KipWellsFan

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jul 3, 2009 -> 12:33 PM) Barackus the Great told us - HIS WORDS. It's not a "PARTISAN ATTACK PIECE". "...uhhh, you know, under my plan, uh, of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." - Barackus the Great on the campaign trail. So, is he partisan attacking his own plan? From the bill amendments: Now sure, it doesn't EXPLICITLY say that, but if it doesn't meet the "energy requirements" that are set, a person will not sell their home. I'm just saying it will be used as a partisan attack piece. You of all people should recognize that what Obama said during the election campaign may not become reality once he became President. Can you provide link for that quote too?

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jul 3, 2009 -> 11:41 AM) Yeah, they like to ball it up together. Pfff, have they ever even played?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jul 2, 2009 -> 08:31 PM) It's amazing how much people go out of their way to find documents/websites/blogs that justify everything Barackus the Great and his Democrat buddies do, and how much people go out of their way to make anything GOP related look like they're evil incarnate/wrong or whatever on damn near any issue. It's amazing how far some people go to try and prove their ridiculous claim that all politicians are the same. Is Kevin Johnson really Obama's buddy anyways?

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jun 29, 2009 -> 10:46 PM) <!--quoteo(post=1933546:date=Jun 29, 2009 -> 07:42 PM:name=KipWellsFan)-->QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Jun 29, 2009 -> 07:42 PM) <!--quotec-->Your quality of life probably won't be affected anyways by this weak bill. That will probably be the case for 99% of the American population. Some of the house members apparently voted against because it wasn't strong ENOUGH. I think it's pretty clear a large chunk of the Republicans in the house have zero interest in making the best legislation possible. Sometimes politics is about power, and unfortunately for some, those who give half a s*** about climate hold a very large chunk of it right now. Democrats and Obama were pretty clear on their environmental position in recent election campaigns and I think it would be a betrayal to pass anything weaker than this now. Don't forget about how you now also have to meet government qualifications if you want to sell your home. That means is your house isn't green enough, you have to pay to get all that stuff taken care of before you can sell... YAY!!!! No way your electricity bill will skyrocket. Maybe over 50 years but not at all in the short term. But that video will be a great partisan attack piece to use. And I would really like to see where in the House bill it says that you could be stopped from selling your home. The bill hasn't even passed anyway. Oh, and lol about those lights. I've got them in every room in my house and they last bloody forever.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jun 29, 2009 -> 07:09 PM) climate change or man-made climate change? I believe man has an effect on everything and our very existence is gonna impact the climate in some way. However, as of now, I do not buy the theory that this current climate change is mainly man's fault. There's just no definitive proof that man is the main reason for this climate change. And any bills passed regarding this issue should wait until after more research, more debates, and more ideas are put together. How can anyone doubt that this cap and trade bill is nothing but a tax that's being shoved down our throats? I got no problem with wanting to cut down pollution, find new energy resources, etc. But we gotta be smart about this. We can't have which ever party that is in charge go, "nuh uh, we're right, you're wrong, end of discussion." It's like the politicians are using playground rules to determine our futures. I guess you didn't read that academic article I posted. It argues that scientific debate isn't going to clear up this issue any further. The only actual thing that will do anything to "solve" this issue will be definitive political action (for or against). If anything, more scientific information will just provide outliers even more information from which to cherry pick and allow them to argue whatever their extreme position. Again I'd encourage you to go back and read it. http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/publicat...rsies_worse.pdf And I would argue that this bill isn't even close to being strong enough. It should be a much larger tax and it should be applied at all sources of pollution, hence a carbon tax. It does not cost enough for individuals and businesses to do the polluting they're doing, period. And no the bill is not being shoved down your throats. Your elected representatives have passed it in part. Your quality of life probably won't be affected anyways by this weak bill. That will probably be the case for 99% of the American population. And seriously do I really have to spend time feeling sorry for people in the coal industry. Like duh... you didn't think that one day someone might realize that is a fugged up industry. Some of the house members apparently voted against because it wasn't strong ENOUGH. I think it's pretty clear a large chunk of the Republicans in the house have zero interest in making the best legislation possible. Sometimes politics is about power, and unfortunately for some, those who give half a s*** about climate hold a very large chunk of it right now. Democrats and Obama were pretty clear on their environmental position in recent election campaigns and I think it would be a betrayal to pass anything weaker than this now.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 29, 2009 -> 01:44 PM) There's plenty of people who still call it a myth or a hoax. Pat Buchanan just called it a hoax. And something to the effect that its real purpose is to transfer wealth from the private sector to government and to create world government. Say what you will about climate change but I do think the scientists, advocates, bureaucrats and politicians for the most part are doing what they think is right and do not have particularly devious goals. I'd hope the same were true for the contrarians and Republican critics as well.

