bytor2112 Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 WASHINGTON — If the Senate doesn't pass a bill to cut global warming, Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer says, there will be dire results: droughts, floods, fires, loss of species, damage to agriculture, worsening air pollution and more.Sigh.......Boxer faces 'challenge of a lifetime' on climate change bill - Yahoo! News Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aesa Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 It's great to have alarmists who have no idea what they're talking about in government, innit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxel Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 From the article:"This is consistent with a pattern of 'No. No, we can't. No, we won't,' " Boxer said. "I believe that this committee, when the votes are eventually taken on our bill, will reflect our president's attitude, which is 'Yes, we can, and yes, we will.' " The Obama brand: saving our world while destorying our country! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 Here I thought this thread was about the ultimate fight challenge of a boxer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ploomf Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 So are we calling it a climate change instead of global warming now? I remember my mother saying once that when she was my age all the scientists were screaming about the coming ice age and how we were all going to freeze to death. Then it was global warming that was going to destroy us, she figured that the ice age and global warming would meet and cancel each other out. Now it's a climate change, I guess they call it that so that no matter what happens they can say they predicted it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a-train Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 The cap and trade system now on the table is a tax on domestic carbon emmisions and a protective tariff on imports from countries not participating in any carbon emmisions tax. The gamble being played here is our Washington bureaucrats are betting the non-participants will be unable to continue the same market activity without playing, but every indication would suggest that the far east will actually grow its business as their own people afford carbon intenstive products. If that is the case, we will pay the costs of lowered emmisions, but still suffer the same global warming. I think the hope in the hearts of the advocates of cap and trade is that the western people will push for global controls, but even if they do I doubt the east will change policy. What is most befuddling is that the same environmentalists that hope to see a cap and trade system purport the peak oil notion, that oil is going to run out soon. If that is the case, doesn't cap and trade really have little meaning as the resources necessary to continue the current emission levels are soon to be in short supply? Further, with all this new taxation and regulation, is the Obama White House prepared to take away the subsidization of carbon heavy industry? Are my tax dollars going to stop supporting Conoco Phillips? By the way, COP suffered some downward pressure lately and I would recommend picking some up for the long haul. Dividends are free from social security and medicare taxes you know. -a-train -a-train Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Blaylock Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 Here I thought this thread was about the ultimate fight challenge of a boxer. I'm no fan of sports in general, and particularly not of the more violent sorts; however, I'd pay to see Barbara Boxer go a round or two with Mike Tyson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prodigal_Son Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 "If the Senate doesn't pass a bill to cut global warming, Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer says, there will be dire results: droughts, floods, fires, loss of species, damage to agriculture, worsening air pollution and more."So is that a threat? Is she going to do this to us herself? Or was she given the Sealing Powers of Heaven? If so, I might need to rethink my political stances... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 "If the Senate doesn't pass a bill to cut global warming, Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer says, there will be dire results: droughts, floods, fires, loss of species, damage to agriculture, worsening air pollution and more."So is that a threat? Is she going to do this to us herself? Or was she given the Sealing Powers of Heaven? If so, I might need to rethink my political stances... Isn't that just called "the last days?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prodigal_Son Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 Isn't that just called "the last days?"I'd have never guessed that Barbara Boxer was one of the 4 horsemen (??horsewomen??) of the Apocalypse. But then again, my avatar shows photographic proof of one of the others.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyando Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 I'd have never guessed that Barbara Boxer was one of the 4 horsemen (??horsewomen??) of the Apocalypse. But then again, my avatar shows photographic proof of one of the others....Would that be the pale horse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.