View Single Post
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 07-02-2009
TheHighForester TheHighForester is offline
Secretary of Defense

 
Member Since: Aug 2008
Location: Hohenwald
Posts: 2,187

United_States     Tennessee

Re: Global warming debunked

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesDavenport View Post
Here's the deal, guys. Global warming was a manufactured crisis to rally the stupid people around a government response. A lot of people make a lot of money off of stupid people, and gain a lot of power. It's run it's course, and you'll find the rhetoric shifting to "clean power". That's because the whole premise is about to be universally destroyed. Those same stupid people, however, will latch on to the clean energy thing with the same fervor. We'll be talking again about the fragile Earth and all that, and the big boys will exploit for money to no actual benefit. It never ends with you stupid people.

Having said all that, Obama is about two years behind the rest of the world, and still may get that bs passed. Anybody realize that the "science" of the predicate of that bill is complete crap? Who cares, right?
I have observed that whenever a particular group (such as the Democrats) attempts to "make a lot of money off of stupid people," immediately another group (such as the Republicans) attempts to "make a lot of money off of stupid people" by proposing an alternative course of action. The only thing that is consistent is that both these groups understand that a significant portion of the electorate consists of "stupid people."

Some parts of the administration's proposals, such as their advocacy of "clean coal technology," are nothing but pie in the sky. But it is certainly true that we are damaging the environment in which we live by pouring pollutants into the atmosphere, into the waters, and encasing toxic wastes in the very Earth on which our descendants must ultimately live.

We need to impose term limits on our Congress, get rid of the self-serving clowns from both political parties, and replace them with thoughtful and well-intentioned representatives who will place the common interests ahead of their own. Of course that would mean that the Democrats would have to give up Pelosi, Frank, Dodd, and others, but it would also mean that the Republicans would have to eliminate McConnell, Boehner, Cantor and others. I think that would be a fair trade. Do you have a better suggestion?
Reply With Quote