I thought it would be kind of lousy since I hadn't heard about it since I saw the trailer, but I saw Nothing but the Truth starring Kate Beckinsale and it was actually quite good. It follows a Valerie Plame-like story. Acting's great, pretty taut stuff.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 27, 2009 -> 12:40 PM) Let me clarify, because it's been lost in translation. I don't care to prove it right or wrong, I'm not an expert in the field and I have no agenda on either side of the discussion. I'd like them to continue researching it, study it over a span of years and come up with some well thought (and politically disconnected) recommendations based on data from BOTH sides, and I'd like it done objectively, as all scientific research should be done. I see a lot of hidden agenda on this specific subject, and I'd like them to toss that, and rather than studying it from one side or the other, to study it from the middle. My big issue/problem with this is that the government is shoving things like this climate bill through without knowing one way or the other. As it stands, they're guessing, based on politically charged science. The fact that debate still exists is what I have a problem with -- meanwhile we're taking drastic steps that may or may do absolutely nothing, and at what cost to the country, to the people, and to business? That's my issue with this. I know I tend to come of as bullheaded when it comes to things like this, but politics really annoys me...I try to be objective, but when I see things like this happening, I have a problem with it. I've always been a devils advocate of sorts. If the bill was really that solid, then Obama and his administration shouldn't have had to make phone calls and convince people to vote for it -- well written bills based on fact should need no push to get it signed...it should just happen. You absolutely have to read this academic article. Completely relevant to your discussion here. It's PDF http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/publicat...rsies_worse.pdf

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jun 18, 2009 -> 03:52 PM) I won't f***ing forget what you did today, Ozzie. Oh lord, would you relax. Ozzie has been great for this team.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 07:17 PM) Why is no one reporting this: http://www.infowars.com/service-inspector-...-kevin-johnson/ Maybe because Alex Jones is bats*** crazy.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jun 12, 2009 -> 10:37 PM) the guy told a joke about rapign a 14 year old. is this what it's come to? Unintentionally, he meant to be talking about Bristol who's apparently of legal age. And as far as I know he said nothing about raping anyone. He said knocked up. It was a joke, and compared to some of the stuff out there, very tame. Ever listened to a real comedian, uncensored? NSFW http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFnKTs6CXwQ

David Letterman is a comedian. Sometimes a mildly raunchy one. f*** Palin.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 9, 2009 -> 10:17 PM) So are you just not going to use Jenks tonight then? I just hate losing yesterday's game and possibly tonight's with Jenks and Thornton sitting while Linebrink throws 93 mph fastballs down the plate. Yah, we're all upset. But this isn't any kind of terrible move by Guillen. Just played the wrong card is all.

I can't believe it just crossed my mind to pick up Podsednik for my fantasy team. I'd like some more steals and Willy Taveras is hurt, and Nyger Morgan his replacement has struggled. No way Podsednik can keep this up.

Yah, Drudge's tilts are kind of annoying sometimes. He's always obsessing over the latest climate change skepticism. But I still visit everyday. Huffington Post's news pages are a decent balance against drudge.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jun 6, 2009 -> 10:27 AM) Ok, the MSM has now declared that flip-flopping is OK, because the Messiah is doing it, for our own good. Just check out the headline! Too funny. http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnews/20090604/ts...orthepublicgood That article sucks.

Tim Kaine, Barack Obama, Mark Warner

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 2, 2009 -> 08:06 PM) That he uses them a lot to the point of ridiculousness. Oh, I get it... who cares.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jun 2, 2009 -> 02:03 PM) That’s not the question here, because we both know the answer is that no such president has ever been completely unscripted. The really “issue” (if there is one at all) is has their ever been a president in history who has had the teleprompter issue loom as large as it has during his political career then Barack Obama? The answer is no. What is the issue with Obama and teleprompters? I missed this one.

I think it's just karma when a hunter blows away another hunter by accident in a boreal forest. I'll now exit this thread...

QUOTE (Cknolls @ May 31, 2009 -> 03:27 PM) Tiller the baby killer was killed himself today in Kansas. Karma is a b****. I would be interested to hear Sebelius's comments.

I don't mind Linebrink coming in there. Unless he has a past tendancy to be awful in save situations, he does issue less walks than Dotel. Up 3 runs Linebrink might be the better choice.

Guy in my fantasy league dropped him. Should I grab him off the waivers?

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 23, 2009 -> 02:16 PM) Where have I ever said that it had anything to do with his speech? My comments are about what he believes and what makes him as a person, not about some speech. I really dont believe I have even used the word "speech" in any of my posts, and to be honest I didnt even see the speech (or Obama's). I could not care less about either Obama's or Cheney's speech. Talk is cheap. Well, alright, but here's my belief. Cheney's positions on national security are extreme but they have nothing or little to do with his faith... if he has any.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 22, 2009 -> 03:23 PM) Kap, I mean i hate to say it, but Cheney is an Evangelical. (Unless you are denying that he is one.) And part of that belief is the Rapture, Armageddon and the coming of the anti-christ. Now whether or not Cheney is actively trying to create those things is unprovable. But the fact he belongs to the religion, suggests that he wants them to happen and in order for them to happen there have to be certain occurrences (many of them extremely violent and brutal.) I have never seen him speak against any of these things. Ummmm, I kind of think Cheney is a little loonie, but jeeze... I don't think that's got a darned thing to do with it. And SS2K, well played on Al Gore. I happen to think Gore's cause is more just but I feel you. EDIT: And do you have a source for Cheney even being an evangelical?