James Lovelock on the value of sceptics and why Copenhagen was doomed

James LovelockWe need a more authoritative world. We’ve become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It’s all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can’t do that. You’ve got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. And they should be very accountable too, of course.

But it can’t happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What’s the alternative to democracy? There isn’t one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.

By Leo Hickman

When I recently interviewed James Lovelock for the G2 section of the Guardian, we spoke for nearly two hours about the various events of the past few months – a period in which he’d remained silent because he’d been over-wintering with his wife Sandy in her native Missouri. There was a lot to talk about: the stolen emails from the University of East Anglia, the UN climate summit in Copenhagen, the intense scrutiny placed on the IPCC, and the rather nippy winter experienced across much of the Northern Hemisphere. As is inevitable with an interview appearing in the newspaper, space was at a premium so the quotes used were tightly edited. But, just as I did with my interview with Al Gore last year, I have decided to publish a transcript of his key points here online for anyone interested in hearing in much more detail what Lovelock had to say on some of these controversial and much-discussed topics. 

Lovelock’s reaction to first reading about the stolen CRU emails [he later clarified that he hadn’t read the originals, saying: “Oddly, I felt reluctant to pry”]: 

I was utterly disgusted. My second thought was that it was inevitable. It was bound to happen. Science, not so very long ago, pre-1960s, was largely vocational. Back when I was young, I didn’t want to do anything else other than be a scientist. They’re not like that nowadays. They don’t give a damn. They go to these massive, mass-produced universities and churn them out. They say: “Science is a good career. You can get a job for life doing government work.” That’s no way to do science.

I have seen this happen before, of course. We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.

Fudging the data in any way whatsoever is quite literally a sin against the holy ghost of science. I’m not religious, but I put it that way because I feel so strongly. It’s the one thing you do not ever do. You’ve got to have standards.

You can make mistakes; they’re helpful. In the old days, it was perfectly OK to make a mistake and say so. You often learned from it. Nowadays if you’re dependent on a grant – and 99% of them are – you can’t make mistakes as you won’t get another one if you do. It’s an awful moral climate and it was all set up for the best of reasons. I think it was felt there was far too much inequality in science and there was an enormous redress. Looking around the country [at the wider society] this was good on the whole, but in some special professions you want the best, the elite. Elitism is important in science. It is vital.

Read the rest at the London Guardian.

73 Responses to James Lovelock on the value of sceptics and why Copenhagen was doomed

  1. Cubanshamoo April 7, 2010 at 2:11 am #

    James Lovelock is an [BLEEP!], a liar, an eco-extremist, and alarmist and a piece of flesh without any credibilitiy. To read about him just make me vomit!!!!

  2. Cubanshamoo April 7, 2010 at 4:31 am #

    For those who don’t know Lovelock

    “A billion could live off the earth; 6 billion living as we do is far too many, and you run out of planet in no time.” –James Lovelock, Scientific enviromentalist

    “China will soon emit more greenhouse gases than America, but its regime knows if it caps aspirations there will be a revolution.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “Climatologists are all agreed that we’d be lucky to see the end of this century without the world being a totally different place, and being 8 or 9 degrees hotter on average.” –James Lovelock. Scientific environmentalist

    “ESSO has been the main one in America spreading the disinformation that there is no global warming problem.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “Evolution is a tightly coupled dance, with life and the material environment as partners. From the dance emerges the entity Gaia.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “Florida will be gone altogether, the whole damned place, in not too long.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “Geological change usually takes thousands of years to happen but we are seeing the climate changing not just in our lifetimes but also year by year.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “I have heard that the Saudi Arabians are paying Greenpeace to campaign against Nuclear Power. It wouldn’t surprise me at all.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “I’m not a pessimist, even though I do think awful things are going to happen.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “If we gave up eating beef we would have roughly 20 to 30 times more land for food than we have now.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “If you start any large theory, such as quantum mechanics, plate tectonics, evolution, it takes about 40 years for mainstream science to come around. Gaia has been going for only 30 years or so.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “There is little evidence that our individual intelligence has improved through recorded history. –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “This programme to stop nuclear by 2020 is just crazy. If there were a nuclear war, and humanity were wiped out, the Earth would breathe a sigh of relief.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    “You mustn’t take what I say as gospel because no one can second-guess the future.” –James Lovelock, Scientific environmentalist

    • yorick2 April 15, 2010 at 12:39 pm #

      re: [Cubanshamoo April 7, 2010 at 4:31 am]>

      lol, I read the quotes, and somehow, I can’t see what’s wrong with them? apart from some politic speculations, it’s just predictions based on theories…. what’s wrong with eg saying that tomorrow more people are likely to die in road accidents than there were dead in 9/11 attacks?

  3. Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 7, 2010 at 5:46 am #

    Thanks CS. I knew I had seen some of those quotes somewhere before. I am not all that familiar with James Lovelock, but just from what I read in this article I got the feeling that he was firmly ensconced on the fence. What I call being too resonable. After reading the quotes provided by CS above I am thinking James Lovelock was firmly in the camp of AGW advocacy until climategate, which made him beat a hasty retreat up on to the fence.
    There is something odd about some of the things he said that I can’t quite put my finger on. Some things he said I agree with 110%. Other things he said I disagree with 120%. I think he is just trying to remain relevent (if he ever was to anyone, I don’t know.).

  4. Cubanshamoo April 7, 2010 at 7:08 am #

    Wellcome Neil, but we must remember that he was in the Global Cooling team at the 70’s. So he is the one who change with the wind-alarmist direction

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 7, 2010 at 5:14 pm #

      I’d like to coin a term, if I may. I think people like this should be called a windsock. Whichever way the wind blows that’s the way they point. Yes? No? What do you think?

  5. Rob N. Hood April 7, 2010 at 8:53 am #

    What we’re witnessing is nothing less than an explosion of paranoia being expressed by a certain class of people — namely conservative White Anglo-Saxon Protestant males — who are freaking out not only because a black man (and a Democrat!!) is president, but more importantly, the growing realization that WASPs will lose their majority status by the middle of this century.

    Loss of majority status for WASPs means an inevitable loss of power and privilege. This has been made certain by the Census Bureau’s disclosure late last month that Latino births will outpace WASP births in the U.S. within two years.

    No wonder the radical “white nationalist” movement has gone totally bonkers over abortion; it’s hardly a secret that the greatest number of abortions performed in this country have been performed on white women — and that it’s white women who have been the greatest users of contraceptives.

    This has resulted in a net decline in the white birth rate, while the Latino birth rate has been steadily increasing and the black birth rate has remained constant (The white birth rate in Europe has fallen far more steeply, forcing many European governments to liberalize their immigration policies to cope with a growing labor shortage).

    Bottom line: What’s going on is the WASP male’s last, angry blast aimed at stopping that which he cannot stop — the browning of America and the inevitable demise of WASP male hegemony.

    • Dan McGrath April 7, 2010 at 10:11 pm #

      I don’t think anyone cares which skin pigment is predominant in the US (I certainly don’t) as long as the law treats everyone the same – which right now, it doesn’t. I don’t need to be around people who look just like me to succeed and prosper in this life. I only need just laws that for the most part leave me to pursue my own ambitions and happiness.

      There is no reason in the world that “wasps” should lose anything at all should they be outnumbered by another ethnicity – providing that we continue to have the protections of the Constitution and equal application of the law.

      This “white nationalist” movement you refer to consists of a handful of racist loons which have no relationship to conservatism. In fact, historically most of them have been Democrats.

      You are partly wrong about abortions. Per capita, abortion kills far more black babies than white, and that’s by design. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood was on a racist mission to control the African-American population. To this day, most abortion centers operate in predominantly minority neighborhoods. Abortion was established as a “soft” genocide or population control and it’s founding mission carries on to this day, even if many proponents and abortion workers are oblivious that they are still very effectively carrying on the scheme Sanger instituted. To top it off, they’ve convinced the people they are targeting that abortion is fundamental to thier freedom!

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 8, 2010 at 12:15 am #

      Woa! Throw out the race card why doncha’. Skeeter. How do you explain this relating to anything that James Lovelock was saying? Or are you just infering that we are racists? Speaking of race I am Irish.

      Although African Negroes were better suited to work in the semi-tropical climates of the Caribbean, they had to be purchased, while the Irish were free for the catching, so to speak. It is not surprising that Ireland became the biggest source of livestock for the English slave trade.

      In the 12 year period during and following the Confederation revolt, from 1641 to 1652, over 550,000 Irish were killed by the English and 300,000 were sold as slaves, as the Irish population of Ireland fell from 1,466,000 to 616,000. Banished soldiers were not allowed to take their wives and children with them, and naturally, the same for those sold as slaves. The result was a growing population of homeless women and children, who being a public nuisance, were likewise rounded up and sold.

      Stew on that. *******!

      • Rob N. Hood April 8, 2010 at 6:45 am #

        Stewy, what you say has no bearing on the real racism towards blacks today. Not quite the same as that of the Irish… A simple fact that you, for some odd reason, have to be defensive about. Strange that.

        • Rob N. Hood April 8, 2010 at 6:52 am #

          Paul your statement is either based in fantasy or brain-damage (re: what you think other “people think about skin color”). Part of the problem with racism is most people DON’T think about it- it’s subconscious mostly. Why oh why do I have to explain such elementary things like this??? Not to mention the fact that racism is alive and well in this country- it’s just coded much better than in the past, especially by the far Right.

          And Dan, your analysis drips with conspriacy theory, and false data. Especially the part about White Nationalists historically being Democrats. Wow, that’s not historical, that’s hysterical !!!

          • Rob N. Hood April 8, 2010 at 6:53 am #

            I’m referring to your statement below-

          • Dan April 8, 2010 at 11:54 am #

            You, like most lefties have been duped. You need some major history lessons. Who wrote the Jim Crow Laws? Democrats. Who has a Klan member in the Senate? Democrats. Who put a Klan member on the Supreme Court? A Democrat. Who ended slavery? Republicans. Who championed the Civil Rights Act? Republicans. Who appointed the first black Supreme Court justice? A Republican. First black Secretary of state? Oh yeah – Republican. Second black SOS, and also a woman? Republican.

            The Ku Klux Clan was founded by Democrats as was the “White League.” Democrats led the charge for secession prior to the Civil War.

            Who encouraged the destruction of the black family unit and created a dependent class? Democrats.

            Who thinks minorities can’t succeeed on their own merits? Democrats.

            Get a clue.

        • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 8, 2010 at 11:40 am #

          Just trying to irrelevent. How does it feel?

          • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 8, 2010 at 12:35 pm #

            If all else fails accuse your opponent of being a racist! That is exactly what you are doing here Rob. I really resent that because I don’t care if you are black, white, yellow, blue, or Klingon! It is completely irrelevent to me. But you seem to think that every person that has a political view that is right of center is a racist. I can’t say that there are no racists on the right, just as you can’t say that there are no racists on the left. There are racists in every camp, on all sides so this argument is BS and you know it.
            Here is how it works; you say to us we are racist. We say to you that we are not. You say that we are, but we don’t even know it because it is subconcious. That is a trick designed to put us off guard, if just momentarily, because when someone says that you are doing something subconciously your natural reaction is to focus inward and ask yourself if that could be true. But I don’t have to because I know in my heart that I am not a racist, and this tactic will not work on me.
            So tell me Rob, one instance in anything that I have written here that would be a sign that I am a subconcious racist. You can’t because you will find nothing that even remotely resembles that kind of attitude.

            http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/pcism/sad_history.htm
            In the late 19th century, Democrat governors and Democrat-controlled state legislatures in the South couldn’t pass Jim Crow laws fast enough. Those Democrats created a nearly century-long, legal racial caste system that relegated blacks to the lowest educational, political, economic and social strata. I have family members who grew up under Jim Crow. To hear them tell it, it weren’t no joke.
            And let us not forget that during the same period it was Democrats throughout the United States who organized and ran America’s premier terrorist organization – the Ku Klux Klan.
            And speaking of the Klan, remember the great Democrat President Woodrow Wilson? After a screening of D.W. Griffith’s paean to the Ku Klux Klan, “Birth of a Nation,” Wilson, turned-movie critic, said of the film: “It is like writing history with lightning. And my only regret is that it is all so terribly true.”
            Yes, dear readers, the man who is worshipped as the utmost “progressive” (where and by who have you heard that term used lately?) of his time allowed federal officials to segregate “toilets, cafeterias and work” areas of various federal departments.
            In 1957, Orval Faubus, the governor of Arkansas, called out his state’s National Guard to prevent the integration of Central High School in Little Rock. In response, President Dwight D. Eisenhower sent U.S. troops to the city to escort nine frightened black teens into the school past riotous mobs inflamed by Faubus’ defiance of a federal court order. Faubus was a Democrat. Eisenhower was a Republican.

            What was that you were saying about hysterical? Buzzflash is BS.

          • Rob N. Hood April 12, 2010 at 1:39 pm #

            Dan, it is you who are skewing your “facts.” The “Republican Party” at the time of Lincoln was what the Democratic Party is today. By that I mean their mission, values, and political ideas, were much more closely related to if not exactly what The Democrats stand for today. Those ideals switched over time and anyone with any honesty would/could admit that. But don’t take my word for it, it’s all in the history books.

            Another example of such a pheonomenon is happening again today. For example, the Democrats have become a more fiscally conservative party than the Republicans (not by much perhaps), AND it is the “grassroots” Republican and Rightys who are out demonstrating and calling for violence against the establishment (some anyway) exactly like the Lefist hippy movement of the 60’s. It is the Democrats who are currently defending the government etc., just like the Republicans did in the 60’s and 70’s, and 80’s. The Rightys are against the government, very similar to the hippy movement back then.

            As for who has a KK member in the Senate I don’t know who you are talking about, maybe you can enlighten us all. And for the Blck Supreme Court Justice, he was nominated FOR his skin color alone, he is a staunch Conservative, as if you didn’t know. Same with all the other Black Republicans in or oout of office. The Right highlights them simply to make believe and fools somevery few people that they are an inclusive party.

            So Dan, your superficial and innacurate statements are indicative of your lack of depth of understanding issues, or pure dishonesty.

          • Dan April 12, 2010 at 1:59 pm #

            The Dems and Republicans haven’t swapped roles at all. You’ve been bamboozled by the co-opting of language. The Republican party is the party of liberty and always has been. The Republican party are the original liberals (in the true, classical sense) – always were and still are. The Democrats are statists who stole the word liberal because they knew “communist” didn’t market well. Now that they’ve dragged liberal through the mud for so long, that word’s ruined, too, so now it’s “progressive.” progressing toward what, you ask? Communism, of course. Nothing philosophical has changed, only the language. It’s very Orwellian, really.

        • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 8, 2010 at 10:53 pm #

          I said Skeeter because if you go back to where you plaigerised your above post you will see that the person’s name, who actually wrote it, is Skeeter. Don’t you know who you’re even stealing from?

          • Rob N. Hood April 16, 2010 at 10:07 am #

            It isn’t Liberals who ruined the label/word “liberal”, it was people like you with the help of the MSM. Dan, you are also not being honest about the history of the two parties. And anyway everybody, above a certain age, knows that things in reality are not that simplistic or nicely defined, espeically when it comes to politics.

            You can fool some of the people, and your type has, but you don’t and cannot fool most of them, thankfully.

            Currently, about half of our eligible electorate doesn’t vote, and it isn’t all apathy. We’re mad as hell and we’re not going to vote against our own interests any more. Of the other half of the electorate, the half that still votes, more of them (38%) identify as Independents, or third party voters, than as either Democrats or Republicans.

            Dan, of that 38% I would guesstimate that your “type” garners about half that, maybe slightly more. Your libertarian fantasyland history- imparied agenda will never gain much beyond that. So what are you all in it for? Not MONEY… oh gosh no!!!

          • Rob N. Hood April 16, 2010 at 10:09 am #

            grow up Neil

          • Dan April 16, 2010 at 10:18 am #

            Your knowledge of history seems to be a bit shallow. Better perhaps than many, but insufficient to deal with the issues we’re discussing. You’ve swallowed the communist propaganda of the 1960’s hook, line, sinker. It’s going to take a long time to extract all that tackle. Good luck with your journey.

  6. HaL Groar April 7, 2010 at 8:48 pm #

    I like windsock. Maybe add a adjective in front of it like “opinion windsock”. Just a thought.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 7, 2010 at 9:02 pm #

      I like it! It’s more descriptive. Thank you.

  7. paul wenum April 7, 2010 at 10:11 pm #

    The guys 90 plus years of age. I read this last month. There is a lot of truth to what this old guy has to say. Never argue with your elders that have been in the trenches.

  8. paul wenum April 7, 2010 at 11:18 pm #

    Today, no real thinking person in America looks or thinks about skin color. “Robbie boy” He hit a nerve with you as well Dan. Well said my friend! Damn, Alinsky is alive and well. What College do these people go to? Not the School of Reality I can now see why we are in the dire situation we are in today. Education is the key, but that is an entirely different issue that get’s my dander up and my Brother is a teacher!

  9. Cubanshamoo April 8, 2010 at 2:02 am #

    Yes Neil, windsock for people like Lovelock and ….. for people like Rob

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 8, 2010 at 11:52 am #

      Thanks CS. But I would hardly call Rob a windsock. I have said what I call Rob before, but Dan always deletes it! Rob is more like a catch-all. He reads all of the Leftist blogs and believes everything he reads.

  10. Rob N. Hood April 8, 2010 at 6:55 am #

    I see I may have hit a nerve… not the other way around.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 8, 2010 at 12:39 pm #

      Yes it is a raw nerve because people like you keep saying we are racists and we get sick of it because it is BS.

      • Dan April 8, 2010 at 12:48 pm #

        Well, it’s typical of the left. They project their own wrongs onto their opponents. Accuse your opponent of what you yourself are guilty of – isn’t that an Alinsky principle?

        • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 8, 2010 at 3:42 pm #

          http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm
          “The organizer’s first job is to create the issues or problems,’ and ‘organizations must be based on many issues.’ The organizer ‘must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression. He must search out controversy and issues, rather than avoid them, for unless there is controversy people are not concerned enough to act. . . . An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent.”

  11. Hal Groar April 8, 2010 at 8:18 pm #

    Rob stepped in it. I find it tiring to call a conservative a racist. That line has been used for the last twenty years it has become a joke. You can watch any lefty speak and without exception they call the right racist. Therefore all one can gather is that Dan’s point is the truth! They are guilty of the sin and can’t stand the fact that the right isn’t. It has become too predictable. This coming from Rob was just a matter of time.

  12. paul wenum April 8, 2010 at 9:56 pm #

    Wasn’t the civil rights act passed by republicans? Correct me if I’m wrong.

    • Rob N. Hood April 12, 2010 at 10:17 am #

      Basically you are wrong. First it was championed by MLK, JFK, RFK (Jesus too for that matter, and look what it got them) and then finally the Johnson adminsitration made it happen.

      • Dan April 12, 2010 at 11:00 am #

        The Civil Rights Act was voted for by over 80% of Republican lawmakers vs. like 60% of the Democrats.

        • Rob N. Hood April 13, 2010 at 6:07 am #

          Sorry, Dan, I just don’t beleive that- not based on any research I’ve done, but I simply don’t believe that. Even if it is true, there must be an explanation for it, like some kind of right-wing BS was attached to the bill etc. That happens all the time and you know it.

          • Dan April 13, 2010 at 9:07 am #

            Belief’s a funny thing. It doesn’t have to agree with the facts. Research it yourself, if you can get past the wall of lib-media brainwashing and denial. Equality is fundamental to the right. That’s all the right-wing stuff you need in the bill. No BS. Look at all the race-based legislation that needs to categorize and establish different rules for different colors. All from the left. Affirmative action being a prime example.

  13. cubanshamoo April 9, 2010 at 6:38 am #

    No Neil, I don’t call Rob windsock, but …. which mean “beeep” to censure the bad word I have in mind.
    Bush have done more for Africa that many Dems (presidents or not) but for liberals the important is what you say, not what you do.
    For Republicans the better way of saying is doing. Thanks to Republicans, Dems enjoy freedon still today.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 9, 2010 at 7:04 pm #

      Don’t say it!!! Dan will have more work if you do!!! The thing about Rob is that everything he says is designed to put us on the defensive. I think what I will do from now on is just agree with him no matter what he writes. No matter how offensive it is I’m just going to say “Rob, you’re right! I am a hate filled-sexist-racist-homophobic-right-wing-psychopatic-hitler lovin’-baby brain eatin’-scotch breath-planet destroyin’-war mongerin’-oil addicted-Bush lovin’-gun totin’-red face-two faced-wife beatin-redneck-child abusin’-bible thumpin-Republican. Thanks for pointing that out. Now how do I be just like you then?”
      I wonder how that would go over.

  14. paul wenum April 9, 2010 at 10:04 pm #

    No, Neil we are not rednecks, racists, or gun toting idiots. Yes, some, as well as I, own guns and use them correctly which is my right, not an entitlement. Nor am I, or others “Rednecks” even though I fail to put on sunscreen, finally we ar not racists. If so, Condi would not have been a household name as well as Colin Powell and others before them. We are simply Americans that value our Country and family values that is sorely lacking in today’s society. If people have a problem with that, “They have a problem.” Not us. We balance our checkbooks, watch how we spend, cut coupons and don’t ever ask for our neighbors to pay our bills. That, my friend is a true conservative. It’s funny. Numerous friends of mine are Democrats and you know something? They have the same values as a conservative and do the same as stated above. Bottom line, let’s not stereo-type people as Robbie Boy does be it either party. We are all Americans. Never forget that.

  15. cubanshamoo April 10, 2010 at 2:18 am #

    Me too Rob… I am a hate filled-sexist-racist-homophobic-right-wing-psychopatic-hitler lovin’-baby brain eatin’-scotch breath-planet destroyin’-war mongerin’-oil addicted-Bush lovin’-gun totin’-red face-two faced-wife beatin-redneck-child abusin’-bible thumpin-Republican. Are you happy now Rob???
    I don’t think it will work Neil. They can’t read subtexts.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 10, 2010 at 8:35 pm #

      Naw, you’re probably right. He’d probably think we were serious. And where would that get us?

      • Rob N. Hood April 12, 2010 at 10:15 am #

        I would say that I didn’t call YOU any of those things. Why such a hard time with REALITY….???!!!

  16. paul wenum April 10, 2010 at 10:28 pm #

    The problem is, that is exactly what left wing liberals think we are. Does it come from the schools? What can we do to get this mindset changed? Any excellent suggestions other than voting for the “left Wing.?” ( Not true Democrats.) Let me know because this is disconcerting to all conservatives.

    • Rob N. Hood April 12, 2010 at 10:22 am #

      Not to all conservatives, just the far right-extremists.

  17. cubanshamoo April 11, 2010 at 2:10 am #

    Oh no, never vot for a leftist, even the mild ones may put USA’s freedom in serious danger. Look what happened in Venezuela.
    It was an incredible beautifull country, since Chavez arrived to power he eliminate all democratic laws to facilitate his perpetuity in Power.
    On the environmental side The bay of Maracaibo is now a disaster having Russian ships cleaning their tank garbage into their waters.
    As a paraphrase of Goethe: if you feel somehow pitty for leftists, try not to fall in their hands….
    They can kill you faster than you think

  18. Hal Groar April 11, 2010 at 8:34 pm #

    I have a far lefty sister who, (big surprise here) is an attorney. Her and I along with my other siblings are working closely on a family project and are spending a lot of time together as of late. We joust constantly back and forth about the ridiculous happenings in the news. I find that she holds firm to her beliefs even when the facts are pointed out. She laughs about it! “I don’t care what the facts are, we need to pay more taxes!” There is a place in a Lib’s mind that will not allow for change. It’s like someone who recounts a childhood memory as unfolding a certain way and when you show them the video tape they refuse to accept the reality. How do you change that? You don’t. You need to let them come to their own conclusion. I watch my children closely while they do their school-work and try to teach them to question everything. My daughter would make you all proud! (except Rob) She points out the folly of Global Warming when-ever there is a news cast ending with the words “…caused by Global Warming”. I am a proud Papa!

  19. cubanshamoo April 12, 2010 at 6:25 am #

    Yeah Hal, you should be a proud dad.
    I am also one. I have two daughter and they are always in trouble at the school. Teachers here are all from the blind left, using Che Guevara T-Shirts and trying to convince the girls that when the muslim boys abuse of them is not because they are Jackass, but because it is their culture and we all most to respect their culture.
    So I can’t trust the public education here in Europe, and when one of my girls came crying because an arab boy make something wrong to them, I just go directly to the islamist home and give my deadlines. These kind of ultimatum are very efficient and now many parents are following my example.
    Now my daughters are instructed to leave the classroom if the teacher start to talk about the peacefull side of islam, or Global Warming. At meetings it is very easy to justify since arab boys alwys leave the classroom when teachers start talking about Christmas.

  20. Rob N. Hood April 12, 2010 at 10:22 am #

    Idealistic indoctrination from the gound up…?! Proud-o-that???!!!

  21. cubanshamoo April 13, 2010 at 12:21 am #

    No. Propaganda have a limit, look yourself in a mirrow and you will see the dangerous effects. You are a victim of propaganda.
    If tomorrow I tell you that a McCastro (the socialist equivalent of a McDonald) is healthy food created with the [edited] of the Comandante, you will run to test it… Bonne appetit!

  22. Rob N. Hood April 13, 2010 at 6:11 am #

    Insinuating that I am a racist in response is itself an Alinsky tactic. It is you Dan, and others who employ that tactic, not I. I never once called any of you anything related to that post. You jumped to that conclusion very quickly. Why? Because perhaps it’s true?

    Being a Liberal makes it VERY difficult (not impossible of course) to also be racist. Just a fact. Now for you all, it isn’t much of a jump, based upon your politics. That’s also just a fact. Now you can deal with FACTS or not, your choice.

  23. paul wenum April 14, 2010 at 8:45 pm #

    Rob got caught with “His pants on the ground.”

  24. Rob N. Hood April 15, 2010 at 7:21 am #

    Paul, stop pulling my pants down without my permission.

  25. paul wenum April 15, 2010 at 9:11 pm #

    Rob, nice response. You a Favre fan? Just kidding!

  26. Rob N. Hood April 16, 2010 at 7:35 am #

    Thanks, I thought it was funny too.

    Here’s my impression of you guys: “Facts be damned, I’ll just make up my own because I’m a rugged individualist and don’t need anybody, especially some pinko communist Mao loving Lefty, to tell me anything!”

  27. paul wenum April 16, 2010 at 11:00 pm #

    You are somewhat correct. Facts are facts and that’s how we make our decisions, not based upon emotions like the far left. As to Mao, isn’t he dead as well as his philosophy? If he and his phiosophy have recently resurfaced, I wonder by whom? Not me, nor my party. Do you know the answer? If so, I would dearly like to know the answer.

  28. Rob N. Hood April 17, 2010 at 12:56 pm #

    No one in the Democratic party, or even any Liberals that I know of, other than perhaps some on the FAR left fringes even talk about Mao let alone his politics. I wonder who does…?? oh right! Limburger and Wr(b)eck and O’Lielly, and Faux News, that’s who. You asked, and got the correct answer you didn’t want to hear.

  29. paul wenum April 17, 2010 at 10:50 pm #

    My God are you in denial!

  30. Rob N. Hood April 18, 2010 at 2:37 pm #

    Oh really? Let’s see your evidence… the quotes… and by whom….. whatever it is……….I’m waiting. (I’m sure Neil will attempt to accomodate me on that… well, bring it on…….!! Again, I’ll be waiting with bated breath (whatever that is)……………

    Paul- it is you who is in denial. It is you who is stuck in the muck. It is you who has top demonize a whole group of people by making things up. I don’t do that- it is sooooooooo easy to shed light on the dark underbelly of the Right.

    I’m waiting Neil………..

  31. paul wenum April 18, 2010 at 9:41 pm #

    Check comments made my Obama officials. You seem computer literate correct? You know how to cut and paste. I’ll give you a lesson. Research what I said and If you find nobody in the Obama administration that has not mentioned Mao I will personally donate $200.00 to Minnesota Majority. Agree? If you lose, you pay as well. I will match you. Documents speak my friend. Make my Day and prove me wrong. I love a challenge and failure is never an option for me when I know for a fact I’m correct.

  32. Rob N. Hood April 20, 2010 at 7:24 am #

    So what if someone “mentioned” Mao? That doesn’t mean anything. In fact I’m 99 % certain without having to check it that it was in response to what the right-wing-nuts were, and are, saying about Obama. So stop trying to win an argument you already lost. And please don’t donate that $200 to MN Majority. Send it to someone who really needs it, like to Haiti instead.

  33. paul wenum April 20, 2010 at 10:47 pm #

    The Haitian leaders kept the donations. Don’t you read????

  34. Rob N. Hood April 21, 2010 at 8:05 am #

    That usually happens- but some always gets to the people too.

    Send your money where ever you want. We still have that freedom left to us anyway… I assume that will be the last freedom to die in America.

  35. paul wenum April 22, 2010 at 9:27 pm #

    Everyone should tithe. Unfortunately most don’t. That said, American’s are the most giving people than any other country in the world. What does that say about our values Rob??? We are a caring nation. Let’s start caring about who we elect and why we elect he/she and then inspect instead of expect before we vote. There is a difference. Trust me.

  36. Rob N. Hood April 24, 2010 at 7:07 pm #

    That’s just another one of those great Myths Paul. Maybe it was even true once upon a time, but I doubt even that. Makes us feel good to say that though, doesn’t it? Just like apple pie sounds good….mmmmmmmmm.

    Don’t get me wrong- I LIKE apple pie!

    There’s a difference between the parties Paul? Sure, but not enough to make any difference, in case you haven’t noticed. Oh, that’s right, you haven’t.

  37. paul wenum April 24, 2010 at 7:48 pm #

    Depends on if you vote and know who your are voting for and why. I have noticed one thing over the years and that is people such as you that never vote, (less than 50% or Americans), and then complain when things don’t go your way and if they did vote they vote off looks, sound bites with no substance behind the statements. Until Americans get off their arse and really look at who is running, inspect their alleged stated plans, know their candidates deeply, nothing will change. Every since TV the good candidates have disappeared. They don’t want people knowing what toilet paper they use and that’s our “indepth reporting” by our infamous media that is partially to blame. The major blame is apathy by the voters that don’t show in November and the complain thereafter. Enough said.

  38. Rob N. Hood April 26, 2010 at 9:42 am #

    Oh, so now you Know I don’t vote? I’ve voted EVERY major election, and some minor ones since 1980.

    You missed the boat as have many people. VOTING doesn’t change anything anymore…if it ever did !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaake Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  39. paul wenum April 26, 2010 at 9:44 pm #

    You must be talking about the high school president?

  40. Rob N. Hood April 27, 2010 at 9:16 am #

    Paul, this is your reality clock ….tick tick tick… time to wake up.

  41. Rob N. Hood April 27, 2010 at 11:04 am #

    Here’s some more truth about the Republicans. Can you handle the Truth?

    After meeting behind closed doors with Wall Street executives, Republicans are protecting Wall Street by blocking us from beginning debate on how to hold Wall Street accountable. Senate Democrats want to restore accountability and transparency to Wall Street, and put consumers back in control. The “Restoring American Financial Stability Act” puts in place the strongest consumer financial protections ever and will help put a stop to the reckless behavior that cost Americans over 8 million jobs and trillions of dollars in savings. But by voting to protect Wall Street, Republicans are leaving hard-working Americans vulnerable by voting against:

    •Ending Taxpayer Bailouts. As long as giant financial firms believe the government will bail them out if they get into trouble, they only have the incentive to get larger and take bigger risks. This bill guarantees that taxpayers will never again be forced to bail out reckless Wall Street firms by creating a safe orderly liquidation mechanism for the FDIC to unwind failing significant financial companies through a panel of bankruptcy judges; shareholders and unsecured creditors will bear losses; and management will be removed.
    •Ending “Too Big To Fail.” The bill provides for strict new capital, leverage, liquidity, risk management and other requirements as companies grow in size and complexity, with significant requirements on companies that pose risks to the financial system. The Federal Reserve will be authorized, as a last resort, to require a large complex company, to divest some of its holdings if it poses a grave threat to the financial stability of the United States.
    •Putting a New Cop on The Beat To Watch Out For Consumers. The bill establishes the Financial Stability Oversight Council to focus on identifying, monitoring and addressing systemic risks posed by large, complex financial firms as well as products and activities that spread risk across firms.
    •Bringing Sunlight and Transparency to Shadowy Markets. The legislation eliminates loopholes that allow risky and abusive practices to go unnoticed and unregulated – including loopholes for over-the-counter derivatives, asset-backed securities, hedge funds, mortgage brokers and payday lenders.
    •Guaranteeing Clear Information in Plain English. The bill creates the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which will have the sole job of protecting American consumers from unfair, deceptive and abusive financial products and practices and will ensure people get the clear information they need on loans and other financial products from credit card companies, mortgage brokers, banks and others.
    •Protecting Against Bernie Madoff-Type Scams. The SEC has failed to perform aggressive oversight and is unable to understand some of the very companies it is supposed to regulate. This bill creates a program within the SEC to encourage people to report securities violations and mandates an annual assessment of the SEC’s internal supervisory controls. The bill also establishes a new Office of Credit Rating Agencies at the SEC to strengthen regulation of credit rating agencies, many of which failed in the past to warn people about risks hidden throughout layers of complex structures.
    These provisions would hold Wall Street accountable and put consumers back in control, but we cannot pass them as long as Republicans continue to protect Wall Street.

  42. paul wenum April 27, 2010 at 10:14 pm #

    Cut and Paste, Cut and Cut and Paste. And your point is in your OWN words?

  43. SPURWING PLOVER March 17, 2011 at 11:11 pm #

    This lovelock wacko subcribes to this GAIA pagan poppycock he is no real scientists just a wacko new age weirdo who needs to be sent to the mental institution he is totaly nuts

Leave a Reply

A project of Minnesota Majority