Gene Frenkle

I think you have that last part backwards.

It's only stupid and meaningless because god in any form is a fairy tale. Except your god of course.

We can agree on that. If you think about it, sports fandom isn't that much different than religion for a lot of people. For me, the Bills and Sabres are very much false idols. I would feel a lot more guilty about missing a Bills game than I ever did about missing church on Sunday.

I'm not mocking anyone with that post. Seriously, take god out of the equation and think about how retarded this whole sequence of events is. Without god there is no Koran burning, no debate about the "Mosque" in NYC and most likely no 9-11 in the first place. Of course, that only scratches the surface. Would I be mocking the atheists if I asked them to "imagine for a moment that there is a god"? Perhaps people might consider that life might actually have meaning and value outside of a religious context. There are many immoral, unfulfilled religious people and many moral, fulfilled non-religious people. Religion has little to do with it.

Awesome

Imagine for a moment that there is no god, and then (within that context) realize how absolutely !@#$ing stupid and meaningless this all is.

Oh hooray, it's you.

How very clever of you.

You're against free market cap and trade, check. We're the US of muthafukin A. It may seem a burden up front, but the technologies produced by this green pursuit will benefit American industry as a whole. See "Space Race" for past results. Wasn't this initially a Conservative initiative? Regardless, why not limit emissions AND give tax breaks to such companies? Do we have to choose one or the other?

There is no truly free market then, because there are loopholes everywhere and that's not really a very a good argument. There are other global warming agents, but that doesn't make controlling/reducing carbon emissions a bad idea. I'm interested in the subject and as with many other interests, I try to ignore talking points and actually have some idea of what's going on.

Did we invade two more countries while I wasn't looking?

How exactly is government control artificial? All cap and trade does is allow companies to sell carbon credits on the open market. There is already restriction on how much pollution these companies can produce.

No comprehension problem here unless I'm missing something. You're saying he should get rid of the teleprompter and be "lost" during every speech instead of continuing to use the "crutch", no? Kind of like the last guy, who you apparently liked a lot better. I'll try to break it down further if you're still having trouble.

Nice talking point. How does a free market cap and trade system harm our economy?

Oh, so you're more comfortable with a president who would instead ignore his inability to speak coherently in public and just wing it. Someone who speaks from the gut, and produces soundbite after soundbite of pathetically humorous utter stupidity. That's not exactly a revelation.

Perhaps you wouldn't be surprised to learn that my primary concern is not what businesses have their panties in a bunch about. The fact that the science is incomplete does not make reducing emissions, becoming more energy-efficient and pursuing alternate energy sources bad ideas. To the contrary, the results of such pursuits will likely lead to savings for businesses in the long run.

So the man has a problem...and you crucify him for his solution. Brilliant.

Yes, we wouldn't want to have a prez who's a crappy public speaker. The teleprompter criticism is about the dumbest and most meaningless I've heard.

I've banked some 'halfwits' IIRC. Well, opinions are like a-holes...

It's obviously not going to happen overnight. My belief is that "what is" will eventually win out. I am well aware of your skepticism on that point.

You forgot to mention his teleprompter, birth certificate and the death panels.

Thankfully the scientific process should eventually weed out the bad research and give us an accurate picture of what's happening.

Yes, the logical answer is that your opinion about research done in the 70's means that Global Warming is a scam.

That doesn't mean that it's not real, just that the research is incomplete. The process should yield a more and more accurate result over time.

Global Warming research?