Michelle Malkin » Cap-and-Tax 8 Watch: Dave Reichert’s rationalization

Cap-and-Tax 8 Watch: Dave Reichert’s rationalization

By Michelle Malkin • July 2, 2009 03:58 PM

Photoshop credit: Leo Alberti

I’m hearing from many old friends and readers that GOP Rep. Dave Reichert in Washington state is in hot water over his cap-and-tax vote.

KVI talk show host and GOP activist Kirby Wilbur says the vote was “make or break” for grass-roots conservatives in the 8th district. Party precinct officers, donors, and volunteers have been flooding phone lines in opposition to Reichert’s vote. Washington state conservatives on Facebook bombarded Wilbur’s page with hundreds and hundreds of comments after last Friday’s vote.

GOP party leaders have tried to quell the revolt, but are only digging themselves a deeper hole. Kirby told me he received a solicitation from the NRCC signed by John Boehner asking GOP activists for money to fight Democrats who voted for cap-and-tax.

Insert bitter laughter here.

At the same time the NRCC excoriates Democrats for the cap-and-tax vote, it continues to support, defend, and raise money for Republicans who voted the same way.

KTTH talk show host David Boze has audio of Reichert’s rationalization here. The word “delusional” comes to mind:

Heritage Foundation, and Wall Street Journal were predicting. He argued that it would cost around $.48 per day and that we would have better national security, more nuclear, coal and refining capabilities, and a cleaner environment with the bill. He argued that the conservative arguments against were mistaken, and that Washington specifically would be better off even though the bill was imperfect.

Not that he bothered to read it all before he determined that, of course…

Posted in: cap and trade

Printer Friendly

comments (87)

trackbacks (19)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

Newer Comments »

#735762

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:01 pm, AlohaGuy said:

Not that he bothered to read it all before he determined that, of course…

No, but he’s sure the mystery phrase to be inserted later will make it all right.
#735763

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:02 pm, hunter said:

The word “delusional” comes to mind:

So does the word “done”. Which is what these 8 should be if their constituents are paying any attention.
#735765

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:04 pm, sonofdy said:

He clearly didn’t read it because it does none of that.
#735766

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:07 pm, swede said:

Washington state conservatives

Geez, I thought that was a contradiction of terms. If you are a conservative there, God bless ya, and throw the bum out.
#735768

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:10 pm, JusDreamin said:

but he’s sure the mystery phrase to be inserted later will make it all right.

Natch. Bad enough when they do it in secret then rush the vote. Imagine the joy of having that little “place holder”, no need to even pretend, just tell the taxpayers to bend over.
delusional? Try lying sack. Out on a rail I say
#735770

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:13 pm, happy2behere said:

$.48/day per person? Or is it per family, kilowatt, light fixture, cow fluff, what?!? That guy is a dim bulb.
#735771

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:16 pm, JusDreamin said:

we would have better national security, more nuclear, coal and refining capabilities,

I must have missed that part of the bill. What a loser as well as lier.
It’s been a long while since I lived in Washington, but I seem to remember some pretty heavy coal use in SE Washington. I’m sure the residents will be thrilled to hear about all the wonderful opportunities for coal that crap and tax will bring. Nice job Davey boy.
#735773

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:19 pm, Ragspierre said:

News of our political barons…

The spending on overseas travel is up almost tenfold since 1995, and has nearly tripled since 2001, according to the Journal analysis of 60,000 travel records. Hundreds of lawmakers traveled overseas in 2008 at a cost of about $13 million. That’s a 50% jump since Democrats took control of Congress two years ago.

The cost of so-called congressional delegations, known among lawmakers as “codels,” has risen nearly 70% since 2005, when an influence-peddling scandal led to a ban on travel funded by lobbyists, according to the data.

Defund the Federal government. Term limit ALL of them, including the Supremes.
#735777

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:24 pm, bjc said:

*The NRCC should be asking for money to primary the rat bastard out of office, along with the other 7; Even if they don’t succeed with all, the message will eventually get out: The Democrats own these problems and have co-opted the “Death to America” slogan from Bin Laden.
*If conservative minded folks don’t like what either party is doing, then become “Independent of Party, but United for Liberty”.
#735781

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:27 pm, blues said:

So,when are people going to realize that it is time to throw them all out?Then make sure they stay out.I’m not referring to these eight,but to all incumbents.The politicians are far too concerned with political process to be at all concerned about the welfare of the country,or their job performance.NO MORE INCUMBENTS,TWO CYCLES.
#735783

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:31 pm, Hangfire said:

A limit of two-terms per legislator is going to take some radical action from the people, perhaps even violence.

The Legislative branch fiddles while America is dying.
#735787

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:36 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:

He argued that it would cost around $.48 per day and that we would have better national security, more nuclear, coal and refining capabilities, and a cleaner environment with the bill.

Wow! Who knew Sunshine Suppositories came in Cherry flavor now?
#735790

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:40 pm, Papa Louie said:

I have a suggestion for the GOP 8 who voted for the Cap and Trade bill. When they lose their seats in the next election they should get together and form a blues band. They could call their group “Cap’n Kirk and the Traders.”
#735794

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:45 pm, swede said:

Papa Louie said:
“Cap’n Kirk and the Traders.”

How about “You Schmooz, You Lose Blues Band”
#735802

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:48 pm, fourstringfuror said:

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:07 pm, swede said:
Washington state conservatives
Geez, I thought that was a contradiction of terms. If you are a conservative there, God bless ya, and throw the bum out.

We’re working on it.
#735803

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:49 pm, traveler49 said:

Washington specifically would be better off even though the bill was imperfect.

You want to take away my rights as a free man and I’m supposed to feel better off? No thank you man. You,sir, are an idiot! Next time read the bill and then apply some logic and common sense to it.
#735805

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:51 pm, HuskySig said:

Reichert sounds confused and is taking a play out of the Obama book. If you can’t defend your actions, keep talking in hopes your detractors forget the original question.
#735807

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:53 pm, WarEagle82 said:

In the end, term limits ought to be more acceptable than revolution even to brain damaged legislators.

Many of them may not figure that out until they see the torches though. Stupid is as stupid does…

This doesn’t have to end badly but my expectations are dwindling quickly.
#735809

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:55 pm, dadinseattle said:

To Swede…there are lots of us here…just not enough.
Like most states- most of the state is red except for the cities.
When thinking of a user name for MM site, I decided on mine for that very reason. Some people have given up on this state thinking it to be solid blue! Not true!

Back to Reichert, he says we don’t get the big picture.

The people I am hearing from think he is the one that does not “get it”! They are livid about this vote and not likely to ever support Reichert again, and are looking for a primary challenger already!
#735810

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:56 pm, CyberCipher said:

And now you know why it took Dave Reichert nearly 20 years to catch the Green River Killer.

My collie says:

The poor fellow is a bit slow, isn’t he?

He was matching his wits with a guy (Gary Ridgway) that had an IQ of 82 — and that’s a fact.
#735816

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:02 pm, right_on said:

Fire Him!

He abandoned conservative principles, so perhaps conservative principals should abandon him. Does anyone know what he was promised in return for vote to stifle liberty and free choice?

National GOP leaders better take notice…support conservative turncoats to their own risk. Leadership can be changed with a vote.
#735817

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:04 pm, swede said:

dadinseattle, Seattle is one of my favorite cities. Georgeous. But aren’t you getting boatloads of “refugees” from LA and SF? Would have to be tilting the meter to the left there. Just wondering.
#735818

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:04 pm, Papa Louie said:

I knew that the cost of the cap and tax bill would be horrendous. But, until I read Rich Lowry’s piece at NRO, I had no idea that the bill actually does more harm than good to the environment:

The cap-and-trade bill passed the House of Representatives shrouded in a fog of willful ignorance and calculated irrationality…

The upshot is that an Environmental Protection Agency analysis says that under Waxman-Markey, there will be no reduction in emissions by 2020. The progressive Breakthrough Institute estimates that emissions could continue at their current business-as-usual rate through 2030.

Perversities abound. According to the Los Angeles Times, under the bill, the U.S. “would use more carbon-dioxide heavy coal in 2020 than it did in 2005.” Time writes that “the total amount of renewable energy generation under Waxman-Markey would actually be less than the renewable energy that would have been produced without the bill.”…

Even if Waxman-Markey were perfectly formulated, it would reduce global surface temperatures by only one-tenth of 1 degree Celsius in 100 years. That’s a negligible difference, purchased at a great price. … President Barack Obama called it an “extraordinary first step.” Extraordinary indeed.

– Rich Lowry; Jun 30, 2009; NRO: The Waxman-Markey Travesty

All this and the bill only reduces global temperatures by .1 degree in a century, and then only if there are no significant loopholes to exploit, and then only if other countries follow suit. I’d like to hear Rep. Reichert’s explanation for this.
#735824

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:16 pm, Flyoverman said:

The NRCC should get this message loud and clear. Until you cut off the Cap and Tax 8, all 8, we are cutting you off.
#735827

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:18 pm, Ragspierre said:

In the end, term limits ought to be more acceptable than revolution even to brain damaged legislators.

THAT’S the ticket…on that and a lot of other issues.

We have to give them an offer they CANNOT refuse….
#735830

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:23 pm, orlandocajun said:

Look at the states these eight people represent. Does anyone really think that they’re conservatives?

Pahleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez!
#735831

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:25 pm, swede said:

Ragspierre said:
We have to give them an offer they CANNOT refuse….

Maybe we should eat THE BEAST! Na, major indigestion.
#735832

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:26 pm, symrian said:

CyberCipher #20

Speaking of the Green River Killer, one of his defenders put a comment on my blog about how he caught the Green River Killer. The tone is how he had moral untouchability and that I need to shut up because of it.

If you want to read this daft comment, you can click through my name and look it up under the Cap and Trade Crystal Ball.
#735837

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:35 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

Is this another example of “perfection is the enemy of the good” that the “lesser of two evils” nose-holders like to talk about? Hey, the guy is only partly pregnant and is honest sometimes too.

It is always dangerous to hold a knife by the blade.
#735839

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:38 pm, Ragspierre said:

Maybe we should eat THE BEAST!

I wouldn’t eat THE BEAST using Bwany Frank-lover’s mouth…

Noisome…
#735842

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:47 pm, JusDreamin said:

Look at the states these eight people represent. Does anyone really think that they’re conservatives?

Good point OrlandoC, best we can hope for is to turn them in to an unemployed RINO.
#735846

On July 2nd, 2009 at 5:51 pm, happy2behere said:

I cut the RNC off several years ago and give to specific candidates only. Tancredo was my favorite, in person he has a great sense of humor. Tancredo is no longer in office because of a self-imposed term limits pledge, he kept his word.

Term limit all of them. The TR8TORS should go.
#735851

On July 2nd, 2009 at 6:14 pm, swede said:

Though I am solidly conservative, and almost always vote Republican, I refuse to be associated with the Republican Party, for obvious reasons of late. For 10 years or more I have registered as independent. Just curious if anyone else here is in that category. I suspect there are more conservatives in the mysterious “independent” cult than we think.
#735854

On July 2nd, 2009 at 6:17 pm, Misscheryl said:

all together now…Stick.A.Fork.In.Him!
#735858

On July 2nd, 2009 at 6:27 pm, dadinseattle said:

The ACU rating for Reichert in 2007 was 48, and in 2008 was 56.
90 or above is considered conservative.

This demonstrates the danger of electing RINOs, or the lesser of two evils.

His opponent would have made the same votes. The libs than claim votes bi-partisan!

Might as well place the blame where it belongs.

Swede I hear all the surrounding states near California are having to absorb a massive influx of libs from there!

Funny how they don’t want to live in there own mess!
#735861

On July 2nd, 2009 at 6:33 pm, Big Hammer and Anvil said:

After speaking with the congressional staffer from the “Honorable” Congressman Reichart and reading his comments that I just do not understand you can see why I am ever so much more upset with Sheriff Davey than I was a month ago.

At least he didn’t leave his service pistol in his car only to be stolen in downtown seattle. That was Sherif Gil Kerlie-Q, who is now working directly for Obama the Narcississt in Chief. I guess that incompetence inbreeds in Seattle Politics.

Don’t get me started on Ron tax to the max…
#735862

On July 2nd, 2009 at 6:34 pm, SpeakEasy said:

What is it going to take for the true conservatives to take back control of the party? What is it going to take for the GOP to set limits?

I am seriously thinking of changing my affiliation to Independent- If people start jumping ship, the leadership will have to take notice.

Let’s start with a couple of basic guidelines:

1)John McCain will not get my vote.
2)His daughter is a NOBODY in the GOP.
3)Sarah Palin is a step in the right direction.
#735863

On July 2nd, 2009 at 6:35 pm, Big Hammer and Anvil said:

I am another self desceribed Independent Conservative. Emphasis on the CONSERVATIVE if you please!
#735868

On July 2nd, 2009 at 6:55 pm, southsideironworks said:

Neither the RNC or the RNCC will get a penny from me.

I will actively participate in any campaign by a conservative candidate who runs against Mark Kirk (IL).

As long as it’s not Jim Oberweis.
#735870

On July 2nd, 2009 at 7:05 pm, right_on said:

We have to give them an offer they CANNOT refuse….

Rags, are you suggesting we offer the NRCC eight political whores heads?Ha!

That message should be pretty clear…bed with those whores, and we’ll cut you off, as well. Most in Washington will blow it off as empty threats. We need to show them at the next Tea Parties that WE, THE PEOPLE, stand as ONE, and mean what we say… Even if they don’t.
#735871

On July 2nd, 2009 at 7:06 pm, swede said:

On July 2nd, 2009 at 6:34 pm, SpeakEasy said:
Let’s start with a couple of basic guidelines:

speakeasy, I liked what Rep. McCotter from Michigan laid out as what were once – and should be – five basic tenets of the RNC. Seems to be a great place to start:

1. Our liberty is from God, not the government.
2. Our sovereignty is in our souls, not the soil.
3. Our security is in strength, not surrender.
4. Prosperity is from the private sector, not the public sector.
5. Our truths are self evident, not relative.

A far cry from what we hear from the RNC these days, no? I agree, Palin is probably the closest to these principals of anyone on the radarnow.
#735872

On July 2nd, 2009 at 7:08 pm, FireBlogger said:

He argued that the conservative arguments against were mistaken, and that Washington specifically would be better off even though the bill was imperfect.

Spoken like a Dem. How can this guy call himself a Republican?
#735874

On July 2nd, 2009 at 7:23 pm, KCK said:

Reichert has soiled the bedding for all Wa state republicans. he is a disaster and a sham.

NW repubs are hardly any different from dems. Bleeding hearts for the imaginary dying *environment*.

I am sick of hearing it.
#735877

On July 2nd, 2009 at 7:37 pm, 24Klady said:

The deathknell for the Dems and those that supported them will come with the first bill that hits your wallet. To date, we’ve not had the pleasure of seeing what any of this prez’s bills are going to cost us individually – the time is coming. It’s also not going to be pretty. They’ve promised to send out monthly checks to help the ‘poor’ pay their bills and such, which is nothing but glorified welfare. However, the same gov’t that mailed checks to dead people are the same ones handling this. Have we reached our own level of ‘bastion of baffoonery’ yet?
#735884

On July 2nd, 2009 at 7:48 pm, 24Klady said:

dadinseattle #35
“don’t want to live in their own mess”

Have you ever seen a cat sleep in it’s own litter box?

Yes, they’re fleeing CA just like I did 15 yrs. ago. My sister fled before that to Oregon, only to have Silicon Valley follow her up to Portland and surrounding areas. I’m to the point of suggesting states that have a way of life to protect insist that new move-ins make a new pledge to leave all they thought was wonderful in their former homes behind them….start anew, and learn why the natives of any state love it and if you can’t fit in, go back home. They don’t need you to come in and fix them.
#735890

On July 2nd, 2009 at 7:58 pm, tonyr951 said:

HEADS on a STICK!
#735895

On July 2nd, 2009 at 8:19 pm, a crapweasel said:

“KTTH talk show host David Boze has audio of Reichert’s rationalization here. The word “delusional” comes to mind:

Heritage Foundation, and Wall Street Journal were predicting that I should take what’s behind door #3.”
#735897

On July 2nd, 2009 at 8:27 pm, lgm said:

we would have better national security, more nuclear, coal and refining capabilities, and a cleaner environment with the bill.

You don’t think this is true? Say why. Truth is, you don’t have a reason. If you did, you would say it.

tonyr951 said (46):

HEADS on a STICK!

The Republican approach to dissent! Do you want to set an example that Republicans tolerate dissent better than Democrats. Of do you want to show that Republicans squash dissent better than Democrats?
#735902

On July 2nd, 2009 at 8:47 pm, John Deaux said:

On July 2nd, 2009 at 8:27 pm, lgm said:

You don’t think this is true? Say why.

I think you’re an idiot.

You don’t think this is true? Say why.
#735903

On July 2nd, 2009 at 8:52 pm, swede said:

lgm said:
You don’t think this is true? Say why.

Largest tax increase in history in the middle of the deepest recession in history. It is idealistic nonsense based on junk science. I’ll agree with the nukes part though. I thought the lib position was that is evil.

HEADS on a STICK!
The Republican approach to dissent!

Pick one post and call it the Republican approach to dissent? Let’s take a peek over at Kos and find one showing what the Dem approach to dissent is.

Well said John Deaux. No dissent here.
#735905

On July 2nd, 2009 at 8:59 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

On July 2nd, 2009 at 6:14 pm, swede said:

Though I am solidly conservative, and almost always vote Republican, I refuse to be associated with the Republican Party, for obvious reasons of late. For 10 years or more I have registered as independent. Just curious if anyone else here is in that category. I suspect there are more conservatives in the mysterious “independent” cult than we think.

I re-registered independent in November 2006 and then went on a blog campaign (you can still visit my blog linked above) urging everyone to do so. The RINOs at Townhall immediately warred against me despite attracting lots of similar-minded readers. I co-founded the Saint Crispin’s Day Society there which had many members by the time Townhall kicked me out.

One important aspect of McCain is that he is the only presidential candidate in history who ran while his party’s registration plummetted. What does that tell you about the RNC?

I am angrier at the GOP these days than I was at the Democratic Party in 1980 when I switched to vote for Reagan. And the Dem Party of 1980 was more conservative than today’s GOP.
#735908

On July 2nd, 2009 at 9:13 pm, tomlw said:

The thing that amazes me is that once again Congress has passed a huge bill that nobody has read. Is it asking too much to have them actually read the bills before they vote on them?

I would like to see a law put in place that would not allow a politician to vote on a bill unless they certify under penalty of perjury that they have read and understand the bill.

There is NO valid reason for these Bills to be pushed through so fast that no one knows what’s in them. (except of course it is done that way on purpose.)
#735913

On July 2nd, 2009 at 9:41 pm, right_on said:

One important aspect of McCain is that he is the only presidential candidate in history who ran while his party’s registration plummetted. What does that tell you about the RNC?

What happens when the GOP leadership allows the Democrat Party to pick their candidate for them? McCain.

He is a patriot, but is not a conservative. He fell for the notion that a moderate tone, and being affable by compromising with unyielding progressives, would make him appear to be the sane voice of reason. It instead made him a goat, and unelectable.
#735918

On July 2nd, 2009 at 9:53 pm, right_on said:

You don’t think this is true? Say why. Truth is, you don’t have a reason. If you did, you would say it.

It’s been said before:

“You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot further brotherhood of man by encouraging class hatred. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn. You cannot build character by taking away man’s initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.

- Abraham Lincoln
#735920

On July 2nd, 2009 at 9:58 pm, hunter said:

we would have better national security, more nuclear, coal and refining capabilities, and a cleaner environment with the bill.

Because you and the idiot libs have opposed every attempt at new nuclear plants, new oil refining (not to mention drilling for our own oil), and the only way a new coal plant will be built is if it does not add any CO2 to the atmosphere, which is impossible.

You don’t think this is true? Say why. And as was said before me, you are an idiot that will help take this country down.
#735921

On July 2nd, 2009 at 10:00 pm, hunter said:

On July 2nd, 2009 at 9:13 pm, tomlw said

Exactly! These a$$hats work for us, and we should be able to tell them how to do their job!
#735922

On July 2nd, 2009 at 10:10 pm, swede said:

On July 2nd, 2009 at 8:59 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

What percentage of the GOP exodus do you think went independent vs democrat? I had a feeling the indy trend was bigger than people think. All of us closet conservatives could easily turn the next elections around if they don’t crank out another RINO.

They said conservatism was dead in ‘64, ‘76, ‘92 and now. Yeah right. The pendulum is swinging back already.

Sounds like you and I kicked the donkey at the same time. Hard to admit I actually voted for Jimmy in ‘76, but Ford was dead in the water when he pardoned Nixon.
#735925

On July 2nd, 2009 at 10:25 pm, love2rumba said:

To Swede…there are lots of us here…just not enough.
Like most states- most of the state is red except for the cities.
When thinking of a user name for MM site, I decided on mine for that very reason. Some people have given up on this state thinking it to be solid blue! Not true!

Back to Reichert, he says we don’t get the big picture.

The people I am hearing from think he is the one that does not “get it”! They are livid about this vote and not likely to ever support Reichert again, and are looking for a primary challenger already!

I agree, DadinSeattle.
I think Reichert-who is completing his 3rd term- is planning to leave congress, retire, and triple dip with respect to pensions. I also think he is one of the many RINOs who piggybackbacked onto conservatism when is it was de facto hip in 1990s, but once having gotten inside Congress really had a Democrat moment.

Incidentally he also was a strong supporter of John McCain….
#735932

On July 2nd, 2009 at 10:45 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

On July 2nd, 2009 at 10:10 pm, swede said:

What percentage of the GOP exodus do you think went independent vs democrat? I had a feeling the indy trend was bigger than people think. All of us closet conservatives could easily turn the next elections around if they don’t crank out another RINO.

I don’t have any idea the number but today, only about 23% of voters are registered Republicans. Only 19% of voters describe themselves as liberals. Yet voters who define themselves as conservative or moderate-but-leaning-conservative is between 60-70%. However, it looks like about 7 million conservatives stayed home and about 1-2 million voted like me for “none of the above”. That was the Reagan coalition they abandoned, all in a futile attempt to appeal to everyone else. Result? McCain lost ground in every single demographic category: women, men, latinos, blacks, Jews, blue state/red state, you name it. The party that stands for nothing appealed only to those “Republican Uber Alles” types whose brains were oxygen-deprived from excessive nose holding.

The GOP has taken the position that the Latino demographic shift spells the death of conservatism. How intellectually brain dead is that? I know plenty of Mexicans and I can assure everyone that they are not genetically programmed to be liberals. They want the same liberties that Americans have and conservatism is not outside of their genetic capabilities to grasp and embrace. But they need to stop cutting deals with the race merchants like La Raza and start selling conservatism if that is going to happen.

Today, the “new” GOP has joined the most liberal of Dems in calling conservatives racist and archaic. Without a party, we have now halted amnesty, gun seizures, and have
spontaneously spawned the Tea Party movement without a leader. We are a new party just waiting for a Reagan to grasp and ride to a landslide victory. I am reasonably confident it will happen. Lincoln formed the GOP for the very same reasons conservatives can form a successful new party. We just need to stop talking ourselves out of it. The “we’re so screwed” crowd has to join the screeching women and children in the basement while those of us who believe and are willing do the job. We’ll let them know when it is safe to come out again.
#735964

On July 3rd, 2009 at 12:09 am, swede said:

Today, the “new” GOP has joined the most liberal of Dems in calling conservatives racist and archaic. Without a party, we have now halted amnesty, gun seizures, and have
spontaneously spawned the Tea Party movement without a leader.

I’m thinking the “new” GOP is not even the GOP but a centrist mush that just fell into the leadership void you mentioned. The epic fail of RINOism ala McCain is too blatantly obvious to ignore. The only moment in the campaign when he had any semblance of a chance was when Palin, a genuine conservative, hit the fan. When folks liked her better than the Mav, his genious staff saw her as a threat instead of an opportunity. Those anonymous bozos are still sniping at her. I have my doubts she can fill the leadership void, but she definitely hit the right button. Is a new party really viable or necessary? If a Reaganistic leader showed up, wouldn’t the GOP come back in line? Who’s out there that can make it happen? Guess thats the real question either way.

Also vehemently agree with you re the “We’re so screwed” crowd. STFU already and get to work.
#735970

On July 3rd, 2009 at 12:24 am, Bruce said:

I think that a lot of us thought that if we sat by and allowed the GOP to lose that the party would learn a lesson or two about how their “Democrat Lite” philosophy works. We told them that it’s a losing strategy, they demonstrated that it’s a losing strategy, yet they still think that acting like losers is they way they should operate. The Republican Party is perhaps more insane than the Democrat Party!

Once and for all, ALL conservatives should refuse to vote for ANY RINOs. Let them lose, and lose, and lose, and lose, and lose until some decent leadership comes into play that actually wants to OPPOSE the Democrats.

In spite of repeated disastrous losses, I don’t know if the Republican Party will every change course.
#735977

On July 3rd, 2009 at 12:44 am, blizzard said:

There is good(scary) stuff over at Climate Depot right now.

1. 20 Percent of Manufacturers to close under Cap and tax

2. US ready to sign Climate pact.

TEA Parties anyone?!?!?!?
#735983

On July 3rd, 2009 at 1:11 am, ThunderHawkk said:

Reichert and the other 7 TRAITORS hear this:

YOU ARE GONE!

Do you get it? We don’t need any Marxist/Obama sympathizers here.

GET LOST YOU TRAITORS! Time for you to get real jobs!
#735986

On July 3rd, 2009 at 1:20 am, lgm said:

blizzard said (#62):

There is good(scary) stuff over at Climate Depot right now.

1. 20 Percent of Manufacturers to close under Cap and tax

Those guys are global warming deniers. That’s like evolution denial. You can’t talk the true believers out of it. Have you seen the lists of “scientists” who believe the world was created 6000 years ago?
#735994

On July 3rd, 2009 at 1:36 am, swede said:

lgm, your lips move when you read, right? I’ve had better intellectual discourse with a fence post.

Nite all.
#735998

On July 3rd, 2009 at 1:45 am, blizzard said:

On July 3rd, 2009 at 1:20 am, lgm said: Those guys are global warming deniers. That’s like evolution denial. You can’t talk the true believers out of it. Have you seen the lists of “scientists” who believe the world was created 6000 years ago?

You are a global warming kool-aid drinker and your point is what again? It’s obvious you don’t work for living. Government hack perhaps?
#736029

On July 3rd, 2009 at 4:02 am, puhiawa said:

He is an idiot. Plain and simple. Clearly on the take, he should be investigated. Too stupid for science, a poor criminal, and too dumb to hold office. Maybe he can get a job as a marriage counselor in South Carolina.
#736030

On July 3rd, 2009 at 4:03 am, puhiawa said:

Whoa. There is someone here who doesn’t know that global warming stopped 10 years ago? Hmmmm.
#736071

On July 3rd, 2009 at 8:31 am, jangar said:

Have you seen the lists of “scientists” who believe the world was created 6000 years ago?

Just goes to show you how far man has fallen away from his Creator God, and his desperate need for Christ the Savior and His Holy Spirit to open his eyes and heart to the truth.
#736077

On July 3rd, 2009 at 8:53 am, John Deaux said:

On July 3rd, 2009 at 1:20 am, lgm said:

blizzard said (#62):

There is good(scary) stuff over at Climate Depot right now.

1. 20 Percent of Manufacturers to close under Cap and tax

Those guys are global warming deniers.

That’s the point, you idiot. Global warming is a made up problem. Despite your “settled science” argument, you cannot prove the existence of man made climate change.

That’s like evolution denial. You can’t talk the true believers out of it.

At least there is some evidence to show that evolution is a valid theory, even if it doesn’t explain everything.

Have you seen the lists of “scientists” who believe the world was created 6000 years ago?

Yet you do see a list of 31,000 scientists arguing that global warming isn’t real.

Think about it. You, a humble math teacher, have chosen to oppose 31,000 scientists about a scientific issue.
#736080

On July 3rd, 2009 at 9:12 am, RobM1981 said:

Michael Steele’s leadership is really something, isn’t it?

Hey, look at the upside: at least we know he’s a RINO *before* we vote him into something more important than head of a dying party.
#736082

On July 3rd, 2009 at 9:13 am, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

Those guys are global warming deniers.

As are most people who really study the issue. Cardinal ManBearPig , Al Gore, of the Holy Global Warming Batman! Cult cut quite a phrase there with global warming deniers and he was lying about that too. Now Dear Little One it is your turn to state “only scientist in the pay of the oil companies deny the Holy Truth of Cardinal ManBearPig , Al Gore, of the Holy Global Warming Batman! Cult. Members of the Holy Global Warming Batman! Cult keep making the charge that only scientist in the pay of the oil companies deny global warming but as of yet I see no evidence for that statement. Perhaps they do not mean it?

May The Cap-and-Tax 8-aka Pelosi’s Eunuchs- Green Agenda end up being that ugly mold under the sink. Defeat them all; Wal-Mart always needs greeters
#736084

On July 3rd, 2009 at 9:27 am, Savage24 said:

When are these damned fools going to read this TAX to the MAX bill they passed, and find out just how much damage they have done.
#736090

On July 3rd, 2009 at 9:46 am, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

On July 3rd, 2009 at 9:27 am, Savage24 said:

When are these damned fools going to read this TAX to the MAX bill they passed, and find out just how much damage they have done.

Hopefully, and if we do our part, soon they will have plenty of time to do so.

RINO Relocation Project 2010: It is More Than a Job-It is an Adventure. My Capture-Tag-Relocate Target 2010–John “Reach Across the Isle” McCain.

—
Good news of the day: our flags, decals and pins for the Tea Party arrived.

Less Good News of the Day was this disclaimer on the invoice: “No, not very many anyway, Tienanmen Square survivors were harmed in the manufacture and testing of this product.”
#736108

On July 3rd, 2009 at 10:09 am, DBNinKY said:

Think about it. You, a humble math teacher, have chosen to oppose 31,000 scientists about a scientific issue.

Fantastic job of turning the tables, JD!
#736144

On July 3rd, 2009 at 10:54 am, lgm said:

John Deaux said (#70):

At least there is some evidence to show that evolution is a valid theory,

Be very careful. This kind of loose talk could get you banned here, or at least labeled as a RINO troll.

even if it doesn’t explain everything.

What is the survival value of Republicans?

You, a humble math teacher…

Lowly, maybe. Humber, never.

…have chosen to oppose 31,000 scientists about a scientific issue.

But at least my memory goes back a few days to the thread where this was discussed and answered. The list is bogus. It does not have the professional affiliations of these supposed scientists.
#736150

On July 3rd, 2009 at 11:10 am, Flyoverman said:

LGM,

It’s me your favorite “global warming denier”. I have prepared for your edification a highly abridged version of the Executive Summary of the report the EPA supressed, which Dr. Carlin has referred to.

Sorry for the length. I could only edit so much. Find and read the report. You might be enlightened.

Here in summary is HARD DATA discussed in detail in the supressed report that refute current Global Warming premises.

ENJOY!

1. Lack of observed upper tropospheric heating in the tropics.
2. Lack of observed constant humidity levels, as CO2levels have risen.
3. The most reliable sets of global temperature data we have, using satellite microwave sounding units, show no appreciable temperature increases during the critical period 1978-1997, just when the surface station data show a pronounced rise. Satellite data after 1998 is also inconsistent with the GHG/CO2/AGW hypothesis
4. The models used do not take into account the most important ocean oscillations which clearly do affect global temperatures, namely, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and the ENSO.
5. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility of indirect solar variability, which would again have the effect of overstating the importance of GHGs/CO2.
6. The models ignored the possibility that there may be other significant natural effects on global temperatures that we do not yet understand The1998 spike in global temperatures is very difficult to explain in any other way.
7. Surface global temperature data may have been hopelessly corrupted by the urban heat island effect. The Draft TSD refers almost exclusively to surface rather than satellite data.

The current Draft TSD is based largely on the IPCC AR4 report, which is at best three years out of date in a rapidly changing field. There have been important developments in areas that deserve careful attention:
• Global temperatures have declined—extending the current downtrend to 11 years with a particularly rapid decline in 2007-8; in addition, the PDO went negative in September, 2007 and the AMO in January, 2009, respectively. At the same time atmospheric CO2 levels have continued to increase and CO2 emissions have accelerated.
• The consensus on past, present and future Atlantic hurricane behavior has changed.
• The idea that warming temperatures will cause Greenland to rapidly shed its ice has been greatly diminished. by new results indicating little evidence for the operation of such processes.
• A new 2009 paper finds that the crucial assumption in the GCM models used by the IPCC concerning strongly positive feedback from water vapor is not supported by empirical evidence and that the feedback is actually negative.
• A new 2009 paper by Scafetta and Wilson suggests that the IPCC used faulty solar data in dismissing the direct effect of solar variability on global temperatures.

These developments alone should greatly influence any assessment of “vulnerability, risk, and impacts” of climate change within the U.S.
#736153

On July 3rd, 2009 at 11:16 am, Flyoverman said:

P.S. Also note that the poor “endangered polar bear” numbers have INCREASED to the point that there are plans to potentially cull their numbers. I.e. shoot some because there are so many.

I cannot think of one Global Warming ascertain that has not been directly and effectively challenged. The entire theory is being effectively destroyed. The deniers are all in Congress, because this destroys their socialist game plan.
#736190

On July 3rd, 2009 at 12:03 pm, DBNinKY said:

The current Draft TSD is based largely on the IPCC AR4 report, which is at best three years out of date in a rapidly changing field.

And there’s the clincher – thanks, FM!
#736237

On July 3rd, 2009 at 1:04 pm, jangar said:

The deniers are all in Congress, because this destroys their socialist game plan.

It has NOTHING to do with anyones CLIMATE and EVERYTHING to do with TAXATION.

Those of simple mind that choose to believe otherwise are foolish. Period.
#736240

On July 3rd, 2009 at 1:06 pm, iamgman said:

we would have better national security, more nuclear, coal and refining capabilities, and a cleaner environment with the bill.

You don’t think this is true? Say why. Truth is, you don’t have a reason. If you did, you would say it.

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/06/report-cap-and-trade-bill-bringing-refinery-closures/

America’s biggest oil companies will probably cope with U.S. carbon legislation by closing fuel plants, cutting capital spending and increasing imports.

Under the Waxman-Markey climate bill that may be voted on today by the U.S. House, refiners would have to buy allowances for carbon dioxide spewed from their plants and from vehicles when motorists burn their fuel. Imports would need permits only for the latter, which ConocoPhillips Chief Executive Officer Jim Mulva said would create a competitive imbalance.

“It will lead to the opportunity for foreign sources to bring in transportation fuels at a lower cost, which will have an adverse impact to our industry, potential shutdown of refineries and investment and, ultimately, employment,” Mulva said in a June 16 interview in Detroit. Houston-based ConocoPhillips has the second-largest U.S. refining capacity.

Seems the actual people that do the refining disagree. That being said, increasing our dependence on imports hurts national security doesn’t it? Wasn’t the whole point of this to decrease our dependency?

Also, environmentalists sue anyone who has the audacity to even propose new nuclear reactors. And to top it off, didn’t Obama say he was going to tax coal out of business back during the campaign?
#736276

On July 3rd, 2009 at 1:36 pm, NestingHawk said:

On July 2nd, 2009 at 4:13 pm, happy2behere said:

$.48/day per person? Or is it per family, kilowatt, light fixture, cow fluff, what?!? That guy is a dim bulb.

Per pixel it takes to scan the bill.
#736354

On July 3rd, 2009 at 3:09 pm, corkie said:

On July 2nd, 2009 at 8:27 pm, lgm said:

You don’t think this is true? Say why. Truth is, you don’t have a reason. If you did, you would say it.

Ha ha ha. Of course the statement isn’t true. Let’s debate alternative energies, lgm. And the bill doesn’t provide for a cleaner environment at all. The emission controls of this bill are negligible (can you say “rounding error?”) even if CO2 was a pollutant.
#736358

On July 3rd, 2009 at 3:13 pm, corkie said:

On July 3rd, 2009 at 1:20 am, lgm said:

That’s like evolution denial.

Actually, lgm, the fact is that the global warming theory is like evolution denial. You’re on the wrong side of science on this one.

Stop fighting it. Stop denying that AGW is a bunch of crap.
#736393

On July 3rd, 2009 at 3:46 pm, John Deaux said:

On July 3rd, 2009 at 10:54 am, lgm said:

…have chosen to oppose 31,000 scientists about a scientific issue.

But at least my memory goes back a few days to the thread where this was discussed and answered. The list is bogus. It does not have the professional affiliations of these supposed scientists.

Translation: I will believe in global warming until Al Gore personally tells me not too.
#736646

On July 3rd, 2009 at 7:24 pm, JustAThought said:

I’d like to hear Rep. Reichert’s explanation for this.

How can one comment on something about which one has ZERO knowledge and no experience?

Kinda like asking for a book report,knowing the book never had a page turned.
#737890

On July 6th, 2009 at 9:26 am, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

He needs a strong primary challenger.

If he is the nominee, well, he’d still be better than any Demonrat, but he should be cut off at the knees.

I can think of only two ‘Republicans’ who would actually benefit the party by losing, Snowe and Collins. I believe they are actual Democratic moles in the caucus. Lincoln Chaffee, who switched parties after his defeat for his Rhode Island Senate seat, admitted being a Democrat and said he caucused with the GOP when they held the Senate so he could ‘alter’ (obstruct) GOP policy.

But with most squishes/RINOs, one has to consider if the alternative is worse.

The time to smash squishes and RINOs is during the primaries.