Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Now They Tell Us! (ObamaCare, Ongoing...) | Main | They Failed To Dazzle Us With Science »

October 22, 2010

Comments

Clarice

Completely off topic, but here is the best political ad evah!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QbNGnvBR7k

Jack is Back!

Now that Harry Reid has finally admitted what he himself knew all along - that he saved the world - we don't have to worry about AGW or climate change anymore.

/Al Gore eat your heart out

Are we cooling, folks?  Even kim doesn't know for sure.

People might check out Judith Curry's blog 'Climate, etc.' And Jeff Id's got a nice discussion at the Air Vent about a potentially huge flaw in the Global Climate Models, that they fundamentally don't account for the change in pressure when water condenses out of a volume.

Remember:

I think I've never heard so loud
The quiet message in a cloud.
==============

Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)

My goodness, what the libs won't do to try and paint us in a corner.

I think we need to come up with a concurrent set of articles of faith for the Obama crowd.

1. Racism is acceptable if blacks do it.

daddy

Rats,

Just posted my comment on Global Catastrophe on the other thread.

Oh well, here it is again without the links.

The BBC reports today that the UN has just announced that we only have 10 years to solve the Nature Crisis. Jeepers!

Normally I would be alarmed at such definitive predictions like that from our World Leaders, but after Ted Danson's prediction in 1988 that we only had 10 years to save the oceans, and Al Gore's prediction in 2006 that we only had 10 years to save the Earth from Global Warming, and Nasa's head in 2009 saying Barack Obama only had 4 years to save the Planet, and Gordon Browne's prediction last year that We only have 50 days to Save the World, I find I begin to take these predictions with a tad less seriousness than I suppose I ought to.

Has that happened to you guys?

Neo
As of today, the Democratic Congress has had responsibility for the Iraq war for three years and just under 10 months -- exactly as long as the Republicans controlled the purse strings on Iraq.

The Democrats' three years and 10 months goes back to Jan. 4, 2007, when Nancy Pelosi was handed the gavel as Speaker of the House.

Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)

Clarice,

As of today Bielat is 12 points down and the MA crowd is giving up.

Not me - he is gonna lose.

We are cooling, folks; for how long even kim doesn't know.

Well, we'd do a lot better with national security by allowing domestic development of fossil fuels. The Green energy is a chimera; there isn't the energy density necessary to make it economic unless fossil hydrocarbon bonds get a lot more expensive.

The right, the Republicans, and the Tea Partiers have all become skeptical, and that certainly is the way the tide of public opinion and climate have moved. The alarmists are losing the scientific fight, worse every day and week.

Sure, CO2 has an effect. We don't know what it is, but it is becoming increasingly clear that it is a lot smaller than the alarmists would have you believe. Or rather, they would have you believe again as you once did, only three short years ago.
==================

Roll out the pick-up trucks.

Jane, I think polls are just going to flat out lie for the next week and a half. First of all, people are increasingly motivated to lie to the pollsters in the highly polarized environment. Furthermore, I think the bias of the press and the pollsters is going to consciously and unconsciously warp the results you, hoi polloi, are to receive.

Polls have Sestak closing on Toomey. NRO's numbercruncher calls it Toomey by 10.
============

Jack is Back!

Clarice,

That ad is terrific. Ace was there for the filming and gave a written preview.

But I have to tell you that this">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTSQozWP-rM&feature=player_embedded'>this ad is the most poignant and scary scenario you can imagine.

Cecil Turner
More than half of Tea Party supporters said that global warming would have no serious effect at any time in the future . . .
I suspect this is more a matter of priorities than a fundamental disagreement on the science. The problem with most of the "solutions" is that they require completely tanking the economy to deal with less than a tithe of the carbon emissions. Tea Partiers (and anyone else concerned with long-term economic issues) aren't buying it as a "crisis" in the Animal House sense (i.e., "this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture"). I'm with 'em.
Clarice

Jane, from your mouth to God's ears.

Rob Crawford

Clarice, earlier this week, Time/CNN had a poll that put Merdekowski ahead of Miller. The same poll had Strickland ahead here in Ohio.

I *know* that second part is a complete lie; couple that no break down on party affiliation of who they sampled and what turnout model they're using, and I suspect they purposefully cooked that poll.

The Bielat/Frank poll is cooked, as well. The left is desperate to not discourage their base -- and if Frank were that far ahead IN HIS OWN POLLS, would he be acting the way he is?

daddy

Both are great ads, and you're right JiB, that is frightening.

I R A Darth Aggie

An article of faith?

Phil Jones won't release the original data + CRU's "value-added quality controlled" data + their methodology that created the value-added stuff. Because someone might be trying to prove it wrong. That's how science works, Dr. Jones.

The article of faith is on the left, and that the "science is settled".

Porchlight

Polls have Sestak closing on Toomey. NRO's numbercruncher calls it Toomey by 10.

I saw those stories, too, kim. I don't believe those polls. Toomey will win comfortably.

FWIW, seeing a lot more Donna Campbell signs here in TX-25, and Doggett seems to be spending some money - I've gotten 3 half-sheet full color postcard mailers in the last week. I don't know that he's ever had to campaign before.

Pagar

"The BBC reports today that the UN has just announced that we only have 10 years to solve the Nature Crisis"

IMO, the BBC and citizens of Great Britain will have absolutely nothing.

The so called cuts in spending are complete jokes. The actual spending is increasing according to article after article in EU Referendum.
Here is just a couple of examples, instead of spending money to help citizens of Great Britain, their government is planning to:

"In terms of the departmental increases, one item we are looking at is the £2.9 billion to DECC for international climate finance "to help developing countries pursue low carbon growth and adapt to the impact of climate change." Under the current regime, the only way this can be afforded is to claw it from the health, defence and other departmental budgets.

The same applies to the £3.7 BILLION increase to DFID for foreign aid – assisting the Indians to develop their space programme – which will also have to be clawed from health, defence, etc. That's £6.6bn which has to be withheld from hospitals, schools, police, roads, etc., etc."

Don't just read the one link, they have story after story all with the same message--The so called cuts are nothing but a illusion. Spending is increased and can not be substained.

Porchlight

Not me - he is gonna lose.

Go, Jane!!

daddy

Rob,

I met 2 co-workers on this trip who are voting for Lisa. Absolutely frightening. They are ADN conservatives. They can't go for the Dem, but think Joe Miller is scary. I talked myself blue in the face, but they think Lisa's seniority argument is the best option. Ughh.

Rick Ballard

Jane,

Sean Trende has a very good how to cook a poll piece up at RCP and Jay Cost has raised his expectations considerably.

I'm still satisfied with my 75 House seat prediction but I feel I might be a little low at 8 Senate seats. The shift in the female Muddle cohort is somewhat stronger than I had anticipated. They're somewhat less sympathetic to the Kendonesian commie bastard than they were two years ago. I suppose that being the sole breadwinner in a family really does temper feelings towards the worthless.

Janet the tea-vangelist!

Bielat is wonderful. It is not JUST that Barney Frank is so bad (which he is), but that Bielat is so great. Lollar running against Hoyer in MD is really good too...well spoken, strong, confident. And West in FL.. These are great candidates & they deserve to win.

jag

For liberals their "god" is government, all knowing, kind and true.

Every adult knows that's ludicrous but every liberal solution still begins with some "government" lead idea.

Talk about "clinging" to a religion! Global warming/climate change/whatever rhetorical device the left is using lately is a THEORY. It is proof, yet. Should we consider it? By all means. Should it direct every facet of economic life? How is it rational to have a unproven theory instruct that choice, exclusively?

This is just another liberal device by which they club nonbelievers to death since this is "science" and therefor beyond questioning. The arrogance is amazing though; using an unscientific proposition (the science is unproven) to coerce people into doing your policy preference.

Rob Crawford

I talked myself blue in the face, but they think Lisa's seniority argument is the best option. Ughh.

I had an idea today -- seniority in the House and Senate should be based on the proportion of the military who are originally from the representative's district or senator's state.

Want your rep to have more pull? Encourage more people to volunteer for military service!

(Yeah, unworkable and likely ridden with other problems. But there has to be something better than the "the voters haven't caught on, so I get more power" system.)

