Slow Start To Monday On A Holiday Week Open Thread

We’re all either busy or already on vacation.

Talk among yourselves until we get some new topics up.



  1. Andre says:

    Call this a shameless plug for my site, Blog for Georgia:

    According to October FEC reports, the state Democratic Party raised $22,629 more than the Georgia GOP last month. However, the state Republican Party sits on a war chest of $1,676,544 which dwarfs the amount Georgia Democrats have in the bank — $147,273.

    Any thoughts on that?

    • Speaking of meager amounts in the bank… that link pulls up a “Temporarily Unavailable” page, with a message asking the website owner to kindly call them and pay their bill.

    • Doug Deal says:

      grift, you nicely restated the talking points from RC. Congratulations, you have proven once again that you can transcribe propaganda mindlessly.

      You are so much in the tank for that side, it is pointless for you to post. We will simply log you as disbelieving anything that goes against your permanent opions on the matter.

      For any of the rest of us who bother to actually think about issues before commenting, read the emails. They are disturbing and disgusting.

      • Doug Deal says:

        Look, you made up your mind on this breaking story years ago. I understand.

        Try to comment on content and not regergitate leftists talking points and perhaps people will believe you when you pretend to think about an issue. Until then, your opposition is duly noted, no sense in wasting bandwidth.

        (Also, as an aside, just for you. RC is about as left wing as you can get and was never about science, it was about politicizing global warming. You look like an absolute fool when you use them as a supposedly credible source.)

          • Doug Deal says:

            I read the original article in RC days before you posted here. I read his biased synopsis of it, but he just regurgitated, as you do, what the RC story said. Maybe I am the one in the wrong here, but I believe in getting things first hand instead of having someone tell me how to think about it.

            Why would you go to a second site to tell you what the first site said?

            Anyway, the RC article was pure whitewash, as it took the weakest claims of the other side and made up some potentially plausible arguments for them, but completely ignored the most damning comments.

            Defend this. It is an email exchange asking for the deletion of information being requested in a Freedom of Information request in the UK and the US.

            From Phil Jones, University of East Anglia
            To Michael Mann, The Pennsylvania State University

            > Mike,
            > Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
            > Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
            > Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t
            > have his new email address.
            > We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
            > I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature
            > paper!!
            > Cheers
            > Phil

            For the uninitiated, CA is climate audit. Taking out of context, my you know what. If anyting, this is adding context, as the email does not mention the external fact that this was during the time that CA was seeking documents in FOI requests around the world. AR4 is the basis of one of the IPCC reports.

          • Doug Deal says:

            I said no such thing about anything. But it is admirable how you go back to injecting personal attacks and attempts at belittling without actually providing anything even remotely capable of being labeled reason.

            I told you I read the original article and all this place does is regurgitate something I already read days ago. I do not need a news aggregator to tell me what I read. It would be like reading your “blog” to re-read what you read on a site that posts synopses of more important blogs. Hardly worth my time.

            Anyway, here is a good reason why RealClimate would step up to defend these bozos. They are these bozos. They were created by the very people depicted in the emails.

            In order to be a little bit more pro-active, a group of us (see below)
            have recently got together to build a new ‘climate blog’ website:
   which will be launched over the next few days at:

            on behalf of the team:
            Gavin Schmidt
            Mike Mann
            – Eric Steig
            – William Connolley
            – Stefan Rahmstorf
            – Ray Bradley
            – Amy Clement
            – Rasmus Benestad
            – William Connolley
            – Caspar Ammann

          • Doug Deal says:

            sure thing…

            So, Little Green Footballs is now part of the leftist conspiracy?

            You are dismissing me as a kook or crank. Or did you mean this in a supportive and positive way?

          • Doug Deal says:

            But, I do not mind if you do that, if you at least contribute something of substance to back up the sniping, but let us not pretend you are taking the high road.

          • griftdrift says:

            Asking a question is a personal attack? Methink thou doth interpret too much.

            But anyway, you asked for reasoning instead of regurgitation, so be it.

            Does it bother me that the words “FOI” and “delete” are used in the same email? Absolutely. However, we do not know the nature of the FOI. We do not know the nature of what was asked to be deleted. There should be an investigation and the author of that email should have a chance to defend himself. And if wrongdoing is discovered, he should be punished accordingly.

            But the larger question is not being answered. Assuming there was wrongdoing, does this potentially unethical, if not criminal act, invalidate the science? The answer is no. No more than the fraud that was Piltdown had no effect on the validity of evolution.

          • Doug Deal says:

            In any event, if you didn’t lead of with this gem, perhaps this exchange could have been friendlier:

            A few stolen emails taken completely out of context. Well, I’m convinced.

            This is why I knew where you got that from because that is the defense I read a couple days ago on RC. You got it from another site, but of course your intermediate source was not independent of the original.

            Dismissing facts with “a few stolen emails” when in fact there are hundreds packaged in such a way that it looks more like a “whistleblower” released them and adding to it by claiming they are taking out of context is ludicrous. They individual emails are posted in their entirety and the number of emails goes on and on, seemingly without end.

            The one thing that is clear, that these guys suffer greatly from “group think” at the very least. They are overly willing to use political tactics in the realm of science, and very likely believe what they are saying. However, the police officer that plants evidence in a defendant’s car often thinks he is doing good because the defendant is “clearly guilty”.

            It is hard to imagine that any of these people are incapable of the same thing under the guise of “saving the planet”.

          • Doug Deal says:

            Was that really a question you legitimately expected to be answered? Or was it a bit of rhetoric added to discredit your opponent? If it was the former, my apologies. If it was the latter, I stand my ground.

            The problem is that Mann is the major contributor to the “evidence” of global warming (see the hockey stick). The discoverer of the Piltdown man was very likely discredited completely following the discovery of fraud. Will the same occur to Mann?

            There are issues with CO2, and I roll my eyes with equal disdain when people say things like “CO2” has no effect on our climate or that it is all the sun, etc. The issue is that the anti-global warming side is not looking to commit trillions of dollars of the world’s assets and increase the size and scope of the government to fight their bogeymen.

            I have been a fan of science since I was a small child. I am becoming increasingly aggravated with what passes for science these days which smells way to much like another interest of mine, politics.

            Scientists should favor openness and free exchange of ideas, not the stonewalling of critics and appeals to popularity to gain acceptance. If your theory cannot accurately predict the future with any reliability, it is not correct, despite if it is a belief held by 1%, 51% or 99.999% of scientists. Natural laws are handed down by an absolute despot, who has no patience for any form of democracy.

          • Doug Deal says:

            And by the way, I didn’t read the RC article until you pointed it out. You brought up RC first.

            Your source was RC, whether you read it there or not. You source pretty much just quotes heavily from that article (which was my point). This might be a shocking revelation, but few people contribute original material to these internets.

          • griftdrift says:

            Let’s see. Someone stole a bunch of emails from the CRU (yes, I had heard about it, just not from RC) and people like Michelle Malkin who is notorious for quote mining and conflation start screaming bloody murder and I, all by my little self, conclude that they are probably taking things out of context.

            You’re right. That does seem far fetched. Obviously I just regurgitated Real Climate.

          • Doug Deal says:

            I thought you knew that I am not a fan of people like Michelle Malkin, but if you don’t, rest assured I am not. If anything, if I knew that she had anything to say on this topic, I would have avoided it altogether.

          • benevolus says:

            I think I’m coming around to being a global warming skeptic. The thing that did it for me was knowing that the other skeptics are altruistic and there is no profit motivation involved. Well, except for Big Oil, but we can trust them to be honest.

  2. tinsandwich says:

    I have been unplugged from the matrix for a couple of days and just read the AJC story on the Speaker. The article makes note of a couple of highs but some really low points that really seem to make sense of his situation. I really wish for the best for his family and hope that everyone can take the time to appreciate their life.

    • Doug Deal says:

      One wonders whether it might be better to hire 2 lawyers at the comparatively discount rate of $425/hour. (which is nearly $900,000 a year each, assuming 2,000 billable hours). But seriously, who can really live off less than a mill these days? Diamond covered, solid gold, dollar sign shaped belt buckles don’t make themselves.

    • AubieTurtle says:

      That depends on if he wins or not. Georgia’s position gets weaker at every turn. If somehow Georgia comes out of this with more than a token amount of water from Lake Lanier, the money paid for the lawyer will be a bargain.

      While $855/hr is quite hefty, there are several attorneys at my firm that get $1200/hr and quite a few more who bill $800/hr. All of them are some of the best the world in their practice area and worth every penny when they win. When they lose, well, reputation is a high price to pay.

  3. AubieTurtle says:

    Everyone’s favorite dysfunction county, Clayton, has a problem with too many people having sheriff department badges. Apparently the former sheriff gave them out like candy, most likely in return for favors received. While one can imagine that giving one to a Pep Boys employee resulted in a good deal for automobile repairs, you have to wonder what the former sheriff got for giving them to various pastors. Did he think Jesus takes bribes?

    Normal Clayton silliness aside, the article in the AJC mentions that the new sheriff is trying to collect the old badges and has issued new badges to current deputies. The old badge had a six pointed star while the new badge has a seven pointed star. I’m curious if there is any sort of law the requires sheriff badges to be in the shape of a star or is it just tradition. With so many badges floating around (the article states that there are 200 of them), wouldn’t it have been better to replace them with a shield instead of a star with one more point on it?

    • That was so beautiful, man. It brought a tear to mine own eyes.

      I’m looking forward to Icarus’ attempt to top it though.

      You can do it. I have “faith” you will be successful.

      • Icarus says:

        Mine will have much less humor, if not less sarcasm. After all, how do you top a paragraph like this:

        “Dad’s great, but listening to all that talk radio has put some weird ideas into his head,” said daughter Samantha, a freshman at Reed College in Portland, OR. “He believes the Constitution allows the government to torture people and ban gay marriage, yet he doesn’t even know that it guarantees universal health care.”

  4. GOPGeorgia says:

    It is Thanksgiving and I am thankful. I am thankful for all of the posters and sock puppets on PP. I am thankful for being able to vote up or down and I am thankful for being voted up or down.

    I am thankful to comrade byte for showing us what an unashamed liberal looks like. I am thankful for Andre to show us what a Democrat with some respect for laws and procedures looks like. I am thankful for DNA to show us what someone without a heart really looks like. (Not the scarecrow in the wizard of OZ. And it’s fun to make fun of his parties 5% best efforts.) I am thankful for John Konop because I get to make FUN of his capitalization tendencies and his stone tablets of prophesized doom. I am thankful for Doug Deal for using science and logic to back up his posts. I am thankful for Eric and his colorful posts regarding goats. I am thankful for Pete Randal for his colorful posts. I am thankful for Goldwater Conservative is for showing us he is nothing like Goldwater and not a conservative. I am thankful for Icarus for coming up to where I live to report back to all of you and being a voice of reason. I am thankful for Jason Shepherd, Steve Ellis, Tyler Burgus, Mark Pettit, Nathan Smith and many others for being my friends in real life.

    I am thankful that I don’t have a wikipedia entry that was hacked into via wireless at the towers in Atlanta to talk about my degrees or lack there of. I am also thankful that I wasn’t accused of doing that to someone else. I am thankful for PP because I like to argue and it’s a great place to do that. Occasionally I get to make a point, but not always.

  5. DNA to show us what someone without a heart really looks like….

    I’ve written a response concerning this and taxes being used for run-off elections… but for the rest of the day, I plan to give politics a rest… I hope you (and everyone else) have a very Happy Thanksgiving and overall Great Day spending time with family and friends.

    ps Icarus, don’t forget to get your pick’ems in… 3 pro games today.

  6. John Konop says:

    Very good article all should read!

    Handing out Bibles at a high school: Why do we keep doing this in Georgia?

    AJC….Her concern mirrors my own: Our schools are attended by students of all faiths and traditions. All those faiths and belief deserve respect. We risk making many students feel like outsiders when we elevate one religion above all others.

    Consider the 1656 warning by devout Baptist Roger Williams, the founder of Rhode Island, on the consequences of mixing religion and government: “God requireth not an uniformity of religion to be enacted and enforced in any civil state; which enforced uniformity, sooner or later, is the greatest occasion of civil war, ravishing of conscience, persecution of Christ Jesus in his servants and of the hypocrisy and destruction of millions of souls.”

    More than a century later, Thomas Jefferson allayed the fears of the Baptist Association that the newly birthed United States of America was planning to designate a national religion. Responding to the worried Baptists, Jefferson wrote, “The First Amendment has erected a wall of separation between Church and State.”…..

    • “Separation of Church and State” is designed to protect the Church… I don’t understand why so many religious folks have such a hard time understanding this concept.

      They use excuses like “but, we are a Christian Nation.” But don’t understand that if we can be a Christian Nation then we can be a fill in the blank Nation in the future. If we accept one it allows the possibility of the other. Just as we’ve seen our nation switch from one ruling political party to another… once we allow and accept a “ruling” religion to exist, it allows for the possibility that in the future, it might not be your religion that is in charge. All through history this is what leads to religious persecution. Remaining without a state religion, almost makes religious persecution impossible to occur.

      It is best to be a Freedom of Religion State than to be any specific religious state. Our Founders knew this, but policies enacted with the use of fear tactics in the 1950’s, have somehow caused people to unlearn this fact.

      • Harry says:

        That’s all good, but I still fondly remember singing in school “God Bless America”, “The Battle Hymn of the Republic”, and “Oh Beautiful for Spacious Skies”.

Comments are closed.