Skip to comments.Romney reaffirms stance that global warming is real
Posted on 06/04/2011 1:30:50 AM PDT by UniqueViews
In the first town hall of his freshly announced presidential campaign, Mitt Romney yesterday reaffirmed his view that global warming is occurring and that humans are contributing to it, a position that has been rejected in recent years by many Republicans as the issue has taken on a greater partisan tinge.
"I don't speak for the scientific community, of course," Romney said. "But I believe the world's getting warmer. I can't prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that . . . so I think it's important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and the global warming that youâre seeing."
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
What a moron and idiot! -- and I usually refrain from "name-calling", even against those I don't like.
Maybe not reading newspapers actually better.
go fishing, go golf, go do whatever you normally do, but, dude, the time for politicians like yourself was oh, 30 years ago? go start some auto franchises or something and do us all a big favor, whatdaya say there, Mitt my friend? Nothing personal, but let’s be real. You can’t beat Zero.
As if I needed another reason to NOT support him.
So, Mitt, you don't speak for the scientific community, but you assume you can speak for me? This is why you are simply wrong. No thank you!
With due respect, who can?
I understand your position and I don't support him for the nomination either. But if he is the nominee I will not sit out the election and I will not vote for the Obomination under any circumstance.
That’s the end of Mitt—he needs to get chucked out onto the couch with Newt. Stick a fork in him—he’s done.
“You cant beat Zero.”
“With due respect, who can? “
I fervently hope you're right. But I guess I'm close to losing my confidence in the intelligence of the American electorate, the results of the 2010 elections notwithstanding.
This is how mitt shores up his conservative credibility issue, by appealing to liberals.
How do you spell RINO?
M I T T E N S!!!
To quote Nancy Reagan: "Just say Noooooooo!"
Let me reaffirm the stance that I’m not voting for you, Mitt.
And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that . . .
So many non-sequiturs, so little time.
Is the world getting warmer? Not thoroughly proven. At least outside the bounds of "normal" fluctuations. Or, if it is, that this is part of a trend that will continue indefinitely rather than the normal fluctuation. IOW, are we seeing part of a pendulum swing that will shortly reverse itself, or the beginning of a long-term trend in one direction? Nobody knows.
Of course humans contribute to it! 6B humans and their activities obviously affect everything that happens on this planet. The question is how much the human contribution to possible global warming is relative to the other factors. 1%? 10%? 50%? 90%? If a small percentage then attempts to reduce warming by changing our behavior, no matter how drastic, will have no beneficial effect.
Even if it were to be proven that our emissions are the major cause of global warming and that reducing emissions would stop the warming, we would still need to compare the costs to the benefits of doing so.
Poll: Obama beats GOP field in Iowa
Obama 55, Sarah Palin 35
Those two articles take Greenhouse Theory at face value and by the criterion set up in the theory itself finds no evidence of warming on the basis of greenhouse effect.
Those five articles each show that Greenhouse Theory has no basis in reality due to a direct conflict with the known laws of physics. No wonder the smoking gun "hotspot" can't be found.
That article kills any thought of planetary warming from any cause. Think about it. If there is absolutely no sign of rising sea levels how could the planet be warming? The rise in sea level in the last 100 years is almost exactly the same as the average over the last 40,000 years caused by the inter-glacial period we are in.
If Romney hasn't taken the time or doesn't have the intelligence to research this subject then I wouldn't hire him to manage a five-bird chicken coop.
He will push thru the 'carbon tax'....likely he's heavily invested also in green energy. These are what he BELIEVES in.
RE: his Bain Capital days
“I believe Acme Company is making money. I can't prove that but I believe based on what I read...”
Would you vote to invest money in Acme? Would you pay him hundreds of thousands of dollars for that advice?
Public Policy Polling - Democrat polling agency (as noted at the bottom of their press release: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_IA_0602.pdf)
but the real problem, if PPP is to be believed, is this: “Obama leads by 19 to 38 points with independents, and
takes 7-13% of the GOP vote”
now why would that be? why is zero leading with independents that he would have 1/3 of their vote? what will it take to wooo them?
I smell a loophole in that global warming and carbon buy back scheme... something along the line that if you are a player and buy carbon credits you not only can freely pollute, but you are freely polluting then.
We know the Marxist soaked agents are for irresponsability, victimology and unaccountability. Thus a third world participant who would profit in carbon trading would be an automatic victim and gain carbon reparations of sorts.
He doesn’t want to beat Zero.
I am convinced, and no on here could sway me otherwise, that the presidency is gerrymandered like our congressional districts, with deals being made on who gets to run.
I have seen this over the years, and my own political, first hand experience here, has lead me to believe that for the most part, it is a one party system at the top. The lower down the food chain you get, the less likely this is true, such as municipal elections, but I am convinced, that the candidates are chosen, and the presidency is granted via a deal.
