RSS

Oh boy. Those damn hippie journalists are at it again.

07 Aug

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-burning-how-wildfires-are-threatening-the-west-20130801

 

 

 

fire-king-228490

Advertisements
 
25 Comments

Posted by on August 7, 2013 in Uncategorized

 

25 responses to “Oh boy. Those damn hippie journalists are at it again.

  1. GMB

    August 7, 2013 at 5:17 pm

    From the article.

    “U.S. wildfire policy was dominated by fire suppression, formalized in 1936 as “the 10 a.m. rule”

    The TEA Party has been around that long? I do believe this rule is a wholly owned construction of the FDR Administration.

    “Beginning with the Forest Service in 1978, the 10 a.m. rule was gradually replaced by a plan that gave federal agencies the discretion to allow fires to burn where appropriate.”

    “Jimmuh and Tip O’Niel were TEA Party folks too?

    “That was the case last year when the Forest Service once again made fire suppression its default position. Fire managers were ordered to wage an “aggressive initial attack” on fires, and had to seek permission to deviate from this practice.”

    Last year you say? Last year? BHO and the FSC Commissioner have switched sides to us evil TEA Party folks.

    “The problem is especially acute in Arizona, where average annual temperatures have risen nearly three-quarters of a degree Fahrenheit each decade since 1970, making it the fastest­-warming state in the nation.”

    The author states this, however does not cite his source for the claim. I am supposed to believe him because he says so?

    Well excuuuussseeee me if I don’t.

    ” Rep. Doc Hastings of Washington, called the Forest Service’s handling of fire threats “woefully inadequate,” adding that “much of this federal inaction is caused by the Forest Service’s fear of lawsuits by environmental groups, using the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.”

    Donk’s eating their own. How fitting.

    This story is so full of holes. Maybe because it wasn’t written by a hippie but a hipster instead. Two different creatures those are. The main themes is our (Conservatives) inability to accept the religion of agw and “it’s all the TEA Party’s” fault.

    As far as the money is concerned, Just have big ben over at fed print up a few hundred billion more green backs. It’s not like boner, cant/wonter/ mcconnell/miss lindsey/mcrino will try and stop it, much less complain .

    Break time.

     
    • mitchethekid

      August 8, 2013 at 7:42 am

      Very discerning of you to understand the difference between a hippie and a hipster, but AGW is certainly not a religion, since there is no transcendent deity involved. Belief yes, but based on observable facts.

       
  2. GMB

    August 7, 2013 at 6:00 pm

    Does anyone know real estate law? If this was really for sale and they didn’t mention the fire damage would that be okay?

    http://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/1600-pennsylvania-avenue-washington-DC_rb/

     
  3. mitchethekid

    August 7, 2013 at 6:27 pm

    The point is, the temps are increasing and the planet is melting. See Iceland during the past few months. Look at the polar ice caps.One can refute human activity all one wants, but that doesn’t change the empirical evidence that essentially proves the planet is getting hotter. To deny it is an affirmation of an ideology that refuses to accept a human element and our influence upon the environment. There are two things to global warming. One, an abject denial that it is getting hotter and two, that humans activity is a contributing factor. Which do you subscribe to? You are a tender of the land and see the results of global change daily.

     
  4. GMB

    August 7, 2013 at 7:09 pm

    Anthropomorphic Global Warming.

    We have an excuse for everything. If you don’t believe us, you are a nazi.

    Cheers or should I say Cheerio?

     
    • mitchethekid

      August 7, 2013 at 7:17 pm

      Cheerio. As in frozen cereal.

       
  5. GMB

    August 7, 2013 at 7:56 pm

    Ok You have been put in charge of the Department of Stop Global Warming. We already know what the goal is. How do you as Secretary of STG accomplish this? What is your plan?

    Don’t worry about financing, big ben over at the fed has your back on this.

     
  6. GMB

    August 7, 2013 at 11:59 pm

    Just a few random questions here. I don’t have much else to do this early in the morn.

    How many people do you think that the United States could support without damaging the environment beyond repair, just within the forty-eight continuous states?

    What is your preferred method of power generation?

    Are you still laughing at conservative B4V poster Norma Stitz? If so why?

    Have you ever been to Fort Courage, Kansas? If so, have you visited O’Roarke’s Bar and Grill?

    Have you taken sides in the Syrian civil war?

    Do misplaced, commas bad grammer, and mispelt words, bother you?

    Just some random thoughts.

    Enjoy your day. 🙂

     
    • mitchethekid

      August 8, 2013 at 7:16 am

      Well, as Jules said in Pulp Fiction, “Allow me to retort”. Question one, I have no idea. Question two, cold nuclear fusion. There is enough energy is a glass of water to power NYC for a yr. Question 3, I’m not sure what to make of her. Self-depreciating name, have no desire to see her “Norma Stitz” (probably more udder like than sexy) and she could be a performance artist. The B4V group certainly doesn’t get the joke. Question 4, no. I didn’t like F Troop. Question 5, not really but McCain certainly has. Being photographed with kidnappers and all. But i don’t like Assad. Question 6, it’s spelled “grammar” and it’s redundant to include either misspelled or misspelt in the same sentence. Generally no, it doesn’t bother me. I’m horrible at it but I do appreciate a large vocabulary. Words are tools and each has a purpose. Or should I say, a metaphorical expression of meaning.
      Now, as far as Antarctica goes, there is this. From NASA.http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/20100108_Is_Antarctica_Melting.html
      In some ways, the entire issue is like a house plant. The plant is dying. You look up why. The information says either too much or to little water or sunlight. Which is it? An enigma wrapped in a riddle? But again I say, why take a chance? I think it’s the height of conceit to dismiss (1) that the planet is warming and (2) that human activity has anything to do with it or (3) the grand super prize, a combination of both. The primary way humans have created energy since forever is to burn something.
      I like your sense of humor. Congrats!

       
      • GMB

        August 8, 2013 at 7:48 am

        http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080108131546AAwnt8j

        http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_is_Antarctica_melting

        You can hardly accuse those two groups of being right wing, TEA Party plants. I do believe Cluster issued a very large, ahem, “donation” to both. However I realize they are not scientist and that makes any opinion they might possess invalid. Even if they do back up their opinions with research data.

        😦

        I have this vague memory of people saying that it was the height of conceit to deny global cooling back in the late 60’s and early 70’s.

        The only prediction I am willing to make is this. After the AGW scare has passed away, having blown AGC down the hole years before, Global Static Climate paranoia will become all the “rage”

        Now pardon me. I have to go buy some oats from Thrift’s General Store.

        “Overall, loss of polar ice has contributed about 11.1 millimeters (0.03 feet) to global sea levels since 1992, research shows. Sea levels are rising at a rate of 3.2 millimeters a year.”

        And while I am at it, might as get prepared. Wonder how much Miss Jane will charge for a couple hundred thousand empty sandbags?

         
  7. Cluster

    August 8, 2013 at 5:21 am

    This is the kind of journalism that makes me pull my hair out – what’s left of it anyway. As GMB accurately pointed out, the past government policies which were noted in the article that could be attributed to the problem have absolutely nothing to do with the tea party, yet that doesn’t stop the “left leaning” author to take a jab at them in the headline. Why is that? Why does the left constantly ridicule, mock, blame, etc., etc everything on their opponents? I would think a little self introspection would be particularly helpful right about now amongst those on the left, especially considering the fact that our country and the overall world is not exactly in great condition despite their well intended policies and the vast money they have spent. The Tea Party’s sole focus is a smaller, more efficient, less expensive federal government with lower taxes and personal responsibility and autonomy. For life of me, I just can’t see what is so wrong with that.

    Re: global warming – the climate has been changing since the beginning of time and there is not a whole hell of a lot we can do about it. We definitely should transition to greener, more sustainable energies, and we are, but that role is best played by innovators in the private sector, not bureaucrats in the government. As it is right now, there is no mass produceable, affordable alternative to oil – and speaking of oil, we could essentially eliminate our dependence on foreign oil if we had the political will to extract our domestic reserves. I think the question we all need to ask is – why aren’t we doing that?

     
  8. mitchethekid

    August 8, 2013 at 7:28 am

    “The Tea Party’s sole focus is a smaller, more efficient, less expensive federal government with lower taxes and personal responsibility and autonomy.” It was, but that’s not what it turned into. Ted Cruz, Michele Bachman, Louie Gomert, Jim DeMint etc.Crazy people. And where was the Tea Party during the Bush yrs? Why no outrage then? And to just give up on global warming by saying “there’s nothing we can do about it” is a cop out. There are many things we can do about it, but the first step is to stop denying it’s happening. (Not you personally, but others.)

     
    • Cluster

      August 8, 2013 at 7:44 am

      That’s like asking – where was the AGW crowd during the dust bowl? The tea party sprang up as a result of over spending and over taxation and that does include the Bush years.

      If people like Bachman diminish the efforts of the tea party, then couldn’t the same thing be said about Sharpton’s role with the NAACP?

      And unless and until we find a way to control the sun, there really isn’t a whole hell of a lot we can do:

      http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/01/31/with-suns-activity-set-to-diminish-is-global-cooling-coming/

       
      • GMB

        August 8, 2013 at 8:07 am

        http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/aug/06/us-general-electric-solar/

        The environment takes another one on the chin

        😦

        I have a comment in moderation. Dratted, I put two links in it and I do know better.

         
      • bardolf2

        August 8, 2013 at 5:44 pm

        admit it, you stole the dust bowl idea from my postings at B4V!

        The TEA party (taxed enough already) did not spring up because of over spending, but because of taxation, that in Spook’s opinion is one of its weaknesses. In fact the Tea Party opens itself up to the charge of hypocrisy precisely because it says almost nothing about e.g. agriculture subsidies e

        “Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Mo., who also was swept into office with the Tea Party movement, received $774,489 in farm subsidies over the same period, according to the EWG’s numbers.” is the run of the mill account at ABC news. Google (Tea Party and Agriculture Subsidies) and the most common links have the word hypocrisy.

        Sharpton is a pariah and the fact that the left hasn’t distanced itself from the Tawana Brawley profiteer is also hypocrisy. All can rejoice that, slowly justice is being enacted as Tawana begins to pay for her crimes

        http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/05/brawley-begins-to-repay-lawyer-she-falsely-accused/2618399/

         
  9. mitchethekid

    August 8, 2013 at 9:53 am

    I don’t even know how to moderate. Maybe it’s a glitch or reenter the links.

     
    • kmg

      August 8, 2013 at 5:09 pm

      There’s a default setting in WordPress to kick comments to moderation based on the number of links, but you can change the number. Ask watson, I think he knows how to change it.

       
  10. mitchethekid

    August 8, 2013 at 5:25 pm

    Great advice! Thanks. I’ll change it behind Clusters back 🙂

     
    • Cluster

      August 9, 2013 at 11:50 am

      Beat you to it! I just changed the number to 4, so 4 links or more, the comment will be moderated.

       
  11. GMB

    August 9, 2013 at 6:02 pm

    Wasn’t no fault but mine. First comment got moderated because of links, second comment got moderated because it was posted to fast when I already had a comment in moderation. Feature not a bug.

    Bardolf! Welcome to our humble and not so humble home.

    🙂

    Have a great weekend everyone.

     
 
%d bloggers like this: