...or the anti-colonel, depending on your religion.

Since the downside of Bush being wrong is so catastrophic, would it not be better to attempt to reduce greenhouse gases in the event we are making this problem worse?

#31 by BakerStreet Wed, August 02, 2006 7:00 PM [BakerStreet] ...or the anti-colonel, depending on your religion.

#32 by COL Gene Thu, August 03, 2006 07:42 AM Since the downside of Bush being wrong is so catastrophic, would it not be better to attempt to reduce greenhouse gases in the event we are making this problem worse?

Yep, you're absolutely right (err, I mean Left). We should take immediate steps to stop the problem. So, are you trading your car for a horse today?

Since the downside of Bush being wrong is so catastrophic, would it not be better to attempt to reduce greenhouse gases in the event we are making this problem worse?

Yes, cause the only way to teach people to stop using their cars so much is to punish them everytime they use it. I really feel for your children, they must have an internal hatred for you for the way you raised them.

" Since the downside of Bush being wrong is so catastrophic, would it not be better to attempt to reduce greenhouse gases in the event we are making this problem worse?"

You can't even frame this without Bush, can you? Kyoto was undertaken in the late 1990's, bub. Clinton never even took the issue to the Senate. Gore/Lieberman said they wouldn't unless developing nations were held to the terms.

In reality, none of the nations are really keeping to it. It's been found that they've fudged the way the data is collected, and Britain, France, etc., are all just claiming to keep to it and really aren't. Bullshit like this is never about the environment, it is about leverage against the most successful economic nations.

Do you really, REALLY think Russia, of all countries, can keep to these standards? Please. notBush is just wanting the US to compete economically with one hand tied behind our back, and the other constantly handing our money over to the federal government. He's no republican, not by a long shot.

It is not just Kyoto. It is the Bush approach to dismantle the controls in place as well as not looking for new ways to help. If we had continued and extended the cafe standards we would be getting higher mileage and producing LESS greenhouse gas even at the SAME level of driving. If we had spent the money we wasted in Iraq to help industry develop alternate energy, build wind farms, and provide clean use of coal we would be a lot better off. Bush and his lame energy policy did NOTHING but give BIG OIL another $12 Billion dollar GIFT.

And if there was a study that said we were economically hindered by environmental protocols, your silly ass would be right here saying that Bush is destroying our economy because of risky theories of global warming. How can anyone take you seriously when we know that your sole criteria for choosing a position is what the opposite of Bush's position is?

Do you really, REALLY think Russia, of all countries, can keep to these standards? Please. notBush is just wanting the US to compete economically with one hand tied behind our back, and the other constantly handing our money over to the federal government. He's no republican, not by a long shot.

Don't forget all the other former soviet republics. Bishkek has the worst smog of any city I have been to!

build wind farms

Col, do you have a wind farm?
Do you have a wind generator on your house?
How about a solar panel?

Is it Bush's fault if you're too lazy to implement these. Oh wait no it would be his fault for not raising taxes and paying for them to be installed on your house. the NotBush logic (I think)

On another note.

Mason, were the people surveyed have at leaset one drink? If so then we can determine that these surveys are the most honest as inhibition is lowered and the true responses come out. The more alcohol the less reservation and higher integrity of the survey. Arrrrrg back to de ship ay doc?

BUSH WHACKED???? That sounds painful.

I hope that is not like Dynamaso's turkey whacking.

Bush is responsible for not providing leadership for a energy policy that would have replaced the electric grid and moved us to less dependence on foreign oil. Global warming is not taking place per Bush so I guess the story about the heat is just another liberal lie!

Right, Col (rolls eyes).

Now, my memory may be hazy here, but I seem to remember not only 8 years of a Democratic President prior to Bush, but of a VICE PRESIDENT who is preaching on global warming as we speak yet effectively did nothing to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

But I think that's my hazy memory. Bush has been President since the Constitution was written, and is thus responsible for everyone of the United States' historical ills. I do wish he'd have worked to end slavery and Jim Crow much sooner.

You're a loon, Col, and it's quickly starting to show.

He should also immediately force all cattle and horse ranches to plug the asses of their animals so as to contain all of that methane which is a greenhouse gas produced by them in very high volumes.

You crack me up Mason.