Danube of Thought

Mirabile dictu:

[Washington] State Supreme Court justices Richard Sanders and James Johnson stunned some participants at a recent court meeting when they said African Americans are overrepresented in the prison population because they commit a disproportionate number of crimes. Both justices disputed the view held by some that racial discrimination plays a significant role in the disparity.
Porchlight

Chaco, call your office:

HotAir: Video: Hickenlooper accuses rural Coloradans of backward thinking, ties them to Shepard murder

scott

That MA 4th Beilat/Barney poll was weighted 42D/16R/40I. I doubt turnout will fit that model. Sounds like Barney has internals that don't line up with that sample either.

Ultra-lib slimeball Maurice Hinchey in NY22, whom I had the pleasure of voting against 4 or 5 times, is in a run for his money too. Keep hope alive. If voters toss these two losers good things are sure to follow.

Danube of Thought

It's hard for me to see how, if the generic ballot data are accurate, the outcome won't be significantly more favorable than it was in 1994. I don't think there has been a popular GOP vote of this proportion in a mi-term in my lifetime.

I've always wondered how house polling is conducted. I believe there is no necessary correspondence between telephone area codes and congressional districts, so what do the pollsters do?

Porchlight

It's hard for me to see how, if the generic ballot data are accurate, the outcome won't be significantly more favorable than it was in 1994.

That's been my view, too. IIRC the Gallup likely voter generic ballot was Repubs +6 going into November 1994. (Registered voters were tied.) Today Gallup has the GOP at about double that.

I'm still going with 80/10. It's hard to see how we get to Senate control when you look at individual races, but somehow it's going to work out.

JM Hanes

Kim:

"Polls have Sestak closing on Toomey. NRO's numbercruncher calls it Toomey by 10."

I suspect it must be a good bit closer than that, because apparently Club for Growth is about to dump $1 million into that race.

Porchlight

Ultra-lib slimeball Maurice Hinchey in NY22, whom I had the pleasure of voting against 4 or 5 times, is in a run for his money too

I've been following this race - it is indeed delicious to see Hinchey in trouble. If he loses, I think the Dems could lose even more than 80 seats.

Extraneus

Just watching a few videos, it's pretty clear that Hinchey is a major asshole. I hope he goes down hard, cries, and then gets indicted for corruption.

otter

he was one of those who was insisting the Rathergate papers were real, and he's gone
farther down the rabbit hole,ever since

scott

From the MA4 poll..."Responses were only collected for people who indicated they were registered to vote at their address and either were probably going to vote or were almost certain to vote"

I guess they go on the landline being registered to an address in the district.

I lived outside of New Paltz,NY for about 10 years so Hinchey was my congressman. You're probably familiar with that town porchlight, It's part of the greater Woodstock arts scene, sort of like a mini Austin.

DebinNC

Excellent ad: Elections Have Consequences

Porchlight

scott,

Yes, I used to visit high school friends attending New Paltz and Ithaca College. Both towns are like mini-Austins. Pray for low turnout there and in Binghamton...those are the folks that send Hinchey back to Congress every two years. Poughkeepsie, too, I guess.

JM Hanes

Cecil:

"I suspect this is more a matter of priorities than a fundamental disagreement on the science."

I think that's how it started out. As I recall, earlier polling tended to focus on public attitudes toward spending on global warming mitigation. Oddly enough, I have the impression that the relatively modest concern about a putatively immanent threat started shifting toward skepticism about the human contribution, if not the science itself, as Al Gore's histrionics began to dominate the global warming air waves.

The email scandal, which no amount of whitewash could disguise, opened the floodgates to revelations about the IPCC report and dissenting views from scientists who had been intimidated into silence. Those falling dominoes ultimately dealt a serious blow to the entire climate science community from which it has yet to recover. Even Bjorn Lamborg, the original skeptic, looks like more of a believer than the disenchanted cynics in the public.

Rick Ballard

Here are two Gallup pieces concerning the generic. The first one is a rather amusing response to a HuffPo critic who can't believe his lying eyes and the second explores an aspect supporting the Abandonate Ogni Speranza, Democratici* outlook envisioned in the current Gallup polling.

The takeaway from the articles is that Gallup shows conditions for the Democrats to be worse than they were in 1994 by a statistically significant measure.

