Patterico's Pontifications

6/13/2011

Open Thread: GOP Debate

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 5:31 pm



Sorry I am just opening this now. I just got home.

Thoughts?

248 Responses to “Open Thread: GOP Debate”

  1. I just sat down to this thing. Who is winning?

    Patterico (135ea8)

  2. Newt by my estimation. But I’m always wrong.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  3. What a bunch of stupid questions they are asking. Elvis or Johnny Cash? Jesus.

    Patterico (135ea8)

  4. not watching. hate cnn.

    Aaron Worthing (73a7ea)

  5. I’ve been following the open thread on hot air, looks like Bachmann is the fav… as of 8:35

    Hargoosh (d0e9bc)

  6. Elvis or Johnny Cash? Jesus.

    Comment by Patterico —

    THIS…. IS CNN

    Dustin (c16eca)

  7. First question to everyone-Are you against masturbation?

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  8. Yeah, Leno or Conan?

    Pepsi or Coke?

    CNN or a real news outfit?

    Heaven forbid they ask what Obama’s biggest three mistakes have been, or how serious the deficit is, or what to do about Iran or Syria or Libya.

    If you were a tree, Pine or Spruce?

    Dustin (c16eca)

  9. Why is the CNN guy talking more then all the candidates combined?
    What the hell, is he running?

    papertiger (e55ba0)

  10. I can’t watch CNN either and it’s hard to respect a Team R candidate what indulges those losers by showing up and providing fodder for a bunch of Time Warner propaganda whores.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  11. Also, the moderator, King, sucks. They should have a Republican moderate these things, and one who is interested in complete answers. This should be a showcase of the candidates, not of CNN or Twitter.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  12. Charles Johnson’s question to Michelle Bachman-Why are you stalking me on my website?

    Michelle Bachman-Who the hell are you?

    Charles Jonson-That’s it i’am gonna ban you from my website.

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  13. That’s it i’am gonna ban you from my website.

    Comment by DohBiden

    Let the record reflect that I laughed.

    Anyway, King is terrible,and it makes these candidates look a bit like suckers. It’s difficult to tell them apart, because they can’t really get beyond the most basic answers.

    Any debate where Ron Paul sounds reasonable is not doing a good enough job of exposition.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  14. Man i’am laughing too.

    Question to all contenders-why do you hate the poor?

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  15. why are they bothering with this?

    we all know Sarah is the best candidate out there, regardless of party.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  16. Well, OK, Ron just proposed cutting foreign militarism to fund entitlements. That’s absurd. Never mind.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  17. That’s it i’am gonna ban you from my website.

    First G Mail and now Charlie. I can’t catch a break.

    The reason I come back here so often. You guys don’t give a damn what I do, and the rest of them won’t have me.

    papertiger (e55ba0)

  18. Pawlenty finally gets into nuts and bolts on medicare reform, and King is “ah ah ah ah ah ah” half the damn time.

    First guy to directly address King and ask him to stop inter ah ah ah fering gets a donation.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  19. I do not think it is possible for me to care less about these debates.

    JD (318f81)

  20. You know what would spice the thing up – A Jeopardy format with Alex Trebec as moderator.

    At the end we’d know who won. There wouldn’t be any doubt

    papertiger (e55ba0)

  21. Only if Sean Connery, SNL version, was a contestant.

    Simon Jester (34989a)

  22. OMG, Patterico. Your question suggestions to CNN are hilarious.

    MayBee (081489)

  23. Santorum actually is pretty good, too. I like that he actually noted we’re already going to cut and ration in 2014 as things are now. I like that he memorized a specific explanation of why that is.

    Cain’s response isn’t perfect. I detect a hint of waffling (such as on retirement age).

    And Romney’s just got that x factor. His voice and tenor are great, and his turning the question onto ‘where’s Obama?’ really appeals. Somehow, Romney looks more like a leader. And for the record, I’m not at all disposed towards Romney.

    “Let’s shorten those answers so we can keep the voters involved – King”

    THAT IS THE STUPIDEST THING I’VE EVER HEARD

    Dustin (c16eca)

  24. ZOMFGBBQ. Mary Anne or Ginger? If you were a car, would you be a Lexus or a Prius?

    JD (318f81)

  25. Cain is opening that can of worms again, on how he isn’t comfortable with Muslims in his admin.

    I appreciate that he reject Sharia. That’s a big issue. But it takes a special care to express that.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  26. So what are the odds the moderator asks questions about masturbation???

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  27. And dammit they show Romney’s face and he’s got the same look on it I do. Dammit dammit I really don’t want to like Romney.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  28. @ Dustin,

    “Let’s shorten those answers so we can keep the voters involved – King”

    Because he assumes everyone the same short attention span that he does.

    Dana (4eca6e)

  29. Twitterer from San Fran: Circumsized or uncircumsized?

    ∅ (e7577d)

  30. Uh-oh, Newt brought up Nazis!

    Dana (4eca6e)

  31. I keep waiting for him to say, on a scale of 1-10, how racist are Republicans, or somethiNg equally vapid.

    JD (318f81)

  32. “deep dish or thin crust”

    Not Kidding. They asked that.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  33. ok I am home where is the link

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  34. I keep waiting for him to say, on a scale of 1-10, how racist are Republicans, or somethiNg equally vapid.

    Comment by JD —

    I like how Herman Cain’s race is completely not mentioned. He’s simply equal to everyone else there. His ideas get applauded because of the idea. He gets challenged because of the idea.

    No ‘historic’ nonsense. This is the Republican party, and for all its faults, that’s a good aspect. Something John Mccain never understood.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  35. happyfeet, cnn.com

    Dustin (c16eca)

  36. thank you here is the link but the cnn whores want you to install some octomom software crap

    I’ll pass

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  37. I declined that software, happyfeet, and the video loaded anyway.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  38. oh it works anyway it’s just glitchy

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  39. has anyone commented yet about how awash in white people the audience is?

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  40. they are asking about gay marriagings

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  41. Oh you poor, poor sad people watching this debate. Have you no lives?

    elissa (784284)

  42. John King is sputtering like a demented teapot — “Blump! Flarp! Verdip! Bup!” — in his attempts to hem the candidates into 30 second sound bites.

    King should be (metaphorically) horse-whipped, tarred, and feathered.

    I would have respected all of these candidates a great deal more if they’d agreed to boycott CNN and this silly, too-early, ridiculously formatted debate.

    Beldar (a4d09e)

  43. Cain has a point about Muslims, but like raising the retirement age or rationing healthcare, people aren’t willing to accept this.

    Some Muslims (not Methodists, Presbyterians, or Buddhists) are separating themselves from the U.S. and loyalty to the consitution. This is a problem, and there is a militant faction acting as a Shadow Warrior right here, right now, in the US.

    I am digging Cain.

    TimesDisliker (e18626)

  44. John King looks like an undertaker

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  45. what’s Gingrich doing there?

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  46. Herman Cain has the best Same Sex answer in my book. Let the states go their various ways. Bachman too.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  47. Pawlenty is such a pandering whore he already said he would reinstate DADT now he’s flip-flopping.

    Which, that’s good I guess. If he’s gonna pander he might as well pander to me.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  48. Bachmann is pretty but a bit eager to amend the constitution for my taste

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  49. has anyone commented yet about how awash in white people the audience is?

    I didn’t notice…never thought about doing such a funny inventory…

    Dana (4eca6e)

  50. Santorum just looks constipated

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  51. The Bruins are up 4-0 at the end of the first period…

    -x(not watching the debate…obviously)mas

    Xmas (7b3dbd)

  52. It’s an interesting first look a the Republican candidates. (second and third look at some). Newt cheated on his wife with cancer … he’s the John Edwards of Republicans. How do he get around that?

    Bachmann is just dangerously stupid: ”(Gay marriage) is probably the biggest issue that will impact our state and our nation in the last, at least, thirty years.” What an embarrassment for all women.

    Ron Paul always makes the most sense and then steps over to “WHAT?” But he has the most common sense answers.

    Cain got in trouble with the Muslim question.

    Pawlenty, I like what he says, but his state is a mess. How do you get around that?

    Rick Santorum is not a presidential candidate. He is a VP candidate.

    Mitt Romney is a used car salesman. Most people where I grew up view him as such.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  53. Some Muslims (not Methodists, Presbyterians, or Buddhists) are separating themselves from the U.S. and loyalty to the consitution

    I wish Cain had simply said he insists on loyalty to the US Constitution and this country, and perhaps identified Nidal Hasan as the sort of person who is disloyal.

    Newt answered this well.

    John King is sputtering like a demented teapot — “Blump! Flarp! Verdip! Bup!” — in his attempts to hem the candidates into 30 second sound bites.

    This really does disgust me. These answers should be more detailed. It’s OK to ask fewer questions and let the candidates have fleshed out answers. This is ridiculous. They should have boycotted CNN, whose interest is not to help or permit these Republicans to make their case.

    It’s also annoying they are focusing on social issues. This is clearly an effort to keep us off the economy and issues like Libya and Iran and immigration. DADT? Abortion? Seriously? The only serious issue the democrats want to talk about is Medicare, so they can build advertisements to scare people with, and lo and behold, that is the only serious issue they gave much time to.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  54. -x(not watching the debate…obviously)mas

    Comment by Xmas

    Actually, Romney interjected that point for some stupid reasons.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  55. Dana these things are staged staged staged and you can bet CNN wants you to take away a certain impression

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  56. Mitt Romney is a used car salesman. Most people where I grew up view him as such.

    Comment by Anita Busch

    Yes, but he has really really improved his skills at salesmanship. I wonder how hard he’s worked on that over the past couple of years.

    I’m not going to vote for him, but he’s a contender.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  57. happyfeet, it’s in New Hampshire. New Hampshire is 93.9% white.

    The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race, though. I look forward to the day you’ll be embarrassed to say something like you just said (should be today, actually), and the day the U.S. government no longer maintains that statistic.

    Beldar (a4d09e)

  58. happyfeet,

    CNN might have done that but I think only the left buys the crap they’re selling. Most of us know better.

    Dana (4eca6e)

  59. I just figured out who Pawlenty reminds me of

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  60. They have touched on pretty much all topics that are important to voters, esp. any Independents that are on the fence. Newt is the best politician of the group up there, but he is morally bankrupt.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  61. Hmrph, botched the link, trying again.

    Beldar (a4d09e)

  62. Okay, why is Patterico’s disabling my links somewhere between “Live Preview” and “Submit Comment”?

    http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/33000.html

    Beldar (a4d09e)

  63. oh. I’m just saying there sure is a lotta white folk in that audience. I think that’s what you’re supposed to see when CNN slowly pans the crowd. It matters Mr. Beldar cause identity politics is the bread and butter of American politics anymore.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  64. Why is he a contender? ObomneyCare? AGW?

    JD (318f81)

  65. __________________________________

    Why couldn’t America’s first black president have been Herman Cain? Instead, we got a sleaze like Bill Clinton, the honorary “first black president” of the US, and the guy now in the White House, who’s technically only half-black.

    If 90-plus percent of the African-American community had the mindset and socio-political biases of Cain instead of, say, Obama, that part of society would really start to come into its own. It would really start to kick butt. For that matter, the same notion applies to the Latino community too.

    Mark (411533)

  66. Wow, Gingrich nailed that immigration question by implying John King’s question was silly. Well done…

    TimesDisliker (e18626)

  67. Newt’s straight-up about the border. I like how he made the distinction that no one should be trapped into a either send them all back or not at all re immigration.

    Dana (4eca6e)

  68. nobody’s attacking Obama

    that my friends is a very very bad sign and portent

    that sure is a pretty set though someone did good work

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  69. Romney is an irredeemable cheesy poof

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  70. Brrrrrrrr.

    Scariest words I’ve heard today were definitely Ron Paul just saying, “I’m commander in chief!” Even hypothetically.

    Beldar (a4d09e)

  71. Why is he a contender? ObomneyCare? AGW?

    Comment by JD

    Money.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  72. Michele is taking it to Obama. She gets a scratch n sniff sticker on her report card for today.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  73. She’s good on this, hf. Interestingly, no applause for her candid answer.

    Dana (4eca6e)

  74. would we were only in debt up to our eyeballs

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  75. Cain is too honest, too soon. “There’s more that we don’t know, than we do know.” Awesome. Everybody else seems to have it all figured out, and I don’t buy it for one second.

    TimesDisliker (e18626)

  76. Romney also was great on Obama when it came to Medicare.

    Though I understand why JD wouldn’t appreciate my praising him. When I say he’s a contender, I am recognizing his possession of that x factor thing, and also his political operation being substantial.

    This ‘ah ah ah’ thing is seriously getting on my nerves.

    Santorum is not really ready for prime time, I think. He’s not distilling his argument.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  77. I kinda enjoyed Santorum’s last riff

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  78. For liklihood of getting my vote, so far, it’s Cain, Bachmann & Pawlenty tied, Santorum, Newt Romney

    For performance tonight, it’s Newt, Romney, Cain, Bachmann, Pawlenty, Santorum

    Dustin (c16eca)

  79. Is that King that keeps sputtering in the background?

    It usually starts about 10 seconds into a response.

    It’s annoying.

    Ag80 (1bc637)

  80. It’s really weird that the GOP lets liberals run their debates. Isn’t that one of the most damned odd things?

    It’s like we’re conceding that they are right, and we are aliens for them to examine.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  81. I’ll start to respect the GOP squad if, at the next MSM-moderated debate, they agree in advance amongst themselves to reply, at the very first question from Anderson Cooper or Katie Couric or whoever, “You know what? Screw you, leftist filth, we’re just going to talk among ourselves for the next two hours.”

    No respect until they all acknowledge what’s really happening and stare it down as a team.

    I’ll say it again: start demanding a debate moderated in full by the right-leaning blogosphere, with the questions asked by Steve Sailer, Patterico, Ann Althouse, and Hinderaker/Johnson. And maybe Ace.

    d. in c. (ae55d7)

  82. Fabulous response from TPaw re Biden!

    Dana (4eca6e)

  83. nice line from Romney about how America’s president is such a feckless loser-douche

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  84. Is that King that keeps sputtering in the background?

    Yes. It’s absolutely ridiculous.

    My wife is starting the ‘ah ah ahs’ for him, and is about ready.

    Romney just very nicely distilled the argument against Obama. Really, he’s got his crap together. I wish it were Perry saying all this.

    Santorum just plainly endorsed Herman Cain. That’s pretty amazing, right?

    Dustin (c16eca)

  85. ________________________________________

    I’m not going to vote for him, but he’s a contender.

    That reminds me of a question that Sean Hannity directed at Ann Coulter a few days ago. He asked her that if the Republican candidate were Romney, would she vote for him. Coulter paused, then gave a look of incredulity. Or perhaps it was exasperation.

    I wasn’t sure if she going to spout off something like “hell, no, the opponent had better be a certified rightist!” Instead, she said that even if Charlie Sheen were the opponent running in 2012, she’d vote for him over Obama.

    I had to laugh, but also at the fact there’s even a slight bit of doubt among various people over the ultra-liberal now in the White House not being reelected next year. The very fact there is that ambivalence or uncertainty illustrates just how screwed up — and leftwing (or “goddamned”) — this society has become.

    Mark (411533)

  86. That was a disaster.

    Ron Paul’s half laughing and weezing ‘federal reserrrrrrrve’ at the end to John King going ‘ah ah ah’ was the perfect commercial for CNN. I hope they run with that.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  87. 82) they have learned nothing in the last four years, double digit unemployment, action in at least
    three or four campaigns, turmoil among all our regional allies and we’re talking about gay marriage, and whatever other distraction,

    ian cormac (72470d)

  88. Amen, Mark.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  89. ok that was a waste of a time it’s interesting how you get the impression from the CNN propaganda whore that there’s really no particular urgency to address America’s actual problems it’s all hey what do you think about Yemen and what about the military homos?

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  90. Glad to see they all made nice at the end, the msm is going to do damage enough. Always good to remember the words of Academy-Award winning comedian Red Buttons: “I come, I spritz, I make nice, I leave.”

    TimesDisliker (e18626)

  91. I’ve got to say, in my humble opinion, Pawlenty may have aquitted himself best in that debate.

    And that’s coming from someone who is skeptical of Pawlenty up until the last 10 days or so.

    And I hate to say it, but Bachmann lost some ground in my eyes, which is a bitter pill indeed as someone who agrees with her more often than not. But I was taken aback by her answer to the question about Libya; I got the sense that she was playing politics with a military mission.

    I far preferred Palin’s initial admonition to go in large and get in over with quickly while Obama was still dithering with the UN about “sanctioning” the mission.

    Cain neither advanced nor regressed. Once again, I was distressed by his nebulous answers to foreign policy questions.

    An illuminating debate, overall.

    Bob Reed (5f2db5)

  92. Governor Romney
    this or that? coffee or tea?
    the Coke or Pepsi?

    ColonelHaiku (8fa4f9)

  93. A good first debate, agreed, Bob Reed.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  94. But I was taken aback by her answer to the question about Libya; I got the sense that she was playing politics with a military mission.

    Her argument was a little simple. Somewhere in there she said ‘that’s all you need to know’ or ‘you can stop right there’ about how Obama let French take the lead.

    But she had a good point. The USA wasn’t leading in this effort, and the entire way we went to war is wrong.

    I didn’t think she came across super well generally, but I do think we should talk about how to handle our war effort legally.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  95. Romney is The Man
    you can not argue with the
    Truth that Romney spoke:

    “Anyone on this stage would do a better job then President Obama.”

    ColonelHaiku (8fa4f9)

  96. Anyway, Newt was good, but he wasn’t good enough to save his campaign by any stretch, right?

    This really isn’t that weak of a field, either. A lot of people with good executive experience. I just think some of the people who sounded the best are the ones I’m not really willing to listen to.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  97. Get it together
    people one purpose resolve
    Obama serves once

    ColonelHaiku (8fa4f9)

  98. I’ve got to say, in my humble opinion, Pawlenty may have aquitted himself best in that debate.

    Also, with respect, I’m not sure I understand how.

    Plenty of chances for T-Paw to really hit Obama that he surprisingly did not. Romney kept wailing at Obama, reinforcing the idea he will do that if nominated. I want Pawlenty to do that.

    I had to run out to get my wife a 7-up, so I missed a bit of the debate, where I bet Pawlenty spoke on a big issue, so what was that?

    Dustin (c16eca)

  99. Oh I agree with you completely Dustin, regarding the legality of the Libyan war effort.

    I guess all of my years “in the saddle” predispose me in favor of a swift, decisive, strategem as opposed to the military minimalism, the analogue to “just in time delivery” manufacturing, that we’re seeing play out right now.

    She did have a good point regarding our ignorance of the makeup of the rebel forces; something Gingrich recap far more lucidly directly after Bachman finished speaking.

    But overall it smacked of the same whinging that the left engaged in during the Bush administration, and, where have all of those “committed” war protesters disappeared to anyway?

    I apologize to all who strongly believe we have no business intervening in Libya; I don’t claim to be the pope of foreign policy. But I hear a lot about “what American interests are served”, and too little about K’Daffy having blood on his hands from the Americans he ordered killed.

    For me, our interests are served by seeing him come to room temperature.

    Which, I’ll be all “mea culpa” about in confession this coming weekend, I’m sure 🙂

    Bob Reed (5f2db5)

  100. I didn’t see a winner I just saw the foreshadowing of a dreary business-as-usual campaign. I wonder what Governor Perry saw?

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  101. Regarding Pawlenty, what impressed me was his command of the issues and his candor.

    Especially after he’d been cut off by the moderator a few times, and had to abandon his pat answers and speak extemporaneously. Then his command, candor, and actual excitement showed through his usual boring delivery.

    He did call out Obama quite a bit, on his ideas. And I really enjoyed near the end where he ripped Biden for having the most boneheaded ideas in recent memory; specifically calling him out over the plan to break up Iraq into 3 smaller entities.

    And I’ve been really skeptical of Pawlenty, so admittedly it wasn’t hard for his stock to go up in my book.

    Bob Reed (5f2db5)

  102. Romney really did go after the Chosen. So, I will give him that.

    But the whole thing was a left-fest of gotcha questions. Everyone did OK. I do have to give credit to Gingrich, also, for calling out the stupidity of the immigration question.

    Ag80 (1bc637)

  103. Governor Perry might have seen the green light, if he percieved the performance as lackluster and dreary as you did happyfeet.

    Bob Reed (5f2db5)

  104. I thought it was pretty good.

    The only problem I really had was Paul’s constant need to talk about the federal reserve…and the whole thing about TARP. TARP worked, and it looks like it will turn a profit. That does not mean we should have done the all the bailouts or the stimulus or most of that stuff, but if all we had done was TARP..we would not be looking at this deficit now. I was disappointed that everyone said they would not support that…when the truth is most of them would, if they were faced with the kind of situation Bush was looking at.. I did not hear any alternatives. It was kind of a gotcha question I think…if you say yes, the Tea Party people will get you..if you say no..well who is going to test it?

    Terrye (007c3b)

  105. But overall it smacked of the same whinging that the left engaged in during the Bush administration, and, where have all of those “committed” war protesters disappeared to anyway?

    I understand where you get the vibe. I’m giving her the benefit of the doubt. But yes, given Libya’s history of murdering Americans, and the support of the world, I do support action there if that action is smart.

    In other words, if we wind up leaving behind an enemy of America, then we failed. Frankly, Qaddafi was scared into coming to the bargaining table. He gave up nukes and (apparently) stopped supporting terrorists. That’s one of Bush’s largest successes, and it was worthwhile to use Libya as an example.

    [John King begins: AH AH AH AH AH AH AH AH]

    Now, what do we have? We have a country giving up a nuke program, and being bombed, vs countries like Iran that laugh in our faces, develop a nuke program, while we shiver at the idea of stopping them. That’s not a good set of rules for the world.

    [John King: Please try to shorten your ah ah ah ah answers}

    Dustin (c16eca)

  106. But the whole thing was a left-fest of gotcha questions.

    I agree. If the democrat party sat down and decided what to focus on, this is the debate we’d have gotten.

    Frankly, one of the debates should be nothing but criticism and suggestions for the Obama economic malaise. One should be nothing but foreign policy, covering south America, Europe, and of course the GWOT.

    And really, Fox News or PJM or Hot Air should host those.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  107. all in all there were
    good questions raised by the folks
    but King sucked Big Time

    ColonelHaiku (8fa4f9)

  108. I disagree, Dustin. I’m not a fan of CNN or – most especially – of King. But I thought the questions… for the most part… were pretty good. Especially in light of the fact this was on CNN.

    ColonelHaiku (8fa4f9)

  109. But the whole thing was a left-fest of gotcha questions.

    I agree. If the democrat party sat down and decided what to focus on, this is the debate we’d have gotten.

    Frankly, one of the debates should be nothing but criticism and suggestions for the Obama economic malaise. One should be nothing but foreign policy, covering south America, Europe, and of course the GWOT.

    And really, Fox News or PJM or Hot Air should host those.

    Comment by Dustin — 6/13/2011 @ 7:36 pm

    So true.

    Terrye (007c3b)

  110. let me clarify
    the people of New Hampshire
    asked some cogent questions

    King – as always – suckled at the hairy hind teat of the Liberal Mainstream Media Sow
    but I repeat myself

    ColonelHaiku (8fa4f9)

  111. ah, I just like bashing CNN.

    Screw them.

    And the only part of the debate I found useful was the Medicare part. Those parts were good, but I realize the democrats really want to focus on Medicare right now for demaogury purposes, so I award no points to CNN for this.

    All those social questions were distractions, IMO, but that’s just me.

    But yes, it’s fair to draw a distinction between King and the questions, that he wasn’t asking after all.

    What point is there of a good question if you only get a few seconds to flesh out an answer before John King starts waving his arms?

    That’s why Romney won the debate. He was ready to boil it all down, score a punch at Obama, and get out of there. Other candidates may have had much more intelligent answers, but it was hard for them to flesh out the specifics.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  112. why are any of these people running for president exactly?

    Paul was the only one what even gave a sense of that I thought, and he’s like a klansman.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  113. Yeah, what the Hell was up with King and his ah, ah, ah? I was waiting for the rest of the Tourette’s to kick in… ah ah ah FOOK!

    ColonelHaiku (8fa4f9)

  114. but for reals that was some backpedaling by Pawlenty on DADT

    I bet Mr. Allah noticed that too

    brb

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  115. I wanted to strangle Pawlenty for his “me, too!” appreciation for the Navy vet with three sons also presently serving. What a waste of precious time, and way to appear to be a blatant panderer in a Democrat mold. The appreciation had been expressed and noted. The audience had applauded to form.

    The various mentions of using the National Guard in foreign territory and refusing to let them actually protect, you know, OUR borders, is a slam-dunk winning issue for us. More, please.

    Ed from SFV (64542f)

  116. c’mon happy feet!
    the common cause is to ensure Obama serves but one term and one term only. THAT should be a given at this point.

    ColonelHaiku (8fa4f9)

  117. nope they don’t have much to say about the debate over there at the hot air place

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  118. Colonel you go to war with the army you have and then after that army gets slaughtered cause they’re weak-assed losers then you’re in a pickle and you’re like oh crap I need to get another army what am I gonna do now

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  119. Hot Air talks about the debate.

    (not the live thread for the debate)

    Dustin (c16eca)

  120. _________________________________________

    I will vote for anyone (ANYONE!) other than the guy now in the Oval Office. So I’m not going to nitpick over the words or policies of the Republican candidate facing Obama in 2012. All I know is that it will be unconscionable and actually disgusting to allow the current slop, otherwise known as the White House administration since 2008, to continue beyond next year.

    Meanwhile, a major reason why I like the phrase “limousine liberal” is because it so aptly describes the phony, half-assed, disingenuous nature of so many folks on the left. For instance, something like the following…

    hotair.com:

    The New York license plate bolted on [Anthony] Weiner’s Pathfinder – US Congress 9 – had expired as of 2006, according to the DMV.

    “That license plate should not be on a car,” a DMV spokeswoman said. It wasn’t even issued to the Pathfinder, but to another one of Weiner’s cars, a Honda, according to vehicle records.

    Until now, Weiner earned $174,000 in annual salary as a Congressman. His wife earns almost the same amount working for Hillary Clinton, putting their combined household income at a figure exceeding $325,000 per year.

    Weiner has agitated for higher taxes and more government regulation, but has apparently evaded his responsibility to pay for fees owed the state of New York
    for the last four years — even switching plates to save himself a few hundred dollars.

    ^ As the saying goes, you can’t make this s*** up. Moreover, call it a variation of the report awhile back of John Kerry (truly the essence of a limousine liberal) registering his yacht not in his home state but in a jurisdiction where the fees were lower.

    Mark (411533)

  121. And I see AP agrees with me on who won.

    And they don’t seem to like it any more than I did

    Dustin (c16eca)

  122. T-Paw can be counted on to go after Obama at least as hard as he hit Mitt tonight.

    That’s a comment at Hot Air. And it’s right. I like Pawlenty’s taking on ethanol and medicare, but he didn’t take on Romney and he’ll be shades of Mccain against Obama. It’s tough to attack an opponent like Romney or Obama. You open the door to being hit back. Things might not go well if you miss your mark.

    So it’s good to nominate someone who will take it to Obama. I think 2012 is our election to lose, and the way to lose is to be sheepish.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  123. And come on. They asked ‘Conan or Leno’ and ‘Thin Crust or deep dish’.

    I get to bash the quality of their questions now. And forever. The questions were only occasionally OK and often completely retarded. Most of the questions would have worked perfectly well in the world of Idiocracy. Think about it.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  124. Happy, they are running for president because they are politicians.

    Except Cain and I thought he acquitted himself well from that perspective. He also fumbled the Muslim question, I thought, not because he’s wrong, but he didn’t think it through. Gingrich did better on that because of a real-world example. Maybe Cain can do better on that by listening to Gingrich.

    And, please, I know there are plenty of loyal Muslim-Americans. That’s not the problem.

    Ag80 (1bc637)

  125. I think that nothng that happened tonight will be meaningful beyond Thursday, or even Wednesday. Te election is 17+ months away. Almost a year and a half.

    JD (318f81)

  126. I think JD is right.

    Ag80 (1bc637)

  127. Yeah, JD is right. This is for news junkies.

    Which is part of why it’s silly to demand 30 second soundbites. I realize many of the candidates won’t even announce for a while, perhaps even for months, but the people who care enough to watch right now want fleshed out answers. We know the basics already.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  128. TARP was not targeted at the ‘toxic assets’, which is still the overhang on this economy, QE 2, has devalued the dollar, and inflated food and fuel prices, I agree we have to follow through on Libya,
    since we know what happened the least time we dropped the ball, but I’m not sanguine about a positive result, and Dodd/Frank, Obamacare, and
    EPA regulations, make everything more un certain,

    ian cormac (72470d)

  129. Michelle Bachmann is an embarrassment to Republicans and to women. Every time she opens her mouth, she shows her stupidity. The EPA is a job killing agency? If the EPA didn’t exist, the air would be so bad in L.A., that we wouldn’t be able to see across the street.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  130. I question whether or not Anita is a conservative.

    JD (318f81)

  131. The EPA slaughters jobs like Sarah Palin slaughters syntax.

    Yes it’s that brutal and yes it’s that merciless.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  132. The EPA wants to regulate the gas we breath, and practically every aspect of our production cycle.

    ian cormac (72470d)

  133. Anita,

    You’re in Los Angeles and think the EPA has benefited Californians? Have you seen what they’ve done to the Central Valley? 1 million acres of fields and orchards have no above ground water supply. The water has been shut off to in order to protect a one inch fish (smelt) to the point where there are now a million acres of dry parched farmland. If you drive up through that area, you will see sign after sign in this vast wasteland, sarcastically thanking the EPA and government for creating a modern dustbowl.

    Fish or people’s livelihood? The thing is, the EPA will always choose the fish.

    Dana (4eca6e)

  134. So when is the air quality good enough for the EPA? I think Bachmann might be referring to Obama using the EPA as an end run around cap and trade.

    kansas (68df4a)

  135. Michelle Bachmann is an embarrassment to Republicans and to women. Every time she opens her mouth, she shows her stupidity.

    I don’t think she’s stupid. Honestly, you think she’s got a low IQ? Or are her politics not yours?

    If the EPA didn’t exist,

    I doubt the air would be dirtier. California has a lot of laws about this kind of thing.

    Don’t give the EPA so much credit. Technology has advanced, and the EPA has stood in the way much of the time. Where’s my clean nuclear power and clean coal? Oh yeah, some red tape got in the way, keeping the air filthier.

    Bachmann caters to a particular set of voters on the right, and I don’t know that her appeal is broad enough. But she’s sharp.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  136. I think Bachmann might be referring to Obama using the EPA as an end run around cap and trade.

    Comment by kansas —

    Yes, that’s exactly right. And it’s an intelligent point, not one proving how stupid she is.

    Only, how in the hell is she supposed to get around to explaining this point when John King is throwing tomatoes at her and making the noises Anthony Weiner made when he was in the back of the gym?

    Dustin (c16eca)

  137. In response to the “what have you learned here?” idiocy, Santorum should have asked everyone else: “CNN or Fox?”

    Kevin M (298030)

  138. ________________________________________________

    If the EPA didn’t exist, the air would be so bad in L.A., that we wouldn’t be able to see across the street.

    You’re living in the past. You’re analogous to a civil-rights activist in 2011 — instead of in 1930 or 1950, or even 1970 — wailing and groaning “racist! racist! racist! discrimination!, discrimination!!” at every difference in socio-economic standing (real or merely perceived) associated with some minority group.

    Come into the present, when something like the horrors of carbon dioxide — you know, the stuff every human breathes out every few seconds — now is characterized by environmentalists/leftists (and it’s a fine line where one begins and one ends), at the EPA and elsewhere, as a major pollutant.

    Beyond that, and given all the advances in clean-up over the decades — so that the pallor of sooty air in 2011 isn’t a fraction as severe as it was decades ago — there could be a reasonable debate about the sensibility of the following. But even then I’m reminded of the symbolism of, say, none other than Barack Obama giving a speech a few years ago in Illinois that warned about the perils of global warming. A speech given at a location he drove to in his gas-hog SUV. And his (or his spokesman) having the friggin’ nerve to say the vehicle was actually fuel efficient when closer scrutiny revealed no such thing.

    usnews.com June 8, 2011

    Two new EPA pollution regulations will slam the coal industry so hard that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost, and electric rates will skyrocket 11 percent to over 23 percent, according to a new study based on government data.

    Overall, the rules aimed at making the air cleaner could cost the coal-fired power plant industry $180 billion, warns a trade group.

    The EPA, however, [says] that the hit the industry will suffer is worth the health benefits. What’s more, officials said that just one of the rules to cut sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions will yield up to $290 billion in annual health and welfare benefits in 2014.

    Still, the EPA did note that the two new antipollution rules are “pending” and that the agency has “accepted and are considering feedback” from the industry.

    The industry says the costs and potential to lose four jobs for every new clean energy job created isn’t worth the rules, especially in a job-starved economy.

    Mark (411533)

  139. I grew up in L.A., and remember playing all day on the Mar Vista Elementary tarmac and my lungs burning at night. That said, the air is 70% cleaner today in Los Angeles than it was in 1980.

    It wasn’t the EPA that cleaned up smog, Anita.

    And just to be clear, you tied smog in L.A. to the EPA’s negative impact on jobs. A non-sequiter. Some might say that you are showing ‘stupidity’.

    TimesDisliker (e18626)

  140. I am an Independent. Voted both ways in the past.

    And all of you about the EPA … Uh-huh. Right. Okay. The EPA regulated air standards, fined corps. and forced them to clean up their messes to the environment that affected both animals and people, banned the use of DDT which was directly linked to deformities, found out about the dangers of second-hand smoke, etc. You cannot be serious that the EPA does nothing. Sounds like you are puppeting remarks from Fox News.

    Bachmann believes that the swine flu was a vast conspiracy, asked if the federal government really needed to know our phone numbers, and if we got rid of minimum wage we could wipe out unemployment. This woman IS an embarrassment. She’s just as bad as Sarah Palin who said that France gave us the Statue of Liberty as a warning.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  141. And all of you about the EPA … Uh-huh. Right. Okay.

    Hmm. I think people specifically noted their problem with the EPA, and particular noted Bachmann was talking about an end run around cap and tax oppositions, which is not a stupid position to take.

    I am an Independent. Voted both ways in the past.

    That’s what I seemed to recall, and more power to you. You’re entitled to an opinion on these yahoos from outside the right.

    Bachmann believes that the swine flu was a vast conspiracy, asked if the federal government really needed to know our phone numbers, and if we got rid of minimum wage we could wipe out unemployment.

    With all due respect (And yeah, I basically know who you are and that you’ve earned respect), it sounds like you came into this thinking Bachmann was stupid, and then used some heavy bias to scrutinize her.

    Which, frankly, isn’t a big deal. That’s why Romney will not gain traction with people like JD. Thank goodness people do not let politicians talk them into things that aren’t really true.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  142. Anita – Is the EPA creating green jobs?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  143. Dustin, Yes, I have paid attention for a long time to realize over many years what an idiot she is. I remember her, at one point, talking about Terry Shiavo and saying the brain-dead woman was healthy.

    And how many times did she stress how many foster children she took in? It’s disgusting that she is using those children to gain political points.

    Newt is the best politician of all, but he is morally bankrupt having cheated on his wife with cancer.

    I have no idea who I will vote for, but there have to be some standards for morality and intelligence.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  144. “and if we got rid of minimum wage we could wipe out unemployment”

    Anita – Does raising the minimum wage increase or decrease unemployment. 50% chance here.

    It sounds like you are parroting DNC talking points here.

    Banning DDT did wonders for Africa. More fake science.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  145. Anthony Weiner gave up his right to represent his constituents. What a disgusting pig.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  146. Daleyrocks, I am shaking my head. And there is no Global Warming either, right? And Evolution is a myth, too?

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  147. And no, I was parroting Michelle Bachmann … let me see if I can find the direct quote … hold on.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  148. Here it is. Just did an Internet search for Michelle Bachmann and minimum wage: “Literally, if we took away the minimum wage—if conceivably it was gone—we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level.” —Michele Bachmann, 1/26/05, Jobs, Energy and Community Development Committee, testifying against SF 3, a bill to raise the MN minimum wage and advocating the elimination of the minimum wage altogether.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  149. Yes, Anita, Weiner and Newt both have had signs of being pigs, though personally, I think the manner of Weiner’s cover-up really takes the cake.

    Anyway, I respect your standards. Hopefully they are accommodated. Bachmann can’t be understood without knowing about her foster care. In my experience, people like that are special. She wasn’t doing that for the money.

    Sure, it’s a bit cheap to use it as a political point, but it’s not hugely different from Romney talking about his resume or Obama talking about his views as a father (I don’t always agree with these views, but I do like that he takes fatherhood to be an issue).

    Something was really lame about how Schiavo’s death was arranged. People were upset for reasons other than being stupid. That was a heart breaking little thing, and yes, a lot of people went in with honorable intentions only to get egg on their face. Is that really fair?

    Anyway, Bachmann probably will not be the nominee, so don’t let her get under your skin if you dislike her this much. Some of these issues have a completely reasonable opposite view. The EPA is doing more harm than good. The min wage? Well, it probably does reduce jobs, like any other cost.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  150. And there is no Global Warming either, right?

    Lots of intelligent people think global warming is largely a fraud, and climate change is natural rather than man made or a threat to human life / the planet. It really isn’t that crazy to think this.

    And Evolution is a myth, too?

    Is this intended to be a defense against the charge you put words in someone’s mouth?

    I don’t think anyone here seriously disputes that animals change over generations, and that’s all evolution is… a word to describe change. It’s not something many conservatives have a problem with, at least to the degree some on the left are sure we do.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  151. This is the first link that comes up in that query, very objective huh:

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×5809759

    there are links to Wonkette, and other sublime portals of opinion,

    ian cormac (72470d)

  152. Actually, I’m not really seeing what’s horrible about reducing the min wage. Sure, the buck is inflating, so that seems like the wrong way to go, but I think Bachmann has a longer discussion of this (saw a piece of it at DU thanks to Ian’s link, lol.

    If $7 is a good min wage, why not $20? The reason is that it would increase unemployment very much. And we probably could reach nominally minimum unemployment if we had no minimum wage.

    Crazy? Perhaps. Agree to disagree, but why does Bachmann get stuck with being called stupid for comments that are simply provocative. Cain (whom I like) had sillier things to say. Santorum had some too. Bachmann wasn’t the dumbest one in the room.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  153. One recent example, not in this debate, was Cain saying the Iranian bomb would make us more energy
    independent, that’s true, in the way that it would put the Saudi oil fields in danger, but also beside the point.

    ian cormac (72470d)

  154. We just have different opinions. There was a great documentary on the Discovery Channel about Global Warming which is the same label as Climate Change … about what happens when the polar ice caps melt and changes the mix of desalination and how ocean currents are affected and how it causes changes in weather patterns that, if it continues, would be deadly for humans and plant life alike.

    I grew up in the Midwest. The massive flooding and the deadly tornadoes show a change in those weather patterns. There are almost 7 billion people on this planet now. Technology and industry and humans DO affect this planet. It’s just logical.

    As is evolution. I brought up evolution because, as you know, Bachmann believes in creationism and even introduced a bill to try to get it taught in schools in her state. I believe that Santorum is a creationist as well.

    Just wonder how much logic one can set aside.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  155. “Daleyrocks, I am shaking my head. And there is no Global Warming either, right? And Evolution is a myth, too?”

    Anita – That’s it? No answer? Go right for the slam?

    Come on, you had a 50:50 chance with the minimum wage question and Obama’s awesome performance on preserving or creating green jobs through EPA regs.

    California often instituted laws more stringent than EPA requirements because your state was so screwed up.

    Do you support the EPA’s endangerment finding on CO2? Seriously? If so, does that mean we all need to stop breathing?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  156. Just to be clear here: Every state has its own EPA or variant thereof. Federal EPA is just more bureaucracy, more lawmaking without representation, more disregard for the Tenth Amendment. Federal EPA needs to go.

    Federal Dep of Ed needs to go, for the same reasons.

    All Federal departments that have state-level counterparts need eliminated. And law-making power needs to be returned to the Legislative Branch where the Constitution put it in the first place. If it’s so imperative that it be the law of the land, make the Legislative Branch pass and the President sign the bill instead of hiding behind unelected and unaccountable pencil-pushers.

    But on the debate, I ah ah think ah Romney did ah far ah better than I ah wanted him to ah, Paul sounded ah sane half the time ah and ah insane half ah the time, ah Cain wasn’t as ah crisp as I’d have ah hoped. (The King act is too annoying, even for this stupid exercise.) T-Paw fired too many blanks, Gingrich was his normal strong debating self, Bachmann was very sturdy and unapologetic in her positions, even when given opportunity to “squish for votes.”

    All in all, this debate seemed more like a jam session to explain why ABO was the best candidate for America than a real debate.

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  157. “Technology and industry and humans DO affect this planet. It’s just logical.”

    Anita – But scientists do not understand how and should stop pretending that they do. Their predictions of impending disaster have been consistently off. They don’t understand the feedback effects they keep trumpeting, which work great in a closed laboratory setting, but not in the real world. Instead, they want their gravy train to continue and us to throw money at their BS “consensus” even though there has not been any warming over the past ten years, which is completely inconsistent with their models.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  158. Anita – I rode a dinosaur to work today. The bible thumping jesuslanders in my neighborhood cloned some.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  159. Didn’t one of the leading AGW advocates out of Penn State, admit there has been no global warming at least for the last 15 years.

    ian cormac (72470d)

  160. @daleyrocks, you are my entertainment for the night. Thank you. Yeah, I think I read about them there dinosaurs in the Bible.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  161. And, btw, John King was irritating as all get out, constant audio interruptions trying to get them to stop talking with his ‘uh,uh,uh,uh,uh”

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  162. @daleyrocks … I think the EPA is important on all fronts, including setting standards for C02 emissions.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  163. Anita, I think CA has its own EPA and is far more stringent than the Fed EPA. Why not let CA set its own rules, TX set its own rules, FL set its own rules? Or is the Tenth Amendment — which has never been repealed — totally irrelevant?

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  164. ____________________________________________

    if we got rid of minimum wage we could wipe out unemployment.

    I wouldn’t go as far to make that claim, and I’d also say that a large majority of Americans buy into the notion that the minimum wage is a sign of our compassion and sophistication. But I’d also say that people who believe such do-gooder instincts therefore mean their s*** don’t stink, while, in comparison, people like Bachmann are but a steaming pile, better keep one thing in mind:

    Urban America, including inner-city America, is among the most leftwing places imaginable, where the existence of minimum-wage laws is a given, a no-brainer. Oh, so the unemployment rates in such areas are truly miniscule?! Yep, uh-huh.

    Since France also is one of the most liberal, socialized places in the Western world, it’s very appropriate to use it as a study — as a paradigm — of the effects of “egalitarianism-is-beautiful!” policies and practices.

    The following is a well-researched, but also arcane (ie, the eyes tend to glaze over) paper on the effect of the minimum wage in France. So in a nutshell, the sentence below has been bolded:

    http://www.cerc.gouv.fr/rapports/cserc/summary-cserc6.pdf

    A national minimum wage exists in France since almost fifty years: the SMIG, “salaire minimum
    interprofessionnel garanti”, (interprofessional guarantied minimum wage) was created by a law in 1950. It was replaced in 1970 by the SMIC, “salaire minimum de croissance” (minimum growth wage).

    In France, the assessment of this instrument has become more opportune in the economic challenge of
    the transition to a 35 hour working week for the employees earning the minimum wage.

    By devoting this report to the minimum wage, the CSERC pursues the analysis of the links between
    employment, income and inequalities undertaken in previous reports. As is usual, this report relies on statistical work and analyses by French or foreign economic administrations or research centres; it has also called upon an analytical review of the academic literature.

    Does the minimum wage have an impact on employment? This question was in the midst of much
    controversy in France and abroad, academic arguments feeding on a large number of empirical studies. It is often said that a minimum wage has a negative effect on employment. It would not allow the employment of persons whose productivity is weak and lower than their labour cost.

    Various empirical studies using French data led to an estimation of the negative effect on employment (especially for the young) of marked increases in the minimum wage.

    On the whole, these considerations lead us to estimate that the French SMIC has a negative impact on low skilled jobs.

    Mark (411533)

  165. And where in the Constitution does an unelected and unaccountable bunch of pencil-pushers get the right to write laws?

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  166. The minimum wage protects workers, you know. In my first job, I was only paid $1.45 an hour and after a month, got a raise to $1.75 an hour and I worked like a dog. It was the only job I could get in my poor steel and farm town. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone. Minimum wage does NOT have a negative impact on low skilled job … it pays people what they are worth and doesn’t allow companies to take advantage of workers.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  167. The minimum wage protects workers, you know.

    Of course it does. We understand the concept.

    Of course, you have to define ‘workers’ as those who have jobs post min wage increase, and not employers or unemployed folks.

    But this may very well be a ‘moderation in all things’ issue. But Bachmann had a point. Why not a $20 min wage? Why not a $100 min wage? Because the higher this wage, the fewer jobs, and the lower, the more jobs. I realize you’re intelligent enough to see that.

    it pays people what they are worth

    Maybe. Maybe what a worker is worth is what he’s willing to work to be paid.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  168. Raising the minimum wage does three things:

    1) Increases inflation.

    2) Increases unemployment.

    3) Forces “the next rung up” to suddenly be minimum-wage jobs.

    None of those three things are good.

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  169. @John Hitchcock, CA has led the charge on many environmental issues, but if not for the standard set by the EPA, I believe that states would look the other way on pollution to and environmental impacts just to bring jobs in. It happens all the time right here in this city … environmental impact studies are run over by developers with the approval of the city ALL THE TIME.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  170. setting standards for C02 emissions.

    Anita, this is oppression.

    Your mockery of those who didn’t agree with global warming shows you have bought propaganda. Much of it is a fraud. And the standards on this issue specifically are extremely harmful to society. CO2 is not like lead or sulfuric acid. It’s a harmless and damn common substance. It’s something you emit no matter what you do, and often is emitted by good things.

    Setting standards over this is simply the government taking over every aspect of everything. And in the name of global warming? That is sickening.

    No, the government shouldn’t do this. Bachmann is not stupid to disagree with you on this.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  171. Wiping out the minimum wage would be disastrous for many Americans, esp. in towns all across America like where I grew up … poverty numbers would increase and more people would be lining up to get help from the government just to put food on the table.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  172. What would I know of the effects of minimum wage? The last time I had a minimum wage job was way back in March of 2010 (after I spent over a year out of work from a much better-paying job).

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  173. @Dustin, I don’t believe much of it is fraud. All you have to do is look at the increasing strength and number of tornadoes and the increasing strength of hurricanes and the amount of polar cap melting and the fact that polar bears are becoming extinct and the severe drought areas and the missing snow on the mountain peaks to know that the climate is changing. You can see that with your own eyes; it is not propaganda.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  174. John, I hope you find work again, minimum wage or not.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  175. wow. just wow.

    All you have to look at is the fact some polar ice sheets are growing while others are shrinking, polar bears are doing quite well, glaciers are growing in many places, AGW scientists cooked the books, we are not as warm as the Medieval Warm period, Greenland used to grow grapes, etc, etc, etc.

    Sorry, Anita, you were seriously hoodwinked.

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  176. __________________________________________

    The massive flooding and the deadly tornadoes show a change in those weather patterns.

    And there wasn’t a lot of such flooding and tornadoes several decades ago? There were never up-and-down cycles evident in climate going back to the beginning of time?

    I think people who believe man-made sources of carbon dioxide (again, the same stuff humans breathe out every few seconds) are so powerful, so dramatic, so horrific, so earth-shattering should do themselves a favor. They should go outside around noontime on a sunny day and — without the use of visors or any special eyewear — stare straight into the sun. Something that is non-manmade and that hovers above us in the sky everyday has the power to render us blind. Almost like a version of Medusa.

    BTW, the reason there are four seasons, or why the northern hemisphere is generally cold in the winter and hot in the summer, is due to “Medusa.” Namely, that the amount of energy emanating from the sun is affected by another non-manmade aspect of our existence, referring to the natural tilt of planet earth.

    Yep, “Medusa” and our planet, whose axis is at an angle, aren’t as amazing and powerful as we stupendously strong, influential humans are.

    Mark (411533)

  177. Thanks for the spirited discussion everyone. I have one thing left to say: Johnny Cash, deep dish, Conan and Pepsi. It doesn’t get more idiotic than that now, does it.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  178. All you have to do is look at the increasing strength and number of tornadoes and the increasing strength of hurricanes and the amount of polar cap melting and the fact that polar bears are becoming extinct and the severe drought areas and the missing snow on the mountain peaks to know that the climate is changing.

    Are you joking?

    Serious question.

    If you aren’t joking, you should know that all of this isn’t true. All of it. It’s just lies.

    It’s disturbing, too. You have a blind faith, and believe lies, and think your faith gives you the right to demand the EPA control the emission of a harmless gas much unlike toxins despite being cursed as one.

    In the winter of 2010, polar caps came back strongly. This is simply a fact. Do you interpret this fact as proof you’re wrong? IF not, why was the opposite proof you’re right?

    Polar Bears are not dying out. Again, do you admit this proves your entire view is faulty? Because it does.

    Tornado frequency is not going up or down. We are simply detecting more because we have better ability to detect them. This is not controversial at all.

    You are way, way off base.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  179. Just wanted to end the night on something we probably all agree on … um, right?

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  180. Isn’t the “we need cheap labor” illegal immigrant argument basically an anti-minimum wage argument?

    MayBee (081489)

  181. And furthermore, I already said climate changes naturally.

    So the climate changing one way or the other doesn’t prove me wrong.

    However, predictions of global warming predicted a range of outcomes, and we’re colder than that. So that theory is wrong. And the next theory that we’re going into global cooling or warming might be wrong too.

    The truth is that nature is complicated and resilient. It produced oil and nuclear reactions and volcanoes. If the Earth gets warmer, we will probably be better off, but it just doesn’t seem to be happening. Within a few years, I’m sure it will get a little warmer, or there will be a disaster, and people will be convinced this is their religious faith in global warming proven.

    Now, that’s not to say I disagree that we affect nature. We can pollute and destroy, and that has to be minimized. The sad thing about global warming is that in the sheer greed to con good people like Ms Busch, we are overlooking real solutions and real problems.

    Global warming sucked all the oxygen out of environmentalism. It is statist in nature, and anti business by design, and thus is very political.

    Really, nuclear power and clean coal would solve everyone’s problems. CO2 is not a problem, but it would even reduce that.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  182. There is an aura of hubris, almost narcissism often present in the global warming zealots’ arguments out there which I think differentiates them from the rest of us folks who are also deeply concerned about life on this planet. And for gosh sakes who in their right mind isn’t interested in fresh water and clear air and preserving natural resources? But the idea that there is one evil causation in current climate patterns, that it all has to be us, and we modern men are to blame and we are the only ones who can stop it is where the stretch in logic comes.

    During the bronze age the iceman of the alps and his brethren walked and hunted and lived and died on land that is certainly as warm as it is today if not warmer. We know that is so because of scientific proof. We know he died with a bow and berries in his pocket, became buried under snow and ice for centuries–ice that only a decade or so ago receded to expose him once again for scientists and climate people to study. The mountain ice formed, then melted and he was exposed because of cyclical cooling and warming trends and other natural phenomena that have been going on for eons on this planet. There have also been tornadic winds, volcanic eruptions into the atmosphere, massive earthquakes, tsunamis and hurricanes through the millennia. This was going on before the combustion engine and atomic energy hit the scene.

    Why can there not be a rational discussion on this complex topic without large groups of people being viewed and mocked as “deniers” simply because they dare believe there are multiple aspects to climate change must be considered –but that the economically corrupt “climate scientists” leave out of the reports? Will any presidential candidate rise to rein in the corrupt green political interests which have hijacked and are trying to completely shut down an important discussion that we need to have about climate?

    elissa (d07fa8)

  183. ___________________________________________

    You can see that with your own eyes; it is not propaganda.

    Again, go outside one day and stare straight into the sun. Then you’ll really know what influences this little planet, far more than what we mere humans do.

    Also, I’m really irritated by environmentalists (and/or a variety of liberals) who talk the talk but can’t walk the walk. I’m referring to people (Hi, Al Gore!) who can’t even modify their lifestyle by doing something as relatively easy and simple as buying and driving around in a somewhat smaller car. No, they need — they require — a big SUV to get around town in.

    Or the folks who can’t even build and live in a somewhat smaller mansion (Hi, Hollywood eco-greenie celebs, like the producer of Avatar!). No, they require a big, big house to keep themselves happy, much less all the energy-guzzling toys that go with that.

    Or the people who turn up the heat or switch on the AC when the indoor temperature becomes just a bit too cold or a bit too warm.

    When it comes to environmentalism, a lot of people — a lot of us of all political stripes — live like limousine liberals.

    Mark (411533)

  184. Dustin: the foster care background made me deeply respect Michelle Bachmann as a person, even though I disagree with her on almost everything at a policy level. 🙂

    I thought Newt was the best of the lot, which astonished me.

    Dana, at #67, that answer was, IMO, the single best answer of the night … and sounded a lot like candidate-Obama’s rhetorical position on bipartisanship.

    John, @164: it’s very difficult to handle air and water pollution on a state-by-state basis. Air pollution, it’s hard because factories in New Jersey will befoul New York’s air, as factories in St. Louis will befoul the air in Illinois. Water, it’s hard because discharges into the Missouri in Montana effect the water quality in Louisiana, just as discharges into the Colorado in Colorado effect the water quality in California. Any mechanism for dealing with this is necessarily going to involve the federal government.

    aphrael (9802d6)

  185. Gorebull warming leads to less tornados you knucklehead 🙄

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  186. Consider the reasonable question first directed toward Gingrich (then later opened up to all by King,) from WMUR-TV’s Jean Mackin: “President Obama effectively killed government-run spaceflight to the International Space Station and wants to turn it over to private companies.” Thus, she asked, “what role should the government play in future space exploration?”

    A good question touching on geopolitics, international commerce, high-tech and national prestige to GOP candidates, considering the flip-flop from Obama’s campaign position on HSF when he cancelled Constellation last year. ‘HSF’ is a ‘luxury’ expenditure, too, in an era when necessities are taking priority and austerity rules. So where do they stand?

    As a group, they seemed ill-prepared to discuss it- it although Pawlenty pawed weakly with it- and Bachmann appeared to raise her hand in support but never voiced a position.

    Then there’s Newt. Bear in mind, “House Speaker Newt Gingrich said that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should have been disbanded after the Apollo moon program ended in the 1970’s.” -source NYT- 2/6/95

    But tonight, the conservative, fiscally ‘responsible,’ Gingrich, who talked of shuttering NASA in early 1995, stated he ‘worked to get the shuttle program to survive’ then stated NASA has had ‘failure after failure.’ So Newt helped keep NASA operating ‘failure after failure,’ eh. Then Newt stated he supports the overt socialism of government subsidizing private enterprise space firms, thereby socializing the high risk on the backs of the many (just like bailing out the banks, Wall St., and auto firms, Newt) to profit a few, rather than having same seek investors for their ventures in the private capital markets, in an era when his own party says the government is going ‘broke.’ State Capitalism, eh, Newt– that makes you a China man. The GOP of today will soon have you “cRyan in your beer,” Newt. Oh, and Newt, space exploitation is not space exploration.

    When opened up to all of them, the last zinger pitched was from the used car salesman: “I think fundamentally there are some people—and most of them are Democrats, but not all—who really believe that the government knows how to do things better than the private sector.”– ‘Mitt’ Romney. Indeed, Spalding, many things, not the least of which has been the half century of America’s human spaceflight programs. Space exploitation is not space exploration, Spalding. Didn’t see a private firm take the lead and land men on the moon and return them safely– except in the make-believe universe of the movies. See ‘Destination Moon’ for details.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  187. source NYT

    You’ll have to do better than that.

    Their accuracy is worse than random. Not that I trust Gingrich any farther than I can spit a pyramid.

    But aren’t you the idiot who bashed NASA? You’re a real weirdo sometimes.

    John, @164: it’s very difficult to handle air and water pollution on a state-by-state basis. Air pollution, it’s hard because factories in New Jersey will befoul New York’s air, as factories in St. Louis will befoul the air in Illinois. Water, it’s hard because discharges into the Missouri in Montana effect the water quality in Louisiana, just as discharges into the Colorado in Colorado effect the water quality in California. Any mechanism for dealing with this is necessarily going to involve the federal government.

    And sadly, the federal government is not up to the task. I agree with you in principle, but then, why not have the world government handle this via UN resolutions? Oh, because it’s completely feckless. Just like the feds on this issue.

    Fortunately, we have better technology like clean coal, nuclear power, natural gas. We probably can have a much cleaner environment if we disband the EPA. State governments actually do a fairly good job, but I understand your hesitation to trust all of them to handle this well enough.

    There’s a moderate solution to all of this. It can’t be reached when global warming is assumed to be true, and the target is CO2. The target should be honest science, something both parties fall short of embracing.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  188. Will any presidential candidate rise to rein in the corrupt green political interests which have hijacked and are trying to completely shut down an important discussion that we need to have about climate?

    Comment by elissa

    Good question. It sounds like many other questions. Who will stand up? I see Herman Cain stand up like that on some issues, and it appears to endear him to some and drive off others.

    It’s probably not as smart as Romney’s attacking Obama, very clear moderate bulletpoints, and perfect delivery, no doubt focus grouped and painstakingly perfected.

    Makes me a little sick.

    Again, go outside one day and stare straight into the sun. Then you’ll really know what influences this little planet, far more than what we mere humans do.

    I liked this line, Mark!

    Dustin (c16eca)

  189. ____________________________________________

    But tonight, the conservative, fiscally ‘responsible,’ Gingrich,

    I find it interesting that almost every major bone-headed policy or practice of White Houses managed by Republicans/conservatives, at least going back to Herbert Hoover, can be traced to when they leaned left.

    So in the case of Hoover, he greatly ratcheted up income taxes (and really spooked the investor class) right after the great stock market crash of 1929.

    Or in the case of Richard Nixon, any multiple number of things (eg, wage-and-price controls). And need anyone say anything more about a person who was both scandal-plagued and a big squish?

    Or Ronald Reagan going against his own publicly stated policy of never dealing with hostage-taking nations and instead doing a Jimmy-Carter-type of d’oh! routine—and, hence, the Iran-Contra scandal.

    And George Bush Sr. with his “read my lips, no new taxes” squishiness, and his selection of one of the most foolish justices in the history of the Supreme Court, David Souter. The guy who thought it was un-constitutional for the federal government to have a screening process for the arts instead of funneling money to any and every “artiste” out there in America looking for dollars.

    Or George Bush II with his go-along-to-get-along approach to huge deficits, and his falling for the idea that conservatism needed “compassion” because common sense wasn’t good enough.

    So with an out-and-out ultra-liberal now in the White House, America really has decided to let it all hang out.

    Mark (411533)

  190. Ahhh, aphrael. Long time, no see. It’s a shame you’re still so wrong on so much, but it’s good to know you’re still honestly so. 8) You’re a breath of fresh air. (and no, I’m not hitting on you)

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  191. banned the use of DDT which was directly linked to deformities

    Bulldust. DDT is harmless to humans. It was banned because it allegedly harmed birds.

    found out about the dangers of second-hand smoke

    What dangers? The EPA “found out” about them, all right; in its dreams. Didn’t you know that a federal judge forced the EPA to withdraw its “study” because it was a load of rubbish?

    if we got rid of minimum wage we could wipe out unemployment.

    Not wipe it out, but surely reduce it tremendously. Isn’t that obvious? How can you not know this?

    Sarah Palin who said that France gave us the Statue of Liberty as a warning.

    No, she didn’t. She said it is a warning, which of course it is.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  192. I remember her, at one point, talking about Terry Shiavo and saying the brain-dead woman was healthy.

    You filthy liar. Schiavo was not brain dead. She was alive by every legal definition, and she was murdered in cold blood by the order of a court. At no stage in the proceedings did anyone even allege that she was brain dead.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  193. Newt is the best politician of all, but he is morally bankrupt having cheated on his wife with cancer.

    Cheating on his wife was bad enough, but she did not have cancer.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  194. Literally, if we took away the minimum wage—if conceivably it was gone—we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level.

    And what exactly do you think is wrong with that quote? “Virtually wipe out” may be a bit of an exaggeration, but it’s basically right. Are you a moron, not to understand this, or are you just pretending?

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  195. We just have different opinions.

    No, you’re a moron.

    There was a great documentary on the Discovery Channel about Global Warming which is the same label as Climate Change

    Dear god, that’s your source?

    … about what happens when the polar ice caps melt and changes the mix of desalination and how ocean currents are affected and how it causes changes in weather patterns that, if it continues, would be deadly for humans and plant life alike.

    You do realise this is all wild speculation, don’t you? No, of course you don’t.

    I grew up in the Midwest. The massive flooding and the deadly tornadoes show a change in those weather patterns.

    What change? There have always been flooding and tornadoes.

    There are almost 7 billion people on this planet now. Technology and industry and humans DO affect this planet. It’s just logical.

    Sure, we affect the planet; but what makes you think we have a bad effect rather than a good one or a neutral one? It would be nice if we could warm the planet up a degree or two Celsius; it would be a vast improvement. But unfortunately that doesn’t seem to be happening. Instead the world seems to be in a cooling trend at the moment, and we should start worrying about an ice age, as we were in the ’60s and ’70s. Meanwhile the handful of liars in the “global warming” industry continue to lead the whole world around by the nose, and morons like you lap up every word that falls from their mouths, even after they were caught red-handed faking their data.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  196. Cheating on his wife was bad enough, but she did not have cancer.

    Hmmmm. Source for this, please?

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (513c76)

  197. Please be nice to Anita Busch.

    No, some of her points aren’t accurate. But she’s not being a dick to anyone here, and her comments about a politician don’t count.

    And I do think Milhouse makes a lot of great points. But still.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  198. Bradley, this convinced me of Milhouse’s claim about Gingrich. Though it was very widely thought otherwise.

    I agree with the blog that this doesn’t change much about Gingrich, but it’s the sort of untruth that should be corrected.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  199. The minimum wage protects workers, you know.

    No, I don’t know, and nor do you. That you think it does proves that you’re economically illiterate and incapable of logic.

    In my first job, I was only paid $1.45 an hour and after a month, got a raise to $1.75 an hour and I worked like a dog.

    And what makes you think you were worth more than that?

    It was the only job I could get in my poor steel and farm town. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.

    If it was the only job you could get, then by definition you were not being underpaid.

    Minimum wage does NOT have a negative impact on low skilled job … it pays people what they are worth and doesn’t allow companies to take advantage of workers.

    Huh? That makes no sense. All goods and services are worth what the market will pay for them; not a penny more or less. That’s the definition of “worth”. And since nobody will pay more than something is worth, setting a minimum price is the same thing as banning the sale or purchase of anything worth less than that minimum, thus creating a glut. Come on, this is obvious stuff. Setting a minimum price on labor is no different than setting one on apples. If you forbid anyone from paying less than $1 an apple, most apples will become unsaleable; the rich will have fancy apples that were wrapped in paper on the tree, and the poor will have to do without apples altogether.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  200. Dustin, I don’t believe much of it is fraud. All you have to do is look at the increasing strength and number of tornadoes and the increasing strength of hurricanes and the amount of polar cap melting and the fact that polar bears are becoming extinct and the severe drought areas and the missing snow on the mountain peaks to know that the climate is changing.

    Except that none of that is happening. Polar bear numbers have increased. Some glaciers are retreating while others are growing. Some ice packs are still recovering from the Little Ice Age, while others are putting on more ice. There is no reason to believe there are more tornadoes now than ever. Nor are hurricanes any stronger. It’s all garbage.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  201. No, some of her points aren’t accurate

    All of her “points” are not just inaccurate but also illogical. One doesn’t need to see any studies to know that setting a minimum price on anything creates a glut in that thing, and therefore that lowering or abolishing the minimum will relieve the glut. That is pure reason, which one can work out on ones own, sitting in a dark cave with no data at all. For someone not to understand that is astounding.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  202. I’m sure somewhere in there something she said was correct. Off the top of my head, no, she mostly was not right. She said Newt won the debate, which I think is arguably fair. She also said John King sucked, which is quite true.

    No, on the environment or min wage she didn’t seem to be right.

    But regardless of that, I think she’s being nice enough. Astoundingly wrong? Yeah, that too.

    Anyway, she’s one of the good guys. I figured you already knew this much, though.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  203. Did you all hear the army abandoned that damn stupid beret? I realize it’s not so stupid if you’re a ranger or SF, but … it’s actually quite a stupid hat.

    The Shinseki era has ended!

    Dustin (c16eca)

  204. When did that happen, Dustin? My daughter’s in the Army and I haven’t heard about it.

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  205. No, Dustin, her name rang no bells with me at all.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  206. Ahh, I just read it. I like it. Course, she still gets to wear her stetson.

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  207. Damn that Milhouse is a smart fellow.

    Random (662312)

  208. Please be nice to Anita Busch.

    No, some of her points aren’t accurate. But she’s not being a dick to anyone here, and her comments about a politician don’t count.

    I believe he was set off by Busch’s comment regarding Terry Schiavo — to anyone such as myself who was outraged how Schiavo was murdered by court order, I can understand the tone of Milhouse’s reaction and empathize …especially considering the ill considered and callous nature of Anita Busch’s comment.

    Random (662312)

  209. John H, thank you for the greeting, but could you engage with my point? 🙂

    Air and water pollution are difficult to manage on the state level because the harm of the pollution is often borne by people in other states. Louisiana can’t ensure that the Mississippi is clean; it has to have cooperation from the upstream states, whose incentive to cooperate is lower if Louisiana is going to bear the costs.

    Nuisance and tort law is a bad way to address it because it’s very, very difficult to prove to the satisfaction of a jury that a particular point source is the cause of the problem, especially if there are hundreds of contributing point sources – each individual source could be fine, but the overall aggregation isn’t, but you can’t blame any one individual source for the effect of the aggregation.

    So: how do you resolve it without federal involvement? (And note, the reason the feds got involved at all is that it wasn’t being resolved).

    aphrael (9802d6)

  210. I will have exhaled breaths in Illinois, Indiana, and Kentucky by the end of the day. Clearly, the only way to regulate breathing is by the use of the EPA. Anita was just spitting out leftist claptrap about min wage, Bachman, etc. It was disappointing.

    Why is it that the leftists immediately call conservative women stupid?

    JD (29e1cd)

  211. Air and water pollution are difficult to manage on the state level because the harm of the pollution is often borne by people in other states. Louisiana can’t ensure that the Mississippi is clean; it has to have cooperation from the upstream states, whose incentive to cooperate is lower if Louisiana is going to bear the costs.

    The same is true on an international level.

    MayBee (081489)

  212. I believe he was set off by Busch’s comment regarding Terry Schiavo

    That and many other things she said that were just plain wrong. The AGW comments bugged me a lot.

    the ill considered and callous nature of Anita Busch’s comment.

    Towards people who aren’t in this thread. Bachmann, and yeah, I can see why you’d say Schiavo, though from her mistaken view, she was just telling a sober fact.

    Milhouse is usually very polite, anyway. I just wanted to note this is one of the good guys, and sometimes the good guys are completely mistaken about the truth. She’s living in LA, and I guess that means she’s inundated with BS propaganda that she earnestly thinks is true (since she has integrity).

    Anyway, I do it too (getting too hostile towards someone) and I’m not the nanny. I just think in this case, it’s someone who is dishing out talking point, not insults towards people in the thread, so bash the talking points, not the speaker. It’s not a big deal if you disagree though.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  213. When did that happen, Dustin? My daughter’s in the Army and I haven’t heard about it.

    Comment by John Hitchcock — 6/14/2011 @ 12:49 am

    They just made the call. FNC has also covered it.

    Thank God. I hated that stupid beret. It was difficult to keep clean, it didn’t shield my eyes or have those earflap things the winter cap has, and it just looked stupid. It wasn’t a good hat, it was a power trip, IMO.

    I hope your daughter is safe and I’m happy for her over this seemingly minor but good thing.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  214. May Bee – absolutely the same is true on an international level; this is a recurring argument between the US and Mexico (over the state of the Tijuana river).

    But we have no real power to resolve it at the international level. We do, on the other hand, have the power to resolve it as between the states – at the federal level.

    aphrael (9802d6)

  215. But we have no real power to resolve it at the international level.

    We don’t? Isn’t that what all the Copenhagen and Bali meetings are supposed to be about? Kyoto accord negotiations?
    Or are they just a waste of money?

    MayBee (081489)

  216. “Anita was just spitting out leftist claptrap about min wage, Bachman, etc. It was disappointing.”

    JD – Anita never did address the question about the impact of the minimum wage on unemployment in case anybody noticed.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  217. Yes, she did: “Minimum wage does NOT have a negative impact on low skilled job”

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  218. Yeah, she was wrong about almost everything she brought up. Annoyingly so.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  219. Have you noted a particular willingness of other countries to fulfill the commitments they made at Kyoto? I haven’t. And, when they don’t, what’s the enforcement mechanism? Another negotiation. Public shaming.

    That’s not useless. But it’s not as effective as being able to hale someone into court and say “hey, you violated this rule, stop it, or pay up”, and having the court enforce it.

    Look to my examples: do you want the people of Louisiana to have exactly the same recourse with respect to ensuring that the Mississippi is clean that we have with respect to ensuring that the Tijuana is clean? This seems like a recipe for disaster.

    aphrael (9802d6)

  220. Or are they just a waste of money?

    I think you answered your own question, MayBee.

    JD (aae929)

  221. Apparel – do you think the same agency tasked with enforcing standards on the Mississippi River should regulate the breaths you exhale?

    JD (aae929)

  222. Auto correct. Aphrael. Sorry.

    JD (aae929)

  223. Look to my examples: do you want the people of Louisiana to have exactly the same recourse with respect to ensuring that the Mississippi is clean that we have with respect to ensuring that the Tijuana is clean? This seems like a recipe for disaster.

    You’re right. Of course. There are environmental issues that extent across state lines, and it’s simply practical to have some kind of protection element that goes across state lines. I’d say the court system.

    However, the EPA is not that protection. They are making things worse, not better, with red tape around needed improvements, and focus on protecting us from things that aren’t bad. They are politicized and conclusory rather than following hard science (not the consensus of cherry picked experts, but proven predictions, testable theories, etc).

