Bring It On!

By Paul Watson The Cranky Brit on Nov 17, 2006 | Reply

steve,

So, you’re saying global warming is a plot by Satan to make himself mor comfortable? Surely that’s a good reason for all the fundamentalists to fight it.

By Liberal Jarhead on Nov 17, 2006 | Reply

If that were the requirement to end global warming, we’d have all been wearing parkas after two presidential elections in a row were stolen by a semi-literate coke-snorting insider-trading draft dodger who had demonstrated his prowess at running things by using his Harvard MBA to run every business he ever had into bankruptcy and wrecking the environment and educational system of his home state when he was governor.

By Jersey McJones on Nov 17, 2006 | Reply

Anyone surprised by this would also be surprised that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are comeplete failures, that pollution is having a negative effect on the environment, that laizzez faire capitalism has destroyed the American family, and that vinegar and baking soda make for great table-top volcano models.

JMJ

By steve on Nov 17, 2006 | Reply

Jersey?  “Laizzez” faire capitalism has destroyed the American family?  Heh… try divorce, drugs and “teh gay” marriage. 

Since when has pollution had a positive effect on the environment anyway? 
 

By Paul Watson The Cranky Brit on Nov 17, 2006 | Reply

steve,

The argument, as I assume you know, is that because most low paid families, or those with children, now require two incomes, this means that husband and wife rarely see eac hother leading to divorce. Obviously, that is a simplistic version, but that’s the basics. People are having to work so much that they don’t have enough time to sustain their family life. Additionally, the instant gratification culture that laissez faire capitalism encourages reduces people’s willingness to put in the necesary work to sustain a relationship. The UK effectively has gay marriage. Divorce rates have not spiked (probably because they were at 60% anyway). Nice try to justify your prejudices, though.

By steve on Nov 17, 2006 | Reply

Oh Paul… You know I was having a bit of fun with it.

But hey, let’s take a look at some of Nancy’s “San Francisco Values” without talking about sexuality, shall we?:

Minimum Wage $8.75 an hour.  $3.60 more than it is now yet, still offers completely unaffordable housing due to the highest real estate prices per square foot and highest rent on the planet for a city of 750,000.  So much for a “living wage”.  Find someone in that city that earns 8.75 an hour who pays 1200 for a studio apartment.

Forces businesses to pay health care in order to do business in the city.  Yet, just a few miles out of the city, you don’t.

A higher than average rate of homeless people who have been jailed for pan handling.  In fact, San Francisco is one of the meanest cities when it comes to homeless people.

One of the most diverse cities on the planet as well, yet Nancy leads an “all white” team into the Congressional leadership.

My prejudices are what they are yes, but at least I admit them… unlike this lady.

By Paul Watson The Cranky Brit on Nov 17, 2006 | Reply

steve,

Sorry, I left off the smiley. I was being about as serious as you were. (especially about the prejudice comment as on this issue I’m as prejudiced as you, just going the other way)