RCM only

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:18:34 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


I think we will. We have some very good people in this administration, and

Got a list? Who do you like and why?


there's no mystery about what's happening. The biggest risk, IMO, is that
the recovery will get hung up in partisan politics. If that locks us into
inaction, we could wind up with a decade like the one that Japan just had --
and is still having, actually.

That's one risk. Another large risk is insert Arab sleeper theory
here. Another large risk is that the Democrats will give all our
country's offensive (and probably the defensive, too) weapons away,
outlaw our guns, turn us into another Euro entity, and cause us to
self-destruct (if the bad guys in the world don't act first.)

Gee, I wish I were more relevant in national economic and political
trends outside the newsgroup.

--
Mistrust the man who finds everything good, the man who finds everything
evil, and still more the man who is indifferent to everything.
-- Johann K. Lavater

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
RCM only

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:18:34 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


I think we will. We have some very good people in this administration, and

Got a list? Who do you like and why?

I don't keep "lists."



there's no mystery about what's happening. The biggest risk, IMO, is that
the recovery will get hung up in partisan politics. If that locks us into
inaction, we could wind up with a decade like the one that Japan just
had --
and is still having, actually.

That's one risk. Another large risk is insert Arab sleeper theory
here.

What "risk" is that? Forty thousand people die here each year from car
accidents. An estimated 440,000 die each year from smoking-related
illnesses. Is a terror attack going to be worse than that? You can't destroy
the US with terror attacks.

Another large risk is that the Democrats will give all our
country's offensive (and probably the defensive, too) weapons away...

Where in the hell did this one come from? Is that in your
global-warming-denial books? g

outlaw our guns, turn us into another Euro entity, and cause us to
self-destruct (if the bad guys in the world don't act first.)

There are anti-anxiety medications that will relieve those symptoms of
yours, Larry.


Gee, I wish I were more relevant in national economic and political
trends outside the newsgroup.

We can say a little prayer each night that the attitudes and beliefs of
hardly anyone here is relevant to anything going on in the real world. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 02:35:51 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
RCM only

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:18:34 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


I think we will. We have some very good people in this administration, and

Got a list? Who do you like and why?

I don't keep "lists."

So, you can't/won't reel 'em off, or you have "a generally good
feeling" about the new administration? I see.

I'd count them mostly as Clintonian retreads and previously discounted
failed advisors to the Liberals. ONe example is John P. Holdren (
advisor to Paul Ehrlich, failed author of "sky is falling" Liberal
books, all of which were disproven) Now he "advises" Obama about
science and technology. thud
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-advisor-called-for-planetary-regime-to-enforce-totalitarian-population-control-measures.html
Is this one of your "good people", Ed?


there's no mystery about what's happening. The biggest risk, IMO, is that
the recovery will get hung up in partisan politics. If that locks us into
inaction, we could wind up with a decade like the one that Japan just
had --
and is still having, actually.

That's one risk. Another large risk is insert Arab sleeper theory
here.

What "risk" is that? Forty thousand people die here each year from car
accidents. An estimated 440,000 die each year from smoking-related
illnesses. Is a terror attack going to be worse than that? You can't destroy
the US with terror attacks.

Oh, noooo, nothing has changed since 9/11, has it? Do you see, in
trainloads of money and degrees of freedom, our country changing
because of it?

Besides, a sleeper would turn our heads and eyes away from the reality
of our country being given away. With the EU's and Russia's help, the
Arabs are starting to redefine democracy around the world until, some
day, we won't even recognize it. It's not an attack, per se, but the
outcome would be the same. It can't be measured in numbers of lives
until it happens, when it goes from zero to beaucoup overnight.


Another large risk is that the Democrats will give all our
country's offensive (and probably the defensive, too) weapons away...

Where in the hell did this one come from? Is that in your
global-warming-denial books? g

No, from the daily news: Obama's Moscow Summit, etc, etc. Dems are
historically disarmers by nature.


outlaw our guns, turn us into another Euro entity, and cause us to
self-destruct (if the bad guys in the world don't act first.)

There are anti-anxiety medications that will relieve those symptoms of
yours, Larry.

You're worried about the sky falling (AGWK) when the infrastructure is
melting. How savvy is that?


Gee, I wish I were more relevant in national economic and political
trends outside the newsgroup.

We can say a little prayer each night that the attitudes and beliefs of
hardly anyone here is relevant to anything going on in the real world. d8-)

Yeah, we're all just a bunch of weirdos, aren't we, Ed?

--
Mistrust the man who finds everything good, the man who finds everything
evil, and still more the man who is indifferent to everything.
-- Johann K. Lavater

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 02:35:51 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
RCM only

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:18:34 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


I think we will. We have some very good people in this administration,
and

Got a list? Who do you like and why?

I don't keep "lists."

So, you can't/won't reel 'em off, or you have "a generally good
feeling" about the new administration? I see.

I just have no interest in arguing with you about who is good or bad.


I'd count them mostly as Clintonian retreads and previously discounted
failed advisors to the Liberals. ONe example is John P. Holdren (
advisor to Paul Ehrlich, failed author of "sky is falling" Liberal
books, all of which were disproven) Now he "advises" Obama about
science and technology. thud
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-advisor-called-for-planetary-regime-to-enforce-totalitarian-population-control-measures.html
Is this one of your "good people", Ed?

The page comes up blank. But, Jesus Christ, Larry, are you reading Prison
Planet as one of your sources? No wonder you've been going through the
looking glass lately.

Look, I spent days reading your anti-global-warming "authorities," at your
instructions, only to find out they were full of nonsense. I don't have time
for another round of that.


there's no mystery about what's happening. The biggest risk, IMO, is
that
the recovery will get hung up in partisan politics. If that locks us
into
inaction, we could wind up with a decade like the one that Japan just
had --
and is still having, actually.

That's one risk. Another large risk is insert Arab sleeper theory
here.

What "risk" is that? Forty thousand people die here each year from car
accidents. An estimated 440,000 die each year from smoking-related
illnesses. Is a terror attack going to be worse than that? You can't
destroy
the US with terror attacks.

Oh, noooo, nothing has changed since 9/11, has it? Do you see, in
trainloads of money and degrees of freedom, our country changing
because of it?

Nope. But then, I'm not reading Prison Planet. Maybe they've dug up some new
conspiracy theories.


Besides, a sleeper would turn our heads and eyes away from the reality
of our country being given away.

Paranoia strikes deep, eh?

With the EU's and Russia's help, the
Arabs are starting to redefine democracy around the world until, some
day, we won't even recognize it. It's not an attack, per se, but the
outcome would be the same. It can't be measured in numbers of lives
until it happens, when it goes from zero to beaucoup overnight.

Is that before or after the Trilateral Commission puts drugs in our water
supply?


Another large risk is that the Democrats will give all our
country's offensive (and probably the defensive, too) weapons away...

Where in the hell did this one come from? Is that in your
global-warming-denial books? g

No, from the daily news: Obama's Moscow Summit, etc, etc. Dems are
historically disarmers by nature.

Right. That's how we got into Vietnam. sheesh



outlaw our guns, turn us into another Euro entity, and cause us to
self-destruct (if the bad guys in the world don't act first.)

There are anti-anxiety medications that will relieve those symptoms of
yours, Larry.

You're worried about the sky falling (AGWK) when the infrastructure is
melting. How savvy is that?

It looks pretty accurate, and it's not some little gaggle of conspiracy
theorists who are saying it.

Do you know why eight major glaciers in Alaska are growing, despite global
warming? You should look into it. You'd find out how the conspiracy
theorists are pulling the wool over your eyes.



Gee, I wish I were more relevant in national economic and political
trends outside the newsgroup.

We can say a little prayer each night that the attitudes and beliefs of
hardly anyone here is relevant to anything going on in the real world.
d8-)

Yeah, we're all just a bunch of weirdos, aren't we, Ed?

Uh, there is a lot of that going around, especially since Banquer moved back
for a visit. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 06:53:18 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:


We can say a little prayer each night that the attitudes and beliefs of
hardly anyone here is relevant to anything going on in the real world. d8-)

Yeah, we're all just a bunch of weirdos, aren't we, Ed?


This of course is some of Ed's finest material. Which of course speaks
volumes...doesnt it?

Its one of the big reasons he lives in most peoples killfiles. He
actually Is a nice guy....but his thought processes are so predictable
and leftwing that it tends to make people yawn, or get ****ed. So
simply kill file him if he bothers you.


Gunner

"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in
liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support
to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that
would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked
passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us
today. Now the useful idiots can be found in the chorus of appeasement,
reflexive anti-Americanism, and sentimental idealism trying to inhibit
the necessary responses to another freedom-hating ideology, radical Islam"

Bruce C. Thornton, a professor of Classics at American University of Cal State Fresno

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 06:53:18 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:


We can say a little prayer each night that the attitudes and beliefs of
hardly anyone here is relevant to anything going on in the real world.
d8-)

Yeah, we're all just a bunch of weirdos, aren't we, Ed?


This of course is some of Ed's finest material. Which of course speaks
volumes...doesnt it?

Its one of the big reasons he lives in most peoples killfiles. He
actually Is a nice guy....but his thought processes are so predictable
and leftwing that it tends to make people yawn, or get ****ed. So
simply kill file him if he bothers you.


Gunner

And there's one of the weirdos -- a guy who pasted a complete fraud to the
NG this morning (and a libelous one, since he attributed it to an actual
person), who blasts the "liberals" who passed the legislation that saved his
life twice, when he couldn't pay for it himself, and whose idea of
entertainment is figuring out new scenarious by which he can watch them die.
And then he chuckles about it.

That's an irrelevant weirdo, Larry. Fortunately, people like Gunner, and
similar characters we often see here, will have no effect on anything that
matters. Which is what I said.

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:11:39 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 02:35:51 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
RCM only

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:18:34 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


I think we will. We have some very good people in this administration,
and

Got a list? Who do you like and why?

I don't keep "lists."

So, you can't/won't reel 'em off, or you have "a generally good
feeling" about the new administration? I see.

I just have no interest in arguing with you about who is good or bad.

Well, you could state them without arguing with me, eh?


I'd count them mostly as Clintonian retreads and previously discounted
failed advisors to the Liberals. ONe example is John P. Holdren (
advisor to Paul Ehrlich, failed author of "sky is falling" Liberal
books, all of which were disproven) Now he "advises" Obama about
science and technology. thud
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-advisor-called-for-planetary-regime-to-enforce-totalitarian-population-control-measures.html
Is this one of your "good people", Ed?

The page comes up blank. But, Jesus Christ, Larry, are you reading Prison
Planet as one of your sources? No wonder you've been going through the
looking glass lately.

It works for me. It was the first link I found about Holdren. The guy
is just as bonkers as Ehrlich. Check him out. I dare you.


Look, I spent days reading your anti-global-warming "authorities," at your
instructions, only to find out they were full of nonsense. I don't have time
for another round of that.


there's no mystery about what's happening. The biggest risk, IMO, is
that
the recovery will get hung up in partisan politics. If that locks us
into
inaction, we could wind up with a decade like the one that Japan just
had --
and is still having, actually.

That's one risk. Another large risk is insert Arab sleeper theory
here.

What "risk" is that? Forty thousand people die here each year from car
accidents. An estimated 440,000 die each year from smoking-related
illnesses. Is a terror attack going to be worse than that? You can't
destroy
the US with terror attacks.

Oh, noooo, nothing has changed since 9/11, has it? Do you see, in
trainloads of money and degrees of freedom, our country changing
because of it?

Nope. But then, I'm not reading Prison Planet. Maybe they've dug up some new
conspiracy theories.

Lose the wool, Ed.


Besides, a sleeper would turn our heads and eyes away from the reality
of our country being given away.

Paranoia strikes deep, eh?

East Coast blindness, eh?


With the EU's and Russia's help, the
Arabs are starting to redefine democracy around the world until, some
day, we won't even recognize it. It's not an attack, per se, but the
outcome would be the same. It can't be measured in numbers of lives
until it happens, when it goes from zero to beaucoup overnight.

Is that before or after the Trilateral Commission puts drugs in our water
supply?

Go ahead, play it up. Your (and our) leaders are doing things on a
daily basis which continue to sell us out. (It's not paranoia if it's
true, right?)



Another large risk is that the Democrats will give all our
country's offensive (and probably the defensive, too) weapons away...

Where in the hell did this one come from? Is that in your
global-warming-denial books? g

No, from the daily news: Obama's Moscow Summit, etc, etc. Dems are
historically disarmers by nature.

Right. That's how we got into Vietnam. sheesh

No, that's how Demonrats killed thousands of our soldiers in Nam. They
turned off the money while we were still deployed so when they ran out
of ammo, they died. No air cover, no resupply. Grrrrrrrrrr!


outlaw our guns, turn us into another Euro entity, and cause us to
self-destruct (if the bad guys in the world don't act first.)

There are anti-anxiety medications that will relieve those symptoms of
yours, Larry.

You're worried about the sky falling (AGWK) when the infrastructure is
melting. How savvy is that?

It looks pretty accurate, and it's not some little gaggle of conspiracy
theorists who are saying it.

Do you know why eight major glaciers in Alaska are growing, despite global
warming? You should look into it. You'd find out how the conspiracy
theorists are pulling the wool over your eyes.

? Isn't that contra-indicative of the sky falling? Who's pulling
whose wool?


Gee, I wish I were more relevant in national economic and political
trends outside the newsgroup.

We can say a little prayer each night that the attitudes and beliefs of
hardly anyone here is relevant to anything going on in the real world.
d8-)

Yeah, we're all just a bunch of weirdos, aren't we, Ed?

Uh, there is a lot of that going around, especially since Banquer moved back
for a visit. d8-)

Plonk him and forget him. I'm about to plonk Gunner again with all
his retorts to hot ham and sleeze, et al. Damn, that gets annoying to
have to hit the ignore key for 50 posts every day...well, Sundays,
anyway. vbg

--
Mistrust the man who finds everything good, the man who finds everything
evil, and still more the man who is indifferent to everything.
-- Johann K. Lavater

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:11:39 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .

I'd count them mostly as Clintonian retreads and previously discounted
failed advisors to the Liberals. ONe example is John P. Holdren (
advisor to Paul Ehrlich, failed author of "sky is falling" Liberal
books, all of which were disproven) Now he "advises" Obama about
science and technology. thud
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-advisor-called-for-planetary-regime-to-enforce-totalitarian-population-control-measures.html
Is this one of your "good people", Ed?

The page comes up blank.

Try http://tinyurl.com/n53e48 or
http://www.amazon.com/Ecoscience-Population-Environment-Paul-Ehrlich/dp/0716700298/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1248150268&sr=8-1
Holdren/Ehrlich book reviewed -extremely- unfavorably on Amazon.

