LIMBAUGH RIPS BUSH WHITE HOUSE OVER GLOBAL WARMING 'FLIP-FLOP'

Drudge Report ^ | 6/3/02 | Matt Drudge

[hchutch]

Just the headline

[christine]

GREAT POST!! :)

[rwfromkansas]

After 9-11, we focused more on international issues and terrorism, not a bunch of other stuff. We did withdraw from the ICC. Now, I would say we need to watch Bush, but as of right now, I don't think we can say he is turning left as a result of war popularity. If this continues with little conservative actions in the next six months to a year, I will have to rethink this and perhaps agree he is deciding that he won't be a conservative anymore.

[rwfromkansas]

The report indicates considerable uncertainty as to man-made global warming.

[Jhoffa_]

So, at this time it appears from what you have read, that the NY Slimes as usual as a lying left wing maggot infested fishwrap did some Creative Lying on this Bravo Sierra Article.

So it appears, that or the "quotes" aren't "quotes" after all.. (which in my mind is deceptive, since this whole thing kind of hangs on a couple of very provocative "quotes" from NYT via Drudge)

I linked the report in #600 if anyone is interested in viewing it in it's entirety. I warn ya though, it's 268 pages long and boring as moss on a rock. The best I could muster was a quick flipping through it.. AND I AM INTERESTED

I can't imagine being forced to read it as an assignment or whatever.. Blah!

[concerned about politics]

Again, Drudge is jumping the gun. He has no scruples whatsoever. Rush hasn't ripped anyone. I am convinced Drudge is posting this crap to get a rise out of people the same way he carelessly posted pieces of the NYT article.

Rush called Bush : George Al Gore.
Rush hit it right on the head. Bush is becomming just like Gore, too. LOL. Oh well, maybe we'll get someone better in in 2004.

[MJY1288]

I see you have read it also, That's my impression of it. There is far more doubt than certainty. I will see if I can find the first annual report in 2000 by the Clinton Administration which was based on Junk Science that the Enviro-Wacko's hand picked for their EU Kyoto infringemnet plan

[christine]

The republican revolution for smaller, less intrusive government and greater sovereignty for states and individuals, is now officially dead.

great post too!

[cmsgop]

Where the Heck Have You Been?

I was about to dispatch Richard Simmons to organize a search party!

[cmsgop]

Yoo Hoo???????????

[concerned about politics]

The republican revolution for smaller, less intrusive government and greater sovereignty for states and individuals, is now officially dead.

great post too!

I'll second that. "Read my lips....lower taxes and smaller government."

[Grampa Dave]

At age 63, I don't eat brussel sproats nor do I read boring reports like this one.

We have some fine tooth freepers who will go over this report, and then we will have a better knowledge of it after they give us their report on it.

MJY1288 has read it and agrees with your first glance at it.

[floriduh voter]

Rush has had the same beliefs about environmentalist whackos for years. I guess he liked Bush as long as he agreed with Rush 100%. Now Rush comes to the realization that the POTUS doesn't agree with him, doesn't need to and he cannot handle it.

I am tired of Rush bashing Bush and saying he's Algor is beyond belief. It is very irrational and probably driving lots of listeners away. IS RUSH TAKING STEROIDS FOR HIS AUTO IMMUNE DISORDER? They could be affecting his thought processes. FV

[MJY1288]

Hey back patter! Have you read the report? or are you a firm believer of everything that the NYT's writes?

[christine]

It tells me that, Clinton-like, you'll denounce me the instant I disagree with the man of the hour. I've noticed on this thread that every single time someone even questions Bush's agenda, they are attacked as a "whiner" and "disloyal" and on and on it goes. People who are committed to limited government, a constitutionally bound judiciary, and who are staunchly pro-life are considered no better than the mindless leftists. Something seems wrong with this picture.

well said, capt!

[jwalsh07]

On the Global Warming issue, Rush has cast himself as the useful idiot to the New York Times.

[rintense]

Looks like I turned Rush off just in time. If you've got someone better than GWB in 2004, kick out the name. Remember, they actually must have a chance at winning.

[MJY1288]

hey GrampaDave, I will post all 260 sum pages of it on this thread if it will shut the pie holes of the pouting pitchforkers, But then again, that would require them to read and decide for themselves, the NYT's does that for them apparently

[christine]

Personally, I'm left to wonder at a "strategery" that leaves a great deal of your base annoyed (at best confused or in a "wait and see" posture) and your enemies emboldened. Whatever happened to simply telling the truth boldly and consistently? To taking the fight right to the enemy in the way of speeches? Whatever happened to courage of convictions? Why are folks on this thread left to surmise and argue among themselves what is meant by this or that move by the administration? Is there anything wrong with longing for a day when you have a leader who will clue you in?

i loved your post... so honest and heartfelt. thank you!

[Howlin]

OVERHEATED TIMES TWO [Jonathan Adler]
A front-page New York Times story claims that the U.S. government has officially acknowledged the coming greenhouse apocalypse. Last week, the administration submitted the 2002 Climate Action Report to the United Nations. This report summarizes recent national and international syntheses of climate science, and describes some of the "likely" and "possible" impacts of increased emissions of greenhouse gases and resulting climate changes.
As is to be expected from any document produced by the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of State, the report accentuates the negative. (For a more balanced presentation of the science see here and here .) At the same time, however, the report time and again reiterates the uncertainty of climate science. The Times nonetheless opens its story by claiming the report "detail[s] specific and far-reaching effects that it says global warming will inflict on the American environment." Not quite. The report outlines some specific potential scenarios, but it carefully states all of its predictions in probabilistic terms and reiterates the National Academy of Sciences' conclusion that specific predictions about climate change are, as yet, impossible. More importantly, the report notes (and the Times acknowledges) that global warming is likely to increase agricultural and forest productivity and that insofar as some climate change is inevitable, current policies should embrace adaptive measures, not crash energy diets. There's no need to wait to see how the report will be spun. The Times was ready this morning with an editorial calling for congressional action to regulate greenhouse gases. No doubt Senator Jeffords will do his best to oblige.
Posted 9:59 AM | [Link]

52 posted on 6/3/02 11:48 AM Eastern by VinnyTex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse

[WRhine]

Rush Klimbaugh and Sean Klannity just ate a whole bunch of NY Slimes Bravo Sierra and thought that it tasted good. They have lost even more credibility with the ones who will not be deterred this November when we defeat a lot of Rat senators.

LOL. You show very convincingly that all it takes for good conservatives like Rush and Sean (who support Bush) to get smeared by Bush-Bots like you is to have the audacity to disagree with the Bush Administration on something. Sorry Sir, it's you that have no credibility. You prove it every time you post.