What I spent the first hour trying to tell you was how it was being reported in a way that resulted in the Republicans canceling their convention today when it's nowhere near there. And that there were model runs Saturday night that showed Tampa was not gonna be hit at all, massive shift of models that was not reflected by the hurricane center for 12 hours. That's all I'm saying. And now we got the media jazzed like I haven't seen 'em in a while because now Hurricane Isaac is casting a pall. How dare the Republicans even do a convention with a hurricane bearing down on the Gulf Coast. How do they even do that? How do they have a convention where they celebrate anything when people's property is being destroyed?
So the effort is on with the media here to try to pressure the Republicans to cancel the whole thing, is what I think is happening.....
२८ ऑगस्ट, २०१२
Does Rush Limbaugh accuse the government of faking the hurricane reports to screw up the GOP convention?
The storm was headed right for Tampa, then suddenly re-aimed at New Orleans. Rush talks about the evidence without making a direct accusation.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१०४ टिप्पण्या:
I'll try and keep in mind that Rush is a humorist rather than rist the ire of the right wing and calling him out for what he is.
This is what, the second convention that we've had prominent Democrats -- caught on tape or Twitter -- laughing that a hurricane might kill or injure some people near where the convention happened because Republicans were there, willed by God? Frankly, Republicans should keep having conventions in hurricane alley so they can keep getting free, easy unforced errors from Democrats.
... typo fixed.
It's Allah's will according to the DNC, who rejected a prayer by Cardinal Dolen of NY, but is going to host a 2 hour "prayer" session with muslims with ties to terrorist. Least I be accused of Islamo-phobia by Andy, one of the Imam's mosque's is owned by an un-indicted co-conspiritor from the Holy Land trial.
The other Imam has stated that if all the ragheads in America united they could over through the constitution, and install a caliphate.
But Zero denies he's a muslim or pals around with terrorist's.
Great guy you got there, DNC.
The science is settled.
Or as the rag-heads say In'shallah, and Allah' Ackbar!
Or maybe General Ackbar-"It's a trap!"
risk not rist. sorry
Could be the climate just changed course. Climate does change, doesn't it?
When ya talk every day for three hours, ya gotta have a bit of filler and fun, no?
Admit, I have trouble listening to Rush these days; his competition on the radio in NY is better, or more interesting to me.
Ollie ollie oxen-free?? I was never very good with English,let alone foreign speaking, like Austrian.(it's like those people have a different word for everything!)
Maybe God can whip up a Hugo type hurricane when the Dems have their convention in Charlotte, NC. next week.
Tank said...
"When ya talk every day for three hours, ya gotta have a bit of filler and fun, no"?
This is fun? Seriously, I suspect that eventually he, like the hurricane, will run its course and that will be the end of it.
Frankly, Republicans should keep having conventions in hurricane alley so they can keep getting free, easy unforced errors from Democrats.
The reason Democrats joke about this is because of the completely serious, ignorant and abhorrent comments made about Katrina by Pat Robertson et al. (E.g., that Katrina was punishment for the general wickedness of the U.S., New Orleans in particular, or even because Ellen DeGeneres--who is from New Orleans--was hosting the Emmys.
The reason Democrats joke about this is because of the completely serious, ignorant and abhorrent comments made about Katrina by Pat Robertson et al.
...so, it's OK for Democrats to laugh about the death of people they don't like because Robertson said something stupid?
Nice standards ya got for yourself there.
Lindsey Meadows said...
Tank said...
"When ya talk every day for three hours, ya gotta have a bit of filler and fun, no"?
This is fun? Seriously, I suspect that eventually he, like the hurricane, will run its course and that will be the end of it.
Fun for him. He loves to talk, been doing it for a million years, and gets paid mucho dollars. Given the size of his audience, a lot of others have fun too.
Some of his best shows are when he picks apart examples of media bias, which he says he could do every day all day for three hours, but it would get too boring.
He was better years ago when he wasn't as well known, and was more edgy.
Ah. Right. Pat Robertson makes an ill-advised comment, so Democrats have carte blanche to laugh at others suffering. How could I have forgotten the ironclad logic of Tu Quoque!
so, it's OK for Democrats to laugh about the death of people they don't like because Robertson said something stupid?
No, it's okay for Democrats to joke about God sending vengeance on a group of people who claim to know the will of God.
it's OK for Democrats to laugh about the death of people they don't like
hyperbolic much? We are joking about the convention being disrupted, not wishing death or injury on anyone.
I was unaware that Pat Robertson planned the Republican convention.
Look, the sooner you simply accept that some Democrats are rotten human beings, the easier it will be. Some Republicans are rotten human beings; life gets a lot easier when I can just nod and say: "Yep. That guy's an asshole," instead of choosing every hill to die on.
Pat Robertson makes an ill-advised comment, so Democrats have carte blanche to laugh at others suffering.
Yet Rush can "joke" about an entire group of professionals deliberately falsifying scientific data to inconvenience a political party (not to mention that if his accusations were true, the incorrect path would have put others in danger because they would not have adequate warning).
It is all Bush's fault!
"Yep. That guy's an asshole,"
Yep, Rush is.
Pat Robertson said what?
Snopes: False
http://www.snopes.com/katrina/satire/robertson.asp
Yet Rush can "joke" about an entire group of professionals deliberately falsifying scientific data to inconvenience a political party (not to mention that if his accusations were true, the incorrect path would have put others in danger because they would not have adequate warning).
Except that Rush said nothing of the sort.
It was good old-fashioned Left-Wing humor.
Ha,ha,ha.
Honestly, I think that for the next few years, every hurricane will be overhyped until we get a better monitoring system because no one wants New Orleans to happen again with the local governments ignoring the federal government's instruction and stranding people.
Any hurricane heading for New Orleans may end with disaster, since the Democrats insisted on re-building the city in-place.
All it needs is one unsuspected weak place in the defenses, and it will be deja vue all over again.
Freder Frederson said...
The reason Democrats joke about this is because of the completely serious, ignorant and abhorrent comments made about Katrina by Pat Robertson et al
So in other words, Democrats never do anything wrong.
Watching you make a complete idiot of yourself on this blog has become passe.
"Does Rush Limbaugh accuse the government of faking the hurricane reports to screw up the GOP convention?"
Are you surprised?
Except that Rush said nothing of the sort.
Oh really? then what the hell did he mean by this:
"And that there were model runs Saturday night that showed Tampa was not gonna be hit at all, massive shift of models that was not reflected by the hurricane center for 12 hours."
And this statement is a lie anyway. The models Saturday night were all over the place and Tampa was still in danger.
I think it is interesting. Republicans complain about actual government officials being classless jerks; Democrats counter with Rush and Pat Robertson.
Good to know the standards you have for government officials.
PS: The sooner you accept they're all jerks, the sooner you stop looking like hypocrites.
Matthew Sablan: Yeah, I saw the Drudge Report was posting every comment he could find on Twitter from a lefty about the hurricane and the convention. Who the heck cares if Ellen Barkin retweeted something? If you go over to Democrat sites they're attacking Republicans for making jokes that the hurricane is a blessing because it kept Joe Biden away.
An approaching hurricane that is keeping us waiting as to where it will hit and how much damage it will do, plus a political convention in the area, will naturally lead to comments, brain farts, jokes, etc. So what?
People who constantly try and make scandals out of tweets are the real jokes. With only a few exceptions (for example, Spike Lee tweeting someone's address during a potentially violent witch hunt) I think it's time for people who manufacture outrage over tweets to be told to shut the fuck up. Let us breathe.
I think his argument would have more credence had he made it last Friday. But that would require Rush to have a knowledge of hurricane forecasting that he lacks.
It's easy to talk about conspiracy theories after the fact. People will believe just about anything.
The graphics archive of model forecasts is here.
"No, it's okay for Democrats to joke about God sending vengeance on a group of people who claim to know the will of God."
Funny, Freder, lots of liberals (including Obama) claim that imposing socialism is "doing God's work". Or have you forgotten that?
Loafing Oaf: I notice that it matters WHO is getting hoisted on their petards determines when it is time for us all to "shut the fuck up" and "breathe." I've been consistent: All these people are being silly and should be ignored as silly. Yet, it seems, Rush and Robertson are viewed as especially vile, despite, you know, not being politicians. It's just an odd standard I'd like to figure out.
It's been true at least since the beginning of the Bush administration that Republicans are not allowed to smile so long as someone in the world is crying.
Everything today is politicized; even the freakin' weather. And politics has devolved to the simplistic "our side vs their side", school-yard mentality. Your side did this so our side will do that... "You're a poopie head."... "No, YOU are!" Nyaa nyaa nyaa. It's impossible to have a rational discussion when so many are operating under a siege mentality.
But make no mistake, the siege was brought about by the left. When they demonize Republicans the way they do, to the point where average citizens with conservative leanings are afraid to be publicly open about their political beliefs for fear of losing their jobs, their customers, and/or being excoriated in the press, it's not surprising that we arrive where we are. I read somewhere, "Demonize your opponents and be prepared to fight demons".
When the left, or at least the Democratic Party leaders, are willing and able to acknowledge that the Republican platform is not built on all things evil, but may actually have some logic behind some of its policies that is worthy of debate, discussions will get rational again; instead of the pointless food-fights that occur daily.
Mathew Sablan: "...New Orleans to happen again with the local governments ignoring the federal government's instruction and stranding people."
Matthew: emergency response is a local jurisdiction resonsibility. The Feds cannot intervene unless, under the Stafford Act, they request assistance. The request goes thru the local authorities and then to the governor who can ask for federal assistance. The other applicable statute is the Insurrection Act but that is a nuclear option and not likely to be use as it usurps the state and local authority. Bush talked about that in his book.
Now the Feds can cajole, attempt to persuade and take other non-coercive measures, but they cannot "instruct" nor can they expect compliance with their "instructions" or advice. Those attempts failed in katrina because of Gov Blanco's and Mayor Nagin's absolute stupidity. Other than that, response remains a local responsibility, and the Feds (FEMA) are involved in recovery operations.
Mathew Sablan: "...New Orleans to happen again with the local governments ignoring the federal government's instruction and stranding people."
Matthew: emergency response is a local jurisdiction resonsibility. The Feds cannot intervene unless, under the Stafford Act, they request assistance. The request goes thru the local authorities and then to the governor who can ask for federal assistance. The other applicable statute is the Insurrection Act but that is a nuclear option and not likely to be use as it usurps the state and local authority. Bush talked about that in his book.
Now the Feds can cajole, attempt to persuade and take other non-coercive measures, but they cannot "instruct" nor can they expect compliance with their "instructions" or advice. Those attempts failed in katrina because of Gov Blanco's and Mayor Nagin's absolute stupidity. Other than that, response remains a local responsibility, and the Feds (FEMA) are involved in recovery operations.
On Friday or Thursday, there was half a chance Isaac might nail Tampa, but it was still pretty iffy. the fact it took a westward bounce is what happened Saturday, as far as I can tell.
As for Rush being suspicious of the report, they've been fudging everything else for Choom, especially the unemployment figures, so why wouldn't it be reasonable to assume they'd play with the models for this?
@Oaf(by the way GREAT screen name
You said--"Yeah, I saw the Drudge Report was posting every comment he could find on Twitter from a lefty about the hurricane and the convention. Who the heck cares if Ellen Barkin retweeted something? If you go over to Democrat sites they're attacking Republicans for making jokes that the hurricane is a blessing because it kept Joe Biden away."
I agree...because washing whole groups of people out to sea is toatally the same of making fun of the wimpy Veep not showing up because of the threat of a hurricane. Besides, Slow JOe had sheep to insult in NY(look it up).
I guess people might have cared what Barkin' Barken had to say back when she was sorta' "really hot body and attitude but kinda fucked up in the face". Now she's looks like the wattles on Thanksgivingday turkey, so no one really caes what she has to say.
Samuel L. Jackson tried to play that card too, put had to walk it back real quick when he got his ass handed to him on Twitter.
Too bad most lib-tards aren't as smart as Jackson.
@LyndseyMeadows
I know you people don't learn, but really, you've been hoping Rush would run out of schtick for 10 years now. But as long as the Dummycrats keep giving him material, he's gonna' use it. Maybe if your party wasn't stuck on permanent "special" it would help.(the R's just go into "special" every other day.
Matthew Sablan said...
"...with the local governments ignoring the federal government's instruction and stranding people."
Heckuva job there Brownie!
Seriously, in an mandatory evacuation situation it is expected that 10% of the people can't find their way out or have no way out - either money or means.
It is convenient to push blame locally and it is convenient to push blame nationally. There was plenty to go around and somehow I think things have improved substantially because we don't have horse judges in charge.
"I think things have improved substantially because we don't have horse judges in charge."
Exactly. Now we have Republican Governors.
Michael said...
"Exactly. Now we have Republican Governors."
How very sad that your only measure of competence is party affiliation.
Ooh. We should call Rush an Isaac Truther.
Freder Frederson said...
Oh really? then what the hell did he mean by this:
"And that there were model runs Saturday night that showed Tampa was not gonna be hit at all, massive shift of models that was not reflected by the hurricane center for 12 hours."
And this statement is a lie anyway. The models Saturday night were all over the place and Tampa was still in danger.
You said "Yet Rush can "joke" about an entire group of professionals deliberately falsifying scientific data to inconvenience a political party..."
I don't see anything in the entire transcript of Rush's remarks where he accused anyone of "falsifying scientific data" deliberately or otherwise. I challenge you to find where he claimed anyone falsified data.
Lindsey--there is no such thing as a "mandatory" evacuation order even though they are issued by civic authorities. Citizens simply do not have to evacuate. I suspect your figure of 10 percent is probably very low--In the case of NOLA, it was probably much higher.
Lindsey Meadows said...
Exactly. Now we have Republican Governors.
How very sad that your only measure of competence is party affiliation.
Blanco and Nagin were Democrats.
And the people couldn't get out of NOLA because the mayor of Chocolate City wanted motor coaches for them; plain old school buses was rraaaaccciiiissssttt.
Compare Mississipi's response to Katrina with Lousiana's and let me know if you see a difference.
It's weird that the hurricane center would want "prediction continuity."
What Rush means is that all he has is the strange fact.
What's the most likely explanation?
Bureaucratic screw-up or bureaucratic edict.
I'd say it's 50-50. Both the bureaucracy and the adminstration are corrupt. It might be either.
Lindsey Meadows: BINGO! You started a sentence with the lefty tattoo: "how sad."
How pitiful.
if we do not understand the statutory limitations, and the attendent processes, that govern federal, state, and local relationships when it comes to emergency managemnt, there is nothing to be offered by uninformed opinion. But this is a blog, and that never restrained anyone.
It's weird that the hurricane center would want "prediction continuity."
That's not weird at all.
The difficulty with forecasting one particular storm is that, if you look at storms over the course of several seasons, you will always find some that are harder to predict, and that forecasts for them vary. Sometimes a jump in one direction is an outlier. Sometimes it's the beginning of a trend. When you're talking about coastal communities that need more than a day to evacuate, you don't want to say GO, then NO, then GO again just because of one bad forecast. People will stop believing you.
That's the real danger in Rush's (or anyone else's) politicization of the forecast -- that people will stop believing them and not heed warnings to leave.
Althouse seriously, your infatuation w/all things dealing w/blowhard Limbaugh is duly noted.
Coincidentally, there is much more ((( water to carry )) :-P for your narcissistic kindred spirit than (4) years ago.
But not to worry as Limbo is up to the task lol.
Compare Mississipi's response to Katrina with Lousiana's and let me know if you see a difference.
Compare the geography of New Orleans with that of Biloxi and Gulfport and let me know if you see a difference.
As an aside I've had to work in a hurricane/blizzard/acrctic blasts/ and 100 degree days. If you don;t do anything stupid, you're fine.
Stupid is me on top of a semi-trailor hanging plastic to protect a museum display from the rain of the hurricane. And on top of a 3 story building putting roofing on in the blizzard. But I survived!(man was I dumb as a kid)
I remember during a hurricane in college, I was an RA, someone said: "Someone needs to go make sure the glass windows are protected."
I said: "I'll do it."
They meant to go out side and cover them. I was unhappy.
@madman
make the same comparison about political affiliation. Then about color, then about income distribution.
My point is, what's your point?
There's 3 kinds of people in the world. Those who sit around waiting for the government to tell them what to do, and those that do it for themselves. (and I really liked the kid who stole the freaking bus Mayor Nagin had locked up in a bus yard, to evacuate a bunch of people. He didn't wait to be told)
The third kind is those who like to be told but won't admit it.
that people will stop believing them and not heed warnings to leave.
Which a new mayor of NO is, again, refusing to give.
Nice to know that voters learn when they elect idiots.
Seriously, in an mandatory evacuation situation it is expected that 10% of the people can't find their way out or have no way out - either money or means.
Which makes New Orleans plan --- yet again --- to sit out the storm and weather it baffling.
There was tons of transportation available to take people out before Katrina. Amtrak offered to take a trainful out. They had buses aplenty. Nagin shot them all down.
Sorry for the dble posting...don't know how that happened.
I think Letterman nailed it when commenting on the course of the Hurricane noted that this proves God is a women.
Madison Man--my point was not about geography, but was about the caliber of emergency planning. MEMA and the LA Emergency Management folks knew their geography, and their planning, if competent should have taken those considerations in effect. Mississipi did, and NOLA didnt. So what precisely is your point?
Compare Mississipi's response to Katrina with Lousiana's and let me know if you see a difference.
Yeah, Barbour used relief money to funnel it to casinos (including one that was built in Natchez) and rich developers while screwing over poor and middle class people who lost their homes.
Amtrak offered to take a trainful out. They had buses aplenty. Nagin shot them all down.
Now you are just making shit up.
"roesch/voltaire said...
I think Letterman nailed it when commenting on the course of the Hurricane noted that this proves God is a women."
So women bosses are the meanest.
With respect to Mayor Nagin, had he read his own NOLA plan, he should have known it assumed that political leadership would have "ordered" and evacuation 72 hours prior to land fall. He failed to do that. Emergency plans fail primarily because of political leadership--in the case of Katrina, those of Mayor Nagin, parrish sheriffs, and the governor. Again, critics of my assertions, should familiarize themselves with the emergency management process as specified in the Stafford Act. But that apparently is a bridge too far for some commenters.
So what precisely is your point?
If you evacuate people 50-100 miles from NO, they are still in harm's way. If you evacuate people 50-100 miles from coastal MS, they are not.
Furthermore, compare the populations being evacuated -- both in size, and in how they expect to interact with the Government.
Just saying "Democrat rule here, Republican rule there" is highly simplistic.
That's the real danger in Rush's (or anyone else's) politicization of the forecast -- that people will stop believing them and not heed warnings to leave.
Correctamundo
Similar to the situation about "global warming" or "climate change". When everything you do and say is all about climate change then nothing is about it at all. The left exaggerates, lies, distorts and tries to make all of our life choices a big drama about killing the earth. Waaaah!
If it is hot. Global warming. If it is unseasonably cold. Global warming. Lots of hurricanes...Global warming. No hurricanes....Global warming. Cats and dogs living together....well....you know.
We don't believe you [global warming fanatics] anymore. You've cried wolf too many times.
Madison Man--exactly--and a competent emergency management structure takes those considerations into consideration when formulating plans.
And I have not, in any of my posts named party affiliations--I have only talked about the efficacy of emergency planning. If you wish to say I made my comments from a partisan perspective, you are free to draw that inference. But I did not--I spoke only to the caliber and execution of emergency plans. And were the Governor of Mississipi a democrat, I would give him full credit as well. The issue I point to is the incompetence at the local and government levels in implementing their plans irrespective of political affiliation. If you saw anything else in my comments, you inferred too much.
What's the most likely explanation?
Bureaucratic screw-up or bureaucratic edict.
No, the most likely explanation is that predicting the path and intensity of a tropical storm is an inexact science. And it is better to err on the side of caution.
We don't believe you [global warming fanatics] anymore. You've cried wolf too many times.
I was wondering how conservatives find a way to rationalize ignoring the clear and unequivocal science related to global climate change.
"Yeah, Barbour used relief money to funnel it to casinos (including one that was built in Natchez) and rich developers while screwing over poor and middle class people who lost their homes."
"Now you are just making shit up."
I was wondering how conservatives find a way to rationalize ignoring the clear and unequivocal science related to global climate change.
That would be a good question IF there really were clear and unequivocal scientific evidence instead of fudged data and out and out lies and distortions for personal gain (grants) and political power grabs.
When you have some real and impartial data....get back to us.
Most people agree the climate is changing. The disagreement comes in:
1) The scope of the near term change (will it be a normal shift that we routinely see or the catastrophic end of world scenario proposed?)
2) The cause of the change.
It is when those reasonable, moderate voices are assumed to be akin to Holocaust deniers that it makes it hard to do science.
"I was wondering how conservatives find a way to rationalize ignoring the clear and unequivocal science related to global climate change."
Who is arguing that the climate doesn't change? AGW (anthropogenic global warming theory) advocates now say "climate change" instead of "global warming" , since in some place this warming is not so global anymore. It is goal-post moving redefining of terms like this that leads people to doubt the integrity and rationality of "climate-change" nee "AGW" proponents.
