We've passed the tipping point on global warming -- and bush sits on his arse. We've passed the tipping point on the chances of real success in Iraq -- and bush sits on his arse. We're reaching the tipping point on a dictatorship in the U.S. -- and bush sits on his arse.

I won't be here 50 years from now, but I see you winning the bet, David.

OK that was wierd.^^^^^

Divers nine hundred years from now will find the submerged remains of our failed civilization and marvel at our stupidity.

Please, David, if you can't expand into soemthing more serious, then sticks to Bush lied about everything and stay out of betting Bush is responsible for `failure to address global warming'. I owuld be happy to bet you for much more than $100; email me! But you might live another 50 while I have doubts about my hitting the century mark.

Mankind probably has accelerated whatever natural global warming that would have occurred anyway. But, I sometime forget that in the Left's and Environmental cuckoos' mind, all of mankind's current and past enviro problems were/are/will be caused by us arrogant Americans; and Bush in particular, even half-a-century from now.

Oh yes, Corky, that was weird. No response necessary. Now wasn't it the Antartic they wanted for more oil drilling? Haven't the scientists, you know, the real ones, been warning us for years about this? Here it is folks.

Yes Happy, mankind is to blame. But wasn't it all the other industrialized countries who went to Kyoto to try to tame our incessant ruination of the environment? And wasn't it Bush who completely ignored these plaintive calls?

Yes Happy, mankind is to blame. But wasn't it all the other industrialized countries who went to Kyoto to try to tame our incessant ruination of the environment? And wasn't it Bush who completely ignored these plaintive calls?

This Is Bush's Only Legacy Left

Will that too end in disaster?

Yes Happy, mankind is to blame. But wasn't it all the other industrialized countries who went to Kyoto to try to tame our incessant ruination of the environment? And wasn't it Bush who completely ignored these plaintive calls?

Sorry for that multiple post. My computer's fussing up.

This Is Bush's Only Legacy Left

Will that too end in disaster? Sorry, about the previous link!

Bush has attractive daughters but I wonder if they possess the characteristics of nurturing and sensitivity? Or, are they like their father, a spoiled brat?

As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken

This Is Probably Bush's True Legacy

"Mankind probably has accelerated whatever natural global warming that would have occurred anyway."

Yea, probably just accelerated natural global warming. That's the ticket. Hot air, right?

Yea, probably... yea.

This Is Another Legacy for the People to Remember Bush

David, how can I bet on something that will be 50 years down the road? Every day that my name is absent from the obituary page is another one of God's miracles for me.

Jeanne,

Spanky DOES have a digital camera, but hasn't so far been able to send any back. They've been warned (threatened) about taking/sending pictures of bodies, war-damage and images "detrimental to the integrity of the mission" whatever the hell that means.

I'm hoping he'll send them on discs, instead of trying to e-mail them. His calls to his mother are so very brief, but since he's been back from Baghdad, he's certainly more upbeat.

If he give me permission, I'll forward some og them. He said most of the pics he's taken are pretty much like Karl had taken, almost 3 years ago, now.

Supposedly, he's getting leave to come home for his SgtKarl's wedding, in June. I'll believe it when I see it.
-T

It amazes me how the Reich-wing so conveniently forgot the "war on Xmas" that O'Reilly and all the limbaughnistas were so recently railing against!!! *Happy Holidays* IS FAR MORE OFFENSIVE than mocking the founder of a religion.

Thank you once again Mr. Corn,
It seems that nothing can provoke more shrill hysteria among the ideological beserkers on the right than solid, scientific evidence.

God willing! I hope that this is my legacy!

The Formula

I am giving you a formula that I believe will bring about justice and peace. Actually, God has given me these ideas directly for a better world. You can accept what I say through Divine Providence or reject what I say. We are all given a free choice. The decision is yours alone.

1. Shalom translated means peace but it is more than peace. Shalom is God's vision of the world. It is God's dream that Shalom comes only to the inclusive embracing community that excludes no one.
2. In each of us there is a Jesus and a Hitler. We should always strive to bring out the Jesus in us.
3. Love is wanting the best for another person or persons.
4. Try to emulate Mother Teresa who saw in each human being the face of Jesus.
5. War is outmoded; no normal person chooses war over peace.
6. From James in the New Testament, Faith without deeds is worth nothing.
7. Practice your faith that believes in the true God. God wants us to love one another.
8. Read the Bible because it is God's love letter to us.
9. Read Mattie Stepanek's books on Heartsongs.
10. John Kerry says that it is not important for God to be on our side, what is important are we on God's side?
11. Read Matthew 25:31-46! When you do it to the least of my brethren, you do it for me.
12. Read Matthew 5:1-12! The beatitudes!
13. Read Luke 10:25-37! Who is my neighbor?
14. Read Luke 12:13-21! These verses warn us against greed.
15. Be aware of the Just War Theory! Are we in imminent danger?
16. Practice being a Conscientious Objector!
17. St. Ambrose says, "I shall pass this way but once, any good that I can do let me do it now, because I shall not pass this way again."
18. Totus Tuus means all yours. We are all God's children.
19. Paul Wellstone says that politics is not about power. Politics is not only about money. Politics is not about winning for the sake of winning. Politics is about the improvement of people's lives. It is about advancing the cause of peace and justice in our country and in the world. Politics is about doing well for people.
20. Mr. Bourn who built the Filoli Home and Gardens that is south of San Francisco says that we must fight for a just cause; we must love our fellow man; and we must live a good life.
21. When we recite the Lord's Prayer, we are acknowledging that God is the Father and we are all brothers and sisters.
22. The Cross is a sign of contradiction. It is not about death and hatred; it is about life and love.
23. St. Irenaeus says, "The glory of God is man fully alive." Man can only be fully alive when he loves God with his whole mind, body, and soul. And, when he loves his neighbor, as he loves himself.

Many persons will have and will offer various formulas for justice and peace. The end result will center on whether or not we have love and mercy in our hearts. Justice and peace can never move forward unless we have a conversion of the heart.

Leo Buscaglia reminds us that the heart sees what the eyes fail to see. In life we may be called upon to see with our hearts. Our hearts must be filled with love and mercy.

The moral demise of a nation precedes the ultimate demise of a nation. America is in a state of moral demise because Americans do not believe in God. They have chosen the antichrist of money, nuclear weapons, and the words of Bush.

Interesting NOVA the other night about the exploration of the "Northwest Passage". The most aggressive attempts were thwarted by an unnusual decade of cold. (in the 1870s?) Such conditions didn't permit the ice-pack to melt and trapped dir John Franklin and over 100 men and 2 large, reinforced warships in pack ice for at least 3 years. None of the men returned, but some are said to have been sighted on land, heading south, as long as 5 years later!

The following decades were much warmer and allowed a fan of Franklin, Roald Amundsen, to finally thread his way along the northern Canadian coast with a much smaller vessel and a much greater appreciation for the Native People there.

There's an interesting take on what continued polar melting could do for shipping and the effect that it might have on the innuit, who've already moved from a nomadic lifestyle to one of static villages that have to be supplied by air.

I was just having a conversation about weather and the effects of water on our lives. We find fossils of shoreline creatures, even at these elevations all the time. Nothing for man to do to hold back the water!

Think of how much time it could take off a coast-to-coast drive, though!

-T

Sorry about the spelling errors...been huffing chainsaw fumes all day!

-T

Watched the show.
Tom Friedman - ick. What a ...oh why bother.

Ok, the levee thing. When a levee can be topped there is always the danger of it breaching. All it takes is one weak spot. No loophole, sorry. Bush is still an incompetent middle manager type.

Ahhhhh...hmmm oh yeah Ann Coulter. Next time you're going to talk about her discuss her big adams apple.

Please forgive me! After I sent this prayer to Coulter, she just got worse. I probably sent the prayer to her about two years ago.

I said a prayer

I said a prayer for you today and I know God must have heard
I felt the answer in my heart, although He spoke no word!
I didn't ask for wealth or fame I knew you wouldn't mind
I asked Him to send treasures of a far more lasting kind!
I asked that He'd be near you at the start of each new day to
Grant you health and blessings and friends to share your way!
I asked for happiness for you in all things great and small
But it was for His loving care I prayed the most of all!

The Big Question
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
NYT 3/3/6

"A majority of Americans, in a gut way, always understood the value of trying to produce a democratizing government in the heart of the Arab-Muslim world.

Is he saying the US is 51% neo-cons?

"That is why there has been no big antiwar movement.

I gues that depends on your definition of "big." Let's go to the polls.

"Americans should, and will, stick with Iraq if they sense that Iraqis are on a pathway to building a decent, stable government."

What planet are you living on Thom Freidman? Busty this was my favorite in the category called Neo-con blame game:

"because of President Bush's decision to approach the Iraq invasion with the Rumsfeld Doctrine, which calls for just enough troops to fail, rather than the proven Powell Doctrine, which calls for overwhelming force to win.

See? Bush chose the wrong horse. Too bad. Otherwise, we would have won. Oh well.

I have so far refrained from commenting on the global warming debate mainly because I am far from convinced that it is an imminent disaster. I have been reading tons of data from both camps, one thing I have found is that it is very difficult to get research results from anyone who isn't funded by one side or the other. This is a hot button issue just like abortion, it generates billions of dollars in funds and has reached nearly religious proportions, all based on very partisan politics. Someone above mentioned solid science, but most of what I have found is based on emotional dogma. For every conclusion for global warming there is one against. I know I am committing heresy by saying this, but I can't jump on a bandwagon without more evidence, and what I have seen so far is not very convincing. I am certain that humans are seriously harming various ecological systems, such as strip mining and dumping toxic pollutants into the oceans, decimating both temperate and tropical rainforests, polluting air and fresh water supplies, indiscriminate dumping of hazardous wastes, poisoning the soil of food crops, and many other crimes against nature, but whether any of this contributes to global warming is still being hotly debated. I will reserve my conclusion on this topic, so hammer me if you must.

Thats ok Sal. You can sit on the fence until you've made up your mind.

O'Reilly, I'm not sitting on the fence. That would be someone who doesn't do any research at all and couldn't care less, and that is certainly not me!

Saladin's an EnviroWitch! BURN HER!!!

No! Can't burn her...bad for the OZONE! Throw her in the water...if she sinks to the bottom, then she's NOT a witch!

-T

It's funny, but that is just the sort of comment I expect, not, "well gee Sal, what makes you doubtful?" Oh well.

I hear she has a personal vendetta against CRABGRASS! She HATES nature!

There's a lot, especially regarding the natural heating/cooling cycles that this rock seems to go through, of interesting research, both ways.

Hajji, you know how I LOVE to stir things up!! I also love intelligent debate, which is why I look at both sides. I learn a lot that way.

No more crab grass wars, there's no lawn at our new place! I only put my heart and soul into gardening for the joy I get in watching it wither at the end of the year, I am so EVIL!!

It was an interesting moment during the above mentioned NOVA when the climatologists realized that ice core samples, from the Decade of the Franklin expedition for the Northwest Passage, didn't show the tell-tale layering that occurs from the natural thaw/freezing cycles of the arctic year.

He mentioned that it reminded him of the early 1970s, a particularly cold era. I remember taking a dare to walk out on the frozen Ohio River...Stupid, I know, but....

Regardless, nobody in their right mind can argue that the continued pollution of planet earth is in any way BENEFICIAL to our continued existance.

I know for a fact that Saladin stands on the side of Gaia when it comes to respect for life on the planet. (crabgrass, excluded, of course!)

-t

-T

31 No, let's build a bridge out of her. BTW, I am told smoking dried cannabis flowers is much more gratifying than huffing chainsaw fuel. Paint, glue and paint sniffing all very redneck trailer trash. Best to avoid it. Bad form, you know.

My cousin said to me one time that we came in at the right time and we are leaving at the right time. I won't be around long enough to know how global warming will effect the world and me.

I hope that heaven is like San Diego's weather and not highs in the 2,000 degree or 20,000 degree range. Those highs would be more indicative of hell.

Today I'm dancing around the compound! My crabgrass, dandelions and bunches of stuff that have been through Pabla's digestive system are sprouting and THRIVING!! The blackberry vines are already shredding my shins as I venture out into the pastures.

If only it can spread over the bare places before the spring deluges. Thanks to our pre-christmas Ice storm, we've got another quarter-acre of grazing/browsing pasture for the hooved ones. It has reached almost 80degrees here the past 3 days, been sleeping with the windows open with nighttime lows in the 50's.

The bulbs have sprouted bright green and have grown to about 6" already. (that is, the ones the goats haven't...uhm...pilfered.

The bradford pears are blooming house-sized cotton balls throughout the woods. The dogwoods are puffing up their buds, expectantly. The dogs, goats and ESPECIALLY the donkey have been rollin' and rasslin', butting heads and kicking up their hooves. It is funny to watch how the dogs have learned to posture as though they're gonna butt heads with the goats. They also pretend to be grazing and they all lay down together, in the sun until something like a branch falling from the trees (LOTS of broken brances...I need a helmet to go from a walk) sets them off to investigate.

I'm not calling an official end to winter, just yet, but I've gotta say...WOW!

-T

"I hope that heaven is like San Diego's weather and not highs in the 2,000 degree or 20,000 degree range. Those highs would be more indicative of hell."

Like Mark Twain said, "heaven for climate, but hell for society."

Saladin,

Sounds like you’ve done more research on Global Warming than I. But it seems to me the only scientists that deny greenhouse gasses contribute are those bought and paid for by fossil fuel related interests. Whose paying of the proponents, conservationists? What exactly do they have to gain?

#40
If we got 3 days in the 80's in MN we'd call it summer.

Republican senator says Dubai port deal broke the law

Government officials broke the law when they agreed to let a United Arab Emirates-owned company operate terminals at major American ports without doing a more extended review of the national security implications, U.S. Sen. Richard Shelby told the Birmingham (Alabama) News in Friday editions. (Excerpted here because page is information restricted).

"It's my interpretation that the Byrd Amendment is pretty clear, that if you look at the legislative history, they certainly didn't follow the law that I thought they should have," Shelby, R-Ala., said in an interview after a congressional hearing on the Dubai Ports World deal. He referred to the 1992 law that requires extra national security review of some foreign investments.

Shelby and others are planning legislation to tighten the government's review of major foreign investments in the United States by giving Congress more notice of the transactions before they are complete.
--------------------
Wow, it almost sounds like a working congress.

GOP growing increasingly angry, frightened by Bush's missteps

President Bush, once the seemingly invincible vanguard of a new Republican majority, could be endangering his party's hold on power as the GOP heads into this year's midterm congressional elections.

A series of political missteps has raised questions about the Bush administration's candor, competence and credibility and left the White House off-balance, off-message and unable to command either the nation's policy agenda or its politics the way the president did during his first term.

This week, newly released video of Bush listening passively to warnings about the dire threat posed by Hurricane Katrina and a report that intelligence analysts warned for more than two years that the insurgency in Iraq could swell into a civil war provided fresh fodder for charges that the president ignores unwelcome alarms.

His attacks on those who questioned his administration's approval of a seaports deal with the United Arab Emirates and his ill-fated nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court have angered some conservatives and Republican members of Congress.

And even some Bush supporters remain anxious about the economy, the federal deficit, the war in Iraq and the extent of the administration's warrantless wiretapping.

"The White House has been taking it on the chin lately, and the reverberations are being felt throughout the GOP," Republican blogger Bobby Eberle wrote this week. "From the Harriet Miers nomination to the Dubai Ports and more, the folks in charge of message strategy appear to be asleep at the wheel."
Said Republican pollster Ed Goeas: "If this environment holds, you have to assume it's going to tip for the Democrats."

....When conservatives challenged the ports deal, for example, Bush threatened to veto any legislation blocking it, then all but accused his critics of racism for opposing an Arab company.

"I've been helpful out here on the campaign trail, backing the president on eavesdropping, defending them on Iraq and Social Security, and then you have this thrown on your lap without any consideration," said Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla. "Then the threat of a veto, that really took my breath away."

"I didn't think his choice of words there was really good," said Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss. "And I thought his veto threat was untimely and inappropriate."

"It certainly is the perfect storm of aggravating or provoking congressional egos and the president getting his back up and saying the least diplomatic thing he could have said," said Michael Franc, a former Republican aide in Congress who's now a scholar at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research center in Washington.

Moreover, Bush's remarks reminded conservatives of the fact that the White House accused them of sexism when they challenged the Miers nomination. They didn't like that, either.

...Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg found that the ranks of Republicans who say they strongly approve of Bush's job performance had dropped by 15 percentage points. Similarly, strong approval from conservatives dropped by 14 points, and approval from white married men dropped by 14 points.

"Our analysis," Greenberg said, "shows a sharp slippage among white rural voters and blue-collar men as well as the best educated and upscale married men, even before the last controversies around port security and the Iraq `civil war.'"
---------------
It took Rep Foley's breath away when the work veto was used. Oh my. Imagine the American public's reaction to the energy bill and the bankruptcy bill and the tax cuts for the rich and the patriot act and the no bid contracts and on and on and on.

Do the men's one first. LOL

Orgasmic Simulator

National Archives halts reclassification of documents

After complaints from historians, the National Archives on Thursday directed intelligence agencies to stop removing previously declassified historical documents from public access and urged them to return to the shelves as quickly as possible many of the records they had already pulled, the New York Times reports Friday.

Allen Weinstein, the nation's chief archivist, announced what he called a "moratorium" on reclassification of documents until an audit can be completed to determine which records should be secret.

A group of historians recently found that decades-old documents that they had photocopied years ago and that appeared to have little sensitivity had disappeared from the open files. They learned that in a program operated in secrecy since 1999, intelligence and defense agencies had removed more than 55,000 pages that agency officials believed had been wrongly declassified.

Weinstein, who became archivist of the United States a year ago, said he knew "precious little" about the seven-year-old reclassification program before it was disclosed in The New York Times on Feb. 21.

He said he did not want to prejudge the results of the audit being conducted by the archives' Information Security Oversight Office, which oversees classification. But he said the archives' goal is to make sure government records that can safely be released are available. The audit was ordered by J. William Leonard, head of the oversight office, after he met with historians on Jan. 27.

"The idea is to let people get on with their research and not reclassify documents unless it's absolutely necessary," said Weinstein, who in the mid-1970s successfully sued the FBI to obtain records he used for his book about Alger Hiss, the State Department official found to be a Soviet spy.

fuck ann coulter

Wow! 36 whole cubic miles! Geez, I need my calculator ... - surface area of earth is 4 * pi * radius squared - radius is 4000 mi., so surface area is 200,960,000 sq.mi. - 36 cubic miles spread out over that area leaves .000000179 cu.mi. for each sq.mi. of surface area, or .011 inches. Huh? All that over an 88th of an inch? So the alarm bells that are sounding on this particular factoid are way out of line. SOMEONE here should have done this math before me. And if you think you're going to excoriate me for having my head-in-the-sand (-ocean?), I actually do believe man is causing global warming. This little factoid, however, does nothing to advance the argument. Let it have it's 15 minutes and move on.

Calculations say that if all the land ice melts, excepting ice trays, the oceans will rise 270 ft!!. That might take a millenium or less.

Almost as soon as the Kyoto Protocol on global warming came into effect on February 15, Kashmir suffered the highest snowfall in three decades with over 150 killed, and Mumbai recorded the lowest temperature in 40 years. Had temperatures been the highest for decades, newspapers would have declared this was proof of global warming. But whenever temperatures drop, the press keeps quiet.

Things were different in 1940-70, when there was global cooling. Every cold winter then was hailed as proof of a coming new Ice Age. But the moment cooling was replaced by warming, a new disaster in the opposite direction was proclaimed.

A recent Washington Post article gave this scientist's quote from 1972. "We simply cannot afford to gamble. We cannot risk inaction. The scientists who disagree are acting irresponsibly. The indications that our climate can soon change for the worse are too strong to be reasonably ignored." The warning was not about global warming (which was not happening): it was about global cooling!

In the media, disaster is news, and its absence is not. This principle has been exploited so skillfully by ecological scare-mongers that it is now regarded as politically incorrect, even unscientific, to denounce global warming hysteria as unproven speculation.

Meteorologists are a standing joke for getting predictions wrong even a few days ahead. The same jokers are being taken seriously when they use computer models to predict the weather 100 years hence.

The models have not been tested for reliability over 100 years, or even 20 years. Different models yield variations in warming of 400%, which means they are statistically meaningless.

Wassily Leontief, Nobel prize winner for modeling, said this about the limits of models. "We move from more or less plausible but really arbitrary assumptions, to elegantly demonstrated but irrelevant conclusions." Exactly. Assume continued warming as in the last three decades, and you get a warming disaster. Assume more episodes of global cooling, and you get a cooling disaster.

In his latest best seller State of Fear, Michael Crichton does a devastating expose of the way ecological groups have tweaked data and facts to create mass hysteria. He points out that we know astonishingly little about the environment. All sides make exaggerated claims.

We know that atmospheric carbon is increasing. We are also in the midst of a natural warming trend that started in 1850 at the end of what is called the Little Ice Age. It is scientifically impossible to prove whether the subsequent warming is natural or man-made.
India Times
SWAMINOMICS/SWAMINATHAN S ANKLESARIA AIYAR

Feingold on Patriot Act: "The Fight Is Not Over"

Mr. President, in a few minutes, the Senate will conclude a process that began over a year ago by reauthorizing the Patriot Act. I will have a few closing remarks but first I want to take this opportunity to thank the extraordinary staff who have worked on this bill for so long. These men and women, on both sides of the aisle, have worked extremely hard and they deserve to be recognized. I ask unanimous consent that a list of their names be printed in the Record after my remarks.

Mr. President, beginning in November when we first saw a draft of the conference report, I have spoken at length about the substance of this bill. I hoped that when we started the task of reauthorizing the Patriot Act at the beginning of last year, the end product would be something that the whole Senate could support. We had a real chance to pass a bill that would both reauthorize the tools to prevent terrorism and fix the provisions that threaten the rights and freedoms of innocent Americans. This conference report, even as amended by the bill incorporating the White House deal that we passed yesterday, falls well short of that goal. I will vote no.

Protecting the country from terrorism while also protecting our rights is a challenge for every one of us, particularly in the current political climate, and it is a challenge we all take seriously. I know that many Senators who will vote for this reauthorization bill in a few minutes would have preferred to enact the bill we passed without a single objection in July of last year. I appreciate that so many of my colleagues came to recognize the need to take the opportunity presented by the sunset provisions included in the original Patriot Act to make changes that would better protect civil liberties than did the law we enacted in haste in October 2001.

Nevertheless, I am deeply disappointed that we have largely wasted this opportunity to fix the obvious problems with the Patriot Act.

The reason I spent so much time in the past few days talking about how the public views the Patriot Act was to make it clear that this fight was not about one Senator arguing the details of the law. This fight was about trying to restore the public's trust in our government. That trust has been severely shaken as the public learned more about the Patriot Act, which was passed with so little debate in 2001, and as the administration resisted congressional oversight efforts and repeatedly politicized the reauthorization process. The revelations about secret warrantless surveillance late last year only confirmed the suspicions of many in our country that the government is willing to trample the rule of law and constitutional guarantees in the fight against terrorism.

The negative reaction to the Patriot Act has been overwhelming. Over 400 state and local government bodies passed resolutions pleading with Congress to change the law. Citizens have signed petitions, library associations and campus groups have organized to petition the Congress to act, numerous editorials have been written urging Congress not to reauthorize the law without adequate protections for civil liberties. These things occurred because Americans across the country recognize that the Patriot Act includes provisions that pose a threat to their privacy and liberty -- values that are at the very core of what this country represents, of who we are as a people.

In 2001, we were viciously attacked by terrorists who care nothing for American freedoms and American values. And we as a people came together to fight back, and we are prepared to make great sacrifices to defeat those who would destroy us. But what we will not do, what we cannot do, is destroy our own freedoms in the process.

Without freedom, we are not America. If we don't preserve our liberties, we cannot win this war, no matter how many terrorists we capture or kill.

That is why the several Senators who have said at one time or another during this debate things like, "Civil liberties do not mean much when you are dead" are wrong about America at the most basic level. They do not understand what this country is all about. Theirs is a vision that the founders of this nation, who risked everything for freedom, would categorically reject. And so do the American people.

Americans want to defeat terrorism, and they want the basic character of this country to survive and prosper. They want to empower the government to protect the nation from terrorists, and they want protections against government overreaching and overreacting. They know it might not be easy, but they expect the Congress to figure out how to do it. They don't want defeatism on either score. They want both security and liberty, and unless we give them both -and we can, if we try -we have failed.

This fight is not over Mr. President. The vote today will not assuage the deep and legitimate concerns that the public has about the Patriot Act. I am convinced that in the end, the government will respond to the people, as it should. We will defeat the terrorists, and we will preserve the freedom and liberty that make this the greatest country on the face of the earth.

I yield the floor.

[SPLORP]

Don't mind me, just checking out scenery. And, no, that's not peanut butter on my lips. OK, that's enough...time to go back in!

[SPLORP]

Global warming is having a real affect on the gulf states. The gulf has warmed and the hurricanes that enter it become stronger and last longer. They build while in the gulf. If I lived in the gulf states I'd believe in global warming.

The state owned bank of the UAE probably has a secret account under the name of George Bunnypants Mcflightsuit. I cannot beleive he knew nothing prior to the approval especially with the Coast Guard and DHS questioning. It is a ruse so people don't go looking for his secret cookie jar.

Hajji,

I got the best chuckle the other day picturing you being pulled over hill and over dell by your amorous donkey. I'm just glad you weren't seriously hurt. Send some of that warm weather up your hometown way, howboutit!

As computing power has increased so has the accuracy or computer models in all areas including weather modeling.

To compare predictions (modeling) today to predictions in the '70's is like comparing a 1970 model car with a new one. A world of difference. In 1970 we did not even use computers in cars. No PC's, no cell phones, no not even a glimmer of an Internet.

It is like saying Doppler radar is just a hunch when it shows a storm or tornado coming.

Get an education, then get a life.

Jeanne,
Hurricanes in the Gulf are not becoming stronger. Again, poor modeling. The current models showing stronger current hurricanes now than before stopped with the hurricanes of the 1960's.

If you go back to include the hurricanes of the 30's, 40's and 50's, you will see that all hurricanes then - the means, medians, modes and five standard deviations out, were all stronger then than now.

And, of course, the natural disaster that, to this day, is the greatest taker of American lives is the 1900 storm that hit Galveston, TX.

Nerdboy,

I am familiar with the hurricane models of both the 70's and the current ones. Please inform me which models were being used in the 70's versus the ones being used today, and why the ones today are superior.

Actually, sophisticated computer modeling was being performed in the 60's and 70's on IBM 360's and 370's. It took an entire office floor to do what can be done on a laptop today, but the tools - various types of regression analyses, multivariate statistical enhancements and Monte Carlo designs are about the same then as now.

Or do you have some specific different information?

Boy, don't bring a rock to a gunfight.

I'm not calling an official end to winter, just yet, but I've gotta say...WOW!

Hajji, my red-bud trees are starting to bloom. When they are in full bloom, I'll email you guys a picture. They really are georgous... but it only lasts a little while.

I still got a 3D picture of 'em from last year. Done by taking two pictures a few inches apart and combining them with PhotoShop. Need the glasses to see it tho.

*gorgeous

NO, YOU ARE THE SUCK

Factchecker has no facts to share.

I will not waste my time educating you.

If you think for a fatmosecond that old IBM mainframes could offer the same modeling as today you are just too dumb to confuse your point of view with a single fact.

Get yourself an edumacation!

Dear David Corn,

I won't take up your bet but I'll see if my grandchildren will :)

The reason is that Bush 41 and Clinton 42 and Bush 43 have all dropped the ball on climate, energy efficiency and all that. So Bush 43 will get extra bad marks for just his errors.

For Saladin and other fence-sitters, here are two good books that will make fence-sitting less painful. Both are by W.F. Ruddiman. "Plows, Plagues and Petroleum" is a popular account of how humans took control of the climate. This is a debatable thesis and Ruddiman explains how he came to this conclusion and what parts are still in contention. "Earth's Climate: Past and Future" is a book on climatology for poets. I found both easy and well-written.

After these, and reading the RealClimate web site, I know enough to ignore the sensationism in the press regarding climate studies. Regarding the Antarctic data, the study is only over 3 years of data, not enough to say anything statisttically meaningful. Links from RealClimate will quickly take you to other criticisms of this study.

Despite all of that, note that climatology is not weather forecasting -- different subject, different computer programs(models). I'm now reading F. Oldfield's rather more difficult book on climatology. All of this has convinced me that climate change is real, just now it is warming and the cause is us. As to what to do in this situation, read both of Ruddiman's books before deciding.

Alan,

"georgous"

Is that when Bunnypants dresses up like a cowboy?

Factchecker - Nerdboy is right and you are not. There was no doppler radar in the 1970's - not used for weather predicting.

Have you not noticed the weather man (person) can tell you and show you where it is raining in realtime? That would never happen on a mainframe. One clue - mainframes had nothing but CRT's functioning as print-punch readers.

I was a mainframe programmer on IBM 3083's and 3090's, I worked on projects large and small some development of fourth generation languages (FOCUS using an IMS database) operated under MVS-TSOe.

You are completely clueless if you think modeling is even slighly similar to the old days of wind, pressure predictions.

Just sayin'

capt

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2003/s2131.htm

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/braun_bio.html

David I sure appreciate you taking a shot at what is on peoples minds, but you sure missed what is on mine. PHASE 2 OF THE SSCI(remember we are supposed to be attempting to hold those responsible for the false pre-war intelligence accountable)... NSA WIRE TAPPINGS... THE SAME REPUBLICANS WHO VOTED TO INVESTIGATE A PRESIDENTS BLOW JOB AND REQUIRED HIM TO TESTIFY UNDER OATH VOTED AGAINST INVESTIGATING NSA WIRE TAPPING, AND THE NUCLEAR TESTING THAT TOOK PLACE IN NEW MEXICO THIS WEEK.(the u.s. breaking the NPT)

It just amazes me how anyone could get upset about the film Munich. Can you imagine if the film industry(forget the MSM) ever scratched the surface about what really took place in the creation of Israel, and continues to take place for Palestinians. REmember when Vanessa Redgrave was basically thrown out of Hollywood when she mentioned the Palestinians plight in the mid 70's? I sure do.

You certainly can not be a gentile and bring up this issue in Hollywood let alone a Jew. You will get hammered. This is a fact.

Finally Amy Goodman does some honest coverage at Democracy Now on the history of the conflict. This issue has been successfully shut down in the MSM/HOllywood for years..this is shifting just a bit.

NB,

Before you paste a long URL consider using tinyurl.com or:

How do I make a hyperlink?