*Scuse, Signor Alighieri

Janet the tea-vangelist!

Deb, that is a good video....and this one too. I get chills when I hear Santelli screaming, "Stop spending, stop spending, STOP SPENDING!"

Benhoweblog.com He does a great job.

Pagar

"Stop spending"

Something to keep in mind.
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is now the biggest outside spender of the 2010 elections. Anyone think a dime of that is being spent on Republicans or Tea Party Candidates?

Any one want to hazard a guess as to who hands all voter registration/election operations?

"The union is spending heavily this year because "a lot of people are attacking public-sector workers as the problem," said AFSCME President Gerald McEntee. "We're spending big. And we're damn happy it's big. And our members are damn happy it's big—it's their money," he said"

Meanwhile, Doug Ross says 500 California Highway Patrol members make over $150,000 a year. One Sergeant Made over $300,000 in 2009. You think these people are are going to let a few angry taxpayers take away their huge salaries?

IMO, the 2010 elections stand a good chance of being riddled with fraud and noone to investigate it.

JM Hanes

Janet:

I love "Stop Spending" too. For the essential Obama, you can't beat, "You'd think they'd be saying, 'Thank you!'" either.

DebinNC

Another funny ad: Call Me Senator

cathyf
I talked myself blue in the face, but they think Lisa's seniority argument is the best option. Ughh.
You know, one of those things I've always wondered is how congressional seniority doesn't violate the 14th Amendment.

Sure, the Supreme Court is quite deferential to the internal affairs of another branch of government, but this isn't just about perks like parking spaces and who gets the nice offices. There is a huge amount of money that goes to the citizens of the districts represented by the congresscritters with lots of seniority. You can argue that this is what the voters are choosing when they vote their incumbent out of office, but citizens in areas which are growing or shrinking in population and gaining/losing seats, or citizens whose representative does not run for re-election, have no opportunity to have long-serving representatives.

Bill in AZ sez it's time for Zero to resign

"The BBC reports today that the UN has just announced that we only have 10 years to solve the Nature Crisis. Jeepers!"

I take this as great news! 10 years takes us out beyond the end of the Mayan calandar. We're good!

Janet the tea-vangelist!

I'm with daddy up at 10:39 on this one...I'm beginning to think that the AGW guys don't know what the hell they're talking about.

Clarice

Is that 10 business years?

Bill in AZ sez it's time for Zero to resign

"...the AGW guys don't know what the hell they're talking about."

It's worse than that - the main err... "researchers" know it is a colossal hoax.

Janet the tea-vangelist!

Maybe the libs have redefined the word years?
Years = never

bgates

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Catechism requires the believer to assent to nine articles of faith:
1) We know what the temperature is across the surface of the earth;
2) And what the temperature has been throughout history.
3) The earth is warmer than it has ever been.
4) We know why it is getting warmer,
5) And we can be sure it will continue to get warmer,
6) And that will be bad.
7) We know how to prevent the temperature change,
8) (and provide great economic benefits at the same time),
9) And all we have to do is give complete control of our lives to a small cadre of authoritarians.

I dispute all 9 claims.

Tinkerbell

bgates, i say that if you can persuade people to give tens of millions to community organizers to hire ex felons to weatherize our homes you can beieve in anything.

Porchlight

bgates, I would add a few more:

10) And the solutions proposed by said cadre can actually be implemented;
11) And those solutions will result in improvements and not make the situation worse;
12) And those improvements will be worth the trillions spent (and the opportunity costs associated with the lack of that spending elsewhere).

I dispute all 12, but some who can get to 9 might be swayed by 10, 11, or 12.

Rick Ballard

You brutes! Don't you know that if you stop clapping the CO2 Monster will die, Air Taxes won't be collected and OPM addicts across the world will be forced to actually work for a living?

I just can't believe the cruelty on display here.

Clarice

Heh heh me pretty!! Avast with the climate changers.Keel haul em all.

macphisto

vote ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

Jay

The survey found that only 14 percent of Tea Party supporters said that global warming is an environmental problem that is having an effect now, while 49 percent of the rest of the public believes that it is

In other words, tea party members are more informed on the issue than the public at large.

There is no evidence to support the AGW claim.

None.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame