PDA

View Full Version : Chatting with Howard Dean online today...



Paris
06-05-2008, 07:56 PM
Okay, not really chatting, more like HD was communicating and millions are listening. Here's the email he sent me: (cause, ya know, the democratic party checks with me whenever they make a major change.;D)


Dear Paris[sic],
I wanted to drop you a quick note about a major policy change here at the Democratic Party.


As we move toward the general election, the Democratic Party has to be the Party of ordinary Americans, not Washington lobbyists and special interests. So, as of this morning, if you're a federal lobbyist, or if you control political action committee donations, we won't be accepting your contribution.


This is an unprecedented move for a political party to make -- one that has sent shockwaves through Washington and has turned the debate on clean campaigns upside down. We've unilaterally agreed to shut lobbyists out of the process, and are we're relying on people just like you.


Just imagine what hundreds of thousands of Americans donating $20, $30, or $50 at a time can accomplish together. Imagine the signal that it sends to anyone who looks at John McCain's political machine and the special interest money it needs to fuel every move it makes.


We have a chance to change the way business is done in this country, and we're taking the lead. Will you join us and make a contribution right now to help us elect Barack Obama?
[/URL]
[URL="http://www.democrats.org/page/m/672205e996534521/5n30XT/VEsE/"]
(http://www.democrats.org/page/m/672205e996534521/5n30XT/VEsE/)
I've written before about guys like Charlie Black and Rick Davis, lobbyists who are at the highest levels of McCain's campaign. But they're just the start -- John McCain and the RNC suck up lobbyist money millions of dollars at a time.


In May, McCain had his best fundraising month of the campaign, and it was directly because he refuses to shut special interests out.
But we did, and we need your help. This is an example of the kind of White House Barack Obama would run. Make a contribution to help elect him:


(http://www.democrats.org/page/m/672205e996534521/5n30XT/VEsF/)
I'll be in touch with you, Paris [sic], about our plans for the general election, but I wanted to let you know about our policy change right away.
Thanks,
Howard Dean

Yekhefah
06-05-2008, 09:53 PM
I have the most beautiful beachfront home in Tucson...

Paris
06-05-2008, 10:10 PM
I have the most beautiful beachfront home in Tucson...

Through my entire life I have felt the same exact way. But things are changing. I can't put my finger on it exactly, outside of saying there is an evolution of the human spirit going on.

Yes, bad stuff still happens. But the collective human spirit seems, I dunno, lighter? Transcendental?

There are a lot of places that this is happening, not just in the massive political shift, but with the light at the end of the tunnel re: racism. (Obviously it is a long tunnel, but at least we can see an end)

There are also people's desire to end human rights abuses, to end animal cruelty, to end pollution. All on a massive global scale never seen before.

Something is going on. It's all good, too. :peace:

And I'm supposed to be in my approaching-middle-aged-cynicism phase.;)

missjzone
06-05-2008, 10:25 PM
if they could only tell me what is meant by "change"

Tauries
06-05-2008, 10:39 PM
Something is going on. It's all good, too. :peace:

And I'm supposed to be in my approaching-middle-aged-cynicism phase.;)


Sounds to me like you fried your noodle with some pretty good Humboldt herbage. :O

Paris
06-05-2008, 11:06 PM
Sounds to me like you fried your noodle with some pretty good Humboldt herbage. :O

Just the opposite, actually. Quit that last March.

Look around! The stuff that every idealist has been trying to accomplish since the dawn of man is happening!

Sure, bad stuff is still going on. I'm not blind. Just get out of your own head for a minute and look at what is going on around your neighborhood. Things are different. The fear is evaporating. That horrible oppressing fear that has been pressing down the human race for so long, it is disappearing.

I feel very lucky to be alive today. It truly is an amazing place in history that we have found ourselves.

Will wars suddenly end? No. Will disease suddenly be cured? No.

What is happening is that the powerful people (the puppet masters) are losing control. Power is becoming decentralized, and it is open to anyone with a brain and voice and an internet connection.

Anyone.

George W. Bush would have been a wildly popular President in a by-gone era. American's would have followed him blindly anywhere. But now, now we have the opposite of big brother. The total opposite!

We don't begrudge people their human flaws and frailties. What we have a problem with is deception. Deception is no longer easy. It is actually really, really hard with so many watch dogs and so few people to watch. The new politician can't be corrupt. He/she will get caught and will have to answer to us...The Watch Dogs.
http://www.guarddogsecurity.com/dog.jpg

Tauries
06-06-2008, 12:02 AM
Just the opposite, actually. Quit that last March.

Look around! The stuff that every idealist has been trying to accomplish since the dawn of man is happening!

Sure, bad stuff is still going on. I'm not blind. Just get out of your own head for a minute and look at what is going on around your neighborhood. Things are different. The fear is evaporating. That horrible oppressing fear that has been pressing down the human race for so long, it is disappearing.



I would have been jealous...the KGB rarely operates this far east of the Sierras these days;) . The difference for me is that I live in an urban warzone...so I see much fear. I'm glad your optimistic even if I personally don't have faith in either party at this point.

bem401
06-06-2008, 07:05 AM
Look around! The stuff that every idealist has been trying to accomplish since the dawn of man is happening!

Sure, bad stuff is still going on. I'm not blind. Just get out of your own head for a minute and look at what is going on around your neighborhood. Things are different. The fear is evaporating. That horrible oppressing fear that has been pressing down the human race for so long, it is disappearing.

I think you need to put down the kool-aid.

LadyLuck
06-06-2008, 10:38 AM
Just the opposite, actually. Quit that last March.

Look around! The stuff that every idealist has been trying to accomplish since the dawn of man is happening!

Sure, bad stuff is still going on. I'm not blind. Just get out of your own head for a minute and look at what is going on around your neighborhood. Things are different. The fear is evaporating. That horrible oppressing fear that has been pressing down the human race for so long, it is disappearing.

I feel very lucky to be alive today. It truly is an amazing place in history that we have found ourselves.

Will wars suddenly end? No. Will disease suddenly be cured? No.

What is happening is that the powerful people (the puppet masters) are losing control. Power is becoming decentralized, and it is open to anyone with a brain and voice and an internet connection.

Anyone.
Beautiful posting, Paris :great: Despite what naysayers may think-it's true, more people are seeing things that way everyday. About damn time too!

Melonie
06-06-2008, 04:20 PM
What is happening is that the powerful people (the puppet masters) are losing control. Power is becoming decentralized, and it is open to anyone with a brain and voice and an internet connection.

Yeah right ... that's why Dr. Ron Paul got booted out of most of the televised presidential debates !

It may be true that a person with a brain, a voice and an internet connection can get some tiny amount of blog exposure, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with 'real power'.

dlabtot
06-06-2008, 04:26 PM
^ Maybe because he's a joke, a faux libertarian who never had any intention of running to win.

Paris
06-06-2008, 04:50 PM
Yeah right ... that's why Dr. Ron Paul got booted out of most of the televised presidential debates !



I showed them! I stopped watching TV. ;D And you'll find that most people under 30 do not get their news from TV either. Everyone knows that TV news is a joke on par with the National Enquirer.

Viva La Internet!

Yekhefah
06-06-2008, 05:12 PM
I do think your experiences are definitely colored by living in Oregon. The mainstream American population does not share the Oregonian drive to better the world and get to basics. The vast majority of Americans get their "news" from sources like CNN and the bulk of their news consists of celebrity gossip. As long as they can still charge enough gas to get to Wal-Mart and buy Chinese-made gadgets, they could give a fuck what anyone in government is doing.

bem401
06-07-2008, 08:31 AM
I showed them! I stopped watching TV. ;D And you'll find that most people under 30 do not get their news from TV either. Everyone knows that TV news is a joke on par with the National Enquirer.

Viva La Internet!

OMG, so if its on the internet, it must be true?

The fact is, if Obama and Howard Dean gain the Whie House, they intend to strip us of all the power they can and redirect it to the federal government. Higher taxes, socialized health care, "green laws", federal intervention into higher education are all encroachments on our freedom. I don't see how you reasoned that there is a trend to empower the little people going on here. I think it is more a case of people you disagree with losing some of their influence and you are jumping to the conclusion that means you gain something, but in reality, you lose just like the rest of us under the scenario you are hoping for.

LadyLuck
06-09-2008, 01:02 PM
OMG, so if its on the internet, it must be true?

The fact is, if Obama and Howard Dean gain the Whie House, they intend to strip us of all the power they can and redirect it to the federal government. Higher taxes, socialized health care, "green laws", federal intervention into higher education are all encroachments on our freedom. I don't see how you reasoned that there is a trend to empower the little people going on here. I think it is more a case of people you disagree with losing some of their influence and you are jumping to the conclusion that means you gain something, but in reality, you lose just like the rest of us under the scenario you are hoping for.

I disagree that universal health care, "green laws" and public higher education programs are encroachments on our freedom. Quite the opposite. Those things EMPOWER people.

bem401
06-09-2008, 02:22 PM
I disagree that universal health care, "green laws" and public higher education programs are encroachments on our freedom. Quite the opposite. Those things EMPOWER people.

They encroach on our freedom because the government is forcing them upon us. Right now, you can purchase as much health care as you care to or can afford to. Some people might just choose to go without healthcare. I'd be willing to bet there are plenty of 20-somethings on this board who have little or no health care, as much out of choice as anything else. I'd also be willing to bet they'll have need for a doctor veryoften as young adults. Obviously, there will be exceptions but chances are their premiums will far exceed the actual costs of the care they need. Forcing them to purchase insurance or forcing others to pay taxes to cover the costs of someone else's premiums reduces my freedom to spend my money as I see fit.

"Green Laws" lead to higher energy costs and that encroaches on my freedom as well. On top of this, global warming is only a theory. The left supports green laws because it increases the control the government has over the people.

"Public higher education" programs are a waste of money. We already have the some of the best universities in the world in this country and some of the worst secondary schools imaginable. Trust me, I know this, I am a high school teacher. These students are constantly fed a steady diet of how they have to go to college no matter how weak they are academically. Most of the students Obama refers when he speaks of college for everyone are the marginal students. He is appealing to uneducated voters who think he's going to provide college diplomas for everyone. There are already ample opportunities for the underprivileged to go to college, all paid for by the taxpayer. I'd wager that 5% or less of my students who get into these programs ever actually graduate from a 4-year school. The taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for such silliness. ALook at what a mess the government has made out of high schools. Allowing them more power at the college level is not a good idea.

Education does empower people but a college education is something you have to earn, not something the government should say you are entitled to.

LadyLuck
06-10-2008, 08:33 AM
Even though I disagree I will say that you made reasonable points in regards to healthcare and education. Your comment about global warming on the other hand isuhmno comment ;) But hey, 2 out of three isnt too bad considering we sit on other sides of the proverbial fence.

bem401
06-10-2008, 01:45 PM
Even though I disagree I will say that you made reasonable points in regards to healthcare and education. Your comment about global warming on the other hand isuhmno comment ;) But hey, 2 out of three isnt too bad considering we sit on other sides of the proverbial fence.

Thank you. At least we can disagee in an agreeable manner. ;D . Let me now put a little more effort into letting you see why I oppose these "green laws". LOL.

There is absolutely no evidence that global warming is taking place, or if it is taking place, that it has anything to do with us. Want to know why the leftists aren't screaming about all these weather related events in the country? All this extreme storms and tornadoes are caused by cold air masses. For the US to impose restrictions on ourselves regarding energy consumption will only drive up the cost of our energy. This "cap and trade" thing will mean even greater profits for energy companies. Hitting energy companies with higher "windfall" taxes will just cause them to pass on their higher costs to us.

Another important issue is whether the US has that big a role in all of this "green" stuff. We have 1/3 the population of India and 1/5 the population of China and they are industrializing at a significant rate without concerning themselves about the ecological effects. For us to place unnecessary constraints on our energy consumption places us at a relative disadvantage.

I think Obama is going way over the top when he says we can no longer drive what we want, eat what we want, and heat/cool our homes as we see fit. Why not? The earth has been here 5 billion years, man a mere 5 million. To put this in context, if the entire life of the Earth were equal to one day, man has been there a minute and a half out of that day. The Earth has survived far greater threats than those that man has subjected it to.

However, if you want to listen to guys criss-crossing the country in private jets and riding in big SUV's telling us we need to conserve more and not drill for oil and keep our thermostats at a certain level, that's your choice.

Melonie
06-10-2008, 03:39 PM
This "cap and trade" thing will mean even greater profits for energy companies. Hitting energy companies with higher "windfall" taxes will just cause them to pass on their higher costs to us.

Actually, 'cap and trade' will mean greater profits for those who are in a position to broker trade deals between those companies who need to buy additional carbon credits and those companies that are not using their entire gov't carbon credit allotment. This won't involve the oil companies, but will involve a new group of companies (one of which has Al Gore as a major investor).

The other segment of companies that profit from 'cap and trade' are those companies who find themselves granted generous carbon allowances by the gov't which greatly exceed their actual usage, and who are then able to turn around and sell their carbon allowances for cash money to other companies whose gov't granted carbon allowances were not so generous. This has already become the source of major controversy in Europe



(snip)"So, two things recently happened that sparked the hubbub:

21 of the 25 participating countries came in below their initial targets (Lithuania by 70%!), leaving an enormous 70.5 million ton (or as they say on the continent, 64 million "tonne") surplus. (Interestingly, the UK was one of the few countries to exceed its target.) Now, you might think this is good news. They're reducing emissions, right? Well, not so much. Consensus opinion seems to be that industry gamed host governments into vastly high-balling the allocations, meaning facilities could get (and sell) credits without making any particular energy-efficiency efforts. So industry's been enriched, and CO2 emissions haven't fallen significantly. Oops.

To make matters worse, the data was accidentally put on the EU Commission's website (?!) well before the official release date. On news of the huge surplus, prices for credits plunged by 72 percent in three weeks (ouch!). The market, having reached a high of $265 billion, abruptly lost two-thirds of its value. Double ouch. Since credits are all but worthless now, some companies and countries are threatening to abandon the whole scheme. "(snip)


When gov't assumes the power of arbitrarily deciding that some industries will be given excess carbon allowances which can be readily sold for cash money, and at the same time gov't assumes the power of arbitrarily deciding that other industries will be given small carbon allowances and thus forced to spend cash money to buy somone else's surplus carbon allowances in order to continue operating their business, this will give that gov't an unprecedented role in its ability to 'regulate' each and every business / industry in the country. Stated another way, this will give the gov't the power to essentially guarantee that certain businesses will remain profitable (via the new income stream stemming from their generous gov't carbon allowances) while similarly guaranteeing that other businesses will become non-competitive (because the new business expense of being forced to buy carbon credits will make them even more vulnerable to foreign competitors who have no such expense).

Circling back on topic, business and industry lobbying in order to obtain generous carbon allowances from the gov't under a 'cap and trade' system is likely to make every previous lobbying effort pale in comparison. Of course, technically speaking, lobbying money coming from businesses and industries won't fall under the heading of PAC money, so the Democrats will still be 'free' to accept it !

LadyLuck
06-10-2008, 09:52 PM
There is absolutely no evidence that global warming is taking place, or if it is taking place, that it has anything to do with us.

Oh my, my, my. Im afraid that's the end of our convo now. Considering I know how MASSIVE the amount of evidence is that it is not only happening at extremely unnaturally fast pace but what has caused it to occur, it's hard to take you serious enough (on that subject) to have further discussion.

That's probably well enough though as it would likely turn into another one of those I'll show you my evidence and you show me yours events where no one changes their position. In other words, a big waste of bandwidth. Nothing personal- it's just that proverbial fence thing again :peace:

Melonie
06-11-2008, 03:57 AM
^^^ I'm not going to argue any issue about whether or not gov't mandated CO2 emission reductions is an effective or scientifically sound policy at this point. I am only going to reiterate that the 'cap and trade' system, as already implemented in Europe and as being proposed in the USA by both Barack Obama and John McCain, will not be an effective means of actually reducing CO2 emissions. Instead it will be a gov't mandated means of making some gov't selected businesses more profitable, while creating new costs for other gov't selected busininesses that will render them less competitive on a global basis. It will also, for essentially the first time, place the future profitability / growth potential of businesses and industries at the 'mercy' of gov't policy towards those businesses and industries via the size of the carbon allotment the gov't agrees to grant. It will also be immensely profitable for those new companies that will operate a newly created 'carbon credits trading market' a la Al Gore.

This will obviously create intense lobbying efforts by those businesses and industries in an attempt to pursuade legislators and gov't officials to grant very generous carbon allotments, which equal cash money gov't subsidies since unused carbon allotments can be readily sold. And for those businesses and industries that are NOT able to lobby effectively - probably because of their small size and/or their line of business being politically unpopular - a small carbon allotment will limit both future profitability and especially future growth potential. As mentioned earlier, between the ultimate financial impact of gov't granted carbon allotments acting as an industry specific subsidy or 'tax', combined with the creation of a massive new gov't bureaucracy with 100,000 new public sector employees to administer the 'cap and trade' system and the carbon allotments, it is being argued that the financial impact will be even larger and even more extensive than FDR's 'new deal' programs.

bem401
06-11-2008, 05:25 AM
Oh my, my, my. Im afraid that's the end of our convo now. Considering I know how MASSIVE the amount of evidence is that it is not only happening at extremely unnaturally fast pace but what has caused it to occur, it's hard to take you serious enough (on that subject) to have further discussion.

That's probably well enough though as it would likely turn into another one of those I'll show you my evidence and you show me yours events where no one changes their position. In other words, a big waste of bandwidth. Nothing personal- it's just that proverbial fence thing again :peace:

Not to be argumentative but saying the evidence is MASSIVE is alot easier than actually laying it out for me. I could be convinced to change my mind if someone made a compelling case. There are just as many people saying its nonsense as there are saying its gospel.

LadyLuck
06-11-2008, 09:20 AM
Not to be argumentative but saying the evidence is MASSIVE is alot easier than actually laying it out for me. I could be convinced to change my mind if someone made a compelling case.

Forgive me for not going there with you but I've done it with others who take your position and find it's a waste of time. From my experiences it's much like trying to explain that planet is older than 5000 years and that dinos really did walk the Earth to those Fundy Christian types who believe otherwise. Nothing anyone points out to those people ever makes a lick of difference or variation of their thinking. I'm not saying you are as wacked as those folks or anything, I'm just trying to give an idea of why I'm not into getting into a drawn out debate.

It kinda boils down to this- if the vast amounts available data has not convinced you that global warming is real, I doubt I can do any better of a job. Sorry :(

bem401
06-11-2008, 09:41 AM
It kinda boils down to this- if the vast amounts available data has not convinced you that global warming is real, I doubt I can do any better of a job. Sorry :(

My point was global warming might be real and it might not be real, but even if it is real, how can we know it has anything to do with humans, and even if it is caused by humans, what impact would the US enacting green laws have on world-wide global warming? I don't believe there are any conclusive answers to that.

Anyhow, LL, I enjoyed what debate we did have.;D

Melonie
06-11-2008, 05:23 PM
what impact would the US enacting green laws have on world-wide global warming? I don't believe there are any conclusive answers to that.

true ... at this point there is only anecdotal evidence. However, that anecdotal evidence seems to indicate that if a country enacts environmental / green / energy laws that increase production costs, manufacturers will be strongly motivated to outsource or move production facilities to other countries that have much less stringent environmental / green / energy laws (and thus much lower production costs). Anecdotal evidence from the 'Chinese migration' tends to show that between lax environmental standards at the production facility itself, cheap energy coming from 'dirty' (unscrubbed coal fired) power plants, and much less stringent worker safety laws in regard to chemical / pollutant exposure etc., that the total amount of pollution as well as the total amount of CO2 emissions are SIGNIFICANTLY higher for the same amount of production than were the pollution and CO2 emissions from the American plants which were closed down !

If you're looking for specific proof, consider the case of California which was one of the first to start enacting strict environmental / green / energy laws, and therefore has experienced a high rate of closures of manufacturing plants in favor of outsourcing / relocation to Asia. While these measures did in fact reduce the amount of pollution and CO2 emissions originating in California, they actually did nothing to improve California air quality in general. An in-depth analysis of this failure to achieve the desired result revealed that with the much higher levels of pollution and CO2 emissions that are now coming from Chinese factories / power plants instead of California factories / power plants, the trade winds are in fact blowing the Chinese pollution across the Pacific and right back to California !!! A recent scientific study on California mountaintop air claims that 25% of California's current air pollution now actually originates in China !!!!!

(snip)"While the East Coast isn't immune, the West Coast is particularly hard hit. Sensors in the Sierra Nevada Mountains have identified huge Chinese pollution clouds that cross the Pacific Ocean to the United States.

In California, Oregon and Washington, sulfur from China alone reaches 10 percent to 15 percent of the EPA's allowable levels. Overall, researchers believe a third of California's air pollution (and a fifth of Oregon's) originates in China.

Chinese pollution is basically nullifying the western states' environmental progress - and their ability to meet federally mandated Clean Air Act requirements.

Unfortunately, Beijing's unswerving focus on economic development has made China unwilling to commit to curbing emissions. Premier Wen Jiaobao has made informal pledges of cuts - but in the end delivered only increased pollution levels."(snip)

from

LadyLuck
06-12-2008, 05:03 PM
In regards to "green laws" and their potential positive effects on the environment-we can only control what we do here in our own nation and lead by example. We can pressure, lobby etc. other nations to try and get them on board. But other than that what else can we or any country do?



That being said, what kind of logic is it to sit back and do nothing just because China isn't doing much? It's alot like saying someone shouldn't ever bother to clean their house just because a neighbor chooses to keep a filthy house. That's just absurd!

Green laws are no different than many laws already in place that require people to maintain their property and businesses in a manner that does not create health and or safety hazards.

The purpose of green laws is the same as any other health and safety law. If someone opposes green laws they might as well oppose the health department laws, building codes, etc etc. as well.

Paris
06-12-2008, 05:37 PM
OMG, so if its on the internet, it must be true?

The fact is, if Obama and Howard Dean gain the Whie House, they intend to strip us of all the power they can and redirect it to the federal government. Higher taxes, socialized health care, "green laws", federal intervention into higher education are all encroachments on our freedom. I don't see how you reasoned that there is a trend to empower the little people going on here. I think it is more a case of people you disagree with losing some of their influence and you are jumping to the conclusion that means you gain something, but in reality, you lose just like the rest of us under the scenario you are hoping for.

Yeah, and all that stuff is ruining the rest of the developed countries on the planet, right? Damn them and their renewable energy and universal healthcare and better educational systems!

Damn them all to hell! }:D

Paris
06-12-2008, 05:42 PM
There is absolutely no evidence that global warming is taking place, or if it is taking place, that it has anything to do with us.


Are you a climatologist? Because 94 out of 100 scientists agree that humans are causing global warming. The other 6 were hired by exxon-mobile to prove otherwise.::)

http://bp3.blogger.com/_bkpMkZ1Y1wM/RydI-O6yAzI/AAAAAAAAAM8/DdsjaB29OdU/s1600/ostrich-head.jpg

LadyLuck
06-12-2008, 09:13 PM
Are you a climatologist? Because 94 out of 100 scientists agree that humans are causing global warming. The other 6 were hired by exxon-mobile to prove otherwise.::)


Exactly. In other words it's a scientific FACT that it is happening and human activity is greatly increasing the pace at which it is occurring.

Melonie
06-12-2008, 11:34 PM
That being said, what kind of logic is it to sit back and do nothing just because China isn't doing much? It's alot like saying someone shouldn't ever bother to clean their house just because a neighbor chooses to keep a filthy house. That's just absurd!

if only things were that easy. Under present circumstances it's more like saying that someone should quit their full time job and take a part time job in order to allow them to devote more time and effort to cleaning their own house, while at the same time their neighbor is now able to accept the open full time job and pile up even more filth --- PLUS the wind blows the neighbors bigger pile of filth right back across the property line only to land on the first person's property - resulting in 'their own house' actually being no cleaner than before despite the increased time and effort devoted to cleaning (and despite the reduced efforts at other productive work that were necessary to devote more time and effort to cleaning in the first place).

Under this "California scenario", the reduced efforts at other productive work resulting from the first person devoting greater time and effort to cleaning then makes it more difficult for that person to save / invest money or to continue paying their bills on time since they must devote a greater percentage of their time and effort to cleaning and a greater percentage of their money to purchasing cleaning products. So that person ultimately winds up borrowing money from the filthy neighbor in order to continue paying their bills and continue cleaning. Meanwhile the filthy neighbor is able to loan out this money, since they are now earning more money than ever thanks to the first person reducing productivity in other areas in order to allow more time and effort to cleaning - work in other areas that the filthy neighbor readily accepted and can actually do much more profitably (since the filthy neighbor doesn't have to worry about the amount of additional filth they create in the process of performing the additional work). In the long run, this scenario devolves into the first person going bankrupt, the filthy neighbor becoming filthy rich, a huge pile of filth sitting in the neighbor's yard plus a sizeable pile of the neighbor's filth blown right back into the first person's yard (with the combined size of the filth piles being even larger than before the first person started their compulsive cleaning).

~

bem401
06-13-2008, 07:23 AM
I would love to debate this in more detail but we have to use facts. LL says its a FACT because Paris says a majority of scientists believe humans are at least partially responsible for some of the global warming that might be taking place. Does that about sum it up?

LadyLuck
06-13-2008, 01:29 PM
I would love to debate this in more detail but we have to use facts. LL says its a FACT because Paris says a majority of scientists believe humans are at least partially responsible for some of the global warming that might be taking place. Does that about sum it up?

LOL! We are using facts, Bem401. I didn't write that because of Paris's post. I am very, very, very well versed in this subject.

If I may suggest something- maybe you should do some in depth research on the subject. No offense, but you don't appear to not be very well informed about global warming. The following website is a great place to start:

Do some research and then I'm sure we can have a reasonable discussion about this subject.

Until then...take care :)