He and Hanson are a real pair, I tell ya. Give him a Nobel!

--
Mistrust the man who finds everything good, the man who finds everything
evil, and still more the man who is indifferent to everything.
-- Johann K. Lavater

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 21:21:43 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:11:39 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 02:35:51 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
m...
RCM only

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:18:34 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


I think we will. We have some very good people in this administration,
and

Got a list? Who do you like and why?

I don't keep "lists."

So, you can't/won't reel 'em off, or you have "a generally good
feeling" about the new administration? I see.

I just have no interest in arguing with you about who is good or bad.

Well, you could state them without arguing with me, eh?


I'd count them mostly as Clintonian retreads and previously discounted
failed advisors to the Liberals. ONe example is John P. Holdren (
advisor to Paul Ehrlich, failed author of "sky is falling" Liberal
books, all of which were disproven) Now he "advises" Obama about
science and technology. thud
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-advisor-called-for-planetary-regime-to-enforce-totalitarian-population-control-measures.html
Is this one of your "good people", Ed?

The page comes up blank. But, Jesus Christ, Larry, are you reading Prison
Planet as one of your sources? No wonder you've been going through the
looking glass lately.

It works for me. It was the first link I found about Holdren. The guy
is just as bonkers as Ehrlich. Check him out. I dare you.


Look, I spent days reading your anti-global-warming "authorities," at your
instructions, only to find out they were full of nonsense. I don't have time
for another round of that.


there's no mystery about what's happening. The biggest risk, IMO, is
that
the recovery will get hung up in partisan politics. If that locks us
into
inaction, we could wind up with a decade like the one that Japan just
had --
and is still having, actually.

That's one risk. Another large risk is insert Arab sleeper theory
here.

What "risk" is that? Forty thousand people die here each year from car
accidents. An estimated 440,000 die each year from smoking-related
illnesses. Is a terror attack going to be worse than that? You can't
destroy
the US with terror attacks.

Oh, noooo, nothing has changed since 9/11, has it? Do you see, in
trainloads of money and degrees of freedom, our country changing
because of it?

Nope. But then, I'm not reading Prison Planet. Maybe they've dug up some new
conspiracy theories.

Lose the wool, Ed.


Besides, a sleeper would turn our heads and eyes away from the reality
of our country being given away.

Paranoia strikes deep, eh?

East Coast blindness, eh?


With the EU's and Russia's help, the
Arabs are starting to redefine democracy around the world until, some
day, we won't even recognize it. It's not an attack, per se, but the
outcome would be the same. It can't be measured in numbers of lives
until it happens, when it goes from zero to beaucoup overnight.

Is that before or after the Trilateral Commission puts drugs in our water
supply?

Go ahead, play it up. Your (and our) leaders are doing things on a
daily basis which continue to sell us out. (It's not paranoia if it's
true, right?)



Another large risk is that the Democrats will give all our
country's offensive (and probably the defensive, too) weapons away...

Where in the hell did this one come from? Is that in your
global-warming-denial books? g

No, from the daily news: Obama's Moscow Summit, etc, etc. Dems are
historically disarmers by nature.

Right. That's how we got into Vietnam. sheesh

No, that's how Demonrats killed thousands of our soldiers in Nam. They
turned off the money while we were still deployed so when they ran out
of ammo, they died. No air cover, no resupply. Grrrrrrrrrr!


outlaw our guns, turn us into another Euro entity, and cause us to
self-destruct (if the bad guys in the world don't act first.)

There are anti-anxiety medications that will relieve those symptoms of
yours, Larry.

You're worried about the sky falling (AGWK) when the infrastructure is
melting. How savvy is that?

It looks pretty accurate, and it's not some little gaggle of conspiracy
theorists who are saying it.

Do you know why eight major glaciers in Alaska are growing, despite global
warming? You should look into it. You'd find out how the conspiracy
theorists are pulling the wool over your eyes.

? Isn't that contra-indicative of the sky falling? Who's pulling
whose wool?


Gee, I wish I were more relevant in national economic and political
trends outside the newsgroup.

We can say a little prayer each night that the attitudes and beliefs of
hardly anyone here is relevant to anything going on in the real world.
d8-)

Yeah, we're all just a bunch of weirdos, aren't we, Ed?

Uh, there is a lot of that going around, especially since Banquer moved back
for a visit. d8-)

Plonk him and forget him. I'm about to plonk Gunner again with all
his retorts to hot ham and sleeze, et al. Damn, that gets annoying to
have to hit the ignore key for 50 posts every day...well, Sundays,
anyway. vbg


Bye!!!

Gunner waves from his lawn chair....as he gets ready for another 2 weeks
in LA....and its obviouis that Larry hasnt a clue about who I send
retorts to. Or why.

"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in
liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support
to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that
would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked
passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us
today. Now the useful idiots can be found in the chorus of appeasement,
reflexive anti-Americanism, and sentimental idealism trying to inhibit
the necessary responses to another freedom-hating ideology, radical Islam"

Bruce C. Thornton, a professor of Classics at American University of Cal State Fresno

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:11:39 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 02:35:51 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
m...
RCM only

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:18:34 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


I think we will. We have some very good people in this administration,
and

Got a list? Who do you like and why?

