gdp's Comments

Big Government : EXCLUSIVE: 1980 Memo Shows Gingrich Urged Reagan to Reach Out to Black Voters

Wed, 18 Jan 2012 20:50:17 +0000

I think this article here exposes Gingrich for the unprincipled phony that he is. The NAACP changed dramatically over the years. The people who earned respect for the organization are all gone now. It would be unprincipled to treat the group as though it should still represent that historical relationship. Yet, Newt saw it as a way of getting through to black voters, thinking only of himself. If he did understand the situation, then he's apparently presuming that black people don't. It's a glimpse into the mind of a totally self-centered and probably sociopathic compulsive liar.

Western Center For Journalism : Romney Admits He Won't End ObamaCare

Tue, 20 Dec 2011 23:14:14 +0000

Yes, you are correct. He and Romney both play a state-federal shell game, and it's on a lot more issues than just Obamacare. Both parties are pushing the same thing - federal expansion, concentration of power, and corruption. Democrats push something like Obamacare straight out - claiming it's for the little people against the wealthy. It's about time the (federal) government did something. Only they don't. They budget a huge amount to be spent and include a "mandate" for states to carry out. They allow states choices in how the mandate is carried out - basically to do what they're told to do and more of it if they want to. Republicans like Newt Romney support exactly the same thing - only they call it a states issue - and then laugh while you're not watching and finish the sentence - "to carry out the mandate."

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Tue, 20 Dec 2011 13:50:08 +0000

Nope. No one who's received funding from a Koch bros. foundation has ever presented any fake data. The fake data is all on your side. You're also cherry-picking the Soros history as well. He's been directly involved with the grandfather of the GW hoax, James Hansen, since at least the mid 1980s.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Tue, 20 Dec 2011 13:47:48 +0000

Actually no. There hasn't been evidence of warming for about a decade.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:53:19 +0000

The trial is over. You lost. You have no new significant evidence to present. Motion for retrial denied.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:35:55 +0000

The Koch brothers didn't make up any fake data and didn't provide support for anyone who did. They weren't involved in manipulating the research and there isn't a single scandal associated with their contributions to a limited number of political think tanks that have in turn, never misrepresented themselves in the process of commenting on the issue. I don't know if you're making money on this or not. But if you're just a useful idiot, it's time for you to wake up. Soros' involvement is for no other reason than to make money, and to do it by controlling and manipulating. Lying about the weather is extremely profitable if you're the only one who possesses the real data. Beyond that, the vast expanses of government corruption and trainloads of public money support his operation as well. It's a scam. It's not a political scam from the beginning. It's just a scam - for money. A Soros sponsored scam. Just because people on the left are easily recruited for such things doesn't logically lead to the conclusion that people on the right are equally corrupt in the opposite direction. That's just stupid.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:27:47 +0000

You're missing the main point here. We've been through all this already - more than once (many times). Just because you don't want to give up doesn't mean the rest of us need to repeat the process from scratch every time you or another political activist on the left or proxy for the organized crime network wants to re-post this nonsense. Boy who cried wolf - only difference is - there's no wolf out there in the woods. The stuff was just made up. We understand there's no danger in ignoring the next call and the one after that and the one after that ....

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:09:43 +0000

It's been shown that the warmers haven't made a scientific case. There is no actual evidence to support their bizarre claims. It in fact, isn't necessary to restart the process every time they repeat the junk science, no matter what spin they put on it, new or otherwise. Muller may have done a nice job of analyzing the fake data, but it's still fake data - garbage in, garbage out. So he presented nothing new. We already knew what the fake data was created to say.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:01:05 +0000

There were people before Al Gore. James Hansen for example. Wasn't it his book that inspired Gore to start the con?

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:59:43 +0000

For some people, it has something to do with political ideology. Takes all kinds. But the main driving force is money. This scam is like many others, just a lot, lot bigger. They were playing for trillions. Even if they don't get all they want, plenty of people have carted away a very large amount of money already.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:57:19 +0000

And don't forget the private funding, including funding from George Soros as well as his orchestration skills. He's made a bundle.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:52:03 +0000

You guys have been claiming that warmers are the only people qualified to comment on warming forever. It's not a new trick. You've also been pretending that warmers far outnumber the "skeptics" in the scientific community, which is entirely untrue (except based on your "consensus" in which only those who agree are counted). The warmers aren't super-scientists - far from it. Their goofy "science" (I wouldn't even call it that) "theories" (wouldn't call it that either) are easy to see through by a very wide range of qualified scientists. You don't need IPCC approval for that or a carbon exchange license through Al Gore. Conspiracy yes! Conspiracy "theory" - no. It's a fact. It's really really easy to create one of those when you can pay billions of dollars in public money to do it. Happens all the time. You're just demonstrating that you don't have a clue.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Mon, 12 Dec 2011 19:06:45 +0000

LOL! Oh, the old people who disagree with you have the wrong qualifications trick. Many years experience studying climate as a professional scientist can't claim to be a real scientist who studies climate. LOL. (yes, twice). Here's reality for you again: There is no actual scientific evidence supporting the catastrophic man-made global warming hypothesis; never was, never will be. It's a political agenda with a lot of money involved. Claims, even when illustrated by man-made computer programs (games) are not evidence. Fake data generated by those programs are not evidence. Analysis based on fake data generated by those programs is not evidence, just repetition of the fake data. It doesn't matter how many "scientists" are paid to agree. There is no actual scientific evidence supporting the catastrophic man-made global warming hypothesis; never was, never will be. It's a political agenda with a lot of money involved. If it was right, all you'd need would be one - with actual evidence.

Breitbart.tv : Et Tu, Beck? - Part III: Erratic Multimedia Star Pulls Race Card Again

Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:58:32 +0000

Newt claims all his "achievements" are conservative. That doesn't make it so.

Breitbart.tv : Et Tu, Beck? - Part III: Erratic Multimedia Star Pulls Race Card Again

Mon, 12 Dec 2011 09:56:12 +0000

Those of use who have followed politics and politicians closely for many years know that neither Gingrich nor Romney is good enough. They''re RINOs being pushed by the RINO establishment. Beck is right. I won't vote for either one. The advantage of leaving Obama in place over electing Newt or Mitt (which will probably happen if either is the Republican nominee - don't say it can't happen - just remember McCain) is that with Obama in office, people still understand that they need to fight against his agenda. The RINOs will fool people into thinking we don't; just like they're fooling some people now into thinking they're different.

Breitbart.tv : Et Tu, Beck? - Part III: Erratic Multimedia Star Pulls Race Card Again

Mon, 12 Dec 2011 09:45:27 +0000

The only thing wrong with calling Newt Gingrich a "progressive" is that it puts political spin on corruption. Gingrich is an anti-Constitutional Big Government RINO, that's for sure. (On his record, not on his dishonest politician's rhetoric.) But why? For some misguided ideas about making the world a better place by destroying individual freedom for the sake of a collectivist's dream? No, I don't think so. He's in it for the money like the rest. He's making his friends rich and he's done pretty well too. It's criminal, not ideological.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Sun, 11 Dec 2011 18:36:35 +0000

You're claiming something, that's all. You're repeating a claim. You're repeatedly claiming your claim is supported by science - just part of the claim you're repeating. UPDATE: Another ‘Top’ Global Warming Scientist Screams “It’s A Scam!!” -Top scientist resigns from post – admits Global Warming is a scam http://redwhitebluenews.com/?p=7670

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Sun, 11 Dec 2011 08:06:48 +0000

LOL! This isn't my first conversation with a warmer. I know this can go on forever. You haven't "shown" (i.e. demonstrated, proven, etc.) anything. You've repeated the claim. Repeating something, even ad nauseam, doesn't make it true.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Fri, 9 Dec 2011 10:36:31 +0000

You've given a typical warmer's response - ignore what's being said and continue repeating the claim. Of course I've looked into the science. That's why I was able to give a clear description of the problem above. That's why I'm able to form a conclusion. The results are in and nothing is going to change them. There is no new argument that can be presented as a work around for the fact that the actual evidence does not support AGW catostrophiism. That won't stop people from accepting money for publishing pseudo-scientific models with quotable text in support of a political agenda. But as a matter of real science, the AGW thing is not worth public concern, dramatic policy shifts, or large financial investments.

Big Government : Global Warming Alarmism on Thin Ice?

Thu, 8 Dec 2011 11:40:10 +0000

I'm not going to the suggested link to read anything. I have done a thorough investigation and am not impressed by continuing claims that are not supported by scientific evidence. There are models created by people who obviously have a political (financial) agenda. Building a model that corresponds to a claim isn't evidence, it's merely a demonstration of the claim. The models have been used to create fake data sets and then other warmers pretend the fake data is real data and process it in a way that makes their own point - often in a way that gives results that are independent even of the fake data. There is no actual scientific evidence supporting their claims and they're being downright dishonest even going so far as to claim that their results are based on scientific "theory." Computer games are built the same way as their models, designed to provide a particular behavior that the designer wants it to have. BTW: I am a well-qualified scientific (mathematical) modeler. I can in fact tell the difference between the real thing and a bogus one. This isn't the first time I've seen this game being played. My first investigation into fake science supporting a political agenda (they do it for the money) started in the late 1980s. I was so shocked by what I found that it took years before I could talk about it openly. Actually took me quite some time to fully believe what I found. Scientific dishonesty for money isn't rare; unfortunately. And when there's such a huge amount of politically controlled money involved - such as in the case of the global warming scam - anyone would be right to assume a lot of dishonesty. The real scientific perspective matches the good old common sense perspective. Warmers have made a bizarre claim. It's a suspicious claim that does not correspond to scientific or common knowledge. It would take a lot more than repeating the claims to be the least bit convincing. And doing things like showing the average temperature went up after the coldest point in the century doesn't prove humans caused the warming ... etc. etc. etc. At this point, warmers have been lying so consistently for so long, it's beyond time to dismiss the claims. Other than that, there are places where investigations are being held to determine whether some of the warmers should face criminal charges. They aren't all politically rigged, so that could be the fate of at least some of the members of this particular con.