Sounds like she drew some pretty benign, inspirational-poster conclusions from Mao's political philosophy. She would have been much better served by citing the "Hang In There!" kitten. Moron.

Why do you think that environmental protection measures will necessarily cause massive damage to the world economy? Don't you think that there are steps that we can take that strike a balance between protecting the environment and protecting the economic welfare of humanity?

Your arguments are in incredibly bad faith. I could just as easily claim that opponents of "AGW" are operating under an anti-environmental political agenda, and care more about corporate profits than the health of the planet. But I don't choose to do that, because where does that get us? It gets us screaming at each other and accusing each other of having ulterior motives.

Charlie: Yes, I believe that there is consensus in the scientific community on AGW. We may not understand it completely, owing to the fact that climate science is notoriously complex and hard to predict, but I believe that based on the available data, we can say with reasonable confidence that human activity is having a significant impact on the global climate....

Fine, you can quibble about whether *any* quote attributed to anyone is valid. It can be attributed to anyone you like, it doesn't change the substance of the quote. "Common sense" is still a crock, still shorthand for the half-baked opinions you have come to regard as self-evident.

I made explicit in my first post that it's entirely possible for experts to be jerks too, as the "climategate" scientists were. That doesn't change the fact that experts are, by definition, more qualified to determine specific policy issues; and it doesn't change the scientific consensus about climate change. And it IS a consensus.

You claim that because we have discovered one instance of bad science, the whole scientific community must be...

is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen". - Albert Einstein

The conservative populist appeal to "common sense" is a way of falsely reassuring the ignorant, uneducated, and uninformed that their opinion is just as good as that of the educated "elites" that they so despise. I hate to break it to you, but it isn't.

Would you rather your auto mechanic was just some random guy with common sense, or an *expert* on the technical details of cars? If you don't trust your car to common sense, what makes you think you should trust bigger and more important issues?

Sure, the experts will sometimes get it wrong. The experts will sometimes have agendas, and be bad people who would rather lie than tell the truth....

if you'd be singing the same tune if Huckabee were a Democrat/liberal/nonbeliever? I'd be willing to bet that "well, he let a dangerous criminal back onto the streets, but at least he's got a good Christian heart" would very quickly turn into "he let a dangerous criminal back onto the streets, because Democrats/liberals/nonbelievers are moral relativists and don't have any respect for human life".

but so are you if you think that it's appropriate to let your kids watch a late night music awards show featuring Lady Gaga, Janet Jackson, and Eminem.

I agree with you, Mr. Bozell, that most pop culture is garbage at best, and extremely offensive at worst. However, parents *are* responsible for their children whether they like it or not (and most of them seem to abhor the idea). It's not the world's responsibility to be kid-friendly, it's the parents' to raise their kids in the kind of environment they think is appropriate. If that means turning off the TV, then shut up and do it.

the Catholic Church is increasing their quota of moralistic hissy fits, at the expense of the poor and needy that they claim to care about. Because if there's one thing *Jesus* was concerned about, it sure wasn't people in need - it was making sure that queers and women didn't get uppity.

Truly pathetic.

A) Being gay is not a choice. If it were a choice, no one would be gay, primarily because of people like the ones on this board.

B) Even if being gay were a choice, good conservatism tells us that we should mind our own damned business. The tiny percentage of gay people in the world are not going to end the species by refusing to breed, and would actually help by adopting unwanted children created by irresponsible heterosexuals, if those heterosexuals would allow them to do so.

C) If anything, straight people should thank gay people for improving their own odds with the opposite sex.

D) Why are we speculating about human sexual behavior/characteristics by comparing it to penguin biology? I'm no zoologist, but I'm...

Prop 8 will be voted down anyway, either next year or in 2012. Support for gay marriage and gay rights is one of the biggest demographic markers of the millennial generation, and there are more and more of them voting every election.

The dinosaurs are dying.