Track back to Townhall Blog Posting on Ron Paul

My responses to Khomar

Khomar "understands"

where religious terrorist "are comming from" Great! As long as you are replacing a corrupt and intolerant religion. :) (couldn't help) First, a little scolding: HOW DARE you talk down to me you little twerp! I am a 40 year old former Lieutenant in the United States Army who served during Iraq in ’91. I refuse to be talked down to by some snot nosed kid who should be out protesting with Code Pink. You show your true colours when you say you changed your mind on the war due to the Fairness Doctrine. Read the 14 points of the UN resolution, and tell me it was an unjust, unconstitutional war! First, I prefer to look at as a continuation of hostilities from the ’91 action. Since after 12 years Iraq had not met the terms that THEY signed to in ending hostilities, no argument, we had the right and properly duty to re-engage. Second, you have the right, and again duty, to attack anyone who is actively firing upon your troops, Iraq was! Stuff that in you peace pipe and smoke it! My problem, is that we didn’t take Baghdad in ’91. It totally ticks me off that finish it then and there, and it is up to today’s kids to do the job they wouldn’t let me 12 years prior. Get out of my party you Freak! You are not a Conservative, you are not a Republican, you and your ilk are using a Libertarian whack to add the “unhinged right” term to the media story. Your condescension and (I’ll go a little light on you here) youthful “I know it all” attitude doesn’t belong in the party of the adults. Let us do what needs to be done. My whole problem with Ron Paul is supporters that act so much like the whacked out liberals at Move On! Stop drinking the Cool-Aid! I am just so thankful that this interloper hasn’t got a chance at the nomination. Sorry, I had a Mark Levin moment :)

Post continues with rebbutal

Now, The atrocities of the Christian faiths are well known, I will not go even close to debating them as it would take a few books. However, please do not try to school me on English history. I did grow up in the country after all and spent 2 years in British schools, I think I got a better history lesson than you did on US history. In fact, I grew up in Scotland and know the oppression that went on there. I can also go into the entire history of the rebellion of the Catholic Church in England. I remember celebrating Guy Fawkes day as a kid, and yes he is burned in effigy, although they do just build a bon fire sometimes as they did in Bradford when I was there last week. Guy Fawkes was no hero! He was a religious terrorist fighting a guerrilla war as a proxy of France and Germany. I know persecutions were occurring at the time, it does not remove the fact that the Catholics in England at the time were spying and running a terror war against the government. The Gun Powder Conspiracy on November 5th was only the pinnacle of this war. My point was only that you don’t get too many chances to get it wrong in today’s election campaign cycle. Associating you campaign with a religious terrorist, no matter how long ago it happened, probably is not the best move.

Dear sir,

I respect and congratulate you on you settlements toward the Koran. However, I do wish that you could include in your official refusal of the Koran, that you do wish that if anyone could tutor you to the incorrectness of your statements, that you would welcome it. Also, as a Christian, you understand that even to hold the "Holy Koran" would "defile" it. And, therefore, in an effort not to alienate those in you district of Muslim faith, that you must refuse.

Hope this helps!

 

I do not know his name, and it doesn’t really matter. Last night at about 11:45 PM, in St. Louis, MO I shook the hand of an American hero, an American soldier! He very embarrassedly lowered his head and thanked me. I told him to thank everyone he saw in uniform today for me. I think he may have seen the tears in my eyes as I moved aside, he didn’t say anything.

I do not know if he followed my wishes. It doesn’t really matter. For those of us who have placed themselves between the fascists and my little girl, we know who we are. You can see it in our smile, and in our tears.

God bless those who fight for us, and God bless America!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aC2eunpbSw

A friend once asked me if I was still afraid that terrorists were after my family, my response today, for the families that the terrorists did get!

Let us see, 3 tons of ammonium nitrate In the hands of terror suspects in Toronto. A chemical dispersing bomb on the loose in the UK. Yeah, we are all completely safe!

Toronto no less, isn’t that “sort of like shooting Care Bears.” I love that line!

Do you deny that there is an international Islamic movement to kill as many infidels as possible?

Another quick question, where did all of the “Palestinians” come from?

I don’t believe that my family is in any more danger than anyone else, but I do believe that we are all in danger to some extent. I am still not sure that any government can defend against an loosely affiliated group of killers. Although the Knights Templar seemed to do a good job back in the 500s. I still think that a “private” organization that is not bound by international law is a good idea to track these guys down. Thankfully there are others out there doing just that and my services are not required, yet… At least they said they would keep my resume on file.

Sent to openforum@denverpost.com 3:21 PM MT 8/1/2006

Please consider this response for guest commentary in response to your article published in the “Perspective” section 7/30/2006 titled “Cooling the mall, heating the planet” by Stan Cox.

Hyperlink:

http://www.denverpost.com/perspective/ci_4104579

Dear Sirs,

I would like to take both you and Mr. Cox to task for the publication of the article entitled “Cooling the mall, heating the planet” published in the 7/30/2006 edition of Perspective. The first issue that sincerely concerns me is the title ascribed to Mr. Cox of “Senior Scientist”. While I have little doubt that Mr. Cox is a scientist, and may even be extremely well respected in his particular field, since his area of research and training is plant breading, it does not lend itself to global climate change. Your publication of his title solely as “Senior Scientist” therefore is tantamount to adding authority to his opinion on the subject matter not necessarily present. I can only assume that this is intentional as Mr. Cox publishes widely using the title of "plant breeder and writer in Salina, Kansas”. Indeed even in the original publication he is listed as a “plant breeder and senior scientist at the Land Institute”.

But maybe Mr. Cox works with a world class climatologist, heck, he might even work for Dr. Gray! But, no… We find that the “Land Institute”, according to it’s website, does not employ a single climatologist. Hey, I was trying to give you one there guys!

Moving on into the article we find very soon that alarmingly “16 percent of the average U.S. household's electricity consumption” is used for air conditioning, with no mention of how much life sustaining heat for the winter months is in this percentage. This places this total and statistic in the range of a “Straw Man”, and now we are tilting at windmills (pun intended) to find the coherent thought. What Mr. Cox would like us to believe is that this is an ungodly amount of energy. But without the physical numbers i.e. the amount of Kilowatt hours this represents I am left with out a comparison. I would wager that heat (produced in much of the US via the same heat pump that produces the air conditioning) is higher, and would be right by going to www.rmi.org the Rocky Mountain Institute by CO2 emissions space heating (as of 1997) was about 4 times higher than AC. What else is there, well you will find out that “other appliances” in my estimation that would be TVs, VCRs, Desktop Computers, ect…, is over 3 times as high as air conditioning not the “same as” as listed in the article, but Mr. Cox just might have updated numbers on me. Perspective changes everything.

We also find out from Mr. Cox that the refrigerants used in air conditioners are also global warming gases! Funny, I hadn’t heard this one before. A simple Google search for “refrigerant global warming” does show that the new refrigerants can in fact be global warming gasses (not exactly proven as of now). Pity that we were forced to move away from using Freon by alarmist like Mr. Cox, just because it was never proved that it created holes in the ozone layer.

The simple facts are this, CO2 has never been proven to cause global warming. In fact there is a case for global warming causing higher levels of CO2! The levels of CO2 caused by humans is miniscule compared to the overall production by nature. And, since CO2 is actually heavier than O2 and is one of the heavier gases in the atmosphere it tends to sink and be absorbed by things like plants.

Another fact missing from this debate is the actual top greenhouse in the atmosphere is water vapor. This accounts for about 4% of gases contained in the atmosphere. But how much CO2 is there, you ask? Well let’s see if we can make a comparison based on the pre and post industrial revolution numbers. It would seem that the air pre-industrial had about .028% CO2, and post-industrial it up substantially to .038%. Wow! With that information in hand, why isn’t Mr. Cox calling for a ban on watering my lawn? In fact, we should stop all of the grain we are growing for ethanol production, because I am sure it needs to be watered.

So what are we to do? Without a single solid piece of provable evidence that humans are causing global warming, we are to place a huge burden on our economy? This is all based on computer models that can’t regularly tell us if there is going to be rain tomorrow, but can, if we believe people like Mr. Cox, tell us what the water level in Central Park will be in 2020. I don’t think I will be wearing hi-waters, but who knows that may be the fashion.

I have worked with computer models before, I doubt Mr. Cox has. But be that as it may, I know that the models are only as good as the information put in them. A simple fact is that we can not record, enter, and compute the amount of data necessary for a good model to exist. This means that we are dealing with a stick figure compared, to the Rembrandt of mother nature. These models give us the inkling of a possibility, not a scientific fact, and may yet be based in incorrect or faulty data.

One final point to make is that the production of greenhouse gases would have been substantially lower if we had not abandoned nuclear energy in the late 70’s. And that industrial production of CO2 in the US has dropped substantially over the last 20 years. Once again we let the alarmists drive us away from a safe, clean fuel source. Will Mr. Cox be happy when we are living in caves again? I hear that they are very well insulated.

http://corruptedlamb.townhall.com

So Katie Couric is doing a listening tour in my back yard. While you have heard many going on about how the CBS news is going "perky" I think many are missing the point. Since when did a "News Cast" need a listening tour?

I didn't see Brit Hume or Bill O'Reilly do a listening tour... Nor, did Al Franken or Randi Rhodes do one. (Although, come to think of it, they may have actually benefited from one!)

The point is this, I do not believe that there has been a systemic move of the populace in the last 15 to 30 years. The populace did not suddenly change and leave CBS news without audience, we were offered an alternative, and took it in droves! CBS has about as much of a clue to what we want to watch as a deaf bat has of giving good directions.

It is my belief that this was always the case, however, I could be wrong. I just believe that you have to offer a person who knowledgeable, trustworthy, and has enough sense to understand, that WE are the consumers. WE will decide what to watch.

The big story here is not the listening tour, it is the blatant admission by CBS News that it had no idea what we wanted.

And so Nancy Polisi goes on the record telling us how to deal with North Korean dictator.  http://democraticleader.house.gov/press/releases.cfm?pressReleaseID=1672  Welcome to the party, why don't you attack the president while your at it.  Oh, sorry, you already did!

She calls for "six party, multilateral, and bilateral diplomatic negotiations", maybe we should throw in the kitchen sink to! And what does she fail to mention?  The fact that Clinton and "not so Albright" already did that, meaning that the Clinton legacy once again is nothing but sand. 

What she does not say is even more telling...  That by abandoning the six party talks and starting to talk bilaterally with North Korea, we will be embarrassing both the Chinese and Japanese.  Telling them thanks, but we can handle this.

After we tick them off, and fail because we have nothing to smack beloved leader with.  (the chinese and japanese do!) Then she can blame the failure on the president, but only after attacking him first.