I'm surprised we didn't discuss this here. This situation was not what Obama needed while trying to get health care reform through the congress. If their vetting let this guy through, then who else with skeletons in their closest was let in?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/06/AR2009090601054.html?hpid=topnews
QuoteVan Jones's Resignation Reveals Vetting Lapse
By Scott Wilson and Garance Franke-Ruta
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, September 6, 2009; 3:38 PM
The resignation of White House environmental adviser Van Jones has revealed a lapse in the administration's vetting procedures that, nearly eight months into his tenure, delivered President Obama with an unwelcome distraction as he begins an important week on behalf of his health-care reform initiative.
Jones's resignation late Saturday came amid spreading calls for his ouster by Republicans leaders, who have been critical of past statements and associations that have also taken the White House by surprise. His departure as a top adviser to the White House Council on Environmental Quality leaves Obama's push to create so-called green jobs, which he has called an essential element of the more stable economy is trying to build, without a leader.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs on Sunday explained the resignation on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," saying Jones "decided that the agenda of this president was bigger than any one individual." The president does not endorse Jones's past statements and actions, Gibbs said, "but he thanks him for his service."
Jones, a towering figure in the environmental movement, had issued two public apologies in recent days. One was for signing a petition in 2004 from the group 911Truth.org that questioned whether Bush administration officials "may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war," and the other for using a crude term to describe Republicans in a speech he gave before joining the administration.
His previous involvement with the now-defunct Bay Area radical group Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM), which had Marxist roots, also emerged as an issue. And on Saturday his advocacy on behalf of death-row inmate Mumia Abu-Jamal, who was convicted of shooting a Philadelphia police officer in 1981, threatened to further widen the controversy.
A White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a personnel matter, said Sunday that Jones's past was not studied as intensively as other advisers because of his relatively low rank.
Jones's position, for example, did not require Senate confirmation. So he avoided the kind of vetting Cabinet officials were subjected to.
Those procedures were tightened during the transition after a history of unpaid taxes emerged during the confirmation of two high-profile nominees -- Timothy F. Geithner and Thomas A. Daschle. Geithner was later confirmed as treasury secretary, but Daschle withdrew from consideration as Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Moreover, as an adviser to the Council on Environmental Quality, rather than to Obama directly, Jones's past was not reviewed to the same degree as the more senior "assistants to the president" and other top advisers inside the West Wing. The result was the recent revelations that, administration officials acknowledge, caught the White House off guard.
"He was not as thoroughly vetted as other administration officials," the official said. "It's fair to say there were unknowns."
The announcement that Jones was stepping down came minutes after midnight Sunday morning. In a written statement, Jones said, "On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me. They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide."
He continued: "I have been inundated with calls -- from across the political spectrum -- urging me to 'stay and fight.' But I came here to fight for others, not for myself. I cannot in good conscience ask my colleagues to expend precious time and energy defending or explaining my past. We need all hands on deck, fighting for the future."
Fox News Channel host Glenn Beck launched the drive against Jones. Beck's campaign grew more vitriolic after a group Jones founded in 2005, ColorofChange.org, led an advertising boycott against his show to protest Beck's assertion that Obama is a racist.
Republican calls for Jones to step down have growing over the weekend. Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) called on Jones to resign Friday, saying in a statement, "His extremist views and coarse rhetoric have no place in this administration or the public debate."
Senator Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.) urged Congress to investigate Jones's "fitness" for the position, writing in an open letter, "Can the American people trust a senior White House official that is so cavalier in his association with such radical and repugnant sentiments?" On Saturday, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, wrote on his Twitter account, "Van Jones has to go."
It became clear Friday, after Gibbs declined to defend Jones, that a resignation was likely in the offing. Gibbs said only that Jones "continues to work for the administration" -- but did not state that the adviser enjoyed the full support of President Obama.
Jones had worked for the administration's environmental council since March. He was a civil-rights activist in California before turning to environmental and energy issues, and he won wide praise before joining the Obama administration for articulating a broad vision of a green economy Democrats could embrace.
"The political environment is rough, and so these things get magnified," David Axelrod, an Obama senior adviser, said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "But the bottom line is that he showed his commitment to the cause of creating green jobs in this country by removing himself as an issue, and I think that took a great deal of commitment on his part."
Staff writers Anne E. Kornblut and Juliet Eilperin contributed to this report.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2009, 03:13:18 PM
If their vetting let this guy through, then who else with skeletons in their closest was let in?
Quote
"A White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a personnel matter, said Sunday that Jones's past was not studied as intensively as other advisers because of his relatively low rank.
Jones's position, for example, did not require Senate confirmation. So he avoided the kind of vetting Cabinet officials were subjected to.
Those procedures were tightened during the transition after a history of unpaid taxes emerged during the confirmation of two high-profile nominees -- Timothy F. Geithner and Thomas A. Daschle. Geithner was later confirmed as treasury secretary, but Daschle withdrew from consideration as Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Moreover, as an adviser to the Council on Environmental Quality, rather than to Obama directly, Jones's past was not reviewed to the same degree as the more senior "assistants to the president" and other top advisers inside the West Wing. The result was the recent revelations that, administration officials acknowledge, caught the White House off guard.
"He was not as thoroughly vetted as other administration officials," the official said. "It's fair to say there were unknowns."
Noob.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2009, 03:13:18 PM
In a written statement, Jones said, "On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me. They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide."
Poor Van. :(
I mounted a viscous smear campaign in my bathroom today.
Quote from: The Brain on September 06, 2009, 04:31:18 PM
I mounted a viscous smear campaign in my bathroom today.
lolz.
I don't even know who this guy is.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2009, 04:42:58 PM
I don't even know who this guy is.
He was the "green jobs czar". And apparently a complete nutter in the vein of Jeremiah Wright, no wonder Obama liked him.
Well anyway, he doesn't look dutch.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2009, 05:53:12 PM
Well anyway, he doesn't look dutch.
Maybe he's related to Van Morrison.
The Obama administration is certainly going to be noted for its disloyalty and cowardice, isn't it?
We haven't really had a good putsch in DC personnel since Nixon. They impeached Clinton, but for some reason, they let him keep his job.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on September 06, 2009, 06:19:16 PM
We haven't really had a good putsch in DC personnel since Nixon. They impeached Clinton, but for some reason, they let him keep his job.
Because he wasn't convicted.
Sounds like a typical bay area nutjob.
Quote from: garbon on September 07, 2009, 12:50:44 PM
Sounds like a typical bay area nutjob.
Yeah, surely if they're mainstream enough to head the House, "green jobs czar" should be a non-issue.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 06, 2009, 05:47:31 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2009, 04:42:58 PM
I don't even know who this guy is.
He was the "green jobs czar". And apparently a complete nutter in the vein of Jeremiah Wright, no wonder Obama liked him.
I don't know about everyone else, but I'm beginning to worry more about the radicals in the White House than the ones in the Middle East. Someone remind me why I voted for this fool again?!
This guy wasn't even vetted properly? Well, at least that explains some and gives the administration some wiggle room, though it's embarrassing to admit that lack of vetting anyway. Jones should have resigned. It wasn't a smear campaign mounted against him, it was his own words, views and what he said he believed in that got the attention leading to this.
I'm with Jaron a bit. From what I've been hearing in the news lately there may be more Czars which will come under similar scrutiny. About 37 Czars, most who do not get approval by Congress, have their own little "fiefdom", with a Federal budget to go with it and accountable only to the President. But even so, if the Czars come to the Congress's attention, or the hapless media even, at least pressure can be brought to bear.
Van Jones?
What a weird name...Bizarre mix of Dutch and Welsh.
Who cares whether or not he was vetted? You'd think the administration would have a little more courage, what with them having to plow through all sorts of anti-American statements made by Obama's friends, mentors and wife, pretty much since the minute Obama became a serious candidate. If he's the guy you want, stand by him.
You know, that was Bush's most admirable trait: His loyalty to his friends and allies. It got him into hot water sometimes, but he came off much better than Obama has.
Quote from: Neil on September 08, 2009, 07:49:04 AM
Who cares whether or not he was vetted? You'd think the administration would have a little more courage, what with them having to plow through all sorts of anti-American statements made by Obama's friends, mentors and wife, pretty much since the minute Obama became a serious candidate. If he's the guy you want, stand by him.
You know, that was Bush's most admirable trait: His loyalty to his friends and allies. It got him into hot water sometimes, but he came off much better than Obama has.
Yep, and if this is the guy the Obama admin wants, then they have to face the pressure over it too. They really don't need the hassle though, so they're a bit lucky in this case, since he wasn't vetted. Rather than Obama having to eventually toss the guy under what must now be a very crowded bus. Or keep him and face more and more irritation by voters and Repubs.
I can't find the quote now but I read somewhere that people would rather turn on a weak ruler than a harsh one. If I have one criticism to make against Obama is this will to compromise to the point of compromising. There's a fringe of conservatives who will do everything in their power to hinder his admisnistration, even when their help could turn a bad situation around. They see nothing but their narrow world view.
G.
Why would a conservative want Obama to succeed at anything?
Obama's learning curve is pretty steep. Here is hoping he can get this ship righted soon.
Quote from: Neil on September 08, 2009, 08:15:09 AM
Why would a conservative want Obama to succeed at anything?
They are the ones usually harping endlessly about patriotism. They were quick enough to label traitors those who questioned some of the very questionable decisions of the Cheney administration. Yet now, when the welfare of the country is in the balance, some of them go out of their way to cause trouble. In my mind *they* are the traitors!
G.
Quote from: Grallon on September 08, 2009, 08:35:42 AM
They are the ones usually harping endlessly about patriotism. They were quick enough to label traitors those who questioned some of the very questionable decisions of the Cheney administration. Yet now, when the welfare of the country is in the balance, some of them go out of their way to cause trouble. In my mind *they* are the traitors!
G.
Good. I'd rather them throw up distraction, preventing Obama and co from screwing things up.
Quote from: Grallon on September 08, 2009, 08:35:42 AM
Quote from: Neil on September 08, 2009, 08:15:09 AM
Why would a conservative want Obama to succeed at anything?
They are the ones usually harping endlessly about patriotism. They were quick enough to label traitors those who questioned some of the very questionable decisions of the Cheney administration. Yet now, when the welfare of the country is in the balance, some of them go out of their way to cause trouble. In my mind *they* are the traitors!
The welfare of the country is never and always in the balance. Besides, why would a conservative be interested in having Obama increase his popularity, and thus run through all sorts of things that would be intolerable to a normal person?
Quote from: Grallon on September 08, 2009, 08:35:42 AM
Quote from: Neil on September 08, 2009, 08:15:09 AM
Why would a conservative want Obama to succeed at anything?
They are the ones usually harping endlessly about patriotism. They were quick enough to label traitors those who questioned some of the very questionable decisions of the Cheney administration. Yet now, when the welfare of the country is in the balance, some of them go out of their way to cause trouble. In my mind *they* are the traitors!
The only one's who love to throw around the words traitor, treason, unpatriotic, and un-American are the Democrats. Everytime they're critizised for anything they immediately jump up and scream that they're patriotism is being attacked all the while endlessly accusing the Republicans as being unamerican for having the temerity to disagree with them. It's the oldest page out of the Democratic playbook.
Quote from: KRonn on September 08, 2009, 07:42:37 AM
This guy wasn't even vetted properly? Well, at least that explains some and gives the administration some wiggle room, though it's embarrassing to admit that lack of vetting anyway. Jones should have resigned. It wasn't a smear campaign mounted against him, it was his own words, views and what he said he believed in that got the attention leading to this.
The reason he wasn't vetted by the WH was that Michelle Obama and senior WH advisor Valerie Jarrett both knew him well and basically vouched for him.
Hey Hans, what ever happened to Claude Allen?
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 05:06:41 PM
Hey Hans, what ever happened to Claude Allen?
Wasn't he in
BJ and the Bear?
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 05:06:41 PM
Hey Hans, what ever happened to Claude Allen?
As usual you fail at making a point.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 05:11:06 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:09:18 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 05:06:41 PM
Hey Hans, what ever happened to Claude Allen?
As usual you fail at making a point.
What happened again?
He was caught shoplifting and was fired. It has no relevance to the Van Jones incident.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 05:52:15 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:22:46 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 05:11:06 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:09:18 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 05:06:41 PM
Hey Hans, what ever happened to Claude Allen?
As usual you fail at making a point.
What happened again?
He was caught shoplifting and was fired. It has no relevance to the Van Jones incident.
Was he particularly well vetted?
Did he have a record at the time he joined the WH? No? See, you still are too stupid to make a point.
I didn't think Van Jones did either. Anyway wasn't this all brought up by the same "nobodies" with the conspiracy theories about the Presidents do good in school speech.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:18:08 PM
I didn't think Van Jones did either. Anyway wasn't this all brought up by the same "nobodies" with the conspiracy theories about the Presidents do good in school speech.
Actually, yes. He had a record from the Rodney King riots. And he was well known to the Obama team who had followed his career for years. And yet they could think of nothing wrong with bringing a nutjob whow embrace every crazy conspiracy and advocated every insane cause for the last 16 years into the WH. But I guess it's all a matter of perspective. If you can't find anything wrong in associating with Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, or Khalidi, why should you think that there is anything objectionable about Van Jones. To Obama those are mainstream people.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:36:11 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:18:08 PM
I didn't think Van Jones did either. Anyway wasn't this all brought up by the same "nobodies" with the conspiracy theories about the Presidents do good in school speech.
Actually, yes. He had a record from the Rodney King riots. And he was well known to the Obama team who had followed his career for years. And yet they could think of nothing wrong with bringing a nutjob whow embrace every crazy conspiracy and advocated every insane cause for the last 16 years into the WH. But I guess it's all a matter of perspective. If you can't find anything wrong in associating with Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, or Khalidi, why should you think that there is anything objectionable about Van Jones. To Obama those are mainstream people.
Dude, fuck you, you're not even a real American. Take your neo-nazi ass back to Germany.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:36:11 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:18:08 PM
I didn't think Van Jones did either. Anyway wasn't this all brought up by the same "nobodies" with the conspiracy theories about the Presidents do good in school speech.
Actually, yes. He had a record from the Rodney King riots. And he was well known to the Obama team who had followed his career for years. And yet they could think of nothing wrong with bringing a nutjob whow embrace every crazy conspiracy and advocated every insane cause for the last 16 years into the WH. But I guess it's all a matter of perspective. If you can't find anything wrong in associating with Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, or Khalidi, why should you think that there is anything objectionable about Van Jones. To Obama those are mainstream people.
What was he convicted of?
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:46:16 PMDude, fuck you, you're not even a real American. Take your neo-nazi ass back to Germany.
He's more American than you are, you Marxist traitor.
Quote from: derspiess on September 08, 2009, 06:53:17 PM
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:46:16 PMDude, fuck you, you're not even a real American. Take your neo-nazi ass back to Germany.
He's more American than you are, you Marxist traitor.
Hans has taken a person stake in the well-being of the country. Fireblade would be more than happy to sell out his country for a taste of the Mexican leaf.
Why you people don't remove the citizenship of anyone who has used drugs is a mystery to me.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:47:08 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:36:11 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:18:08 PM
I didn't think Van Jones did either. Anyway wasn't this all brought up by the same "nobodies" with the conspiracy theories about the Presidents do good in school speech.
Actually, yes. He had a record from the Rodney King riots. And he was well known to the Obama team who had followed his career for years. And yet they could think of nothing wrong with bringing a nutjob whow embrace every crazy conspiracy and advocated every insane cause for the last 16 years into the WH. But I guess it's all a matter of perspective. If you can't find anything wrong in associating with Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, or Khalidi, why should you think that there is anything objectionable about Van Jones. To Obama those are mainstream people.
What was he convicted of?
Not convicted, but arrested.
QuoteVan Jones is President Barack Obama's newly appointed "Green Jobs Czar."
Jones' official title is Special Advisor on Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation for the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
The 41-year-old Yale Law School graduate and civil rights lawyer is also the founder of California's Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, "a non-profit agency for justice, opportunities and peace."
Sounds idyllic, but Jones' past isn't so pastoral.
The Ella Baker Center was connected to STORM (Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement), a "multi-racial activist collective with Marxist influences" with which Jones was involved.
In 1992, Van Jones founded another STORM project, Bay Area PoliceWatch, a "hotline and lawyer-referral service for victims and survivors of police abuse." This is fitting, perhaps, since Jones was himself arrested and detained briefly during a protest after the Rodney King verdict that same year.
Jones told the East Bay Express in 2005:
I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th [1992], and then the verdicts came down on April 29th. By August, I was a communist. (...)
I met all these young radical people of color – I mean really radical: communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary.
Like a character out of The Big Chill, Van Jones seems to have evolved from radical activist to Establishment insider. Perhaps only a left-wing administration incapable of recognizing irony would put a self-described communist in charge of creating jobs.
Luckily for Van Jones, and Obama's many other "Czars" with dubious credentials and troubling backgrounds, his new job was not dependent upon making it through Congressional hearings.
For more info: Earlier this week, we looked at Obama's new "Science Czar" John P. Holdren, a longtime radical whose beliefs about ecology are tinged with misanthropy
Oh. Well that's not really a record then. Shit GWB had gotten arrested as well (and was actually convicted of a minor thing).
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 08:04:59 PM
Oh. Well that's not really a record then. Shit GWB had gotten arrested as well (and was actually convicted of a minor thing).
Communism is no minor thing.
Quote from: Neil on September 08, 2009, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 08:04:59 PM
Oh. Well that's not really a record then. Shit GWB had gotten arrested as well (and was actually convicted of a minor thing).
Communism is no minor thing.
Communism is a red herring.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 08:33:40 PM
Quote from: Neil on September 08, 2009, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 08:04:59 PM
Oh. Well that's not really a record then. Shit GWB had gotten arrested as well (and was actually convicted of a minor thing).
Communism is no minor thing.
Communism is a red herring.
Well, it was a red
menace, but it's pretty much discredited except among mental defectives or crackheads like Fireblade.
Seeing more about Van Jones. He said of 9/11 that "we deserved it". Said "white people poison black people"(because of pollution I think it is, or what ever else) he says on one of his videos that I saw. And more. He wasn't railroaded, he did it to himself. Pres Obama should be glad he came and went, more quietly. But the question is how and why was he there in the first place?
Also, not many, if any, media outlets even reported on this Czar, what he was saying, believed in, until he resigned. And I have to laugh at the claim of it being a right wing conspiracy. Get over it - the Dems will do well without left wingers like this in the lime light. Don't need it, or don't need more of it. Just as the Repubs don't need right wing zealots and wack jobs.
The fact is the guy was carefully vetted. He had a long distinguished record for professionalism and was generally recognized as a cheery, all-American sort of guy. Of course, there were concerns about substance abuse, rumours about his sexual preferences, and a somewhat messsy divorce, but he overcame that. And while he never won an Oscar, he was always deserveredly one of America's favorites.
So the fault did not lie in the vetting. No the problem - which no one could reasonably foresee - is that Van Johnson suddenly died before he could get his cabinet appointment, and this Van Jones character snuck in and assumed his identity without anyone noticing in time.
I've got my fingers crossed that he is replaced with Van Halen. :punk:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 09, 2009, 10:06:35 AM
The fact is the guy was carefully vetted. He had a long distinguished record for professionalism and was generally recognized as a cheery, all-American sort of guy. Of course, there were concerns about substance abuse, rumours about his sexual preferences, and a somewhat messsy divorce, but he overcame that. And while he never won an Oscar, he was always deserveredly one of America's favorites.
So the fault did not lie in the vetting. No the problem - which no one could reasonably foresee - is that Van Johnson suddenly died before he could get his cabinet appointment, and this Van Jones character snuck in and assumed his identity without anyone noticing in time.
:D
Quote from: Caliga on September 09, 2009, 10:31:30 AM
I've got my fingers crossed that he is replaced with Van Halen. :punk:
Van Helsing would be cool.
Quote from: dps on September 08, 2009, 09:05:41 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 08:33:40 PM
Quote from: Neil on September 08, 2009, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 08:04:59 PM
Oh. Well that's not really a record then. Shit GWB had gotten arrested as well (and was actually convicted of a minor thing).
Communism is no minor thing.
Communism is a red herring.
Well, it was a red menace, but it's pretty much discredited except among mental defectives or crackheads like Fireblade.
