Free Republic 2nd Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $22,756
26%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 26% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by Let_It_Be_So

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • John Pinette, stand-up comedian, dead at 50

    04/07/2014 7:53:24 PM PDT · 24 of 26
    Let_It_Be_So to Red in Blue PA

    At the waterpark...

    “So I’m in flipflops and my speedo...(audience laughter)

    Don’t visualize that!!! It’s burn your corneas and give you nightmares!”

    Funny guy. RIP, John.

  • Juan Williams Clashes with Eric Bolling: ‘We Need America to Be a Gun-Free Zone’

    04/05/2014 2:52:49 PM PDT · 38 of 96
    Let_It_Be_So to ThePatriotsFlag

    “He means a fum free zone like HIS HOUSE, he actiually stated on air there were no guns in his house...”

    I’m willing to give up all my fum, personally. Never used it much anyway.

  • IRS to give up, release all Lerner e-mails, documents

    03/09/2014 4:16:58 PM PDT · 47 of 48
    Let_It_Be_So to chessplayer

    My take:

    Giving a written order or directive to scrutinize conservative groups or groups with conservative-sounding names was most likely avoided. Rather, the directive was likely a verbal one, in a room with doors closed and recording devices absent.

    Therefore, emails would most likely not contain any kind of “smoking gun” evidence of wrongding.

  • Christine Todd Whitman: Yes, the EPA Has the Power to Stop Climate Change

    02/24/2014 6:25:41 AM PST · 64 of 72
    Let_It_Be_So to dr_lew

    “They think that the massive emissions, and they are that, of CO2 etc. by our industrial activities is inexorably changing the climate according to Natural Law, i.e. physics. It’s far from a ridiculous assertion.”

    One can make an otherwise reasonable assertion (massive emissions by industrial activities is inexorably changing the climate) that turns out to be ridiculously overstated when tested against observable reality, as has been shown to be the case here.

    What is ridiculous is for those same “asserters” to continue to put forward the same assertion even in the face of evidence to the contrary...and for any thinking person to continue to believe it.

  • Universities in FCC Newsroom Probe Have Close Ties to Soros, Got $1.8M in Funding

    02/22/2014 12:13:27 PM PST · 13 of 19
    Let_It_Be_So to loveliberty2

    “Since truth and reason have maintained their ground against false opinions in league with false facts, the press confined to truth needs no other legal restraint. The public judgment will correct false reasonings and opinions on a full hearing of all parties, and ...” —Thomas Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805. ME 3:381

    A key phrase in the above quote is “..the press CONFINED TO TRUTH ..” (caps added for emphasis). Alternatively, a press confined to obsfucation, deceit, propaganda, etc. , in coordination with those occupying the pillars of power, does no service to the people and their God-given rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Actually, just the opposite, they can justifiably be considered enemies of such.
    Thankfully, we are not constrained by the “mainstream press” in our quest for information..yet.

  • Judge strikes down Nebraska law that allowed Keystone pipeline to proceed through state

    02/19/2014 4:09:19 PM PST · 25 of 31
    Let_It_Be_So to CodeToad

    Was the role of the Public Utilities Commission (with reference to eminent domain matters) laid out in the Nebraska constitution? If so, the judge could be right.

    If not, why couldn’t the legislative branch, with signature of the Executive, make such a determination?

  • Daily Kos Publishes Worst Comic Ever: The One Rich Guy

    02/17/2014 2:07:20 PM PST · 71 of 71
    Let_It_Be_So to blueunicorn6

    This “comic” would be what one might expect from a kindergarten child of a set of leftist parents..seriously.

    There are so many “holes” in the thinking behind it (if you can call it “thinking”) it isn’t worth paying attention to in any serious way.

  • Ayers: Constitution needs to be replaced

    01/31/2014 7:59:56 AM PST · 31 of 36
    Let_It_Be_So to rktman

    I think Ayers (and others like him) would have all the face time they want whether anyone is allowed to counter his views or not. At least in this instance (assuming it was a valid debate forum), some of the audience would be given information from another point of view. Which point of view the student accepts is another matter.

  • Surgeon general urges new resolve to end smoking

    01/19/2014 7:56:55 PM PST · 64 of 74
    Let_It_Be_So to doublecansiter

    “I’d like to see the tobacco companies call the government’s
    bluff...Do you think Congress would pass a law ordering them to continue selling the products?”

    Nah. They would then just go into overdrive trying to find new ways to tax more things, create a V.A.T., increase the corporate tax rate, increase the capital gains tax, tax the private retirement fund accounts, slap a tax on each bottle of bottled water, etc. They haven’t reached the bottom of their list of ways to increase revenues yet..far from it.

  • New Mayor Bill De Blasio Tells New York City, ‘We Will Not Wait’ on Inequality

    01/01/2014 8:32:26 PM PST · 136 of 144
    Let_It_Be_So to JohnBrowdie

    Putting your snarky reply aside, in case you’re interested, the correct answer is....nothing.

    Therefore, the 78% weren’t screwed by the 22%, they screwed themselves. Put another way, they can stop blaming the results of an election on the quarter of the electorate who voted (yes, for liberal candidates) and blame themselves and all who did not bother to vote at all.

  • New Mayor Bill De Blasio Tells New York City, ‘We Will Not Wait’ on Inequality

    01/01/2014 6:05:48 PM PST · 105 of 144
    Let_It_Be_So to JohnBrowdie

    “Then, to pursue the metaphor, 22 percent screwed the 78 percent.”

    The 78% were prevented from voting exactly how...?

  • Woodie Guthrie's New Years Resolution List, 1942

    12/31/2013 2:09:55 PM PST · 30 of 66
    Let_It_Be_So to Bernard Marx

    Thank you. Very informative.

  • Woodie Guthrie's New Years Resolution List, 1942

    12/31/2013 1:30:34 PM PST · 17 of 66
    Let_It_Be_So to Bernard Marx

    I read the lyrics and don’t find reference to communist ideology written therein. What are you talking about? (must have missed it somewhere)

  • Duck Dynasty: Freedom of speech vs. intolerance

    12/30/2013 6:58:59 AM PST · 16 of 17
    Let_It_Be_So to nickcarraway

    “I am not saying they should have fired him at all. I am just saying it’s not a Free Speech issue. Because A&E is not the government,”

    We don’t have a disagreement on that, fellow Freeper.

  • Duck Dynasty: Freedom of speech vs. intolerance

    12/29/2013 11:38:29 PM PST · 14 of 17
    Let_It_Be_So to nickcarraway

    Sure, I might. Depends on what he said of course.

    I believe A&E has the legal right to fire any employee for just cause, so whether they can do it and whether they should are two different things.

    Robertson said homosexuality is a sin according to scriptures, and basically that he agreed with what he considers his God to have said about the matter.

    Are you saying that an employee should be fired for quoting biblical passages and/or saying that he happens to agree with what the Bible has to say about a topic, especially if he said those things off-site, on his personal time away from the “job”?

    Again, if he had advocated violence (eg advocated a Holy War or death and destruction against all nonbelievers, etc) as you mentioned in your weak analogy, then by all means as owner of the TV network, you’d want to fire any such employee forthwith so as to not be associated with him in any employee-employer relationship.

  • Duck Dynasty: Freedom of speech vs. intolerance

    12/29/2013 8:40:33 PM PST · 12 of 17
    Let_It_Be_So to nickcarraway

    “If any Freepers owned a TV station would they let someone go on it and promote Jihad and Shariah?”

    Probably not.

    However, Phil Robertson didn’t express his views on A&E. Neither did express views that could be interpreted as advocating any physical harm to homosexuals or any other “sinner”, nor did he in any way promote the idea that his Christian beliefs be forced upon all nonbelievers?

    Therefore, your analogy doesn’t seem to work.

  • Obama Says 1 Million Signed up for Health Care (BS!!!)

    12/22/2013 12:25:11 PM PST · 54 of 57
    Let_It_Be_So to napscoordinator

    “This is so stupid. They should have just put those original 36 million without insurance on the Medicaid program.”

    First, I doubt the 36M figure is a valid number and even if it was, a good percentage of that number were people who chose to not buy insurance. The number of people who wanted insurance and couldn’t get it was quite small and THAT group could have been added to an expanded Medicaid program, imo.

    Secondly, I agree with you and a variation of this (expanding Medicaid) was part of the Republicans’ proposed alternative to Obamacare when it was being debated in Congress...only to be summarily dismissed/ignored by the democrats in control of both houses of Congress at the time,iirc.

  • VIDEO: Why You Gotta Lie, Unions? 'Google Employee' Angrily Yelling At Protesters Actually A Plant

    12/11/2013 5:57:04 PM PST · 19 of 24
    Let_It_Be_So to bushbuddy

    “Ever notice “lie”, “liar” and “liberal” all contain the same letters?”

    Not until you pointed it out, but did you ever notice that “Press”, “Grope” and “Progressive” all contain the same letters?

    And while we’re at it, “Vast”, “Coin” and “Conservative” contain the same letters.
    :)

  • John Boehner: Conservative Groups' Reaction to Budget Deal Is 'Ridiculous'

    12/11/2013 11:32:40 AM PST · 53 of 57
    Let_It_Be_So to Beave Meister

    “They’re using our members and they’re using the American people for their own goals,” he said.

    As opposed to you (Boehner) using OUR members and using the American people for YOUR own goals?

  • Republicans moving to overhaul 2016 primary process

    12/11/2013 11:30:17 AM PST · 66 of 82
    Let_It_Be_So to cripplecreek

    “I think a better primary system would be 5 ten state primary dates with states from each region chosen on a rotating lottery system.
    On each date you would get 2 western, 2 eastern, 2 northern, 2 southern, and 2 central states.”

    The more I think of your idea, the more I really like it!! The current system truly disenfranchises millions of voters (at least in the nominating process) and it seems this would give those millions a voice when it matters, and that would be a wonderful departure from the status quo.

  • Reid sets up votes on nominees

    12/10/2013 11:20:23 AM PST · 13 of 14
    Let_It_Be_So to ModernDayCato

    Thanks for your reply, ModernDayCato. I agree with your sentiment that there would seem to be something they could have done. But I just can’t figure out what it would have been once the majority voted to take the filibusterer off the table.

  • Dear Christians, We Hate You. Sincerely, Atheists

    12/10/2013 11:11:59 AM PST · 266 of 275
    Let_It_Be_So to donmeaker

    donmeaker, I appreciate having a friendly “back and forth” on this subject matter and enjoyed sharing my thoughts with you and anyone else reading our posts. I can’t figure out how you came up with “others know better than you..” from my latest post, but I assure you that isn’t at all what I was trying to say.

    Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts with me.

  • Reid sets up votes on nominees

    12/09/2013 7:52:28 PM PST · 11 of 14
    Let_It_Be_So to ModernDayCato

    “So the stupid party did what it usually does...NOTHING.”

    I’m not trying to argue with you, but what exactly could they have done?

  • Dear Christians, We Hate You. Sincerely, Atheists

    12/09/2013 7:42:31 PM PST · 246 of 275
    Let_It_Be_So to donmeaker

    “Perhaps you like math...”
    “...the second best thing for you to do is to solve intergral equations...”
    “...So you are now reduced to performing differentiation, your third favorite thing. The after life is still good, but after only 20,000, you after life quality is significantly diminished.”
    “And as time goes on, you see that you will be reduced to doing things that you are increasingly less enthusiastic about doing...”

    A lot of assumptions there. Like assuming that whatever things you liked during your wisp of time on Earth are all you will “like” in the afterlife. That would be like a four year old thinking that he doesn’t want to become an adult because he would be bored doing adult things since everyone knows the only thing worth doing is playing on his scooter, or perhaps riding that red bike with training wheels.

    Also, the “as time goes on” assumes the afterlife is bound within the constraints of time as it was when on Earth.

    Finally, your thought process seems to be bound by the dimensions you have learned while on Earth, when in the afterlife you very well may find your new “reality” to be much less constrained.

    Sure, we all will make certain assumptions when speculating about the afterlife, but why limit yourself to those assumptions that make it an undesirable “place” to be?

    In the end, it really doesn’t matter what we speculate the afterlife to be, it will be what it will be, regardless of our speculations.

  • Dear Christians, We Hate You. Sincerely, Atheists

    12/09/2013 7:02:27 PM PST · 237 of 275
    Let_It_Be_So to dmz

    dmz: “That Q&A works on everything. It turns honest believers into agnostics. Just replace God in the 3rd question with the phrase ‘proof that God doesn’t exist’. It’s not a terribly illuminating line of questioning in that respect.”

    Not really. If one searches for something and finds it, he becomes a believer in that thing’s existence. There may be a lot of things he doesn’t know, but one thing he no longer doubts...the existence of that thing he has found. Further, he will possibly want to learn more of this thing he’s found (it’s character, attributes, traits, etc), but he will no longer search for it as he has already found it.

