Madam Speaker, you recently asked: Congress is working on legislation to address global warming - what would you like to see included? After reading the responses to your question it appears that most of the people were saying, do nothing. So my question is, will you view this at face and do nothing or will you go forward with gorefic facts (psuedoscience at best) and intrude further into american lives?
2007-05-22 06:26:24 · 9 answers · asked by Michael G 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
1) She won't read your question.
2) She won't read any of the answers to "her" question.
3) She didn't write the question.
4) She does not really think.
This is all for show.
2007-05-22 07:36:28 · answer #1 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
Psuedoscience- go to junkscience.com and read about greenhouse gas effects. Al Gore was duped and yet doesn't have the fortitude to come forward and put his story in perspective. The best thing is the plight of his polar bears. The fact is that 17 out of 18 species of polar bears are so successful that there numbers are growing. Al has us believing they're starving and can't find a solid piece of ice to stand on. Poppy cock!
No argument that the earth is warming. It's done it several times in recorded history and also was cooling as late as the 70's. The scare then was the next ice age. Mars is warming right now as well. SUVs aren't to blame. Increased solar activity is. The same solar activity is warming our planet along with about ten other top contributors. Man is down around number ten or lower.
I'll make a deal with you greenies- When you first get every other nation in the world to contribute money, change their production techniques, curb their unclean burning methods- essentially take drastic steps to cut pollution, then I'll get on board with you. In the meantime, asking me to take personal responsibility for global warming while China looks like a smoke stack from outer space and John Travolta flies around in his personal Boeing 737, and Al Gore has a carbon footprint the size of Rhode Island....well you get my point.
2007-05-22 06:43:06 · answer #2 · answered by colorado_df 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Madam Speaker, You have recently stated the solution to Iraq is a "political" solution, not a military one. So why not send all our Congressmen to Iraq? Let them serve 15 month tours there, they can mentor the new parlement in Iraq, teach them all they know about graft and corruption, how to disengage themselves from their constituents like ours do. If you are serious about brining the troops home from Iraq, I don't know of a single soldier/marine who couldn't pack his belongings in less than an hour and board a plane. Why wait till 2008? You want the solution, let the aftermath be on your watch. For that matter, bring all the troops home from all over the world, close our bases in Europe and the Far East, and let the soldiers deal with our own border security. We could become an isolationist country like China...it seems to have served them well so far.
I believe it is impossible to teach an emerging democracy to elect a non-corrupt governing body when we have so miserably failed to do so in our own 200+ years.
2007-05-22 06:51:44 · answer #3 · answered by jadi 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh, when it comes to "global warming" Little Nancy will dance to the tune of her San Francisco voters, most definitely!
2007-05-22 06:30:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
sure the unhinged lizards of the indoors fringe ultimately are eating interior the direction of the bitter husk of your outer excremental ectoplasm. The sanity of Quaker penguins redeems the plastic evangelist stratum of the non-organic diatribe. The tube pushed electrostasis of an inert plebiscite demands a carbohydratic evening snack ate up with lactic derivatives. I accede on your greater suited homunculosis.
2016-11-05 00:18:28 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Psuedoscience, lol.
Come on, point out some of the psuedoscience....
2007-05-22 06:30:01 · answer #6 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Considering that there were over 1700 the last time I looked, it would be a miracle if she could even read all of them.
2007-05-22 06:29:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why pick on her, friend? What about the others who have been on here, everyone from Jay-Z to Hillary ..... why are you singling out Nancy?
2007-05-22 06:36:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
of course not.
she's looking for good, pithy comments supporting her own positions.
dissenters need not respond and will not be listened to
2007-05-22 06:30:56 · answer #9 · answered by Spock (rhp) 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