Bucco, my friend, you misunderstood me. I said it was so true of "our group". That meant the entire group of regulars on TOTV. It meant me, RichieLion, you, and Dalemn.

Tartlezac's add-on was hilarious, too.

Eweissenbach wrote a very funny posting. Take it with a grain of salt and enjoy reading something light-hearted.

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Ann Coulter though would probably find some way to say that the Democrats had put the smallpox in the blankets meant for the Natives. Which then opened up huge territories for the French in the US because of the decimation of the indigenous population. Which made the French very rich but also ****ed over the French mob which got very jealous. The Democratic French mob then killed off the French aristocracy.

I do not know if I should ask this question of you since it appears you did not make the cut into "the group" but I assume you are talking about anything deragatory said about Obama and how it is the "right" blaming the Democrats for everything.

Actually, what you propose I have never heard on here or otherwise. THERE IS however a tendency for those of the left to keep saying things like that and like the race stuff until it becomes a truth simply by constantly saying it. I KNOW this is a fact....I WAS one who practiced that and quit that party because of it.

You make this claim in a huge sweeping comment but how do you feel about Obama lying on healthcare ? How do you feel about, for instance his remarks on the Panama treaty where he mocked the previous president for the same thing and then blew his horn when he did the same thing he mocked him on....same thing with the "war on terror"..he literally tore the previous administration apart for their invasion of privacies to fight terrorism and then not only continued 100% of those practices but escalated them....how do you feel about the fact that this country has had NO BUDGET for over 3 years under his leadership, and I could go on but the deception of this administration is overwhelming to the point, if you read the NY papers at all, Mike Lupica who is a strong advocate of Obama or was, wrote in an editorial this week that Obama HAS GOT TO LET GO of everything is Bush's fault and for ONCE do something on his own.

You making this sweeping allegation does not make it true, nor would me making a similiar accusation about Obama...I do not and have actually said "atta boy" on here about certain things The things I bring up are sort of sneaky and lets say less than honorable what he has done, yet you supporters simply shrug your shoulders and say he is being attacked.

Diversion and ridicule...........so boring.

Originally Posted by Bucco

I do not know if I should ask this question of you since it appears you did not make the cut into "the group" but I assume you are talking about anything deragatory said about Obama and how it is the "right" blaming the Democrats for everything.

Actually, what you propose I have never heard on here or otherwise. THERE IS however a tendency for those of the left to keep saying things like that and like the race stuff until it becomes a truth simply by constantly saying it. I KNOW this is a fact....I WAS one who practiced that and quit that party because of it.

You make this claim in a huge sweeping comment but how do you feel about Obama lying on healthcare ? How do you feel about, for instance his remarks on the Panama treaty where he mocked the previous president for the same thing and then blew his horn when he did the same thing he mocked him on....same thing with the "war on terror"..he literally tore the previous administration apart for their invasion of privacies to fight terrorism and then not only continued 100% of those practices but escalated them....how do you feel about the fact that this country has had NO BUDGET for over 3 years under his leadership, and I could go on but the deception of this administration is overwhelming to the point, if you read the NY papers at all, Mike Lupica who is a strong advocate of Obama or was, wrote in an editorial this week that Obama HAS GOT TO LET GO of everything is Bush's fault and for ONCE do something on his own.

You making this sweeping allegation does not make it true, nor would me making a similiar accusation about Obama...I do not and have actually said "atta boy" on here about certain things The things I bring up are sort of sneaky and lets say less than honorable what he has done, yet you supporters simply shrug your shoulders and say he is being attacked.

I suppose next you're going to tell us that bucco the elder would have supported Isabella. REVISIONIST HISTORY!!!

Seriously, take a laxative and relax.

Originally Posted by Bucco

I do not know if I should ask this question of you since it appears you did not make the cut into "the group" but I assume you are talking about anything deragatory said about Obama and how it is the "right" blaming the Democrats for everything.

Actually, what you propose I have never heard on here or otherwise. THERE IS however a tendency for those of the left to keep saying things like that and like the race stuff until it becomes a truth simply by constantly saying it. I KNOW this is a fact....I WAS one who practiced that and quit that party because of it.

You make this claim in a huge sweeping comment but how do you feel about Obama lying on healthcare ? How do you feel about, for instance his remarks on the Panama treaty where he mocked the previous president for the same thing and then blew his horn when he did the same thing he mocked him on....same thing with the "war on terror"..he literally tore the previous administration apart for their invasion of privacies to fight terrorism and then not only continued 100% of those practices but escalated them....how do you feel about the fact that this country has had NO BUDGET for over 3 years under his leadership, and I could go on but the deception of this administration is overwhelming to the point, if you read the NY papers at all, Mike Lupica who is a strong advocate of Obama or was, wrote in an editorial this week that Obama HAS GOT TO LET GO of everything is Bush's fault and for ONCE do something on his own.

You making this sweeping allegation does not make it true, nor would me making a similiar accusation about Obama...I do not and have actually said "atta boy" on here about certain things The things I bring up are sort of sneaky and lets say less than honorable what he has done, yet you supporters simply shrug your shoulders and say he is being attacked.

Have not a clue what this has to do with Ann Coulter's new book on liberals and the mob? That is what I was making fun of in my post about 1492, smallpox, the French Revolution and the Democrats. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/jack...beral-mob.html

I do believe though that when Mitt Romney's views on global warming come out that they will be pretty much the same as Barack Obama's. Unless, he flip-flops yet again.

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

If only the worldwide web had been around in 1492...............

buggyone - Just heard that Chris Columbus is going to sail around the world - cool

richie - buggy my friend, he is doomed to fall off the edge

daleMn - I suppose Aristotle and Pythagoras were crazy

bucco - Aristotle and Pygthagoras, everyone knows they had a liberal agenda.

richie - Here is a link from the Madrid Leader, by Ferdinand Coulter that proves that the world is flat.

bucco - We have got to get Isabella out before she destroys the greatest country on earth................

That is hilarious.

Here's the problem I have with the Global Warming / Climate Change argument... People are arguing over minutae that shouldn't matter.

IMO, you should be pushing for action where there is common ground.

1) Fossil fuels, while not exactly running out, are past the point where we can get them cheaply. There are so many things made from petrochemicals (like, specifically, plastic) that, in the long term, it almost seems like a waste to be using the stuff to go to the store.

2) Renewables are, in the long run, cheaper. Only in the US can we make wind, hydro and solar more expensive than $100/bbl oil. There's something wrong with that. Now we're treating energy like we treat health care and that is NOT a good thing.

3) Remember the trade deficit? Is there some reason we should be sending so much money overseas to people who want to kill us?

IMO, the debate should be phrased more in the frame of National Security. We can find a LOT more common ground there than we can if we're arguing over who's scientist does or doesn't have an agenda. We KNOW the agenda of many in the Middle East.

And, just for good measure, I'd really like to know if fracking is safe or dangerous. Were the people who have contaminated water systems victims of poor implementation of fracking, or is it really as bad as some would have us believe?

Originally Posted by djplong

Here's the problem I have with the Global Warming / Climate Change argument... People are arguing over minutae that shouldn't matter.

IMO, you should be pushing for action where there is common ground.

1) Fossil fuels, while not exactly running out, are past the point where we can get them cheaply. There are so many things made from petrochemicals (like, specifically, plastic) that, in the long term, it almost seems like a waste to be using the stuff to go to the store.

2) Renewables are, in the long run, cheaper. Only in the US can we make wind, hydro and solar more expensive than $100/bbl oil. There's something wrong with that. Now we're treating energy like we treat health care and that is NOT a good thing.

3) Remember the trade deficit? Is there some reason we should be sending so much money overseas to people who want to kill us?

IMO, the debate should be phrased more in the frame of National Security. We can find a LOT more common ground there than we can if we're arguing over who's scientist does or doesn't have an agenda. We KNOW the agenda of many in the Middle East.

And, just for good measure, I'd really like to know if fracking is safe or dangerous. Were the people who have contaminated water systems victims of poor implementation of fracking, or is it really as bad as some would have us believe?

Fossil fuels are not only in danger of running out, natural gas is at record low prices and expected to stay there for decades. We have coal enough to last for centuries and enough oil to last for over 100 years.

Renewables are at this time many times more expensive than conventional or nuclear sources of electric generation. Solar generation was expected to be approximately three times the cost of fossil fuel generation, however reality is different. The largest plant to date in Florida is producing only 20% of the expected output driving the cost of generation to fifteen times the cost of generation using fossil fuels.

The wind idea was first tried in Spain where they wanted to be the leader in renewable energy technology. The Spanish government has admitted that this idea cost them 2.2 jobs for every job gained. Wind generation has been a disaster wherever it has been tried. It was supposed to be economical, reliable and environmentally friendly. To date, no wind farm has achieved even one of these goals much less all three. Wind farms in the US are routinely abandoned after the subsidies run out. Even Pickens has given up on wind!

While someday renewables may present a reasonable alternative to existing technologies for power generation that day is not today nor is it within the future for the next ten to twenty years. Fusion is closer to realization than 'green' energy.

As to the safety of fracking, the objective evidence to date is that it is extremely safe. There have been some problems reported, but they are few in number and at least some of them are in no way related to fracking. Do not allow the hyping of some isolated incidents to overrule the total picture.

Mitt Romney is not Barrak Obama. Do we really need to know more?

BBQMan: Coal hasn't exactly given me warm fuzzy feelings. There's the mercury problem and other pollution problems combined with lopping the tops off of mountains in West Virginia and blocking rivers and streams with the 'debris'.

We were told (those of us who looked this stuff up years ago) that Montana had enough coal for 150 years worth of our country's gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel needs using the Fischer-Tropsch process (invented in the 1920s) of turning coal into those fuels (South Africa, for example, produced all their gasoline that way when they were subject to boycotts because of apartheid). We were told that it would produce these fuels at the equivalent cost of $40/bbl oil. That was 8 years ago and still nothing.

Nuclear is a different story - one which I'm very much in favor of for a variety of reasons.

Wind is proving to be very effective in two countries I've recently visited - the Netherlands (where I saw offshore windfarms that have been producing electricity for quite some time) and Scotland (where it seemed like every 3rd or 4th mountain ridge had a small farm on it). Why not here?

dp - While The Netherlands' windfarms are very visible, they are extremely costly. You may find this article from Reuters informative. The Dutch can no longer afford their windmills.

Dutch fall out of love with windmills | Reuters

Interesting. I wonder if this is the same wind farm I saw on approach to Schipol Airport. 36 turbines in the North Sea seemed smaller than what I saw (and photographed) and a quick WIkipedia check confirmed it. The one you umentioned is the Windpark Egmond aan Zee and that seems to be the one with the controversy.

I saw the larger Princess Amalia Wind Farm.

The article says the government was subsidising the ENTIRE 18 cents per KwH (implying that's the WHOLE cost of the electricity). That's certainly the first time I've heard of the government *subsidising* an *entire* project for more than just construction (as in the ENTIRE operating cost).

By comparison, my electric bill in NH comes out to $0.166/KwH and we have a nuke plant generating a lot of our electricity.