tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post534265647408768046..comments2024-03-18T03:27:18.777-04:00Comments on Rabett Run: RP Jr. says strength of climate denialism in the US "not a limiting factor" in US politicsEliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger34125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-12183806706941239712011-08-16T12:48:50.110-04:002011-08-16T12:48:50.110-04:00Eli,
OK
Celery EaterEli,<br /><br />OK<br /><br /><br /><br />Celery EaterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-83264068992713776392011-08-16T12:30:18.080-04:002011-08-16T12:30:18.080-04:00Folks, cool it.Folks, cool it.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-46078799771363727872011-08-16T11:59:20.870-04:002011-08-16T11:59:20.870-04:00Bullshit Eater, you said:
"If your side [cli...Bullshit Eater, you said:<br /><br />"If your side [climate activism] was not a total public relation disaster, you would not be in such a predicament."<br /><br />So you weren't cheering on the Congressgoons who claim that climate science is a fraud? You were just concern trolling? Good to know!<br /><br />-- frankfrank -- Decoding SwiftHackhttp://climategate.tk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-25951813115827100952011-08-16T11:34:43.534-04:002011-08-16T11:34:43.534-04:00"Congressgoons" haha funny what are you ..."Congressgoons" haha funny what are you 17?<br /><br />Where did I cheer Congressgoons that deny Climate change? Another strawman. Frank you are the most dishonest immature poster I have come across in awhile. You are a joke.<br /><br /><br />Celery EaterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-4767664597634200062011-08-16T11:26:09.315-04:002011-08-16T11:26:09.315-04:00Bullshit Eater says "I do not recall stating ...Bullshit Eater says "I do not recall stating that climate science is a fraud", and then happily cheers on Congressgoons who state outright that climate science is a fraud, and he claims it's all OK because their "public relations" is good. But he's Bullshit Eater after all.<br /><br />Anyway, back to RPJr's fatuous bullshit: the real reason for the disconnect between public opinion and policy is that, well, <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/05/19/167912/town-hall-oil-subsidies-cravaack/" rel="nofollow">there's a sentient being standing between the two</a>.<br /><br />The flow isn't public opinion → policy; it's public opinion → Congressgoons (← lobbyists, blackmailers, ...) → policy.<br /><br />Add to that the fact that Congressgoons aren't really elected according to whether people like their proposed policies, but by how well their <b>vague Rorschach-Test-like speeches</b> can strike just the right chords in vastly diverse audiences.<br /><br />I think Brian sort of hinted at this in the blog post, so I'm just making the argument more explicit.<br /><br />-- frankfrank -- Decoding SwiftHackhttp://climategate.tk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-1664501178464025412011-08-15T23:45:07.433-04:002011-08-15T23:45:07.433-04:00a. Eli thought you did?
b. We don't do that....a. Eli thought you did?<br />b. We don't do that.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-8748284911725771822011-08-15T23:24:48.712-04:002011-08-15T23:24:48.712-04:00Should I welcome Celery Eater into the arms of cli...Should I welcome Celery Eater into the arms of climate realism? Not sure he said that either, though.<br /><br />Also not sure where this thread's going at this point, it seems to have left our dear RPJr. behind.<br /><br />I'll just note that I have the keys to the blogging kingdom here at Rabett's, but not to comment moderation. I just suggest we return to the subject or move on to the latest and greatest.Brianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09301230860904555513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-40954590806339402812011-08-15T21:17:15.181-04:002011-08-15T21:17:15.181-04:00Frank,
Another Strawman, does he come with a blue...Frank,<br /><br />Another Strawman, does he come with a blue or green coat? I am guessing green. I do not recall stating that climate science is a fraud so why I would need to explain that it is a fraud? I understand your desire to change the subject after experiencing such a thorough thrashing in front of all to see. <br /><br />I do look forward to more derangement and all that bold font, it makes you look really important! lol<br /><br />Thanks for the chuckles Frank, I truly do mean that!<br /><br /><br /><br />Celery EaterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-48061574098478518882011-08-15T18:56:06.934-04:002011-08-15T18:56:06.934-04:00"Perhaps you meant to say the rest of the par..."Perhaps you meant to say the rest of the paragraph"<br /><br />Great, Bullshit Eater! You caught one mistake in one word!<br /><br />Now <b>explain to us how that proves climate science to be a fraud.</b> Extra paper is provided for your detailed working.<br /><br />kthxbai<br /><br />-- frankfrank -- Decoding SwiftHackhttp://climategate.tk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-84742979462503525142011-08-15T14:52:51.147-04:002011-08-15T14:52:51.147-04:00Frank,
Stop embarrassing yourself. Not one of tho...Frank,<br /><br />Stop embarrassing yourself. Not one of those quotes is a complete sentence. The one from Jeffrey was a complete sentence. If you are going to quote a portion of sentence you need to use "..." as in <br /><br />"...your face would more than likely get some "modifications".<br /><br /><br />This alerts the reader that something came before those words to complete the sentence.<br /><br />"You must be a blast after a few beers, though you probably do not drink in public as your face would more than likely get some "modifications". <br /><br />You said I needed to read the rest of the sentence for this:<br /><br />"There's no point to the Senate."<br /><br /><br />Perhaps you meant to say the rest of the paragraph, understandable with your inability to know what a complete sentence is and how to properly quote people. So lets's look at the very next sentence.<br /><br />"Particularly a Senate which permits 16% of the country to veto needed legislation."<br /><br /><br />So the writer, Jeffrey, is conveying the point that there is no point to a Senate, particularly this one or one that has the following components. So as to the meaning of the first sentence the rest of the paragraph does not modify or explain lack of need of a Senate, in fact it reinforces the statement, that the Senate has no point.<br /><br /><br />Another epic fail from Frank, more derangement soon to follow.<br /><br /><br /><br />Celery EaterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-89919979147087447022011-08-15T12:30:32.501-04:002011-08-15T12:30:32.501-04:00Celery Eater confuses Frank with Motl.Celery Eater confuses Frank with Motl.J Bowersnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-28449598131607343952011-08-15T12:24:21.135-04:002011-08-15T12:24:21.135-04:00Bullshit Eater, if you want to play quote-mining g...Bullshit Eater, if you want to play quote-mining games, there are a lot of things you said which look like complete sentences.<br /><br />Here's one: "<em>your face would more than likely get some 'modifications'.</em>"<br /><br />Hmm, that certainly sounds like a threat of violence. Why is Bullshit Eater so prone to violence? In the face of such a threat, should I be screaming oppression, I wonder?<br /><br />Here's another complete sentence you said: "<em>I don't get it.</em>" A refreshingly frank admission.<br /><br />And the best part? You said, "<em>there is not much purpose in having a Senate.</em>" Hey look, you actually agree with Jeffrey Davis!<br /><br />If you want to play silly quote-mining games, well, I can play quote-mining games with you all day long.<br /><br />Alternatively, you can discuss the facts of climate science. But I know you won't, because Bullshit Eater is your name.<br /><br />-- frankfrank -- Decoding SwiftHackhttp://climategate.tk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-84559359870501062072011-08-15T11:18:53.839-04:002011-08-15T11:18:53.839-04:00Jeffery Davis said "There's no point to t...Jeffery Davis said "There's no point to the Senate."<br /><br />Frank said I should read the rest of the sentence, that looks like a complette sentence to me. Perhaps Frank drinks 24/7 tht would explain a lot.<br /><br />What's the matter Frank? Divorced? Lose a job lately? Or just pretty much hate yourself?<br /><br /><br /><br />Celery EaterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-40250997371759010772011-08-15T11:13:09.341-04:002011-08-15T11:13:09.341-04:00And still nothing of substance from Frank.
Cele...And still nothing of substance from Frank.<br /><br /><br /><br />Celery EaterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-86302067827627110192011-08-15T10:56:00.805-04:002011-08-15T10:56:00.805-04:00Bullshit Eater says,
"Jeffery Davis said the...Bullshit Eater says,<br /><br />"Jeffery Davis said there was no point to the Senate"<br /><br />You forgot the rest of his sentence. Probably because that doesn't fit into your "<b>BUT THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!!!!</b>" narrative?<br /><br />"You must be a blast after a few beers, though you probably do not drink in public as your face would more than likely get some "modifications". You are rather hot and hyper."<br /><br />Ah, when logic fails, use bullshit. That's the strategy of Bullshit Eater.<br /><br />* * *<br /><br />"In a sane world the fact that his views are mostly bullshit would be taken into account, but a quick look at coverage of national politics tells us that we don't live in such a world."<br /><br />Word.<br /><br />-- frankfrank -- Decoding SwiftHackhttp://climategate.tk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-65159467531404638062011-08-14T18:26:54.468-04:002011-08-14T18:26:54.468-04:00I think it's interesting that the Republican P...I think it's interesting that the Republican Party leadership with their desire to amend in multiple ways the Constitution they profess to love, have no interest in making it more democratic/republican, like fixing the demographics of the Senate that Jeff pointed out, or a popular vote for president. <br /><br />As for not getting our way recently, the Senate is up for grabs next year. I think both sides should commit in advance to majoritarian rules, and then let the people decide who wins.<br /><br />And Steve supplied an explanation for why RPJr gets attention that I think is correct - the press is too lazy to find reasonable alternative perspectives, many of them also realize the denialists are off-base, and so they default to R as their alternative.Brian Schmidthttp://backseatdriving.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-74587670855423059412011-08-14T01:45:28.471-04:002011-08-14T01:45:28.471-04:00Frank,
You make no sense whatsoever. Jeffery Davi...Frank,<br /><br />You make no sense whatsoever. Jeffery Davis said there was no point to the Senate. The Senate is established by the Constitution, is it not?<br /><br />Get it?<br /><br /><br />You must be a blast after a few beers, though you probably do not drink in public as your face would more than likely get some "modifications". You are rather hot and hyper.<br /><br /><br />I see Steve Bloom is in the same "I don't get it" camp that Eli frequents.<br /><br />Celery EaterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-64431298639651085132011-08-13T19:23:33.827-04:002011-08-13T19:23:33.827-04:00David, RP Jr. is damned effective at working the p...David, RP Jr. is damned effective at working the press. Part of that is that he puts the effort into working it via a steady stream of communiques, another part is that he promptly responds to requests for comment and is happy to produce op-eds on deadline, and the third is that he positions himself in a way that appeals to journalists (i.e., we're all good centrists here, standing in judgement of the "debate"). In a sane world the fact that his views are mostly bullshit would be taken into account, but a quick look at coverage of national politics tells us that we don't live in such a world. The fact that it's very rare for science journalists to end up in editorial positions doesn't help.Steve Bloomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12943109973917998380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-48979223876095561082011-08-13T15:05:18.948-04:002011-08-13T15:05:18.948-04:00Bullshit Eater, when you replied to Jeffrey Davis&...Bullshit Eater, when you replied to Jeffrey Davis's points about the filibuster and the ruling on Citizens United with "<b>BUT THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!!!</b>" it's clear that you weren't understanding the Constitution, but merely using it for name-dropping -- just as I said. It's not an "opinion"; it's a clear fact.<br /><br />-- frankfrank -- Decoding SwiftHackhttp://climategate.tk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-72007329041490130922011-08-12T20:51:16.089-04:002011-08-12T20:51:16.089-04:00Why is it that Frank brings nothing to the table o...Why is it that Frank brings nothing to the table other than his opinion of other commentors?<br /><br /><br /><br />Celery EaterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-41803297436697502682011-08-12T20:49:50.771-04:002011-08-12T20:49:50.771-04:00John,
I have been agreeing with you. The only pre...John,<br /><br />I have been agreeing with you. The only precedent for changing the Senate rules by a simple majority is when a new session starts. I know the Senate rules are not in the Constitution and I never said otherwise.<br /><br />Jeez<br /><br /><br />Celery EaterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-13258456200551473632011-08-12T19:26:38.519-04:002011-08-12T19:26:38.519-04:00RPJr. is utterly ignorable.
Don't understand ...RPJr. is utterly ignorable.<br /><br />Don't understand all the attention which is paid to his mutterings.David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-6194822372849752152011-08-12T09:44:07.782-04:002011-08-12T09:44:07.782-04:00Why is it that people (such as Celery Eater) who w...Why is it that people (such as Celery Eater) who worship the US Constitution the most are also those who understand the Constitution the least?<br /><br />-- frankfrank -- Decoding SwiftHackhttp://climategate.tk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-31480789395231468322011-08-12T00:35:52.565-04:002011-08-12T00:35:52.565-04:00Celery Eater:
If you look at the history, you'...Celery Eater:<br />If you <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate" rel="nofollow">look at the history,</a> you'll find that the vote margin to overcome a filibuster has varied from one era to another: 67% or 60%? Either 67% of votes cast or 67% of all Senators, etc. It's in the Senate rules, NOT in the Constitution.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09575837647825433144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-72100576522260421962011-08-11T12:15:33.835-04:002011-08-11T12:15:33.835-04:00Shorter Jeffrey Davis:
"There is no point to...Shorter Jeffrey Davis:<br /><br />"There is no point to the Constitution, because recently I am not getting my way."<br /><br /><br /><br />Celery EaterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com