Derangement
I was delighted to see an article today from former Republican congressman, and all-around right wing lunatic, Tom Tancredo, offering us the following insightful analysis:
"10 symptoms of 'Obama Stockholm Syndrome'
Well, there they are:
"1. You believe that the Obama bumper sticker on your Prius automatically extends its warranty to the year 2016."
It doesn't? Who knew? Well, at least it still has those nice latte holders.
"2. You think Obama should have won the Nobel Prize in Philanthropy for giving away other people's money."
No, but I think he should win the Nobel Prize in patience for not slugging people like you in the face, after the lies you tell about him every day.
"3. You believe that the 1.5 million people who protested excessive government spending on the Capitol Mall on Sept. 12 were all part of a vast right-wing conspiracy."
No. I believe the 70,000 or so who really turned up, after a nationally financed multimillion dollar campaign to get them there, were a bunch of ignorant, greedy suckers who don't want to pay their taxes, and are stupid enough to think the Republican party is on their side. Tom, you are still going around saying 1.5 million were there? Talk about derangement. Or dishonesty.
"4. You believe the colder winters across Europe and North America over the past 11 years, the cooling of the Pacific Ocean and the increased ice accumulation in the Antarctic are all convincing evidence of global warming."
No, Tom. I believe the real facts are convincing evidence of global warming. I believe the things you cited are evidence that you are a corrupt liar.
"5. You think the best way to stop the drug cartel violence in Mexico from spilling into the U.S. is to curtail handgun sales in Omaha, Denver and Spokane."
Really? Most of us think the best way to stop drug cartel violence in Mexico is for that country to have an effective, functional government, instead of the bunch of criminal, self-serving oligarchs who the United States has supported for decades.
"6. You think Obama's acquiescence to Iran's nuclear weapons is a giant step toward peace in the Middle East."
Who knows, since he didn't do that. I think a giant step toward peace in the Middle East would be to see that there is never another chance for a Republican to start a war of aggression against an innocent country. No war- now that's my idea of peace.
"7. You believe that giving amnesty to 15 million illegal aliens will actively discourage another 15 million from coming across our open borders in the decade ahead."
Who believes that? You know what? When you allow countries like Mexico to remain sunken in poverty, because it suits the interests of international corporations, you guarantee that their people will keep coming over here. Want to keep them at home? Help them to have a better life there. And here is step one: Throw the full might of the United States behind supporting unions in third world countries. That's what I believe.
"8. You believe that a committee of United Nations bureaucrats should be given a veto over U.S. economic policies in order to reverse the destruction of the planet's environment by American capitalism."
Well, of course no one on earth believes that. However, how about you guys, who believe that corporations should be given a veto over any U. S. policy that might restrict their profits? That's just fine, right?
"9. You think al-Qaida will not attack America again because Barack Hussein Obama and not George Bush is now the face of America in the Muslim world."
It's a start.
"10. You believe that Obamacare will provide better health care
for more Americans at lower cost without rationing because government-run services are always more efficient than services provided by the greedy private sector."
No, I believe that Obamacare will provide better health care because that's what exists in every industrialized country that has national health care, and because I have spent a lifetime watching insurance companies and HMO's demonstrate themselves to be nothing but a bunch of greedy, criminal pigs, who are bent on raping us forever if we don't stop them.
Well, that's what one Obama supporter really believes. Not so deranged after all, huh?
"10 symptoms of 'Obama Stockholm Syndrome'
Well, there they are:
"1. You believe that the Obama bumper sticker on your Prius automatically extends its warranty to the year 2016."
It doesn't? Who knew? Well, at least it still has those nice latte holders.
"2. You think Obama should have won the Nobel Prize in Philanthropy for giving away other people's money."
No, but I think he should win the Nobel Prize in patience for not slugging people like you in the face, after the lies you tell about him every day.
"3. You believe that the 1.5 million people who protested excessive government spending on the Capitol Mall on Sept. 12 were all part of a vast right-wing conspiracy."
No. I believe the 70,000 or so who really turned up, after a nationally financed multimillion dollar campaign to get them there, were a bunch of ignorant, greedy suckers who don't want to pay their taxes, and are stupid enough to think the Republican party is on their side. Tom, you are still going around saying 1.5 million were there? Talk about derangement. Or dishonesty.
"4. You believe the colder winters across Europe and North America over the past 11 years, the cooling of the Pacific Ocean and the increased ice accumulation in the Antarctic are all convincing evidence of global warming."
No, Tom. I believe the real facts are convincing evidence of global warming. I believe the things you cited are evidence that you are a corrupt liar.