    On the other hand, if one doubts the existence of something he may hold fast in his belief that the thing does not exist, until he finds it. He has searched for that thing, and has not found it, and he now believes the thing does not exist.

    The question for that person, then, is “Have you looked everywhere yet? If not, would you at least acknowledge the possibility of that thing existing somewhere you have yet to look?”

  • Dear Christians, We Hate You. Sincerely, Atheists

    12/09/2013 12:48:26 PM PST · 214 of 275
    Let_It_Be_So to donmeaker

    “By that reasoning, perhaps Christians would also be agnostics, in that if they were to, in the after life come face to face with Set, Moloch, or Dagon (as opposed to St. Peter) they would then have enough information to change their mind.”

    Nice attempt at humor there, but in reality one can not be an agnostic and a believer in God at the same time, by definition.

    Of course, your point may be that our “God” may not be who we believers think Him to be. In that case, we would still not be agnostic, but just...wrong.

  • NYT: My, many of these ObamaCare premiums aren’t really as low as they seem, are they?

    12/09/2013 12:32:31 PM PST · 35 of 35
    Let_It_Be_So to sickoflibs

    Good points, all.

  • NYT: My, many of these ObamaCare premiums aren’t really as low as they seem, are they?

    12/09/2013 9:12:30 AM PST · 27 of 35
    Let_It_Be_So to sickoflibs

    “Where’s the polls saying Americans trust Dems to impose single payer?”

    Good point, for now. But keep in mind that the polls clearly showed Americans’ disdain for Obamacare before it was rammed down our throats.

    At any rate, I’m guessing you’ll start hearing about how those evil insurance companies (Big Insurance) are inflating health care costs with their evil profit motives (high compensation packages for Big Insurance execs, etc). That if we simply cut out the middle man and “self-insure” as a nation (nationalize the industry), we could bring costs to the consumer down to a more affordable level...blah, blah, blah. They will say, yes, it will increase the cost of government but “you like your Medicare, don’t you?”.

    It will take a few years, but Progressives believe that those in favor of single-payor health care will increase to the tipping point, thereby increasing the number of congressmen who share that vision, and voila!...nationalized health care will pass or so they believe.

    Unfortunately for them, the fiasco with the federal exchange website set them back but they believe only temporarily. They have been working toward this for decades and they look at it over the long term, with temporary setbacks being only bumps in the road.

    I hate being such a skeptic, but that’s the way I see it with my crystal ball. I hope I’m dead wrong.

  • Global Study Finds Majority Believe Traditional Hospitals Will Be Obsolete In The Near Future

    12/09/2013 9:12:08 AM PST · 20 of 22
    Let_It_Be_So to Innovative

    “Intel Health Innovation Barometer was conducted online by Penn Schoen Berland in Brazil, China, France, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan and the United States. It was conducted among a representative sample of 12,000 adults aged 18 and older...”

    An online poll? 12,000 respondents from 8 countries with a combined population of how many BILLIONS?

    Uh, yeah. Okay.

  • Dear Christians, We Hate You. Sincerely, Atheists

    12/08/2013 4:56:54 PM PST · 132 of 275
    Let_It_Be_So to Kip Russell

    Kip: “The proper answer to this question is “Since I have no belief in any deity while not affirming that no deities exist, I am an atheist of the weak variety rather than a strong atheist. This is distinct from being an agnostic, is it not, who when asked if God exists answers, ‘Maybe’?”

    My reply:
    The intellectually honest agnostic answers something like “I don’t know, really. I suppose it’s possible God exists, I’m just not convinced of it”. He could answer “maybe” as a short-cut to his true answer, of course.

    I would propose that your “weak atheist” categorization is another way of saying “I don’t believe there is a God, although I’m not saying he doesn’t exist either”. Leaving open the door to the possibility of God existing. Sounds like an agnostic with an identity confusion issue.

    In any event, I agree with you that each individual is free to hold whatever beliefs he chooses to hold.

  • Dear Christians, We Hate You. Sincerely, Atheists

    12/08/2013 1:51:20 PM PST · 52 of 275
    Let_It_Be_So to Irenic

    Unless he/she knows all there is to know, an “atheist” is most likely an agnostic without having reached that conclusion yet.

    It goes like this, in an interview with someone who professes to be an atheist:

    Q. Do you know all there is to know?
    A. No.

    Q. Do you know half of all there is to know?
    A. No.

    Q. Let’s say you do. Is it possible that you could find God in that half of what you do not know?
    A. Yes, it’s possible, though I don’t believe so.

    Q. Then, in essence you are an agnostic since you acknowledge it is possible for God to exist, correct?
    A. ?

  • IRS using Google Maps to spy on taxpayers

    12/07/2013 10:48:35 AM PST · 26 of 43
    Let_It_Be_So to markomalley

    This is what you get when we have a system where the government is charged with the responsibility of collecting taxes from income.

    If we had a Fair Tax system, all of this would be completely moot would it not? The amount and source of income would be irrelevant.

  • Question: BitCoin transactions taxable?

    12/06/2013 9:44:00 AM PST · 30 of 34
    Let_It_Be_So to thetallguy24

    I like the Fair Tax concept, understanding the need for constitutional amendment-including a provision limiting spending to no more than revenues, etc.

    How would Obama and the Democrats have funded their health care legislation without the ability to tax (impose fines) individuals/companies? You could ask the same question of a myriad of other spending measures. The only answer would be that our elected representatives would be forced to look at setting spending priorities based on anticipated revenues and live within our means. Novel concept, I know.

  • You Picked A Fine Time to Leave Me, Blue Shield

    12/05/2013 4:36:56 PM PST · 7 of 16
    Let_It_Be_So to BfloGuy

    I know it’s funny, but was it the insurance company or your favorite Democrat Senator that is the villain here?

  • Obama Laughs Off Negative Poll Numbers to Barbara Walters: ‘Nowhere to Go But Up’ (Video)

    11/30/2013 7:08:21 AM PST · 4 of 46
    Let_It_Be_So to Hotlanta Mike

    No where to go but up? Actually, there’s up, down, stay the same and my favorite... out.

  • Why experts blew the 2013 hurricane forecasts

    11/25/2013 2:08:37 PM PST · 43 of 69
    Let_It_Be_So to Cincinatus' Wife

    From the article: “’A combination of conditions acted to offset several climate patterns that historically have produced active hurricane seasons,’ said Gerry Bell, NOAA’s lead hurricane forecaster. ‘As a result, we did not see the large numbers of hurricanes that typically accompany these climate patterns.’”

    Translation: We failed in our predictions because, uh, there were some, uh, conditions that, uh, acted to offset.. never mind, we just really didn’t know what we were doing. But you can trust us next time, because we’re the experts and we’re experts because we know what we are doing.

    Whaa?

  • Obama's simple promises vex complex health rollout

    11/05/2013 6:54:11 AM PST · 8 of 10
    Let_It_Be_So to Oldeconomybuyer

    From the article: “’You have to pay attention to what your opponents are saying, and do what you can to correct the record,’ said Nick Papas, the White House’s spokesman for health care for the first three years after the law passed. ‘The Republicans in Washington were lying to people and leaving tens of millions of Americans with the impression they were going to lose their health insurance, that this was going to be an apocalyptic development for the American health care system.’”

    Wow. The reason they lied about people not losing their insurance was because Republicans were saying that people were going to lose their insurance. So, if they didn’t lie about it, the people would rise up in opposition to it, so they lied to be able to “sell” it. Never mind that in reality people actually ARE losing their insurance. Amazing.

    Also from the article: “Anna Greenberg, a Democratic pollster who has studied public opinion on health care, said what’s been missing from the White House’s message is how completely dysfunctional the health insurance system was before “Obamacare.”

    Really, Anna? At least 85% of the people were happy with their insurance before Obamacare. That’s “completely dysfunctional” in your world? Now, AFTER Obamacare, what percentage would you think will be happy with their “new and improved” (and more expensive) plans????

  • We the People V. Obamacare

    11/05/2013 6:37:28 AM PST · 3 of 5
    Let_It_Be_So to Kaslin

    From the excerpt: “And that’s only possible if we “un-elect” in 2014 every politician who voted for it.”

    Can’t do that, unfortunately.

    First, the main congressional culprit in this mess is the Senate and all Democrat Senators who voted for the ACA are not up for reelection in 2014, and therefore cannot be “un-elected” . Only a third of the Senate is up for reelection every two years.

    Secondly, the Executive can veto any repeal Bill and the Executive cannot be “un-elected” in 2014. Therefore, the Senate would have to be “veto-proof” and that’s not going to happen in one election cycle (see item one above).

