The auto makers should suspend all car and truck shipments to Kalifornia.
Several truckers have stopped driving to that state after one got a ticket for \”smoking on state property\”. $200 fine. He was in line at a weigh station in his truck. Smoking. The cop said the weigh station is state property so he was on state property. The highway is state property so whatever gets shipped has to wait for a non-smoker driver.
Leave it to liberals to politicize the weather. You say, \”What could that guy know.\” Gee, you\’re right. That\’s a brilliant argument?
\”Gray has supervised graduate work by dozens of well-known storm researchers, including top staffers at NCAR and the National Hurricane Center,\” from http://www.westword.com/Issues/2006-06-29/news/feature_full.html, which is hardly a \”right wing web site.\”
\”That guy is a paid opperative of big industry. Look it up, thats a fact you fool.\” I guess I could look it up… where? moveon.org? In fact, as opposed to your slanderous and juvenile remark, he takes only travel reimbursements when asked to speak out of town. He does not take any other money. But it\’s ok when Bill \”Stained Blue Dress\” Clinton gets paid $100,000 a speach, I guess.
First, there are literally thousands of scientists who disagree with Al Gore & Co. If a majority\’s opinion makes science right, then we would still be letting blood to cure pneumonia, wouldn\’t we?
Second, answer my oringial question: what caused the \”global warming\” that made Greenland habitable in AD 1000, and what caused the mini ice age that ended its habitability? Here\’s another question: What caused the mini ice age to end?
Here\’s another: Why were temperatures in europe in the 16th century so much warmer than they are now? SUV\’s? And see if you can\’t answer me without childish name-calling. I know it will be a struggle for a liberal to act with some civility when discussing a topic like this with someone who disagrees with him, but it\’s worth the effort, take my word for it, adults do it all the time.
But alas, you can\’t and won\’t answer my questions about past climate changes because liberalism is based on emotion and guilt, with a dash of unAmerican hatred of success, and has no way of approaching issues objectively and dispassionately. Therefore, when something like history makes current liberal arguments untenable, liberals refuse to discuss history – like past cyclical changes in global termperature. It doesn\’t fit their Stalinist agenda to force people to ride the bus or carpool in Priuses – except of course for Al Gore, whose entourage comes and goes in four Chevy Suburbans.
Or like John Kerry who, when asked if he owns any SUV\’s while touring an auto plant in Detroit, bragged that he owned several. Then at some stupid \”earth day\” event he was asked indignantly by some reporter why he owns those horrible pulluting SUV\’s, and his answer was, \”I don\’t own any SUV\’s… my family owns them.\”
And so what if Bill Gray owns a restaraunt (not that I know whether or not he does)? Does that mean that he is not also a science professor at CO State? Or do you just hate small businessmen?
Did anyone consider who would be paying for all this? The consumer. The government cuts programs for schools, the handcapped, the elderly or the poor but spend millions on these law suits? And do you think any of the individuals that they claim are being hurt by the pollution will ever see any of that money. I like a dummy smoked for years. Started as a child when you believed in companies and what they told you to be true. I quit and 10 years later got heart desease. I might add at a very young age. Do you think I will ever see any money from the tobacco companies law suits to help me if I need it? It just burns me up with these large law suits that only cost the consumer more money with absolutly no benefit to the injured consumer. The government is always saying that they are protecting the consumer. Well you know, stop protecting me. I can\’t afford it.
Grassy, check this: I don\’t care if global warming is caused by our actions or not. I believe that these emissions are harmful to children, animals, and people of all ages. I believe that overall, lowering emission would be good for the environment regardless of whether or not they cause global warming. Care to disagree?
Its pretty simple to me. Our whole economic system is set up to FAVOR corporations and rich people in general. So before you think you EARNED the right to have more than everyone else, or that you have EARNED the right to exploit the environment and the people who live in it, think about how the system is set up to allow those in power to make more money. I work hard not for myself, but for all of humanity. I do not need to set up a corrupt system in order to feel superior to others. I am equal to all others, no matter how hard I may out work them. I don\’t feel entitled to more material gain due to my hard work. I am rewarded from within. Namaste.
Instead of suing someone for what is here, sue those who kept out something that is not but should be. Rapid transit would help out all the pollution fogged brains in California and everywhere else. Keep out the oil and tire companies and not allow them to pay off politicians to not vote for rapid transit so they can keep reaping huge profits at the expense of everyone else, financially and health wise.
You concede the argument on global warming, then change the subject to saving humanity. Wow. You should change your name to Mohatma Ghandi, or Albert Schweitzer, your holiness.
How stupid is all this? Posturing at election time? If emissions are a problem – walk, ride a bike, a horse, stay home. Force businesses to locate in accessible areas and force car pools. No more limo\’s, etc. Fed and state gov\’ts have bailed the auto industry out more than once as they employ thousands – so Ok let\’s sue thme (with tax dollars) and put more Americans out work. Why wouldn\’t industry move jobs offshore. Our legal \”profesisonals\” and politicians are idiots. By the way – what\’s CA government doing about the contaminated spinach – that came from there. I think anyone ill or families of victims should sue the state -obviously they are not doing their job with respect to agriculture.
To be fair and honest, if the automobiles are at fault for global warming and other woes, should he, not only sue all auto manufacturers, but everyone who purchased those autos who are as much at fault–even himself and his constituents? (I assume even he has owned a vehicle in the past and does not walk everywhere). Also, the state and Federal governments at all levels for not banning automobiles?
This is simply another way of redistributing \”wealth\” from one segment of society to his friends, the trial lawyers.
It worked for Spits-sir, why would it not work for Lock-leer?
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
The auto makers should suspend all car and truck shipments to Kalifornia.
Several truckers have stopped driving to that state after one got a ticket for \”smoking on state property\”. $200 fine. He was in line at a weigh station in his truck. Smoking. The cop said the weigh station is state property so he was on state property. The highway is state property so whatever gets shipped has to wait for a non-smoker driver.
Leave it to liberals to politicize the weather. You say, \”What could that guy know.\” Gee, you\’re right. That\’s a brilliant argument?
\”Gray has supervised graduate work by dozens of well-known storm researchers, including top staffers at NCAR and the National Hurricane Center,\” from http://www.westword.com/Issues/2006-06-29/news/feature_full.html, which is hardly a \”right wing web site.\”
\”That guy is a paid opperative of big industry. Look it up, thats a fact you fool.\” I guess I could look it up… where? moveon.org? In fact, as opposed to your slanderous and juvenile remark, he takes only travel reimbursements when asked to speak out of town. He does not take any other money. But it\’s ok when Bill \”Stained Blue Dress\” Clinton gets paid $100,000 a speach, I guess.
First, there are literally thousands of scientists who disagree with Al Gore & Co. If a majority\’s opinion makes science right, then we would still be letting blood to cure pneumonia, wouldn\’t we?
Second, answer my oringial question: what caused the \”global warming\” that made Greenland habitable in AD 1000, and what caused the mini ice age that ended its habitability? Here\’s another question: What caused the mini ice age to end?
Here\’s another: Why were temperatures in europe in the 16th century so much warmer than they are now? SUV\’s? And see if you can\’t answer me without childish name-calling. I know it will be a struggle for a liberal to act with some civility when discussing a topic like this with someone who disagrees with him, but it\’s worth the effort, take my word for it, adults do it all the time.
But alas, you can\’t and won\’t answer my questions about past climate changes because liberalism is based on emotion and guilt, with a dash of unAmerican hatred of success, and has no way of approaching issues objectively and dispassionately. Therefore, when something like history makes current liberal arguments untenable, liberals refuse to discuss history – like past cyclical changes in global termperature. It doesn\’t fit their Stalinist agenda to force people to ride the bus or carpool in Priuses – except of course for Al Gore, whose entourage comes and goes in four Chevy Suburbans.
Or like John Kerry who, when asked if he owns any SUV\’s while touring an auto plant in Detroit, bragged that he owned several. Then at some stupid \”earth day\” event he was asked indignantly by some reporter why he owns those horrible pulluting SUV\’s, and his answer was, \”I don\’t own any SUV\’s… my family owns them.\”
And so what if Bill Gray owns a restaraunt (not that I know whether or not he does)? Does that mean that he is not also a science professor at CO State? Or do you just hate small businessmen?
Did anyone consider who would be paying for all this? The consumer. The government cuts programs for schools, the handcapped, the elderly or the poor but spend millions on these law suits? And do you think any of the individuals that they claim are being hurt by the pollution will ever see any of that money. I like a dummy smoked for years. Started as a child when you believed in companies and what they told you to be true. I quit and 10 years later got heart desease. I might add at a very young age. Do you think I will ever see any money from the tobacco companies law suits to help me if I need it? It just burns me up with these large law suits that only cost the consumer more money with absolutly no benefit to the injured consumer. The government is always saying that they are protecting the consumer. Well you know, stop protecting me. I can\’t afford it.
Grassy, check this: I don\’t care if global warming is caused by our actions or not. I believe that these emissions are harmful to children, animals, and people of all ages. I believe that overall, lowering emission would be good for the environment regardless of whether or not they cause global warming. Care to disagree?
Its pretty simple to me. Our whole economic system is set up to FAVOR corporations and rich people in general. So before you think you EARNED the right to have more than everyone else, or that you have EARNED the right to exploit the environment and the people who live in it, think about how the system is set up to allow those in power to make more money. I work hard not for myself, but for all of humanity. I do not need to set up a corrupt system in order to feel superior to others. I am equal to all others, no matter how hard I may out work them. I don\’t feel entitled to more material gain due to my hard work. I am rewarded from within. Namaste.
Instead of suing someone for what is here, sue those who kept out something that is not but should be. Rapid transit would help out all the pollution fogged brains in California and everywhere else. Keep out the oil and tire companies and not allow them to pay off politicians to not vote for rapid transit so they can keep reaping huge profits at the expense of everyone else, financially and health wise.
You concede the argument on global warming, then change the subject to saving humanity. Wow. You should change your name to Mohatma Ghandi, or Albert Schweitzer, your holiness.
I didn\’t post the one about tv\’s.
haha, just kidding, yes I did post it…..
How stupid is all this? Posturing at election time? If emissions are a problem – walk, ride a bike, a horse, stay home. Force businesses to locate in accessible areas and force car pools. No more limo\’s, etc. Fed and state gov\’ts have bailed the auto industry out more than once as they employ thousands – so Ok let\’s sue thme (with tax dollars) and put more Americans out work. Why wouldn\’t industry move jobs offshore. Our legal \”profesisonals\” and politicians are idiots. By the way – what\’s CA government doing about the contaminated spinach – that came from there. I think anyone ill or families of victims should sue the state -obviously they are not doing their job with respect to agriculture.
To be fair and honest, if the automobiles are at fault for global warming and other woes, should he, not only sue all auto manufacturers, but everyone who purchased those autos who are as much at fault–even himself and his constituents? (I assume even he has owned a vehicle in the past and does not walk everywhere). Also, the state and Federal governments at all levels for not banning automobiles?
This is simply another way of redistributing \”wealth\” from one segment of society to his friends, the trial lawyers.
It worked for Spits-sir, why would it not work for Lock-leer?