Letters to the Editor
-
Say what?
"Incoherence and utter failure! 2008 is off and running!"
I beg your pardon. We've had this ever since Bush took office.
-
YES
Good ol' Jerry. What a pity America was never smart enough to elect him to the White House.
-
Welcome Home!
If we had elected President Moonbeam to a couple terms, then Linda Ronstadt might have become our first woman President. And we might have flying hydrogen cars plus peace and love.
Missed opportunity.
-
We'd at least have had
a Chief Executive capable of framing a coherent English sentence.
More than we have now.
I gris-gris every SUV/gigantic pickup with a Bush/Cheney (Hey, nimrod! - Gee - why are ya still driving a beatup '98 with a '00 bumper sticker, huh? Economy's not been so stellar after-freaking-all for ya? Why's that do ya think? Can you think?) I see.
That's only due to a lack of shoulder mounted anti-Bushite missile launcher...
An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor
does the truth become error because nobody will see it. -Mohandas K. Gandhi
-
It's Not Too Late
If the Democrats manage to lose here in 2008, expect Brown to run for California governor in 2010 and President in 2012. He'll be 74 then.
-
Hey Andy
Welcome back Andy. It's been a dry couple of weeks. I am looking forward to you get me back up to speed. Any thoughts on the emerging personal credit crisis in the U.K.?
footsore
-
Go Jerry
His track record as mayor of Oakland may be have been mixed. But as Attorney General, Jerry has been kicking ass on a consistent basis, particularly in the area of environmental protection. Rock on, Jerry!
-
My Heroes
I have always loved Moonbeam. I was sceptical, well, angry, that an actor was elected governor of the state, but I have to say I've really warmed up to the Governator, too. I think I will frame two lipstick stained photos of them and put them on my mantel.
-
Easy solution
16 states sue the Environmental Protection Agency over its refusal to allow California to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles.
Vote for Ron Paul, and California can be as Communitarian as it wants to be. See, "State's Rights" works both ways, and isn't just an excuse to be racist or a way for government to sell out the people to big corporations.
-
I'm sure Steve Johnson's not worried
Call me cynical, but as soon as this case gets to the Supreme Court I'm sure John Roberts will be happy to make sure his cohorts vote 5-4 in favor of the EPA, just like Bush hired him to do. And all of us who care about global warming can go jump in a lake.
-
Lesson
Ever try to explain to kids that something called the Environmental Protection Agency is actually trying to keep state governments from protecting the environment? That's the conversation I had this morning with my sons. The only way I could easily explain it was to say that federal agencies are political bodies. Wouldn't it be nice if they weren't? If their missions were pure, kind of like NRA and NARAL and ACLU? Those organizations' goals remain the same regardless of which party is in power. I would like to think the EPA operated that way too. Maybe appointments at those agencies should expire on a different time schedule than federal elected officials'. Something like that.
-
@lateagain
Or just get rid of them and let the states do what they want. Like CA.
-
Under Ron Paul: Chris Sinnard's actionable energy use
Chris,
Please have your people contact my people. Your energy use while composing that last post (and the resulting carbon dioxide production) has resulted in a marginal increase in global temperatures and a marginal increase in the likelyhood of huricane damage to my property (an automobile) in New England. This has lowered the net value of my vehicle.
Under Ron Paul's vision for environmental protection, I should be able to sue you for this damage. I imagine my lawyer will say you should owe me .0000000002 cents, and your lawyer will suggest it's more like .0000000001 cents, but I'm willing to take it to a jury. Once that's been settled, I'm going to sue everyone else who uses energy, and then they'll probably want to sue me. Each jury will find a slightly different amount of damage for each gallon of gas used or for each kiloWatt, but that's the way it goes. Hopefully, my lawyers will be the best.
It's a shame we couldn't have a federal (or, God-forbid, international) agency to figure out the net (financial!) damage done by burning gasoline or using electricity and assessing some sort of carbon tax, but I'm pretty sure the founding fathers would prefer that we sue each other.
-
prove it
Shit or get off the pot.
-
And besides
I don't live in New England, I live in a different state, and I don't see how the executive alone would be able to have the power to make changes in one or two terms, so your argument isn't in context. I love hearing these bullshit horror stories about Dr. Paul though.
Really, I do. They amuse me.
-
I know I'm going to regret this but...
I don't live in New England, I live in a different state...
That's sort of the point. It's my understanding, after reading this interview, (http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/10/16/paul/) that Ron Paul advocates using property value and rights to address environmental issues. That means lawsuits to me. He also vaguely mentions local and state regulation. So if you live in a different state, but produce pollution that crosses state lines, then what? Get sued in federal court? Doesn't this lead to scenarios humorously alluded to by CTMorling?
...and I don't see how the executive alone would be able to have the power to make changes in one or two terms, so your argument isn't in context
This line of reasoning is cold comfort to Ron Paul skeptics. You're supposed to explain how we've misunderstood his policies, or why they are in fact reasonable, see? Simply stating that we shouldn't worry because he won't be able to implement any of his hair-brained schemes doesn't bring anyone over to your side. We want someone with good ideas, not someone with a bunch of crazy ideas that they can't deliver on anyway.