, they have dug their foolish heels in, and closed their “minds”, so there is no point in attempting to “reason” with them—they are willfully ignorant and gulp down any misrepresentation that their right wing garbage troughs present to them, misrepresentations they are dying to consume.

Les, jay, OT, Preacher Cash, and of course the Dauphin of Willful Ignorance, 2D, are all hopeless deniers and will never have reason enter their brains on this subject, and most others.

There is no reputable climate scientist that questions in the slightest the cause of global warming (manmade CO2 from fossil fuels) and that the warming will continue unabated and lead to an environmental catastrophe unless we start immediately reducing our CO2 emissions.

That’s the fact of the matter, despite jay thinking there is 40 years of “cooling” about to arrive, or SgtP thinking there are “arguments” and data on both “sides” (he’s wrong) and despite jay sitting in some commodity traders conference presentation with some pinhead misstating some (unindentified) NASA chart.

I don’t know if the last remaining denalists like those that exist at BQ will succeed in frustrating our planet’s last chance to preserve its 10,000 year old stable climate. If this last group of dead-enders is able to use its last ounce of political power to stop what needs to be done, all I can hope is that they make their idiotic, reckless “contribution” known to their children, so that those children (and their children) can spit in Grandpa Deniers face. (Funny how most dead-ender deniers are men, isn’t it?)

dare2sayit.com says:

May 20th, 2008 at 7:38 pm

Partisan,

Were you a part of the liberal “Global Cooling” alarmists in the late 70′s? They made fools of themselves as well.

Katherine Kerstine’s blog has a great piece on the physical assault on the KSTP news crew by staff of the Muslim school. I wish BQ would get topics this good!

Cash N. Carey says:

May 20th, 2008 at 7:48 pm

Jay, don’t you understand that you are wrong. There are more and more scientists that are coming around to your way of thinking but they are wrong too. There is only global warming, you must be assimilated.

http://tinyurl.com/3hurhz

I don’t think I have ever been called a “denier” partisan. What does the linear density of fibers have to do with anything but textiles? IT must have something to do with us being men of fine moral fiber:)

(1 denier = 0.05 gram/450 meters for those liberals that are ignorant of science).

O.T. says:

May 20th, 2008 at 9:12 pm

wow, you wanna see something offensive, check out this dailykos post:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/30012_Daily_Kos-_The_New_Improved_Southern_Strategy

did anyone else notice obama’s flipflop overnight about how dangerous iran, cuba or venezuala is. you wouldn’t know it by the media. the same same media which editted bush’s comments to fit their liberal agenda. nbc news should be sanctioned from the white house.

Jay says:

May 20th, 2008 at 9:13 pm

Yes, yes, of course. Anyone who believes anything contrary to parthian is a white male and in some soprt of denial. Parthian possess some level of ego-centricism seldom exhibited anywhere else on Earth. How lucky we are to see it here on display on a regular basis.

The data I was presented with must come from some ficticious place because I failed to write down the exact source, and the presented must be a pinhead because he dared showcase data contrary to the beliefs of parthian……nevermind the fact that this presented didn’t give a damn about the presence, lack of presence, cause of, or any other factor surrounding global warming. He was completely impartial on the issue, focusing instead on how to project crop yields around the globe (fyi, parthian- climate plays a rather important part in that, and my analysts are much more concerned about being right than pursuing either political agenda).

FWIW, it was a projected 25-30 year cooling period, not 40. But what’s an extra decade’s worth of continued misrepresentation on your part for something that apparently doesn’t exist.

The point you continue to miss, deliberately I suspect, is that I readily point to the fact that an overall warming exists. But there are also extended periods of cooling periodically (some would argue, predictably) along that trend. Your refusal to recognize that paints you as the fool. You can hammer all day long as to the science behind the “why’s” but at the end of the day, its useless because I don’t really give a damn why. My focus is on the honest assessment of how much and when. Idealism does nothing for me.

Jay says:

May 20th, 2008 at 9:17 pm

matter of fact, parth, I’ll call the guy tomorrow and get the data source that he used from NASA so you can start a new line of BS telling how one division of NASA is gospel and all the other divisions are garbage and instruments of the great white male conspiracy against mankind.

Your mindless banter has finally crossed the line from annoying to entertaining.

Jay says:

May 20th, 2008 at 9:35 pm

Sgt: “Jay I do know it to be a fact because up until a couple weeks ago, I walked past it two days a week.”

Congratulations. Hopefully you didn’t miss the point of my illustration in your zeal to establish your familiarity with the names on college campus buildings.

So Dow paid for a building. Or a study. Or lots of studies in lots of areas. As do most other pipeline companies at all research schools. They can’t possibly do the volume of research trails internally. My point is that in this particular instance, due to the diversity of their product line, Dow has as much to gain financially from either side of this social issue.

If you are talking about actual product research impropriety, I can tell you that I interned for Dow while a student at the UofMN and I can tell you that (at that time anyway) the reason the Univ trials were almost always successful weren’t because we paid them to do the study. It was because we only gave them the products that we already knew worked well in the first place. We burned up our internal resources tinkering with all the experimental products and when we found one that performed well over a number of years, we then passed it off to the University to run independant study on as a way to establish an endorsement of sorts before bringing it to the marketplace.

parthian says:

May 20th, 2008 at 9:58 pm

“You can hammer all day long as to the science behind the ‘whys’, but it’s useless because I don’t really give a damn why.”

Thank you. Exactly as I thought. Since you don’t understand (and are openly hostile to) the actual science behind global warming and its cause (the “why”), you’ll NEVER understand it. Or what anyone is talking about on the subject.

What you call “idealism” is actually scientific knowledge. I do give a damn “why” and that’s why I know something about it.

6th district Jim says:

May 20th, 2008 at 10:11 pm

Jay:
I liked your post, but I am a definite warmer; MN has clearly warmed 50 degrees in recent millenia, ie the massive glaciers have melted.

I am just not one of the “man is destroying the world” CO2 fanatics, like CO2 has some magic flubber type of superpower.
Jason Lewis had a noted climatologist on last week, a nonwarmer, and he pointed out CO2 is a food/nutrient to plants, and the flora may just get more lush with CO2 release.
In the end, none of us know.
Parth as a child believed The Absent Minded Professor was a biographical story.

parthian says:

May 20th, 2008 at 10:33 pm

Well, if the Pinhead Lewis guest was a “nonwarmer” then he wasn’t a “noted climatologist”.

And we’re cutting down the ancient old growth forests that take in the most CO2 all over the earth, not preserving them. Your “lush” Scotts lawn (mown by a gas guzzling riding lawnmower no doubt) isn’t going to save the planet, 6DJ. Not that you give a rip.

“plant food” also not a “non warming” argument, BTW, it’s an “adaptation” argument, which is the latest ploy by do-nothing, fossil fuel financed shills…..denialism, your guys’ outdated specialty, has been superceded by the corporate fossil fuel interests.

6th district Jim says:

May 20th, 2008 at 10:52 pm

Actually, he is noted. You can even listen to the podcast. Thought provoking insights.

The thing I love is: if you added the science degrees of parth and dora together you’d still be at ZERO. But in the blog world they are “geniuses.”
As for parth’s brilliant insights:
Old Trees? they aint growing much so not storing “carbon,” are they?
How about new forests?
Have you seen the millions upon millions of acres growing huge, totally green, corn plants? You think those babies arent sucking up some CO2?
Unlike Parth, educated people realize flubber is a Hollywood story, but then again, parth as “genius” never answered the old question:
why has burning 80 mil bpd of oil only raised CO2 by 1 part per 10,000?

It’s ok to say, “I don’t know.”
It’s better than your flubber insights
into science.

Jay says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:18 pm

parthian: “Thank you. Exactly as I thought. Since you don’t understand (and are openly hostile to) the actual science behind global warming and its cause (the “why”), you’ll NEVER understand it. Or what anyone is talking about on the subject.”

Once again, in parthian’s book, a lack of desire to agree with him equals ignorance. I fully understand the well-documented facts of global climate change. The reasons why it is happening are a distant secondary concern of mine. You’d like to convince yourself and others that this somehow minimizes what I know to be true, but it doesn’t. Mostly because I have hard numbers on my side. You are mentally incapable of separating the two, and that’s fine.

If you wish to concern yourself with what is causing global climate change and spreading notions of what we ought to do to stop it….knock yourself out.

My job is to help adequately produce enough food to feed a skyrocketing global population, and I need to accurately predict climate patterns over the next 10, 30, and 50 years to do that effectively. I don’t have the luxury of screaming from my soap box about the evils of CO2 and global warming when I am facing a very real global food shortage heading into the beginning phases of a potential 25-30 year cooling period.

I guarantee you that if people around the world start to run out of food…..they won’t give a damn about your thoughts on the causes of global warming either. Happy shouting at the rain, parth.

Jay says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:22 pm

parth: “I do give a damn “why” and that’s why I know something about it.”

You are obviously very passionate about it. I don’t think anyone here has ever questioned that. But passion is not synonomous with knowledgeable. You don’t “know” as much as you think, or if you do, your bias and pride prevent you from admitting the full extent of your knowledge here. Your passion clouds your objectivity. That much is certain.

Jay says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:31 pm

parthian to 6DJ: “Well, if the Pinhead Lewis guest was a “nonwarmer” then he wasn’t a “noted climatologist”.”

Perfect example of parthian-style objectivity. Don’t ask who. Don’t weight credentials…..because of course, to disagree with a stance that parthian holds is to inherantly disqualify the source, regardless. Have you ever considered seeking professional help for your mental illness, parthian? I becoming concerned.

Jay says:

May 20th, 2008 at 11:42 pm

parthian, I’m curious….how can you be so certain and concerned that the world is running out of fossil fuels very shortly, and also concerned that the continued reliace on its use is causing such dramatic and alarming global warming? If your right about one, shouldn’t that kind of solve the other? Tough to continue to doom the Earth by burning up a fuel source that is no longer in existance isn’t it?

Les says:

May 21st, 2008 at 7:33 am

Partial brain wrote: “frustrating our planet’s last chance to preserve its 10,000 year old stable climate”

Now there’s a good one. There will never be another ice age as long as we dont emit CO2? The idea that man’s activity will have a dramatic effect on the earths long term climate is rediculous. The idea that the climate is stable is debateable. Seems like the “mini ice age” in the 1500 or so slips parth’s mind.

BTW, dont have his name at the tip of my tongue right now, but there is a noted climatologist in Canada, U of Ottawa, I believe, that beleives man made global warming is bunk.

Of course, he cant exist, as Chicken Little’s proclamation from on high say he doesn’t.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:19 am

Jay, you have a widly inflated (and delusional) view of your personal importance in the global food supply operation. The fact that you think you have “hard numbers” on your side increases the absurdity. This is a symptom of narcissism and egomania, which are actual treatable mental illnesses. Good luck.

As to your question, the black humor of the situaton is that we will destroy the earth’s climate by excessive fossil fuel burning just as we run out of those fuels. So we will have wasted our most valuable source of energy AND destroyed our planet’s climate at just about the same time—CO2 stays in the atmosphere for a very long time. Sort of a great cosmic joke on humanity. And people like you will be to blame for it.

Pinhead Les, a typical diversionary, off-point comment from you—you must be quite an employee to “manage”. The earth may naturally enter into another ice age at some point in the future, no one says that natural climate changes in future have been rendered impossible.

But absent global warming, climate scientists have estimated that the current interglacial period (which began at the end of the last ice age around 11,000 years ago) would have lasted another 50,000 years. So our current stable climate would have lasted a very long time, except for the fact that we humans are now destroying it by burning massive amounts of fossil fuels.

The “mini ice age” is a complete misnomer in the scale of what we’re talking about and shows your abject reliance on right-wing internet garbage troughs and email trees for your “knowledge”.

That you deny that man can even theoretically have a dramatic effect on the earth’s climate shows you are a data-free ignoramus and certainly not worth wasting time “discussing” this topic with.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 9:16 am

“The fact that you think you have “hard numbers” on your side increases the absurdity.”

Right……..I’m using the same historical data on global climate as everyone else. That really not up for debate by anyone, including you. Again, my luxury is the ability to objectively look at the values as temperatures. Nothing more, nothing less. Because that’s what I care about. You don’t appear to have that ability.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 9:43 am

6DJ, atmospheric CO2 concentrations are measured in parts per million (ppm), not “parts per thousand”—just another sign of your embarrassing scientific illiteracy or obstinacy. Read a book sometime.

But whatever unit of measure you want to use, humans have increased the share of CO2 in our atmosphere by over 35% since 1850, mostly by burning fossil fuels. An enormous increase in the leading greenhouse gas, unprecedented in the past 650,000 years. More absolutely uncontested facts that no climate scientist on earth disputes.

And if you don’t want to “believe” in the greenhouse effect, then that’s just more appalling scientific (and willful) ignorance on your part, and again no climate scientist on earth disputes its existence and the part CO2 plays in it.

Les says:

May 21st, 2008 at 10:52 am

It’s official, Chicken Little has left the realm of the sane.

I think his familiarity with the mental issues he accuses Jay of are a good indication of his personal problems.

One more thing, partial Brain. You have never “Discussed” anything, just made pronouncements from “on high”

Go back to reading your comic books.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 11:10 am

Well, I’m sure that a recitation of facts about the climate and CO2 do appear “insane” to an ignoramus like you, Pinhead Les. But there’s nothing I can do about that.

And reading a comic book would be as much a momumental challenge to you as reading a big-boy book without any pictures….

6th district Jim says:

May 21st, 2008 at 1:24 pm

Parth is desperate!
As we discussed on threads long ago,
it is reported in ppm, and “scientists”
like to herald it in smaller units because it is more impressive to say an increase of 100 vs 1.

Yet, in your flubber world, the actual increase is 1 in 10,000, or .1 in 1,000, etc. Statistics at its best/worst.
And then people start to wonder, hmmm is that really statistically significant to cause world anniliation.
If it’s flubber, then yes!

Yet again, man with no science degree:
let’s accept your 35% increase as true,
if CO2 is less than 1% (and isnt it like .05% or some miniscule amount) of our atmosphere:
isnt a 35% increase of nothing still pretty close to nothing
And Jason Lewis regularly has on climatologists that dispute your premises.
Accept it.
Arguing science with parth is like Mike Tyson boxing Al Franken, funny but in the end meaningless.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 1:41 pm

We know you think you know more than actual trained climate scientists, 6DJ. That’s one of the big problems with “conservative” males. But the fact that you think a 35% increase in the gas that scientists know is the main driver of the greenhouse effect shows that you are just plain ignorant.

Yes, the percent of CO2 in the atmosphere is in the small single digits—it’s not a massive component. But yes, the CO2 in the atmosphere is principally responsible for the unquestioned greenhouse effect even at its small “size” as an atmospheric component.

And if Pinhead Lewis’s guest disputes that, he is not a climate scientist—but I’ll bet he doesn’t.

So your “idea” that “a 35% increase of nothing is still nothing” is absolute, unadulterated, pure scientific illiteracy. Yet you’re sure you’re “right” and no amount of evidence or apppeals to experts and reality will move you. That’s why I call you an egomaniac.

Again, no climate scientist on earth disputes the power and importance of CO2 as a greenhouse gas (despite its small “size” as an atmospheric gas), nor the substantial increase in CO2 that has recently occurred.

So you are 100% absolutely, fundamentally wrong and would receive an “F” if you were still a student giving this “answer” in class. And then you could go home cryin’ to Daddy that the lib’rul prof had it in for “conservatives”, ha-ha.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 1:49 pm

correction: “But the fact that you think meaningless a 35% increase in the gas that scientists know is the main driver of the greenhouse effect shows that you are just plain ignorant”.

John E Iacono says:

May 21st, 2008 at 2:14 pm

On Education and Global Warming:

My neighbor Len (rest his soul) used to say “Every time you get a little more edication, a little common sense leaks out, until finally you’ve got no common sense left at all.”

>More carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is related to higher temps. But it is not determinative, or previous ice ages would not have occurred.

>Carbon dioxide levels were not measured when previous smaller populations were spewing tons of it into the air from inefficient burning of various fuels, but they should have caused serious warming if that was enough to do it. Instead, the climate just continued on it’s inexorable pace.

>Climate is not weather, and the overall trend since the last ice age has been to warmer temps. But the rise has not been either constant or cataclysmic.

>Nothing in present increases suggests that that will change.

>Changes in climate beneficially affect some areas and harm others. Black and white scenarios are flawed on their face.

Beyond that, it seems to me lies speculation, and for those who do not worship in the fallible church of science, speculation warrants no more than a shrug, while common sense says to forget about the most recent predictions of imminent doom and enjoy the warmer weather.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 2:52 pm

John: “>Climate is not weather, and the overall trend since the last ice age has been to warmer temps. But the rise has not been either constant or cataclysmic.”

That said, looking at parthian’s cherished Goddard Institute’s data from the previous century plus, it appears to be both somewhat cyclical and predictable. But we (parthian) don’t want to recognize or talk about that. Takes away from the ability to be an alarmist.

I hope you did take the opportunity to enjoy the warmer weather in the 80′s and 90′s, John, because sales of Coppertone are about to start dropping.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 3:17 pm

John’s points:

1. The existence of the planet’s natural level of CO2 (non manmade) does not prevent ice ages, but this is irrelevant to the situation we face today.

2. Absolutely false. The world’s oldest ice cores from both arctic regions have given us undisputed global CO2 levels going back 650,000 years as a result of research done in the 90s. And the early burning of fossil fuels DID start the CO2 levels to rise, and temperatures to start rising.

3. Upon the retreat of the glaciers, global temperature has been remarkably stable until the last century, when an unprecedented warning trend became unequivocal.

4. Misleading statement—if you mean the earth would be at the present levels of warmth absent fossil fuel burning, the scientists say that’s totally false. But at least you’re not predicting global cooling!

5. True. Want to risk being one of the places that is “harmed”?

“forget the most recent predictions and enjoy the warmer weather”. Trivializing an enormous and looming crisis and burying one’s head in the sand, for whatever weird personal reasons, usually because one fears that they will be required to alter their lifestyle.

And very irresponsible, given the clear and dire warnings the world’s climate scientists have unanimously issued in the IPCC reports over the past decade.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 3:26 pm

It’s not MY cherished Goddard Institute, jay, it’s the US’s Goddard Institute, a NASA agency.

OUR country, our climate scientists, our technology, the best in the world. The scientists who figured the whole global warming situation out and began warning about it by 1988. Who collected and analyzed the crucial data.

Pity you have no respect for American scientists or science. Just political poison.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 3:27 pm

parthian jabs: “But at least you’re not predicting global cooling!”

parthian, given your loud blathering endlessly on about weather-not-constituting-climate, and 650,000 years worth of trend data, other people’s inability to be objective thinkers…..it strikes me as sickly ironic that you are unable/unwilling to recognize a truth that that GIS data that you proudly proclaim to be irrefutable scientific fact clearly shows. You are a child.

