Powered by TypePad

« Saturday Morning | Main | The Topless Ann Althouse »

November 21, 2009

Comments

Ignatz

--Chants, I've done a lot of data analysis, and I understood "trick" in more or less the way the RC folks explain it.

it's the word "hiding" that's suspicious.--

The meaning of a word has a little something to do with the context within which it is used and since "trick" in this case is used in the context of "hiding" something it seems prudent to give the former no more benefit of the doubt than the latter.

clarice

revkin has his own blog and refuses rather much to discuss or even post the emails references or made to or from him on his blog.

MikeS

I suspected the honesty of those folks when they kept insisting that nobody disagreed with their catastrophic predictions even though several IPCC scientists had voiced disagreement.

I still wouldn't refer to this hoax as a conspiracy. It is just that these leftist, whether they are politicians or scientists, have an irrational disregard for the facts.

clarice

Thanks,Gmax..as these emails get put in order and context they appear even more damaging..at least the ones Powerline just did do.

PD

bad,

My apologies to the whores. Except the one with the $300M price tag from Lousiana.

bad

Isn't that disgusting, PD. I can't begin to articulate my disgust.

clarice

It would be good to be able to read TM's old post about the Hockey Stick Fraud right now.

clarice

Synopsis of all the emails:
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/11/20/climate-cuttings-33.html

Also LUN

bad

O/T but I've lost the thread where it was on Topic and it's too funny to pass up.

from Rock at WeasalZippers about Andrea Mitchell:

She looks like something Rahm rolled in newspaper and sent to an opponent.

bad

Thanks for that link, Clarice. I know a lot of people who will enjoy that format.

Ralph

Chaco @1:30PM

"Chants, I've done a lot of data analysis, and I understood "trick" in more or less the way the RC folks explain it."

Charlie,
I've done my share of data analysis as well,and I agree with you that "trick" is used as described, EXCEPT that I've always used "tricks" to actually analyze the data and find out what is "hidden in the pot," rather than to make the results turn out the way I wanted them to be.

In the case of these emails it certainly seems that the "tricks" in the jargon sense were being used to play a "trick" in the layman's sense on the public.

While the emails do almost seem "too good to be true," they are also consistent with what I already know about the behavior of government employees like Hansen refusing to share "their" data when it belongs to the taxpayers.

All the Best

PaulL

The NYT journalist is already furiously covering up by using misdirection.

clarice

You're welcome--h/t yo Insty and Volokh for it..
Love the Mitchell joke..

Ralph

Chaco @1:30

"Chants, I've done a lot of data analysis, and I understood "trick" in more or less the way the RC folks explain it."

Charlie,

Typepad appears to have eaten this comment when I first tried to post it, so if this winds up being a duplicate, I apologize.

I've done my share of data analysis over the years, and I agree with you that "trick" is often used as described with one important difference: If you're ANALYZING the data, you're using the "trick" to get it to reveal its "hidden secrets" (if they weren't hidden there be no need for an elaborate analysis, after all), rather than as in this case to make the results come out as I intended.

It seems to me that in the cases described in the emails, they are using "tricks" in the jargon sense to play a "trick" in the layman's sense on the public.

This goes beyond just presenting the data in the most favorable light (as as the old standard of changing the scale/origin of one axis or the other) and approaches manufacturing the data.

I make the latter claim based on the fact that they appear to have had no reason to use a particular "trick" except that it produced the data pattern that they WANTED.

All the Best

clarice

AP story on the hacking--still no claim the stuff is fake or doctored.
LUN

Jane

I spoke with Mr. Left a few minutes ago and asked if he had heard of this story. He had. I asked what he learned about it reading the NY Times. He said something to the effect that the global warming people are as paranoid as the deniers.

I didn't read the Times but I wasn't surprised.

m. landrieu

"Except the one with the $300M price tag from Lousiana."

I resemble that comment!

Neo

The only unanswered question for me ..
Did any of these folks (in the e-mails) ever gave testimony before Congress or any court under oath ?

If so, they should go to jail.

clarice

From sweetness and Light a document in the Hadley packet on how to propagandize global warming:

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/how-to-propagandize-climate-change

Pofarmer

I hope this episode also makes people start questioning the numbers from Hansen's unit. It's obvious they are massaged, maybe this will open folks eyes a bit.

Captain Hate

I resemble that comment!

We know what you are, Mary, and your price tag.

Pofarmer

This goes beyond just presenting the data in the most favorable light (as as the old standard of changing the scale/origin of one axis or the other) and approaches manufacturing the data.

I make the latter claim based on the fact that they appear to have had no reason to use a particular "trick" except that it produced the data pattern that they WANTED.

Ralph, I think you're exactly right, which is why the "team" is trying to discredit Anthony Watts work, as well. I sure hope it brings into question Hanson's ridiculous record "adjustments" as well, which have been shown time and time again to cool past temperatures in the record. If this isn't fraud, then nothing rises to the level of fraud.

Gmax

CH

Do you think Mary runs any "sales" from time to time? After all, since we have established the occupation, isnt just down to haggling over the fee?

Gmax

OK here we go with a couple of scientist quotes:

Dr. Trenberth said Friday that he was appalled at the release of the e-mails, which he said were private discussions. . . . .

At first, said Dr. Michaels, the climatologist who has faulted some of the science undergirding the global warming consensus, his instinct was to ignore the correspondence as “just the way scientists talk.”

But on Friday, he said, after reading more deeply, he felt that some exchanges reflected a concerted effort to block the release of data for independent review.

So Trenberth a warmist does not deny, but decries the invasion of privacy, so it means they are valid e-mails or he would have screamed fraud and produced his copy of the e-mails.

Two Michaels, who has been skeptical, is putting two and two together. Wait until he sees these on a timeline ala what Powerline has done. Pretty obvious that a conspiracy to block peer review or stack the deck. That aint the scientific method, and at least a few scientists will be jarred awake by this breach of ethics.

Pagar

"Just down to haggling over the fee?

Apparently, they found Sen Lincoln's price too.

memeorandum says she is now on board and the Democrats have the 60 Senators they need.

60 Americans willing to sell their country for far less than 60 peices of Silver, IMO.

jimmyk

the difference between real fraud and what they were doing is small, but it's the difference between losing credibility and losing tenure.

Agreed, but again the key is transparency. There are lots of legitimate "tricks" to deal with flawed data, but in a healthy discipline researchers make the data and the techniques available so that others can both reproduce the results and critique the methods. If the methods are bogus or rigged to generate a pre-desired result, someone will figure it out, and either the findings won't get published, or if already published there will be a rejoinder. There have been some highly publicized cases of this in economics (some involving Steve Levitt's famous abortion-crime connection, for example). That's the way it's supposed to work.

But when researchers aren't transparent about what they do with the data, and when their peers let them get away with it, that is a sure sign of big big trouble.

Jim Ryan

From: Phil Jones
To: “Michael E. Mann”
Subject: HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Date: Thu Jul 8 16:30:16 2004

I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!

Cheers
Phil

daddy

"Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it." Mark Twain.

Time to update that:

"Everybody talks about the weather, but the Climate Change boys lie about---plus get rich in the process and rob us blind and destroy freedom and get to establish a 1 world Government".

clarice

Between the climate scamsters, Landrieu, Lincoln and nelson I'm boiling mad tonight.

Porchlight

The bribes to the Senators are just for show, a little bauble for the voters back home. They would have voted yes anyway. Now they get to vote yes and get some money too.

Lincoln says no public option or she'll filibuster. So they'll take it out and then put it back in conference.

This bill is going to pass in the end and it's going to include everything the Dems wanted.

And it will get 60 votes. People thought otherwise because people didn't realize that these people DO NOT CARE if they're re-elected or not. They are willing to walk the plank for the Holy Grail of socialized medicine.

clarice

There simply has to be massive show of public protest between this vote and the final one.

Captain Hate

Do you think Mary runs any "sales" from time to time?

Having seen her on FNS, she seems like a snotty skeezer; I'm betting she gives it away on occasions but pays good money to keep it hushed.

Porchlight

I hope so, clarice. They've timed it perfectly with the holiday season, but people are damn mad. If there is a protest march in DC I would consider flying in for it.

Extraneus

They're inviting the nationalization of the 2010 elections, and a Repeal! movement in 2012.

It's easy to imagine TV commercials showing respectable old geezers protesting in August and opinion polls showing that the Dems ignored the will of the people.

Seems suicidal.

PD

My understanding of Landrieu's payoff is that it's framed in terms of disaster funding (think Katrina). That makes it especially galling: When I think "Landrieu" and "Katrina," I think how, following the post-Katrina cleanup, when people from all over the country had poured in to LA with assistance and money, and Congress had voted billions in aid, Landrieu got up on the floor of the Senate and complained it wasn't enough.

jimmyk

Seems suicidal.

Yes, I just hope they don't take out more than just themselves with collateral damage.

I go back to Fred Barnes's column in the WSJ a few weeks ago:

For decades, a rule of thumb in Washington has said that there should be popular support and a bipartisan majority before approving an initiative that significantly affects tens of millions of Americans. Health-care reform—ObamaCare—has neither, yet Democrats want to impose it anyway. If they succeed, the consequences could be devastating for the country and probably for the president and his party.

The reasoning behind the rule is simple. Forcing drastic change on an unwilling public is likely to cause national disunity, stir angry protests, increase political polarization, and deepen distrust of Washington. But if popular opinion and both political parties support the change, discord will be minimal.

LUN (may require subscription)

Porchlight

Not sure if we'd even need to repeal, Extraneus. A Republican prez and a Republican Congress might simply pass a new health care bill and overwrite the old one.

But as a campaign movement, yes. The impact would be compounded if the weasels, on the heels of a successful Obamacare vote, manage to push through cap and trade, amnesty, card check and the rest of it.

Janet

I just feel sadness for our country. I can't believe we are allowing the federal government to take over the entire medical profession. Our country will be permanently changed. So sad.
...and just like these low life "climate experts", the "health experts" will be coming out of the woodwork to tell us how to live and die.

Sue

Once this is enacted, it will never go away. Never. Ever. People do not give up "free" stuff willingly. This country is on the fast track to socialism and I don't think we can stop it.

jimmyk

To those who think the e-mail grab was an inside job, Karl Denninger's analysis agrees:

My conclusions on the email data set itself are that this is very likely to be either (1) someone's "private email" storage of things they wanted to save, or (2) it was a working directory of someone who was in the process of putting forward a response to an FOI request or internal inquiry of some sort. The messages are not the entire email stream to or from any specific set of users, but rather are a set selected in some fashion - either by the person saving them as "important" or by someone collating messages for the purpose of responding to some sort of request.

His key point is that they are not complete--there are sequence numbers, but they are not consecutive, and attachments are missing. So it wasn't a data dump but something accumulated over time in a discretionary way.

LUN

Jane

I;m with you Clarice. I;ve been so blindingly mad for days I can barely function. And I cannot think of a thing I can do.

Porchlight

Sue,

True, but per Fred Barnes' view, all the free stuff to date has been passed with at least some semblance of majority approval. The power grab here makes it a little different. Maybe.

I hold out hope - not for this particular bill, but for the future. Those of you who were adults when we had to endure Carter to get Reagan might have better insight.

Jim Ryan

2012 GOP campaign ad against O will have clips of Obama saying "no tax increases except on the rich" and "you'll be able to keep your current policy," both juxtaposed with reality.

jimmyk

Those of you who were adults when we had to endure Carter to get Reagan might have better insight.

I attained adulthood under Carter, and Reagan was the first presidential candidate I voted for in 1980. While Reagan accomplished much, I can't think of any mega-program like this that he was literally able to repeal. For example, I believe he'd talked about scrapping the Dept. of Energy (and maybe Education as well, both Carter creations) and did not do so. Cutting taxes and strengthening defense is one thing; those are incremental. Dismantling an entire bureaucracy is another thing, and much more difficult.

Ironically, it was Carter who scrapped airline and trucking regulation (the only positive accomplishments of his administration).

Jim Ryan

I don't see how I can cooperate with this law an look at myself in the mirror. My family's insurance policies will be canceled and I will have to choose what the federal government decides should be my policy. I don't know whether I'm capable of complying. I'm not used to subjection.

Jim Ryan

How many Americans will fail to comply? There must be millions because I'm not an uppity type and I don't think I can comply. There are millions of uppity types.

Can you imagine Ted Nugent complying? There are a million of him.

Extraneus

People do not give up "free" stuff willingly.

I'm not getting any free stuff out of this. Is anyone here getting any free stuff? Most of the free stuff is going to traditional Dem voters.

Anyway, there's no such thing as free stuff, and I say they're going down hard.

[Cue the steak knife.]

Ralph

Remember that Reagan was working with a Democrat majority in Congress. IF the Republicans could achieve the level of control the Democrats presently have, repeal might well be possible.

Also this abomination of a bill is not just "free stuff." The mandates to buy health insurance, the increased taxes, etc are real and will cause a LOT of pain for a lot of people.

Past efforts with free-stuff involved things like increasing Social Security benefits without increasing the payroll taxes enough to fund them over the long term, so if you'd tried to roll them back, there would have been pain to the SS recipients, but no reduction in pain for the tax payers.

We're truly in a unique situation, I think.

Porchlight
My family's insurance policies will be canceled and I will have to choose what the federal government decides should be my policy.

My employer will almost certainly dump me and my family into the public plan, within a couple of years if not immediately. A lot of our employees, 95% or more of which are liberal, will be very disappointed at the results, I think. But that's a few years in the future.

Jim Ryan

Porch, my employer will dump me. My wife and kids have their own policy not through any employer, a policy unacceptable to Nancy: catastrophic coverage.

caro

The saving grace might be the timing. They will be collecting taxes right away but not starting "benefits" until 2014, I think. This timing will make everyone furious. There will be no freeloaders on the new plan yet so perhaps it can be done away with in 2013. Our new favorite word will be REPEAL.

Porchlight

Jim,

We'd been considering doing what you're doing - moving my husband and kids into catastrophic coverage. Oh well.

Honestly, I've been 100% opposed to this bill from the beginning not because of what it will do to me personally, but because of what it will do to the country. It's only in the last couple of weeks that I've realized that it actually will affect me personally. It's funny since conservatives are always perceived to be "stay out of my wallet" kind of people.

Extraneus

RepealHealthCare.com is already taken.

Jane

Well my premiums are already thru the roof because of govt care and if you add more taxes and increase them further, I won't be able to pay for my insurance and my mortgage at the same time.

The only thing I can think of is to force the Congress onto the bill. I see no other way to inject any sanity at all.

Jim Ryan

Porch, yes, catastrophic. Go for it now, I'd say. Saves you a lot of money every month, unless you're always going to the doc's office for this and that. Otherwise you're paying for services you'll never use. Catastrophic is part of the solution to problems in the health insurance system.

My wife and kid's policy is under $200. I told my boss, a libertarian, to give me catastrophic and then he and I could split what he saved. He didn't get it, insisted on full coverage.