Long URL's will not wrap - so they will make the whole blog too wide.

Thanks

capt

fact checker 51, I can't help but notice what all this fear induced hysteria is leading to. More and more people are being crammed into cities, access to wilderness is being slowly chocked off, off course by those environmentalists that don't spend much time away from computer simulators to actually get out in the wilderness to do any real life studies. Computer models are easy to tweak.
Jeanne 54, where did you get those "facts"?
nerdboy is the perfect example of the religious ferocity this subject has promoted. Won't look at both sides, just contemputous dismissal, as pathetic as any bushbot. Tell me nerdboy, what do you know about Mt. Kilimanjaro, the equatorial volcano that is rapidly losing it's glacier to melting? And no looking it up, just what you know right now, right off hand.
One thing I truly believe is that science and politics should stay as far apart as politics and religion.

Is that when Bunnypants dresses up like a cowboy?

hahahaha Uhm, yeah, that's what I meant!
*laughs again*

I'm with you on the non-fact Factchecker. Plus that comment about the hurricanes not getting stronger was a crock. They can't say 'more often', but they've proved to me that they are larger and stronger.
That gulf-coaster who's lived thru a few, Alan.

Kathleen,
One of my heros is Farouk Abdel-Muhti. A true peace activist.

Palestinian Activist Ordered Released After Two Years in Prison Without Charge

For the War and Against the Troops

Antiwar comedian Bill Hicks used to quip that, on the issue of the first Gulf War, he had etched out an unusual position for himself: "I was for the war," he said, "but against the troops." At least once he followed up by saying it was "not the most popular stance I've ever taken on an issue."

Actually, that position, being for the war and against the troops, appears to be quite popular.

The hawks don’¥ see it that way. They in fact often insist that you cannot support the troops but oppose the war. This is their response to the dovish slogan, "Support the troops. Bring them home!" The warmongers like to argue that if you support the troops –†even if you are against the war in principle –†you must "support the war effort," for only victory will ensure safety for America’≥ young soldiers and marines, and only solidarity behind the war will mean victory.

In truth, however, it is the war that is endangering the troops, that is killing them every day, that is maiming many of them for life, keeping them from their families, destroying their relationships and early careers, and engaging them in brutalities which will forever traumatize so many of them and defile their conception of life. To support the war, then, is to support the continuing death and injury of America’≥ men and women in uniform.

Often the pro-war camp will retort that since the U.S. Armed Forces only comprise voluntary enlistees –†in other words, since there is no draft –†antiwar Americans disgrace them in saying they support them but oppose the war. The troops know what they’≤e fighting for, we are told. They signed up voluntarily. They chose to go to war, and we should honor their choices.

Well, now many of them want out. The overwhelming majority of them, in fact, want to get out of Iraq by the end of the year. A good quarter of them want to come home immediately.

More HERE

*****end of clip*****

Support for the troops means bringing them home. It that makes the hobby war a bust -so be it - if it exposes the gigantic failure of leadership that this WH keeps trying to pass off as a necessary evil - so be it.

How can we allow any world leader[sic] to start a war by invading another country then say "whoop's my bad I thought it was the right thing to do so I am not wrong" right?

capt

Pentagon Warns Bush That Radical Climate Change is World's Most Serious Threat

Published on Sunday, February 22, 2004 by the Observer/UK

Now the Pentagon Tells Bush:
Climate Change Will Destroy Us
Secret Report Warns of Rioting and Nuclear War; Threat to the World is Greater than Terrorism
+++++++++
This must have been on one of those days when bush wasn't paying attention....

Sal,
Here are some articles.

Hurricanes Are Getting Stronger, Study Says September 15, 2005

BOULDER—îhe number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes worldwide has nearly doubled over the past 35 years, even though the total number of hurricanes has dropped since the 1990s, according to a study by researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). The shift occurred as global sea surface temperatures have increased over the same period. The research appears in the September 16 issue of Science.

Hurricanes getting stronger due to global warming says study
mongabay.com
August 29, 2005

SUMMARY: Late last month an atmospheric scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology released a study in Nature that found hurricanes have grown significantly more powerful and destructive over the past three decades. Kerry Emanuel, the author of the study, warns that since hurricanes depend on warm water to form and build, global climate change might increase the effect of hurricanes still further in coming years.

Saladin,

Just because I do not agree with you does not make me anything you said. What a reaction to simple facts. The discussion was on predictions and computer modeling.

What is your expertise in this area?

Capt - gave his, factchecker has shown her inability to counter facts.

"nerdboy is the perfect example of the religious ferocity this subject has promoted. Won't look at both sides, just contemputous dismissal, as pathetic as any bushbot. Tell me nerdboy, what do you know about Mt. Kilimanjaro, the equatorial volcano that is rapidly losing it's glacier to melting?"

Where are you coming from? And what do you know about the subject? Anything?

Religious ferocity? WTF are you on about?

You are an example of a reactionary kook!

Where did you get religious ferocity from my writing? Please offer an example or an apology.

I bet you do not even know what computer language you are using - no looking it up.

The 2005 season is finally over!

The amazing 2005 Atlantic hurricane season has shattered many long-standing records, chief among them a record number of named storms, twenty-seven, which has obliterated the previous record of twenty-one in 1933. There were 15 hurricanes this season breaking the old record of 12 set in 1969. Another record set was for the most category-five hurricanes, three, with Katrina, Rita and Wilma. Wilma became the strongest hurricane on record in the Atlantic Basin with a pressure of 882 mb breaking the old record set by Gilbert (888 mb) in 1988. Katrina likely will be the costliest U.S. hurricane on record. Also, the final seasonal tally for damage will be the greatest in U.S. history, breaking the previous record set just last year. The landfall of four major hurricanes in the U.S. also set a record.

Overview of the 2005 hurricane season:

The 2005 season began early with Tropical Storm Arlene forming on June 9th from a tropical depression in the southwest Caribbean Sea. Tropical Storm Bret also formed in June making it only the 13th time since 1851 that 2 tropical storms are known to have formed in June.

A record active July followed, wherein 5 named storms (Cindy, Dennis, Emily, Franklin and Gert) formed. The previous record for the number of named storms in July was four. Of the 5 named storms, 2 major hurricanes formed tying a record set in 1916. The seven named storms that had formed up until the end of July represented a record level of activity for the first two months of the season.

A further five named storms formed in August of which two were hurricanes bringing the seasonal total to 12 named storms and 4 hurricanes - well above the long term average as of August 31st, which is 4.4 storms and 2.1 hurricanes. August also saw the development of Hurricane Katrina, which will likely be one of the most costly and destructive storms in US history. At one stage a category-5 hurricane, Katrina ultimately made landfall in Louisiana and Mississippi at category 4 strength. While loss of life will not approach the magnitude of the Galveston Hurricane of 1900 (6000-12000 deaths), it nonetheless caused approximately 1,200 deaths and will likely cost more than 80 billion dollars - by far the highest cost of any hurricane in history. In September, five hurricanes formed leading to a seasonal total nearly double the June-September average number of named storms. In only one other year (1933) had this many storms (17) formed by the end of September. The 2005 season eventually surpassed 1933 for the number of named tropical cyclones. The second category five hurricane of the season developed in September - Hurricane Rita. Impacting the Florida Keys and eventually the Texas/Louisiana border, it prompted massive evacuations along the Gulf Coast and caused widespread damage in parts of Southwest Louisiana, just weeks after Katrina impacted the state. Hurricane Ophelia also impacted the US as it raked the North Carolina coast leading to 10-12 inches of rain for coastal areas as well as significant coastal erosion.

More HERE

*****end of clip*****

Anybody can have an opinion but those pesky facts are thus.

"As a rule we disbelieve all the facts and theories for which we have no use." ~ William James (1842 - 1910)

capt

Mr. Benson, I disagree that any study has conclusively proven humans are the sole reason for any global warming that may be occurring. How many of these studies acknowledge the role methane plays? It is potentially more hazardous that CO2 and is emitted in the largest quantities by termites and rotting plant life as well as rice paddies. Same with solar activity which contributes greatly to earths climate over time. Another factor is the heat island effect. And there's this from Atmospheric and space physicist Dr. S. Fred Singer, a Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia who serves as president of the non-profit Science & Environmental Policy Project - www.sepp.org.

Not only is the current warming well below even the lowest limits given by the IPCC, the UN-appointed climate science panel, but the IPCC claim (in its 2001 report) that the 20th century was the warmest in 1000 years has turned out to be complete fiction -- based on mishandled data and faulty methodology.

Like I said, for every claim for this theory I can present the opposite claim. That only means that no one is doing anything beyond guessing, computer models are only predictions, and not very accurate ones yet, not facts.

Factchecker has no facts to share.

I will not waste my time educating you.

If you think for a fatmosecond that old IBM mainframes could offer the same modeling as today you are just too dumb to confuse your point of view with a single fact.

Get yourself an edumacation!
Posted by: Nerdboy at March 3, 2006 04:53 PM

I'm sorry, but this struck me as unnecessarily rude. BTW, what does computer language have to do with Mt. Kilimanjaro? Does that mean you don't know? You say I'm a reactionary kook? That's a laugh! I'm sure everyone here who knows me well will back you on that.
Capt, I am not disputing known facts, I am only saying that there are many credible studies out there that are debating this theory. And no one can deny it is being used as a club to whip us into fear and panic. I treat the research the same way I treat issues up for a vote. The first thing I do is find out who or what is supporting a given issue, that tells me a lot about it right away. I just wish science could remain neutral to politics. But someone always has something to gain.

Another Orwellian moment in Bushworld: So...bush sneaks into Pakistan earlier than planned under the cover of night. Pakistan is supposed to be the U.S.'s "most allied ally in Asia" and partner in the "war on terror" in neighboring Afghanistan. bush yaks about fostering democracy in Pakistan, but Musharraf is a military dictator. Islamabad is in lock-down mode for bush's visit, and according to people there, military helicopters FILL the sky. Over 7,000 security personnel are patrolling the streets around bush's "secure" location at the U.S. Embassy.

Oh, well...

Saladin,

Nobody is saying that man is the ONLY reason for global warming. You cannot deny the fact that we are dumping hundreds of thousands of tons of carbon into the atmoshpere from coal and oil.

That is a fact.

"And no one can deny it is being used as a club to whip us into fear and panic."

Show me someone in a panic before you can say it is undeniable?

The big oil companies have been the ones denying that their industry contributes to global warming. It is vey odd to hear you accept their crud as fact?

No big deal.

It seems you do not want to debate the issue - your mind is the one made up.

AGAIN - no big deal.

capt

I couldn't access the link, maybe because it's too current but in this week's Economist magazine, they cover a scientific conference where a number of scientists presented evidence from a past global warming era in the earth's history that, when they ran the preconditions through their current models, did not reproduce as high temperatures as occured. Their conclusion is that the current models are underestimating the impact of global warming.

Re #77

Nobody says anything about 'conclusive proof'. This is science, not mathematics. The preponderance of the evidence is that global warming is strongly enhanced by human activity. Read the two Ruddiman books.

Everything I read, lots by now, discussed the role of methane as a greenhouse gas. Termites, etc., have been around for much longer than 400,000 years but in that interval there is only one methane spike comperable to today. And so it goes, on and on and ... No one piece of evidence is adequate to support a conclusion of human intervention in the climate. It takes all of it, from all over the globe to piece this story together.

Singer's story is going to have to change or his reputation will be completely ruined. The major piece of evidence he trumpeted for years has now shown to be completely wrong --- and in line with other global warming predictions. For more along much the same lines, see the RealClimate web site, where honest scientists attempt to set the story straight and who are prefectly ready to say they don't know when they don't.

The mere fact that there are opposite claims is not relevant. It has been shown time and again that the opposite claims fly in the face of the data. I assure you that climatologists are not guessing. I assure you that the major use of computer climate models is to improve the accuracy of the models and only incidently to predict.

Everybody agrees that the climate models are not very accurate. In the case of weather forecasting one can prove that no forecast beyond 10 days is reliable. Something similar, but nobody knows exactly what, is true for climate predictions. So very few attempt to predict for more than 100 years, some only for 20.

However, the govenment makes policy based on predictions of economists, whose models are, imho, no better. But it is all we have in an attempt to wisely allocate resources. Should not we do the came with regard to the risks associated with climate?

Just the opposite of your question. What does any mountain have to do with computer modeling and weather prediction? You thought me rude so you call me a bushbot? I work for the DNC you idiot!

So just for fun, what does Mt. Kilimanjaro have to do with computer modeling - specifically with regard to IBM mainframes and current PC or Cray supercomputer predictions?

Or did you misspeak?

Polite people apologize when they are wrong.

I did not think you were man enough to own up to your mistake. (I know you are a female I have read this blog for before) You are dead wrong.

So offer an answer and quit trying to change the subject. The subject was COMPUTER MODELING AND WEATHER PREDICTION WITH IBM MAINFRAMES AND CURRENT TECHNOLOGY.

Any expertise on the subject other than talking about mountains?

You ARE a Nerd, Boy.

According to many scientists we are in a new geological epoch -- the Anthropocene Era. Many of them agree that humans now have a greater impact on the earth than does nature.

Why does everything have to always come down to a fight: I'm right! No, you're stupid! You don't know what you're talking about! "Your igorant!" I refuse to believe that because someone is going to benefit and it ain't gonna be me!

Face it folks: The challenge is not about feeling guilty for our consumption and wasteful ways or virtuous for being green and aware. The challenge is about recognizing that, as the human race we stand or fall together.

Jeez louise!

"Everybody agrees that the climate models are not very accurate. In the case of weather forecasting one can prove that no forecast beyond 10 days is reliable."

The accuracy for reliable weather forecasts is currently only one day. I looked it up.

For what it's worth.

Still factchecker is dead wrong about mainframes, trust me, I was considered an expert years ago (a silly title as there are no experts). Mainframes used IBM 360 architecture which was ostensibly print-punch so no graphics. Major difference there. There was no Doppler radar used in civilian weather forecasts. 30 years has made a major difference.

Old green CRT's (still used today in some places) have 80 columns on the screen (to match a punch card).

They still use EBCDIC - Extended Binary coded Decimal Interchange Code - and a C-1 is still the letter "a" for what that is worth too! C is 12 so 12-1 (column 12 on position 1 on a old punch card). I can still add and subtract in hexadecimal, octal, and binary. (that is worth nothing but a little historical fun).

capt

It is all in the name!

What a bunch? Name calling is not nice.

I am bushbot that volunteers my time for the DNC do YOU?

You guys are wacked.

Re #78 -- "credible studies debating ..."

Nope. All of these that I know about have been severely critized, on one grounds or another. You can almost always find the reasons and/or the links at RealClimate.

Science, honest science, should inform policy. We (attempt to) organize government into a majority and a loyal opposition in those matters for which science has not provided any definitive answers. There are just lots and lots of these. But climate science has just recently matured enough, say since 2004 or 2005, to be able to make fairly good projections regarding climate in the 21st century. The main thrust is that greenhouse gases, principally carbon dioxide and methane, will produce significant effects. Period. Done deal. Will happen.

Further, many predict horrific effects if mankind continues to increase fossil fuel use as in the recent past. (A horrific effect is an increase in sea stand by 23--25 meters, along with rather quite a bit warmer, this maybe in 200 years.) For them something need doing now. But read what Ruddiman has to say.

Jeanne,

Do you see that the studies you site only go back 35 years? As I said in my post at 58, if one takes that study back to a larger sample, say back to the 30's, then the hurricanes of today are no stronger, and, in fact, weaker. Besides, Hurricane Camille, the largest Category 5 storm ever to hit the mainland (probably)was in 1969, and, therefore, not in the study. Nor were the major storms that hit the Florida Keys in the 30's.

And please notice that Nerdboy said that models today are better than the 70's, but has absolutely no facts to back up his assertion. He sounds very young, and hopefully wisdom will come with age.

Hope that helps.

Captain,

I defer to your superior computer knowledge, from one old man to another. All I ever did was give my statistical models to others and let them punch up the cards, on an old 26, if I remember correctly. Am I bringing back some old memories?

But I haven't seen any new modeling. I do know there is better input now, however, including the aforementioned Doppler. But Doppler doesn't do anything for forecasts more than one week off.

Unfactual-checker,

What is YOUR expertise on mainframes in the 70's?

You sound very full of yourself, where is a single fact to back your assertions?

Would you like to discuss page size and frame rate on an IBM mainframe? How about a super-mini? I am well read on the issue. Shall we discuss facts or are you just a pathetic name caller?

capt

I can't figure out why we are arguing a point about global warming. We are polluting the earth. No question. We are running out of oil. No question. What do we do to solve those things? If solving those problems helps global warming that will be wonderful.

Do you know what "Multiple Virtual System Extended Architecture- time share option - extended" even means? (MVS-XA TSOe)

(it is the system operating procedural language on mainframes 3083 and 3090)

Stick with what you know as you are only making yourself sound more stupid than your over-spoken handle.

Any old programmer will know of what I speak, you sir, will not. To compare the technology today to that of thirty years ago is just plain uninformed. (better input? yeah that's the only difference)

I do not assert my "knowledge" on many things but you stepped into my area and you have not the slightest idea of what you speak.

Thanks

capt

It seems like a common sense issue.

We should be using less oil, coal, fossil fuels.

We should be concerned with the pollution we create.

We should treat the earth with some respect.

But what do I know?

capt

Mr. Corn wants to bet $100 that, 50 years from now, Bush is remembered for not stopping global warming.

I guess it is biologically possible that I might be around in 50 years, but not likely.

Presidents (fairly or unfairly) are usually only remembered for one (or at MOST two) things. Since I started grade school: Kennedy got killed, LBJ--Vietnam and Great Society, Nixon--Watergate and opening to China, Ford fell down a lot, Carter...Camp David accords and got bit by a rabbit, Reagan--end of Cold War, GHW Bush--Gulf War I, Clinton--Monica (and Paula and Juanita and Gennifer), and GW Bush--9-11 and war in Iraq. Again, I'm not saying these are fair, but presidents are seldom remembered for more than one or two things.

I suspect that is how W will be remembered, as a failure....failure to stop 9-11, the failure of his grand plan for Mid East happiness through starting a war in Iraq, failure to stop the explosion of deficits, failure to stop the collapse of the dollar that would occur in the next administration. I suspect George W Bush will be seen in Hoover-esque terms, at best. At least Hoover could speak in complete sentences.

Bob

Conservative weekly: Chertoff has 'only a few days left'

According to an article at a top Conservative weekly, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has "only a few days left," RAW STORY has found.

On Thursday, former FEMA director Michael D. Brown said that Chertoff deserved to be fired for his performance during Hurricane Katrina, and another official who oversaw the federal response, Matthew Broderick, director of operations for DHS, resigned.

Excerpts from the article written by John Gizzi, Political Editor for Human Events Online:

In the aftermath of the public revelation of the presidential "teleconference" and mounting criticism of the performance of Michael Chertoff, Administration sources told HUMAN EVENTS today that the secretary of Homeland Security has "only a few days left" in the Bush Cabinet.

As one source acquainted with the former federal prosecutor and U.S. appellate judge said under promise of anonymity, "They will give [Chertoff] a little time so it won't hurt his reputation too much, but he's probably got only a few days left."

----------------
I thought he was the best and the brightest. What happened?

Peak oil or global warming are not the issue.

We (humans) are messing up the planet for ourselves, it is the only planet we have so far.

It really does not matter who predicts what, we are messing our own nest as we speak.

That should be a concern for all, predictions or not.

capt

Best and brightest was Meir. Look at what happened to her.

Captain,

I don't understand your assertion. I am sure I've been a "pathetic name caller", as you state, somewhere along the way, but whose name did I besmirch here?

As I said previously, I defer to you in computing, but I haven't seen anyone here who can talk about statistical modeling, especially Nerdboy, other than casting aspersions.

The claim was that modeling is better today than thirty years ago. Really? How? Specifically? And, please, no "computers are stonger today than previously". That doesn't mean anything. Stronger to do what?

And what statistical anomolies were present in the 1970's models that said the world was cooling? And, in statistical terms, why should the current models be any better, or worse than those of 30 years ago?

Bush faces angry reception in Pakistan

President Bush saluted a new era of friendship and economic co-operation between the United States and India today, declaring that the world's two largest democracies were "closer than ever before".

Mr Bush made the comments at the end of a three-day visit to India that saw a landmark agreement yesterday under which India will be able to import Western technology and fuel for its fast-growing nuclear power programme.

The visit to India provoked multiple protests by Indian Muslims and leftists angered by the US-led invasion of Iraq. Three people were killed today in Lucknow, the capital of Uttar Pradesh state, when dozens of armed Muslims tried to force Hindu shopkeepers to join an anti-Bush protest and shut their stores.

But Mr Bush faces the prospect of much more widespread demonstrations when he touches in down in Pakistan tonight for the final leg of his South Asian tour.

Although Pakistan is seen as a key ally in the War on Terror, anti-Americanism runs deep and the country was virtually paralysed today when Islamist parties called a nationwide strike. Mr Bush's arrival comes one day after a suicide bomb attack on the US consulate in Karachi which killed three people, including a US diplomat.

More HERE

*****end of clip*****

Anyone want to wager that Commander Bunnypants knees were knocking?

Did we get any agreement on the important issues like mangoes or cashews? How about those submarine launched missiles the Paki's are trying to make?

capt

Re #99

Cptn can defend himself. But I have been working with and teaching about computers and software for 50 years now. I assure you that the models used for weather prediction, hurricane prediction and especially climate modeling are vastly improved over those used 30 years ago. This primarily has to do with a combination of faster computers and vast improvements in data collection.

Only in the popular press did one see predictions of cooling in the 1970s. Not in the scientific literature. And the same problem with the press continues today, scientific illiteracy. Briefly, do not trust anything reported in the press regarding climate. Instead, there will be commentary about what was printed on the RealClimate web site. That'll get it straight, with honestly informed knowledge about the little climate matter which the press has sensationalized.

If you truly believe there have not been major improvements in computer modeling just visit a few sites that speak to the issue?

Why should I list them for you?Here is a list for you anyway.

We have satellite and real time info that feeds computers with many times the throughput. We have new engineers making major strides daily.

You cannot make a case that weather prediction is the same or has the same faults as years ago, not even last year.

Your position is wrong because it is not reality based.

Nerdboy was right, get yourself an education.

As time passes things change.

capt

Friday Headlines to Make You Laugh and Cry at the Same Time

"Rumsfeld Cautions against too Many Troops in Iraq". I swear to God, that is what it says.

"Iraq now 'Less Safe'. Oh, I'd say so.

"Pentagon Dismisses US Troop Poll". A Pentagon spokesman actually said, "It shouldn't surprise anybody that a deployed soldier would rather be at home than deployed . . ."

Is that what Bush has been saying? "It is also important for every American to understand the consequences of pulling out of Iraq before our work is done. . . We would undermine the morale of our troops by betraying the cause for which they have sacrificed.

"Now it turns out the troops think the US should get out within a year.

"Iran to Invest $1 Billion in Iraq"

"Late 30s aren't Too Late to Enlist". Jonah Goldberg, Michael Rubin and Dan Senor alert.

Fox News asks, "Could All-Out Civil War in Iraq be a Good Thing?" You can't make this stuff up.

Followed by: "Iraq Civil War: Made up by the Media?".

*****

Juan Cole is kicking butt today!

capt

"It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes." : Andrew Jackson - (1767-1845) 7th US President 1832

=
"Big Brother in the form of an increasingly powerful government and in an increasingly powerful private sector will pile the records high with reasons why privacy should give way to national security, to law and order, to efficiency of operation, to scientific advancement and the like.": Justice William O. Douglas - (1898-1980), U. S. Supreme Court Justice - Source: Points of Rebellion, 1969

=
"Throughout the history of the United States, war has been the primary impetus behind the growth and development of the central state. It has been the lever by which presidents and other national officials have bolstered the power of the state in the face of tenacious popular resistance." : Bruce D. Porter (1952- ) Professor of political science at Brigham Young University - Source: "War and the Rise of the State", 1994

===

Thanks ICH Newsletter!

The Monolith Crumbles: Reality and Revisionism in Iran

It is a well-known fact –†except among the American media, the American government, and about 98.7 percent of the American people –†that Iran is not a monolithic state where sheep-like masses bray with a single voice in chorus with their demented leaders, but is, on the contrary, a complex society where many conflicting opinions on matters political, religious, social, historical, etc., contend with each other in open debate. True, it does have a government dominated by repressive clerics, who exercise the kind of veto power over secular law that George W. Bush's vaunted "base" dreams of seeing established in the United States; but Iran is far more open than, say, Saudi Arabia or China, just to name two countries where the Bush Family and friends have long engorged their bellies through insider connections with the ruling cliques.

Therefore it must have come as a great shock to the system for Americans this week to hear Iran's former president, Mohammad Khatami, rail against the ignorant Holocaust revisionism mouthed by his successor, the hardline flibbertigibbet Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. (Excerpts after the jump below.) Or rather, it would have come as a shock to the American system to hear Khatami's words –†if Americans had actually been told about them. But it serves no interests among America's own ruling cliques to dilute the current line of the day: that Iran is a hellhole of unremitting evil, a new Nazi Germany led by a new Hitler. So Khatami's remarks, reported widely elsewhere in the world, were not allowed to disturb the lie-drugged slumber of the American consciousness.

More HERE

*****end of clip*****

"were not allowed to disturb the lie-drugged slumber of the American consciousness.

Sad and true.

capt

#92 Jeanne -- I agree!

Capt, I have admitted from the very beginning that my mind is NOT made up, but because I don't fall right into line that makes it made up? Whatever.
D. Benson, I don't need anyone brow beating me to get me to be ecologically aware. I have not denied that people are causing serious harm to this planet, I have always been conservative minded, I do it because I think it is important to leave my little speck of earth better than I found it if at all possible. I have not claimed to be an expert on climatology or the environment, on the contrary, I admitted that I am not sure and so continue my own research, and have been hammered as I knew I would be for it. However, as far as I know, none of the people here are experts either but are certain beyond the shadow of a doubt that the theory of global warming is an undeniable fact. I see the claims of imminant catastrophe all over the media, fear, panic, etc. I do know there are several very serious threats right around the corner, that we are facing right this minute, that will make possible future climate change pale into insignificance if we don't deal with it right now. If we start launching nukes when our whole economy collapses I promise you, global warming will be the last thing anyone will worry about. And those two scenarios are far more likely in the VERY near future. You're right Capt, I'm not going to debate this anymore, it's as useless as debating whether evolution is intelligently driven or an accident. 35 years of controversial research is not enough to make me say yes or no for sure, at least I have the courage to admit it and keep looking, because the earth is as important to me as it is to the most ardent environmentalist. And in the mean time I do the best I can to show the respect and love it deserves. Even if all scientists said everything is perfect and has never been better, I would do the same.

micki 85, AMEN!
Nerdboy 87, for clarification I did NOT call you a bushbot, BTW working for the DNC makes no impression on me because I can't stand them. I said that your one sided ranting was as pathetic as any bushbot who tend to come here and do the same thing. Excuse me but I thought the subject was global warming and the damage that has occurred because of it. I am so sorry.

Uhm...yeah...

We can point to man's effect on the damages hurricanes cause easily enough. We can agree that whatever the cause, Arctic, Antarctic, Greenland and other land and sea ice is melting.

How much damage that does to coastal regions is (arguably) yet to be seen.

The death of natural barrier islands, reefs and coastal marshes will serve to exacerbate the effects of ANY hurricane landfall. Can anyone claim that the losss of these natural buffers have NOT been at the hands of man?

My point being...it doesn't really matter how severely man's pollution of the earth, the water and the atmosphere is changing the climate...the fact that it demonstrably DOES means that the effort to end such detrimental behavior is surely a noble one.

Like all issues, passions become inflamed when beliefs are questioned.

You all are smart enough to see that.

'cept for maybe the Capt...

He's obviously insane!

that's why I love him so.

-T

And now for a subject I think it is safe to say we ALL agree on!

Resolution to Impeach Bush-Cheney Passes 7-3
by Ken Werner, Trinity Plaza Tenants Association (TPTA)⠍ar. 03⠲006

From: BeyondChron.org SF alternative media

On Tuesday, February 28, 2006, the City and County of San Francisco became the first large municipality to call for the impeachment of George Bush and Dick Cheney, by a 7-3 vote. Supervisors Sean Elsbernd, Michela Alioto-Pier, and Sophie Maxwell cast the dissenting votes (Sup. Jake McGoldrick was absent for the vote). Sup. Chris Daly commenced his introduction of Agenda Item 27 with "I initially thought this ... would be a noncontroversial piece of legislation. Perhaps it still is, maybe not-a-unanimous-vote piece of legislation. But if you remember when we took our oath of office we swore to uphold the Constitution."

Sal, all we can do at this point is to think responsibly ourselves. Recycle waste, stop using products that pollute and cannot be removed from nature, conserve our resources, encourage others to do the same. We are each culprits when it comes to polluting and reducing the ozone.

Common Sense on Climate Change

The technology exists to build cars, minivans, and SUVs that are just as powerful and safe as vehicles on the road today, but get 40 miles per gallon (mpg) or more.

Better transmissions and engines, more aerodynamic designs, and stronger yet lighter material for chassis and bodies can cost-effectively increase the average fuel economy of today's automotive fleet from 24 mpg to 40 mpg over 10 years. This would be equivalent to taking 44 million cars off the road—°nd it would save individual drivers thousands of dollars in fuel costs over the life of a vehicle.

Five Common Sense Solutions:
#1 Better Cars and Suvs (above)
#2: Modernize America's Electricity System
#3: Increase Energy Efficiency
#4: Protect Threatened Forests
#5: Support American Ingenuity

More HERE

*****end of clip*****

"UCS is an independent nonprofit alliance of more than 100,000 concerned citizens and scientists. We augment rigorous scientific analysis with innovative thinking and committed citizen advocacy to build a cleaner, healthier environment and a safer world."

I am completely insane you know.

capt

Longest sentence ever given to ex-congressman
________________

SAN DIEGO - Former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, who collected $2.4 million in homes, yachts, antique furnishings and other bribes on a scale unparalleled in the history of Congress, was sentenced Friday to eight years and four months in prison, the longest term meted out to a congressman in decades.

Cunningham, who resigned from Congress in disgrace last year, was spared the 10-year maximum by U.S. District Judge Larry Burns. He also was ordered to pay $1.8 million in restitution for back taxes.
_________________

Am I having DejaVu all over again, or did we debate the severity of some other politician/crook (but I repeat myself) not long ago?

I'm getting that familiar feeling.

-T

(scat singing) one two three four
If I had ever been here before
I would probably know just what to do
Don't you?
If I had ever been here before on another time around the wheel
I would probably know just how to deal
With all of y