I don't keep "lists."

So, you can't/won't reel 'em off, or you have "a generally good
feeling" about the new administration? I see.

I just have no interest in arguing with you about who is good or bad.

Well, you could state them without arguing with me, eh?

I really don't care to get into a meaningless discussion about it. I have a
pretty good idea who most of those people are, and I'm not interested in
convincing anyone else about them. I also have made my own judgments about
which opinions will be consequential, and which will not. Fair enough?



I'd count them mostly as Clintonian retreads and previously discounted
failed advisors to the Liberals. ONe example is John P. Holdren (
advisor to Paul Ehrlich, failed author of "sky is falling" Liberal
books, all of which were disproven) Now he "advises" Obama about
science and technology. thud
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-advisor-called-for-planetary-regime-to-enforce-totalitarian-population-control-measures.html
Is this one of your "good people", Ed?

I know about Holdren from his days at Woods Hole. He's reputed to be one of
the world's top experts on environmental issues. I don't know any more
details than that, as I haven't read any of his articles for over 20 years
and I've never read his books.


The page comes up blank. But, Jesus Christ, Larry, are you reading Prison
Planet as one of your sources? No wonder you've been going through the
looking glass lately.

It works for me. It was the first link I found about Holdren. The guy
is just as bonkers as Ehrlich. Check him out. I dare you.

Larry, did you read that book, or did you just read *about* the book, as
told to you by the likes of the Prison Planet freaks? Because if you haven't
READ the book, what good is your opinion about it?

It's tiresome to chase these claims all around the block, only to find
out -- usually after I've spent considerable effort to track down original
sources -- that the person I'm talking to is handing out second-hand
opinions, cherry-picked quotes taken out of context, and other nonsense.

I'm not going to chase this one. I never read _Ecoscience_ but my
understanding is that it contained the full range of potential policy ideas
relating to limiting population growth, as they were being discussed in
1969. You'd find a lot of people here who agree that there are too many
people in the US as it is. g I'm not going to comment on the book without
actually reading it, and I'm not going to read a book about science and
social science issues written in 1969. Did you?



Look, I spent days reading your anti-global-warming "authorities," at your
instructions, only to find out they were full of nonsense. I don't have
time
for another round of that.


there's no mystery about what's happening. The biggest risk, IMO, is
that
the recovery will get hung up in partisan politics. If that locks us
into
inaction, we could wind up with a decade like the one that Japan just
had --
and is still having, actually.

That's one risk. Another large risk is insert Arab sleeper theory
here.

What "risk" is that? Forty thousand people die here each year from car
accidents. An estimated 440,000 die each year from smoking-related
illnesses. Is a terror attack going to be worse than that? You can't
destroy
the US with terror attacks.

Oh, noooo, nothing has changed since 9/11, has it? Do you see, in
trainloads of money and degrees of freedom, our country changing
because of it?

Nope. But then, I'm not reading Prison Planet. Maybe they've dug up some
new
conspiracy theories.

Lose the wool, Ed.


Besides, a sleeper would turn our heads and eyes away from the reality
of our country being given away.

Paranoia strikes deep, eh?

East Coast blindness, eh?


With the EU's and Russia's help, the
Arabs are starting to redefine democracy around the world until, some
day, we won't even recognize it. It's not an attack, per se, but the
outcome would be the same. It can't be measured in numbers of lives
until it happens, when it goes from zero to beaucoup overnight.

Is that before or after the Trilateral Commission puts drugs in our water
supply?

Go ahead, play it up. Your (and our) leaders are doing things on a
daily basis which continue to sell us out. (It's not paranoia if it's
true, right?)

Enough of this crap. I'm doing no such thing. And this discussion is
ridiculous.




Another large risk is that the Democrats will give all our
country's offensive (and probably the defensive, too) weapons away...

Where in the hell did this one come from? Is that in your
global-warming-denial books? g

No, from the daily news: Obama's Moscow Summit, etc, etc. Dems are
historically disarmers by nature.

Right. That's how we got into Vietnam. sheesh

No, that's how Demonrats killed thousands of our soldiers in Nam. They
turned off the money while we were still deployed so when they ran out
of ammo, they died. No air cover, no resupply. Grrrrrrrrrr!

Oh, Jesus, you've been drinking that Kool Aid again. Yeah, we spent
ourselves into penury over that stupid war, and 58,000 soldiers all died at
the very end, when the ammo ran out. Do you listen to yourself writing this
stuff?



outlaw our guns, turn us into another Euro entity, and cause us to
self-destruct (if the bad guys in the world don't act first.)

There are anti-anxiety medications that will relieve those symptoms of
yours, Larry.

You're worried about the sky falling (AGWK) when the infrastructure is
melting. How savvy is that?

It looks pretty accurate, and it's not some little gaggle of conspiracy
theorists who are saying it.

