Jeannie B.'s Comments
Page 1 of 86  first | prev | next 
Dec 28, 2009 | recommended: 11 | comments: 111
in reply to a comment by Bruce K.
Jeannie B. Dec 28, 2009, 10:22pm EST
Pres. Bush had the advantage of an opposition party whose sole agenda was not to defeat anything and everything he proposed, even at the expense of the American people. Pres. Obama has no such luxury.

Right now, if the Dems proposed a tax-lowering bill giving a 100% guaranteed living-wage job to every American, the Party of No would do their level best to kill it. Then when the jobs didn't pan out, they'd blame the Dems. In other words SOP for these jerks.
Dec 23, 2009 | recommended: 5 | comments: 12
Jeannie B. Dec 23, 2009, 1:35pm EST
I'm sure you'll get many a "Bah humbug" from the Right!
Dec 20, 2009 | recommended: 10 | comments: 30
in reply to a comment by Mary Ann S.
Jeannie B. Dec 21, 2009, 7:29pm EST
When the question is "guns or butter", the answer always seems to be "guns" - especially from the Right. They want to believe that an individual's need for the basic necessities is self-inflicted.
Dec 15, 2009 | recommended: 3 | comments: 87
Jeannie B. Dec 17, 2009, 4:17pm EST
And the temperature in a certain area on a certain day has what relevance to a discussion on climate?
Dec 15, 2009 | recommended: 3 | comments: 87
in reply to a comment by Char H.
Jeannie B. Dec 17, 2009, 4:16pm EST
"What about all the other times it happened, when man didn't exist? " It didn't happen as fast, nor to such a degree.
Dec 15, 2009 | recommended: 3 | comments: 87
in reply to a comment by Angela A.
Jeannie B. Dec 17, 2009, 4:13pm EST
That's true -- even if the deniers are right and climate change isn't our fault even in part. Which is why I wonder why they want so badly to keep on keepin' on. Why not change, if (as they claim) it makes no difference?
Dec 15, 2009 | recommended: 3 | comments: 87
in reply to a comment by Rude D.
Jeannie B. Dec 17, 2009, 2:11pm EST
Deforestation is anthropogenic. You're not helping your argument by saying that one man-made cause is doing what another man-made cause is not.
Dec 15, 2009 | recommended: 3 | comments: 87
in reply to a comment by Chris W.
Jeannie B. Dec 17, 2009, 2:08pm EST
" It doesn't help that most of the hysteria was based on the group who has been proven to have "cooked" the data." Proven? By whom? Or by what? A series of heavily cherry-picked emails?

You still haven't answered the question of why we should pay more attention to scientists whose discipline is not climatology. I wouldn't listen to a climatologist speaking on physics or paleontology; why should I listen to a physicist theorizing on climatology?
Dec 15, 2009 | recommended: 3 | comments: 87
in reply to a comment by Georgiana S.
Jeannie B. Dec 17, 2009, 2:01pm EST
How can a naturally-occurring species (i.e. homo sapiens) be called an "interloper"?
Dec 15, 2009 | recommended: 3 | comments: 87
in reply to a comment by K K.
Jeannie B. Dec 17, 2009, 1:55pm EST
What does all that have to do with anything?
Dec 12, 2009 | recommended: 1 | comments: 275
Jeannie B. Dec 15, 2009, 4:38pm EST
All these arguments as to whether the hacked emails "prove" or "disprove" anything, or as to the anthropogenic nature of the current climate change still haven't answered my main question:

Even if it's all BS, does that mean that it'd be stupid/useless/contrary to humankind's best interest to do all we can to conserve our natural resources?
Dec 12, 2009 | recommended: 1 | comments: 275
in reply to a comment by Sandre M.
Jeannie B. Dec 15, 2009, 4:30pm EST
In any endeavor, there will always be those who do not want to believe a given conclusion, even when shown the evidence. Marilyn and other climate-change deniers would rather believe in mind-control or other strongarm attempts at control by unnamed "others" (usually "the government") than in anything else. IMHO that's because, if they belived that climate change was anthropogenic, they'd have to do something to change it -- that would take too much effort.
Dec 12, 2009 | recommended: 1 | comments: 275
in reply to a comment by Matthew M.
Jeannie B. Dec 15, 2009, 4:23pm EST
...not allowing anyone to disagree with their faulty science... So have they come after you yet? Has the scientific community come up with a Gestapo-like organization to prevent the expression of contradictory opinion?

Get real.
Dec 12, 2009 | recommended: 1 | comments: 275
in reply to a comment by Gary (The Eclectic) Timothy
Jeannie B. Dec 15, 2009, 4:19pm EST
"What 'everybody knows' -- ain't so!"

It's just as true with science as with everything else. But when empirical data seem to contradict scientific theory, scientists test the new data in order to prove/disprove the theory. The general public will tend to hold onto their opinion regardless of contradictory evidence -- Galileo was excommunicated for his belief that the Earth revolved around the Sun, and was pardoned centuries later (and centuries after the helocentric paradigm was "common knowledge").
Dec 15, 2009 | recommended: 1 | comments: 61
Jeannie B. Dec 15, 2009, 4:09pm EST
I get really steamed when I hear pundits (especially from the Right) declare the Obama administration a failure because they haven't, in less than a year, fixed all the problems that have been brewing for years!

I agree that we need to be patient and let the process proceed -- as long as progress is happening. But the endless carping and not-so-subtle attempts to derail anything this administration proposes are getting really old. IMHO, the Blue Dogs and Joe Lieberman need to take off their respective masks and declare themselves to be what they are -- Republicans in drag.
Dec 9, 2009 | comments: 13
in reply to a comment by Sheryl O.
Jeannie B. Dec 11, 2009, 7:28pm EST
I did hear that they were changing it to make it clear that God shows His favor by making us wealthy.
Dec 11, 2009 | comments: 55
Jeannie B. Dec 11, 2009, 2:24pm EST
I'm glad that someone is finally cutting through the hype and bull**** and doing something worthwhile! Opening up Medicare makes lots of sense all the way around. It's a program with which people are familiar (thus not as frightening as something entirely new), plus has the advantage of being affordable to those with limited incomes.

My enthusiasm could be partly because I'm 59, but it's more than that. Once the conservatives see that such a public/private intermix can work, there'll be lots of folks wanting to take part in the program who once opposed it. At least, I hope so.... I'd hate to see the Party of NO derail a good program just for spite.
Dec 9, 2009 | recommended: 1 | comments: 118
Jeannie B. Dec 10, 2009, 3:43pm EST
Can any of you "yeah but it was cold here" deniers define "counterintuitive"? As in, my hyperactive child is calmed by drinking caffeine (a known stimulant).

"Climate change" means a change in the climate, not a fluctuation in the weather. But I think most of those who pooh-pooh the theory are trying to absolve themselves of the responsibility to change their behavior. Unfortunately, no one can predict the "tipping point" where lots of atmospheric CO2 becomes too much. Do you want to be responsible for the Earth becoming a second Venus?
Dec 9, 2009 | recommended: 1 | comments: 118
in reply to a comment by Wyoming Catt (The Militant Midget)
Jeannie B. Dec 10, 2009, 3:32pm EST
"Because the UN lackys control the scientific journals... " Just because you disagree with their findings, suddenly the scientific journals are conspiring?

And you say you're not paranoid.
Dec 9, 2009 | comments: 70
in reply to a comment by Winston Smith
Jeannie B. Dec 10, 2009, 3:28pm EST
Define "Marxist", Winston. You knee-jerk conservatives have made "Communist/Socialist/Marxist" as perjoratives, using them to counter anything you disagree with.
Page 1 of 86  first | prev | next 
 
Jeannie B.
Spokane, Wa
Gather | Friends | Groups | Share
About Gather | Engagement Marketing | Make New Friends | Gather Points | Advertise on Gather | Gather Press | Privacy | Terms of Service | Community Guidelines
Books | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Health | Moms | Money | News | Politics | Spirituality | Sports | Travel | Writing
Version 16961, "Pacino"; Copyright © 2009 Gather Inc. All rights reserved.