And as for what the argument actually is, it is whether the warming trend - that has been going on since the end of the last ice-age- is being affected by the activities of humans. And if it is, how is that a bad thing- given that humankind flourishes under warm spells, and declines during ice ages. And whether it makes sense to enact polices to halt the alleged affects of human activity on the climate- that may cost billions of dollars that no one has- which may lead to unintended consequences that could be worse than doing nothing. On these topics, the so-called "science" does not even exist.
I was wondering how conservatives find a way to rationalize ignoring the clear and unequivocal science related to global climate change.
I'm wondering exactly what sort of scientific knowledge and training Andy the Whiner has.
My guess... absolutely zero.
I see it's troll-fest day again.
@FF
No, the most likely explanation is that predicting the path and intensity of a tropical storm is an inexact science. And it is better to err on the side of caution.
But the models were all saying westward shift, so that's the new information.
The bureaucrats continued to say that it was Tampa, not passing that information along.
The science such as it is goes with the models.
Explain this. That's the question.
Rush is spot on again. How dumb does the media think we are?
Oops, the stage 3 hurricane about to slam into Tampa is an everyday rain storm system crossing the Gulf towards Mississippi.
Global Warming: "Humans Are Almost Entirely the Cause"
However, as near as I can tell, climate skeptics, including those who said they'd trust Muller's results no matter what they showed, haven't budged an inch since he published his initial papers last year. I doubt his new paper will change their minds either. That's no surprise, since this has long since ceased being a scientific controversy. Climate skeptics are skeptics because they don't like the idea of global warming, not because there's truly any evidence that it doesn't exist. It's politically inconvenient, economically inconvenient, and personally inconvenient, so they don't want to hear about it.
I wish I knew what more we could do about this. It's pretty plainly the biggest problem facing the human race at the moment. By comparison, everything else is about like arguing over whether the deck chairs on the Titanic will help keep people afloat when the ship sinks: obviously they won't, but the debate acts as a nice distraction. But if people don't want to believe for reasons of personal/political/economic self-interest, how do you convince them? What kind of self-interest can we fight back with? Because at this point, it's pretty obvious that neither science nor the future of our grandchildren is enough.
That's you he's talking about.
I was wondering how conservatives find a way to rationalize ignoring the clear and unequivocal science related to global climate change.
Let me help.
1. You can't tell a trend from a cycle with data that's short compared to the cycle you want to exclude. That's a mathematics can't. You can't do it. So there's no data supporting AGW. A cycle, which we've had many of for eons and eons on earth and which certainly always exist, is not man-caused. GW is followed by GC. GC is followed by GW.
2. You can't solve the Navier Stokes equations that govern the atmosphere. No computer resolution is adequate. So there are no scientific predictions.
There you have it. No data, no theory, support AGW.
That's how.
The current Global Cooling does affect the weather.
There have been no hurricanes in the past 7 years hit the USA. The summer Bermuda High weather system got stuck this year over the mid-west, just like it did over central Russia last year, and caused a few weeks long heat wave from the trapped surface air.
But the cooler weather is back again about five weeks early as winter marches south.
The winters over the past 5 years have been extremely cold in Europe and in the Southern hemisphere.
How dumb does the Fake Science Propaganda Ministry think we are?
Most people agree the climate is changing. The disagreement comes in:
Of course - the climate is always changing. Always has, and probably always will. But, beyond that - you are essentially making things up.
The bureaucrats continued to say that it was Tampa, not passing that information along.
Have you even looked at the NHC site. The reports are written by the forecasters, not some bureaucrat.
But the models were all saying westward shift, so that's the new information.
This statement is simply untrue.
I'm just reporting what Rush said.
He's the hurricane report hobby guy.
The wierd formatting and strange punctuation conventions finally convinced me. Shiloh is J!
I'm just reporting what Rush said
Rush consistently lies. So reporting what Rush says without bothering to check if he is lying or just making shit up is dangerous
edutcher thought I was pb&j and now another Althouse fool thinks I'm J ?!?
I'm always shiloh, except when already taken, then I use shiloh24. Back in the day I used spruance, my 1st ship, a couple times.
and now you know the rest of the story ...
"I was wondering how conservatives find a way to rationalize ignoring the clear and unequivocal science related to global climate change."
It's amazing how clear and unequivocal things can become when you can simply lie to get the result you want. Everybody knows the very best science is made in secret, which is why it's so important to hide data from those totally uncool spoiler scientists who ruin it for everyone by asking questions and testing theories and stuff. Jerks.
Rush consistently lies. So reporting what Rush says without bothering to check if he is lying or just making shit up is dangerous
He seems okay to me.
But here's your opportunity.
Go to Rush's transcript, and compare his history to whatever gov website he's talking about, and point out his error.
Talk about motivation!
Lindsey:
Heckuva job there Brownie!
That's Texan for "Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out."
Only Democrats throw their underlings under the bus on national TV.
LoafingOaf,
People who constantly try and make scandals out of tweets are the real jokes. With only a few exceptions (for example, Spike Lee tweeting someone's address during a potentially violent witch hunt) I think it's time for people who manufacture outrage over tweets to be told to shut the fuck up. Let us breathe.
You're letting Spike Lee off easy here. He didn't just tweet someone's address; he tweeted the address of people who had nothing to do with the "witch" being hunted. The equivalent of a wrong-door no-knock raid, only without the accountability part. Police can be (though too often aren't) disciplined for making random citizens' lives hell. Spike Lee, not so much.
roesch/voltaire,
I think Letterman nailed it when commenting on the course of the Hurricane noted that this proves God is a women.
God would then be like Behemoth, the beast so big that its very name is plural.
--I was wondering how conservatives find a way to rationalize ignoring the clear and unequivocal science related to global climate change--
Green ‘drivel’ exposed 1130
The godfather of global warming lowers the boom on climate change hysteria
...Having observed that global temperatures since the turn of the millennium have not gone up in the way computer-based climate models predicted, Lovelock acknowledged, “the problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago.” Now, Lovelock has given a follow-up interview to the UK’s Guardian newspaper in which he delivers more bombshells sure to anger the global green movement, which for years worshipped his Gaia theory and apocalyptic predictions that billions would die from man-made climate change by the end of this century.
Lovelock still believes anthropogenic global warming is occurring and that mankind must lower its greenhouse gas emissions, but says it’s now clear the doomsday predictions, including his own (and Al Gore’s) were incorrect.....
We read - we understand there is a difference between global warming and man-made global warming.
(1) A long-time supporter of nuclear power as a way to lower greenhouse gas emissions, which has made him unpopular with environmentalists, Lovelock has now come out in favour of natural gas fracking (which environmentalists also oppose), as a low-polluting alternative to coal.
As Lovelock observes, “Gas is almost a give-away in the U.S. at the moment. They’ve gone for fracking in a big way. This is what makes me very cross with the greens for trying to knock it … Let’s be pragmatic and sensible and get Britain to switch everything to methane. We should be going mad on it.” (Kandeh Yumkella, co-head of a major United Nations program on sustainable energy, made similar arguments last week at a UN environmental conference in Rio de Janeiro, advocating the development of conventional and unconventional natural gas resources as a way to reduce deforestation and save millions of lives in the Third World.)
(2) Lovelock blasted greens for treating global warming like a religion.
“It just so happens that the green religion is now taking over from the Christian religion,” Lovelock observed. “I don’t think people have noticed that, but it’s got all the sort of terms that religions use … The greens use guilt. That just shows how religious greens are. You can’t win people round by saying they are guilty for putting (carbon dioxide) in the air.”
(3) Lovelock mocks the idea modern economies can be powered by wind turbines.
As he puts it, “so-called ‘sustainable development’ … is meaningless drivel … We rushed into renewable energy without any thought. The schemes are largely hopelessly inefficient and unpleasant. I personally can’t stand windmills at any price.”
(4) Finally, about claims “the science is settled” on global warming: “One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”
I'm reading an Orlando Sentinel account of Spike Lee's settlement with the completely unrelated people his tweet set a crowd of reporters, malicious callers, and miscellaneous vandals after, and notice this in the Orlando Sentinel account: Trayvon Martin is "Trayvon," and George Zimmerman is "Zimmerman."
Even Spike Lee gets to be "Lee" in the article. But Trayvon Martin is never going to be "Martin."
If some of you come down on the same side of the global warming argument as Rushbo the Drugster supports then it may be prudent to reconsider your position.
@Lindsey, as a mathematician I go where the mathematics take me. That I find Rush Limbaugh there too is interesting. I don't know whether he has talked to other mathematicians or he just figures that if Democrats are trying to cut off debate then there's something phoney about their "science." Either way, you'll have to live with the reality that he's right.
Anyway, I've been aware over the past few days that plenty of amateur and professional meteorologists were questioning whether NOAA's track was correct -- their own models where suggesting a landfall farther west. And Tampa hasn't been hit by a hurricane in 85 years.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा