http://loomisnews.wordpress.com/2008/08/31/i-heart-sarah-palin/

The political gift that keeps on giving.

While carbon emissions have no discernable effect on climate, the belief they do is netting promoters of this “crisis” billions per year in return for our gullibility. Meanwhile they change nothing of their own lifestyles, though they also live on the planet they claim we are destroying.

Your website leads me to believe we have the same concerns about the profit and power grab masquerading as concern over a non-existent climate crisis. Would you help me promote to your readership, a book I have written? I had hoped if enough people read it, it would create a public backlash against this hoax. I have thus, with my own efforts, been unable to publicize this work.

This book is entitled “A Climate Crisis a la Gore.” It is organized as follows:

• Introduction – What motivated the assembly of this research for public use.
• Part 1 – excerpted ideas from Mr. Gore’s book, The Assault on Reason, regarding what he claims to be the proper and reasonable way to enter an argument or evidence in the marketplace of ideas, the forum of reason, the real power behind democracy.
• Part 2 – An event by event analysis of the claims presented by Mr. Gore in his documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. These are evaluated with simple logic, claims elsewhere in the documentary, the principles of reasoning found in Mr. Gore’s latest book, and against scientific research and findings regarding the subjects of his claims.
• Part 3 – A discussion of the players and special interest groups active in creating the perception of a crisis involving global climate. The history of the movement is examined, motives behind involvement, dollar amounts of profit already being reaped by the various promoters, and what else they stand to gain if America enacts carbon legislation.
• Conclusion – The coming economic storm resulting from an enactment of carbon cap-and-trade legislation and a plea to readers to contact legislators requesting any such laws be reconsidered.

Excerpts can be reviewed and the book can be ordered at Amazon.com by entering the title, ISBN# (978-1-4196-8684-9) or by following the link http://www.amazon.com/Climate-Crisis-Gore-perception-warming/dp/1419686844/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1202424474&sr=8-1 If you are willing to read or review it, I believe you would be willing to inform your readers of the contents. An informed population of voters is the only real check and balance system we can depend upon.

Sincerely,

Paul Spite

Energy is my priority interest. Suggest you read Robert Rapier and/or/both theoildrum on energy issues:

“will come from NON FOOD biomass.”

‘Will’ as in the future. Rhymes with ’still’ as in still waiting. Waiting for … $3 … $2 … $1 gas ??? I’m old enough to remember all those prices. Energy-wise, this country and most of the rest of the globe is behind the eight ball on this subject.

My argument with Paul stems from the fact that he is rationalizing inaction by a Pelosi led congress on off-shore drilling. Lets debate the merits of various energy proposals, and then committ ourselves to a course of action. Waffling won’t make the problem abate. Whether we need to drill offshore or not, it’s simply the only proposal of any concrete nature on the table at present.

As to your point about anti-intellectualism becoming the dominant ideology in Washington, I would tend to agree. Many Republicans tend to rationalize offensive actions, like our current war in Iraq, as if it were some sort of defensive measure. Their democratic colleagues push protectionism, various planning apparatuses, and sundry economic biases on an unknowledgeable public. Pick your poison.

The former is inarguable: the GOP has been very successful at convincing people that piety, common sense, and unflinching resolve are all that is needed to solve any problem. Anyone who tries for a more nuanced view iis a flip-flopper, anyone who argues for caution is a wimp, and anyone who doubts the fundamental rightness of America is a traitor and a fag. That is the Republican subtext and it has been extremely effective in winning elections.

Where you can argue with Krugman is his contention that this is no longer just electoral posturing but a governing philosophy. I’m not sure how you would prove that assertion without some Gnostic access to the True Intentions of politicians and policy makers.

Critics on the left and the right have argued that the Conservative Movement epitomized by Goldwater and Reagan has run out of gas. It won many victories, reshaped American politics, but doesn’t have much to offer in the way of solutions to the current problems facing the country. In the absence of any coherent philosophy, there is certainly a risk that what started as a campaign tactic has morphed into an ideology, and one that is very bad for the nation.

Rice was being very much down the middle and polite, while emphasizing that she was a Republican. The Politico reporter had asked her a brain-dead question about being willing to run as Obama’s running mate.

The U.S. will do fine whichever man takes office; that is, we will endure. It’s called damning with faint praise.