Do you know why eight major glaciers in Alaska are growing, despite global
warming? You should look into it. You'd find out how the conspiracy
theorists are pulling the wool over your eyes.

? Isn't that contra-indicative of the sky falling? Who's pulling
whose wool?

Find out how it works, and why. It will give you some insight into how the
deniers play their shell games. And that's what most of it is: shell games,
like Crichton claiming that increased ice floating in the sea around
Antarctica is evidence of cooling -- when it was warming that broke the ice
off the shelves and set it afloat in the first place. That's a good metaphor
for the whole denier argument.



Gee, I wish I were more relevant in national economic and political
trends outside the newsgroup.

We can say a little prayer each night that the attitudes and beliefs of
hardly anyone here is relevant to anything going on in the real world.
d8-)

Yeah, we're all just a bunch of weirdos, aren't we, Ed?

Uh, there is a lot of that going around, especially since Banquer moved
back
for a visit. d8-)

Plonk him and forget him. I'm about to plonk Gunner again with all
his retorts to hot ham and sleeze, et al. Damn, that gets annoying to
have to hit the ignore key for 50 posts every day...well, Sundays,
anyway. vbg

--
Mistrust the man who finds everything good, the man who finds everything
evil, and still more the man who is indifferent to everything.
-- Johann K. Lavater

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 22:02:56 -0700, the infamous Gunner Asch
scrawled the following:

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 21:21:43 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:
Ed said:
Uh, there is a lot of that going around, especially since Banquer moved back
for a visit. d8-)

Plonk him and forget him. I'm about to plonk Gunner again with all
his retorts to hot ham and sleeze, et al. Damn, that gets annoying to
have to hit the ignore key for 50 posts every day...well, Sundays,
anyway. vbg

Bye!!!

Gunner waves from his lawn chair....as he gets ready for another 2 weeks
in LA....and its obviouis that Larry hasnt a clue about who I send
retorts to. Or why.

Aw, c'mon, Gunner. I've been houding you about sending so many replies
to the damned trolls for years now. You know better but you still
reply to damned near every one, and 50-60 replies for every troll post
put on the newsgroup. The electrician liability troll already has 558
replies to it.

Quickly: rangerssuck, hh&c, procto, parakeet, cliffy, and 100 others
just so far this year. Give it a rest, please.

--
Mistrust the man who finds everything good, the man who finds everything
evil, and still more the man who is indifferent to everything.
-- Johann K. Lavater

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 01:48:35 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:11:39 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 02:35:51 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
om...
RCM only

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:18:34 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


I think we will. We have some very good people in this administration,
and

Got a list? Who do you like and why?

I don't keep "lists."

So, you can't/won't reel 'em off, or you have "a generally good
feeling" about the new administration? I see.

I just have no interest in arguing with you about who is good or bad.

Well, you could state them without arguing with me, eh?

I really don't care to get into a meaningless discussion about it. I have a
pretty good idea who most of those people are, and I'm not interested in
convincing anyone else about them. I also have made my own judgments about
which opinions will be consequential, and which will not. Fair enough?



I'd count them mostly as Clintonian retreads and previously discounted
failed advisors to the Liberals. ONe example is John P. Holdren (
advisor to Paul Ehrlich, failed author of "sky is falling" Liberal
books, all of which were disproven) Now he "advises" Obama about
science and technology. thud
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-advisor-called-for-planetary-regime-to-enforce-totalitarian-population-control-measures.html
Is this one of your "good people", Ed?

I know about Holdren from his days at Woods Hole. He's reputed to be one of
the world's top experts on environmental issues. I don't know any more
details than that, as I haven't read any of his articles for over 20 years
and I've never read his books.

So give the man a Nobel. His buddy, Gore, got one for his
lies^N^N^N^Nvast knowledge of climate matters.


The page comes up blank. But, Jesus Christ, Larry, are you reading Prison
Planet as one of your sources? No wonder you've been going through the
looking glass lately.

It works for me. It was the first link I found about Holdren. The guy
is just as bonkers as Ehrlich. Check him out. I dare you.

Larry, did you read that book, or did you just read *about* the book, as
told to you by the likes of the Prison Planet freaks? Because if you haven't
READ the book, what good is your opinion about it?

I read about it.
Have you read any of the skeptics' books? I doubt it, though you seem
to dismiss them easily enough.


It's tiresome to chase these claims all around the block, only to find
out -- usually after I've spent considerable effort to track down original
sources -- that the person I'm talking to is handing out second-hand
opinions, cherry-picked quotes taken out of context, and other nonsense.

I'm not going to chase this one. I never read _Ecoscience_ but my
understanding is that it contained the full range of potential policy ideas
relating to limiting population growth, as they were being discussed in
1969. You'd find a lot of people here who agree that there are too many
people in the US as it is. g I'm not going to comment on the book without
actually reading it, and I'm not going to read a book about science and
social science issues written in 1969. Did you?

So you haven't read the book, either, but you're for eugenics anyway?
I see. Jawohl.


Right. That's how we got into Vietnam. sheesh

No, that's how Demonrats killed thousands of our soldiers in Nam. They
turned off the money while we were still deployed so when they ran out
of ammo, they died. No air cover, no resupply. Grrrrrrrrrr!

Oh, Jesus, you've been drinking that Kool Aid again. Yeah, we spent
ourselves into penury over that stupid war, and 58,000 soldiers all died at
the very end, when the ammo ran out. Do you listen to yourself writing this
stuff?

You read all about it and saw it happen on your TV set, damnit, so
don't give me that. You and I both know it didn't happen in an
instant, as you just stated. I've read dozens of books whose authors
were there when that happened. All were quite angry for some strange
reason, when (Liberal) politics itself killed their fellow soldiers.



Do you know why eight major glaciers in Alaska are growing, despite global
warming? You should look into it. You'd find out how the conspiracy
theorists are pulling the wool over your eyes.

? Isn't that contra-indicative of the sky falling? Who's pulling
whose wool?

Find out how it works, and why. It will give you some insight into how the
deniers play their shell games. And that's what most of it is: shell games,
like Crichton claiming that increased ice floating in the sea around
Antarctica is evidence of cooling -- when it was warming that broke the ice
off the shelves and set it afloat in the first place. That's a good metaphor
for the whole denier argument.

It was simple change which broke the shelf ice; one current warming,
another cooling, as the Earth did its thing (without our help, as
usual.) But I'll check that out.

--
Mistrust the man who finds everything good, the man who finds everything
evil, and still more the man who is indifferent to everything.
-- Johann K. Lavater

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:38:56 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 22:02:56 -0700, the infamous Gunner Asch
scrawled the following:

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 21:21:43 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:
Ed said:
Uh, there is a lot of that going around, especially since Banquer moved back
for a visit. d8-)

Plonk him and forget him. I'm about to plonk Gunner again with all
his retorts to hot ham and sleeze, et al. Damn, that gets annoying to
have to hit the ignore key for 50 posts every day...well, Sundays,
anyway. vbg

Bye!!!

Gunner waves from his lawn chair....as he gets ready for another 2 weeks
in LA....and its obviouis that Larry hasnt a clue about who I send
retorts to. Or why.

Aw, c'mon, Gunner. I've been houding you about sending so many replies
to the damned trolls for years now. You know better but you still
reply to damned near every one, and 50-60 replies for every troll post
put on the newsgroup. The electrician liability troll already has 558
replies to it.

Quickly: rangerssuck, hh&c, procto, parakeet, cliffy, and 100 others
just so far this year. Give it a rest, please.


Ill be gone for another 2 weeks so obviously things will be quiet again.

Right?

Though..most of the posts I replied to..were generated in the last 2
weeks.

Seems Im only iceing on the cake, no?

G

Gunner

"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in
liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support
to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that
would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked
passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us
today. Now the useful idiots can be found in the chorus of appeasement,
reflexive anti-Americanism, and sentimental idealism trying to inhibit
the necessary responses to another freedom-hating ideology, radical Islam"

Bruce C. Thornton, a professor of Classics at American University of Cal State Fresno

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 01:48:35 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:11:39 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
m...
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 02:35:51 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
news:nbu7655sab277eqdipusnfe8ekknbajgg9@4ax. com...
RCM only

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:18:34 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


I think we will. We have some very good people in this
administration,
and

Got a list? Who do you like and why?

I don't keep "lists."

So, you can't/won't reel 'em off, or you have "a generally good
feeling" about the new administration? I see.

I just have no interest in arguing with you about who is good or bad.

Well, you could state them without arguing with me, eh?

I really don't care to get into a meaningless discussion about it. I have
a
pretty good idea who most of those people are, and I'm not interested in
convincing anyone else about them. I also have made my own judgments about
which opinions will be consequential, and which will not. Fair enough?



I'd count them mostly as Clintonian retreads and previously discounted
failed advisors to the Liberals. ONe example is John P. Holdren (
advisor to Paul Ehrlich, failed author of "sky is falling" Liberal
books, all of which were disproven) Now he "advises" Obama about
science and technology. thud
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-advisor-called-for-planetary-regime-to-enforce-totalitarian-population-control-measures.html
Is this one of your "good people", Ed?

I know about Holdren from his days at Woods Hole. He's reputed to be one
of
the world's top experts on environmental issues. I don't know any more
details than that, as I haven't read any of his articles for over 20 years
and I've never read his books.

So give the man a Nobel. His buddy, Gore, got one for his
lies^N^N^N^Nvast knowledge of climate matters.


The page comes up blank. But, Jesus Christ, Larry, are you reading
Prison
Planet as one of your sources? No wonder you've been going through the
looking glass lately.

It works for me. It was the first link I found about Holdren. The guy
is just as bonkers as Ehrlich. Check him out. I dare you.

Larry, did you read that book, or did you just read *about* the book, as
told to you by the likes of the Prison Planet freaks? Because if you
haven't
READ the book, what good is your opinion about it?

I read about it.

That's what I thought. That really should be the end of this discussion.

Have you read any of the skeptics' books?

Lomborg's _The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming_; the
Crichton book you had me read; and many, many articles. (I also read one of
Lomborg's early books, but he wasn't talking about global warming then.)

I've stopped reading anything time-consuming about the subject because I'm
convinced, after decades of interest, that I will never be able to evaluate
the science of it for myself. And neither will anyone that I know.

I doubt it, though you seem
to dismiss them easily enough.

Unlike those who are ready to crucify a person based on a book they haven't
read, I don't go in for that kind of behavior.



It's tiresome to chase these claims all around the block, only to find
out -- usually after I've spent considerable effort to track down original
sources -- that the person I'm talking to is handing out second-hand
opinions, cherry-picked quotes taken out of context, and other nonsense.

I'm not going to chase this one. I never read _Ecoscience_ but my
understanding is that it contained the full range of potential policy
ideas
relating to limiting population growth, as they were being discussed in
1969. You'd find a lot of people here who agree that there are too many
people in the US as it is. g I'm not going to comment on the book
without
actually reading it, and I'm not going to read a book about science and
social science issues written in 1969. Did you?

So you haven't read the book, either, but you're for eugenics anyway?
I see. Jawohl.

I'm not going to judge someone on the basis of some website-pundit's
criticism of a book I've never read. One would think that any reasonable
adult would agree.



Right. That's how we got into Vietnam. sheesh

No, that's how Demonrats killed thousands of our soldiers in Nam. They
turned off the money while we were still deployed so when they ran out
of ammo, they died. No air cover, no resupply. Grrrrrrrrrr!

Oh, Jesus, you've been drinking that Kool Aid again. Yeah, we spent
ourselves into penury over that stupid war, and 58,000 soldiers all died
at
the very end, when the ammo ran out. Do you listen to yourself writing
this
stuff?

You read all about it and saw it happen on your TV set, damnit, so
don't give me that. You and I both know it didn't happen in an
instant, as you just stated. I've read dozens of books whose authors
were there when that happened. All were quite angry for some strange
reason, when (Liberal) politics itself killed their fellow soldiers.

That's a lot of crap, and another argument. What killed those "fellow
soldiers" was a bunch of bonehead politicians, liberal and conservative
alike, who had no idea what kind of a war they had walked into.

The French knew, and tried to tell us. They had been there. But we wouldn't
listen.


Do you know why eight major glaciers in Alaska are growing, despite
global
warming? You should look into it. You'd find out how the conspiracy
theorists are pulling the wool over your eyes.

? Isn't that contra-indicative of the sky falling? Who's pulling
whose wool?

Find out how it works, and why. It will give you some insight into how the
deniers play their shell games. And that's what most of it is: shell
games,
like Crichton claiming that increased ice floating in the sea around
Antarctica is evidence of cooling -- when it was warming that broke the
ice
off the shelves and set it afloat in the first place. That's a good
metaphor
for the whole denier argument.

It was simple change which broke the shelf ice; one current warming,
another cooling, as the Earth did its thing (without our help, as
usual.) But I'll check that out.

Check out the glaciers, too. They're a really good example of how the
deniers are playing their shell game. And, unlike the atmospheric stuff,
understanding the dynamics of various kinds of glaciers is not hard to
follow.

--
Ed Huntress

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 10:51:16 -0400, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .

I doubt it, though you seem
to dismiss them easily enough.

Unlike those who are ready to crucify a person based on a book they haven't
read, I don't go in for that kind of behavior.

Is there any difference? You dismiss, I crucify.


So you haven't read the book, either, but you're for eugenics anyway?
I see. Jawohl.

I'm not going to judge someone on the basis of some website-pundit's
criticism of a book I've never read. One would think that any reasonable
adult would agree.

Well, I read that blurb, the reviews on Amazon.com, and


You read all about it and saw it happen on your TV set, damnit, so
don't give me that. You and I both know it didn't happen in an
instant, as you just stated. I've read dozens of books whose authors
were there when that happened. All were quite angry for some strange
reason, when (Liberal) politics itself killed their fellow soldiers.

That's a lot of crap, and another argument. What killed those "fellow
soldiers" was a bunch of bonehead politicians, liberal and conservative
alike, who had no idea what kind of a war they had walked into.

Overall, yes, but I was talking about the end.


The French knew, and tried to tell us. They had been there. But we wouldn't
listen.

No, we didn't, did we? sigh


Check out the glaciers, too. They're a really good example of how the
deniers are playing their shell game. And, unlike the atmospheric stuff,
understanding the dynamics of various kinds of glaciers is not hard to
follow.

I'm back from my CA trip now. I'll check once I catch up on my sleep.
Here's the first google hit for "alaska glaciers growing":
http://www.iceagenow.com/Growing_Glaciers.htm I just _know_ you'll
approve. bseg



--
Mistrust the man who finds everything good, the man who finds everything
evil, and still more the man who is indifferent to everything.
-- Johann K. Lavater