Darcy burning up the presses

With 44 Democratic challengers now having signed on to the Responsible Plan for ending the war in Iraq, the national media is beginning to pay attention not only to the Plan, but to the “infectiously energetic” force behind it: Darcy Burner. From today’s Washington Post, page A3:

Rejecting their party leaders’ assertions that economic troubles have become the top issue on voters’ minds, leaders of the coalition of 38 House and four Senate candidates pledged to make immediate withdrawal from Iraq the centerpiece of their campaigns.

“The people inside the Beltway don’t seem to get how big an issue this is,” said Darcy Burner, a repeat candidate who narrowly lost to Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Wash.) in 2006.

From MSNBC:

One criticism of Democrats in past elections is that they have railed against President Bush on Iraq without having a plan of their own. But 38 Democratic House challengers along with four Senate contenders have decided to run on a common platform outlining a strategy of withdrawal from Iraq.

[...] The plan was introduced about a week and a half ago, after six months of preparation. The plan combines existing legislation in Congress, packaged by Darcy Burner, a candidate for Washington’s eighth congressional district, with assistance from national security experts and retired generals.

And from The Nation:

At the plan’s unveiling, Burner–articulate, impressive and infectiously energetic–refused to be pessimistic. Despite the White House’s indifference, despite the war’s diminished presence on the front page, the people want the war to end.

“We can do this,” she said.

This fall, Rep. Dave Reichert will attempt to run as a Beltway outsider, fighting the entrenched D.C. establishment, while characterizing Darcy as just another Nancy Pelosi clone, blindly adhering to the Democratic party line. Don’t you believe it. Darcy is obviously not your typical politician — that’s what so endears her to the netroots, and that’s what’s beginning to endear her to the national press.

Comments

  1. 1

    spews:

    “…articulate, impressive and infectiously energetic…”

    That’s the description usually applied to candidates for cheerleader or class recording secretary.

    The Piper

  2. 3

    spews:

    Piper Scott,

    “That’s the description usually applied to candidates for cheerleader or class recording secretary.”

    Sure…right…especially in the Washington Post

    Hitting the hard stuff early, eh, Piper?

  3. 4

    Tlazolteotl spews:

    Or maybe, just maybe, Piper thinks Darcy should stay home and raise chilluns while the menfolk smoke cigars and drink Scotch and make all the decisions for us?

  4. 7

    spews:

    @3…Darryl…

    Washington Post or not, that’s how they’re usually described.

    She wasn’t described as, “knowledgeable, experienced, well respected, seasoned,” was she?

    The Piper

  5. 10

    Don Joe spews:

    Watching Republicans stretching themselves further and further in order to find the last few straws they can use to dismiss Burner’s candidacy is becoming a very amusing pastime.

    Packaging “intelligent” and “articulate” together as common adjectives for “cheer leader” is absolutely priceless.

  6. 11

    spews:

    Piper Scott,

    “She wasn’t described as, “knowledgeable, experienced, well respected, seasoned,” was she?”

    It is a logical fallacy to assume a message by what they did not say. After all, there is a nearly UNLIMITED number of things that were NOT said. What they DID say is that she was “articulate, impressive and infectiously energetic.”

    Perhaps the real “subtext” here is that these are three attributes that Sheriff Hairspray LACKS.

  7. 12

    spews:

    @2 & 4…Tlazolteotl…

    Mean spirited? Please! I accord The Darcy the respect and deference due her accomplishments.

    If you’ll read my posts over time, you’ll see I’ve commended many Democrats when they’ve done commendable things. I also have tremendous respect for many women in public life: Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Condi Rice, Maggie Thatcher, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, KC Councilmember Kathy Lambert, and lots more.

    But pretension demands ridicule, and that’s exactly what I see in The Darcy – pretension. Liberals may fawn over her all they want, but no law says I have to join them as they do half-gainers off the 10-meter platform into an empty pool on her behalf.

