To: Oldeconomybuyer
There is a reason we used to shoot you Brits on sight, we do not like your form of Government.
2 posted on
11/02/2012 7:44:30 AM PDT by
wrench
To: Oldeconomybuyer
News flash, al-Guardian. The game is over. Obama will not be able to do diddly as a lame duck, and MMGW is about as dead an issue with Romney as it gets. Even if he had a passing interest in it, a Republican congress would just laugh as it slashes the EPA budget.
3 posted on
11/02/2012 7:49:42 AM PDT by
yefragetuwrabrumuy
(DIY Bumper Sticker: "THREE TIMES,/ DEMOCRATS/ REJECTED GOD")
To: Oldeconomybuyer
A Category 1 hurricane hitting at high tide on a full moon next to a happenstance cold front does not call for any more meaningful discussion on the hoax of ‘global warming’. Period.
I get that Sandy caused a lot of damage due to the circumstances during landfall and good people have suffered loss. But that’s where the discussion needs to stop.
4 posted on
11/02/2012 7:52:17 AM PDT by
Colonel_Flagg
("Don't be afraid to see what you see." -- Ronald Reagan)
To: Oldeconomybuyer
GW is a hoax perpetrated by the left and anarchists to destroy capitalism. It is the last ditch effort of the communists to destroy America.
6 posted on
11/02/2012 8:00:20 AM PDT by
Doc Savage
("I've shot people I like a lot more,...for a lot less!" Raylan Givins)
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Was the "Frankenstorm" Sandy the disaster some, including David Attenborough this week, believed was unfortunately necessary to wake the US and the world from its slumber over global warming? As much as I enjoy his narrations, Attenborough is a liberal nutjob.
Historical records are full of the term 'Nor'easter', which is exactly what Sandy was.
7 posted on
11/02/2012 8:13:02 AM PDT by
MamaTexan
(I am a Person as Created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
To: Oldeconomybuyer
OK, “Guardian Editor”,
when you answer these questions in detail, get back with me.
1) What does “taking action on global warming” look like, in actual policy, not generalities?
2) How much and how soon can we expect to see measurable results of these policies? If no results are evident, will the policy be scrapped?
3) What will the economic consequences of these policies be?
Again, when you can answer these questions, get back to me.
8 posted on
11/02/2012 8:19:28 AM PDT by
MrB
(The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
To: Oldeconomybuyer
“Climate change” is code for “Communists in Control.”
9 posted on
11/02/2012 9:02:11 AM PDT by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Government is the religion of the psychopath.)
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Does anyone else notice how it's referred to as MAN-made climate change instead of the more PC, gender-neutral human-made climate change? As if we're too unsophisticated and ignernt to catch on to the transparent attempt at subtle manipulation?
11 posted on
11/02/2012 9:11:49 AM PDT by
Impala64ssa
(You call me an islamophobe like it's a bad thing.)
To: Oldeconomybuyer
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Could the backing of Barack Obama by the mayor of New York City Michael Bloomberg be "the most important news story of all time"? Could this be the "stupidest rhetorical question of all time?"
13 posted on
11/02/2012 9:19:21 AM PDT by
Erasmus
(Zwischen des Teufels und des tiefen, blauen Meers)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson