Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#25713 Sep 28, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try, but you missed by a mile.
It doesn't scare me one bit, whether you call it the Tea Party, the Libertarian Party, the American Independent Party, or the John Birch party nothing is stopping anyone from forming a 3rd, 4th, or 5th political party.
Riddle me this,
if the Tea Party is such a threat to the Democrats or the Republicans, then why didn't they form their own party back in 2009. Nothing forced the Tea Party to run under the wing of the Republicans, that was a choice they made, and it was choice that Republicans made to court the extreme right.
By the way, teabagger was what they called themselves in the beginning until the yahoos realized what the term's sexual conotations were.
By the way, you just used the term teabagger and used it in a hateful derogatory way, knowing the sexual meaning. You socialist are a mean and uncaring bunch.
Also it is quite difficult to get a organization or party of the ground with the White House giving orders to the IRS to stop any attempts of the Tea Party to organize. No money means no organization. You socialist also play dirty.
Furthermore I don't care what organization starts a third party as long as it is a conservative/libertarian party that believes in the Constitution and liberty of the American people.
how would a bimbo know

Alpharetta, GA

#25714 Sep 28, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try, but you missed by a mile.
It doesn't scare me one bit, whether you call it the Tea Party, the Libertarian Party, the American Independent Party, or the John Birch party nothing is stopping anyone from forming a 3rd, 4th, or 5th political party.
Riddle me this,
if the Tea Party is such a threat to the Democrats or the Republicans, then why didn't they form their own party back in 2009. Nothing forced the Tea Party to run under the wing of the Republicans, that was a choice they made, and it was choice that Republicans made to court the extreme right.
By the way, teabagger was what they called themselves in the beginning until the yahoos realized what the term's sexual conotations were.
how would you know about sexual connotations?
OMTE

Folkston, GA

#25715 Sep 28, 2013
How bout them Dawgs!!!!:))))
corso

Cordele, GA

#25716 Sep 28, 2013
how would a bimbo know wrote:
<quoted text>
how would you know about sexual connotations?
double not so fast- goat roper! baaaaaa! go dawgs!
please hurry

Adel, GA

#25717 Sep 28, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would expect and expected such a reply from a socialist as yourself. It frightens you and others such as yourself that Americans might actually have a party to vote for that might represent them.
Lets face the truth you and other socialist/communist want only one real political party. That is the Democratic Socialist Party and it's secret allies such as the RINO run Republican Party with the help of the Socialist news media.
Again, I have your number and didn't expect any less from you than what you replied to my post with. You only confirmed what everybody already knows.
You are proof that common sense is not so common. So start your much dreamed about conservative party, heck you can even call it the tea party!! Then watch as what little influence your group has evaporates. That's when we get back to governing this country and personal agendas of a few no longer matter, so please hurry.
just sayin

Quitman, GA

#25718 Sep 28, 2013
Oh my wrote:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad _astronomy/2013/09/26/climate_ change_denial_james_delingpole _tells_it_like_it_isn_t.html
...And finally, no, the models aren’t “bunk”. In fact the models are doing a pretty good job of representing the physical nature of what’s going on. The real problem isn’t with the models, it’s with people interpreting them, or, more accurately, misinterpreting them. Again, I’ll cover this below.
Delingpole continues:
This is why the latest Assessment Report is proving such a headache to the IPCC. It’s the first in its history to admit what its critics have said for years: global warming did “pause” unexpectedly in 1998 and shows no sign of resuming. And, other than an ad hoc new theory about the missing heat having been absorbed by the deep ocean, it cannot come up with a convincing explanation why.
Well, actually, no. That’s like seeing a corpse with a bullet wound to the head and saying “Except for the bullet wound to the head you cannot come up with a convincing explanation why this person is dead.”
The idea that the missing heat is being absorbed by the deep ocean is hardly ad hoc. It’s observed. And it’s hardly “new”; we’ve known the deep ocean has been heating up for a while. This is also happening at the same time that we’re seeing relatively cooler surface temperatures in the Pacific ocean, which cools the air. That’s part of a natural cycle, with ocean surface temperatures going up and down over time. For the moment, that effect is greater than the overall warming trend of surface temperatures, so we see a flattening. And despite Delingpole simply dismissing this idea, recent computer models which incorporate the cooler Pacific waters have been able to reproduce this temperature flattening effect pretty well, too (shown in the inset graph), strengthening our understand of how the ocean affects land surface temperatures.
When we cycle back into warmer surface temperatures, the land surface temperature will go back up. We’ve seen this happen before, over and again in the past. You have to be careful not to make any long-term claims about that either; scientists are careful to average over both cooler and warmer cycles to look at the overall trend. Denialists love short-term trends, because they can cherry-pick them to make it look like temperatures are stable or even dropping, when in reality the overall trend is up, up, up.
So the computer models aren’t “bunk”, as Delingpole claims. They’re pretty good, and our best bet for figuring out what’s going on. They get better at doing so over time, too.
The models? The Models? Are these models produced by the same pin heads that produce the tropical storm models? Yeah pretty much they are. Ever seen these? The only point ever in agreement is the static, from there all bets are off.
You seem to have no understanding that "man made" climate change is a theory and one that has all those who find fault with the science and/or the conclusions are silenced and vilified.
I thought scientists were, by nature inquisitive and willing to look at all evidence. Perhaps that's my Pollyanna understanding of science. It appears that the agenda is more important that real science. But that's what happens when economists rather than scientists are given grants to produce specific results.

Judged:

12

10

6

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#25719 Sep 28, 2013
please hurry wrote:
<quoted text>
You are proof that common sense is not so common. So start your much dreamed about conservative party, heck you can even call it the tea party!! Then watch as what little influence your group has evaporates. That's when we get back to governing this country and personal agendas of a few no longer matter, so please hurry.
Talk about personal agendas. You think that Obama , Biden, Reed, Clinton, and Pelosi do not have a personal agenda to move this country towards a European style Socialist country? If you don't there is something wrong with your thought pattern. I think we all know the answer to that.
Btw I have no group to watch evaporate. None exist at this time that has any power to do anything. I don't call them anything because of now there is only one party disguised as two parties and neither of them are helping hard working Americans or this country.
I am sure if a new party tries to get a foothold, the Obama Administration will stop them by using the IRS again.
Yes of this moment, all I and many other Americans can do is dream of a new honest conservative third party to try and save this country from destruction.

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#25720 Sep 28, 2013
I think I know where the hot air is coming from that makes some people believe in global warming or climate change. The hot air is from the United Nations trying to deceive us about climate change. Seems that they just ignore the truth as it does not fit their agenda.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/...
silver foxx

Moultrie, GA

#25721 Sep 28, 2013
For all the left leaning, socialist idiots out there living in Utopialand.

http://touch.latimes.com/#story/la-na-shutdow...
I saw it

Adel, GA

#25722 Sep 28, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
I think I know where the hot air is coming from that makes some people believe in global warming or climate change. The hot air is from the United Nations trying to deceive us about climate change. Seems that they just ignore the truth as it does not fit their agenda.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/...
Its strange to me that a person so wrong can even imagine the are right. Everyone is lying to you, and you sitting here in Georgia not mattering at all in the big pictures think you have all the answers. I just can't understand how you are being missed, you are such a find and a wonderful intellect.

Just a little hint, scientists don't look at short term trends, it's the long term that matters when it concerns climate change. 15 years in the history of man is a blink of the eye. You blinked, I saw it>

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#25723 Sep 28, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try, but you missed by a mile.
It doesn't scare me one bit, whether you call it the Tea Party, the Libertarian Party, the American Independent Party, or the John Birch party nothing is stopping anyone from forming a 3rd, 4th, or 5th political party.
Riddle me this,
if the Tea Party is such a threat to the Democrats or the Republicans, then why didn't they form their own party back in 2009. Nothing forced the Tea Party to run under the wing of the Republicans, that was a choice they made, and it was choice that Republicans made to court the extreme right.
By the way, teabagger was what they called themselves in the beginning until the yahoos realized what the term's sexual conotations were.
The Tea Party didn't "choose to run" under the wing of the Republican Party, the vast majority of those who identify as Tea Party are conservative Republicans who are trying to bring the party back to the conservative agenda that this country needs. They are tired of the Republican establishment who seem content to let Democrats ruin this country as long as they get their little perks.

I am certainly not embarrassed that the Tea Party was unaware of the vulgar connotation that the Left was so quick to pick up on.

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#25724 Sep 28, 2013
I saw it wrote:
<quoted text>
Its strange to me that a person so wrong can even imagine the are right. Everyone is lying to you, and you sitting here in Georgia not mattering at all in the big pictures think you have all the answers. I just can't understand how you are being missed, you are such a find and a wonderful intellect.
Just a little hint, scientists don't look at short term trends, it's the long term that matters when it concerns climate change. 15 years in the history of man is a blink of the eye. You blinked, I saw it>
How do you know I am wrong? Just because you say so? Maybe because Al Gore says so. There is no proof of what you are asserting and never has been. You read too much Huffington Post.
When are you going to start thinking and figuring things out for yourself? I suspect never.
Now

Jefferson, GA

#25725 Sep 28, 2013

It’s all about the money folks, who gets it and who gives it.
Infinitesimal climate change over a 132 year period only infects the brains of those who are greedy for someone else’s money.

2013 Working Group 1 report here…..the final report will be Monday Sept 30th.
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploa ...

The globally averaged combined land and ocean surface temperature data as calculated by a
linear trend, show a warming of 0.85 [0.65 to 1.06]°C over the period 1880–2012, when
multiple independently produced datasets exist.

The total increase between the average of the
1850–1900 period and the 2003–2012 period is 0.78 [0.72 to 0.85]°C, based on the single
longest dataset available””

For the first set of years, 1880-2012
.65 C = 33.17 degree
1.06 c = 33.908 The 2 numbers above produce a temperature rise of .85c or .738 degree, less than 1 degree temperature change over the period 1880-2012, which is a total of 132 years.

The Ice age was appox 10,000 years ago and it has taken that long to melt most of the ice (Glaciers), which shows the Earth is in a normal warming cycle.

The second set of numbers for years 1850-1900 and 2003-2012
.72c = 33.296 degrees
.85c = 33.53 degrees

The 2 numbers above produce a temperature rise of 13c or .234 degree, less than one quarter of 1 degree temperature change over the periods of 1850-1900 and 2003-2012 which is a total of 69 years.



132 years and only less than a 1 degree increase in warming, The numbers come from the IPPC and show the hysteria put out by the greenies and the Gores and the socialists are nothing but hyperbole.

The whole report is much ado about little, especially when the weather is not determined by man, computer models, or carbon credits.

Mother Nature will have her way, regardless of insignificant foolish man.
Now

Jefferson, GA

#25726 Sep 28, 2013
Temperatures and heat have only accumalted sonce around 1850, specifically less then 1 degree per this years IPPC report.

"The Little Ice Age, following the historically warm temperatures of the Medieval Warm Period, which lasted from about AD 950 to 1250, has been attributed to natural cycles in solar activity, particularly sunspots. A period of sharply lower sunspot activity known as the Wolf Minimum began in 1280 and persisted for 70 years until 1350. That was followed by a period of even lower sunspot activity that lasted 90 years from 1460 to 1550 known as the Sporer Minimum. During the period 1645 to 1715, the low point of the Little Ice Age, the number of sunspots declined to zero for the entire time. This is known as the Maunder Minimum, named after English astronomer Walter Maunder. That was followed by the Dalton Minimum from 1790 to 1830, another period of well below normal sunspot activity."

"The increase in global temperatures since the late 19th century just reflects the end of the Little Ice Age. The global temperature trends since then have followed not rising CO2 trends but the ocean temperature cycles of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). Every 20 to 30 years, the much colder water near the bottom of the oceans cycles up to the top, where it has a slight cooling effect on global temperatures until the sun warms that water. That warmed water then contributes to slightly warmer global temperatures, until the next churning cycle."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013...


Now

Jefferson, GA

#25727 Sep 28, 2013
OMTE wrote:
How bout them Dawgs!!!!:))))
WOOF WOOF!!!!!
corso

Cordele, GA

#25728 Sep 29, 2013
Now wrote:
<quoted text>
WOOF WOOF!!!!!
how did you know he was talking about your ugly ass!!!!
Polemics

Douglasville, GA

#25729 Sep 29, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Talk about personal agendas. You think that Obama , Biden, Reed, Clinton, and Pelosi do not have a personal agenda to move this country towards a European style Socialist country? If you don't there is something wrong with your thought pattern.
.
Of course we know that. Why do you think we love them so dummy.

“Registered Conservative”

Since: Jul 11

Draketown, GA

#25730 Sep 29, 2013
Polemics wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course we know that. Why do you think we love them so dummy.
Because you don't know any better.
Now

Jefferson, GA

#25731 Sep 29, 2013
corso wrote:
<quoted text>how did you know he was talking about your ugly ass!!!!

jeb,
as far as most posters are concerned, you are anathema in this thread. You have exhibted your true self, and most folks dont like you, care for your language, or will waste their time on you anymore.

Go play with yourself, as that is the only thing you seem to care about..
OMTE

Folkston, GA

#25732 Sep 29, 2013
It was hilarious to watch all those Obama worshipers show there butts lastnight on C-span.:)
They really showed there true colors.(IMO) I thought Rep. David Scott of 13th district of Ga; was goin to fall out on the ground and start kickin and screamin. LoL. It was great. They are all for democracy, unless they are out voted by the majority. It's very telling.:) My Rep. Austin Scott and Rep. Jack Kingston done a great job at standing up for our military. Obama wanted to hold our military's pay hostage as a political ploy. The House did a fine job lastnight to stop him from doing that. Bravo! Way to go House of Representatives! Stand your ground, the American people are behind you! Hear! Hear!

Judged:

12

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Citizen Sound-Off Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 6 min NotSoDivineMsM 262,671
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in West Virg... (Oct '10) 36 min Dalai Lama 100,679
Election Who's got your vote for Congress in Kentucky's ... (Oct '14) 1 hr Billy Bob 64
Election Tennessee Hunting Rights Amendment (Oct '10) 2 hr Testing 8,701
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Missouri ... (Oct '10) 3 hr From Russia With ... 109,527
Election Who are you voting for in the Michigan Governor... (Oct '14) 6 hr March 29 2017 25
Election OK Health Care Freedom Amendment, State Questio... (Oct '10) 8 hr Erin 83,960
More from around the web