Posted on 08/30/2011 1:27:35 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Washington Post op-ed writer Richard Cohen is concerned that “Climate Change May Be Ruin of Perry Campaign.” Far less clear was whether he regards that imminent ruination to be a bad thing, or rather, a cause for celebration. There are excellent reasons to suspect the latter.
Cohen doesn’t hold a very high opinion of the Texas governor, of anyone who doesn’t buy into the notion of a looming global man-made global warming disaster, or of Republicans. Referring to Perry in an Aug. 22 Washington Post article, he opined “It’s not his thinking I fear, it’s the lack of any at all.”
Cohen observed that “[Perry] occupies the cultural and intellectually empty heartland of the Republican party.” The article scorned Perry for publicly stating that he stood with an increasing number of scientists who have challenged the existence of man-made global warming threats, commenting “…whoever they (italics noted) might be. In Appleton, Wis., Sen. Joe McCarthy’s skeleton rattled a bit.” His reference to McCarthy went on to elaborate that “The late and hardly lamented demagogue pioneered the use of the concocted statistic” in suggesting that communists were literally everywhere. He further amplified “There were some, of course, just as there are some scientists who are global warming skeptics, but these few – about 2% of climate researchers – could hold their annual meeting in a phone booth, if there are any left. (Perhaps 2% of scientists think they are).”
This would require a pretty big phone booth,.....
Since 2007 more than 31,000 American scientists from diverse climate-related disciplines, including more than 9,000 with Ph.D.s, have signed a public petition announcing their belief that “…there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause...
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
That’s our Deb! :o)
Actually, I thought this was the first time.
Not near as much as the spew from you, RED SOUTH etc.
As someone who is behind Palin 1st, I’m embarrassed for you and some of your ilk. Frankly I doubt Sarah would be proud of your support, I know I’m not.
Then why the fear over hearing the other side of the story form Perry’s own official website?
I have had many FReepers tell me they didn't know the things about RINO Mitt Perry that they read in my posts. I know you RINO Mitt Perry apologists don't want them to see it but they deserve to know the truth about a man who is pro-ILLEGAL alien, pro-amnesty RINO Mitt Perry.
And this has nothing to do with Palin, so there was no reason for you to even bring up her name. But if you want to post what you deem a nagative about her in a Palin thread, I'm sure you are free to do so.
I did at first, but after the 1,000th time...
But every mistake isn't a sign of evil, if it was Sarah wouldn't have supported Perry.
Agreed! CHeers! :)
I wasn't aware he was running for president.
lol!
Guess I should be careful to avoid giving Dave Carney any ideas. He seems to have a history of running false campaigns to draw fire elsewhere.
Am I a bitter clinger? No, not at all, see, I am a skeptic of AGW, a strong skeptic. I have seen the data and have been following the whole thing for nearly 20 years. And as of yet, I am still not convinced that there is any AGW. Any data I see FOR it, falls apart when examined. I still think it is worth investigating, mostly because I hope it all collapses like a house of cards.
Carney as a RINO Mitt Perry adviser speaks volumes. The RINO Mitt Perry apologists won’t think so, but they excuse everything the man does.
OH just keep up the trolling....I have found more people have been turned off by the anti-Perry folks...and actually have driven them to be Pro-Perry. What you’d planned to hurt Perry has actually helped him. Thanks!
Perry’s speech on Texas wind power.
http://wayback.archive-it.org/414/20100820064912/http://governor.state.tx.us/news/speech/4652/
Texas/Perry is fighting the EPA in the courts over the forced closings of some coal plants Jan 2012 (Texas was given an impossible time-line — before they can be re-fitted or new ones built). Texas (every state) has to meet a 10% usage of renewable energy by 2025. Texas’ population is growing so fast that it’s hard to keep up but Texas has to comply with the EPA dictate and WIND in Texas is where to go.
“Perry environmental stance would transform EPA”
The link below describes how needed power lines being built to transport that power to where it needs to be (one reason many are inactive). As it is now, here in Texas we’re getting rolling blackouts, power outages and come Jan, we again (and New Mexico) will have some cold days when the power goes again. But no one wants those power lines going close to them.
http://www.texastribune.org/texas-energy/energy/texas-oks-new-wind-power-transmission-lines/
SO, is Rick Perry making the right moves? He is. What would he do if he had his fingers on the EPA? Now, that is a whole ‘nother situation, isn’t it?
Texas, and the country (for now) is caught between cheap power and the EPA. Remember Perry’s big platform items, roll back — REGULATIONS AND LAWSUITS. He’s working the problem.
These links should bring you up to speed.
Carney seems a bit too much like Cass Sunstein for my tastes.
Political strategists are pretty much all sleazeballs.
You might find this interesting. It's a radio interview of Dr. James Hansen (NASA) -- who incidentally was recently arrested in front of the White House protesting -- and Diane Rehms. The entire show is a walk through liberal mania (don't know if you're so inclined) and around 45:26 into the 51:19 interview James Hansen goes into "CEOs are guilty of crimes against humanity if they continue to dispute what is understood scientifically and continue to fund contrarians."
Hansen also makes accusations of censorship and laments about "contraians" who "confuse" the public. And relates that he is annoyed being asked to appear together on shows with "contraians" -- that he considers placing that restriction on having an interview with him laughable. He said that since the science is no longer balanced with a 50/50 argument, that listening to a "contrarian" (allowing one to appear with a real scientist) only confuses the public.
********
Others are beginning to repeat this same idea -- that "skeptics" "deniers" should be banned from appearing and giving their opinions on climate science, as they are causing problems with consensus of public opinion on something so "vital" to the survival of humanity.
Start a "Day in the Life of Perry" thread, where only group think support and agreement are tolerated.
Everyone can post picture of the candidate, wearing cowboy hats, riding horses, and dragging driftwood out of the river. Show him at the ranch, hooking up to a big carp.
Just a thought.
The first LED watch cost $1,250, but now many of them are throw away watches that you buy at the dollar store. The question is, how quickly can we lower the cost of some of these new technologies.
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.