    If you want to criticize someone for being mean-spirited, try those who mock John McCain’s war injuries and insinuate that he sold out fellow POWs. Or those who constantly belittle Rep. Dave Reichert for an entire laundry list of alleged malfeasences.

    According to the HA Happy HooliHyenas, he can do no right and is original sin personified. Say what you will about him, at least he has the guts to stand up for something in which he believes even if it’s currently not the most popular thing in town.

    The Piper

  8. 13

    spews:

    @11…Darryl…

    Familiar with the term “damned with faint praise?”

    To paraphrase Bogart, “Out of all the words in all the dictionaries in the world, she had to get described with only these!”

    I’d have a whole lot more respect for her if she’d held some sort of either elective or appointed public office and had a track record of achievements and accomplishements to her credit. Still haven’t gotten the full story during her tenure as Prexy of the Ames Lake HOA. What’s she hiding? What did she not know, and when did she not know it?

    The Piper

  9. 14

    The Real Mark spews:

    Mr. Darcy Burner,

    (I’m betting you scribble that all day long — with hearts, too!)

    You say, “Darcy as just another Nancy Pelosi clone, blindly adhering to the Democratic party line”

    Why don’t you enlighten the class with examples of where she differs from — or, better yet, strongly disagrees with — the netroot manifesto?

  10. 15

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Darcy Burner is providing more leadership on Iraq than Bush and the whole GOP establishment — and she isn’t even president yet.

  11. 16

    Rujax! spews:

    So what the fuck do you assholes WANT??!!

    Burner’s ALREADY doing more than Rep. Hairspray has accomplished in 3 1/2 years and she’s not even ELECTED yet.

    Should she lose (certainly a remote possibility NOW), she…AGAIN…will have ACCOMPLISHED SOMETHING. Show me the aggregate of Rep. Hairspray’s “accomplishments”, save sticking the bill for Pres. Dumbass’ security on the City of Medina.

  12. 19

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @5 He was admitted to the bar in 1977, which makes him not much younger than me, and I — as you know — ain’t exactly a spring chicken.

  13. 20

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @6 You really shouldn’t post personal information here, crackpiper! With all the wingnuts patrolling this board someone might steal your identity. Although I can’t imagine why anyone would want it.

  14. 21

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @12 “I accord The Darcy the respect and deference due her accomplishments.”

    And we, reciprocally, accord you the respect and deference due yours.

  15. 22

    My Goldy Itches spews:

    “Darcy is obviously not your typical politician”

    Translation, she has ZERO credentials and is marginally qualified to be on the Bellevue City Council, let along the US House.

  16. 24

    spews:

    @16…Rujax…

    For you to continue to speak and write as you do so that The Darcy can be tagged with you.

    If you elect The Darcy, you elect Rujax’s kind of thinking, civility and language. Is that what you want representing you in the nation’s capitol? Is this the kind of talk the 8th CD encourages its elected officials to encourage and tolerate?

    Thank you for providing additional reasons not to support The Darcy.

    The Piper

  17. 25

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @16 At a minimum, she is forcing the financially strapped (!)* Republicans to spend over a million dollars defending a “safe” seat that has never gone Democratic.

    * Made worse by their own Republican employee stealing from them.**

    ** Now why were they surprised by that?!! HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR

  18. 26

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @24 “If you elect The Darcy, you elect Rujax’s kind of thinking, civility and language. Is that what you want representing you in the nation’s capitol?”

    Why should 8th C.D. voters prefer GOP thinking, civility, and language? Republicans can’t even spell simple 1-syllable words like “too.”

  19. 27

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Democrats kicking Republicans in their shins would definitely be an improvement in civility over the other way around.

  20. 28

    Daddy Love spews:

    The point is that Darcy isn’t letting Dave Reichert define her at all. She’s putting her case directly before the people, and, to paraphrase Atrios: “The message that low information voters need to hear is that Democrats want to get out of Iraq, and Reichert and the Republicans want to stay there forever.”

    Fucking right.

  21. 29

    spews:

    Piper Scott,

    ‘Familiar with the term “damned with faint praise?”’

    Of course. But, apparently, you are not aware of how one ACTUALLY does that. There is no suggestion of damning Burner with faint praise in describing her as “articulate, impressive and infectiously energetic.” There is nothing “faint” about it. Furthermore, none of the context around that statement offered any sort of counter-insinuation.

    The context suggests that they really meant that she was articulate, impressive and energetic. In my experience interacting with Ms. Burner, they hit the nail on the head. (And note that I am not damning her with “faint” praise, furthermore, I did not exhaust the positive attributes I would assign to her and make no implications by the omissions).

    ‘To paraphrase Bogart, “Out of all the words in all the dictionaries in the world, she had to get described with only these!”’

    This is a silly paraphrasing…in Casablanca, Rick uttered the statement with a strong sense of irony, you dope!

    “I’d have a whole lot more respect for her if she’d held some sort of either elective or appointed public office and had a track record of achievements and accomplishements to her credit.”

    Bullshit. You would only respect her if she called herself a Republican. One reason I can say this is true is because Darcy Burner DOES have an impressive record of achievements. In fact, Burner achieved far more by the age of 18 than Reichert achieved by twice that age.

    “Still haven’t gotten the full story during her tenure as Prexy of the Ames Lake HOA. What’s she hiding? What did she not know, and when did she not know it?”

    What the fuck are you babbling about?

  22. 30

    spews:

    Itchy Brain @ 22,

    “Translation, she has ZERO credentials and is marginally qualified to be on the Bellevue City Council, let along the US House.”

    Yeah…because Bellevue City Counil candidates are AWAYS being called “articulate, impressive and infectiously energetic” in the Washington Post.

    Man…you WingDings are sure smoking some wicked shit today!

  23. 31

    spews:

    @17…RR…

    What is worn under my kilt? Why nothing is worn; it’s all in perfect working order!

    What do I wear under my kilt? My shoes and stockings.

    It’s always the pervs who ask.

    The Piper

  24. 32

    Daddy Love spews:

    14 TRM

    Ahem, Mark, You should read up. Darcy is a netroots candidate. Nancy Pelosi is a mainstream Democrat who is the Speaker of the House of Representatives. So asking where Darcy differs from the netroots, first is a meaningless question, and second, would not tell you anything about how her outlook or policies differ from Nancy Pelosi’s.

  25. 34

    Rujax! spews:

    So “The CrackPiper” can’t put down the “Pipe” long enough to detail the stellar accomplishments of the Good Sheriff. Hmmmmm…

    Further..The Crackpiper doesn’t like Ol’ Rujax’ “demeanor” in the comments…fine. Ol’ Rujax happens to think The Crackpiper is a supercillious jerk. Ol’ Rujax is soooo sure The Crackpiper gives a shit not about what Ol’ Rujax thinks.

    So Ol’ Rujax sez to the Ol’ Crackpiper..put up or shut up, my man.

    Oh…and as for civility…Ol’ Rujax does just fine in polite company. Ol’ Rujax used to be QUITE the polite and respectful man at HorsesAss…until the fucking trolls with their christian religionist fakery and their pseudo-klownservative-libertarianism and their “dumb-as-a-box-of-rocks” governing philosphy made Ol’ Rujax see these cretins for what they are. Miseable failures who, having had it all their way for the last (pretty much) 26 years, have made a complete hash of things…drove the economy and the middle class and the International reputation and honor of this wonderful Nation into the ditch and are too goddam STUPID to see what they’ve done and how they’ve misled.

    Sorry Pal…no respect for the nonsense you espouse. Your prollly an OK guy…but just shut the fuck up.

    You HAD your chance.

  26. 35

    harry poon spews:

    re 1: “…diaper wearing whoremonger.” That’s an epithet usually reserved for Republican senators.

  27. 36

    spews:

    @34…Rujax…

    How very “articulate, impressive and infectiously energetic” of you. Spoken like a true disciple of The Darcy.

    Curious…does she endorse your discourse? Does she subscribe to your diatribe? Does she walk your walk and talk your talk?

    Would she like to hear you say all that stuff in the presence of her kid?

    The Piper

  28. 37

    rhp6033 spews:

    If Darcy Burner wasn’t presenting a credible challenge to Reichart, you can bet he wouldn’t be doing anything in Congress for the remainder of his term. As it is, I’m surprised we haven’t heard SOMETHING from him, other than having his book made into a cheezy made-for-TV movie. Perhaps he’s saving his accomplishments this term for a PR blitz this summer?

    I remember last election, he trotted out a rather laughable proposal to address “gang encroachment into the suburbs”. His plan was to spend a few million dollars and several years conducting a study of the ten most dangerous street gangs in American, and then order the Justice Dept. to do something about them. No money allocated for investigations and prosecutions, you understand, just an order that they make some arrests and prosecute them. What makes it so laughable:

    (1) You don’t need a multi-million-dollar study. Reichart could make his own list, with a couple of week’s efforts, by calling the anti-gang task forces in each of the major cities. They would tell him anything he needs to know. Or he could just go out on the street and ask a few cops, and get pretty much the same result.

    (2) I can see the professional federal prosecutors rolling their eyes at that one, wondering what other “priorities” they are supposed to ignore in order to comply – anti-terrorism investigations, white-collar crime, traditional mob & racketeering activity, bank hold-ups?

    (3) The proposal is tinged with racism, in that it carries the implication that our “safe” suburbs are being threatened by blacks & other ethnic-based gangs who will rob us & rape our daughters. Gangs apparantly don’t deserve federal attention, until they get into the suburbs?

    (4) Why don’t we ask Sheriff Dave how well his proposal worked when he tested it when he was Sheriff of King County? Oh, wait, he didn’t.

    Obviously, the whole “initiative” was designed as a campaign stunt, probably dreamed up in Karl Rove’s office. By creating a “crisis” and proposing a program which won’t really require any real funding until years later, it is designed to get some milage in the election, but everyone will have forgetten about it by the time the expected non-results would be apparant.

    Which is not to say that there isn’t a gang problem, and that gangs are indeed appearing on what was previously “safe” suburban streets. But Reichart’s proposal wouldn’t have done anything about that problem, because any real solution would require real money, which isn’t achievable without abandoning the Bush tax cuts.

    So… I’ll take Darcy’s plan as being a more realistic and achievable solution to a major problem, as compared with Reichart’s laughable efforts.

  29. 38

    Daddy Love spews:

    34 R

    But in those last 26 years, we’ve never given real conservatism a chance. Just one more chance. Just one….

  30. 40

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Trolls (including you, crackpiper): In light of the sheer incompetence and untrustworthiness of Republicans, as most recently demonstrated by the ammunition scandal, why should anyone elect any Republican to any office? I mean, really, since Republicans can do absolutely nothing right and have reduced every aspect of governance to a fucking 7th-grade joke, why shouldn’t every voter in America (including you, because that’s your tax dollars they’re wasting) vote a straight Democratic ticket in 2008? Be honest now, boys, what have Republicans done to earn a single vote? Their only accomplishment is to make a laughingstock of themselves, their party, and our country.

  31. 41

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    So here we have a Republican-managed DoD giving a $300,000,000 ammunition contract to a high school dropout who can’t spell “too” and got busted for using a fake ID after he turned 21 …

    And Republicans expect voters to believe they’re “better” than Democrats on national security?

    HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR

  32. 42

    Daddy Love spews:

    37 rhp

    Well, Dave got a pargraph 26 Mention in a March 2008 WaPo article as the sponsor of a bill to outlaw sales of ‘murderabilia.’

    That’s Dave, with his finger on the pulse of America’s needs.

  33. 44

    spews:

    Daddy Love @ 42,

    “Well, Dave got a pargraph 26 Mention in a March 2008 WaPo article as the sponsor of a bill to outlaw sales of ‘murderabilia.’”

    …not that Sheriff Hairspray would EVER CONSIDER capitalizing on the murders of 48 (or more) women.

  34. 45

    Daddy Love spews:

    44 D

    Well, no, of course not. That would be in bad taste. But what gets me is that this is the best he could come up with. Recession? War? Medical care? Education? Immigration? Nope. Shows how dim he really is, and how little he has been paying attention since 2004. What the FUCK has he been doing in Congress anyway? How about some homeland security, dipshit?

  35. 46

    Daddy Love spews:

    Dave’s money quote from the article:

    “My only memorabilia, unfortunately, is image after image of dead bodies.”

    Jeesus.

  36. 47

    Tlazolteotl spews:

    @12:

    Okay Piper, I’ll bite. You say:

    She wasn’t described as, “knowledgeable, experienced, well respected, seasoned,” was she?

    If you can find a link to a WaPo article that describes Reichert with any of these terms, I’ll take back that your comment was mean-spirited.

  37. 49

    Tlazolteotl spews:

    Forget ‘Crackpiper.’ From now on, I’m going to call him ‘Scrooge.’ He’s a mean, bitter old man, who gives undue respect to authoritarian (male) figures regardless of their (lack of) accomplishment…..

  38. 50

    spews:

    Tlazolteotl,

    Here is and example of Piper Scott logic:

    “Darcy Burner must be a man because the WaPo didn’t say she was a woman!”

    Oh…and then, just for a little pseudo-intellectual pretention,

    “quod erat demonstrandum”

  39. 51

    The Real Mark spews:

    DL @ 32

    That’s my point exactly. She marches gooselock-step with the netroots Kool-Aid crowd.

    NO one ideology is perfect — neither Left nor Right — and politicians “stray” from their party line to varying degrees (e.g. Obama and Clinton having slightly different “scores” on the liberal voting scale). The netroots are included here. Unless you’re arguing that she is the Karl Marx of the entire movement or that she is simply an automaton, there must be something in your manifesto with which she disagrees.

  40. 52

    harry poon spews:

    “The Real Mark says:

    DL @ 32

    That’s my point exactly. She marches gooselock-step with the netroots Kool-Aid crowd.

    NO one ideology is perfect — neither Left nor Right — and politicians “stray” from their party line to varying degrees (e.g. Obama and Clinton having slightly different “scores” on the liberal voting scale). The netroots are included here. Unless you’re arguing that she is the Karl Marx of the entire movement or that she is simply an automaton, there must be something in your manifesto with which she disagrees.”

    This is all just slander. There is not even a reference to a fact here. Ad Hoc

  41. 53

    spews:

    The Real Mark,

    “…there must be something in your manifesto with which she disagrees.’

    Perhaps you can offer a link to this “netroot manifesto?”

    Or are you spewing some fanciful bullshit from Little Green WingNuts?

  42. 54

    spews:

    Piper wrote, “Mean spirited? Please! I accord The Darcy the respect and deference due her accomplishments.”

    Accomplishments are what it takes for you to respect people? Leaving aside that producing this document and creating this huge coalition of candidates is a significant accomplishment in itself, you showing yourself to be a veritable dick with your attitude. 58 and growing more crotchety every day.

  43. 57

    Daddy Love spews:

    51 TRM

    Unless you’re arguing that she is the Karl Marx of the entire movement or that she is simply an automaton, there must be something in your manifesto with which she disagrees.

    Really, Mark, pay attention. I don’t have a manifesto. The netroots don’t have a “manifesto,” we are just a bunch of people committed to growing a new ground-up version of the Democratic Party that will be less tied to corporate governenace and more responsive to the needs of ordinary Americans. I’d say most of us would like to see the US out of iraq, but not all of us agree about how that should be done. What we agree on is electing candidates who align with our commitment to growing a new ground-up version of the Democratic Party.

    Republicans are top-down, not us. Republicans are automatons, not us.

  44. 58

    DustinJames spews:

    I think focusing on the war over the economy is a mistake. Making the war the central piece of your platform when only 16% of Americans nationally view it as their number 1 issue makes me nervous on chances that Darcy will win round 2 vs Reichert.

  45. 61

    Don Joe spews:

    I’d have a whole lot more respect for her if she’d held some sort of either elective or appointed public office and had a track record of achievements and accomplishements to her credit. [Emphasis added.]

    Ah yes. One gets promoted to a GPM at Microsoft by jumping up and down, waving pom-poms and yelling, “Go Team!”

    Well, at least you now know why I have absolutely zero respect for you.

  46. 62

    spews:

    @54…DanielK…

    Crotchety??? Me??? Man, you do not know me at all! I am the least crotchety guy on the planet.

    I am, however, not someone who is easily fooled by the gossamer gushing of a cobbled together compendium of warmed over uber-left failed legislative proposals and seething grievances that’s currently being marketed as the “Reprehensible Plan.”

    The Darcy and The Plan are each getting their 15 minutes of fame, but neither seem to be getting picked up by actual decision makers in Washington, D.C.

    That she has 44 Democratic challengers (where are the incumbents? Of ANY party?) means what? Political challengers will sign almost anything if it gets them free publicity. How many of the 44 are viable candidates and how many are sacrificial goats?

    There’s nothing new or unique here. Just more warmed over mush from the netroots, not the 8th CD.

    Maybe The Darcy could do better by promoting a little global warming to get rid of this damn April snow!

    The Piper

  47. 63

    Rujax! spews:

    The CrackPiper @ 34:

    Ol’ Rujax bought his political cred gettin’ gassed in the U-District and marchin’ on the Freeway. The future Congressperson fom the 8th District wasn’t born at that point.

    The CrackPiper failed reading comprehension again, passing over the part about Ol’ Rujax being polite in polite company.

  48. 67

    Daddy Love spews:

    Dave Reichert has NOTHING to offer the 8th CD (my home) but warmed-over mush trying to capitalize ONCE AGIN on his “record” as Sheriff, exploiting the deaths of poor women, without ever a reference to his PISS-POOR record as a Congressman. No plans. No ideas. No policies. No power. No ideas. Not thought. No action.

    Fucking nothing.

  49. 68

    Daddy Love spews:

    62 PS

    That’s pretty sad for you. Are you in the “it’s snowing so there’s no global warming” camp of fools now? Mark talks about netroots “automatons;” are all of you Republicans so fucking lockstep that rejecting the undeniable evidence and overwhelming scientific consensus on global climate change is like accepting the dogma of the Trinity to a Catholic?

    Yes, it snowed here. yes, it snowed in the Midwest. Global climate change means, among MANY other things, that we’re all going to experience “weird weather,” for lack of a better term, for some time to come as the climate seeks a new equilibrium.

    Are you a complete idiot, or are you in complete denial? They are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

  50. 69

    Daddy Love spews:

    Republicans are not just sadly ignorant of science, they are gladly and wilfully ignorant of science. Reality changes, and they refuse to accept the reality of reality. They are, by the clinical definition, psychotic.

    psychosis (sī-kō’sĭs) Pronunciation Key
    Plural psychoses (sī-kō’sēz)
    A mental state caused by psychiatric or organic illness, characterized by a loss of contact with reality and an inability to think rationally. A psychotic person often behaves inappropriately and is incapable of normal social functioning.

    http://dictionary.reference.co.....38;ia=ahsd

  51. 71

    Daddy Love spews:

    BTW, in the paper edition of the WaPo, Darcy’s article was on page A3 – following coverage in The Nation and MSNBC.com yesterday. In other words, when you open the paper from the front page, its on the first page to your right. Niiiice placement.

    Despite the disparagement in this site, the world coninues to take notice, the press has been tremendous, and we are continuing to gain momentum.

    Fuck you assholes. We’re getting out.

  52. 72

    I-Burn spews:

    @69 Deny that there are more than a few posters here on HA from your side of the aisle that meet that definition, pretty well.

    As for anti-AGW? Dr. S. Fred Singer has pretty damned good credentials and says the evidence is inconclusive, among others…

  53. 73

    Daddy Love spews:

    72 I-B

    Dude, Dr. S. Fred Singer “has pretty damned good credentials?”

    You make my case better than I have. Dr. S. Fred Singer is electrical engineer and physicist.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Singer

    THIS is the guy you depend on to tell you about issues that regard global climate? A guy whose training tells him NOTHING about climate? And what about the thousands of climatologists who tell you different? You listen only to the guy who tells you what you want to hear? What a fucking Republican.

    You guys are fucking idiots. I mean, really.

  54. 75

    I-Burn spews:

    73

    Singer is Professor Emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia.

    How do you suppose that happened? Now I can’t speak to the veracity of this, but I think I read somewhere that nobody who has taken a doctorate before 1980 has a Phd. in Climate Science, because there weren’t any.

    This is not even asking how the fuck you explain that Singer is the Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science if he doesn’t know anything about climatology.

  55. 76

    Don Joe spews:

    @ 75

    Do you understand the difference between the opinion of a scientist and peer-reviewed science?

    I’m betting not, because you seem to be a tad unclear about the difference between “environment” and “climate”.

  56. 77

    I-Burn spews:

    @76 Yeah, John Doe, cuz I’z just not as smart as all y’all edukated foks.

    Come on, man. You’re being deliberately obtuse.

  57. 78

    Don Joe spews:

    @ 77

    No, I’m not being deliberately obtuse. Did you flunk fundamental logic? Climatology is a subset of environmental studies, which means, among other things, all climatologists are professors of environmental studies, but not all environmental studies professors are climatologists.

    By the way, “emeritus” means that Singer is retired.

    So, I take it that you don’t understand the difference between the opinion of a scientist and peer-reviewed science?

  58. 79

    I-Burn spews:

    @78 “No, I’m not being deliberately obtuse. Did you flunk fundamental logic? Climatology is a subset of environmental studies, which means, among other things, all climatologists are professors of environmental studies, but not all environmental studies professors are climatologists.”

    Really? Well thanks for clearing that up. I am, of course, far too ignorant to have known this for myself.

    “By the way, “emeritus” means that Singer is retired.”

    No shit? Well damn. I surely didn’t know that either.

    “So, I take it that you don’t understand the difference between the opinion of a scientist and peer-reviewed science? ”

    Take whatever you want. I’ve tried to be civil with you. You’d rather be adversarial. I don’t appreciate being patronized, nor condescended to. So peer review that, huh?

  59. 80

    Don Joe spews:

    @ 79

    You’d rather be adversarial. I don’t appreciate being patronized, nor condescended to.

    If you don’t appreciate being patronized or condescended to, then don’t bring such idiotic crap to the table as the argument you’ve pressed above. You’re smarter than that.

    Seriously, if you actually do understand the difference between the opinion of a scientist and peer-reviewed science, then why, on earth, are you citing the former in order to counter to the latter?

    Worse yet, you’ve tried to bolster the credentials of the former with one of the more ridiculous hand waves we’ve seen in quite a while. Climatology is not Singer’s field of expertise, and your attempt to pump up his credentials is so transparently idiotic as to defy adequate description.

    One of the things that has screwed this country time and time again is when people like you allow their ideology to trump science. When the facts don’t conform to the ideology, then change the facts! Or go find some other “fact,” no matter how ridiculous, just so we don’t have to adjust our theory of how things are or are supposed to be.