So much for governing from the center

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmiableLabs

I have heard him interviewed many times and he is an environmental whack-0. He is in favor of $10 a gallon gasoline to weed people off of fossil fuels. He wants to outlaw all SUVs and all pick-ups, and mandate 40mpg on all new cars.

He wrote an article about global warming causing Hurricane Katrina. He wrote another article linking mercury to childhood autism. Neither have any basis in fact.

He opposes all new oil drilling everywhere, he opposes nuclear power, he opposes clean coal, he is a huge advocate of wind power except when it is in his backyard of Nantucket Sound.

---

I thought RFK wrote the autism article in 2005 when much less was know about the widely suspected link. I have read where Global Warming is expected to intensify weather and some suggest it may cause shifts in weather patterns but I had not read that it was the cause of Katrina.

Had not seen the other articles but would be interested in reading them if you have the links.

Here is something I found interesting:

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/...y_two_to_know/

Best Regards,

Joe S.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joe S.

While President-elect Obama may be a lightweight to some, it is worth pointing out that 52% of those that voted found him to be the superior lightweight when compared to all other options presented.

---

Two points on this:
I'm no fan of Howard Stern, but his street interviews of Obama supporters (we'll never really know if these individuals actually voted) and their total lack of knowledge of the issues was astounding. Not to mention that they even thought Palin was Obama's running mate.

If these individuals did vote (and others like them), then our voting system doesn't really prove it's anything but a popularity contest ... and the basis for the "popularity" of one candidate over the other is quite uninformed at best. Were there more voters of this type for Obama than for McCain. Nobody could really answer that question, I don't think. Anybody for either party with such limited knowledge of what's going on with the issues makes a joke of the election process.

Secondly, so little is mentioned about ACORN with whom Obama was associated for quite a long term ... actually being a trainer for the corps of people to find new voter registrants. The methods for which ACORN is being prosecuted in multiple states, if left unchecked, make a mockery of the election system. It wouldn't matter to me which party they supported. In this case they happen to be Obama supportive.

These two things make me wonder whether it's even worth voting anymore. Is it worth trying to be informed to make as good a choice as possible when such a vote is so easily over-ridden by hundreds of other votes that have a whimsical basis for their choices?

I would agree that there should be no discriminaton on who is allowed to vote, but it sure does seem that there should be some way to improve the quality of voter information available rather than just leaving it to the media and campaign ads and speeches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmiableLabs

I have heard him interviewed many times and he is an environmental whack-0. He is in favor of $10 a gallon gasoline to weed people off of fossil fuels. He wants to outlaw all SUVs and all pick-ups, and mandate 40mpg on all new cars.

He wrote an article about global warming causing Hurricane Katrina. He wrote another article linking mercury to childhood autism. Neither have any basis in fact.

He opposes all new oil drilling everywhere, he opposes nuclear power, he opposes clean coal, he is a huge advocate of wind power except when it is in his backyard of Nantucket Sound.

---

An elaboration:

He opposes wind turbines off the coast of the Kennedy compound.

A couple of additions:

He flies around in his private jet.
He has a fleet to cars.

How come I don't see anyone on that list associated with the Arabian Horse Association? You know, someone like a judges and stewards commissioner. I hear there are great people in this organization to appoint to high positions in government.

How come there are no socialists on the list? Or are there? Can someone please point them out?

Yahoo is reporting that Eric Holder may be a candidate for AG. That is an appointment far scarier than Janet Reno in my book

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Gutermuth

Yahoo is reporting that Eric Holder may be a candidate for AG. That is an appointment far scarier than Janet Reno in my book

---

If the right was willing to accept the selection and confirmation of AG Alberto Gonzalez, it may be difficult for them to mount an effective effort to stop Mr. Holder.

Just A Thought Regards,

Joe S.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joe S.

If the right was willing to accept the selection and confirmation of AG Alberto Gonzalez, it may be difficult for them to mount an effective effort to stop Mr. Holder.

Just A Thought Regards,

Joe S.

---

I hope the "right" use their filibuster to protect my second amendment rights and to force the "left" to nominate and approve moderate (rather then liberal) Supreme Court Justices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Gutermuth

Yahoo is reporting that Eric Holder may be a candidate for AG.

---

Here in Chicagoland there is a lot of talk the machine is pushing for Patrick Fitzgerald as AG. They want all these investigations into Rezko, Blagojevich, Giannoulias, Daley, and ultimately possibly Obama himself, to all go away.

Gonzalles was an improvement on Ashcroft

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Gutermuth

Yahoo is reporting that Eric Holder may be a candidate for AG. That is an appointment far scarier than Janet Reno in my book

---

Bob, I would think he would be a man after your own heart -- originally appointed by Ronald Reagan, served as acting AG under Bush, and managed to keep Chiquita Banana execs out of jail despite their support of death squads in Columbia.:p