Good to know who is on Al Gore's bandwagon.
To: 2ndDivisionVet
So who is going to vote for either of these losers? Both support AMNESTY as well.
2 posted on
01/02/2008 1:51:29 AM PST by
Tarpon
(Ignorance, the most expensive commodity produced by mankind.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
At the Iowa debate it was not just Huckabee and McCain who raised their hands, but also Romney and Guliani - they are all on Al Gore's bandwagon.
Hunter, Paul, Tancredo, Keyes did not raise their hands.
Thompson was the only one who stood up to it.
No doubt we can all learn to ride bicycles again.
3 posted on
01/02/2008 1:56:16 AM PST by
verklaring
(Pyrite is not gold)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Wow, 2ndDivision, now your making up your headlines. I didn’t see anywhere in the article where it said ANY of Republicans said they agreed with Gore.
To: 2ndDivisionVet
All the Repub’s scare me. Seems they all have some liberal in them. Hope it dosen’t come out of the closet once they get in office.
7 posted on
01/02/2008 3:04:54 AM PST by
G-Man 1
To: Beowulf; Defendingliberty; WL-law; Normandy
"Hot Air Cult" ~~Anthropogenic Global Warming ping~~
To: 2ndDivisionVet
None of the Democrats trust the market to do the job by itself. All would make major investments in cleaner fuels and delivery systems, including coal-fired power plants capable of capturing carbon emissions and storing them underground.Must be fun playing around with other people's money all the time.
9 posted on
01/02/2008 3:55:27 AM PST by
raybbr
(You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
This is a little off topic but I wonder why we let Iowa and NH, states we rarely win, decide our nominee. If there are good Conservative candidates who don't have the big east coast money or huge name recognition yet would make great Presidents they get pushed out of the race in liberal leaning Iowa and New Hampshire. By the time they make it to SC they tend to be broke.
Red states should be deciding who our nominee is, not purple states or blue ones.
12 posted on
01/02/2008 4:43:15 AM PST by
normy
(Don't take it personally, just take it seriously.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
I don't think they are on Al's full bandwagon but recognize there seems to be a problem.
I also don't think there is any dispute that CO2 concentrations have risen in the last little while. Of course we are talking concentration increases in the parts per million increases and not percent.
I think the question is - how great the problem will be? Some models predict some dramtaic shifts in weather and ice etc. but others not quite as severe.
13 posted on
01/02/2008 4:51:35 AM PST by
hawkaw
To: 2ndDivisionVet
The new 35 mile per gallon CAFE standard will in the end be neutralized by the fact that as people buy more fuel-efficient cars, they will tend over time to make decisions which will require them to drive more miles. Also, mass transit will become even less competitive with the motor vehicle, in the inevitable competition between the two.
It will be so funny to watch as the same people who clamored for higher CAFE will also be the most vocal when it comes time to bail out AMTRAK.
This is why I fear the solutions to global warming more than the problem itself.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson