Top 3 Climate Change Deniers Up for Re-election

a reply to: Yeahkeepwatchingme

Jesse Ventura is trying to make money. Who isn't? He's not that rich even by entertainer standards. 6 million or so. He's a veteran from a family of veterans and he himself served in Vietnam. He's been a professional athlete and entertainer. Then a politician. Now a newsman (even if it's a little out there). Again how is that the same exact thing as corrupt multi billionaires? Sorry if I don't lump self made men in with corrupt elites. Maybe he is part of the agenda (its possible, anything is) but logic says he'd be better paid for it.

www.celebritynetworth.com...

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
a reply to: boncho

If you can't see how Jesse's part of the agenda too I'm not wasting my time.

For those of us that are too stupid to be privy to the "agenda", would you be willing to enlighten us on how JV fits in to that "agenda".

Thanks

Funny how capitalism is bad when the people speaking against the political machines use there free speech!

Great to expose politicians that get big money from specific industries.

However, I wonder why the focus on representatives from Congressional districts?

Only people in those districts can vote for or against them.



U.S. Senators would be better targets.

More voters involved.

Hmmm.

Senators Who Voted To Protect Oil Tax Breaks Received $23,582,500 From Big Oil

a reply to: xuenchen

I say fire all of them from both the House and Senate that have been whoring themselves out to energy companies. I dont care what letter of the alphabet they put in front of their names.


I think the House has been getting more attention lately because of the recent hearings from the science committee on AGW. Recently because of t they have gotten a bit of press www.abovetopsecret.com....

I am not playing favorites Senators and Congressman on the take need to go they are all good targets.

I'd like to see Jesse go to Washington. But Im an Australian so I have no say in the matter...

a reply to: JesseVentura

While the evidence strongly shows that climate change is real - there are also indications that it something inherently normal to the Earth and follows patterns. Whether or not this particular period of climactic change is purely natural, partly natural or entirely man-made is the million dollar question.

Having said that, I personally have no doubt at all that environmental deregulation certainly is not helping things. In fact the same can be said for all of the poisons being dumped into our water reserves by companies who have managed to slip enough $$$ into the right hands to allow them to simply run pipes to the river and let the chemicals flow. ( Until two days ago I was a resident of Columbus, GA and lived within a mile of the most polluted section of the most polluted river in the country. )

I guess what I am saying is "where there is smoke, there is fire" to be sure. But how big is that fire and who does it profit to speculate on either side of the argument? Those who believe man-made climate change seem anxious to tax the Dickens out of just about everything that produces carbon ( including human respiration ) - while those who deny that it is man-made are being very nicely taken care of by energy conglomerates.

I see it as a lose / lose scenario. The greedsters are hiding behind "going green" and waiting even as they are being paid to let the smoke stacks bellow out whatever Corporations wish to turn to smoke.

Thoughts?

originally posted by: LDragonFire
I guess its easier to attack the messenger when you have no ammo to defend these position.

Why to go Jesse, you need to do another show of industry purchasing public opinion and politicians.

A definition of priceless:
Congratulating a an ex politician in an industry with the worlds largest history of purchasing public opinion. You're much smart than this LD from the post I have read.

JV does a great job at making entertaining television, his opinion carries the same value as yours or mine. What we really need is to find someone with an unbiased view of Global Warming/Climate Change and do a real piece of informative review on both sides. Without a political, commercial, or industrial agenda. Is that even possible.

I love labels. Anyone who doesn't toe the line that says all climate change is man caused and we can stop it is a climate denier.

Really? After all the lies and fudged data from the climate change camp I am skeptical of any claims and don't believe science really understands what is happening. Pollute less? Great idea. Destroy our economies reverting to no use of fossil fuels? Err, I'll take one from column B please.

man made climate change isnt real.

just my opinion

originally posted by: hamlek
I love labels. Anyone who doesn't toe the line that says all climate change is man caused and we can stop it is a climate denier.

Really? After all the lies and fudged data from the climate change camp I am skeptical of any claims and don't believe science really understands what is happening. Pollute less? Great idea. Destroy our economies reverting to no use of fossil fuels? Err, I'll take one from column B please.

thats it tho, thats how they do this sort of thing.......they change the vocabulary.......

It use to be man made global warming......

But since we all know there IS such a thing as climate change (be it increase in temperature or decrease), they move the narrative to make "Man Made" climate change synonymous with "Climate Change", so they dont have to render it down into global warming, or cooling, or if its human caused, they can blanket the whole statement

So that anyone who disagrees is pointed at, called a denier and invalidated.......

Its not the same thing and anyone with a lick of intellectual honesty knows this.......

The same thing was done with "Assault Weapons" and many other key words and terms.......

Change the vocabulary , change the narrative......

its despicable and dishonest, and people buy into it.......