The candidate is chosen in a “bipartisan - reaching across the isle” fashion, and the other side just runs a lame duck, until the powers that be decide it is their turn to run a candidate, who in fact, is the same as the other one, just with a different D or R next to their name.
McCain had no chance in hell at winning. The RNC ran him knowing this, and they pushed him. They gave the presidency to the Dems, for some deal (and I’m not talking about a deal to help our nation) to protect themselves or something.
Now, Romney is going to be shoved down our throats, and in 2016, the dems will run some Dukakis against our appointed R candidate, most likely Jeb Bush or some other “maverick”.
I’m not saying that it is hopeless, I am saying that the one party system we have now has to go. We need a real 2 party system. No more “getting along” and deal making.
I don’t want candidates who cut deals. I don’t want a candidate who “reaches across the isle”. I don’t want a “unity candidate”. I don’t want a “big tent” party.
When you go around trying to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one.
For the most part, D or R, they all behave the same, and I’m afraid that in a few more years, those TEA party folks elected will behave just as badly as their counterparts, they will have been absorbed like the BORG, assimilated, and brainwashed into thinking that the most important thing in DC is “getting along”, and we’ll have to flush the toilet again.
I realize that this turd we have is a big turd, and it is going to take several, if not dozens of flushings to clean the toilet. Sure, we put clean water in, but it just ads to the mess and becomes dirty filthy stinking water in no time. We need to bring in the fire house, and blast the whole damn bathroom.
Doesn't matter if he believes them or not..he supports them and will do likewise as President. Everyone knows the Government is a money laundering funnel to any and all organizations who support whatever party is in power...some just know how to funnel more...and has a string of organizations worldwide to use just for that purpose, who have scads of investment properties, businesses etc.
What a maroon!
caww, you put hammer to nail...imho. The game has always been how to separate the people from their money, using any lie as a truth. (mho)
How much credence does a poll from Seattle, with under 1,400 respondents, have? Did they take it from Starbucks patrons?
Nor will I. I would vote for a RINO with any name before B.O.
"I don't speak for the scientific community, of course," Romney said. "But I believe the world's getting warmer. I can't prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that . .Say goodbye Mittens. We hardly knew yee.
You make some good points in your Post.
It sure has the appearance of fact.
Romney coming out for Global Warming makes you wonder what rock this handsome dullard has been hiding under to have completely missed the Conservative view that the earth is getting warmer because of the Natural Cycles of nature, and that puny man has nothing to do with it.
It appears that once elected the politician forgets about the people who elected him and starts worrying about how to stay on the gravy boat.
Romney the Tard.
It’s good to be King while you kill yourself.
he’s toasted now no matter how much he or the GOP pushes him into the face of the american pple.
I do note that here in Northern California it never rose above 70, rained and the melt off from snow, in the Sierra’s will likely cause flooding, one day....
It’s June, we should be well into the 80’s by now.
Mitt reaffirms belief in Easter Bunny and Santa. “I cant’t prove it, but millions of kids can’t be wrong. and, I can just feel it!”
Thanks for reminding us how unqualified you are Mittens.
Well, good. He’s toast then. Buh bye Romney!
So he insists that phony, faked data is real. Even the GW crowd doesn’t believe in GW. It is now CLIMATE CHANGE.
What rhymes with Mitt?
I WILL sit the election out if Romney is the nominee. With his positions on global warming and government health care, and the fact that I cannot trust what he says on abortion and gun rights because HE doesn't even know where he stands on those issues... I see little difference between him and Obama.
At least now we have some decent Republicans who are trying to block the Obama Marxist agenda. I fear that with a liberal like Mitt, they would be more inclined to go along with the nonsense because it was the leader of "their" party's nonsense.
I would have possibly been willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in the general election before this global warming garbage, but he seems to be intent on giving Obama ammunition to use against the conservatives.
Mitt wants to be President... for MITT. Mitt obviously doesn't give a rat's ass about the Country. I want someone who will undo the destruction Obama has brought upon the Nation, not continue it, or give it a Republican stamp of approval..
PPP surveyed 1,387 Iowa voters from May 27th to 30th. The margin of error for the survey is +/-2.6%. This poll was not paid for or authorized by any campaign or political organization. PPP surveys are conducted through automated telephone interviews. PPP is a Democratic polling company, but polling expert Nate Silver of the New York Times found that its surveys in 2010 actually exhibited a slight bias toward Republican candidates."
Hey... Nate Silver from the NY Times assures us that this poll leans towards republicans.
Romney is Rong.
Mitt needs a group photo with himself, Nancy and Newt, all sitting on a couch and proclaiming a greener world.
Awwwwwww. Wouldn’t that make a sweet campaign poster.