Holy Crap This is Funny
Via Instapundit, The Register reports:
Snow fell as the House of Commons debated Global Warming yesterday - the first October fall in the metropolis since 1922. The Mother of Parliaments was discussing the Mother of All Bills for the last time, in a marathon six hour session.
When will we heed the warning signs of the impending global cooling. All this foolish talk about global warming when the real threat is cooling is getting us nowhere. We need to implement policies that require maximizing the amount of carbon put into the atmosphere. Only through the greenhouse effect will be able to survive global cooling.
October 30th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Just an observation of mine….
Those that feel global warming isn’t as big a problem as reported get defensive and a bit pissy (rightfully so I might add) every time someone points out how a single isolated day in January is much too warm, so therefore it must mean global warming.
However, they also find themselves funny when they make posts on their blogs about snow falling in October (on a single isolated day) as if it somehow refutes the whole concept of global warming.
October 30th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Jeez Steve…”climate change” is the new “global warming”. Didn’t you know that?
October 30th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Sarcasm.
October 30th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Uh, Jamie, isolated events tell you everything you need to know. Except when Palin botches an interview. That isolated event tells you nothing about her intelligence.
October 30th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
I guess the alternative is that isolated events tell you everything. For example one botched interview means Palin is not intelligent.
October 30th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
It is true that you can botch an interview and not be stupid. Perhaps she was nervous, unprepared, or insecure. Nervous, unprepared, insecure people can do plenty of great things… but President isn’t a good fit for them.
But hey, why don’t we put her in office to test this? If she botches meetings with other heads of state like she botched those interviews, we will know she’s not suitable for the role of president.
Personally I’m not comfortable with taking that risk.
I’m even less comfortable with taking the risk that she’s factually wrong on the projects she seems intent on adjusting, as Michael alluded to in a recent post.
October 30th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
And yet we know she has done an unacceptable job working with heads of state. We know this because she was governor Alaska and was not impeached for gross incomptence.
What we don’t know is if Barack will operate acceptably in this capacity. And yet you are willing to roll the dice with Barack but would not with Sarah.
October 30th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Wow, I didn’t realize that a major part of the responsibility of the governor of Alaska was to negotiate with foreign heads of state. Nice, I learned something new.
October 30th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
What with playing the mischaracterization game. I never said ‘major’.
Surely you are not contending that she never spoke with other heads of state or dignitaries. Furthermore, what limited contact she did have would be superior to Baracks given that he has never served as an executive. Thus by extension of your own argument you would prefer Palin as she is a more a known quantity in comparison to Barack.
Something tells me you were disingenuous when you initially argued that because of your aversion to risk you preferred Barack over Palin. Because, even though its demonstratively proven that Palin is more of a known quantity on meeting with other dignitaries when compared to Barack, I very much doubt you are going to switch your support.
October 30th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
“In July 2008 Obama traveled to Kuwait, Afghanistan,[10] Iraq,[11] Jordan,[12] the West Bank,[13] Israel, Germany, France, and Great Britain. During the course of this trip he met with assorted international leaders, including President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan,[14] Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Iraq, King Abdullah II of Jordan, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Olmert, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France,[15] and Prime Minister Gordon Brown of the United Kingdom, as well as former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Conservative opposition leader David Cameron.[16]”
“He also became Chairman of the Senate’s subcommittee on European Affairs.[78] As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Obama made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa. He met with Mahmoud Abbas before he became President of Palestine, and gave a speech at the University of Nairobi condemning corruption in the Kenyan government.[79][80][81][82]”
“In 2006, Palin obtained a passport[85] and in 2007 traveled for the first time outside of North America on a trip to Kuwait. There she visited the Khabari Alawazem Crossing at the Kuwait–Iraq border and met with members of the Alaska National Guard at several bases.[86] On her return trip to the U.S., she visited injured soldiers in Germany.[87]”
Clearly it sounds like Palin has had more experience meeting with foreign dignitaries.
October 30th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Good work.They are equivalent. According to your investigation you have no reason to prefer Barack over Palin when it comes to meeting with dignitaries. I look forward to you renouncing your earlier claims that you choose Barack over Palin because he is less risky then Palin.
October 31st, 2008 at 8:30 am
Steve, do you read Dan’s comments before you respond?
October 31st, 2008 at 8:32 am
So he is not saying they are equivalent? Man I’m confused.
October 31st, 2008 at 8:50 am
Uh…?
I listed seven heads of state Obama met with and zero Palin met with.
October 31st, 2008 at 9:04 am
Okay. So now we are back to denying Palin has any experience meeting with Dignitaries as a governor of Alaska. I must not be reading you very well cause im really confused.
October 31st, 2008 at 9:06 am
Dan, as Steve becomes increasingly proven wrong, he becomes increasingly annoying. It’s his equivalent of sticking his fingers in his ears and saying “la la la la i can’t hear you”
October 31st, 2008 at 9:20 am
Dan seems to have put himself in this odd position and your response is to mock me. And im the annoying one.
October 31st, 2008 at 10:11 am
Steve, are you drunk? Dan listed 7 heads of state that Obama has met with vs. 0 for Palin. Doesn’t this shatter your idea that she has more experience with foreign relations than Obama? Why are you calling it equivalent?
October 31st, 2008 at 10:27 am
I calls ‘em as I sees ‘em. Shoot from the hip, ya know?
October 31st, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Sigh…. Unless you guys are making the odd claim that Palin as governor of Alaska never met with heads of states or dignitaries of other governments then it really doesn’t matter how many heads of state Obama has visited with.
For you see the argument Dan laid out was that Palin is an unknown quantity in matters of dealing with heads of state because of the way she poorly responded in an interview with Couric and Gibson. Therefore, he preferred Obama because he was less of a risk. However it seems odd to deny the experience Palin gained working with heads of state as the governor in Alaska, while at the same time permitting Obama’s more questionable experience of interacting with other heads of state.
On what grounds do you dismiss one person’s qualifications, admit another’s, and then argue the second candidate is more qualified then the first for the qualifications you dismissed in the first candidate?
And i’m apparently the one that has been ‘proven wrong’, is ‘drunk’ and
Does not read comments before I post.
I must mention the fact that when Obama went on his rock star tour of the world - the source of most of Dan’s arugment for Omaba’s supposed experience in interacting with Heads of state - he was not meeting the foreign leaders in any official capacity. There is a difference between foreign leaders inviting a potential candidate for some tea and crumpets and meeting to hammer out a hotly contested trade deal. In one instance it just a very social inconsequential affair, in the other instance, something a little more substantial is in play changing the overall feel of the meeting.
Furthermore, Obama did not go as an official representative of a state. As such, his action were not going to be judge by the people that elected him. Simply put, he went on a fancy vacation, and because of his celebrity status, was entertained by heads of state with some rather innocuous social meetings.
To be perfectly frank, this is not a very strong argument, but given your absurd reluctance to give just a little bit on this argument I feel it needs to come in to play. So here we go.
Unless you want to deny that as Governor of Alaska, Palin never had to meet with heads of state from Canada, or Oregon, or our Federal Government, or representatives of large corporations then its not entirely clear how Obama’s world tour of hanging out with heads of state served as a better example of showing his superiority in interacting with foreign leaders. Palin actually did meet with other heads of state in an official capacity as the executive of a state to actually discuss matter that people of Alaska cared about. Furthermore, her efforts were sufficient enough not to mar her high approval ratings.
How does Omaba’s rock star tour in anyway show that he is so much more experienced than Palin that he is the known quantity and she is risky when it comes to interacting with heads of state?
October 31st, 2008 at 1:42 pm
As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, Mr. Obama most certainly met with foreign dignitaries as an official representative of the United States of America. To quote Wikipedia, “As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Obama made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa. He met with Mahmoud Abbas before he became President of Palestine, and gave a speech at the University of Nairobi condemning corruption in the Kenyan government.”
Please check your facts next time. Thanks!
October 31st, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Also, please tell me more about the hotly contested trade deals Governor Palin was involved with, because I did not realize state governors were now in the business of negotiating international trade agreements.
October 31st, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Oh my god. Are you serious.
The argument is the following:
Palin is less experienced than Obama therefore choosing her is riskier than Obama.
My response:
Palin is no more or less risky than Obama, because in whatever capacity he has interacted with foreign leaders, it’s fair to say that Palin has the same kind of experience and in all probability has more experience.
Therefore its no more or less risky to select Obama over Palin in matters of dealing with foreign policy.
Point to anywhere in my last post were I explicty deny that Obama has no experience at all.
And for the record when Jamie accused me of being drunk, he proof was to point only to Dan’s reference of the rockstar tour. This gives me further reason to attack this position.
And you have the audacity to accuse me of not reading people’s post. Give me a fucking break.
October 31st, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I misread your comment, my apologies. I had gathered from your tone that you thought Barack had no foreign relations experience vs. Palin’s international trade deals and responded accordingly.
Do you then assert that Obama, while vacationing in Iraq and Afghanistan, was only there for “tea and crumpets?”
“Palin is no more or less risky than Obama, because in whatever capacity he has interacted with foreign leaders, it’s fair to say that Palin has the same kind of experience and in all probability has more experience.”
Are you willing to support your claim with evidence?
October 31st, 2008 at 3:29 pm
I’m trying to understand when governers meet with foreign leaders. I never knew that was in the job description.
October 31st, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Are you denying that Obama discussed any policy issues with foreign heads of state on that tour? And even if it fit your characterization of ‘tea and crumpets’, well, that is quite a bit better than nothing at all, and it suggests that he would be liked and respected by our allies - and allies (especially European allies) have been absolutely vital to US security as far back as French intervention in the American revolutionary war. If the last 200+ years of foreign relations tells us anything, it is that there is nothing a US president can do that is more important for long-term US security than improving relations with European allies.
Palin, by contrast, has been widely ridiculed by Europeans.
You keep insinuating that Palin has had comparable experience. Can you tell me -exactly- which heads of state Palin met with as governor of Alaska? Note that if I were to include ‘dignitaries’ rather than just ‘heads of state’, Obama’s resume would become all the more longwinded.
Oregon doesn’t count as a foreign nation.