    “We the People” can only begin to do something in 2014 and will have to continue “doing something” for at least one additional election in 2016 and probably several after that.

    The best chance was in 2012 and “We the People” blew it.

  • World Is Spending $1 Billion Per Day To Tackle Global Warming [dropping like a rock]

    10/22/2013 2:02:11 PM PDT · 24 of 33
    Let_It_Be_So to Our man in washington

    Here is an interesting video that demonstrates the relative volume of CO2 in our atmosphere that is “human-caused”, compared to the rest of the “greenhouse gases” in the atmosphere overall. (The current estimates of 400 ppm is up from the 385 ppm mentioned in the video, but the point remains the same)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYLmLW4k4aI&feature=player_embedded

    Your post says that we could remove 11% of the CO2 from the atmosphere. Were you talking about 11% of the human-caused CO2? In any case, I would be interested in hearing why it is you think removal of 11% (or 100% for that matter) would have ANY positive effect on our global climate.

    Thank you.

  • Obama asks public to spread word about health law

    09/28/2013 9:57:03 AM PDT · 56 of 60
    Let_It_Be_So to Bryanw92

    “Is that the next step? “

    No, unless it is stopped NOW (and I don’t really see it happening), the next step will be single payer. It appears the 2012 elections sealed our nation’s fate on this.

    Since most of the problems associated with Obamacare will be blamed on the “greedy” insurance companies and their “evil profit motives”, after enough time has passed, some future Congress/Executive will come to the rescue with 100% government PROVIDED health care (See the UK system).

    They will giddily do so under the auspices of an electoral mandate following key elections. At least, that’s the way I see it coming down...hope I’m wrong!

  • Pop quiz: What’s wrong with the tea party?

    09/28/2013 5:14:08 AM PDT · 28 of 72
    Let_It_Be_So to Vaquero

    Correct. The question “what’s wrong with THE Tea Party?” implies the conservative movement is a monolithic political party. A movement is not a political party. The underlying impetus for the “Tea Party” was, and is, “taxed enough already”! (Reign in the spending and the resulting size and soft tyranny of the federal government.)

    It would be akin to labeling a group of citizens who are anti-capitalist progressives, who favor Redistribution And Taxation, “The R.A.T. Party” and acting like they are a political party.

    So it’s the Teas vs the Rats in sudden death overtime.

  • Minnesota's health exchange premiums lowest in nation, feds say

    09/26/2013 6:41:42 AM PDT · 15 of 22
    Let_It_Be_So to TurboZamboni

    “How much is your premium” is the wrong question.

    The proper question is “How much is the cost of your health care coverage and who is paying for it?”

    In most cases, the patient (assuming he/she accesses the health care system) pays a certain amount, depending upon co-pays and deductibles as well as the type of coverage. But the rest of the cost is borne by taxpayers (to pay for the subsidies for low income patients and program administration) and/or consumers (in the form of higher prices should the employer continue to participate in plans for their employees).

    Over time, the actual cost of health care for the individual will rise or the quality of actual health care will go down...or both. Either way, the cost to the taxpayers and consumers will steadily rise as government spending continues to rise in the administration of the health care law.

    This has been the case for Medicaid (low income families and children) and Medicare (basically elderly) for several decades now. The difference, of course, is that the rest of the people in the country have now been forced into the mix.

    Enacting this law was a significant first step for those who dream of transforming this country into a European style Socialist Democracy form of government.

    The logical next step is to default to a “single payer” system when the level of complaints about this new system reach a “critical mass” (probably within one generation).

  • Two Minutes to Midnight (no, not Obamacare -- the next IPCC global warming assessment)

    09/25/2013 3:20:39 PM PDT · 6 of 6
    Let_It_Be_So to edwinland

    It’s hard to fight liars and propagandists.

    The fact that there is a “discrepancy” is why there was a “leaked” report weeks in advance. Once the final report comes out, it will already be “old news”, we must now “move on” and responsible governments should now be about the goal of taking swift action to prevent global climate change once we get past this “pause”, don’tcha know.

    The only headline from the msm will be the scientific community is more convinced than ever that there is global climate change and that it is caused by human activity.

  • Science is in a reproducibility crisis: How do we resolve it?

    09/23/2013 10:01:12 AM PDT · 28 of 46
    Let_It_Be_So to Rocky

    Not as long as they (Mann, et.al.) are guided more by political considerations to further the aims driven by their ideology than they are by any ethical considerations underlying their scientific endeavors.

    Besides, didn’t they conveniently “lose” a portion of their raw data? “OOPS! Sorry about that. Trust us, the data we lost just backed up our conclusions anyway”

  • New carbon emission rules will devastate the coal industry

    09/21/2013 2:08:37 PM PDT · 18 of 22
    Let_It_Be_So to workerbee

    I agree. However, I suspect many of his supporters will receive “utility bill subsidies” to help offset their pain, while the rest of the nation will pay the bill in full...yet another form of wealth redistribution, I’m afraid.

  • House Republicans pass test vote to defund Obamacare; shutdown edges closer

    09/20/2013 9:56:04 AM PDT · 117 of 200
    Let_It_Be_So to mandaladon

    I don’t see the government being shut down, but let’s go with that scenario just for the fun of it.

    The first “negative consequence” will be the Dems and media using scare tactics, such as “the men and women of the armed forces will not get their paychecks”, or something similar.

    The House should have at the ready, standalone funding bills, for each specific part of the government they want funded (rather than a catchall omnibus spending bill). So, pass a bill and send to the Senate a bill to fund the armed forces. Then, pass a bill and send to the Senate a bill to fund (fill in the blank...whatever is deemed constitutionally necessary and authorized).

    Whatever it is the people want funded (eg Social Security pensions come to mind although some on this site may disagree) is passed as a standalone bill and sent to the Senate. Members can compromise on things like the level of funding, but any attempts by the Senate to add additional spending should be rejected outright.

  • And now it's global cooling! Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year

    09/10/2013 11:13:46 AM PDT · 21 of 21
    Let_It_Be_So to Democrat_media

    I agree with your conclusions, so this post is not about that at all. Rather, I wonder where you get the following statement:

    “the truth is there is record new arctic ice..”

    Yes, the recent reports show a 60% increase in the Arctic Ice Extent over the previous summer readings. However, that doesn’t mean “record new arctic ice”, just that there is more ice this year compared to last (which was quite low) and that the computer models had not predicted it. At least that’s my understanding of it based on everything I’ve read about the subject.

    Did I miss something, or did you misunderstand something?

  • Environmental Campaign Suggests Naming Vicious Storms After Climate-Change Deniers

    09/09/2013 1:37:45 PM PDT · 39 of 39
    Let_It_Be_So to CW_Conservative

    Hurricane Fogettaboutit

    Then you can ask people years into the future,

    “you remember the Hurricane back in 2013?”

    “Oh Yeah, what was the name of it? I forgot about it”

    “fogettaboutit”

    “okay, but seriously, what was it called?”

  • Should God Appear to Atheists?

    09/04/2013 9:11:29 AM PDT · 30 of 80
    Let_It_Be_So to qam1

    “Then what’s with the Heaven & Hell thingy?”

    Your mocking tone aside, a Christian’s perspective:

    It’s not a “thingy”. It is a “spiritual state”.

    Heaven-state of being eternally in the presence of God (Life)
    Hell-state of being eternally separated from God (Death)

    God is both pro-choice and pro-life at the same time. It’s His will that you choose life and it is His will that it be your choice.

    At face value, your question is more of a “why” question..why would God decide to set up the situation where his created beings (humans)would have to make such a choice, a choice that carries with it eternal consequences?

    A short answer is because His design called for beings to have free will. Free to believe Him, free to not believe Him, free to be with Him for eternity, free to be eternally separated from Him, free to believe he doesn’t exist,free to believe He exists and is who He says He is,free to call yourself a “free thinker”, free to try to convince others that God is a myth, free to call yourself a believer and to share your beliefs with others.

    In summary, it’s all about freedom, but with a twist. With each and every choice we freely make, there is a potential consequence and what we choose to believe is no exception.

    You are free to believe it or not.

  • Best Summation of Barack and Michelle Ever

    09/02/2013 9:29:06 AM PDT · 17 of 61
    Let_It_Be_So to Nachum

    “Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies,...”

    All of which were known or could easily have been discerned well before any vote was cast in 2008, much less in 2012. “Many” voters made their first mistake when they were willing to consider the color of a person’s skin over any concern for that person’s ideology/character, etc in deciding for whom they would vote.

    Unfortunately,”many” voters are still in their world of denial and projection to this very day.