SgtPendleton says:

May 21st, 2008 at 3:36 pm

Jay it’s intersting to hear your experience with Dow. By the way, I wasn’t trying to connect Dow chemical to either side of the debate, just pointing out that companies give money to schools for research.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 3:44 pm

Sgt, that’s one you mentioned, so that’s the one I used to illustrate. Lucky shot that there just happened to be a thin thread of personal connect there. You are obviously very right, but it only stands to reason. The gov/school isn’t going to want to fund all of that extensive research, or even know what needs to be done. Big business has all the money and not enough staff/facilities to research all of the things they would like to. If your going to question the findings of university reasearch funded from the outside, I’d start with the qualifications/accuracy of their hired grunt labor…….much of it tended to be pretty hung over when I was there.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 3:51 pm

Just so everyone is aware of what parthian is denying exists, go to the website for the Goddard Institute for SS that he is always yaking about. They have an endless supply of sound data there.

Over the last 100 years, we’ve seen global temps on the rise. That’s a fact.

From roughly 1900-1920 it was cooling. It went on another warming stretch from there until about 1945. At that point we went through another cooling period until about the mid 70′s. Of course we all know what’s happened since then.

The overall trend is warming, to be sure. But there are undenyable cooling periods along the way that appear to be both cyclical and predictable. Guess where we are at now? Guess what the very short-term trend has started to show?

parth has argued that this is magical voodoo extrapolation, and contended that I am unable to “see the forest for the trees.” Feel free to admire the forest, parth. But you need to be mindful of the trees too so you know when one is about to fall on top of you.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 3:54 pm

“Pity you have no respect for American scientists or science”

Excuse me? I’m the one telling you to actually look at what their data states. I think their data is 100% accurate. You seem to want to ignore 50% of it that doesn’t service your agenda on this issue to your degree of satisfaction.

SgtPendleton says:

May 21st, 2008 at 4:25 pm

Parth — I think you could choose your battles a little more wisely. You seem to take it personally that Jay questions what you’re saying — but at least he’s open-minded about it…He’s not a flat out denier like some of the usual jerk offs.

I don’t understand why you choose to be so confrontational with Jay when he’s actually a potential ally in your argument.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 4:45 pm

jay, you’re hysterical at this point, and just as clueless as ever. And this after suppposedly “reading” the latest IPCC report, which declares the warming of the earth “unequivocal”.

No scientist at NASA has stated we are on the edge of a 30 year cooling trend, whatever “trend” you as an untrained fool want to impose on the temperature chart or think you “see”.

Nor has any scientist said that the (greater) rising and (smaller) falling temperature variations of the past century are “cyclical and predictible”, as though we’re about to enter a “predictible” cooling period. That’s your (baseless) conclusion from looking at the chart and it’s not the conclusion of the NASA scientists.

The latest analysis of the 2007 temp data by GISS makes explicit mincemeat of the nonsense claim that global warming stopped anytime in the past decade. We’ve gone down that path before, with you not able to understand their language, as always.

I certainly have given up thinking that you can have the slightest understanding of this topic. You look for anything to conclude that NASA’s and the IPCC’s conclusions are “wrong” or going to “change” in future, because (as you admit) you don’t understand the “whys” of global warming. Yet like a dog that cannot stay away from the cat’s litterbox when looking for a “snack”, you just can’t help yourself.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 4:55 pm

SgtP, jay is a denier, despite what he “says”. He looks everywhere for reasons to argue that the problem isn’t real, doesn’t need to be addressed, hasn’t been “figured out”, is still being “debated” by scientists, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

And HE was the one to bring it up again on this thread, he LOVES trotting out his latest nonsense for me to demolish—why do you think he can’t keep away from it?

Yes, it’s a waste of my time, forcing facts and reality into these guys faces and BQ has degenerated into a few “conservatives” spouting their daily ignorance. It’s not worth dealing with these boobs anymore and I probably won’t be doing it much longer. You can have all 5 of them to yourself. But I have enjoyed your posts, usually.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 21st, 2008 at 5:21 pm

See ya Partisan! You’ll be back though just like Dora, especially if they start updating this site regularly. I’ll bet you $10 blog dollars.

6th district Jim says:

May 21st, 2008 at 6:33 pm

Jay is so far ahead of PeeWee Parth it is truly entertaining.
And PeeWee loves his “science is written in stone” personna. That’s how I know he has zero science training–he is a hoot!
Hey PeeWee:
Have we seen blockbuster Rx meds recalled in recent years despite the science that said they were safe? Yes.

Has the pancea of ethanol science been ripped recently by its former supporters?
Yes.

Were the UN scientists caught in an absolute lie about AIDS numbers in Africa? Yes.

Or look at the segway, brought to market with its megahype that its “science and technology” would change the world.
Now its mainly a tour ride at Disney.

But Parth is sure on his Global Warming:
he is the Maxwell Smart of this blog site.

6th district Jim says:

May 21st, 2008 at 6:42 pm

Yes, the percent of CO2 in the atmosphere is in the small single digits

and just for chuckles on Parth’s science, isnt CO2 like a tiny, tiny fraction of a single digit (i.e. = 1)
in earth’s atmosphere?
I cant access google from my site here, but I will look at home.

Just listen to Lewis’s podcast and you can learn what the climate scientist said. You can get more info than from just the Huff Po, you know.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 21st, 2008 at 6:57 pm

Oil hit $133 a barrel today and keeps climbing. How high does it have to go before liberal politicians controlling BOTH Houses of Congress will allow us to tap into our own vast oil reserves?

If OPEC sees us getting serious about drilling our own oil, the price will start to drop.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 7:50 pm

Hey, Doofus jim, more extreme ignorance and sophism from you.

The point was your foolish claim that “a 35% increase of nothing is still nothing.” The point was not the absolute size of the CO2 component, but CO2′s crucial role in creating the greenhouse effect, despite its very small volume in the atmosphere. And the very substantial (human caused) 35% increase in the amount of that crucial gas. That seems to have evaded your attention, of course.

That’s because you’re just an intellectually dishonest gameplayer. And because you’re dead wrong in your ignorance about the greenhouse effect. But it is remarkable that you can’t understand what’s the point and what isn’t. Sort of alarming in an adult.

And three of your four examples of science “failure” are not actually about “science”. More science illiteracy from you, quite a pattern.

Finally, I’ll leave the podcast for “conservatives” who are searching for (only) “conservative” propaganda to consume. That’s you, doofus jim!

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:04 pm

Well, I see parthian has retreated to the realm of misrepresentation of my point-of-view now. Let’s take a moment and disect this a bit. Should be fun.

parth: ” And this after suppposedly “reading” the latest IPCC report, which declares the warming of the earth “unequivocal”.”

No where did the report use the word unequivocal in reference to the causes. That is where you choose to use the term. I agree with the fact that the Earth is warming. I challenge you to find any post of mine on any threat that reads to the contrary, assuming you can refrain from taking short wordings completely out-of-context. I’ve never in my lifetime made the claim that the global climate is not trending warmer over the long haul. You have no argument here. You are attempting to paint me as some quack who doesn’t believe in gradual, global climate change, which is not the case.

parthian: “The latest analysis of the 2007 temp data by GISS makes explicit mincemeat of the nonsense claim that global warming stopped anytime in the past decade.”

Of course not. ‘Warming’ in the greater sense has not stopped. I’ve said numerous times that the upward trend is clear and undeniable. Just because there are periods of cooling does not mean that the entire trend is still not toward gradual warming. It is. I’ve never refuted that and I’ve never claimed that any data from within the last decade shows anything but an upward spike. I challenge you to look at data from beyond the last decade. During the periods of cooling that I identified earlier, global warming was still going on. It is the longer term trend. Why would you think reputable scientists would claim it somehow “stopped?” Unlike you, they are not children….shouting “game on” or “game off” in the street when a car goes by.

parthian: “You look for anything to conclude that NASA’s and the IPCC’s conclusions are “wrong” or going to “change” in future, because (as you admit) you don’t understand the “whys” of global warming”

Absolutely not. I don’t need to look for anything to proove NASA wrong because I think their data is right. I simply think *you* are wrong, mostly by being so pigheaded that you refuse to look at their data yourself and be honest about what you see. I also never said I didn’t “understand” the causes. That’s your claim because I disagree with you. Anyone who disagrees with parthian is either a white conservative male conspiring to destroy the Earth or too ignorant to understand the issue.

What I *did* say was that the causes for warming were a distant secondary concern of mine. Again, you somehow think this establishes ignorance when it simply establishes apathy. It is very possible to have a comprehensive understanding of something and still not make it a high priority.

As I said before, my priority is on accurately forecasting climate and trying to be proactive in my preparation for it- especially in the short term (next 5 years). Period. I’ll leave the soap box to you to preach about the evils of what is causing those changes. I sincerely hope you are right about all of this and everything that my market analysts and weather model guys are hypothesizing is an absolute impossibility.

My hope that you are right, is matched only by my fear that I may be.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:07 pm

And you don’t really need to google the “question”—300 ppm is .03% (pre-warming)

simple math, google not required.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:08 pm

Dare2: “If OPEC sees us getting serious about drilling our own oil, the price will start to drop.”

15 years ago that may have been the case, dare2. However, the US no longer has the clout with OPEC that we once did. We are no longer the economy they are pinning their future to. Our petroleum use has been dropping for the last 6 consecutive years and other countries (notably China and India) have been increasing theirs. The days of OPEC catering to (or even reacting to) the US are clearly behind us.

6th district Jim says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:15 pm

Hey, I found Parth’s data(but thanks for the ppm conversion):
nitrogen (78 percent) and oxygen (21 percent). The atmospheric
gases in the remaining 1 percent are argon (0.9 percent),
carbon dioxide (0.03 percent), …….plus nine others……

C02 = .03% = .0003
Let’s increase it by 35%, so = .000405

Therefore, we now have a global calamity.
Nope, no reason to have some level of doubt on that.
Wiki also said Venus has CO2 in the atmosphere of 96.5%

Obviously, this is where Cheney and Halliburton first prospered,
before wrecking Venus and outsourcing their operations to earth

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:15 pm

Jay, is there an ongoing debate in the scientific community concerning the cause of global warming?

If not, what is the cause in the view of the scientists?

Does the warming pose a serious threat to the earth’s current climate, such that it will alter it very significantly should it continue?

What should this country do about global warming at the present time?

6th district Jim says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:18 pm

And three of your four examples of science “failure” are not actually about “science”.

If this is what you’ve been reduced to, then Tyson has knocked Franken back on his heels:
Science, in the broadest sense, refers to any system of knowledge which attempts to model objective reality

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:21 pm

Jim, it’s not just about a bunch of very small numbers. The greenhouse effect exists when the CO2 is 180ppm or when it’s 385—except that the effect is more pronounced.

These (very small) numbers of molecules have very big effects on the planet’s heat distribution. If you don’t know this, you should.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:22 pm

Sgt: “I think you could choose your battles a little more wisely. You seem to take it personally that Jay questions what you’re saying”

First of all Sarge, parthian will seek to argue with me about whatever topic I choose to throw out there. To find factual fault with an argument of mine is parthian’s pink unicorn. And he’s still hunting for it.

Second, I’m not trying to ambush him by disagreeing with what he believes. It is parthian that seems to take issue with my observation on cooling periods. He believes there is no such thing and they don’t or can’t happen….when in fact they do, and have, multiple times, in only the last 100 years. When I post the obvious and cite the data that substantiates it (parthian’s own data source, by the way) he rallies back with “You are in denial if you don’t believe the Earth is warming! You are thus misinformed and at odds with the world’s entire scientific community and an ignorant fool!”

As Dora was so fond of saying…..red herring. And not even that effective, at that.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:24 pm

Well, that’s way too broad a definition for the natural physical phenomenon we are currently discussing.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:28 pm

jay, you make so many factual errors that the BQ livingroom is jammed with pink unicorns.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:30 pm

I’ll leave you to answer the questions, since all I do is “misrepresent” your real positions…..

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:41 pm

Ahhhh…..the ever-clever parthian attempts to take me up on my claim that I have an understanding if minimal interest) in the issue. This is an obvious diversionary attempt on his part because it is the least important aspect of anything I’ve posted. i also realize up front that anything I may have to say that parthian happens to disagree with will be sufficient grounds to make the claim that I have ‘absolutely no idea’ what I am talking about. Watch it happen, folks. Regardless….I’m willing to play ball.

Q1: Ongoing debate? Not among anyone you would consider to be ‘reputable scientists.’ Per’t near 100% of those individuals all agree.

Q2: Cause? Their conclusion is that the cause is exponential growth in fossil fuel use, notably in the last 50 years, and in particular the last 20 years; and the CO2 released from it.

Q3: Absolutely. Not even sure what the point of such an elementary question is.

Q4: What should this country do about it? That’s not my place to say as i have said several times) but I’ll give you my opinion if you wish. My opinion is that our country is probably not the biggest concern due to our environmental stewardship. We need to try and force that same level of responsibility on the rest of the industrializing world that pollutes uncontrolably without regret. Also continue to develop technology to continue to use less petroleum and make energy use more efficient and clean.

Do I pass your childish litmus test of knowledge on a topic which I don’t care much about?

Let’s turn the tables:

Do you have the fortitude to admit that GISS data climate charts show periods of cooling from 1900-1920, 1945-1975?

Do you have the spine to admit that eventhough the overall trend is still toward warming that these periods exist? And to admit there are periods of cooling in no way undermines your belief in overall warming?

Finally, looking at those periods and their spacing in time, does it not appear that we are due for another similar such period starting about last year? And is it total coincidence that last years temperature data indicates a possible beginning of exactly that?

I’d at least like to see you attempt to “explain that away” instead of refuse it has ever happened…..which it clearly has.

Batter up……..

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 8:50 pm

parthian: “Well, that’s way too broad a definition for the natural physical phenomenon we are currently discussing.”

Come again???? Its not a broad definition at all. Its just an extended period of time. Not unlike almost any natural physical phenomenon related to the environment. Warming is warming. It doesn’t ‘warm’ for 25 years and then ‘cool’ for 25. It is all part of the same trend, even if there are stretches of each. But let’s recognize that there are, in fact, stretches of each. Yes?

and then:
“jay, you make so many factual errors that the BQ livingroom is jammed with pink unicorns.”

Actually, I did make a factual error earlier on this vert thread. The data I was looking at last week included GISS after all. I thouight it was from a different outfit.

Sorry if you got impatient waiting for my response on your questions. I’m not a fast typer. I now await your responses to mine.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 9:08 pm

I’m going to take a final stab at bridging this gap in perception between parthian and myself. If this doesn’t work, I give up. This exchaneg has gotten very boring.

A sociologist cares about establishing *why* people commit crime and exploring ways to prevent it in the future.

A cop cares *that* people commit crime and takes the necessary measures to address that reality to help protect the rest of us.

On the matter of global warming, parthian is the perverbial sociologist.
I am the cop. Near as I can tell anyway.

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 9:33 pm

well, without knowing what particular temp chart you’re looking at, the small dips you are likely describing are not identified as “cooling periods” in the 20th century by any climate scientists I’ve ever read, so no. If you can find one saying something like that, I’ll take a look. They’re the experts on interpreting the charts, not us.

FWIW, my own interpretation of the global temp charts at GISS would be that the 1900-20 period is flat, the 1920-40 period is a clear rise, the 1940-75 period is flat, and we rapidly take off from there.

You are seeing meaningful substantive changes in small, basically flat, temp variations for your “cooling periods”. I don’t think the scientists agree with your characterizations—if they are “cooling” periods they are very slight indeed.

I certainly agree that whatever those “periods” are, they in no way change the trend of very large overall warming.

Your idea that we are “due” for “more cooling” is completely baseless and is just you drawing excessive conclusions which aren’t really there and compounding it with some idea that the “dips” follow some durational “pattern”, which you have no reason whatever to believe other than thinking natural data “repeats” itself.

Again, you can’t divorce the charts from the theory. Manmade CO2 is ever increasing over time, CO2 is a greenhouse gas, it causes global temps to rise, more warming begats more warming, we aren’t in a “natural” cycle, we are in a human-caused warming and there is no scientific reason (absent reduction in the CO2 emissions) why temperatures in such circumstances would start falling for a twenty year period.

Finally, as I keep saying and you keep ignoring, no NASA climate scientist is endorsing your claim or your interpretaion of the past cooling “periods” or an “upcoming” one, which should gove you pause in your certainty, but which doesn’t.

As to your answers, you apparently agree with everything the climate scientists say except that we (as the leading CO2 producer for the past 75 years) need to immediately reduce emissions. So you think that other countries (who haven’t put anywhere near the problem-causing CO2 into the atmosphere that we have) need to act—but you do seem to think we should do something, so that’s a (mild) start.

So you agree there’s no scientific debate as to the cause, and agree what the cause is, and agree that it’s going to be a disaster if something’s is not done, but are a little light in what needs to be done by us. Perhaps I misjudged your views. It wasn’t unreasonable given your posts.

But if that’s what you really think, why the going-out-of-your-way to see a 20 year cooling period about to occur which hasn’t been announced or predicted by the NASA scientists?

parthian says:

May 21st, 2008 at 9:38 pm

My comment about “science definition” was to 6DJ, jay.

And I went somewhere and then took a while to respond. Thanks for your very prompt response. Sorry to keep you waiting, I didn’t think you were.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 10:05 pm

Wow. I’m not sure how many more times I can say that this debate is not about the causes of warming, regardless of how desparately you wish it to be.

parth: “well, without knowing what particular temp chart you’re looking at, the small dips you are likely describing are not identified as “cooling periods” in the 20th century by any climate scientists I’ve ever read, so no.”

That’s a cheap cop-out. Its the 5-yr avg mean chart, which seems to be the most prevalant one out there. The ‘dips’ that I am seeing are periods of lower temps than the period preceeding them. If it makes you more comfortable to call it something other than ‘cooling’ then go ahead. It is what it is. And the temp data drops. I’m absolutely speachless at your refusal to recognize that. Your self-worth must truely hinge on this issue.

parth: “Your idea that we are “due” for “more cooling” is completely baseless and is just you drawing excessive conclusions which aren’t really there”

If it were “just me” drawing that same conclusion, i wouldn’t have any concerns whatsoever. But that’s not the case.

parth: “some idea that the “dips” follow some durational “pattern”, which you have no reason whatever to believe other than thinking natural data “repeats” itself.”

If it was just ‘a hunch’ that it should happen. That’s no reason for concern. However, to see a pattern that should, or at least could (and has) repeated itself, compounded with data that supports the notions that it is beginning to is too much for me to simply dismiss as coincidence. We’ve been over that before.

My views on cause and prevention are inconsequential because that’s not what I’m talking about, so I will leave that portion of your post unaddressed.

parth: “Perhaps I misjudged your views.”

This was obvious all along to everyone but you.

parth: “It wasn’t unreasonable given your posts.”

That’s ridiculous. I was very clear the entire time. You have blinders on when it comes to this subject and read what you want to read into others’ posts.

parth: “But if that’s what you really think, why the going-out-of-your-way to see a 20 year cooling period about to occur which hasn’t been announced or predicted by the NASA scientists?”

This is the most important part of anything I’ve posted today, so please pay attention: The reason is that with or without NASA scientists confirmation (let’s not lose sight of the fact that it took them decades to confirm global warming was happening in the first place), we are looking at an immediate global food shortage due to exploding population and longer life expectancy. The last time in human history that this happened, America had just been discovered. Thus, lots of “new land” to start producing food for the world.

We have no such “new land” this time. In fact, it is shrinking due to urbanization. The possible consequences of a short (20-30 year) cooling period at this time would be disasterous for the global food supply. We’d have massive upheaval in nations that we consider to be “modern, industrialized economies.” Much worse in nations that are not.

I don’t think I’m ‘going-out-of-my-way’ to see anything. I’m saying we need to be prepared and take precautionary measures to address/manage this potential disaster- which, whether you want to admit it or not, has some data behind it. People like you claiming it is an impossibility do not help achieve that goal.

If I am wrong about this, the situation will be not much different from today- we’ll continue to battle global warming and take measures to reduce pollution/emission with the expectation that it will help eventually. I’ll gladly take that scenerio.

Can you imagine what it might be like if you are wrong? And we’ve taken no precautions to address it because it “couldn’t happen” (again)?

I can’t.

O.T. says:

May 21st, 2008 at 10:08 pm

It’s all Bush’s fault.

Terror attacks are down 40% since 2001.

A group of researchers from Simon Fraser University says global terrorism is on the decline, despite previous data and public perceptions that suggest otherwise.

The university’s Human Security Report Project says fatalities from terrorist attacks around the world have, in fact, decreased by 40 per cent since 2001.

Cash N. Carey says:

May 21st, 2008 at 10:24 pm

partisan – you asked for a NASA scientist that supported the global cooling theory:

“NASA scientist James E. Hansen, who has publicly criticized the Bush administration for dragging its feet on climate change and labeled skeptics of man-made global warming as distracting “court jesters,” appears in a 1971 Washington Post article that warns of an impending ice age within 50 years.”

http://tinyurl.com/2y2pma

It sounds like it was based on computer models. Those can’t be wrong you know. I am happy those scientists aren’t predicting based on computer models anymore!

Thanks for the news O.T. It is amazing how the liberal media is so quiet on the successes of the Bush administration.

God bless President Bush!

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 10:29 pm

“My comment about “science definition” was to 6DJ, jay.”

fair enough. my mistake.

FWIW: If you have any interest in reading my opinions of what we should be doing to address my scenerio, I think you’d find them acceptable (although you’ve never thought to ask).

First, we need people like yourself to cease in their refusal that this kind of event is even possible. That is illogical, damaging, short-sighted, and counter-productive.

By all means, pursue your agenda of solutions to global warming. Reduce emissions, reduce fossil fuel use, whatever blows your hair back. My contention is these cooling periods are a part of the global warming phenomenon, not somehow ‘in lieu’ of it. Whether I agree with you on cause or not, I wouldn’t stand in your way if you wished to reduce pollution or reduce fossil fuel use. Hats off to ‘ya.

To prepare for the possibility of a cooling period, after the radicals have come down to Earth and admit that it can and does happen- you know as well as I do that far too many people start to accept as fact, that which they hear enough times from enough people- we need to focus (quickly) on the following areas:

More responsible land use for food production, better crop genetics, in some cases- protection of tillable acres, water management, transportation, waste/loss management, better and more efficient processing practices, and yes…..even eating habits- especially in the US and Brazil.

In my opinion, we need to make the investments to squeeze every drop of potential out of every acre of cropland to meet our global food demand the longer this period of cooling hangs around. It will be much more challenging than you think. And it will require that people understand the reality of the situation- not believe the problem is that “we are always warming.”

I went over an over-simplified scenerio at the close of my previous poast about what would happen if you are wrong, parthian. If it turns out that I am wrong- the downside is that we’ll just be sitting on a lot of extra food.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 11:05 pm

In an attempt to change the subject, I’ll respond to OT: “A group of researchers from Simon Fraser University says global terrorism is on the decline, despite previous data and public perceptions that suggest otherwise.”

Just out of curosity (and to some extent, I’m playing devil’s advocate here so forgive me), isn’t it actually a good thing that the public fails to accurately perceive this? If they accepted that terrorism was on the downtrend, wouldn’t the typical knee-jerk reaction be to reduce efforts to stop them?

Also, I’d question that methodology of the stistics behind that. The 9/11 attack itself can sway that statistic dramatically due to the sheer volume of deaths in that tragic event. Example: imagine the shocking drop in terrorism related deaths in the week following the 9/11 attacks versus the week it took place.

That said, although I didn’t vote for him either time (didn’t vote for Gore or Kerry either though), I laugh at all this ‘worst-President-ever’ talk. That’s a predictable fad, T-shirt of the week, kind of mentality that plagues many unpopular figures. I suspect GWB will not be a Top 5 or Bottom 5 President 30 years from now……just somewhere in the middle like his Pa.

Jay says:

May 21st, 2008 at 11:39 pm

parthian: “I certainly agree that whatever those “periods” are, they in no way change the trend of very large overall warming.”

In the interest of finding *some* common ground with parthian, I can tell you that if you looked at the same projections as I did last week you would probably soil yourself. After the 25-30 year cooling period that we are struggling to come to terms on, my analysts are projecting a spike in warming the likes of which we haven’t ever seen. Much more steep than the 80-90′s. They are projecting that to begin sometime around 2025 and extend into 2050. Scary stuff…….if the global population doesn’t suffer a material drop due to starvation before we get there.

Not sure if that makes you feel better or worse about the validity of the models I am using.

6th district Jim says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 7:27 am

Again, people like Parth look for the most difficult, most unprovable explanations for the issues in our daily lives.
It is a folly so well depicted in the movie The Prestige, where Hugh Jackman destroyed his life trying to explain a fellow magician (played by Bale) trick.
A friend kept telling the Jackman character: he simply has a twin, but Jackman thought it was something far more involved. In the end, Bale HAD a twin as he magically “reappeared.”

Similarly, who wouldn’t suspect solar activity as a far bigger driver: look at the simple tilt of the earth thru the seasons, in MN a 60! degree change between summer and winter high temps:
100% driven by solar energy.
CO2 didnt melt the MN glaciers, end of story. And unlike PeeWee, I can admit I dont know for certain what did.

Meanwhile, the mindnumbed robots worship at the shaky CO2 model shrines to explain a one degree increase in temp.
They probably buy the $100/month vitamins on TV because the “scientist looking guy” says they work.

6th district Jim says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 7:31 am

But I agree with jay and aprth:
we should all live lives that conserve, dont litter, etc. That is common sense whether one is a 1 in 10,000 CO2′er or a solar energy fan.
That’s common ground (and my honda gets 40mpg, so gas prices = NBD)

parthian says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 8:16 am

The point is that (under the science you agree with) the existence or non existence of your “cooling period” has nothing to do with whether we need to immediately begin reducing CO2 emissions to try to mitigate the upcoming “warming the likes of which we haven’t seen”–an estimate which the world’s climate scientists completely agree with, BTW, hence their categorical warnings.

I don’t doubt that the world faces a potential food crisis—I’m the gloom n’ doomer, remember. And that it likely has much to do with a decline in arable land worldwide and an unthinking increase in urbanization and sprawl..

But the health of the world’s crops isn’t going to be catastrophically affected by a “cooling period” starting in 2008, even if it “starts”. You need to look at the big picture.

The world’s average mean temperatures have increased over 1.0 degree C since 1890. With most of that coming in the past 30 years. The world is much warmer than a century ago.

Crops grew fine in the temperatures the first 50 years of the 20th century, when global temperatures were much below where they were now, and far, far below any “cooling period” which you (and no scientists) are predicting. Remember, the prior variations you call “cooling periods” were variations of less than .2 C. and the world has already warmed over 1.0 degree. So the world is quite warm enough for our historic crops.

The more likely food supply problem arising from manmade global warming (whose existence you don’t dispute) is severe, prolonged droughts and catastrophic downpours caused by the ungoing, warming induced changes in global rainfall patterns and increased air moisture.

These droughts (and monsoons) are already occurring as a result of the warming. What do your analysts say about those?—which the IPCC climate scientists (who you also agree with) ARE talking about in the their latest reports.

Anyway, I’m sure that immediate federal policies to increase food production are likely wise and needed. I’ll support them. And I’ll expect you to support policies designed to begin immediate substantial cuts in US greenhouse gas emissions and impose massive pressure on our CO2-emitting trading partners (who may need our food exports) to immediately begin to reduce theirs.

Perhaps we can use US food as a weapon to save the planet! Sounds good to me.

Jay says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 8:31 am

“the existence or non existence of your “cooling period” has nothing to do with whether we need to immediately begin reducing CO2 emissions to try to mitigate the upcoming “warming”

Exactly…..it is a separate issue. That’s been my point this entire time and this is the first time you’ve managed to see the difference.

parth: “But the health of the world’s crops isn’t going to be catastrophically affected by a “cooling period” starting in 2008, even if it “starts”. You need to look at the big picture.”

Actually, they will. Without adequate food supply, there is no big picture.

parth; “Crops grew fine in the temperatures the first 50 years of the 20th century….So the world is quite warm enough for our historic crops.”

This is the part you fail to understand. While crops grew “fine” 50 years ago, the resulting yields were drastically lower than they are today, and the population was obviously much smaller. Today, we have fewer acres in production and many, many more mouths to feed. Our technology has made up the difference by producing ever-increasing upward yield potential. A period of cooler temps puts that ability at risk.

As far as what we each expect the other to support going forwad, I will continue to acknowledge that the overall warming trend exists, as I always have. I expect you to stop with this “there are no dips and spikes along the way” nonesense.

parthian says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 9:02 am

I suggested that we each support the other’s policy positions, not untutored views about the GISS temp charts. Or are you unwilling to do that?

And again your concerns about inadequate food supply really have nothing to do with feared cooling of the world’s temps in 2008 but greater mouths to feed, fewer acres in production, etc. etc..

The lower yields of the early 20th century were likely caused by less use of modern fertilizers, less irrigation, less pest control—and we’ll NEVER be anywhere near those lower temps again anyway. And our superior technolgy isn’t going anywhere, it’s not going into a cooling period!

So your concern isn’t a global warming issue in any sense–except in the dought/monsoon effect from the warming, which you decide to ignore completely, though that WILL have a very clear and obvious impact on world food production in coming years.

Jay says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 9:36 am

Yes…. drought is a bad thing for growing crops. I didn’t think that even merited a response.

My concern is the foolish notion held by individuals like yourself that the best way to battle misconceptions is with equal and opposite misrepresentations of your own. I understand that to conceed that I may be right opens the door for you get whacked by those who claim that warming doesn’t exist in the first palce. Stay in your little shell and protect your argument, parth.

I’ll spend my efforts on this subject with the grown up’s.

Jay says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 9:51 am

On a new subject, the MN Congress quietly sneaked a change into the latest transportation legislation that increases the length and weight restrictions for heavy trucks. Pawlenty votoed such measures a few years ago, but this time they were able to coat-tail it in.

Good: Helps fuel efficiency
Bad: Get ready for added stress on our roads and bridges

Good trade off?

parthian says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 10:47 am

Well, this causes me to doubt the sincerity of your “admissions”. I don’t argue anything more about global warming than what the NASA climate scientists tell us—whose views you said you agree with. So how am I guilty of “equal and opposite misprepresentations” of my own? Simply because I won’t sign onto your (unsubstantiated) upcoming cooling period argument? More hyperbole from you.

The funny thing about you is that you are likely quite sincere about thinking you are personally involved in the critical global acricultural production and distribution network. Of all the industries in America that one is threatened with some of the greatest disruptions by man-made global warming, and there’s no doubt global societal stability depends upon easy access to food.

And you are aware of (believe!) what the IPCC scientists have actually said, what the cause of the warming is and that something needs to be done soon—and that such action would work to protect the crucial food supply network that you’re intimately involved in and knowledgeable about.

But instead of concluding (with the scientists) that there is CLEARLY a scientifically “right” and a “wrong” position on global warming, and a clear need to do something about it, you cling to your rigid “independent” ideology and refuse to fight for the needed changes in CO2 emissions that will help protect the world’s food supply. Why? Because you are certain that “both sides must be wrong”, and that there is some “more correct” middle position, somewhere, somehow.

And you are “confirmed” in this rigid view because those who are most vocal about demanding immediate action on unchecked emissions (after 8 crucial years of denial and footdragging by Bushists) are people of the Left, and you KNOW they must be “wrong”, and that you could NEVER be on the side of those Dirty F8*king Hippies on ANYTHING.

Thus, someone who should (because of his job) be able to objectively see the desperate crisis and what more inaction portends (you), concludes that a Lib’rul (me) who merely argues the plain language of the IPCC reports and NASA conclusions (which you agree with!) is as guilty of “equal and opposite misrepresentations” as the worst “conservative” denialists, boneheads like 2D, Preacher Cash and even 6DJ. And that you are the “real” grown-up, surrounded by children.

In short, your rigid political ideology now prevents you from thinking clearly. That’s a big problem–especially for an adult.

SgtPendleton says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 11:14 am

Snatching conflict from the jaws of civility…

Jay, what are the new weight restrictions? I thought the Feds mandate 80,000 lbs since they own the interstates.

I remember back in the early 1990s, there was strong growth in trucking — simply because fuel prices were so low. Trains were having a hard time competing with semis…Maybe (through no foresight of our state reps) it will be offset by a decrease in semi traffic as trains become a better alternative?

SgtPendleton says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 11:16 am

that came out weird — “it” being the new weight/length restrictions…

SgtPendleton says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 11:16 am

that came out weird — “it” being the new weight/length restrictions…

Jay says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 11:23 am

“Well, this causes me to doubt the sincerity of your “admissions”.”

I’m unclear what ‘admissions’ you are talking about, since I’m not aware I’ve made any. If you are referring to your little litmus test to try and gauge my knowledge of the situation, those weren’t necessarily my views, as you never asked for them; and they really don’t metter even if you had. You asked what the concensus was, things like that. So I told you. The only opinion I offerred was on the final question and I identified it as such.

I’m not sure where you get the idea that I agree with you on causes of global warming. I’ve said repeatedly that I don’t, and that the causes are not my concern. I agree that global warming is happening. Are you unable to distinguish a difference there? or are the two so tightly bound in your mind that they are inseparable?

parthian: “The funny thing about you is that you are likely quite sincere about thinking you are personally involved in the critical global acricultural production and distribution network.”

I’m from a family that still farms, maintain many close personal firends who farm, and am part owner of a company that buys, sells, and transports grain and grain products on every continent except Africa (and Antarctica I guess). I’ll let you decide whether I am personally involved or not.

parth: “In short, your rigid political ideology now prevents you from thinking clearly”

Only one of us is being too rigid to think clearly….and I agree that is a big problem.

Jay says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 11:28 am

Sgt: “what are the new weight restrictions? I thought the Feds mandate 80,000 lbs since they own the interstates.”

90,000lb for six axels year-round. 97,000 on seven axels year-round, and 99,000 for both during the winter.As I read it, they will not be allowed to travel on interstate highways….so you are still right about the Fed establishing those. I assume they will remain at the 80,000 limit.

99,000lbs is a lot of weight barrelling down the road.

6th district Jim says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 12:21 pm

Check out the Strib online front page banner:
Mike Fairborne joins 31,000 scientists in ~~denouncing the overblown claims of the 1 in 10,000′ers. If true (anyone else seen the story?)
The HuffPo must be meltdown phase (pun intended)
Or as parth would say, it’s only 31,000 bonehead scientists…..

Jay says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 12:25 pm

Sgt: “Maybe (through no foresight of our state reps) it will be offset by a decrease in semi traffic as trains become a better alternative?”

Trains have been the greater alternative for a while. It just all comes down to what shipment rates the railroads want to force people to tolerate. Steel wheels on a steel track that runs straight with no stops, moves product very efficiently. I was once told that a train locomotive pulling a full train of coal (I think that’s 80 cars or so) burns apx 100 gal of fuel per hour.

That pretty incredible on a per ton basis.

6th district Jim says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 12:30 pm

It must be a bad day to be parth when the Strib is poking him in the eye.

As for science, a reader reminded me of the greatest science debacle of the late 20th century–the Women’s Health Initative:
After decade of pushing estrogen on women, all of sudden it’s a complete reversal in 2002–too much breast cancer, too much stroke. Whoops.
The same thing could happen here the way they’ve flopped between cooling and warming stories in the last 3 decades.

Jay says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 12:36 pm

…….or NASA scientists who decided they had discovered a new planet at the far end of our solar system. They called it pluto and for years, it was our most distant planet……until last year when they decided it wasn’t after all. Even NASA is fallable.

SgtPendleton says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 3:13 pm

Yeah, that’s a lot of weight Jay…But if they’re doing it for 6 and 7 axles only…I can stomach that. I’m assuming there’s no parity with WI or IA, so it’s probably been done for mining and construction — that is it’s not really affecting your garden variety OTR driver.

O.T. says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 6:10 pm

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 62% of voters would prefer fewer government services with lower taxes. Nearly a third (29%) disagrees and would rather have a bigger government with higher taxes. Ten percent (10%) are not sure.

6th district Jim says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 6:42 pm

Good one Jay! The planet goofiness
again shows the “infallibility” of science.

Like Elvis, I see Parth has LEFT THE BUILDING.
How funny is it after this thread, the Strib !THE Strib! runs big articles where all three major meteorologists rip Parth’s postions.
It has been one hilarious day.
And for Parth and Dora incessentaly whining, “they just print serial emails..” now they get blown out of the water. The left really does have the mindless robots.
Fairborne’s squishy science comment couldnt be more perfect, but try explain that to people here with no science training really is an exercise in futility.

6th district Jim says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 6:46 pm

Thus, someone who should (because of his job) be able to objectively see the desperate crisis and what more inaction portends (you), concludes that a Lib’rul (me) who merely argues the plain language of the IPCC reports and NASA conclusions (which you agree with!) is as guilty of “equal and opposite misrepresentations” as the worst “conservative” denialists, boneheads like 2D, Preacher Cash and even 6DJ. And that you are the “real” grown-up, surrounded by children.

=

:o ) :o ) :o ) :o )

6th district Jim says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 6:52 pm

And Parth,
the great magicians really do use “assistants” who have identical twins.
They dont use flubber to make the assistant teleport and then appear at that far away door…….

;o) ;O0 :o ( :Q)

SgtPendleton says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 8:52 pm

Interesting OT — I’d imagine that everyone feels that way as long as its someone else’s goverment services that are being cut.

SgtPendleton says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 8:53 pm

Thanks for ruining a movie I haven’t seen yet a55hole.

O.T. says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 9:48 pm

R u talking about the prestige-if so, i really liked that.

also sarge, i would assume that the 29 percent that want bigger govt are the people who pay little or no taxes and would reap the biggest benefit.

Cash N. Carey says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 10:17 pm

Even more folks jumping on the global cooling bandwagon. Seems like a great correlation with sunspot activity and our climate. Makes since when you look at Mar’s temperature tracking with Earth’s.

http://tinyurl.com/6qqzeu

O.T. says:

May 22nd, 2008 at 10:52 pm

and it begins……..

Not waiting until the actual Friday release of John McCain’s medical records, on Thursday’s World News anchor Charles Gibson (who’s 65) and Dr. Tim Johnson (who at 72 is older than McCain) speculated about McCain’s health. Gibson wondered about “psychological damage” from his POW captivity. Assured there’s no evidence of that, Gibson jumped to wonder how much longer McCain has to live, a question which led Johnson to warn, that while McCain may live another 16 years, there’s a decent chance he’ll develop “dementia.”

Gibson asked: “There’s also an enormous amount of medical records involving the time that he was in captivity in North Vietnam to check to see what physical damage he suffered and maybe what psychological damage.” Johnson replied that Navy psychiatrists monitored McCain “for many years after his release. They found no evidence of any serious problem. And he strongly denies any symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.” Gibson pounced with a new line of fear: “But he’s 71 years old. What do the actuarial tables say about a man who’s 71 years old?” Johnson explained they say he should live to 87, but:

Much more difficult, of course, to predict any change in mental acuity. At age 71, there’s about a 30 percent chance of developing serious memory loss or even dementia.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 4:40 am

O.T.,

Thanks for exposing the liberal media’s attempt to scare people into not voting for McCain. I would rather have McCain as President even if he did start having some medical issues, than a guy who wants to “change” America to social*sm.

6th district Jim says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 7:44 am

Jay:
Just a nod again on the great planet debacle, and to CNC for a similar link.
As I fish this weekend, I will still know its warmed quite a bit in recent millenia on our glacier made lakes.

As for GW hysteria, could there be any more 2 cash-strapped organizations begging for grants and funding than the UN and NASA?
I just dont get why the mindnumbed left doesnt have the slightest trepidation about secondary motives. It is a group unburdened by deep thoughts (i.e.
list to Klob discuss issues).

OT–yes, McCain is about to get months of media heat, but he’s an “old” pro.
And for the Prestige, it is a fun movie, but also teaches such good lessons about life and observation.
It is a must see.
Happy M-day weekend to one and all.
Even Parth, probably huddling in a corner of his dark basement……
Get out and enjoy some GW dude!

Jay says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 8:04 am

Thx 6DJ. While I don’t have a problem with us marginalizing parthian (turn about is fair play after all), I don’t want to leave you with the impression that I completely dismiss all of his points either, as he usually does to others.

Warming is a reality, and will be an issue that we need to figure out how to overcome. I’ll let those more qualified and interested in the causes that I, to determine those.

My more immediate concern is dealing with the expected conditions over the next 5-10 years, and the more I look at the information, the more I fear that could be a period of lower than normal temps and conditions. Enjoy the fishing this weekend. I’ll wait until the water warms up a bit.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 8:36 am

“I don’t want to leave you with the impression that I completely dismiss all of his points either”

I’ll dismiss all of them then. By the way, I thought Partisan was bailing?

parthian says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 9:32 am

Ah, the grunting apes of the BQ monkey house, wondering when their keeper will arrive today!

Grunter in Chief Jim thinks that NASA scientists are “creating” a crisis so they can get “funding” (quite a healthy respect for science and scientists there), without having the slightest understanding of what warming research has already been funded and completed and what is currently being researched. As a fool, he wouldn’t know, or see that such info might be important to his “argument”. Chatter on, jim.

Ignorance is bliss, as always, and denial of reality the order of the day for the sufferers of Conservative White Male syndrome, 6DJ the leader of the braying pack. His posts make clear that he doesn’t understand things very well without “pictures” and smiley faces, so things like words, concepts and numbers are simply beyond him. Fish away, Grunter in Chief….and dream of smiley faces and the next expensive steak dinner….

Preacher Cash then scratches himself and grunts “sunspots”, a discussion we had weeks ago, and which has been decisively refuted by every climate scientist, but with his wilfull ignorance he’ll never get it. Preacher C gets his poisonous conservative bananas elsewhere…

Well, I see the monkey house is in good hands this Memorial Day, as the chimps screech and posture amongst themselves. The benevolent keepers will look in every once in a while to see what the latest screeching is about, who’s fighting over the rotten banana, or being pestered by a particularly imsistent fly.

But mercifully for the keeper, the chimps can usually while away the bleak hours peacefully, their blank, empty minds focusing on this or that nonsense, this or that banana fragment, waiting for the sun to set (again) on another worthless day spent in their foul smelling cages. But tommorrow is another day!

Jay says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 10:12 am

“or being pestered by a particularly imsistent fly” = parthian.

O.T. says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 11:57 am

I heard on the radio today that some people will not be going up north this weekend because of the gas prices. So… because your trip will cost another 10-20 bucks, you will not visit your cabin? Another said that they would just cut their visit short because of gas. So…. you already drove there but won’t stay as long?????? what? people are blowing this way out of proportion.

Jay says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 12:06 pm

agreed, OT. If you cannot afford an extra $20 to cover your vacation expense…..perhaps you really can’t afford to go on vacation in the first place. Get back to work and take the holiday pay instead.

SgtPendleton says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 12:28 pm

It depends on what you’re basing the “extra $20″ off of — if you go back 8 years (when the housing boom and presumably cabin boom were in effect), 20 gallons of gas would run you about $32 — now it’s almost $80.

Jay, when is this trend going to stop? I expected the market to stabilze, but it keeps going up.

I’ve been telling my coworkers that if oil stays this high, we’re all going to be taking trains up north for vacation.

O.T. says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 1:05 pm

they said for a trip to brainerd from the cities, the price jumped 7 bucks from last year. to duluth, it was 12 dollars.

no problem buying a 7 dollar latte every morning though, just the extra money for gas.

i see gas as an expense. part of doing business. i have no problem paying 6-8 dollars round trip for to get to my job paying me over three hundred a day. this weeknd is great as a couple days will be 2 1/2 times pay- yeehaw!

Jay says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 2:17 pm

“Jay, when is this trend going to stop? I expected the market to stabilze, but it keeps going up.”

Obviously, if I had those kinds of answers I would no longer be working to earn a living.

The over-simplified answer is that the trend will correct whenever enough big money decides that they want to sell instead of continuing to buy. Right now, there appears to be enough momentum and emotion that no one wants to risk standing in front of the train.

FWIW: Congress is beginning to grasp the situation we are in; and are currently working on ideas to establish regulation of price speculation in energy. Not sure at this point if that will extend into other commodities as well (ie grains, materials) or not. If they can come to terms on how to effectively limit the buying power, or regulate the extent to which managed money can position themselves, prices will likely come crashing down in a big way. If they can’t do that, its anybody’s guess. Typically, one or more major players need to suffer a huge financial loss before the rest of them decide to start approaching the market with a little more discipline. Obviously, the interest to this point has been in taking a long position and that’s resulted in record (relatively easy) profits, not major losses.

SgtPendleton says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 2:26 pm

Is that what police are making these days OT? That’s not a bad living…I thought police were grossly underpaid?

Jay says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 3:07 pm

does that include the value of the beer you lift off of high school kids? I had a former roommate who was a cop, and that was the best part for me…..we always knew we had a shipment of free beer arriving Monday morning.

O.T. says:

May 23rd, 2008 at 4:03 pm

jay maybe the podunk towns could get away with that but not here.

sarge- i am not the usual po-po. this is my benefits job anyways- the real money comes from outside work.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 24th, 2008 at 7:59 am

Partisan,

Are you taking light rail up to your cabin this weekend?

dare2sayit.com says:

May 24th, 2008 at 8:29 am

Liberal Democrat Congresswoman MAXINE WATERS(CA)says to oil company executives:

“And guess what this liberal would be all about? This liberal would be all about social*ze — uh, uh, would be about basically taking over and the government running all of your companies.”

This idiot says it all about the modern day democrat party and their attempt to “CHANGE” America to social*sm. These liberal commies have control of BOTH Houses of Congress right now and it could get much worse.

O.T. says:

May 24th, 2008 at 11:22 am

dare – you left out the best part. the oil exec’s response: “congreswoman, we have seen that movie before, its called hugo chavez and venezuala”.

partisan doesn’t have a cabin, but he may have the place to himself if his parents went up north without him.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 25th, 2008 at 11:20 am

Strib headline:

“On immigration, bluster but little action”

Where is the word ILLEGAL here? This story is about the Minnesota Republican attempt to control illegal immigration with such things as making it tougher for illegals to use false identification, holding employers who knowingly hire illegals accountable, making human trafficing more difficult, and ending illegal alien “Santuary City” policies like Minneapolis has.

To Jean Hophensperger’s credit though, she does admit that liberal democrats like Larry Pogemiller and Mee Moua are blocking these common sense ideas.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 25th, 2008 at 12:04 pm

Has anyone read Garrison Keillor’s leftist rantings in the Strib this morning? Has he lost his mind?

Here are some quotes:

“The current occupant tossed Nazis into a speech last week, something he rarely does, since it only reminds people of Dick Cheney”

“unlike the gentle “commun*st”, a cousin to “communion” and “community” ”

“Richard Nixon and other weasles of the right”

Is this moron trying to out liberal Comrades Nick Coleman and Syl Jones? No wonder the Strib is having such financial problems when it pisses off half of it’s readers.

Richard says:

May 25th, 2008 at 4:49 pm

That’s not so bad, but speaking of partisan rants, how ’bout that guy on dumpbachmann who posted that the GI Bill, that passed with overwhelming partisan support, was a welfare program for veterans. That’s some crazy stuff there, I mean who in their right mind would not support a program that would increase enlistment and reward service. Crazy

SgtPendleton says:

May 25th, 2008 at 8:30 pm

D2, don’t even get me started on what that idiot said in the Knesset — read Pat Buchanan’s column about it.

For starters, the president needs a history lesson. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26606

Cash N. Carey says:

May 25th, 2008 at 11:39 pm

D2SI – Is there any wonder why the Star continues to lose readers and advertisers. If they wish to cater to the elite liberals, let them. If the advertisers wish to support their right to call our VP a Nazi, take your money elswhere. Who advertised in the opinions section this morning? IMHO, Garrison wouldn’t know a weasel if he had one up his rear.

O.T. says:

May 26th, 2008 at 9:13 am

America’s worst president strikes again…

It’s a known fact that Jimmy Carter is not a fan of Israel but to release this kind of information is very troubling- even for a Democrat.
The Times Online reported:

Israel has 150 nuclear weapons in its arsenal, former President Jimmy Carter said yesterday, while arguing that the US should talk directly to Iran to persuade it to drop its nuclear ambitions.

His remark, made at the Hay-on-Wye festival which promotes current affairs books and literature, is startling because Israel has never admitted having nuclear weapons, let alone how many, although the world assumes their existence. Nor do US officials deviate in public from that Israeli line. Carter, who has immersed himself since his presidency in Israeli-Palestinian relations, was highly critical of Israeli settlers on the West Bank, and of Israel’s refusal to talk to elected officials of the Islamic party Hamas, although he said that Israel’s security was his prime concern.
Let’s hope this man is not privy to any more national secrets.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 26th, 2008 at 9:40 am

Richard,

My point on Dump Bachmann was that liberals are very generous with raising our taxes to increase benefits, but they drag their feet when it comes to funding their main purpose. Liberals know that the vast majority of our military dispise pacifist leftists, and they are simply trying to buy their votes.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 26th, 2008 at 9:43 am

O.T.,

I think we should revoke Jimma Carters passport. He is really doing a lot to help the anti-Semite and Islamist cause.

SgtPendleton says:

May 26th, 2008 at 10:54 am

D2, you know — have we’ve told you about 1000 times, that there’s a HUGE difference between criticizing the policies of the state of Israel and being an anti-Semite.

The state of Israel is its own entity – it’s not the same thing as the Jewish people or the Jewish faith.

Just because someone criticizes Israel does not make them an anti-Semite.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 26th, 2008 at 11:26 am

Sarge,

The Israeli’s have been more than fair when trying to work with the Palestinians, but it’s hard to deal with lunatics who want you wiped off the face of the earth. Carter is out of his mind for siding with the terrorists.

Krogy says:

May 26th, 2008 at 7:48 pm

Even Mahatma Gandhi realized that India needed one common language and ensured that India retained English as the official language to help unify the country after its newly won independence. Whatever questionable merits diversity may offer, America desperately needs one common language as the foundation for unity and culture. Multiple languages lead to bifurcation, dissension, disunity, and dissolution.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 26th, 2008 at 8:06 pm

“Multiple languages lead to bifurcation, dissension, disunity, and dissolution.”

Well said Krogy! While failed commun*st policy hurt the Soviet Union (I know this disturbs you Partisan), the fact that they had many languages hurt them as well.

O.T. says:

May 26th, 2008 at 10:00 pm

Just watched the recount movie. Not bad, a little one-sided as usual. The James Baker actor was excellent. The best man won, so all’s well that ends well.

O.T. says:

May 26th, 2008 at 10:04 pm

It’s Memorial Day, and the good folks at the New York Times thought it appropriate to not only attack the President’s position on a new G.I. Bill, but also to despicably lambaste him for “[h]aving saddled the military with a botched, unwinnable war,” and “having squandered soldiers’ lives and failed them in so many ways.”

On Memorial Day!

Thankfully, White House press secretary Dana Perino has already issued a written statement concerning this deplorable act by the Times on a sacred day when our nation commemorates its fallen heroes.

6th district Jim says:

May 27th, 2008 at 7:25 am

Jay says:
While I don’t have a problem with us marginalizing parthian (turn about is fair play after all), I don’t want to leave you with the impression that I completely dismiss all of his points either…

I agree fully. Actually Parth is often insightful and I have learned
much from some of his posts. He is also a gifted writer, ie. the chimp
thing was just plain funny, I had to reread is Sat as it made me
laugh-out-loud. How long must he spend composing that stuff, or is it composed on the fly?

I’m not sure if his GW harangue is just a schtick, or if he really
believes in the koolaid. Yet, the Strib’s GW story really was a kick
in his chops, and I wondered if/how he would reappear: funny, but
still defending NASA, which while contributing much to the US tech, has
had 2 shuttle debacles pretty much related to putting budget and
schedule pressures over astronaut safety. Yet, it’s Parth’s world
and I guess were just living in it……..I’ll still post some nice quotes for him. Why not club him with it?

parthian says:

May 27th, 2008 at 7:25 am

Darn, I forgot to wish OT a Happy Militarism Day.

What did you do for your act of worship on this “sacred day”, OT?

6th district Jim says:

May 27th, 2008 at 7:28 am

Parth will have to put these highled educated meteologists his “chimp” group. If he
thinks Belinda’s a male, then we know who the chimp really is….

WCCO’s Fairbourne said: he has not changed his mind significantly in the approximately eight years since he signed a petition stating that there is no scientific evidence that gases released by human activity will lead to catastrophic global warming, and that remediation efforts would be harmful.

KSTP-TV meteorologist Dave Dahl: in his regular afternoon weather spots on KSTP Radio (AM 1500), reads the record high and low for the day, illustrating extreme temperatures that are often many decades old. “More proof of global warming,” radio host Joe Soucheray typically responds with sarcasm. Then Dahl chimes in with an affirming comment, such as “crazy” or “you got it, Joe.”

KARE 11 meteorologist Belinda Jensen: said the weather experts there regard global warming as an evolving theory, likewise not their area of expertise. She and her colleagues at KARE 11 all feel that human enterprise may only be partly to blame for global warming.

6th district Jim says:

May 27th, 2008 at 7:55 am

Meanwhile, Mr nonscience Parth was dismissive of this jason lewis UN guest:

Michaels is a research professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia and visiting scientist with the Marshall Institute in Washington, D.C. He is a past president of the American Association of State Climatologists and was program chair for the Committee on Applied Climatology of the American Meteorological Society. Michaels is a contributing author and reviewer of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. His writing has been published in the major scientific journals, including Climate Research, Climatic Change, Geophysical Research Letters, Journal of Climate, Nature, and Science, as well as in popular serials such as the Washington Post, Washington Times, Los Angeles Times, USA Today, Houston Chronicle, and Journal of Commerce. He was an author of the climate “paper of the year” awarded by the Association of American Geographers in 2004. He has appeared on ABC, NPR’s “All Things Considered,” PBS, Fox News Channel, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, BBC and Voice of America. According to Nature magazine, Pat Michaels may be the most popular lecturer in the nation on the subject of global warming. Michaels holds A.B. and S.M. degrees in biological sciences and plant ecology from the University of Chicago, and he received a Ph.D. in ecological climatology from the University of Wisconsin at Madison in 1979.

It was a great interview, and still available at the website from 5/5/08;
Highlights (Cliff notes for Parth) included:
he is a GW’er, and thinks we could warm up to another 1.7 C in the next century;
he said recent science studies have shown the initial GW computer models overstated the impact of
CO2 on GW;
Ethanol has been a bust, and lead to food riots in some nations;
GW’ers also eschew clean coal, nuke, etc and only seem to support the wind and solar that: can’t meet our needs and often the supporters have a vest $ interest in the wind/solar tech;
Areas like the Arctic where much warmer in recent millenia, and nobody can
explain this phenom
and on and on and on….

6th district Jim says:

May 27th, 2008 at 7:59 am

OK, I better stop or a social worker might intervene for excessive cruelty to Parth.
It is a smackdown of epic BQ proportions, initiated by the Strib stories. Who knew?

OT:
I also saw Recount and thought it was pretty good, and reasonably fair (for Hollywood, anyway).

O.T. says:

May 27th, 2008 at 7:59 am

typical pathidiot. go ahead and belittle all of the fallen soldiers if you want- we expect it. it is a right the military fights for you. we also know the truth of the matter is that you do not possess enough integrity or courage to be a part of the military, so instead you decide to belittle them and call them murderers (yes I remember your past posts with sh*thead m blaine).

I attended my small community’s parade and procedded in the walk to city cemetery where they read aloud the names of fallen heroes. too bad you don’t have any friends or you could have organized them and came to protest it. another right the military has fought for you to keep.

show of hands – any other vets here. I had eight years and two military excursions with the 10th Mtn. (I didn’t consider them wars).

To preface- thanks to all of you also.

O.T. says:

May 27th, 2008 at 8:24 am

here is the most important tidbit left out completely of the recount movie:

Newspapers’ recount shows Bush prevailed
By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY
George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida’s disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 “undervote” ballots that were at the center of Florida’s disputed presidential election.

funny how they included nearly every other “fact” in the movie but this. Spacey even says in the movie that he “just wants to know who won”? Well, we do.

Richard says:

May 27th, 2008 at 8:49 am

does 6th district jim share the opiniion that dare to say it has that the current GI bill is a welfare program for veterans?

parthian says:

May 27th, 2008 at 8:52 am

Hoo-boy, lots of sound and fury signifying nothing from 6DJ, per usual.

Michaels is well known as an industry financed sceptic, one of a tiny handful and exactly the sort of non-serious person that a disinformation peddler like Pinhead Lewis could be expected have on for you “conservative” dopes to listen to.

Michaels also apparently can’t make himself understood very well, as you intially identified him as a “nonwarmer”. Now you are indeed forced to admit that he agrees with virtually all the physical science behind global warming theory, but just wants to minimize how warm the planet is going to get from fossil fuel CO2 emissions—which is a far cry your ongoing denial of the cause of global warming, manmade CO2 emissions.

Basically, 6DJ, you’ll never find anyone out there (even among the sceptics) who will support your comic, willfully ignorant views that we don’t know what’s causing the warming and that it’s nothing to worry about. That’s a pinhead view that even these sceptics couldn’t take.

Likewise, I’ll simply agree with local radar chart reader Belinda that global warming “is not their area of expertise” and leave it at that. But again, none of them are denying that we know the cause of the warming, and their professional meteorology association has endorsed the current theory of global warming. They don’t have the slightest expertise to challenge the future predictive models, and they admit it.

But as ever, you don’t look at all the information and just gobble down distorted bits and pieces, even when it doesn’t aid your extreme wingnut denialist viewpoint.

Sounds like a nice little ceremony, OT, certainly nothing to protest. But to elevate such sentiments into a “sacred day” is too pious by half.

The best thing we could do for the fallen vets and their sacrifice would be to start cutting immediately our bloated wasteful military, have many fewer soldiers in the future and actually fund all the vets promised benefits, instead of cutting them like your beloved Repubs always do. But you likely prefer the pious displays of “support” for soldiers, not actual support.

parthian says:

May 27th, 2008 at 9:03 am

Oh, and conservative wingnuts like the BQ Boys and their current “movement” pose a far greater risk to my civil rights and liberties than any organized foreign military force that has existed in the past century.

Just to put the “risk” in its proper perspective…..

O.T. says:

May 27th, 2008 at 10:05 am

oh yes, why would would I want benefits for myself and other vets? you are sooo smart.

so, do you limit your protests to funerals or what? code pink? 9-11 conspiracy? just wonderin.

Richard says:

May 27th, 2008 at 11:59 am

benefits for myself and other vets?

Sounds like welfare to me. Eh, D2? Isn’t that what you posted? Veterans benefits are a welfare program for vets. Just another liberal program to give servicepeople an excuse to leave the Armed services.

SgtPendleton says:

May 27th, 2008 at 1:37 pm

OT, if you can get past the anti-Bush rhetoric, the Times makes a strong case for the passage of that bill. The real problem Bush has with it is that it wasn’t written by a Republican. It was the idea of Jim Webb – Democrat from Virginia.

Bush played these kinds of games with vet benefits back in 2004, and now he’s doing it again. He doesn’t want to let a Democrat pass a bill that helps them in any way – he wants to be seen as the soldiers’ only advocate.

This is a very important benefit to soldiers, and Bush is treating it like a political football.

So if you must, criticize the NY Times editorial page for being liberal. But remember, there isn’t a single politician in Washington who’s worked harder for veterans in recent years than Jim Webb.

SgtPendleton says:

May 27th, 2008 at 1:47 pm

…and OT, let’s not forget who won more awards from veterans organizations than any other senator: D2SI’s favorite guy – Paul Wellstone.

Les says:

May 27th, 2008 at 2:34 pm

SgtP:(cermonial title, right?)

Interestingly, the ‘editorial’ isnt signed, but only refers to “this paper’ so we cant verify thier bona fides concerning military service. But their erroneous conclusion concerning a “strong military” is a good indication that the author knows absolutely nothing about things military.

Read the history books concerning the air war in the Pacific during WWII and tell me again that a 16 percent reduction in trained expierenced mid level NCO’s is offset by a 16 percent increase in new recruits. Note how they gloss over a reduction of 16 percent in the career force VS new recruits. It’s common knowledge that a 16 percent increase in enlistments doesnt result in a 16 percent increase in career NCO’s.

The bill has a couple of problems. first, it provides the benefits at the 3 year mark…. Well, normal enlistment for the USAF is 4 years, Why? most USAF career fields are highly technical and it doesnt pay to train a person for 1 to 2 years to become a 5 or 7 skill level and then start all over again 2 years later.

If you dont think this doesnt happen, ask the USAF what happened when they trained folks a novell admin in the late 90′s. It was almost impossible to keep a trained SSgt in the position due to the numerous job opportunities offered them on the outside.

The full ride at three years also leaves out the 2 year enlistee’s. The ones who really end up on the front line get nothing at all.

Second, it think it just a touch to generous and will affect career NCO retention to a greated extent than the CBO expects. A full free ride is a whole ‘nother animal than tuition assistance.

And if the battle of the pacific in WWII isnt enough to scare you away from an Army of raw recruits, ask any senior officer of any political persuasion what the backbone of his operation is. I think you already know the answer.

Having said all that, a substantial increase in the G.I. Bill benefits is in order.

O.T. says:

May 27th, 2008 at 3:05 pm

We will have to ask the professor, obama, about it. he is well versed in the military, after all, his uncle was one of the liberators at Auschwitz, he said yesterday. I was unaware that obama’s uncle was a Russian soldier though- that is odd, or maybe just another example of his tall tales the media overlooks.

SgtPendleton says:

May 27th, 2008 at 3:14 pm

Thanks for that thoughtful post, Les.

Traditionally, editorials don’t have bi-lines, nor are they signed by anyone. They’re written collectively by the paper’s editorial board, and it’s considered the “voice” of the paper (editors but not reporters – this is why I take issue with people who believe that a paper’s editorials demonstrate bias in the regular reporting)…in any case, you’re right – I’m sure none of them have much of a military background.

Clearly, there is no parity between 16% NCOs and 16% new recruits – however, your post assumes that all the soldiers who are leaving are NCOs – that’s not the case.

Also – the way the pay grades are structured, no one gets an increase for their first two years, then there are a couple of modest bumps after that – over the first two years. They could change that as well…We ask so much of our soliders, and frankly I think it sucks that we don’t pay them better, considering how much money we p1ss away. I’d be interested in seeing what percentage of the defense budget is pay.

Les, for me, this is a matter of principle – there are a lot of people out there who assume that our soldiers get a free ride already. They certainly deserve it, and I think we have a long way to go before soldiers’ benefits are “too generous”.

The reason Webb chose to make it 36 months is that it’s equal to 4 years of college (i.e. 9 months per year x 4 years = 36 months). It also provides the 2-year enlistees with an incentive to stick around longer.

O.T. says:

May 27th, 2008 at 3:18 pm

Barack Obama spoke about Auschwitz back in 2002 in his speech against the Iraq War:

My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain. I don’t oppose all wars.

All this would be great if it weren’t pure fiction. For starters, the Nazis destroyed the Treblinka death camp in 1943 after shooting the last prisoners, a group of Jewish girls.

Then there is the problem of the locations of Treblinka and Auschwitz. Both Nazi death camps were located inside Poland. Thus, no American troops ever entered the camps until years after the war was over.

Auschwitz was taken by the Soviet Union after the Nazis evacuated most of the prisoners. The retreating Nazis left those too weak or sick to walk behind. The 322nd Rifle Division of the Red Army liberated them on Jan. 27 1945.
So, it’s not the first time he talked about US soldiers at Auschwitz.
It’s just the first time he mentioned that his crazy uncle was there.

SgtPendleton says:

May 27th, 2008 at 3:28 pm

Nice homework OT — I hope you recognize that in the realm of verbal gaffes, Obama is but a mere amatuer when compared to the King of All Gaffes, George W Bush.

Jay says:

May 27th, 2008 at 4:06 pm

Fair enough assessment, Sgt…..but only one of them is running for president.

Jay says:

May 27th, 2008 at 4:10 pm

Personally, I’m less alarmed by the things Obama has said that are fabrications, than I am about some of the things he’s said that he’s being very honest about.

SgtPendleton says:

May 27th, 2008 at 5:19 pm

And THAT, Jay, is the essence of what bugs me more than anything about the Barack bashing.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 27th, 2008 at 6:17 pm

But is America ready for it’s first social*st President?

O.T. says:

May 27th, 2008 at 7:31 pm

The last sentence is the kicker- obama needs to return the money immediately!!!!

The co-founder of the radical anti-war group Code Pink has “bundled” more than $50,000 for Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, and pro-troops groups are demanding that he return the money.

Jodie Evans, a Code Pink leader, gathered at least $50,000 from friends and associates and donated it to Obama’s presidential campaign, according to information compiled by the nonpartisan watchdog group, Public Citizen.

Evans and her son, a student who lives at her Southern California address, each also gave the maximum individual allowable donation of $2,300 to Obama’s campaign.

The donations have raised questions about Obama’s association with the more radical elements of his base. Code Pink has harassed, vandalized and impeded military recruiters across the United States in a campaign it calls “counter-recruitment.”
The group also gave $600,000 to the families of Iraqi terrorists in Fallujah, whom it called “insurgents” fighting for their homes.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 27th, 2008 at 7:41 pm

O.T.,

I really don’t understand how someone running for Commander in Chief could accept money from such radical leftist anti-American supporters, but this isn’t the first time we have seen Obama with disturbing associations.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 27th, 2008 at 7:42 pm

O.T.,

I hope you don’t mind, but I would like to post this on Katherine Kerstin’s blog.

O.T. says:

May 27th, 2008 at 7:54 pm

go ahead, spread the word as it will never be in the actual star tribune paper. they had plenty of room to say mac was campaigning with bush today though. they had room for the “is that a naked woman in cheney’s sunglass reflection” too, but I can see how that is more important.

Dora says:

May 27th, 2008 at 8:23 pm

His “crazy uncle” OT? A fabrication Jay? The Holocaust Museum confirmed that his great-uncle helped liberate Buchenwald. Yeah, he got the name of the camp wrong. Oh my! How can anybody be president who got the name of the death camp wrong that his great-uncle helped liberate!!

Richard says:

May 27th, 2008 at 8:37 pm

Radical left wing fringe groups? Like those who would call veteran’s benefits a wellfare program? D2 you are a coward and a moron and I can’t wait for your next gem.

O.T. says:

May 27th, 2008 at 9:18 pm

Face it Dora, if it had been W saying it, you would have called him a liar- very disingeuous, very typical behavior.

How about fessin up that he makes sh*t up as he goes and the media laps it up.

O.T. says:

May 27th, 2008 at 9:23 pm

Where in the world is Auschwitz?

Auschwitz, January 1945.

“I had an uncle who was one of the, um, who was part of the first American troops to go into Auschwitz and liberate the concentration camps. And the story in our family is that when he came home he just went up in the attic and he didn’t leave the house for six months.”
–Barack Obama, Memorial Day speech, Las Cruces, NM.

In an attempt to burnish his credentials with America’s veterans, Barack Obama has frequently talked about his grandfather “who served in Patton’s army.” He has now added a new episode to his World War II repertoire: the uncle who liberated Auschwitz. Unfortunately, the story shows that the presumptive Democratic nominee has a poor grasp of European history and geography.

The Facts
UPDATED TUESDAY 5:30 P.M.

Auschwitz is located in southern Poland, near the city of Krakow. It was liberated by the Red Army on January 27, 1945. At the time, U.S. armies were still on the western borders of Germany, a thousand miles away, regrouping after the Battle of the Bulge. The Americans had not even crossed the Rhine at this point.

The Obama campaign now says that Obama was referring to his great-uncle on his mother’s side, and the camp in question was not Auschwitz, but Ohrdruf, which was part of the Buchenwald camp system in Lower Saxony. Ohrdruf was the first camp to be liberated by the Americans on April 4, 1945, and it was visited a week later by Generals Eisenhower, Patton, and Bradley. Eisenhower later wrote to his wife that he “never dreamed that such cruelty, bestiality and savagery could really exist in this world.”

The campaign declined to release the name of Obama’s great-uncle, apparently because he is an elderly man who does not want to be disturbed by reporters. Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said that he served in the 89th Infantry Division which crossed the Rhine river in March 1945.

UPDATE TUESDAY 6 P.M.

The attempt to shield the name of the Obama relative who took part in the liberation of Ohrdruf lasted about an hour. According to the Associated Press, it is Charlie Payne, the brother of Obama’s maternal grandmother, Madelyn Lee Payne.

Obama’s Auschwitz claim, made during a Memorial Day appearance in New Mexico, was first reported in blog postings by Washington Post reporter Karl Vick and by CBS News. Neither report provided a direct quote, raising the possibility that Obama might have been misquoted. I asked Vick to go back and check his recording of the event.

The above quote is taken from a verbatim transcript. Prior to talking about Auschwitz, Obama mentioned his grandfather (the one in Patton’s army), recalling that he did not like talking about the war. This led into a riff on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, a term that Obama said was unknown during World War II and the Vietnam War. “People basically had to handle it on their own.” He gave the example of his uncle who hid away in the attic after liberating Auschwitz.

Granted, it is getting late in the campaign. The candidates are tired, and prone to making silly mistakes. Many Americans might have problems distinguishing Buchenwald and Ohrdruf from Auschwitz. But should we not expect more from a Harvard-educated presidential candidate? Is it too much to ask that an aspiring commander-in-chief knows (1) that Auschwitz (like many of the other Nazi death camps) is in Poland, and (2) that the eastern advance of the U.S. Army in World War II stopped on the river Elbe? Let me know what you think.

The Pinocchio Test
Before hearing from the Obama campaign, I gave the candidate four Pinocchios for this howler. I am subtracting one Pinocchio in view of the explanation that Obama confused the two concentration camps and that the underlying story was accurate. Three Pinocchios for “significant factual errors.”

Richard says:

May 27th, 2008 at 9:25 pm

The difference is when Bush the lesser lied, 4000 US service men and women died.

Dora says:

May 27th, 2008 at 9:27 pm

What sh*t has he made up OT?

Dora says:

May 27th, 2008 at 9:30 pm

How many pinocchio’s would McCain get for his significant factual errors about Sunni’s and Shia’s?

Cash N. Carey says:

May 27th, 2008 at 10:35 pm

Barack Obama is seeing fallen war hero’s in his audience. His quote from Monday:

“On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors it’s unbroken line of fallen heroes, and I see many of them in the audience here today…”

He is as nutty as a Dora.

God bless you President Bush!

Dora says:

May 27th, 2008 at 11:09 pm

God bless President Bush for all the nutty things he’s said over the years! Waiting for OT to point out CNC’s “very disingenuous, very typical behavior”.

SgtPendleton says:

May 27th, 2008 at 11:20 pm

“How about fessin up that he makes sh*t up as he goes and the media laps it up.”

I’m sorry, but gimme a break OT — you’ve proven that you’re capable of intelligent discourse. Why do you pull this crap? You’re obviously very angry about Obama, much like you were angry about McCain before he got the nomination.

Why do you go after Obama over this minor gaffe? People like Dora probably conclude it’s because you don’t have much to say about policy – and I know that’s not the case. Don’t fall back in with the pea brains. So why not criticize Obama’s foreign policy ideas? Or his tax ideas?

Open your mind a little, and you might find that the world isn’t such a hostile place.

SgtPendleton says:

May 27th, 2008 at 11:39 pm

OT pasted: “But should we not expect more from a Harvard-educated presidential candidate? Is it too much to ask that an aspiring commander-in-chief knows (1) that Auschwitz (like many of the other Nazi death camps) is in Poland, and (2) that the eastern advance of the U.S. Army in World War II stopped on the river Elbe?”

I’m sorry, but this is a battle that the Obama haters will lose. How about a Havard-educated Commander in Chief who doesn’t know the difference between Austria and Austrailia? Or who thinks “strategery” is a word?

Bushisms (abridged)

“More and more of our imports come from overseas.”

“Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB-GYNs aren’t able to practice their love with women all across this country.”

“I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn’t do my job.”

“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.”

“Do you have blacks, too?” –to Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001

“If this were a dictatorship, it’d be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I’m the dictator.”

“Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?”

“Laura and I really don’t realize how bright our children is sometimes until we get an objective analysis.”

“Marijuana? Cocaine? I’m not going to talk about what I did as a child.”

“My job is a decision-making job, and as a result, I make a lot of decisions.”

“That’s why we are inconveniencing air traffickers, to make sure nobody is carrying weapons on airplanes.”

“Suiciders are willing to kill innocent life in order to send the projection that this is an impossible mission.”

“I heard somebody say, ‘Where’s (Nelson) Mandela?’ Well, Mandela’s dead. Because Saddam killed all the Mandelas.” [Nelson Mandela is not dead]

Here’s my favorite: “You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror.” –interview with CBS News’ Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 7:23 am

I was wondering when, on a thread about English being the official language, the irony kicks in that we have a president that can’t speak English.

Les says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:00 am

Good point Richard.

Maybe they stressed Eubonics in his grade school.

6th district Jim says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:01 am

Parth says:
They don’t have the slightest expertise to challenge the future predictive models, and they admit it.

Alas, all we get on the BQ are Parth opinions about Parth positions. And of course, Michels is bought and pain for by “industry,” but the UN would never distort science facts for money. Oh wait, I posted that example on AIDS, too.

I am so sorry to present actual quotes from some of America’s most highly trained citizens.
And I do like your incredible, almost shameless, insertion of the word
“slightest.” It is you at your very disinformation best!
It’s been a bad week for Parth man, that’s for sure.
But at least he had the courage to reappear……many would
have left the BQ in shame.

6th district Jim says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:10 am

Richard says:
does 6th district jim share the opiniion that dare to say it has that the current GI bill is a welfare program for veterans

Hello Richard.
I’m a war vet, and of course it is a free benefit program for people who actually deserve some benes. I will defer to our elected officials to determine the size and methods of this benefit program. A healthy debate is now ongoing but I think they will do right by our men and women.

As for Obama:
His gaffes lately are laughable (seeing dead people, Camp liberation, 57 states)
but harmless. I think some here recall the days of potatoe and now see proof of the amazing media double standard that has existed in our lifetime.

Jay says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:40 am

Richard, is it wrong to call veterans benefits ‘welfare?’ That’s essentially what those benefits are, but I cetainly have no problem with that.

Its kind of refreshing to see benefits paid to those who have actually done something for this country instead of just going to those who have done absolutely nothing.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 9:01 am

It is not a “free” benefit program, it is simply what is owed. Support for the troops means more then putting a plastic yellow magnet on your fender. McCain, Kline, and Bachmann voted against supporting the troops. We can afford to send them into a meat grinder but can’t afford to compensate them properly once they come home.

parthian says:

May 28th, 2008 at 9:11 am

You’re a very competitive guy, 6DJ, and it kills you to get your a** kicked so thoroughly, so you really should stop posting about topics where your mind-numbing ignorance is at its most comic, such as global warming.

You ignore virtually every point destroying your prior post, as usual. And if you knew the slightest thing about the IPCC meetings you’d know they don’t perform any independent “research”, but instead simply review the state of the current existing research in reaching their conclusions about global warming, prior research funded by others all over the globe. So your UN “funding” point is meaningless.

And apparently you “think” that every IPCC climate scientist (and their government participants) have (unanimously) “distorted” the existing warming research decade after decade solely to keep attending grueling, difficult conferences every 5 years to affirmatively mislead the world on the state of the earth’s climate. With no dissents. Just so they can have the next IPCC meeting in 5 years “funded”. What a cretin.

Nor is the UN going to get any future “funding” to itself stop wordwide CO2 emissions–that will be up to individual nations worldwide. The IPCC is just issuing the warning. It isn’t going to financially “benefit” from having action taken.

And again, you haven’t the slightest idea what new warming research is currently being focused on by the scientists.

So your “argument” is simply wrongheaded and ridiculous, as usual. You simply cannot think, as a result of having your brain poisoned by tons of “conservative” claptrap, but we’ve known that for years now. But keep coming up with your foolish statements —you’re a great punching bag! (insert smiley face(s) here!)

parthian says:

May 28th, 2008 at 9:25 am

It’s great that Obama’s dumb misstatements can generate so much wingnut interest in fairly arcane trivia like the geographic location of Auschwitz, Treblinka, Buchenwald and Bergen-Belsen and where exactly American and Russian forces were when those camps were liberated. It’s a mini-WWII history course!

Now if only Obama could get the wingnut email teams (which OT happily participates in) to closely look at things like our massively increased national debt, decline of the dollar, massive increase in personal debt, insolvent banking and credit system, federal budget deficits, actual cost of the Iraq “war”, numbers of injured and disabled soldiers (and the lifetime of costs for them), maybe we could get somewhere!

While these recent gaffes are meaningless, Obama really needs to stop being so sloppy, especially when running in the wake of the greatest pinhead gaffemeister ever to hold the office, George the Boob.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 9:34 am

Bush the lesser’s gaffes were amusing but more distressing are his outright lies. Scott McClellen’s new book reveals how outrageously this administration lied and manipulated public opinion in it’s march to war. Surely war crime charges are warranted here.

parthian says:

May 28th, 2008 at 9:55 am

Richard, I was just going to bring the latest Scotty McClellan hilarity up.

The Bushco WH press sec now openly describes his job (at least as to Iraq) as running “a propaganda campaign”. And openly declares that the “Liberal Media” was “far too deferential to the WH and the administration”, and indeed even mocks the very idea that the press is “liberal”.

Not much of a surprise for informed people on the Left, who have been saying such things for years and years. And the BQ wingnuts will never get a clue about anything, including this.

As we find out every day, from the Pentagon’s phony “TV gen’rals” propaganda campaign to the day-late-and-a-dollar-short McClellan, our MSM is simply a Repub propaganda operation that feeds conservative lies to the gullible nation.

Yet the MSM still not enough of a tissue of conservative lies for a true connisseur of conservative crapola like OT, who has to get his daily info exclusively from avowedly rightwing-certified internet and (increasingly) email-tree garbage troughs! Gorge away!

Jay says:

May 28th, 2008 at 10:02 am

parthian: “Now if only Obama could get the wingnut email teams (which OT happily participates in) to closely look at things like our massively increased national debt, decline of the dollar, massive increase in personal debt, insolvent banking and credit system, federal budget deficits, actual cost of the Iraq “war”, numbers of injured and disabled soldiers (and the lifetime of costs for them), maybe we could get somewhere!”

I agree that would be a much more beneficial focus. While Obama’s ‘get out now’ stance on iraq would certainly reduce the number of casualties (at least in the short-term), I haven’t seen much at all from him that would adequately address any of the other imprtant issues you mentioned. Conversely, I have heard him take stances that would compound some of those problems, in my opinion. That’s why I don’t plan to vote for him.

At the end fo the day, I really don’t give a damn that he doesn’t know European geography as well as he maybe should.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 10:18 am

McCain represents Bush’s third term. More of the same policy on war, sweetheart deals for corporations, and tax breaks for the uber wealthy. Meanwhile the manufacturing base of the country continues it’s exodus to India and China and the country takes another step toward a feudal state.

parthian says:

May 28th, 2008 at 11:15 am

Obama doesn’t say “get out now” in ANY objective sense, but don’t trouble yourself over that, jay, you are a classic “low information” ideological voter and couldn’t cast a sensible ballot that would help the country to save your life.

And McCain’s stated positions will exacerbate virtually every domestic issue I identified (while Obama’s will not), but that couldn’t possibly matter to a voter like you.

Militarist dead-enderism is your single issue, you and around 25% of the country.

Les says:

May 28th, 2008 at 11:26 am

“Obama doesn’t say “get out now” in ANY objective sense.”

maybe not this week, but he has in the past, and I suspect he will again.

“McCain represents Bush’s third term.”

Talk about MSM “lies to the gullible nation”.

Les says:

May 28th, 2008 at 11:42 am

SgtP;

Aparently the BQ server ate my response to you concerning military pay.

The short version is dont confuse the pay chart which shows pay increases for time in service every two years with the actual payments to a given enlistee after two or three years. At three years, the average enlistee will most likely be an E-4, not an E-1.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 11:53 am

Talk about MSM “lies to the gullible nation”.

Please refer to Scott McClellen’s thoughts on the compliant media and Bush the lesser’s illegal propaganda campaign. McSame will continue the neocon’s destruction of our nation. Not because he believes in it but because he owes them.

Jay says:

May 28th, 2008 at 12:23 pm

“Obama doesn’t say “get out now” in ANY objective sense, but don’t trouble yourself over that, jay”

Feel free to clear that up for me, parth. Please tell us all how dramatically different the reality of his message is. I’m curious. During the debates, that seemed to be his plan. Has that changed since then?

Jay says:

May 28th, 2008 at 12:25 pm

….also worth noting that if this is *not* his solution for Iraq, he then fails to offer solutions for any of the criteria you mentioned earlier, instead of merely failing to offer solutions to 5 out of 6, as I had stated.

Much better.

Jay says:

May 28th, 2008 at 12:48 pm

classic parthian: “you are a classic “low information” ideological voter and couldn’t cast a sensible ballot that would help the country to save your life.”

That’s quite a statement coming from a person who obviously has no clue as to whom I’ve casted my votes for oveer the years…..and even if I broke it down in detail for you, you would call me a liar due to the number of Democrats I’ve supported over the years. You are a total hack.

Les says:

May 28th, 2008 at 2:31 pm

richard;

If your going to quote McClellan, please use the entire passage, which goes on to say:

“In this case, the `liberal media’ didn’t live up to its reputation”

Your use of the term McSame is a prime example of just exactly what you and Chicken Little are complaining about, your just too biased to see it.

I will give you some credit though, Unlike partial brain, you at least have the guts to use your name.

Les says:

May 28th, 2008 at 2:38 pm

Jay;

Dont get to upset by a description of you written by a prejudicial racist.

The fact you dare disagree with “it” tells “it’ everything it thinks it knows.

parthian says:

May 28th, 2008 at 3:12 pm

jay and Pinhead Les, Obama’s Iraq plan is to begin withdrawing troops (brigade by brigade) until all combat troops are withdrawn by June 2010, 16 months after his inauguration. The withdrawal can be lenghtened if circumstances require it.

It’s a plan, not a straightjacket, and his main guiding idea is that we should be “as prudent getting out of Iraq as we were rash and reckless getting in”.

McCain first said he’d be delighted to continue our Iraq Occupation for a Hundred Years. That didn’t go over too well. His latest gambit is to “predict victory” (undefined, of course) by the end of his first term in Jan 2013–so four more years of occupation, at least. (Depending on the “prediction”!)

Feel free to explain how such Obama’s plan of a phased 16 month withdrawal conforms with the English phrase “Get out now”. Thanks.

Jay says:

May 28th, 2008 at 3:16 pm

Les, as I said in a thread a while back- maybe even this one, given their frequency- parthian has moved from irritating to entertaining.

Jay says:

May 28th, 2008 at 3:20 pm

parthian: “Feel free to explain how such Obama’s plan of a phased 16 month withdrawal conforms with the English phrase “Get out now”. Thanks.”

Thanks for the clarrification. I stand corrected. His plan is not to ‘get out now,’ but rather to get out by 2010, unless the situation merits staying there after all. Given that, he won’t save as many casualties as i mistakenly gave him credit for earlier.

So now he’s 0-for-6 on the list of important criteria that parthian listed above, instead of the 1for-6 that I erroneously claimed. I thank you for clearing that up for me. Feel free to speak up again, if i am giving Obama credit where it is undeserved.

parthian says:

May 28th, 2008 at 4:07 pm

Ha-ha, great sophistry, jay! A revealing glimpse into the workings of your mind…

But at least we were finally “united” by sharing a common language!

SgtPendleton says:

May 28th, 2008 at 4:11 pm

Richard – you’re kind of the idealogical reverse image of D2, aren’t you? Nothin personal dude, but you’re just regurgitating the same party-line type stuff that D2 does.

Jay says:

May 28th, 2008 at 4:29 pm

parthian, we are apparently unuited by much more than a common (if not ‘official’) language. We agree on 5 other very important factors that voters *should* be weighing going into this election. Those items that you listed were the national debt, decline of the dollar, current levels of consumer debt, banking/credit system deficiencies, and budget deficits.

Those should all be very important issues to all of us, and definately are to me. My problem is that Obama hasn’t furnished me with his solutions to any ofthose problems, and he has managed to offer solutions that I believe will make some of them even worse.

As to the inner workings of my mind…..don’t waste too much time trying to read into that. I’m a pretty simple thinker, as you are so often quick to point out.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 4:33 pm

If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq.

The collapse of the administration’s rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. . . . In this case, the “liberal media” didn’t live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served.

There’s the complete quote Less. McClellan pretty much lays out the case for the upcoming war crimes trial.

Jay says:

May 28th, 2008 at 4:34 pm

….and FWIW, the Obama on Iraq point hardly passes for sophism. The fact that you kind of lost track of yourself does not constitute anything deliberate on my part.

Jay says:

May 28th, 2008 at 4:38 pm

Richard: “There’s the complete quote Less. McClellan pretty much lays out the case for the upcoming war crimes trial.”

Correct me if I’m wrong Richard, but a couple of years ago, wasn’t the left dismissing McClelland as some sort of ‘lap dog’ that was merely spewing the rhetoric of his ‘handlers?’

If that’s the case, what’s a more realistic scenerio….. that he’s somehow completely changed as a person? Or that the ‘lap’ and ‘handlers’ in question are now simply someone else?

O.T. says:

May 28th, 2008 at 4:52 pm

For years, libs call mccellan a liar, then he writes a bunch of crap to make money and they think he walks on water. typical. funny how there is always an inflamnatory story or two when they are releasing a book, i would be more impressed if he had said this bs when it supposedly happened. otherwise too little, too late. it is much like the oj pal who comes out now after the trial is well over and cannot be retried and says he destroyed evidence for oj, oh yeah, i forgot to mention he was releasing a book too.

Dora says:

May 28th, 2008 at 6:34 pm

Actually OT, he’s still a liar. And he’s pathetically trying to make money off the lies he told by telling us what we already know. Can’t imagine who is gullible enough to buy his book.

O.T. says:

May 28th, 2008 at 7:19 pm

I hear he has been subpeonaed to congress for this- i hope he can back up his sh*t or he will be spending all of his book money on attorney fees.

thats funny dora, that you only believe the things he says that agree with what you think. in my book, a liar is a liar. you can never fullt trust someone who has been caught before.

Dora says:

May 28th, 2008 at 7:41 pm

So was he lying then or is he lying now, OT?

O.T. says:

May 28th, 2008 at 7:41 pm

Top 11 Revelations in Scott McClellan’s New Book
11. Everyone in the Bush administration was evil and an idiot (except for Scott McClellan)

10. Scott McClellan has a perfect record of nailing every female White House correspondent since 2003.

9. He always hated it when Rove snidely compared him to the Civil War general of the same last name

8. The hurricane machine is real, and it’s spectacular

7. He began to turn against Bush after he gave McClellan the nickname “Koko” instead of “T-bone”

6. Scott McClellan’s family was being held in Guantanamo Bay and threatened with torture if he didn’t lie for the administration

5. Dick Cheney actually ordered Hamilton Lux to dump toxic waste into Half-Moon Bay

4. America didn’t even import foreign oil until 2001

3. Donald Rumsfeld barred Scott McClellan from important meetings because he was jealous that Scott McClellan was so good looking.

2. Whenever he asked the President for information he was told to “Just get it directly from Limbaugh”

1. The publishing royalty for a political expose is 250% higher than for a plain old memoir

dare2sayit.com says:

May 28th, 2008 at 7:43 pm

I think McClennan is more interesting is selling books to blame America first liberals and making millions than being honest and doing what is right for America.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 7:52 pm

D2 you think the GI Bill is a welfare program so there’s the standard. Just be quiet and go lay down by your dish you fascist idiot. Go talk to Katherine, she’s of an intellectual level you can comprehend.

I think the real big question here is, “Is McClellan lieing now or was he lieing while he was working for Bush the lesser?”

I would have to go with the later because of all the evidence that Bush was lieing the country into war while McClellan was in his post.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:05 pm

(From Wednesdays Strib business section)

In another example of culture clash with Muslim immigrants, six Somali woman are now insisting on wearing head to toe Muslim garb while working, instead of the uniforms the New Brighton tortilla factory requires.

The Muslim pressure group CAIR (Council of American Islamist Relations) is of course involved and a frivolous lawsuit is probably in the works.

Why the hell can’t people assimilate in this country any more?

dare2sayit.com says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:12 pm

Richard,

McClellan is lying out of greed and maybe a grudge. It’s sad to see someone hurt our country for money like this, especially right after Memorial Day when we honor our brave soldiers who gave their lives for our freedom.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:13 pm

Because you are a racist little nazi prick. Question asked. Question answered.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:21 pm

Richard,

Let me guess, you are a member of the GREEN (Watermellon) party, you know green out the outside, RED on the the inside.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:21 pm

You, of course mean, our brave welfare recipients.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:23 pm

Get some new material. Seen that before and it’s as idiotic as the first time I saw it.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:26 pm

And let me guess, you are a member of the American Nazi Party, you know, fascist racist white power idiot inside and outside.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:35 pm

Dick,

My views would probably align more with JFK’s than yours. As you know the democrat party has moved so far to the left that even Joe Leiberman is no longer welcome.

I would say that your political views would sit just to the left of Karl Marx.

Richard says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:50 pm

You know as much about Jack Kennedy as Thomas Paine. Which is to say, next to nothing. I know I’m going to regret this but I’m going to recommend something to you. Read some history. Read the constitution. Read and THINK about the Bill of Rights. Read Common Sense. Read Hamilton’s biography. Read Jefferson’s biography. Read Franklin’s biography. Read Adam’s biography. When you get all that done, then you can talk to me. PUTZ.

Cash N. Carey says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:51 pm

Senator McCain placed Obama in a conundrum today. Since Obama has stated he would unconditionally meet face-to-face with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, he ought to meet at least once one-on-one with Gen. David Petraeus.

It shows everyone whose side Senator Obama is cheering for. Typical lib.

Cash N. Carey says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:52 pm

Richard, you are a Dick.

dare2sayit.com says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:55 pm

Richard,

What the hell are you talking about. Reading history won’t change the fact that today’s democrat party has moved to the extreme looney left and you know it!

Goodnight everyone!

O.T. says:

May 28th, 2008 at 8:59 pm

I wonder if ricky will be contributing something besides nazi accusations and other insults?

6th district Jim says:

May 28th, 2008 at 9:32 pm

parthian says:
May 28th, 2008 at 9:11 am
You’re a very competitive guy, 6DJ, and it kills you to get your a** kicked so thoroughly, so you really should stop posting about topics where your mind-numbing ignorance is at its most comic,
But keep coming up with your foolish statements —you’re a great punching bag!

Yes, and as the PeeWee Herman of the blog world, you’re quite a sight
on the old speedbag. Ouch! No, just kidding, but live long and prosper
in your delusional basement. And keep telling your Luke Skywalker and
Leia dolls you rule!
As for me, I’m happy to post the recent interview of a UN climate scientist,
as well as the thoughts of the top local meteorologists. Michels, Belinda
Dave, and Fairborne are good company.
Meanwhile, your 9:11 IPCC “points” had the clarity of a Gilligan story to the
Skipper. Michels did discuss the latest research but learning is beneath a basement jedi.

How phony is Parth?
Parth says:
“They don’t have the slightest expertise to challenge the future predictive models, and they admit it”.

I didn’t see that admission. “Squishy science” was actually used.
Live long and prosper PeeWee Parth, titan of his basement, but with his misquoting and misleading, is a blog
titan of disinformation.

6th district Jim says:

May 28th, 2008 at 9:45 pm

And let me quote from once more from the life of Frank Lucas:

“You know, there’s a difference between quitting while you’re
ahead, and just quitting.”

Yes, it takes quite an ego (i.e basement jedi parth) to flail
away with his laughable GW views with all the easily accessible science interviews the local media has presented
this May. Parth, you should have avoided this topic after
April, but common sense isn’t your strong suit.
And at least wait for a spring where temps ice out the lakes by the fishing opener.

SgtPendleton says:

May 29th, 2008 at 6:56 am

Richard, despite what you seem to believe, there is actually a level of civility here at BQ, and you’re out of line.

D2SI – assimilation doesn’t require that someone give up their religion, and the hijab is an important part of that for some Islamic women. I’d be interested in hearing more about this case. Obviously the people running that factory aren’t parents – otherwise, they’d have told the women they could wear the hijab all they want…as long as it is underneath their uniform :)

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 8:06 am

Yawn, Chicken little has plainly lost it.

July 23, 2007
From the mouth of the Obammer Answereing a question about pulling out of Iraq.

“So we have to begin a phased withdrawal; have our combat troops out by March 31st of next year; and initiate the kind of diplomatic surge that is necessary in these surrounding regions to make sure that everybody is carrying their weight.

And that is what I will do on day one, as president of the United States, if we have not done it in the intervening months.”

That would be march of 2008, Seeing how your ability to reason or count is in question. He would not even had been elected yet. (assuming the absolute worst.)

Now, your probably gonna say something like “He changed his plan” to which I will add his complete lack of understanding of the issues leads to these idiotic plans in the first place.

Or did just start lying “on day one” and has sent a letter to Baghdad saying he really didnt mean it….

parthian says:

May 29th, 2008 at 8:57 am

6DJ, you seem to be the one with overly intimate knowledge of Star Wars, so I’ll chalk this up to more projection on your part. Your family must’ve given their Chewbacca a big Birthday present of all the movies in one excitin’ box set! They know it’s his All-Time Fav’rite!

Try reading the article again for the scope of their “expertise”—or better yet, learn something about meteorology! And of course you can’t comprehend my argument destroying your “UN funding” nonsense–no smiley faces! Plus the Skipper was sort of a dullard as I recall—but maybe you’ve just been given the complete “set” of Gilligan episodes for Christmas!

As for the rest of your post, it’s just simple denial, insults and babble, indicative of the pummelling you’ve received. Time to regroup and get your “wits” back.

Pinhead Les, that likely was Obama discussing a particular funding/withdrawal bill in the senate, in the days when we thought the 2006 election was about ending the Iraq Occupation.

My earlier description of the 16 month phased withdrawal is from Obama’s website and has ALWAYS been his position on what he proposes be done as president. He couldn’t really withdraw the troops “as president” by March 31, 2008, could he, Mr. Counting Man?

This isn’t really a controversial point, but I’ve found from observing the wingnuts at BQ that EVERY basic fact is highly controversial, given the non-functioning state of the conservative “mind”.

It will take a long time to get out of Bush’s Quagmire whenever we begin. Almost a trillion dollars poured down a rathole, with another trillion in the pipeline. For absolutely nothing of value to this country.

That’s what you crazed fearmongering militarists have given us, that’s Exhibit A of your “judgement”. And you cogs still can’t even figure out that it was all done to “liberate” Iraq’s oil from Saddam.

Jay says:

May 29th, 2008 at 9:19 am

“And you cogs still can’t even figure out that it was all done to “liberate” Iraq’s oil from Saddam.”

……along with the rest of the country/region. Your comment isn’t false, just misleading. Everything got liberated from Saddam, and on that list of things was certainly oil, due simply to the fact that it is there.

parthian says:

May 29th, 2008 at 9:54 am

More sophism—my point (quite clearly) is that the reason we invaded Iraq was to liberate its oil.

No oil, no invasion. Get it now?

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 9:59 am

Partial brain beleives a Jul 07 CNN YouTube “PRESIDENTIAL” debate answer was “about the ’06 elections”

And your right, like I pointed out above, he has the same problem counting you have.

I see the UN Secretary General doesn’t seem to agree with you this morning, but I guess he’s a pinhead too.

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 10:04 am

Here a link for ya Feeble brain:

http://www.cfr.org/publication/13876/democratic_debate_transcript_cnnyoutube.html

I know it’ll be difficult, but try a control F and type in Mitch, you’ll see Sen Brainlessness response to the question “How do we pull out of Iraw now?”

Of course we all know this debate was about the ’06 election BECASE PARTIAL BRAIN SAID SO.

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 10:08 am

And McCain’s plan for Iraq is more of the same? Continue until the Iraqis stand up, then we can stand down? The consequences for early withdrawal are dire and potentially disastrous for the United States? Sounds like Bush’s third term to me. Meanwhile, more tax cuts for the wealthy and more debt for the rest of us. McCain is offering nothing new and is either pandering to the far right and doesn’t actually believe what he’s saying or, and this is even more frightening, he does believe what he’s selling.

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 10:15 am

Richard;

Then I guess were looking at Clinton’s 5th term, as the troops havent been withdrawn from Bosnia and Kosovo yet either, eh?

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 10:26 am

Also, as I mentioned to Chicken Little, “more of the same” seems to be working, according to the UN.

If ya wanna complain about Iraq, complain about the request to forgive their debt when they are piling up oil revenues. (funny thing about the war for oil claim, iraq getting these revenues, not the U.S. or it’s corporations)

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 10:40 am

European Union defense ministers agreed Monday to keep the bloc’s 2,500 peacekeepers in Bosnia, citing concern that tensions in Kosovo could spill over into other parts of the Balkans.

Less, please define “working”. The UN is suggesting progress is being made concerning long term political stability? Or is “working” simply a reduction in short term metrics? And “working” is after more then 4000 US service men and women killed, ten of thousands US service men and women permanently disabled and in need of life long care, millions of innocent Iraqi men, women, and children killed and wounded. At this rate will we be able to leave Iraq before 10,000 US service men and women are dead? Will we be able to leave Iraq while there’s anyone left alive in Iraq? When is enough dead, enough?

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 10:55 am

Richard:

I’ll let you read it yourself.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7424782.stm

When is enough dead, enough? . What a question..jeez.

So you’d prefer we leave immediately and then go back in 5 years to spend 4000 more lives getting to the point we are at right now. Regardless of your opinion on if we should have invaded Iraq, the fact remains we did, and at this point we have to take the most prudent action, which is NOT to take our ball and go home just to have to re engage at a later point. Was Rumsfeld plan to “win the peace’ wrong, looks that way, he refused to provide enough personnel to secure the area after combat with Sadaam’s army was over. so what’s your point?

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 11:05 am

So you’d prefer we leave immediately…

Nope, that’s not an option but we can, over say, the next 16 months or so, sharply reduce our troop numbers and force Iraqi forces to assume the responsibility for their nation’s security. The problem we’ve created in Iraq can no longer be solved militarily and it certainly can’t be solved by staying on the same path we’ve been on for the last 6 years. McCain offers nothing new. Or at least, that’s what he’s saying. Again, does he really believe his campaign lit, or is he just pandering to the far right extremists.

O.T. says:

May 29th, 2008 at 11:25 am

Was George Soros behind the publication of Scott McClellan’s book? Meredith Vieira had the perfect opportunity this morning to find out—but chose to punt. The Today co-anchor certainly had the time: her much-touted exclusive interview with the author of What Happened ranged over the show’s first two half-hours. But even when McClellan himself put the issue on the table—citing his publisher by name and alluding to its philosophy—Vieira failed to pursue a line of questioning that could have put matters in an explosive new light.

As MRC’s Brent Baker has detailed, McClellan’s publisher, PublicAffairs:

is part of the Perseus Books Group, which also owns Nation Books, “a project of The Nation Institute” which publishes the magazine of the same name, and Vanguard Press, whose home page now features The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, a new book by Vincent Bugliosi that “presents a tight, meticulously researched legal case that puts George W. Bush on trial in an American courtroom for the murder of nearly 4,000 American soldiers fighting the war in Iraq.”

Baker also notes that PublicAffairs is the publisher of no fewer than six books by Soros himself, and that McClellan’s editor, Peter Osnos, who acknowledges having “worked very closely” with the author, is a liberal pundit in his own right.

Finally, Little Green Footballs has documented that there are several Perseus companies that actually include “Soros” as part of their name, as in Perseus-Soros Management, LLC.

Put it all together, and there’s every reason to wonder whether Soros isn’t behind McClellan’s manifesto.

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 11:29 am

Well, when you put it that way, I dont disagree, I surely like to see the troops come home also. When the situation warrants it.

The trouble comes in with preordained timetables driving the truck instead of actual results.

The solutions to the problems are indeed political, but there remains a need for the U.S. to provide security while the political solutions are derived. Remember, it took 14 years for the U.S. to solve it political issues after 1776, and D.C. was created because Pennslyvania would not gaurantee the safety of the Continental Congress.

As far as McCain goes, the dems are being disengenious about his 100 year statement. Given the fact we are still in Korea, Germany, Britian, Bosnia, Kosovo etc, trying to make hay saying he supports 100 year of combat is rediculous.

parthian says:

May 29th, 2008 at 11:45 am

Richard, the pinhead right and people like Pinhead Les cannot do anything but sloganeer, hence the “leave immediately!” charge when the absolute soonest that we’ll ever have the troops out of Iraq is July 2010 under Obama. As you can see by his hysteria over my post, he just can’t think straight.

Lester thinks that Iraq is a “job”, sort of like mowing your lawn, and you don’t “quit” before you’re “done”. That’s “victory”!

But under wingnut theory, we entered Iraq because the Madman Saddam had WMDs. Saddam is now dead, and he never had any WMDs whatsoever. But demands for withdrawal of troops over 16 months are now met with wingnut fantasy speculation that “we’ll just have to reinvade at a later point!”, like that’s an absolute certainty or like the nation would ever decide to do that again.

Why? Well, choose whatever hypothetical fantasy you want. Most likely the pinhead is basing his prediction on “terrorists” “taking over” Iraq (as McRube has foolishly stated), as though the Iraqis (60% shi’a who control the government and army) would allow that and have no interest themselves in eradicating radical sunni terrorism.

Basically, Les doesn’t want to withdraw or end the occupation because hated lib’ruls advocate withdrawal and he can never agree with any position they advocate. And because, like his candidate McRube, he thinks phased withdrawal after a 5 year occupation makes the US military somehow “look bad”.

It’s hard to get at the real motivations of these conservative militarist guys, it’s all very, very emotional with them.

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 12:00 pm

God what a clown. My hyteria, you really are just plain stupid. They’re the mans own words, regardless of the amount of hystronics you spout.

Keep up the prejudicial analysis, by the way, your incorrect conclusions continue to reinforce our belief your lobotomy was more than “partial”

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 12:01 pm

I guess the fact partial brain responded again means he was able to find the ctl and F key at the same time….

O.T. says:

May 29th, 2008 at 12:06 pm

pathetican says “Saddam is now dead, and he never had any WMDs whatsoever”.

I would wager there are thousands of Kurds who would argue that if they were still alive.

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 12:13 pm

The trouble comes in with preordained timetables driving the truck instead of actual results.

No, the problem comes in when no one is driving the truck. That’s our plan right now. No one can defined what victory means. No one can definitively say what benchmark has to be met before we can bring the troops home. What that means is perpetual war. Great for the war industry but lousy for those that get put into the meat grinder. Bush and company have been disastrous for the armed services and McCain offers nothing new. Thus the moniker, “McSame”.

parthian says:

May 29th, 2008 at 12:14 pm

And the idea that “political reconcilation” and stability is ever going to occur while Iraqi and its people are subject to a foreign military occupation (that’s us!) is just imperialist fantasy—exactly the kind of rationale that western colonialist powers used to justify their military presence the Middle East and Southern Asia for a century.

We invaded Iraq so that our oil comapanies could regain access to the last remaining cheap oil reserves on earth. And thus the story as to why we’re staying and why we just can’t leave until the (undefined) “job is done” is babble which obscures the actual reason for our invasion and tenacious occupation.

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 12:33 pm

Well, I’ll agree with one thing, partial brain does understand the meaning of the word babble..He’s great at it.

Richard: The truck is being driven, you just dont like it’s direction, even though you state we are after the same thing. Shutting off the truck and walking away is definetly not going anywhere.

McSame…wouldn’t that be the monker that could be applied to Obama and Clinton, might as well throw Ried and Pelosi in thier also.

In case you’ve forgotten, McCain was a proponet of the current Iraqi war strategy prior to the Bush administration adopting it when the got rid of Rumsfeld, so ya, his stratey in Iraq is going to look like the current Bush stratey, which, I say again, the UN finds is working, with the situation hopeful, but not fully stabilized. Upon stabilization, comes withdrawl. Note that Gen P is calling for troop reductions already. If that can be done in 16 months. Great, if not, not so great, but not tied to any politicians timetables.

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 12:36 pm

We invaded Iraq so that our oil comapanies could regain access to the last remaining cheap oil reserves on earth.

OK, I’ll play your game. So lets say your absolutely fully correct in this statement… So? how does that change the current situation?

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 1:02 pm

John McCain believes it is strategically and morally essential for the United States to support the Government of Iraq to become capable of governing itself and safeguarding its people. He strongly disagrees with those who advocate withdrawing American troops before that has occurred.

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.

Pretty clear difference. Obama’s plan for withdrawal or McCain’s plan for perpetual war.

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 1:11 pm

McCain’s plan for perpetual war.

There’s where we disagree. Obama’s plan is to withdrawl unilaterly, regardless of conditions, Mccains is to withdraw responsibly.

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 1:20 pm

McCain’s plan will guarantee US troops will be in Iraq permanently. As long as we are there to prop up whatever regime is in place, Iraqi troops will never stand up and there will be a permanent insurgency reacted to our permanent occupancy. Perpetual war, just what the war industry machine ordered.

Jay says:

May 29th, 2008 at 1:31 pm

parthian: “Saddam is now dead, and he never had any WMDs whatsoever.”

That’s false. Well, the part about him being dead is true, but he rest is false. Among the things he was executed for was genocide (use of chemical weapons agains the Kurds, burying them in mass graves). These such weapons were among those listed by Powell and others as the now infamous “WMD”….which was critics would ask you to believe means nukes, just nukes, and only nukes. The facts are that he had chemical weapons, used them, and was convicted and killed for doing so.

Richard: “McCain’s plan will guarantee US troops will be in Iraq permanently”

That’s not only McCain’s plan, that’s what the US has done in almost every waar we’ve ever fought in. Germany, Japan, Korea, the list goes on. If you think the middle east is somehow an exception- you are being foolish. If you think its a bad idea- you need to brush up on your history.

We already established earlier in the thread that Obama’s history is a little rusty, so maybe he should joing some of you in that review.

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 1:35 pm

Richard, your ignoring the history books yourself now. Not to mention I dont beleive, but could be wrong, that McCain is calling for permanent U.S. installations in Iraq.

Using your logic, McCarthur was calling for perpetual war in Japan.

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 1:53 pm

These such weapons were among those listed by Powell and others as the now infamous “WMD”….which was critics would ask you to believe means nukes, just nukes, and only nukes.

Sorry Jay, swing and a miss. A large part of Powell’s completely discredited and career ending UN presentation was the mobile biological weapon labs. The gas Saddam used on the Kurds was long since used up and since we had stopped selling him the stuff, we knew he had no WMD. If you remember, that was the joke at the time. “We know Saddam has WMD’s, we have all the receipts.” The Bush administration lied to Congress. The Bush administration lied to the public. As a result, over 4000 US service men and women are dead. Ten of thousands have permanent injuries that will require life long medical care. Millions of Iraqi men, women, and children are dead or severly injured. For what Jay? What have we gained as a result of Bush’s lies?

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 1:57 pm

Jay; I have to agree with Richard here. The WMD claim was mainly for chemical weapons.

But I will also ask him the same question partial brain is ignoring. Say it’s all my fault, I convinced George to lie to everyone. What does that have to do with extracting ourselves from the situation in a responsible manner?

O.T. says:

May 29th, 2008 at 2:04 pm

so bush lied about wmds? i guess so did clinton, albright, the british, israeli intelligence, biden, and scores of others, including sadaam himself and his generals. but funny how the bds’ers only remember bush being mistaken, hmmmmm.

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 2:06 pm

The first thing I would do is hold Bush and his partners in crime responsible. Turning them over to international authorities as soon as war crimes charges are issued would be a big step to healing both the United States and Iraq.

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 2:18 pm

Let’s see OT. Answer this question, “Who ordered UN weapons inspectors out of Iraq and then started the war?”

O.T. says:

May 29th, 2008 at 2:38 pm

Lets see Rick. Answer this question, Who voted the authorization to go to war with Iraq?

O.T. says:

May 29th, 2008 at 2:47 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H11x6bMu4Y

holy crap, look at one of obama’s new pastors.

Les says:

May 29th, 2008 at 2:58 pm

Richard:

That does nothing to change the situation in Iraq at this moment. As you say to Jay, swing and a miss.

What if they were aquited?

Jay says:

May 29th, 2008 at 3:11 pm

swing and a miss, my ass. You two are not paying attention to what I responded to. Parthian continues to make this tired (false) claim that Hussein “never” had any WMD. This claim is false. He did.

As you guys point out, we were the supplier. I don’t understand why anyone would make the claim that he never had any WMD. That’s a foolish claim.

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 3:12 pm

Who voted the authorization to go to war with Iraq?

The authorization was to give the president the powers to use the military against Iraq. This war was and is Bush’s responsibility solely. He is the one that ordered the military in. What happened to the party of personal responsibility? What’s that do to change the situation today? Absolutely nothing but crimes were committed and those responsible need to pay the price. If Bush is aquitted? I think you and I both know that’s highly unlikely.

parthian says:

May 29th, 2008 at 3:19 pm

Lots of conservative craziness on the Iraq war, which is to be expected.

Saddam had no WMDs when Bushco began its war propaganda campaign in 2002, duh. That’s what was determined after the invasion, remember wingnuts? It was in all the papers, TV too! Saddam’s WMDs from previous decades had been destroyed by UN weapons inspectors. Saddam had no WMDs to destroy.

By acknowledging the reason we actually invaded, Iraq’s oil, we can then see that there was no legitimate reason for the invasion, ever, and thus no legitimate reason to stay—including fearmongering cries of “terrorism”. Once you acknowledge why we illegally invaded, then people can understand that we are continuing the occupation for an improper purpose.

The reason that we have continued to maintain troops in Europe and East Asia is because the people of those countries decided that they wanted a US military presence for decades because of hostile neighbors, and we decided that it somehow enhanced our “security” to spend hundeds of billions running a large scale empire. Basically, only the bloated military benefitted from this.

Iraqis, however, don’t want us to stay in Iraq. They certainly don’t want us there for decades and they never will. The majority of Iraqis do not fear their neighbors at all, especially Iran—they are friendly with them, the only other shia majority country on earth. WE are the ones who aren’t friendly with Iraq’s neighbors.

That’s why we couldn’t permit the Iraqi Parliament to vote on extending the US mandate to stay in Iraq and had to have the puppet government break Iraqi law to continue the UN mandate. And now Bush is trying to cram a “status of forces” agreement down the Iraqis’ throats by bypassing their parliament yet again–not to mention our Congress!

So when McSame talks of a Hundred Years in Iraq he is hallucinating and thinking like an out of touch Cold Warrior. And left unasked is why should WE even want to maintain troops in Iraq for 100 years? What’s in it for us, even if the Iraqis wanted it?

And that gets us back to Iraq’s massive oil, which is the reason that we are so tenaciously doing everything and arguing anything to justify our open ended, never leave policy. McSame knows that, that’s why he came up with the whole “One Hundred Years of Peaceful Occupation” nonsense.

The choice in the next election is clear–a president who opposed the invasion in the first place and who will work to get us out of this absurd moneypit quagmire that we never should have gotten into, or one that supported every aspect of the invasion, is hostile to the idea of withdrawing and who will look for every possible excuse to maintain the Imperial Oil garrison in Iraq, whatever the cost.

We know where the BQ Conservative Boys are on this one—-the question will be where the non-poisoned brain independents are.

parthian says:

May 29th, 2008 at 3:48 pm

Actually, the better historical analogy for what we are currently pulling in Iraq is the Soviet Union’s “indefinite” military garrisons in the various Warsaw Pact countries. We are helping “stabilize” Iraq like the Soviets helped “stabilze” Hungary and Czechoslovakia.

Except the Iraqis, unlike the Czechs, have decided to resist, by force, the hated foreign occupier of their country. Much as we’d do, I suspect.

Jay says:

May 29th, 2008 at 4:01 pm

let the record show that parthian at least changed his statement from Saddam never having WMD to claiming that he didn’t have them in 2002.

Careful parth……if you continue to modify your argument based on the faults other point out, you may start posting things that are actually factual and make sense. The balance of your post shows that you have some room to work with before crossing that line, however.

Cash N. Carey says:

May 29th, 2008 at 6:31 pm

Nancy Pelosi states the Surge is working! Then she gives credit to the Iranians. Another liberal showing whose side they are cheering for:

“Some of the success of the Surge is that the goodwill of the Iranians — they decided in Basra when the fighting would end. They negotiated that cessation of hostilities — the Iranians.”

dare2sayit.com says:

May 29th, 2008 at 6:59 pm

Nancy Pelosi giving credit to the Iranians? Only a liberal would look at them as a solution instead of the problem in that region they really are.

Why do people keep voting these idiots in? Liberal democrat fruitcake Maxine Waters has now threatened to take over and “social*ze” the petrolium industry. That did wonders for Venezuela under control of their leftist dictator.

parthian says:

May 29th, 2008 at 7:21 pm

I’ve long been well aware that we sold chemical weapons to Saddam when he was Our Dictator in Iraq, and that he used poison gas on Kurds in 1987 and have stated that on BQ many times. And you’re aware of that because we exchanged posts about it the last time “Saddam’s WMDs” came up—so more sophism from you.

Preacher Cash, what do you think the word “some” means? As in “some of the success of the surge”? You seem to read the word as meaning “all”. Do the Iranians receive “any” credit for the cessation of hostilities in Basra? You’re dividing us as a nation by your not understanding our common language of unity!

Pelosi’s point is to draw ignorant Americans’ attention to the fact that Iran is not the demonically evil “enemy” that Bushco (and the right leaning MSM) continually paint them as, an especially needed perspective as Bush seems intent on recklessly attacking Iran and initiating (yet) another war.

6th district Jim says:

May 29th, 2008 at 8:12 pm

Parth says:
And of course you can’t comprehend my argument destroying your “UN funding” nonsense–no smiley faces!

I see Parth pretty much waved the white flag this am with a lame, lame post.
How lame is parth? Here is another current major media story to contrast
against his “they arent interested in funding” poppycock. I cite stories,
parth opines from his dank basement. Hey Parth: SHORTAGE OF FUNDING.
P.S. He is the last guy I’d read for Iraq insights. He met his Waterloo
on this thread, as every opinion he presents is contradicted by recent
media stories. It is hilarious.

U.S. Experts Bemoan Nation’s Loss of Stature in the World of Science

By Keith B. Richburg
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 29, 2008; Page A04

NEW YORK, May 28 — Some of the nation’s leading scientists, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s top science adviser, today sharply criticized the diminished role of science in the United States and the shortage of federal funding for research, even as science becomes increasingly important to combating problems such as climate change and the global food shortage.

Speaking at a science summit that opens this week’s first World Science Festival, the expert panel of scientists, and audience members, agreed that the United States is losing stature……..

Parth:
this one is for you, as a BQ moron without equal: (or did you filter out the painful “funding” angle)

:o )

Anymore opining, or will you start to cite real stories/sources?

6th district Jim says:

May 29th, 2008 at 8:16 pm

C’mon goofy:
Even you must admit your bad luck is unbelievable here.
First the Strib, then WaPo.
Parth = intellectually bankrupt

6th district Jim says:

May 29th, 2008 at 8:20 pm

6th district Jim says:

May 29th, 2008 at 8:12 pm

Parth says:
And of course you can’t comprehend my argument destroying your “UN funding” nonsense–no smiley faces!

You smilin’ Parth?
Hey Parth.
I cant understand stupid arguments, I read real newspapers.
Stop reading the comics, OK?

dare2sayit.com says:

May 30th, 2008 at 12:25 am

Komrade von Sternberg,
Your reporting is disgraceful. I attendend the Minnesota State Fair a few years ago and there was a patriotic demonstration of representatives of military and veterans, even John McCain spoke to a very supportive crowd.
You sir, paid no attention to the supporters of the war on terror and concentrated on the few liberals who were interupting the honor of the veterans.
I happened to be wearing a t-shirt which said “Kerry-Edwards” for a spineless America.”
You were interested in my comments until you realized what my shirt REALLY said.
In any case, I’m really sick of liberal bias.

Les says:

May 30th, 2008 at 7:23 am

Jay;

For the record, I was only agreeing with Richard that the issue before the invasion concernied chemical weapons,and was publicised that way. not nukes.

Les says:

May 30th, 2008 at 7:31 am

So. all night to think about it, and neither Chicken Little nor Richard offers a any course of action (or any course of action) for moving ahead in Iraq. Only disagreement as to why we invaded and how to compare it to history. Way to look forward to change guys.

Keep ranting against George, it will bite you in the rear this November when you finally realize he isnt running for any office.

6th district Jim says:

May 30th, 2008 at 7:41 am

Parth remains hushed.
He could cite the news story the White House released its GW report: forced by legal action, 4 years late, and obviously grudgingly citing GW scientific reports it doesnt really believe.

Yet, could anybody on the left use the White House as its source? In their world, bumbling Bush releasing a GW take must mean there couldnt be GW.
He cant do anything well…..
It’s a conundrum for our illiterate
local blogger.
Fortunately, a new thread will help hide his ineptness on this thread.

Jay says:

May 30th, 2008 at 7:48 am

Les; “Jay;For the record, I was only agreeing with Richard that the issue before the invasion concernied chemical weapons,and was publicised that way. not nukes.”

That is correct. What my post said (or at least what I was attempting to say) was that the critics of the war have been somewhat successful at spinning those facts into something much more. Then we see other persons compound that inaccuracy by making statements like “Saddam never had WMD” when we know he did. Even parthian later admits that this is factual- then throws in the fact that I knew he knows that- but still makes statements like Hussein never had any.

We’d be a lot better off if we all just stuck to the facts when debating issues like this, but that doesn’t seem possible with people like parthian who have these oil theories to try to substantiate and sensationalize.

I also see parthian must have learned a new word, because he’s sneaked sophism into the conversation several times in the last two days. Word-of-the-day for you, parth? Now that you’re familiar with it, I’d suggest trying to refine your usage to situations where it is accurate.

Richard says:

May 30th, 2008 at 8:00 am

Richard says:

May 29th, 2008 at 11:05 am

So you’d prefer we leave immediately…

Nope, that’s not an option but we can, over say, the next 16 months or so, sharply reduce our troop numbers and force Iraqi forces to assume the responsibility for their nation’s security. The problem we’ve created in Iraq can no longer be solved militarily and it certainly can’t be solved by staying on the same path we’ve been on for the last 6 years. McCain offers nothing new. Or at least, that’s what he’s saying. Again, does he really believe his campaign lit, or is he just pandering to the far right extremists.

There’s the plan. Sharply withdrawal troops over the next 16 to 20 months. I’ll give a point and add, as the situation warrants, but the vast majority of troops are coming home, soon.

parthian says:

May 30th, 2008 at 8:27 am

More illogical babble from the great suburban babbler, steakman and science fiction DVD collector 6DJ.

So what’s your actual position, 6DJ, the US climate scientists are faking the science and results in order to get “more funding” or they are faking the science and results but getting LESS funding? Perhaps they should conclude “Warming isn’t that bad!” and Bushco might grant more funding, right? :0

You might also note this report is about total gub’mint funding for science, not funding for studies involving global warming. And research determinining the existence and cause of global warming is long since completed and scientific consensus already reached. But whatever.

And I didn’t say that scientists “aren’t interested in funding”—that’s your childish misreading. Scientists need funding for their work, duh, genius.

I said that US climate scientists aren’t shading, distorting or altering their results or exaggerating their global warming findings in order to “get” additional government funding—that’s your childish, ignorant, pinheaded conspiracy theory, which at bottom is fundamentally anti-science and anti-intellectual. Which fits a bonehead like you perfectly.

The reality of the situation is that the Repubs have substantially cut federal funding for all types of science research (as WaPo reports) because they don’t like the conclusions that scientists come up with in ANY area, from global warming to endangered species to pollution to national health—these scientific conclusions don’t support their “conservative” politics and policies, so they defund them. Repubs are hostile to independent science research–that’s what a rational adult reader of the WaPo article would conclude.

And because Repubs prefer to pour our nation’s tax revenues down the Iraq rathole instead of fund needed science research.

Repubs (Bushco especially) are used to paying “scientists” for “results” that support their politics, like they get with people like Michaels. That’s why Repubs fund conservative “think tanks” like the one Pinhead Lewis’s Michaels is at, and not our actual research scientists in academia or government. They don’t like funding scientific studies that show conservative politics are a disaster, so they stop funding them.

But you trot off and find another newspaper article which doesn’t have anything to do with global warming and experts in that field, while thinking that you’re really “informed” and have “figured things out”—that’s what a sufferer of Conservative White Male Syndrome would do.

BTW, have you ever read a nonfiction book since you left college? You act like someone who can’t read anything more challenging than a newspaper article. Or a Star Wars video. It’s pathetic to see such idiocy and poisoned judgment in a professional.

parthian says:

May 30th, 2008 at 8:42 am

I wouldn’t have thought it that difficult to conclude from my posts, Lessman, but I think the correct “action” in Iraq is Obama’s 16 month withdrawal schedule, agreed to with the Iraqis, followed by a regional conference securing commitments to help Iraq from its various neighbors, and pledging our support for the region’s efforts.

That’s Obama’s plan, and it comes from his advisor Z. Bzezinski.

It’s their country, not ours.

Richard says:

May 30th, 2008 at 9:06 am

John McCain believes it is strategically and morally essential for the United States to support the Government of Iraq to become capable of governing itself and safeguarding its people. He strongly disagrees with those who advocate withdrawing American troops before that has occurred.

McCain’s plan for perpetual war. No real definable benchmarks, just vague bullet points, often repeated. The reality is that an occupying government will be able to say that the occupied government is just not quite ready yet. We will need to occupy for just a little while longer and look, we only lost 10 soldiers this week, that’s down from 15 last week. Hurrah, progress.

Les says:

May 30th, 2008 at 9:53 am

You keep posting:

John McCain believes it is strategically and morally essential for the United States to support the Government of Iraq to become capable of governing itself and safeguarding its people. He strongly disagrees with those who advocate withdrawing American troops before that has occurred.

Which is a very reasonable and responsible position, and then go on to state it’s a plan for perpetual war. You’ve got a disconnect there.

It’s their country, not ours, and their government has asked us to stay, no, they have begged us to stay.

From the outset of this, there was no gaurantee that the form of government in Iraq would be one we desired. It could very well be Sadr wins the next election and asks us to leave. In that case, we leave. Just like we left the Philippines. But until then, we are morally oblligated to assit them.

6th district Jim says:

May 30th, 2008 at 10:14 am

Parth says:
It’s pathetic to see such idiocy and poisoned judgment in a professional.

Ahh, are you refering to yourself, or someone else?
I understand your pain as you get clubbed with one recent article after another on this site. I understand you would like fiction sources, better ;o)

As for my postion, as someone who admits to millenia of GW, it is almost exactly articulated by today’s Krauthammer column in the WaPO.
Yet another in a string of GW stories that absolutely pound your postion into disarray.

Now I know Krauthammer is likely someone who is everything you dont like: white, male, doctor, Semite, Pulitzer prize winner; someone who owns the pros and cons of “scientific study,” but his article
is near perfect.
And, are you cheering the WH report? Is W your bud, now?

6th district Jim says:

May 30th, 2008 at 10:20 am

And I didn’t say that scientists “aren’t interested in funding”—that’s your childish misreading. Scientists need funding for their work, duh, genius.

VS

And if you knew the slightest thing about the IPCC meetings you’d know they don’t perform any independent “research”, but instead simply review the state of the current existing research in reaching their conclusions about global warming, prior research funded by others all over the globe. So your UN “funding” point is meaningless.

And apparently you “think” that every IPCC climate scientist (and their government participants) have (unanimously) “distorted” the existing warming research decade after decade solely to keep attending grueling, difficult conferences every 5 years to affirmatively mislead the world on the state of the earth’s climate. With no dissents. Just so they can have the next IPCC meeting in 5 years “funded”. What a cretin.

Again, your points have the clarity of Gilligan. Please excuse my confusion.

Richard says:

May 30th, 2008 at 12:52 pm

…strategically and morally essential for the United States to support the Government of Iraq to become capable of governing itself and safeguarding its people…

That’s a standard that, given the right administration, can never be met. It’s vague and impossible to define in real terms. Also, as long as there’s a occupying army, there will always be violence and insurgents. We withdraw our forces and let the Iraqis, whom we been training for 5 years now, take over the responsibility for their security. Meanwhile, working the diplomatic channels to make sure no outside groups influence the outcome, whatever that outcome might be.

Les says:

May 30th, 2008 at 12:57 pm

Richard;

This belies your whole argument. You just fail to admit it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7415242.stm

You might note this was based on first hand observation, not Pelosi like hystaria.

Richard says:

May 30th, 2008 at 1:18 pm

I’ll be convinced when we’re down to 10 marines guarding an embassy. Down to pre-surge force levels is not progress. It’s simply where we were two years ago. Why doesn’t McCain come out with some hard numbers like Obama. A brigand or two every month and we’ll have all combat troops home within 16 months. Now I can understand not wanting to be specific like that if you need to keep force levels at 100k plus to satisfy those to whom you owe favors. I simply don’t believe the “Straight Talk Express” is telling the truth in this matter.

Les says:

May 30th, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Because the situation may not allow a brigade every month. On the other hand, the situation may allow more than a brigade every month.

But you gave away your position. You want to abrogate our responsibility and place 10 marines in an embassy.

Did you happen to note this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7427176.stm

You just might find more troops coming home that you can handle. then again maybe not, but whichever, it should be based on the situation, not the calandar.

Les says:

May 30th, 2008 at 1:37 pm

BTW Richard, what’s Obama’s timetable for bringing the troops home from Bosnia, there’s a couple more than 10 marines in the embassy there ya know.

If he doesnt have one, why not??

parthian says:

May 30th, 2008 at 1:55 pm

Les, the main reason we (and Maliki) are hounding the Mahdi Army and Sadr right now is to make sure that the Sadrists lose the upcoming elections, and that our handpicked PM Maliki can continue in office.

That’s also why we have encouraged Maliki to (illegally) bypass Parliament on many important issues, like extending the UN mandate and the upcoming Status of Forces agreement. We are giving their new “democracy” a very bad name with the people.

Our Imperial Storm Troops are now fighting and bombing Iraqi urban areas like Basra and Sadr City in order to throw the next election, and Iraqis are well aware of that.

That’s what you are supporting and what our soldiers are doing–interference in Iraq’s elections to maintain the US occupation. Pretty noble work, eh?

Les says:

May 30th, 2008 at 2:10 pm

Riiiight, I’m gonna agree with your “pulled from plain air” and as always “objective” assessment.

Apart from your extensive comic book review, and 6 months of life experience, you got anything to back that up?

For you information, SOFA’s are negotieated with every country we have military personnel stationed in, and is an indication that our troops in Iraq are not there as an “occuppying force” So I’m rather surprised you dare mention the SOFA.

Les says:

May 30th, 2008 at 2:12 pm

What was that timetable for withdrawl from Bosnia, btw?

Richard says:

May 30th, 2008 at 2:55 pm

Pulled from thin air?

Since 2003, the US has been building long-term military bases in Iraq and a mammoth embassy complex in Baghdad. Although Washington refuses to acknowledge that the bases are permanent, the billions of dollars spent on these projects suggest that the US sees Iraq as a client state. While most Iraqis have no access to basic necessities, the bases are provided with their own water and electricity, restaurants, swimming pools and movie theaters. The huge US embassy covers an area larger than Vatican City and Iraqis see it as an “arrogant” enterprise that aims to show US “superiority.” But as much as US officials in Iraq seek to cocoon themselves from the violence, the “heavy fortified” Green Zone, which houses the embassy complex, has come under an increasing number of deadly attacks. The US Congress opposes the base project and has rejected the spending of funds for this purpose, even while construction continues.

Richard says:

May 30th, 2008 at 2:57 pm

Pulled from thin air?

As long as Americans aren’t being wounded or killed, and it’s the Iraqis who are fighting and dying, McCain believes that Americans are just fine with the United States having permanent bases there, and keeping a large military presence all over the world. He also points out that the Saudis didn’t want our base in their country, but it’s worth noting that Bin Laden was angered by our presence there as well — but according to the Republicans in last night’s debate, terrorism has nothing to do with American foreign policy.

Richard says:

May 30th, 2008 at 3:03 pm

Honestly, in the wake of McClellan’s confession of taking part in a campaign of misinformation and dishonesty, in the wake of all the evidence of the last 6 years, in the wake of the reality of 4000 US service men and women dead, ten of thousands permanently injured and in need of life long medical care, millions of dead and wounded Iraqis, in the wake of a 2 trillion dollar bill for this monumental catastrophe, how can anyone continue to parrot right wing talking points.

Les says:

May 31st, 2008 at 8:03 am

Dont confuse a sense of responsibility for former actions, right or wrong, as a “talking point” That’s the trouble with defeatocrats. They see this as an “paper’ issue we can just defund and that’s that.

We invaded Iraq, we cant just say “sorry about that” and take our ball home. It is OUR responsibility to ensure the country is stable before we leave.

6th district Jim says:

May 31st, 2008 at 8:31 am

As this long thread ends with the avalanche of new topics, let me post one last media story to accentuate parth’s very bad week:

Carbon Chastity
The First Commandment of the Church of the Environment
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, May 30, 2008; Page A13

I’m not a global warming believer. I’m not a global warming denier. I’m a global warming agnostic who believes instinctively that it can’t be very good to pump lots of CO2 into the atmosphere but is equally convinced that those who presume to know exactly where that leads are talking through their hats.

Predictions of catastrophe depend on models. Models depend on assumptions about complex planetary systems — from ocean currents to cloud formation — that no one fully understands. Which is why the models are inherently flawed and forever changing. The doomsday scenarios posit a cascade of events, each with a certain probability. The multiple improbability of their simultaneous occurrence renders all such predictions entirely speculative.

Yet on the basis of this speculation, environmental activists, attended by compliant scientists and opportunistic politicians, are advocating radical economic and social regulation.

6th district Jim says:

May 31st, 2008 at 8:36 am

But at least we learned this week Parth marches in carbon lockstep with the Bush White House.
What a week!

And:
Our Imperial Storm Troops……

Is someone playing with his dolls again?

Richard says:

June 1st, 2008 at 7:46 am

It is OUR responsibility to ensure the country is stable before we leave.

That’s exactly wrong. We have to leave so that Iraq can become stable. After 6 years now, it’s up to them what kind of country they want to live in. We need to get our army out of there and let Iraqi forces take over. Simultaneously, our diplomats need to be working with all the countries in the region including Iran, to help build a lasting peace. This can not be resolved militarily and that’s essentially all McCain is offering. More of the same.

Richard says:

June 1st, 2008 at 8:01 am

6DJ,

Whether or not you believe human activity is leading to eminent global climate change, would you not agree that reducing our use of fossil fuels is a good idea? Would you not agree that improving air quality, not just here in the US but, planet wide would not be a good idea? Would you not agree that the potential for reinvigorating our manufacturing base with green technologies is worth the investment? I simply don’t see the down side. Solar, wind, geothermal and ultimately hydrogen are all technologies that the US is losing it’s technological lead.

6th district Jim says:

June 2nd, 2008 at 8:36 am

I fully agree Rich that living the greenest life possible is a great idea.
That’s why I recycle like mad, and drive a 1993 honda that gets 40mpg.

As for the green technology, many are dead enders, i.e. I used to sell solar panels by phone in 1980–they were not very good then and many of the greens are not too practical even today.
If something is a homerun in the green energy tech, I am more than willing to pay a French or British company it’s fair due to use it.
Yet, the big “breakthru” is still pending. Meanwhile, we worship at the CO2 shrine, without a science climate plan B:
what if the millenia of warming IS something else, or, worse, if cyclical, what happens with the next big ice age?

Les says:

June 2nd, 2008 at 10:34 am

You know Richard, we want the exact same thing. When the time comes, and it wont be based on arbitrary “MicroSoft Project” timetables, we’ll have it. McCain will ensure it.

This is a place where open-minded critical thinkers of all political persuasions encounter information and arguments that both support and challenge their preconceptions. The goal is not to eliminate differences but to narrow and clarify them. We begin with a bedrock agreement that the search for insight and clarity is important, serious - and fun.

We ask commenters to be civil and substantive and, if possible, good humored. We reserve the right to delete comments that disregard this request.

Follow The Big Question on Twitter Do you use Twitter? Follow The Big Question.