    So I think the EPA, while unlike the UN in power, is like the UN in utility to the bona fide environmentalist such as Sarah Palin or myself who wants a cleaner environment rather than talking points and intrusion and control.

    It probably seems like I’m merging two issues, but I’m not. The EPA’s growth into this nonsensical BS agency is why it’s not able to do its job. Eliminate it. Reform is impossible once they get to this point. Find an alternative protection, such as the legal system, for things like dumping chems into rivers. I would go a step further and make states somewhat liable if their enforcement was corrupt or unconcerned with neighbors.

    There’s a middle ground here.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  224. Look to my examples: do you want the people of Louisiana to have exactly the same recourse with respect to ensuring that the Mississippi is clean that we have with respect to ensuring that the Tijuana is clean? This seems like a recipe for disaster.

    I don’t see a lot of Americans rushing to move to Tijuana. That’s because it is an unpleasant place to live, partially because of this example. So I’m not sure I buy into the idea that an American state would allow itself to become an environmental cesspool, because I can’t see it being able to attract citizens.

    Now, I don’t think the EPA is worthless. I do think the international “negotiations” show how much money we are willing to waste in the name of “the environment”.

    MayBee (081489)

  225. Hurricanes are not getting either more frequent or stronger. 2005 (the year of Katrina and Rita, when we ran out of names) was bad, and the doom criers stated that this was the new normal, indeed the next years would inevitably get worse. Did not happen. In real science when a theory predicts a outcome that does not occur observers conclude the theory is deeply flawed.

    Polar bears are not becoming extinct. (I am going to do this from memory but I believe all of the following facts are correct.)
    Biologists separate the Polar Bears into 13 populations by the geographic areas they live in. Of these 13 populations 12 of them are increasing in population. The thirteenth is not well enough studied for a determination to be made about whether it is increasing in size but it is fairly clear that it is not decreasing. (IIRC the population which is indeterminate is the western Siberia subset.)

    The fact that a journalist as smart as Anita Busch can be not only as wrong as she is on basic facts but so convinced that she is correct is worrisome.

    Have Blue (dbbcd4)

  226. Dustin – I’m willing to look for solutions which are better than the EPA; my point is entirely that it’s an issue which can’t be left to the states. If the EPA isn’t working, it should be replaced with something which will.

    The trouble with using the court system, though, is that it’s very, very difficult to prove causation at the level needed to win at trial – multiple point sources mean that you can’t trace sufficient causation to any individual source.

    aphrael (9802d6)

  227. JD – I think trying to regulate the breaths I exhale is so practically impossible that the concept is inherently self-mocking.

    aphrael (9802d6)

  228. Yet they are attempting to do so

    JD (976b6a)

  229. We agree on this one, Aphrael.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  230. Though let me underline my insistence on replacement, wholesale.

    That needs to become the norm.

    A lot of federal agencies need to be eliminated. The entrenched corruption within should learn to be afraid of that happening to their agency too.

    The ATF should be eliminated, and its duties largely unassigned to anyone, but what is essential assigned to the DEA and FBI. The EPA should be eliminated, and its most critical functions assigned perhaps to the FBI as well in a very limited capacity for real offenders. If needed, a new agency could be established.

    The Departments of education and energy should be looked at carefully at that point. How effective can these bureacracies be?

    And those who work there: they are done if their agency is eliminated. It should be a black mark on their resume. If they are particularly awesome, they can be rehired, but the trend should be against doing so whenever possible.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  231. And yes, the EPA does have an Office of Civil Rights.

    In case you’re wondering if it is a government out of control.

    MayBee (081489)

  232. Dustin, the FBI itself would be high on my list of agencies to be abolished and replaced. And the replacement agency should not be allowed to hire anyone who worked at the old one, without careful review. There’s been too much abuse.

    Ditto for the State Department.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  233. Yes, Milhouse, you’re probably right about those two. The FBI does a lot of good work, and those I’ve met there are good folks, but my anecdotes don’t line up well with the facts about that agency in total.

    —-
    Anyway, DCSCA, the NASA bashing nutcase, claimed Gingrich was exposed as a fool and hypocrite in his NASA answer.

    I didn’t really know Newt’s full history on this issue, but apparently this was a very interesting part of the debate worth thinking about.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  234. There’s a middle ground here.

    sorry chuckles the blogclown sat on it.

    Sorry.

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  235. “Yes, she did: “Minimum wage does NOT have a negative impact on low skilled job””

    Milhouse – Thank you for the correction. I forgot that one. It’s amazing she could not even get the basics right. It took a willing suspension of disbelief to read her comments. Liberals are impervious to basic economics.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  236. @#189#220,#235.”source NYT. You’ll have to do better than that.”

    No, Dustin. In fact, this writer remains quite critical of specific space shuttle program management practices as established in both the Rogers and the CAIB reports, not NASA’s stellar accomplishments as a government agency, their creativity, skilled engineering and capacity to innovate, idiot. As the paper of record, the NYT remains a gold standard for sourcing in the real world, idiot. Gingrich’s ambiguous positions on space policy are well known is space circles, idiot. And you know even less about it now referencing a commercial space lobbyist affiliated with an ultra-conservative group of commercial space advocates, idiot. A group which includes Gingrich and Thompson supporter/lobbyist Bob Walker, fronting for firms to tap the Treasury, which currently has to borrow 42 cents of every dollar it spends, to subsidize their LEO proposals with your borrowed tax dollars, idiot. They want to socialize the risk rather than securing investors in the private sector, idiot. Not very ‘Ryanesque,’ idiot. They want your tax dollars to subsidize their firms becauseprivate capital markets continue to balk at the high risk and low ROI in that limited market, idiot. And, of course, space exploitation is not space exploration, idiot.

    Ms. Busch’s honest, personal commentary is accurate, idiot. Oh, BTW, she has years of experience as a professional journalist in the real world, idiot; got paid for it as well, idiot; risked her life doing her job, idiot; so gathering facts and protecting sources are second nature to her, idiot. You wouldn’t see her doing anything unethical like passing around sensitive source material as ‘hijinks’ for laughs with a bunch of chuckleheads at a radio show, idiot. BTW, maybe you finally comprehend how impolite it is to call someone an idiot, imbecile.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  237. IMP calling someone an idiot might be the pinnacle of irony. You are so far beyond parody, DSCSA, that we need to create a new word for you.

    JD (b98cae)

  238. Ms. Busch’s honest, personal commentary is accurate, idiot.

    Oh. OK. I can really tell you’re right because you call people idiot instead of dealing with factual assertions and even linked proof she was inaccurate.

    Thanks for the correction, DCSCA

    Dustin (c16eca)

  239. Disco Stu sniffs Limbaugh’s butt.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  240. As the paper of record, the NYT remains a gold standard for sourcing in the real world

    Ha ha ha ha ha.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  241. This thread is stale now, but I just wanted to (non)answer aphrael with a redirect and refocus.

    The EPA (and every Federal bureaucracy) writes its own laws, “arrests” people for violating its laws, “tries” people on those law violations, “proclaims guilt” on those people who violate those laws, “sentences” those people who violate those laws. The EPA has the power of all three branches of government all rolled into one unelected and unaccountable hat.

    None of what the EPA does follows the Letter of the Constitution. None of what the EPA does follows the Spirit of the Constitution. None of what the EPA does has any concern with the Consent of the Governed. All of what the EPA does is out of unrestrained Power.

    There are many things which can be deemed “good.” That doesn’t make those things right or proper or Constitutional. The Founders and Framers had as their intent the hamstringing of Central Power as much as absolutely possible, and with giving the Governed as much Freedom and Liberty and power over the government as absolutely possible for a reason: A free and self-governing people with hardships is vastly preferable to an indentured serfdom under a dictatorship, even a “benevolent” dictatorship.

    The powers given to the EPA and the actions taken by the EPA are outside the realm of the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence. If you want the EPA to have all that power, amend the Constitution to give EPA that power. But until then, the Federal EPA needs abolished. The various State EPAs are within the bounds of the Tenth Amendment (but may be outside the bounds of the various State Constitutions).

    If you like the EPA’s laws and don’t want to amend the Constitution, fine. There’s a process already in place. Have Congress — who is accountable to the Governed — write the laws. Then have the President — who is accountable to the Governed — sign the laws. And if the Governed don’t like the laws, they can “throw the bums out” as is the Governed’s Constitutionally protected power. And, no, writing a law that says a bureaucracy can write laws is not Constitutional. The Constitution does not give Congress or the President the right to abdicate their prescribed duties.

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  242. Anita Busch picked the worst possible time to recite her global warmening mantra. Today’s news is huge. Sunspots look like they’re going away for a while. Maybe a few decades. You know what that means. Global cooling; perhaps another Little Ice Age, like the one from about 1500-1850, that we were still recovering from in the first part of the 20th century (that’s what all the pre-War warming was).

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  243. In the 1770s, 60 years after the Maunder minimum was over, and therefore the earth was already well on its way out of the Little Ice Age, things were so cold that George Washington’s army, based in Morristown NJ, raided the British base on Staten Island on foot!

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  244. (that’s what all the pre-War warming was).

    Comment by Milhouse

    Yeah, I don’t think it’s understood enough that they start their charts on global warming at a time when the world was colder than normal. They assume the beginning of the chart is the ‘right’ temp.

    Anyway, that’s not the best sunspot news if you think the world would be better a little warmer.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  245. Anyway, that’s not the best sunspot news if you think the world would be better a little warmer.

    Exactly. You can’t eat vindication, and you can’t warm yourself with it. And there’s no schadenfreude when you’re in the same boat as the other fellow, just because you predicted it and he swore it wouldn’t happen.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  246. As a long time supporter of Governor Perry, I cannot help but have strong emotional feelings about a Bachmann candidacy. Any woman who opens her heart and her house to almost 2 dozen foster children and loves them as her own, shows a depth, a true unspoken love of her fellow man, an unselfishness of sacrifice of the emotional rollercoster of the carnage that foster children have endured.

    This is a woman who has decided on a very personal level to make a difference in total strangers lives – a woman who has reached out to help the most vulnerable among us.

    We are fortunate to have the Bachmann’s out there who make this world a better place

    EricPWJohnson (2a58f7)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1854 secs.