See!
Posted on 06/13/2012 8:55:50 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
See!
According to “The Forgotten Man”, Willkie lost to FDR because Willkie ran the 1936 campaign and not the “war campaign” of 1940.
Exactly!
Hey, I asked you nicely not to post my picture. ;-)
George Romney was born in Mexico to TWO American citizens.
MR’s grandparents did not surrender their US citizenship.
This issue was settled when George ran for president against Goldwater.
Obama will veto ANY attempt to repeal Obamacare.
Romney may have changed his mind on many things but Obama has not and will not surrender even one step of his Marxist agenda.
Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat. He would be considered a flip flopper by many on this forum.
All inconsequential. ORomney doesn’t have Americas interest at heart. Like every other politician its all about him all the time. His only ‘draw’ is he’s not quite the narcissist Barry is. Looking at his record as a public official is enlightening. He’s a RINO by any measure. RINO being code for liberal. He’ll crap all over this country yet not so overtly like Barry and Clinton did. Crap he will though. Yet, he seems to be the despot of choice over here. That seems to make it all OK.
Holdren is a leftist nutcase, but he was also a Harvard professor and is one of the most highly-regarded and well-credentialed experts in the world on the subject of global warming.
I think the correct amount of money to spend avoiding CO2 emissions is exactly zero, but if I was Governor of MA in 2003 and I was making decisions regarding how to deal with this issue I would gladly talk to Holdren. I'd also want to talk to Richard Lindzen at MIT, but I'd talk to Holdren too.
It is foolish not to try to learn from the experts.
I don’t care if Romney and his parents were born on Mars. I can’t stand him and am only voting for him because I hate Obama more, not because I think he will be good for America.
It is foolish not to try to learn from the experts.
Excuse me, but how can "a leftist nutcase" be considered an "expert"? A "highly-regarded" and "well-credentialed" nutcase on AGW remains, at bottom, a nutcase.
Sorry, I thought you were trying to make an issue out of an issue that had already been settled.
I am not voting for Romney, I do not hate him, I do not know anything about him beyond his political record which is liberal.
Obama voters: "Hope and change."
Romney ABOers: "Hope he'll change."
If Romney wins, in 2014, as conservative ABOers watch helplessly as Romney and moderate Republicans join with Democrats to advance the global warming agenda, advance nationalized health care, and grow government bigger and bigger, some of us would feel like asking the ABOers:
"So, how's that hope-he'll-change thingy working out for ya?"
What's really sad is reading the posts of hopeful, trusting ABOers who opine that Romney wouldn't ignore conservative Republicans because he wouldn't want to jeopardize his re-election in 2016. LOL -- the only criteria for a Republican candidate, as ABOers would have proven solidly, is for the candidate to be "Anybody But _______" (put the name of the Democrat nightmare du jour in the blank).
To quote a beloved, respected, but temporarily hysterical pundit, Republicans would "vote for an orange juice can" before they'd vote for __________ (Democrat nightmare TBA). The last thing Romney would be worried about would be his re-election. Those who pin their hopes on primary-ing him out if he confirms the corrupt character he demonstrated as governor of Massachusetts, would be sadly and rudely surprised.
Romney is bad news for everybody. I pray for a miracle that will vanquish him and raise up a limited government Republican in his stead.
Either that, or great desperation. Faith -- in God -- leads to good decisions. Desperation usually leads to bad ones.
Yours is a profoundly stupid and ignorant question.
Holdren has degrees from MIT and Stanford and has been a Professor at Cal and Harvard. He has published widely and is often cited.
He has received numerous prestigious awards and is a member of all of the relevant professional societies.
This is the very definition of an expert.
Yet, he's a nutcase.
You describe him as an "expert" on anthropomorphic global warming. Is that not akin to being an expert on the Ouija Board?
Is Paul Ehrlich an "expert", too?
You think that you are being noble but in fact you are being retarded.
Have you ever noticed that there are more conservatives than leftists in America, and yet the leftists seem to exert a preponderance of the political and economic power?
Have you ever wondered why this is?
I’ll tell you why it is.
It is because of people like you who think that a giant nasty attitude is a perfect substitute for intelligence, education, and reason.
So why don’t you get off your duff and start doing some work around here?
So why don’t you get off your duff and start doing some work around here?
Such vitriol. Who peed in your corn flakes?
Why does my contention that John Holdren is something less than an "expert" such a sensitive subject? You yourself referred to him as a "nutcase" -- a label we can agree upon.
Hint: People of "intelligence, education and reason" don't believe in -- or defend -- a hoax.
You want to have your own definition of words.
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
As, in your own words, "nutcase" = "expert".
You are failing to apply simple logic to straightforward ideas.
You implicitly claim that a person cannot be both an expert and a nutcase.
Those of us who are intelligent and well-educated know that the occurrence of both qualities in the same person is so commonplace as to be a cliche.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.