"5. You think the best way to stop the drug cartel violence in Mexico from spilling into the U.S. is to curtail handgun sales in Omaha, Denver and Spokane."
Really? Most of us think the best way to stop drug cartel violence in Mexico is for that country to have an effective, functional government, instead of the bunch of criminal, self-serving oligarchs who the United States has supported for decades.
"6. You think Obama's acquiescence to Iran's nuclear weapons is a giant step toward peace in the Middle East."
Who knows, since he didn't do that. I think a giant step toward peace in the Middle East would be to see that there is never another chance for a Republican to start a war of aggression against an innocent country. No war- now that's my idea of peace.
"7. You believe that giving amnesty to 15 million illegal aliens will actively discourage another 15 million from coming across our open borders in the decade ahead."
Who believes that? You know what? When you allow countries like Mexico to remain sunken in poverty, because it suits the interests of international corporations, you guarantee that their people will keep coming over here. Want to keep them at home? Help them to have a better life there. And here is step one: Throw the full might of the United States behind supporting unions in third world countries. That's what I believe.
"8. You believe that a committee of United Nations bureaucrats should be given a veto over U.S. economic policies in order to reverse the destruction of the planet's environment by American capitalism."
Well, of course no one on earth believes that. However, how about you guys, who believe that corporations should be given a veto over any U. S. policy that might restrict their profits? That's just fine, right?
"9. You think al-Qaida will not attack America again because Barack Hussein Obama and not George Bush is now the face of America in the Muslim world."
It's a start.
"10. You believe that Obamacare will provide better health care
for more Americans at lower cost without rationing because government-run services are always more efficient than services provided by the greedy private sector."
No, I believe that Obamacare will provide better health care because that's what exists in every industrialized country that has national health care, and because I have spent a lifetime watching insurance companies and HMO's demonstrate themselves to be nothing but a bunch of greedy, criminal pigs, who are bent on raping us forever if we don't stop them.
Well, that's what one Obama supporter really believes. Not so deranged after all, huh?
Comments
No, Tom. I believe the real facts are convincing evidence of global warming. I believe the things you cited are evidence that you are a corrupt liar."
Actually, this is true. The hottest year was in 1934.
"self-serving oligarchs who the United States has supported for decades.
"
Then you need to change your definition of functional, Mexico is going to the dogs.
"who believe that corporations should be given a veto over any U. S. policy that might restrict their profits"
No one believes that, but they have their right to petition for a redress of grievances. Oh wait, you hate the Constitution, I forgot =/
"It's a start."
Yep, as you can see with the recent attacks and new recruitment, they really care about Obama being in the white house.
"I believe that Obamacare will provide better health care because that's what exists in every industrialized country that has national health care"
We have the best healthcare system in terms of quality of care and response time.
"insurance companies and HMO's demonstrate themselves to be nothing but a bunch of greedy"
Medicare/medicaid deny twice as many claims as any insurance company. just sayin'.
Yes, you are deranged. You also believe you can spend your way out of debt.
... in 48 states of the USA, that is.
Skeptical Science notes "1934 is the hottest year on record in the USA which only comprises 2% of the globe. According to NASA temperature records, the hottest year on record globally is 2005."
By the way NASA are that little organization which have access to satellite imaging, which did not exist in 1934.
Sorry, chum. Got all hot about that one for a moment, I bet.
Colder winters is not inconsistent with climate change either. Weather patterns are getting more extreme is the point.
Colder winters down under do not alter the fact that we have been in drought for over ten years, and water rationing is every bit as crappy as it sounds.. The worst bush fire conditions ever are pretty crappy too.
Stand ankle deep in our reservoirs of drinking water while a firestorm comparable to a small nuclear explosion comes toward you and see how cool you feel.
"We have the best healthcare system in terms of quality of care and response time."
ahem..
You're entitled to your auto-nationalistic value-based opinion (based on 2% of global sampling again?) of course, but that is not the judgment of Americans I know who work within the system or those I know who have used it. Furthermore you spend a higher % of GDP for what are considered by other people to be inferior returns, and that % is rising unsustainably.
According to NASA, the hottest year is 1934. According to NASA records, the hottest year is 1998. According to NASA spokes people, the hottest year is 2005. Note that the hottest year was 1934, and only due to their recording practices were the records not changed.
"which did not exist in 1934."
They still have means of measuring temperature very accurately.
"Weather patterns are getting more extreme is the point.
"
But that's just it, they aren't. Last year the US have a mild winter and a mild summer. Whole lot of hurricanes too! Its the weather, it changes. We are in an interglacial period of an ice age. 35 million years ago there wasn't a snowflake on this planet.
"The worst bush fire conditions ever are pretty crappy too."
How many bush fires are caused by humans not properly extinguishing their fires properly? Oh yeah, a large majority of them.
"I know who work within the system or those I know who have used it."
Your friends are liberal, what a surprise. Most doctors don't want a public option. Read it and weep.
"
You're entitled to your auto-nationalistic value-based opinion "
That was from the WHO by the way, not that I respect the POS institution.
"Furthermore you spend a higher % of GDP for what are considered by other people to be inferior returns"
According to the WHO, we get the best returns, but pay the most. Note that you must take into account taxes for countries with a govt run system.
Also, Obamacare has been proven to raise premiums for more than 80% of insurance holders.
"Derek's other claims could be demolished just as easily"
Funny because all of them are still standing.
I just explained the deal about 1934. If you wish to take as an article of irrational faith that it was the hottest, that's up to you.
I guess you believe in Adam and Eve and the tooth fairy too. Your privilege... but you are wrong.
"We are in an interglacial period of an ice age. 35 million years ago there wasn't a snowflake on this planet"
35 million years ago there were no humans as we know them and the face of the planet was completely different... what's your point? We are talking about changes within living memory.
"How many bush fires are caused by humans not properly extinguishing their fires properly? Oh yeah, a large majority of them."
And some are deliberately lit. And some are started by the glint of light through glass. Some start by electrical faults. Some by lightning. Any number of ways they can start...
How they start is not relevant to this.
What enables them to turn into sprawling infernos of this scale... are weather conditions.
Hot. Windy. Dry.
Do you understand these words? What they mean for fire?
Friends of mine in the police did victim identification. A grimmer job you cannot imagine.
I resent that you imply it all happens because we a bunch of hopeless fuckups.
Were I to make a similar comment about the natural disasters that happen in your country you would be justifiably angry, so you can take your jingoistic simpleton bullshit and shove it, thank you very much
"Your friends are liberal, what a surprise. Most doctors don't want a public option. Read it and weep."
Actually the friends I was thinking of are staunch Republicans....which would make me weep - were they not such nice people otherwise.
The people who really weep are those who cannot afford treatment in your country, or are financially ruined by the need for treatment.
I guess you're comfortably far from that demograph.
"According to the WHO, we get the best returns, but pay the most."
According to the WHO:
"The U.S. health system spends a higher portion of its gross domestic product than any other country but ranks 37 out of 191 countries according to its performance.... The United Kingdom, which spends just six percent of GDP on health services, ranks 18th"
Your side attacked the WHO over this report, yet you claim they said something else completely...
What happened? Have you not been given your Right-wing drone instructions correctly this week?
Incidentally, the British system is what Stephen Hawking credits for his still being alive - in direct refutation of a politically motivated lie published in the Investor's Business Daily that he would not have received treatment under Britain's system. A lie you would gobble up no doubt.
You've been demolished, Derek.
I suggest you grow up a bit, see more of the world, and talk to people who don't live all their lives in your comfortable little circles.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/darwin_zero4.png?w=510&h=395
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon14_with_activity_labels.svg
http://cloud.web.cern.ch/cloud/documents_cloud/cloud_concept.pdf
http://paulmacrae.com/links/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/010405m2.gif
I could play all day.
"what's your point?"
The earth changes without human involvement. 35 million years is less than 1% of the Earth's history.
'Hot. Windy. Dry. "
Sounds like brush to me. More fires equals more worse brush fires.
"I resent that you imply it all happens because we a bunch of hopeless fuckups. "
Careless hopeless F'ups. I resent the fact that you think me driving my car (or exhaling for that matter) caused those victims to die.
"Your side attacked the WHO over this report, yet you claim they said something else completely"
There were four criteria for the ranking, one of them being responsiveness (quickness and effectiveness of care) which we were ranked #1 by landslide. The other three include financial fairness, healthcare distribution, and health level. These three have little to do with the quality of care. For instance, a country could receive a high rating for healthcare distribution should there be little difference in access to care. Aka everyone could have poor access to crappy care yet that country receives a higher rating. For health level, that is simply life expectancy. While healthcare is a factor, the fact that Americans are accident prone, murder eachother and are obese have nothing to do with the quality of care. As for financial fairness, again, they did not include the cost of the government programs as that money is simply taken from tax revenues.
On what matters, the quality of the care, we were #1. That was my point.
"the British system is what Stephen Hawking credits for his still being alive "
Yes doctors save lives, yet our system is still better.
"You've been demolished, Derek."
Far from it, you only repeated yourself and misread my statements.
2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.
3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.
4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.
5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.
6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.
7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed.
8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians.
9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain.
10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.
See your patriotic little angel Palin is going to work for Fox News and reap millions of dollars for it. Gee, turfing her responsibilities for money really has worked out for her. You must be happy.
Will she be able to put three words together that make sense, though? Hefty challenge there..
Thank you for that jingoistic barrage. I was right then.
Christ, you don’t like Canadians do you? Are you wanting to “flex” against them somehow?
Americans are about to get a better healthcare coverage system too. Congratulations. Millions of people will actually be able to get your...err....quality care, who weren’t able to before. Thanks to Obama.
20 years from now Republicans will be saying it was all their doing.
By the way we just had our hottest night on record, and since you only care about records pertaining to your 2% (from 86 years ago) in application to the state of the planet, I guess that entitles me to make sweeping but selective judgements for or against science too.
How’s the weather in Florida, by the way? A little chilly? A little.... extreme?
“The earth changes without human involvement”
The Earth changes for all contributing factors. Vast pollution is not magically excluded because it suits Right-wing interest groups. That’s just not... common sense.
Sooooooooo you aren't going to address anything I have presented showing that it won't be?
"How’s the weather in Florida, by the way? A little chilly? A little.... extreme?"
Yep, really cold. Sounds like that greenhouse effect is taking a vacation elsewhere this year, huh?
"Vast pollution is not magically excluded because it suits Right-wing interest groups. That’s just not... common sense."
First off, it isn't vast, secondly it isn't pollution. While CO2 does control much of our Earth's climate, the rise in CO2 that we have seen doesn't follow the temperature curve. Did you not look at any of the links I presented?
Derek you're an ideologue opposed to social justice.
I live in a country that got past this debate in the early 70s and have had public health cover ever since. What precisely do think you are going to persuade me of?
“People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied”
Are we? Measured how? Did you ask everyone? Gee I wonder why we still have it then....
Funny you don't reckon I know what Palin was thinking when she quit being governor... but you know what whole populations think in countries you've never been to.
Bet they're not as dissatisfied as sick Americans with no way of paying for treatment either.
Actually it’s the scare-mongering and lies regarding the whole issue that irks me....
Never do we see reactionary conservatives saying “okay let’s see how people around the world do it and see what we can learn or what they can learn from what we do...”.
No... none of that... ever.
It's just “bah...‘socialism’...gargle... ‘death panels’...choke...’illegal aliens’....bah, gargle, burp, splutter”.
National chauvinism for breakfast, hate for lunch, take-money from insurance companies for dinner. Sitting listening to Obama's speech about healthcare with all the benevolence and humanity of a pot full of mutant Venus flytraps. Couldn't even keep from shouting out "you lie" during a presidential speech.
But that's how it is with your branch of politics. Nothing is ever a search for a better way. It's just froth, bitch, belch "America greatest! Always! On anything! Wooo-HOO!"
“Sounds like that greenhouse effect is taking a vacation elsewhere this year, huh?”
You miss the point that Climate Change causes more extreme weather in either direction. I did allude to this and I was alluding to it again.
I did credit you with more intelligence than thinking it just meant warmer weather everywhere all the time... which is the numskull's understanding of the concept. Perhaps that was optimistic of me.
By the way does that comment mean you don't actually believe it's happening? There is a lack of coherence on this issue. It was - and still is according to many - a phenomenon that wasn’t happening at all. Now their allies on the Right are up to “well yes maybe it is happening but it’s nothing to do with human activity".
One assumes your next position will be “yes it’s happening but it’s all the fault of liberals”.
"Did you not look at any of the links I presented?"
Nooooooooo Derek I didn't. It's up to you to gather up the words to present your case, not give me a bunch of links.
That's the conceited bloggers way of thinking they are in the business of giving out study material. Twice as rude when it's a comment in someone else's blog.
I read your frickin' comments don't I....? I should win a medal for that alone.
I want what's best for the majority of people, and Obamacare is terrible for +90% of people. I refuse to harm the masses to help a few.
"What precisely do think you are going to persuade me of"
The evidence shows that Obamacare/socialized medicine does not provide better care for less. In fact, it shows the opposite.
"Are we? Measured how? Did you ask everyone? Gee I wonder why we still have it then"
We are at 51% satisfaction while Canada is at 41.5%. That was a few years ago, and given the increase in satisfaction with coverage/insurance in the past 6 months, the gap could be larger.
"Funny you don't reckon I know what Palin was thinking when she quit being governor... but you know what whole populations think in countries you've never been to."
You are making an assumption, I am not. You assumed something about someone's thoughts, I am using a study to determine a popular opinion within a small error.
"sick Americans with no way of paying for treatment either."
Medicare/medicaid covers them, or they can go to a free clinic.
"Couldn't even keep from shouting out "you lie" during a presidential speech."
Funny because he was lying. Now what are they planning on doing on the issue of giving illegals healthcare? Give them amnesty, then cover them. He lied.
"You miss the point that Climate Change causes more extreme weather in either direction."
It's not that extreme when compared to the past 100,000 years. Yes, occasionally we hit the edge, set a record. Ohio has been normal for the past 10 years. It changes. What doesn't make sense is why there would be an increase in CO2 yet a decrease in temperature. The greenhouse effect doesn't just go away.
"warmer weather everywhere all the time"
Of course not, but the averages of everywhere should increase. They haven't. Also, you attribute the cold weather to anthropogenic causes, namely global warming and CO2 emissions, which is just as bad as someone using cold weather in one spot at one time to discredit global warming. Look at the averages. We are in a slight decline after a slight increase.
"does that comment mean you don't actually believe it's happening"
Depends what data set you are using. The adjusted data of the IPCC and CRU shows an increase followed by a decline the past 8 to 10 years. The raw data (which the CRU used and then adjusted) from the GISS shows a decline, followed by a slight increase, followed by a slight decline.
It's probably relatively stable. We are in an interglacial period, so we can expect 5 degrees centigrade variance in either direction. Besides, it was hotter in the middle ages.
"It's up to you to gather up the words to present your case, not give me a bunch of links."
They are mostly graphs. Want me to explain them?
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/darwin_zero4.png?w=510&h=395
This one is the raw GISS data which shows that temperatures in reality haven't increased in temperature.
I win now right?
"Twice as rude when it's a comment in someone else's blog."
It is rude to fact check? Apparently the truth has gone out of style amongst liberals.
Perhaps Canadians have grown accustomed to expecting more... You should ponder that.
Equally seriously, stats on how a sample of a population "feel" are dubious at best.
“You are making an assumption, I am not. You assumed something about someone's thoughts, I am using a study to determine a popular opinion within a small error.”
I’m stating the obvious about a single high profile individual – now proven by her deal with Fox News. You were making a unfounded generalization about millions of people across multiple countries that you have no experience of, let alone of healthcare in those countries.
“Medicare/medicaid covers them”
I think that’s a bit glib, but in any case those reforms were themselves attacked by reactionaries in exactly the same terms as healthcare reform is now being attacked.
“Funny because he was lying”.
Funny to say that even if he was lying (he was not) the way that Bush lied, no Democrat ever called Bush a liar in that context of gross breach of etiquette that even the Republican Party officially did not dare condone.
“It's not that extreme when compared to the past 100,000 years.”
On that I concur. But there was no agriculture 100,000 years ago, or indeed any type of primary economy designed to feed masses that had the fragility to be wiped out within a human lifetime due to a shift deemed even to be minor in a geological frame of reference. The rapidity of it and how many people live on a knife-edge is the problem. You over-estimate our survivability. You personally may be at the peak of your powers and economically secure. Life elsewhere is a far more precarious proposition.
“Ohio has been normal for the past 10 years.”
Well I am sincerely happy for those who live in Ohio, whatever fraction of 2% of the globe that represents.
Where I live has been a basket case. I know that you don’t care, but whether you care or not doesn’t alter anything.
“the averages of everywhere should increase. They haven't.”
As I said... I am sincerely happy for those who live in Ohio.
Globally the hottest year was 2005. We’ve already been over this and you won’t budge
“Depends what data set you are using.”
Indeed....
“They are mostly graphs. Want me to explain them?”
You are unexpectedly good at comedy.
“I win now right?”
Very good at comedy.
“Apparently the truth has gone out of style amongst liberals.”
Ironic that you should call me a liberal, but in a way that you will not appreciate:
I’m talking your political terminology because it's the only one you know but “liberal” means something quite different here, and people who hold parallel positions to you (barring your elsewhere stated belief that an armed overthrow of the elected government is quite okay if you lost the election) are usually members of “the Liberal Party”, which is equivalent to the GOP. They’re up the shitter politically right now, and to a large degree it's because of their position on climate change.
And "truth" isn't a thing of mere style or subject to the whim of any political position, much less yours.
Of course, but how they "think" can be determined within a small error.
"You were making a unfounded generalization about millions of people across multiple countries that you have no experience of, let alone of healthcare in those countries."
So you believe it is wrong for me to look to the experts who are polling those nations for facts? I'm simply comparing survival rates and treatment options as well. I don't have to visit a country to know something about it, and that claim is absurd.
"but in any case those reforms were themselves attacked by reactionaries in exactly the same terms as healthcare reform is now being attacked."
Doesn't matter how they are attacked, they render this current bill pointless.
"Funny to say that even if he was lying (he was not) the way that Bush lied"
He was given trustworthy but still false information? No, Obama should know what's in the bill. Either he made a claim without reading the bill or he read it and knew that illegals could still be covered.
"Life elsewhere is a far more precarious proposition."
My point wasn't that we are going to survive [though a large majority of us will], it was that this so called "extreme" weather isn't all that extreme when looking at the big picture. The 6" of snow outside is extreme for Ohio . . . over the course of one year. It's one end of the spectrum for a small period of time. Make that time bigger and we aren't setting any records, or at least very very few.
"Well I am sincerely happy for those who live in Ohio, whatever fraction of 2% of the globe that represents."
Again, you are missing my point. It wasn't that things are dandy, it is that you are using one area of semi-extreme weather as a reference, yet ignoring the places that are spot on average. If everything on Earth were going to hell, then sure, maybe we could assume something, but it is, in fact, not. The Earth goes through periods of lower average precipitation, cooler temperatures, warmer temperatures, etc.
"Globally the hottest year was 2005. We’ve already been over this and you won’t budge"
Depends on what data set you look at, and the middle ages were warmer. We only have a hundred or so years of solid temperature records, and the first 40 years of those records are questionable. The fact that one year was hotter than the other 99 isn't all that boggling. Again, try to open the links I showed you if you don't believe me when I say that the middle ages were warmer, as was 100 years ago.
"Very good at comedy.
"
Way to dodge my explanation.
You explain this graph using your view of climate change:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/darwin_zero4.png?w=510&h=395
If you respond anything, explain that graph. That is all I really want to see.
"elsewhere stated belief that an armed overthrow of the elected government is quite okay if you lost the election"
When did I say this? I'm sure if I did there were significant measures you now fail to mention.
"your political terminology because it's the only one"
Far from it. Democratic socialist any better? In the US, the most general would be liberal/moderate/conservative. Most are liberals in the global sense, conservatives being classical liberals, liberals being democratic socialists, moderates somewhere inbetween.
"They’re up the shitter politically right now, and to a large degree it's because of their position on climate change."
Mind me asking where you live? Conservatives in Europe and the UK did fairly well for themselves this past year did they not?
Mind me asking where you live?
Not at all. Australia. The southeast bit that burns.
I thought that was all out there already.
“If you respond anything, explain that graph. That is all I really want to see.”
Okay, Derek... this graph appears to have station names in it and some severely averaged data, and is from a skeptics site run by Anthony Watts, an American blogger. He is, I grant, an expert. One that has been rebutted by other experts (doesn't mean they know more, but doesn't mean they know less).
He has also worked for (oh gosh golly me...) a Fox News affiliate radio station...! How interesting.... Not a crime obviously (except sometimes against truth, justice and humanity) but doesn't do anything for his cred in my view.
Now I on the other hand shall not refer to a Fox News affiliate employee but will instead look at http://www.climatechangeinaustralia.gov.au/documents/resources/TR_Web_Ch2.pdf which is run by the government of Australia, who on the whole and with personal exceptions I'm inclined to trust ahead of one Fox News affiliate employee.
It states (you'll love this and you needn't look at the link because I'm quoting it...), along with some pretty graphs...
"Observational data reveal significant climate change in and surround Australia over the last century"
"The year 2005 holds the record as Australia's warmest year since 1910" (what a nuisance 2005 is proving to be)
"since 1950 a warming trend of 0.16c per decade" (f-ckin hell!)
"direct relationships between drought and global warming through the extreme nature of high temperatures and heatwaves accompanying droughts"
etc etc and many other things you will choose not to believe, because they do not suit the message you want to hear and impart.
“how they "think" can be determined within a small error”
Not all of them on a small sample, and it depends what questions were asked and how they were framed. If you ask the same sample “would you be in favor of your elected and accountable government handing over all control over health insurance to private corporations whose clerks – instead of your doctors – will determine what medicine you can have?” you will get a certain other sort of answer.
“I don't have to visit a country to know something about it”
True. But saying ALL of them don’t like the healthcare system their elected governments have been free to change for decades is not just “something about it”.
“Doesn't matter how they are attacked”
It always matters. Always. You should not attempt to scare sick grannies with dark fairy tales about death panels.
“My point wasn't that we are going to survive [though a large majority of us will], it was that this so called "extreme" weather isn't all that extreme when looking at the big picture.”
There is a bigger picture to be concerned with than human survival? Perhaps that's the corrupt Republican political survival that takes precedence over all concerns, naturally. “a large majority of us” is not good enough, Derek, just because "us" includes "you" (you hope). Ethical vacuity.
“conservatives being classical liberals”
Do you still think that equivalence generally applies?
This is not a rhetorical question or sarcasm on my part. I’ve seen neoconservatives disparage that sort of conservative with particular venom – yet call themselves conservative - which makes me wonder if conservatism as a whole hasn’t been hijacked or welded to other philosophies which are further to the Right.
"Democratic socialist any better?"
I don't mind being called a liberal. I was just saying.
“Conservatives in Europe and the UK did fairly well for themselves this past year did they not?”
Well... the Tories are certainly looking likely to win the next election in the UK, which date hasn’t been announced but it can’t far off because of the budget timetable. Doesn't trouble me greatly. Be mindful that they are completely distinct from the National Front, who are not nice people.
Gordon Brown is unpopular his party has been incumbent for a long time, and quite damaged over Iraq and issues of corruption, and David Cameron should reap the benefit of the timing. If he does it will be interesting to see what he does.
I could be wrong about that though....after all, who knows what everyone in other countries really “think”, until election day when they have an un-nuanced choice about what they are being asked? hmmm?
"When did I say this? (about overthrowing the government)
On this blog some time back. I made a comment that gun-toting militias are dangerous thugs in the context of a post about overthrowing the Obama administration by force, and you said you call them patriots.
You can look for it and clarify your position if you like. Tell me I misunderstood what you meant.
I would like to read that you don't think it's fine to kill your elected president and have redneck scum in charge of a military dictatorship. I really would.
"I'm sure if I did there were significant measures you now fail to mention."
It's never okay. Okay?
How about "Do you approve of your nations current healthcare system?"
"ut saying ALL of them don’t like the healthcare system their elected governments have been free to change for decades is not just “something about it”."
Just going by the polls. Even if, you are fixating on one of the trivial reasons of the ten I presented. Have you nothing to say about the other 9?
"You should not attempt to scare sick grannies with dark fairy tales about death panels.
"
Of course people shouldn't lie about the plan or spin it but my point is that medicare and medicaid render this current bill pointless, a point you attempted to ignore.
"
There is a bigger picture to be concerned with than human survival? "
Quit fixating on my intro, and instead address the bulk. My point is that the extreme weather is not extreme.
"which makes me wonder if conservatism as a whole hasn’t been hijacked or welded to other philosophies which are further to the Right."
Conservative can mean a number of things, just as liberal can. Conservative in US politics is a classical liberal. neoconservative is a classical liberal with a touch of the IR definition of conservative. We are getting into semantics, and it is boring.
"gun-toting militias are dangerous thugs in the context of a post about overthrowing the Obama administration by force, and you said you call them patriots."
Well I wouldn't call any current revolutionaries patriotic so there is something missing. Maybe they were just a militia group and GE called them revolutionaries? That seems more likely.
"It's never okay. Okay?"
It's never okay for someone to overthrow their government? Who is the IR conservative now? This is Congress of Vienna all over again.
"nd is from a skeptics site run by Anthony Watts"
It actually is from the GISS website, from which Watts obtained the graph.
And you rant about Watts, not the graph. That graph is the average of all 222 stations of the GISS for the year. That is essentially the global average temperature. It is from the GISS website. Now please, explain the graph, not Watt.
I just answered this. This issue is NOT - on any level - a matter of THEM all being miserable with what they could have got rid of years ago. It's a matter of reactionary ideologues like you and ruthless lobbying on the part of insurance companies that has denied Americans the same cover, and none of your preposterous attempts at spin changes that.One of the issues of which Obama won the election by a landslide was the widespread belief in America that healthcare in America needed reform.
"you are fixating on one of the trivial reasons of the ten I presented. Have you nothing to say about the other 9?"
If it was trivial why present it? And you are not in charge of this conversation Derek, it's not for you alone to set the questions. And I notice you are utterly unapologetic about ignoring much of what I say.
“My point is that the extreme weather is not extreme”
Then you don’t have a point. As of today another city here experienced it's longest run of heatwaves in 130 years of measurement.
It’s extreme and getting worse.
“We are getting into semantics, and it is boring.”
Cry me a river, Derek, we could use the water. If you're bored, feel free to piss off.
“Maybe they were just a militia group and GE called them revolutionaries? That seems more likely.”
No Derek, the crap you come out with is NOT Green Eagle’s fault.
“It's never okay for someone to overthrow their government?”
It’s never okay for redneck thugs to kill the elected president of the USA and install a military dictatorship just because said thugs didn't get who they voted for.
“This is Congress of Vienna all over again.”
No. It’s just two guys debating stuff on the internet.
“And you rant about Watts”
The link you provided for that graph goes to Watt's site. I check who is running sites. If I notice that person has a professional association to an affiliate of one of the most infamously Right-leaning mouthpieces in America (Sarah Palin's employer now!) I'm hardly going to ignore that am I ?
"Now please, explain the graph"
I laugh.
You have incredible nerve in demanding that I explain stuff YOU have chosen to present. Your iggledy piggledy graph with no accompanying text or commentary (unlike mine). Unbelievable nerve.
What? It's not enough for you that I assent to following your link? I actually have to take it, not worry about who champions it in Right wing media, buy into it like you do, and then explain it back to you on the backfoot of already accepting what you have given me at face value? Just like that?
Not everyone is your kind of fool, Derek, to manipulate, browbeat or mislead. Certainly not me. Forget it.
All your posturing, all your f-ck-them-the-majority-will-be-okay pontificating, all your typically Right wing attempts to own a discussion instead of participate in it, all your faith in goose-brained egomaniacs like Palin, all your big-gun bomb-them attitudes to other countries and your hollow oh-I-read-a-study-and-I've-got-a-graph! smugness doesn’t impress me one bit.
How about you stand in a dried up lakebed here and I demand you explain that to me? Not a graph (for Christ's sake...)... the reality. How about that?
Reform is change. What matters is how you change it. Americans largely do not want Obamacare to pass so clearly this isn't the reform they were looking for.
"If it was trivial why present it"
It only matters to a small degree, yet it still supports my argument. Plus, I like the number ten.
"And I notice you are utterly unapologetic about ignoring much of what I say.
"
That is because you hardly say anything. You blather on and on about unimportant topics or you criticize people rather than the statistics I present.
Do you deny the other nine as well?
"As of today another city here experienced it's longest run of heatwaves in 130 years of measurement.
It’s extreme and getting worse.
"
Ugh. It is 130 years. That is the tiniest blip in the span of geological time. Even for humans that is a tiny tiny portion of our history. Look at the past 10,000 years, and those records are benign. Today set a record high temperature in Columbus. . . for the past week. That record doesn't seem very important does it? When you are going to talk about a geological phenomenon, you must view it through the lens of geological time. The weather isn't extreme for the past 10,000 years.
"the crap you come out with is NOT Green Eagle’s fault."
You mean the crap you are misquoting me on?
"It’s never okay for redneck thugs to kill the elected president of the USA and install a military dictatorship just because said thugs didn't get who they voted for."
Agreed, so what's the problem here?
"It’s just two guys debating stuff on the internet. "
I was implying your ideology was COV, aka no revolutions.
"I'm hardly going to ignore that am I ?
"
You can try and figure out where he got the graph, then decide whether his source was credible.
"our iggledy piggledy graph with no accompanying text or commentary"
I explained the graph. It shows that there is little increase in temperature, if any, over the
20th century. This means your view is complete crap.
"Derek, to manipulate, browbeat or mislead"
Apparently presenting scientific data (the same data used by the IPCC and CRU) is to "manipulate, browbeat, or mislead". I'm asking you to attempt to make your same claims in unison with the data. You aren't basing your views on scientific data over the past +100 years, rather, you are saying "it's hot outside, then it's cold outside." The data shows that your view is malarkey.
"doesn’t impress me one bit."
Who said I'm trying to impress? I'm simply presenting information that you have never considered in hope that maybe you will reconsider your position and view some scientific data for once.
"How about you stand in a dried up lakebed here and I demand you explain that to me? Not a graph (for Christ's sake...)... the reality. How about that?"
Because lakes never dried up before 1700, right? Also, it could be due to draining or relocating for industrial reasons. I can present the same data because it is fact. That graph is the truth for the past +100 years. I could care less how the weather is for a decade or two in one spot of the world. Some areas of the world are flooding, doesn't that break your drought argument? Oh wait, I'm going to hide behind the word "extreme" as if nature never changed before 1700 AD. There were horrible droughts for hundreds of thousands of years which killed off endless amounts of life well before humans. Now tell me your dried lake bed is "extreme".
That's right. Think about it.
Yes, a small change over a short period of time. Why not look at the entire span of geological time and see if something like this has occurred before? It has.
Why not look back a few thousand years and see what temperatures were like? Were they hotter before we began pumping CO2 into the atmosphere, and if so, why?
The Earth was hotter in the past (recent past) and that had nothing to do with human interaction. Why is it suddenly shocking to see a small rise in temperature?