The most significant achievement is the natural gas pipeline.

Fuel cells consuming natural gas can eliminate the burning problems of hydrocarbons and replace them with natural reactions leaving just water and needed energy.

Sarah Palin may have already saved the world, and was looking good while doing it.

She looks to have stage fright.  The professional cheering section in the crowd doesn't match McBushies' wooden delivery.  Go shoot some dice, you anger management challenged gambling addict.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

They're pushing the fact that she wants to open up ANWR, Alaska has oil, blah blah blah.  I guess "drill, drill, drill" is the only thing that works for them, so they'll push, push, push it.

To make us energy independent.  More "Pickens" around at oil and gas bribery and GHG climate disaster.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

Fuel cells consuming natural gas can eliminate the burning problems of hydrocarbons and replace them with natural reactions leaving just water and needed energy.

How exactly does natural gas (even if used in a fuel cell) not qualify as a hydrocarbon?  What are these "natural reactions" of which you speak (even a fuel cell converts CH4 --> CO2 and H2O, in part through reformation and in part electrolytically).  And what mass balance are you using that takes leaves only water and energy from a fuel source that includes carbon?

Natural gas is clearly better than coal from an environmental perspective, but suggesting that it will save the planet is no more accurate than suggesting that giving up hamburgers for bison-burgers makes you a vegetarian.

She said, "...nuclea...nuke..you..ler weapons".  Almost said it the right way, but quickly reverted to industrial programming.

Does nuke..you..ler work better in test audiences?  It's got to be some sort of advertising/brainwashing research study.

Oh now you can shatter that glass ceiling women! So she says.

 Get two more supreme court justices appointed who want to put your reproductive rights back into the evangelical taliban era?

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

Nu-kyu-lar is now a recognized but not preferred alternative pronunciation by most dictionaries. I'm not happy about it either, but the day is past when you can smugly point it out as an error.

biden = useful after the election
palin = disposable candidate

already our landfills are crowded with symbolism. the world wants to know, is palin plastic or cardboard? is she recyclable?

And lest we get all cranky about it, it bears noting that no one gets upset about the fact that "comfortable" is even more consistently misprounced in the same way (e.g., with a letter swap in the middle).  

So if we're going to get linguistically bent out of shape, let's not get too comfterbull in our glass house, even if it is nukular powered.

... said he chose her to help fight the special interests in Washington who spend tax dollars on stuff we don't need or don't want!

Haaaaahhhhhhahahahahaaaaahahahaa.... McCain... please stop it... you're killing me!

"That's not change we can believe in."

Has anyone noticed that Dick Cheney hasn't been around for a while? Perhaps he found a way to move his brain into a new body.

I get frustrated with folks from outside Alaska who come up and say, "You shouldn't develop your resources."

And I get frustrated that Alaskans are such a bunch of federally subsidized freeloaders, getting $2-5+ (depending on the measure) for every $1 they pay. (I come from NJ, one of the biggest sap cash-cow states.)

And I get frustrated that all Alaskans get this fat dividend check from fossil fuels drilled mostly on federal land. Those proceeds belong to all of us.

And I get frustrated at all Westerners who have this attitude of an aggressive beggar - GIMMIE MONEY! NOW! BUT DON'T YOU DARE TELL ME HOW TO LIVE! DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO! GO FUCK YOURSELF!

Will somebody tell these yahoos once and for all, federal land does not belong to them. It belongs to the country.

Believes intelligent design should be taught along with evolution in science classes

I hadn't known before she was one of these.

This kind of Dark Age flat-earthism is empirical evidence that one is just a cretin.

Creationism?  Only duuhbya himself is that dim, wow.

Oh yeah, a native cretin.  The error was prouncing it nuclea..  at first. Her programming slipped, stepford wife?  

I'm with you wisci, Cheney's brain was implanted in a replica robot stepford wife body.

 Well sure ken, of course the CIA got the dictionaries changed.  No surprise there.  Hehey.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

The "intelligent design" position would have been enough to turn me against her. I didn't know she was in that group of wackos. If her anti-environment, anti-wildlife, pro big oil, anti-women's rights positions aren't enough to tank her, I just don't know what to make of the state of the nation anymore.

I can't wait to see Joe Biden verbally attack Palin.  He and a lot of others who care about the earth, environment and wildlife will have a field day with her.  GO GET HER!!

OBAMA/BIDEN 2008  I can see the poll numbers rising Obama already. :-D

THE PEOPLE need to know how Governor Sarah Pain of Alaska, the potential VP of John McCain stands on the illegal immigration plague?  Is she a panderer to the Hispanic Caucuses and open border International globalists?

Before the new President even thinks of contemplating any form of guest worker program. He had better realize that their will not be a 'Path to Citizenship' in the package deal. It will be a straight working visa and return home afterwards. If any person wants to apply for legal residents, they had better understand that they must return home first. There must not be any short cuts, because thousands of bona fide  immigrants wait patiently  for years to enter America.

What do you think as caused the massive budget meltdown and escalating unemployment in California?
Let's face it confronting the huge budget deficit, brought upon the people of California from 'Sanctuary city' policies and allowing illegal aliens access to state, county and city welfare programs  has caused  a major disaster.  Now Arnold  and the state  morons must look for other means to  extract  taxes and dollar bills from property owners  to keep  overcrowded schools running , the  free health care (illegal alien) system  and make room  in the  also overburdened  prisons.

The assembly is overrun with Latino radicals who reserve the right, to allow the influx of as many  illegal  third world country cheap labor force that can spirit into the border states. Arnold seems to have lost his way, or been intimidated by the Democratic-Liberal-Socialist makeup in Sacramento's assembly.  

Get rid of the open-borders criminals, including the Governors, Mayors , city Administrators and all those who out to appease the illegal immigrant advocates.
80 percent of the American population are NOT easily going to be swayed, by either Obama, McCain to give the 13 to 20 million illegal aliens any kind of Amnesty.? By any name they want to call it?  It has to be voted by house, Senate, and  THE PEOPLE and that will have major hurdles, if not impossible?
Everybody who doesn't have the right papers, know they are intentionally breaking the law.  Their is no malice by the agents; just a duty to the American people and those who came here legally.

The 'Rule of Law" must be observed by every person in the United States. LAUREL, Miss, a manufacturing plant where 600 illegal aliens were arrested  this week, shows the abnormality of the problem?  The federal agents declined how many agents were involved in the raid, but said they acted on a tip provided by a union worker.

You cannot tell me for one minute, that the CEO, Directors on mahogany row didn't know about the illegal workers?  Ice has a Tipline: 1-866-DHS-2ICE for intelligence to locate illegal aliens, or predatory businesses that employ them. If we can only pass the Federal SAVE ACT (H.R.4088) that Democrats are trying to keep away from the public eye.

Its funding will build a massive force of interior ICE agents, including 20.000 border patrol enforcement to root out the culprits. The E-verify data base that is 90.5 percent effective. NUMBERSUSA, CAPSWEB

"I'm not one though who would attribute [global warming] to being man-made."

This comment is absolutely horrifying to me. There will be no hope of dealing with global climate change if McCain and Palin take over the white house. I don't want to even imagine...

"She has more experience catching fish than dealing with foreign policy or national affairs."

This obvious pandering to the Clinton camp voters and trying to win over voters with a woman candidate should only fool people with one brain cell.

And he picked someone with no experience or knowledge because he feels threatened with an experienced running mate that people would probably prefer over him.

"For as long as space endures, and for as long as living beings remain, until then may I too abide, to dispel the misery of the world." - Shantideva

That alone scares the living daylights out of me.

This is a person with a B.A. degree.  In journalism.  Her primary executive-leadership experience is being mayor of a small town in our least-populated state.

Please tell me this is a joke.  Has Palin ever traveled outside of the USA?  Does she know where Macau is located?  Does she understand U.S. Constitutional law?  Does she understand U.S. history?

Man, this will be interesting seeing her go head-to-head with VP candidate Biden.

sigh  it's scary to me that people can still say this publically.  Did we not settle this debate once and for all a year or two ago?  Now we're on to debating the long-term effects and the timeline, right?  yikes.  the thing that makes me sad is that there are somehow still people that don't believe (ha! "believe", likes it's some object of faith) in anthropogenic climate change.  In fact, i was having a political talk with my friend (i know, not a good idea) yesterday after Obama's speech, who's a R, who actually told me that "scientists" don't know.  I'm not even angry.  Depressed, perhaps...

At this stage, I would hope that saying a comment like this would be political suicide and that both the right and the left would jump all over it.  Hell, even the Bush administration had finally conceded that the 6-point-whatever-billion of us on the planet burning fossil-fuels at an unprecedented rate has accelerated global warming.  Geez...

Brittanicus, the strategy of blaming others for your problems is a classic strategy of so called populists. The really problem in good old Cali is the slashing of taxes leaving the state with no money to pay for essential services and infrastructure.

High taxes is merely a marketing strategy created by right wingers to create some kind of relevance for themselves to invent a reason for people to vote for them. Radio talk show hosts are making millions off people like you.

Creating pain, discomfort and anger in people who really have everything they need and then some seems to have worked out rather well for neo cons.

And Brittanicus, for all your "rule of law" bluster, how many times have you driven over the speed limit or broken a traffic law potentially endangering yourself.

I suggest you look inwards for solutions to whatever your anger is and stop blaming  hardworking people without much money. Or at least take up a hobby or drinking or whatever does it for you.

my picture is better, you gotta admit

And toss in the "I don't believe in Evolution" bit too.

-David Ahlport

is a signature behavior of fascism.

she's all the more pretty for her power, no, jabailo?

Jabailo, you sound a little sexually frustrated. Why not copy and paste your comment to an online dating service?

What we see here is a good post, with rollicking good fun, exchanges, etc. We even have our own resident trols. Observe and learn.

(1) Don't be so ready to take postings off the front page of the site. Not everything you replace them with is all that earth shattering or valuable. Sometimes I think Grist has the attention span of a 2 year old.

(2) When you see a posting is getting lots of action, keep it on for a while.

Do just these two things and you will really have a forum for people to use, and you will have much happier Grist supporters.

Randy Cunningham
Cleveland, OH

Randy Cunningham

jabailo wrote...

"She that real Goddess that you Lefto-Greenoes are always going on about in "Myths and Literature" class 201 in the Religion department."

My version of a Green Goddess would also display wisdom, care about and for ALL of creation, expect us to live withut abusing nature, actually deserve respect, and not hunt wolves (from a helicopter or on the ground).

jabalio wrote...

"But then, all you wizened, dried up old hippies don't like growth."

Who are you calling a wizend hippie?! I'm not a hippie! Not saying that there's anything wrong with wizend hippies... just don't call me one.  ; )

So only dirty hippies view Palin as absolutley not qualified for the job? She admitted during an interview that she doesn't even know what a vp does!

Americans, sometimes I wish we had your binary black-and-white system instead of our complex multi-party system, with greens, blues, reds, yellows, brownshirts and everything in between.

You now face the simplest choice of any voter on the planet.

-A clean and secure energy future vs. the guaranteed destruction of America because of a continued dependence on hydrocarbons
-Leadership in the world vs. remaining the pariah you became under Bushco
-Economic progress and justice vs. economic downfall and injustice
-Social progress and equality vs. social sclerosis and exclusion, and ever more privileges for the very wealthy few
-Policy creation based on reason and science vs. policy creation based on religion and special interests
-Tapping into the creativity and dynamism of the American spirit vs. declining because of fear of change

It's fantastic to have such a dead-simple choice.

On the other hand, this simple choice is very important to all non-Americans too. Because in November we will know whether we have to prepare ourselves for the historic, definitive downfall of America or not.

It's really that simple: either you go down and America will have proven to be nothing more than an interesting European offshore experiment. Or you go up, and prove that even when in big trouble, America is a resilient nation that dares to step into the future, once again.

It's a thriller!

Americans, sometimes I wish we had your binary black-and-white system instead of our complex multi-party system, with greens, blues, reds, yellows, brownshirts and everything in between.

Odd, my whole adult life I've wished the exact opposite.

Not just because I've always felt myself a continental European at heart, but because here if you don't fit into one of two cookie-cutter molds (and often just one), you're effectively disenfranchised.

if europe has that much extra time and energy to sit around blaming the whole thing on the USA -- having profited handsomely from USA stocks and bonds and from sales to USA consumers -- why not use some of your spare human capital to give us discounted training and equipment?

europe looks much less smart when it patiently waits for america to sink the boat.

I'm sorry, but anybody who thinks the earth was created in the last 12,000 years and who asserts that "creationism" (non-science) should be taught alongside evolutionary theory (science) in our schools should be kept far, far away from the levers of power.

That's simply Dark-Ages thinking on par with some of the poorer muslim theocracies of the Middle East.  Nothing more, nothing less.

We're better than that.  Much better than that.  That kind of leadership turns us into the laughingstock of the rest of the world, which is starting to move past us in science and engineering.

I'm not sure whether Palin has detailed exactly whose concept of the creation story should be taught.  I assume she means the fundamentalist Christian version.  However, if we allow that to be taught we must logically also allow the Hindu version to be taught, the Pagan version to be taught, the Sioux Indian version to be taught, and my favorite the Flying Spaghetti Monster version to be taught.  Let the kids decide for themselves!

... turned down McCain's offer to run as Vice President of the United States of America before one finally accepted?

Surely, Sarah Palin is not the most qualified Republican woman out there!  The consensus among potenial running mates must have been that McCain doesn't have a chance. Or no one wants to inherit the legacy of the current Republican Party. It was bad enough that Republicans couldn't find a decent candidate for President. Sad... they can't even find a decent candidate for Vice President.

I'm going to consider this a positive development...if only to help me throught the next two months... there isn't a single intelligent Republican interested in accepting ownership of the results of eight years of Republican leadership.

If they win, however, welcome to the new Dark Age. I suppose we really do have to hit bottom before we start on the road to recovery. I thought that was G. W. Bush. Yikes... never imagine the bottom was still beyond our view.

Even Condi Rice must have turned down the opportunity. I mean... she has some experience now. And her speciality is Russia, which might be important now. And she seems more interested in diplomacy than saber rattling. She seems downright perfect compared to Sarah Palin.

More often than not, Mother Nature's Fury is the result of humans trying to live out of harmony with the rest of the natural world.

Mother Nature Is.

She "rewards" those who respect the natural order.

She "punishes" those who try to create their own reality.

Thank you, Gia, for the post.

[--------------------------------xx--------------------------------]
                                         ^^
                                Obama  McCain

  I find it hard to believe that so many seemingly intellectual people really think that the fate of the world can be altered by these fictitious stage acts we call "elections".  I know that the sound bites and name-calling seem passionate and legitimate at times, but neo-cons and neo-libs are two sides of the same coin.  How can we expect "change" or whatever this season's linguistic flavor may be when philosophically near-identical candidates pander to the masses and debate frivolous issues.  Wake up and quit voting us down the shitter.

rc...

Ask yourself whether the current Suprem Court is upholding the U.S. Constitution.

Are their decisions protecting the environment, threatened species, freedom of speech, separation of church and state, our right to vote, several EQUAL branches of government, et cetera?

Ask yourself how each candidate would fill vacancies on the Supreme Court. There will be vacancies.

Will the court shift to the left or to the right on your political spectrum?

Remember, the next President might set the tone of the Supreme Court for the next several decades.

I believe a vote against Obama is a vote for right-wing domination of our government.

Thanks, wiscidea.  While I sympathize with Reasonable Cynic's frustration with our current corporately-controlled political system, we need to keep some perspective here.

As much as I would love to see a radical revisionist sweep into the White House and make everything all better, as much as I would like to express my disdain for the status quo by electing a Kucinich or a Nader, it simply ain't gonna happen in 2008.  

Are there still folks who think it "really didn't matter" who got elected in 2000 -- Gore or Bush -- because they were "indistinguishable from each other"?  Please.

Like it or not, change in this country is gonna have to happen incrementally.  IF Obama is elected, and IF people like Reasonable Cynic and wiscidea and myself continue working on the necessary supporting infrastructure to push people like Obama in the right direction (cleaner elections, stronger local environmental interest groups, stronger independent media, public rather than corporate financing of elections), change can happen.  In fact I don't see any other way that it will.

Neocons and big oil and the evangelical flat-earthers that make up today's Republican Party would like nothing better than to watch the left shoot itself in a circular firing squad.  Thanks, but I'll stay out of that circle.

If the American public votes for a country club hack who seems, incredibly, almost as disengaged as Bush -- and who wants to shut down Amtrak -- even while they have a chance to vote for a man who is obviously, if nothing else, extremely intelligent and someone who might actually do something innovative if the economy really hits the fan ; if the US public elects a man that would choose a completely unqualified person as his running mate, who could actually endanger the country if she became President, as opposed to a man who argued against starting a war which a vast majority of the population allegedly does not want, then I won't know what to say, except to get all academic and Jared-Diamon-Collapse-y about my explanations.

What more can I say? How about "drill, drill, drill, drill, drill, drill, drill, drill..." As Gary Gilmore said in 1977, "Let's do it." Palin is a great choice. I am finally excited about the McCain campaign.

The Community Organizer is the most qualified candidate the Democrats have for president? God help us.

jabailo, right on brother!

Gov Palin wants "creationism" (non-science) taught alongside evolutionary theory (science) in our public schools.

Well, while we're at it, I insist that the concept that the sun revolves around the Earth, rather than the other way around, be taught in our schools.  

After all, the former has a Biblical basis, the latter does not.  And any fool can go outside and see for herself that the former is the truth.

'Nuff said.

There are a few other Christian values -- direct from the Bible -- that SHOULD be taught in public schools. How about...

Not accumulating wealth.

Non-violence... i.e., turn the other cheek.

Giving clothing, food, and shelter to strangers who are less fortunate.

Not praying public.

Not imposing dealth penalty... i.e., only God can do so.

There are, of course, a whole bunch of Christian values, that no one -- Christian or non-Christian -- would want taught in the public schools. No need to mention them here.

Anyway...

Why do Christian Fundamentalist focus so much on a few insignificant Christian values and ignore some of the most important values, policies that a majority of people might benefit from and fully support?

and what's with the obsession with guns? Would Jesus have supported the NRA?

Great, just great. A dominionist. Since one of the basic tenets of "believers" of that ilk is Manifest Destiny it is no surprise that she has few problems with killing the only home we have because it has been "given to mankind by god."

What are the chances she's been chosen because her sex will divert attention from the fact that her belief system coincides with such people as P. R***tson, J*y F***ll and that bunch?

It's all about the ultra leftwing agenda, isn't it? "Environment" my butt.

as a means of preventing pregnancy, should be taught in the high schools.

Just ask Palin's high-school daughter.

Everything about the selection of Sarah Palin is offensive--exasperating.  McCain thinks he can draw Clinton supporters into his fold because he put a woman on the ticket? Sarah Palin is no Hillary Clinton. What could be more sexist than thinking that women want a female president or vice president just for the sake of having a woman prez or VP? I want a qualified woman as president, an individual whose beliefs and policy proposals align with my own hopes for the future.

It is not only women who are capable of understanding and advocating for women. I have more faith in Obama to support women's rights and promote women's status in this country than Palin, especially when it comes to the selection of justices.

The sexism still so prevalent in this country has played a sad and divisive role in the media and the campaigns for the presidency.  My greatest fear is that disappointment over Clinton's defeat--and what I have heard veterans of the feminist movement describe as her pandering willingness to accept it--will poison this election. As a woman, I am not about to cut off my nose to spite my face by staying away from the polls in November or--worse yet--voting for McCain. The struggle for women's rights will be set back by decades if we allow the McCain/Palin ticket to secure the White House.

Anti-choice?
For Creationism?
For drilling in ANWR?
Doesn't believe in anthropogenic climate change?
Lifelong NRA member?
A friend to Big Oil?

Women's rights are human rights: the right to lives, families, bodies, homes, educations, and careers of our choosing with equal respect and equal pay for equal work, and the liberty to pursue our happiness in a safe and healthy environment without fear of violence or oppression.

I don't even think Palin and I are looking at the same glass ceiling.

"Anti-choice?"

No, her desire to limit government is in keeping with maximizing freedom and choice for everyone.  But murder is not a choice because the murdered infant would never choose it.  Murdering of the unborn is simply proof of the inhumanity and hypocrisy of the left.  Killing viable babies minutes before birth while crying about the pain felt by a fish that is caught by a fisherman shows what true monsters the eco cultists are.

saluki wrote...

"Killing viable babies minutes before birth while crying about the pain felt by a fish that is caught by a fisherman shows what true monsters the eco cultists are."

How many women have undergone this procedure -- killing a viable child minutes before birth -- in the United States simply because they did not want the child and not because birth of the child would harm the mother?

I do not support the muder of viable children minutes before birth. I doubt any environmentalists do. This is a straw man created by the far right.

But when two lives are threaten, that of the mother and the unborn child, I fail to understand why anti-abortion advocates believe the mother should die.

Perhaps the woman is quite young, the father has abandoned her, and there will be no one there to care for the new child if she dies. Perhaps the woman has three children who depend on her. Isn't it important to keep her alive to care for her first three children rather than allow her to die, leaving four children without a mother?

Please explain why you do not place greater or equal value on the life of the mother, who is also a human being.

And rape and incest?! Do you really think it is morally superior to force a 15-year-old who was raped, perhaps by her father, give birth to and raise the child?! How could this be justified when the fertilized egg could be aborted before there is even a nervous system, a process that naturally occurs roughly 50% of the time?

It might be easier to accept anti-abortion advocates' extreme view if they at least supported adequate sex education in the schools and access to familiy planning options, but they object to that as well.

I agree there is a need to reduce abortion... it should be accomplished by raising the standard of living so people can care for their children and ensuring adequate access to educational and family planning resources so there are fewer unwanted pregnancies. There should be better health care so mothers get adequate nutritional advice. There should be stricter controls on pollution and testing of pharmaceuticals so children are not harmed in the womb. There should be minimum wage laws, so parents can earn enough to care for the children they have and are not tempted to resort to abortion. But conservatives are not interested in this.

You have a right to have an opinion based on misinformation.  I am a nurse and know quite a few environmentalists and feminists.  I don't know of any who have killed a fetus minutes before birth nor any that cry over fish.  I fish myself.  I'm also pro life when it comes to killing fully functioning human beings in war, which many who claim to be pro life are not.  I also know that the human population is not only crowding out other forms of life causing a mass extinction of species and causing the climate crisis, all upsetting the God given balance of the planet's living systems, but that these things are endangering the future of the human species.  Fighting against the climate crisis, the war and for reproductive freedom is pro choice and pro life.

wiscidea:
"How many women have undergone this procedure -- killing a viable child minutes before birth -- in the United States simply because they did not want the child and not because birth of the child would harm the mother?"

Well, we only have the statistics for the women that  participate in voluntary reporting.  There are about 1000 partial birth abortions performed per year  in America alone.  This is more Americans being killed by partial birth abortions than by the Iraqi war.  There are more than 13,000 babies killed after 4.5 month each year, and these are definitely viable.  There are 164,000 killed after 3 month each year and the viability of these is debatable but some of them definitely are.

"But when two lives are threaten, that of the mother and the unborn child, I fail to understand why anti-abortion advocates believe the mother should die."

Now you are throwing out the straw man.  Probably less than 2% of abortions involve the life of the woman.  And no one believes that it is the mother that should die.  If abortion of viable babies was only done to save mothers lives we wouldn't be having this debate in this country.

"Isn't it important to keep her alive to care for her first three children rather than allow her to die, leaving four children without a mother?"

Again you are basing your argument on only the extreme cases rather than on the norm.  I repeat, no one is advocating that women should die in the birth process.

"And rape and incest?! Do you really think it is morally superior to force a 15-year-old who was raped, perhaps by her father, give birth to and raise the child?! How could this be justified when the fertilized egg could be aborted before there is even a nervous system, a process that naturally occurs roughly 50% of the time?"

Rape an incest are indeed an unfortunate circumstance.  But when it comes to a choice of hardship on the one hand and loss of life on the other we have to pick hardship.

"How could this be justified when the fertilized egg could be aborted before there is even a nervous system, a process that naturally occurs roughly 50% of the time?""

I don't have a problem with abortion before there is any nervous system.  But the reality is that we are still doing hundreds of thousands of abortions long after there is a nervous system.

"There should be minimum wage laws, so parents can earn enough to care for the children they have and are not tempted to resort to abortion. But conservatives are not interested in this."

This is a blatant attempt to remove all responsibility for sexual behavior from those who engage in it.  It is not up to anyone to pay someone a salary that is greater than what they are worth.  Rather it is up to the individual to make themselves worth the salary that they want to be paid.  I have worked for minimum wage at the same time that I was working to educate myself and increasing my worth in the job market.  It's not that hard.  And if some employer would have had to pay me more than I was worth at that time I might not have had a job at all.

In any case the whole issue is irrelevant.  If the child is too much of a burden for the mother, there are millions of competent and financially solvent people that are willing to adopt it.

earthmama:
"I don't know of any who have killed a fetus minutes before birth nor any that cry over fish.  I fish myself."

You don't have to look far on this board to find people who cry over the pain felt by the fish.  Just look at some of the recent ones.  I saw such posts after reading less than a couple of dozen posts here.  And I don't care if you are a nurse or who you know.  The statistics on partial birth abortions are available.

"all upsetting the God given balance of the planet's living systems,"

There is no god given balance of the planet's living systems.  Species have become extinct for the entire history of the planet - or at least that portion where there has been life.  Populations crash and replenish without any interference from man.  I remember reading a doctoral dissertation about jack rabbits when I was in college.  The writer found that jack rabbit populations habitually varied by a factor of 10 to 1.  Rabbit populations would be beset by disease, parasites and predators when their density was very high. Then they would crash, making disease and parasites more difficult to transmit, and starving out a large part of the coyote population.  Coyotes would also reduce their reproduction rates when food was scarce.  Then the rabbit population would begin to build and the cycle would start all over.  Eco nuts seem to have this overly romaticised gaia notion of how benign nature is.  But the natural life of most species on the earth can be cruel, harsh, and short - without any interference from man.  You can live your delusions in order to make yourself feel morally superior and in order to make yourself feel that you have purpose in life, but you are no more in touch with reality than any creationist.

saluki wrote...

"I repeat, no one is advocating that women should die in the birth process."

Then perhaps there is not a problem. But the Christian Fundamentalist supporters of the current Republican Party, John McCain, and Sarah Palin... as well as Sarah Palin herself ... want to see a Supreme Court that will uphold bans on abortion even in the event of threats to the life of the mother.

I thought you were defending Palin's views, the topic of this thread, not your own. So you really don't want to see someone as extreme as Palin in a position to assume the power of appointing new Supreme Court justices?

saluki wrote...

"Rape an incest are indeed an unfortunate circumstance.  But when it comes to a choice of hardship on the one hand and loss of life on the other we have to pick hardship."

Why do we have to pick hardship? Why is this morally superior than aborting a fertilized egg that has not yet developed a nervous system?

And...

"This is a blatant attempt to remove all responsibility for sexual behavior from those who engage in it. "

No. Not all responsibility. A person currently has the option of having an abortion. I agree there should be limits. But, again, the Christian Fundamentalist supporters of the current Republican Party would like to see and end to birth control, an end to abortion just days after conception, and an end to abortion even in the event of rape, incest, or threats to the life of the mother.

If Christian Fundamentalists wish to stand in the way of some of the means people have for assuming responsibility for sexual behavior -- by simply using birth control or a morning after pill -- then it is up to them to find ways of helping people prevent unwanted pregnancy or helping families find the resources to raise those children. No one is trying to avoid responsibility. They are doing what they can to cope.

It would be better to work together to ensure women never feel there is a need for an abortion than to ban the procedure. Bans have not worked in the past. They only create more suffering. Bans will not stop abortion. The only way to stop it is to make sure no one ever sees it as a necessity.

saluki wrote...

"But the natural life of most species on the earth can be cruel, harsh, and short - without any interference from man."

Does this mean we cannot use our naturally evolved brain to reduce the amount of "cruelty"? I really view nature as neutral. It is up to us to create the world we want to live in. I believe the net suffering is minimized when a victim of rape and/or incest as the option of an abortion.

Perhaps you are passive and wish to be carried along by whatever "cruelty" nature throws at us. But this in certainly not natural behavior and living in harmony with the world. We have brains. We ought to try to use them to reduce suffering instead of just adding to it.

saluki wrote...

"But the natural life of most species on the earth can be cruel, harsh, and short - without any interference from man."

Does this mean we cannot use our naturally evolved brain to reduce the amount of "cruelty"? I really view nature as neutral. It is up to us to create the world we want to live in. I believe the net suffering is minimized when a victim of rape and/or incest as the option of an abortion.

Perhaps you are passive and wish to be carried along by whatever "cruelty" nature throws at us. But this in certainly not natural behavior and living in harmony with the world. We have brains. We ought to try to use them to reduce suffering instead of just adding to it.

Is that women be allowed to make their own decisions on their own, without government interference, concerning their own bodies and reproduction.

Is that too much liberty for you?  Evidently so.

Does the state own the reproductive organs of every woman within it's borders, or not?  

Nature preserves the life of mothers for a reason, so they can give birth again in case there is a life threatening problem during pregnancy and birth.  

Those life and death decisions ought not be litigated as murder trials for mothers and doctors by the state, at a later date in hindsight.  Your extremist theology ignore the basic realities of life.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

wiscidea
"John McCain, and Sarah Palin... as well as Sarah Palin herself ... want to see a Supreme Court that will uphold bans on abortion even in the event of threats to the life of the mother."

Do you have a link showing that McCain and Palin would rather have a mother die than have an abortion.  I mean a credible link of course.  Not the assertion of some left winger.

"Why do we have to pick hardship? Why is this morally superior than aborting a fertilized egg that has not yet developed a nervous system?"

I think we've been over this ground before.  I have no problem with abortion before any nervous system is developed  - for any reason.  Unfortunately that still leave tens of thousands of abortions of viable human beings that are not a threat to the life of their mother.  So if a rape victim allows their pregnacy to get to a certain point of develpment, then the right thing to do is have the baby.

"But, again, the Christian Fundamentalist supporters of the current Republican Party would like to see and end to birth control, an end to abortion just days after conception, and an end to abortion even in the event of rape, incest, or threats to the life of the mother."

Yes, there is that, and there is the other side of the coin of left wing extremists that demand abortion at any time after viability including seconds before birth even when there is no threat to the mother.  The Christian Fundamentalists will never get everything they want.  But apparently the left wing extremists have.  And this is the kind of extremism that is supported by Obama and Biden.

"If Christian Fundamentalists wish to stand in the way of some of the means people have for assuming responsibility for sexual behavior -- by simply using birth control or a morning after pill"

When it comes to birth control you are talking about a tiny minority, even among Christians, that are against it.  It's a waste of time pretending that such people are some kind of threat.

amazingdrx:
"All we are asking Is that women be allowed to make their own decisions on their own, without government interference, concerning their own bodies and reproduction."

The answer would seem to be all to obvious.  Why can't I make my own decision, without government interference to kill you.

I could care less what you do with your own body.  That baby is not your body.  It is an independent human being and the only possible exuse to kill another human being is to save the life of the mother.  Unfortunately 98% of abortions of viable human beings are not to save the life of the mother.

He says he doesn't want kids.  Amongst a lot of other violent offensive stuff.

It's a shotgun politically correct wedding.

The Baby is part of the Mother until it is born.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

amazingdrx:
"The Baby is part of the Mother until it is born."

Now there is a convenient way to rationalize murder.  As though it's location determines it's humanity.  The babies DNA is completely different from that of the mother.

wiscidea:
"Does this mean we cannot use our naturally evolved brain to reduce the amount of "cruelty"? "

Well, you can start by stopping wolves from killing deer, elk, moose and caribou.  Especially those cute and lovable little caribou babies that they are so fond of.  I suppose you could feed the wolves dog kibble.  Then you can work on getting those polar bears to stop killing those aborable seal pups.  The PB's can probably make it on kibble also.  The problem you will have is with cats and members of the weasle family.  They kind of need meat.  Good luck with that.

Pretty embarrassing Pang.  Hehey.

No need to debate this stuff at all.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

John,

This debate you and others are having with Saluki is an excellent example of how people's personal agenda's makes it impossible to fully consider the viability of an opinion quite different from their own.

Saluki and many, many others are actually incapable (at this point in their lives) of accepting a different viewpoint on the subject of abortion. To do so would require a complete re-wiring of their inner world and belief systems. The only personal security they have right now is their reliance on a limited, out-dated set of beliefs created by others who need followers like Saluki.

Saluki prefers to focus on making wrong the choices of others she doesn't even know personally, rather than taking full responsibility for the disasters resulting from her own choices. She simply can't handle the pain of the latter.

I'm willing to bet Saluki voted for Mr. Bush the last two times around. A significant degree of responsibility for the deaths of some 4,000 US soldiers in Iraq and the maiming of tens of thousands of others there rests squarely on her shoulders for the votes she made twice, but you'll never hear her take responsibility for this. Too painful to do that. There is a long list of other disasters resulting from Saluki's personal choice to put Mr. Bush in power, but rather than take responsibility for this and look deeply inside at her decision making process, she'd rather turn to a woman she doesn't even know and tell that person what is right and what is wrong.

I have no doubt Saluki's heart is in the right place. But she and millions of others with the same belief system are compelled by insecurities and fears that drive the choices they make. It is from that place that people like George Bush get put into power.

But she can't possibly understand what I'm talking about... no easier than she can understand why the "pro-life" position should really be called the "anti-choice" platform.

As Pangolin said, debates like this with folks like Saluki cannot possibly result in a change of position. The breakthroughs she seeks will come in their own perfect time.

Richard

What do you think about the GOP attempt to kill the ethamol mandate?

Are you willing to go with experimental biofuel projects?  It's interesting to see compromise work.

A compromise on abortion would be to fully fund women's choices either way.  The right seems to be opposed to caring for mothers and children with public funds, which would truly give them a reasonable choice.  Safe, legal, quick adoption would also be necessary to facilitate real choice.

The religious right accepts no compromise.  No abortion, no government social safety net.  Period.  Indifent, underage mothers arwe left to fend for themselves.  Would the right then allow a "free" market in babies to take over?  

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

Pangolin:
"That means that all the people that would show up for the funeral of a five year old show up."

Humanity determined by who shows up at the funeral!  Now we are really getting crazy.

Richard and many, many others are actually incapable (at this point in their lives) of accepting a different viewpoint on the subject of abortion.

Richard prefers to focus on making wrong the choices of others he doesn't even know personally, rather than taking full responsibility for the disasters resulting from his own choices. He simply can't handle the pain of the latter.

I have no doubt Richard's heart is in the right place. But he and millions of others with the same belief system are compelled by insecurities and fears that drive the choices they make. It is from that place that people like John Kerry get put into power.

I'm willing to bet Richard voted for Mr. Kerry the last time around. A significant degree of responsibility for the deaths of some 300,000 Iraqis killed by Sadam and another 1,000,000 that would undoubtedly be killed as a result of 50 more years of rule by Sadam and his insane sons rests squarely on his shoulders for the votes he made twice, but you'll never hear him take responsibility for this.  Instead of having the freedom to elect their own leaders, the Iraqis would continue to suffer under their tyrants indefinitely.  Tens of thousands of terrorists that were killed in Iraq would have been able to direct their forces to other places - including the US. He forgets that Sadam intended to resume his nuclear plans after sanctions were removed.  No Richard will not take responsibility for his disasterous decisions.  Too painful to do that. There is a long list of other disasters resulting from Richard's personal choice to put Democrats in power.  For example his choice of Bill Clinton taught Bin Laden that Americans would run at the first sign of trouble, causing Bin Laden to conclude that he could attack America and kill 3000 innocent Americans. But rather than take responsibility for this and look deeply inside at his decision making process, he'd rather turn to babies he doesn't even know and try to rationalize that their murder is right.

But he can't possibly understand what I'm talking about... no easier than he can understand why the "pro-choice" position should really be called the "pro-murder" platform.

amazingdrx:
"A compromise on abortion would be to fully fund women's choices either way."

Typical left wing looney.  Considers a compromise as doing things exactly his way.

"No abortion, no government social safety net.  Period."

How does society become responsible for the sexual choices made by it's individuals.  Under your scenario, where is there any motivation at all for people to be responsible for themselves.  Just the reverse will be true.  You will encourage pregnancy so that the mother can get a free ride from society.

There is no shortage of people willing to adopt children now.  That means that there is no excuse for murdering unborn babies, despite your effort to invent them.

"The abortion debate, which is entirely religious in origin"

This, of course, is the way that the left reframes the argument so as to avoid dealing with the glaring monstrosity of their position.  I have no religion.  I haven't been in a church since I was 15.  The fact that abortion is murder takes no religion at all to recognize.

biodiversivist:
"It is part of a religious doctrine."

Same old nutty argument.  I never cease to be amazed at how you people are able to blind yourselves to the central issues and replace it with some straw man so that you won't have to deal with reality.  As I said previously, I have absolutely no religion.  But if you think that murder is a purely religious concept, then I guess you better take it off the law books.

Saluki,

This is so typical of the way inflexible thinkers debate. You never asked for my opinions or positions. You simply assumed you knew my beliefs.

Turns out, virtually every one of your assumptions was incorrect.

Of course, it's so much more comfortable for you to try and fit me into some kind of box you understand. As I said, thinking outside the box is just not something you are prepared to do.

John,

You probably won't be satisfied with this answer, but I really don't have an opinion on the GOP effort to kill the ethanol mandate. As I've said before, corn ethanol isn't something I have much interest in. Intensive farming with monocrops, pesticides and fertilizers isn't something I can get behind.

My interest is in seeing a dramatic increase in forest cover, with these forests being as bio-diverse and productive as possible. If cellulosic ethanol can help this become a reality, I say do everything we can to make it so.

Richard:
"This is so typical of the way inflexible thinkers debate. "

More psychobabble.  What I tried to demonstrate to you in my previous post was that anyone could attack anyone else with psychobabble.  All you need to do is change the name.  The teqnique of running down other peoples motives, psychology and comprehension because they disagree with you is as old as Moses.  But your attempts at such are even worse.  They are simple assertions with no connections, no reason, no evidence and no rational.  Of course you can get away with such nonsense on a forum like this because the people want to believe it and because the forum is fairly homogeneous in their opinions.  So when someone like me comes along it's much easier to attack them in a way that allows you to avoid dealing with the heart of the issue -  especially since it has become quickly apparent that the heart of the issue is a looser for you.

Now, Richard, try refocusing on the issue.  Abortion of a viable fetus is murder in cases where the woman's life is not at stake.  It's very simple and no amount of diversion is going to allow you to avoid it.

"My interest is in seeing a dramatic increase in forest cover"

Ah, yes, no one can argue against trees - even evil conservatives like me.  Shade, wood, oxygen, beauty, building materials - what's not to like.  I'm for planting more of them anywhere and everywhere.

And since the increase of CO2 fertilization in the atmosphere the biomass of the earth, primarily trees, has increased.  Isn't that nice.

With ethanol it's an easy answer.  The eco cultists were wrong to support it.  First, the use of the farmland has increased the price of food all over the world.  There have even been some shortages.  Second, the dominance of ethanol as a fuel in Brazil has resulted in cutting down more and more of the rain forests.  It's a net loss since the rainforests are like a huge filter for cleaning the atmosphere.

The health problems to man and beast caused by wind power generation are just starting to come in.  Stay tuned.

Saluki,

I have no interest in debating with you. I've made my opinion clear: given where you are coming from, I see no possibility you can openly consider my position on the issue of abortion (even though I have not yet shared what that position is). Having recognized this, there's nothing to be gained from further discussion with you.

I will tell you this, though... the power once held by folks who have opinions like yours is dwindling quickly. It has dominated for a very long time, but those days are now numbered. What is coming in now cannot be stopped. Tolerance is key.

biodiversivist
"Exceptions always exist but are never used to prove a rule."

The rule is simple: murder is not a religious issue.

Richard:
"I will tell you this, though... the power once held by folks who have opinions like yours is dwindling quickly."

I don't see opposition to abortion dwindling.

"Tolerance is key."

Tolerance of murder and intolerace of people with SUVs.  I can't wait.

Saluki,

Again, I won't debate the issues with you, but I will state facts.

To state that opposition to abortion is as strong as ever simply ignores all polls and facts of the past 50 years. But like I said, you'll lie to yourself even on the most basic of facts to sustain your belief system.

"... intolerance of people with SUVs"... would you please point out where I stated that? Once again, all you can do to defend yourself is create lies about my beliefs.

Keep it up. You're validating everything I said earlier.

"Abortion is not a synonym of murder or infanticide"

Here is a definition:

"5. to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously."  

Fits abortion exactly.

(Here's something I hope is more pleasant than these tedious trolls.)

I think I saw an electric bicycle the other morning while I was out running. It was dark, but I'm pretty sure the guy wasn't pedalling, and it had a high-pitched (not loud) sound.

I guess that's the first time I've ever seen one.

Murder, n. - A gathering of crows.

I think that says it all.

Check it out people. The Alaska Gas Pipe Line, financing guaranteed by US taxes, and partially financed by earmarks, will pipe Alaskan gas to Alberta, Canada, to be used to convert tar sand petroleum to oil to benefit Canada, and which can be sold anywhere, not necessarily the lower 48. Additionally, the gas can be compressed and shipped to China. There is absolutely no provision here for shipping any of this precious energy reserve to us poor dopes down in the lower 48, even though this project is underwritten by US tax dollars. By the way, the gas will come from Federal land, not state land, which last time I looked belongs to all of us.
Sarah Palin is just one more corrupt Republican in bed with Big Oil. I expected better from McCain, but maybe when you are 72, you will compromise any and all principles just to get elected.

John Stuart Mill: Not all conservatives are stupid, but all stupid people are conservatives.