Well it
was a quote from a movie.
Now that we got this horrible Van Jones fellow out the way, hopefully we can replace him on CEQ with the kind of guy that Hans & co can get behind.
You know, someone like this guy: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/08/politics/08climate.html?ei=5090&en=22149dc70c0731d8&ex=1275883200&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 09, 2009, 06:03:49 PM
Now that we got this horrible Van Jones fellow out the way, hopefully we can replace him on CEQ with the kind of guy that Hans & co can get behind.
You know, someone like this guy: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/08/politics/08climate.html?ei=5090&en=22149dc70c0731d8&ex=1275883200&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
Wow, a NYTimes hatchet job, that'll convince anyone. :lol:
I'll do you one better http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10274412-38.html (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10274412-38.html). When it comes to the surpression of science you can't beat the Obamateur.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 09, 2009, 06:20:36 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 09, 2009, 06:03:49 PM
Now that we got this horrible Van Jones fellow out the way, hopefully we can replace him on CEQ with the kind of guy that Hans & co can get behind.
You know, someone like this guy: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/08/politics/08climate.html?ei=5090&en=22149dc70c0731d8&ex=1275883200&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
Wow, a NYTimes hatchet job, that'll convince anyone. :lol:
I'll do you one better http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10274412-38.html (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10274412-38.html). When it comes to the surpression of science you can't beat the Obamateur.
Reports that are skeptical of climate change should be supressed, just as those that posit an intelligent designer are.
Quote from: Neil on September 09, 2009, 06:38:17 PM
Reports that are skeptical of climate change should be supressed, just as those that posit an intelligent designer are.
It's always funny how religious whackos like to claim "science" is on their side, even when reality clashes with their delusions. Global warming advocates are like jehovah witness nutjobs, blindly following a 'proven' doomsday only to revise that date when it proves to be wrong to a new 'proven' doomsday while pretending their previous doomsday never existed.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 09, 2009, 06:42:52 PM
Quote from: Neil on September 09, 2009, 06:38:17 PM
Reports that are skeptical of climate change should be supressed, just as those that posit an intelligent designer are.
It's always funny how religious whackos like to claim "science" is on their side, even when reality clashes with their delusions. Global warming advocates are like jehovah witness nutjobs, blindly following a 'proven' doomsday only to revise that date when it proves to be wrong to a new 'proven' doomsday while pretending their previous doomsday never existed.
Well, that's the crazies. But the majority of scientific opinion falls well short of 'apocalyptic'. Of course, it becomes apocalyptic once it reaches the public, because the public is extremely stupid and prone to panic.
Global warming is more dangerous than sexual predators, for example.
Quote from: Neil on September 09, 2009, 06:44:59 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 09, 2009, 06:42:52 PM
Quote from: Neil on September 09, 2009, 06:38:17 PM
Reports that are skeptical of climate change should be supressed, just as those that posit an intelligent designer are.
It's always funny how religious whackos like to claim "science" is on their side, even when reality clashes with their delusions. Global warming advocates are like jehovah witness nutjobs, blindly following a 'proven' doomsday only to revise that date when it proves to be wrong to a new 'proven' doomsday while pretending their previous doomsday never existed.
Well, that's the crazies. But the majority of scientific opinion falls well short of 'apocalyptic'. Of course, it becomes apocalyptic once it reaches the public, because the public is extremely stupid and prone to panic.
Global warming is more dangerous than sexual predators, for example.
Nonsense, sexual predators actually exist, even if the threat from them is hyped up by the media.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 09, 2009, 07:12:26 PM
Nonsense, sexual predators actually exist, even if the threat from them is hyped up by the media.
Climate change seems to exist. The scientists think so, at least.
Quote from: Neil on September 09, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 09, 2009, 07:12:26 PM
Nonsense, sexual predators actually exist, even if the threat from them is hyped up by the media.
Climate change seems to exist. The scientists think so, at least.
Hans' definition of science differs from you. Science isn't science for him unless it gets an endorsement from the National Review's editorial board.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 09, 2009, 09:48:27 PM
Hans' definition of science differs from you. Science isn't science for him unless it gets an endorsement from the National Review's editorial board.
It runs in the family. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Physik)