Ignatz

--People do not give up "free" stuff willingly.--

Can't say what the immediate future will bring but people don't mind giving up other people's "free" stuff.
So down the road when the people who actually work simply cannot generate enough to pay for the freeloaders there will be no second option to giving up the free stuff. Whether the welfare state is peacefully or forcefully destroyed, demographics and mathematics dictate that it will be eventually, one way or the other.

Jim Ryan

Well, here in VA-5 we have three good GOP candidates for 2010. Should be able to make Perriello a one-termer.

Fresh Air

Sue--

Echoing what others have said, the "free" stuff here is actually quite limited. For many, especially the young, there is nothing free given but actually a significant tax taken.

The distinction between this monstrosity and Medicare is the notion that it shall be illegal for an individual not to possess health insurance. This is the first time an economic crime with no identifiable victim has been declared. It is quite simply, a massive overtaking of individual liberty by the federal government.

I will remain optimistic that this pile of socialist crap is repealed prior to going into effect. But before then, they have already created a national issue that will ruin their chances to maintain either Congress or the White House.

This is just a massively stupid move. The old people who vote so reliably will not take kindly to the $500 million reduction in Medicare payments. I can't quite predict the Senate will turn over in two years, but I am expecting a 1974-style wipeout in the House. Even Charlie Cook is saying many of the old guard are already in jeopardy.

This is what happens when radical Marxists are running the country.

PD

Well, let's see, they begin taxing immediately to pay for "benefits" to begin in 2014. That's for the first decade.

How do they pay for the *next* decade when they can't collect 10 years' worth of taxes to pay for 6 years of program?

Porchlight

Jim,

Thanks. I'd have to wait until July (open enrollment) to take the family off the plan, but it's a consideration. I'll have a newborn then, though (knock wood), so I guess I should probably wait to decide.

ben

Someone should ask Obama or Reid why if this is such a great bill everyone wants, they have to buy off Landrieu and Lincoln and twist arms, cajole and threaten and hold late Saturday night votes just to open debate.

PD

Chris Dodd: The people of this country should have a right to health care.


Well, hey, why not a right to groceries? That's even more fundamental. Get on that, would you?

Jim Ryan

Congrats, Porch! My younger guy is 5. Glad to be done with diapers. Our Anthem BCBS catastrophic has little goodies like free yearly checkups for kids up to age 4 and also the same discounts on prescriptions which the full-coverage customers get at the drug stores.

Little guy cut his knee a couple of months ago. I paid $180 for the stitches. It beats paying an extra $180 or so every month for nothing.

clarice

Everyone should have a little cottage in Ireland what they got for peanuts and is worth a small fortune.

Everyone should have as much peklf as they can get nancy or Harry to shovel their way.

Jim Ryan

PD, yup.

Beware if you click, because when I wrote it I had my tongue so far in my cheek I sprained it.

narciso

Seeing Dodd's recent project with AIG, I resort to a Dennis Millerism, originally applied to the reunification of Germany,
"It's like the Jerry Lewis/Dean Martin. I wasn't a fan of their earlier work and I am not anxious for a reunion

peter

Why not a right to free legal care? I would love to have a posse of attorneys filing briefs for me every time I felt the least bit slighted.
Why not free dental care? Free architects? Free massages? Why should I be denied a daily massage just because I don't make as much money as a rich person?
Why not free custom made European shoes?

Porchlight

Thanks, Jim!

Little guy cut his knee a couple of months ago. I paid $180 for the stitches. It beats paying an extra $180 or so every month for nothing.

That's great. I pay twice that every month for my very healthy husband and kids to not go to the doctor. It's crazy, I admit it.

Mark_0454

without reading all the comments.

I have a serious disagreement with Revkin's statement that the proof of global warming is broad and deep.

Computer models were never proof and these e-mails raise serious doubts as to the quality and integrity of the data that went into these models. Same with temperature data. There is a lot of controversy over sea level increase and I would not consider this conclusive proof.

Are there any other data that are conclusive proof?

Jane

Is anyone watching the vote?

Jane

It's amazing how important it was to replace Kennedy. How pathetically stupid to allow it.

Jim Ryan

Porch, of course, we must accept the big bill if someone breaks several limbs, gets a disease, etc. Choose your deductible amount and your co-pay percentage based on your level of risk aversion.

clarice

My husband thinks it's over but Byron York thinks there's a very good chance that the final bill will fail.
LUN

JM Hanes

jimmyk:

"But can someone who actually knows something about it clarify?"

I haven't caught up with the entire thread, so someone else may have addressed your question, but this post on Tricking">http://rankexploits.com/musings/2009/tricking-yourself-into-cherry-picking/">Tricking yourself into cherry picking is probably about as good as it can get for laymen. The link may seem a little sluggish, but it should still load.

I don't completely understand the specific autocorrelations, standard deviations, etc. that go into the author's made up example, but it still seems pretty clear how you can get a hockey stick out of even a fictional, completely unrelated, data set. It doesn't necessarily mean you started off with dubious intentions. The bad faith may have kicked in later.


Melinda:

kim is probably deep into the email weeds at the moment, so I wouldn't expect any drop-ins for awhile!

Dave (in MA)

Jane, the ghost of Fatboy shall haunt us for decades.

Janet

Harry Reid...Nancy Pelosi...can you stand the thought of these people telling your family what they HAVE to do concerning anything? Barney Frank?....We are being led by the worst among us.

Dave (in MA)

Jane, the ghost of Fatboy will haunt us for decades.

Dave (in MA)

From the sidebar it looks like I just double-posted, but my posts still aren't visible here. I blame the Typepad Czar.

Jim Ryan

Dad's not cooperating with this law will at least be a story my kids can tell their kids. "He said he got a lot of reading done in jail! He told us where he buried what he withdrew from the bank account. Mom and my brother and I had to go on welfare for a few years. We laughed about it years later."

There are lines. There are things one simply would not do. It's a matter of discerning them. Not sure if I can cooperate with this law.

PD

"I am not a number! I am a free man!"

Our Congress: That's what you think.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

Orrin Hatch

I am going to spend my time before this historic vote to highlight some very important numbers, so every member of this chamber understands what they are voting to advance. Make no mistake, our actions today will not be without consequences. History and our future generations will judge us on this. Here are some numbers:

· 0 – the number of provisions prohibiting the rationing of health care.
· 0 – the number of government-run entitlement programs that are financially sound over the long-term.
· 10.2 percent – our national unemployment rate, the highest in 26 years.
· 70 – total number of government programs authorized by the bill.

· 1,697 – times the Secretary of Health and Human Services is given authority to determine or define provisions in this bill.

· 2,074 – total pages in this bill.

· 2010 – the year Americans start paying higher taxes to pay for this bill

· 2014 – the year when this bill actually starts most of the major provisions of this bill

· $6.8 million – cost to taxpayers per word

· $8 billion – the total amount of new taxes on Americans who do not buy Washington-defined health care.

· $465 billion – Cuts in Medicare at a time when it faces a $38 trillion unfunded liability to finance more government spending.

· $494 billion – total amount of new taxes in this bill

· $2.5 trillion – the real cost of the bill

· $12 trillion – our total national debt


These numbers are facts. They are undisputable.

DrJ

It is interesting that I am looking for health insurance to cover my spouse and me, and my employee, her spouse and kids. Choices are *really* limited. We all live in a rural area, and the employee and I live in different counties.

We have two choices: Anthem BC and BS. The state mandates that I have to pay 50% of the plan (which is not an issue) and our small size means that we both have to have the same plan. Not just the same provider, but the identical plan.

Needless to say, our situations are quite different. I'll find something that works for both of us, but I'm rather committed to doing so. Not everyone is.

It is a lot harder to find HSA/catastrophic care coverage than I thought.

Pofarmer

BC and BS has Health Savings Account policies in MO. Don't know if you've checked it out. It's what we currently have.

Extraneus

They wheeled Byrd in.

DrJ

Very few options here, PO, at least in comparison with the "traditional" plans. We're getting details, but I think there are only two HSA plans of differing deductible amounts.

Janet

When I called my 2 Virginia Senators they both claimed they were unsure how they were going to vote tonight. Such liars. The WaPo markets them as conservative Dems., but they always vote party line. I guess the WaPo thinks they are conservative because Webb owns a gun, and Warner...well maybe he went to church once or something.
I HATE the media.

PD

PD, yup.

Jim, you and I have been thinking alike.

But, as an example of life imitates art, Rush was reading this past week from some gov't agency lamenting the rise in number of people not having a reliable source of food, called "food insecurity."

And you just know this is the prelude to legislation.

JM Hanes

"1,697 – times the Secretary of Health and Human Services is given authority to determine or define provisions in this bill"

Sara, that's actually the most serious poison in this bill.

maryrose

Clarice:
Your article is great and it was so much fun to see your name and article highlighted in the realclearpolitics.com must reads!

Janet

From NRO The Corner - "Senator Dodd said right before the vote:

I ALSO WANT TO PAUSE FOR A MOMENT, IF I CAN, MR. PRESIDENT, TO RECOGNIZE A COLLEAGUE WHO IS HERE TONIGHT ONLY IN SPIRIT, TED KENNEDY... TONIGHT WE AND IN THE DAYS TO COME WILL PAY HIM THE HIGHEST COMPLIMENT AS OUR COLLEAGUE BY FULFILLING THAT QUEST OF ACHIEVING THE GOAL THAT ALL AMERICANS ASPIRE FOR, AND THAT IS A NATIONAL HEALTH CARE PLAN THAT SERVES EVERY ONE OF OUR CITIZENS."

Did Kennedy leave any money in his will to help the poor & uninsured? Did he set up a charitable foundation? Why must they steal my money to fulfill their "quest"?

PD

Join the new generation of thought leaders

From the photo, I admit I'm not sure just what kind of thought they're talking about.

Pagar

"These numbers are facts."

IMO, not a single Democrat Senator who voted YES tonight gives a damm about any of the facts listed. They see a chance, with this bill, to end private enterprise and turn this country into a totally communist nation and they are going to take it-no matter what.

Jane

He left $700 million to his heirs.

And he would have died 2 years earlier under this bill.

clarice

Thanks, maryrose,but it's a bit of a mystery to me why that one was highlighted. In any event, I think Chaco has a truly dunamite piece coming up tomorrow and it does deserve star treatment.

PD

Remember *Senator* Babs lecturing the General about her title?

Carly Fiorina has a new campaign slogan in her run for Boxer's seat:

Let's Just Call You "Barbara"


Heh.

clarice

PD, I thought I'd read that 47% of Americans are aready receiving some sort of food assistance--either (or and) food stamps, free lunch programs, other.

Janet

and from Senator Reid via NRO again - "Senator Reid tonight:

Today we vote whether to even discuss one of the greatest issues of our generation - indeed, one of the greatest issues this body has ever face: whether this nation will finally guarantee its people the right to live free from the fear of illness and death, which can be prevented by decent health care for all."

What.an.idiot! Fear of illness and death prevented by health care? Even Jesus didn't promise that in this world.

PD

Janet, I read Reid's comments about fear of illness and death to my sweetie.

Her reply: "Yeah, but we'll still have Democrats to fear."

Pagar

"He left $700 million to his heirs. "

Anyone want to guess where that money came from?

maryrose

Janet:
So true! These liberals really buy this pie in the sky everyone is entitled garbage. How about people who are now unemployed, my brother, or living paycheck to paycheck. Where are the jobs? The latest numbers on these fictitious jobs saved is a joke. Shame on the Obama administration for screwing up the stimulus so badly!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame