The Debate Is Over

GOPUSA ^ | March 26, 2007 | Doug Patton

[yoe]

Former Vice President Al Gore, testifying on his pet issue last week, told Congress: "there is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on global warming." As Rush Limbaugh observed a few hours after Gore's testimony, when liberals declare the debate over, you can bet the debate is not over; they just want it stifled.

Perhaps conservatives should adopt this tactic of declaring the debate over on some of our issues. What do we have to lose? It would be a fun exercise, and it might usher in a whole new era of conventional wisdom.

So, I hereby declare that there is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on abortion. Everyone knows it's a baby. It moves. It kicks. It has a heartbeat and brain waves. When allowed to grow, it becomes an adult. Yes, the debate is over. Abortion kills human beings and should be prohibited.

Also, there is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on marriage. Anyone with half a brain knows that for 5,000 years of recorded human history, it has been an institution involving a man and a woman. Case closed.

And, of course, there is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on gun control. Guns make people and societies safer, not more dangerous. Besides, the Second Amendment says you can have one, or many, so that issue is now put to rest.

There is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on government spending. State and federal governments now spend many times what they should in order to fulfill their constitutionally mandated responsibilities. Therefore, it is settled. Government spending should be slashed.

Likewise, there is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on taxes. Americans should be allowed to keep much more of what they earn. In fact, while we're dictating policy, the 16th Amendment should be repealed, the Internal Revenue Service abolished and a national consumption tax, known as the Fair Tax, should be implemented immediately.

Because government schools are such a miserable failure, there is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on whether the private sector, be it secular or religious, should be assigned the task of educating our children. They could do a much better job for a fraction of the price.

There is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on child molesters. They should be castrated and/or imprisoned for the rest of their natural lives, along with their advocates in the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), and anyone caught producing child pornography.

There is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on illegal immigration. People from other countries steal across our borders, bringing with them diseases and social problems. We pay for them. They should go home, and we should build a real, physical fence to keep them from coming back. End of story.

There is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on Islamic terrorism. As Ronald Reagan said of the Soviets during the Cold War: "We win and they lose. That's my strategy."

There is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on capital punishment. Commit homicide and America has a right to demand your life in return.

Oh yes, and outside Hollywood and the ranks of adoring Democrats in the United States Congress, who look at him as a rock star, there is no longer any serious debate over the basic points that make up the consensus on Al Gore. He is an enviro-fascist hypocrite who lives in a Tennessee mansion that uses 30 times the energy of the average American home, yet he has taken it upon himself to lead a worldwide wacko movement that wants to force us to radically alter our way of life in the pursuit of zealous extremism to achieve dubious results in addressing a problem that may not even exist.

The debate is over.

Doug Patton is a freelance columnist who has served as a political speechwriter and public policy advisor. His weekly columns are published in newspapers across the country and on selected Internet web sites, including Human Events Online, TheConservativeVoice.com and GOPUSA.com, where he is a senior writer and state editor. Readers may e-mail him at dougpatton@cox.net.

[Matchett-PI]

"All this statement really means is that there is no more debate in the believer's camp." ~ Disambiquator

There's nothing new under the sun.

Doomsday grifters have run their scam a long time and they've never lacked for chumps to bamboozle.

Hark!! One fine day in the year 156 A.D., in Phrygia (now part of Turkey), the prophet Montanus suddenly reeled round and round and keeled over into a trance in which he envisioned Christ's second coming and the end of the world. Thenceforward, Montanus roamed the dusty paths of Asia Minor, proclaiming to all who would listen that doomsday lay just round the bend.

Montanus gathered many disciples, among whom was one, Quintus Septimus Florens Tertullianus, Tertullian went on to become a champion of Monantism and a dynamic intellectual force and teacher in the early Christian church.

At the core of Tertullian's teachings lay his bitter admonition that life in the 2nd century had become too extravagant, too wasteful, and that population growth had run out of control. Mankind was raping the Earth of its resources, he warned grimly "...we men have actually become a burden to the Earth ... the Earth can no longer support us ..." And, to escape total planetary destruction, mankind had to withdraw to the past and practice severe asceticism, living in a simpler more natural state.

Fast-forward 1800 years...

[....]

"....politically active scientists often produce computer models that generate results amazingly concurrent with the scientists' political agenda. Dr. Carl Sagan did it.

[....]

...[Speaking of Planet Crackpot today, how is Deepak Chopra, Jim Wallace, AlGore, James Hansen, et.al., any different from ] Dr. Paul Ehrlich, the Grand Old Man of Eco-quackery? [Quackery examples snipped] May be accessed here: http://www.opinionet.com/staff/gw4-switalski.shtml

bttt More:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1806867/posts?page=15#15

[adorno]

Don't forget...

Socialism and communism create poverty and stifle personal growth.

Capitalism creates wealth and empowers the people.

Case closed! Debate over!

[John Semmens]

Al Gore Rejects TV Debate on Global Warming

Lord Monckton, a former policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher during her years as Prime Minister, has seen his challenge to debate global warming rejected by former Vice-President Al Gore. “I have seen Mr. Gore’s film,” said Monckton. “‘An Inconvenient Truth,’ is a foofaraw of pseudo-science, exaggerations, and errors, now being peddled to innocent schoolchildren worldwide. By refusing to debate, Mr. Gore has bolstered his profound ignorance with a large dollop of cowardice.”

Gore rebuffed the debate challenge saying “The issue has already been settled. There’s nothing to debate. Every reputable scientist agrees that humans are wrecking the climate. The challenge itself is a disreputable attempt to muddy the waters and delay the necessary transfer of power to those of us pledged to save the planet.”

“I don’t know how many times I’ve told everyone that this is a moral issue,” Gore continued. “Opposition to our moral course of action is, by dint of logic, immoral. We don’t need to hear from the advocates of immorality. We need to make the sacrifices necessary to atone for our sins against Mother Earth. I’ve shown the way. It’s up to everyone to follow it.”

[lilylangtree]

When CO 6th graders put global warming on trial (from FR files: Global Warming on Trial (Sixth-graders decide that humans aren't to blame )
The Daily Times-Call (Longmont,Co) ^ | Ben Ready, and decided the weather is cyclical defying all the egghead global scientists, that tells me that albore LIES with the ease of a scoundrel.

[HawaiianGecko]

Yeah, and the scientific consensus 800 years ago was that the earth was flat, and not very long ago debate was over on another subject and bleeding people with leeches was the consensus.  The consensus of scientists just in my life thought thalidomide was OK for pregnant women. They've held two positions in consensus three different times over DDT as an agricultural aid.

The only thing that gripes me about this global warming flap is the claim that the debate is over when it clearly is not.  When someone can definitively prove one or the other in this debate wrong, that's the side I'll end up on, but Al Gore is trying to keep all information from reaching me. 

[Mr. Silverback]

Digging it! Will use it on anyone who says that "A Convenient Lie" is about reality.

[Old Professer]

Debates are decided by defining the terms; not by arguing the merits.

[Mr. Silverback]

In all seriousness, ask him why the slides showing CO2 and temperature are never overlayed. You see, if they did overlay them, they would show that higher CO2 follows warming. As a followup, you might ask why you should care about a presentation that literally doesn't tell the whole truth, especially when the fudging is around the key "fact" their premise is based on.

Another question (simpler to pull off ) would be where Algore gets his sea level rise figures. No reputable scientist, not even the ones who think we're the cause of the problem, is predicting more than 18 inches, and Gore's showing animations that are based on a 20 foot rise. Even the silly, ultra-biased UN report gave 18 inches as an outside possibility.

[Mr. Silverback]

politically active scientists often produce computer models that generate results amazingly concurrent with the scientists' political agenda. Dr. Carl Sagan did it.

Brit Hume mentioned something on Sunday that really amused me. He noted that none of the computer models that predict global warming can predict our current conditions. In other words, if you take one of them and plug in known data from the past, you don't get a 2007 that looks anything like the one we live in.

Yet we're supposed to turn our nation (and every other first world nation) into a planned economy on life support based on these simulations. Not happenin', Captain. I have this to say about my carbon footprint: Molon Labe, baby.

[Mr. Silverback]

Capitalism creates wealth and empowers the people. Case closed! Debate over!

I remeber reading a speech Reagan gave in '75 where he said we could match the Soviets, but we'd have to tear up half our railways and about 90% of our road infrastructure, etc. No comparison at all.

[Hostage]

Be very careful when engaging a discussion of Gore's claims. His facts are correct but his INFERENCES are dead wrong.

Again the facts are:
1. The Earth is warming.
2. CO2 levels are rising.

The wrong Gore inferences are:
1. Rising CO2 levels cause global warming.
2. Humans are to blame for rising CO2 levels.

The correct inferences are:
1. The Sun is causing global warming.
2. CO2 is released from the oceans as temperatures rise.

So the way to respond to those that swallowing Gore's line is to agree with them on the facts and point out the flaws in the inferences.

[Mr. Silverback]

"By refusing to debate, Mr. Gore has bolstered his profound ignorance with a large dollop of cowardice.”

Nobody does put downs like the Brits!

[Samwise]

ROTFLMAO

[Mr. Silverback]

“I don’t know how many times I’ve told everyone that this is a moral issue,” Gore continued. “Opposition to our moral course of action is, by dint of logic, immoral. We don’t need to hear from the advocates of immorality. We need to make the sacrifices necessary to atone for our sins against Mother Earth. I’ve shown the way. It’s up to everyone to follow it.”

But if you say global warming is a religion, that means you're a right wing hater. Riiiiiiight...

[MHGinTN]

I'm adding that to my quicklist ... brilliant!

[Mr. Silverback]

Yeah, and the scientific consensus 800 years ago was that the earth was flat, and not very long ago debate was over on another subject and bleeding people with leeches was the consensus.

Not to nitpick (and this certainly doesn't make Al Gore look any better) but the average person who could read knew the Earth was round well before the 1st Century.

They've held two positions in consensus three different times over DDT as an agricultural aid.

I've just finished reading Zero Three Bravo by Marianna Gosnell. It documents her journey across America and back in a small plane during the Carter administration. She talked to several cropdusters, and all of them were ticked off about DDT because they had to spray more of the stuff that replaced it (arguably hurting the environment more) and as at lest two of them said to her, "You could eat DDT and it wouldn't hurt you." The replacement stuff was so nasty that they had to wear a protective suit to load it in the plane, because exposure could cause death.

[Mr. Silverback]

Excellent post.

[ricks_place]

The Bloodletting Debate is Over!

Bloodletting is a popular medical practice from antiquity up to the late 19th century, involving the withdrawal of often considerable quantities of blood from a patient in the hopeful belief that this would cure or prevent a great many illnesses and diseases. No more debate!

[Edgerunner]

The challenge itself is a disreputable attempt to muddy the waters and delay the necessary transfer of power to those of us pledged to save the planet.”

says it all for me...

[rockrr]

I think they're still fighting over how soon it'll all end (and how spectacular it'll be!).

And, of course, the debate is over....it's STILL Bush's fault!