Political signs - What to do with them after the election?

[olddog]

You really need to watch the Frontline episode "Heat". Dude...were all screwed!

Keep hiding your head in the sand but it's going to catch up with you or your kids. The earth can only support so many American life styles. China, India and Micro Indonesia are taking over. Right now they are going through the same growing pains America is still growing through. Manhattan, Florida, parts of Texas, New Jersey etc...are going to be under water. For Christ sake it's already happening. Something is happening and if we don't wake up and address it we're doomed. Personally, I hold little hope for the future of mankind. Call me a kook but the evidence is here now.

Some people say technology holds the answer. I think we all need to curb our expectations and learn how to live with less. Conserve, recycle, move close to work or quit, walk to the store, ride your bike. We're too damn fat anyway. Keep your appliances turn off or down. Quit having so many damn babies. We don't have to rely on technology for the answer when it's our over indulgent life styles that is the problem.

I've drastically cut back on my gasoline, electrical and natural gas usage by keeping lights off and the thermostat up high in the summer and cooler in the winter. I'm always turning things off and unplugging things. I walk to the store when possible. But I don't see anybody else doing a god damn thing. They drive around in their SUVs like nothings happening. They just don't get it and I don't expect anything to change

olddog (aka kook)

[DerbyDad03]

er: "similarly inclined"

Similarly inclined to do what? What did Sadaam do to the US that others might be "similarly inclined" to do?

You used the words "fight back". What did Sadaam do that we were "fighting back" against?

[tnom]

You are getting your time periods mixed up. Going into the playoffs the Rays were definitely the underdogs. They were in last place just last year. Palin correctly called them the underdogs during this time period.

Once the Rays became the American league champs most all sporting news authorities ranked the Rays as the team to beat. The Redsox became the underdogs at that later time. Palin then identified the Redsox correctly as the underdogs. Look it up if you don't believe it.

So it seems that she may be more on top of the changing times than you think.

[Nate Nagel]

On the flip side, Osama, who actually attacked the US, is still at large.

nate

[tnom]

I must make a correction. Change all references of the Redsox to the Phillies. Sorry Philadelphia.

[Bob F]

But then, the Republicans plans and methods are 100% proven failures. In both foreign affairs and economic planning. They never learn.

[DerbyDad03]

Well, you sure did miss my point!

The reason for the quotes was not to voice my opinion on whether or not she is "on top of the changing times".

I was responding to "she isn't an airhead and can think on her feet"

In this age of instant playback of anything said by a candidate, not to mention the plethora of satirical news shows, you'd think that she (or at least her speechwriters) would be agile enough to change the words she uses when sucking up to different audiences. I'm not saying she wasn't correct in what she was saying at the time she said it, but there is more than one way to say that the underdogs were victorious.

[HeyBub]

## He made a face and it stayed that way.

## He made a face and it stayed that way.

[Jim Yanik]

"olddog" wrote in news:NW3Mk.88708$ [e-mail]:

you go right ahead in cutting back.

global warming is a bunch of nonsense.

we need more nuclear power plants.

[Jim Yanik]

Nate Nagel wrote in news: [e-mail]:

but not able to really DO anything;he has to spend his energies dodging and hiding.Even though he's found refuge in Pakistan. (a nuclear-armed Islamic state)

[Clot]

That's a powerful speech that I do not recall hearing before. Thanks for the link.

[retired54]

hence...we're screwed

agreed about nuclear tho, but i don't understand....if global warming is "nonsense" why not more coal plants?

Watch "Heat":

olddog

[olddog]

I agree. He's a big piece of the puzzle but killing him wouldn't solve the problem. But you know, nothing would please Bush more.

olddog

[Clot]

I agree whole heartedly that we cannot go on consuming at the rate we currently do in the west. I've used CFL lighting for more than 25 years and ensured that my home is well insulated, (UK and mostly cold!). I switched to diesel powered motors more than 20 years ago, walk and use a bicycle.

We have to limit our impact and set examples. China set an excellent example with their one child policy and despite their growing environmental impact, we have to recognise that their country is presently the factory for the planet, i.e. we are exporting our footprint to them.

[HeyBub]

Oh, fiddle-de-dee.

So what if parts of New Jersey and other places go under water - we'll move inland. If we can put up with the population density of Hong Kong, the entire planet's population could fit in a space the size of Georgia - and Hong Kong has a pretty high standard of living.

By every economic standard, we are better off putting resources into adjusting to whatever climate changes come upon us than trying to mitigate them.

Conserve is good. Consumer recycling is usually not good - it costs more to recycle than to discard. Reuse is better. I live in one-half of a duplex and my office is in the other. I don't have a bike. I'm not fat. I don't have babies.

Our "over-indulgent life style" is the problem? You have a point there. Our technology allows us to have an average life expectancy somewhere in the

70's. Were it not for the technology, we'd live to an average of half that (which is true for many non-technological societies today still).

I am pleased that you've done what you could to cut back. That means there's more for me.

As for "they just don't get it," I suggest there's nothing - or at least not much - to "get." But, for the True Believer, there IS the chance to add meaning to their useless lives, something to use as an excuse to mind other people's business, something (or someone) to hate.

[retired54]

The USA is not setting a good example. Europe is taking the lead in reduction of green house gasses according to Frontline (pbs TV show) because Europe historically has paid much higher prices for fuel.

Good for you guys. Don't wait for us because we still have that Cowboy, throw-the-beer-can-out-the-window attitude going here. It's actually encouraged. Read some of our colleagues posts and you'll see what I mean.

I just shake my head and go about my business.

I wouldn't be too enthused about the Chinese. China and India are building coal-fired power plants literally as fast as they can. China overtook the United States in 2006 as the world's biggest emitter of carbon dioxide.

Watch " Heat".

It's getting very grim.

olddog

[retired54]

I can't tell if you're joking or not.

Party on Cowboy. I'll be the guy flipping you off as you drive by in your Denali.

olddog

[Nate Nagel]

If you want to send a message, there's no more powerful message than swift, accurate justice. Unfortunately that window closed a while ago.

nate

[HeyBub]

It's easy to tell if I am joking: Did you laugh with a thigh-slapping, out loud, guffaw of such intensity that tears ran down you cheek? If not, well, then, I'm not joking.

You mean "Denali" as in "Winnebago?" The one with the "Our House is Off" bumper sticker?

[HeyBub]

It has never been the policy of the United States to kill or capture Osama ben Laden. If either happens, it's a bonus, but actively pursuing either has never been a strategic - or even tactical - goal of the United States in the War on Terror.

Since immediately after 9-11, the single strategic goal of the United States has been to prevent another attack on the country or civilian U.S. interests abroad. To accomplish this goal, tactical efforts have been directed toward disrupting terrorist communications, financing, recruiting, training, and the harboring of terrorists by rogue states as well as strengthening defenses both at home and abroad.

In the decade of the 90's, there have been one or two attacks on U.S. interests, either here or overseas, per year. WTC 1, the USS Cole, embassy bombings, kidnappings of diplomats, etc. Since the aforementioned policy was adopted, there has not been one single attack - successful or otherwise - in the United States or against civilian US interests abroad.

To "capture" or "kill" ben Laden as a goal is to harken to the criminal justice model. Ben Laden is NOT a criminal - he is an unlawful enemy combatant, same as any other guerrilla, saboteur, spy, or fifth-columnist. The criminal justice methodology is not the technique to use on him.

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith, and others understand this. Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Carter, and others of the left do not.