Where do you think he gets the heat for all that hot air?

wokka wokka wokka.

Anyone know if Al Gore was anywhere near central Indiana recently? We are having our first taste of blizzard conditions since 1999.

I get a chill up my spine every time I see his self-serving smile.

I think Best of the Web at the WSJ has been on tis phenomena for quite some time.

The biggist amount of HOT AIR around comes from AL GORE and the rest of the eco-wacko big mouths producing all that HOT AIR by keeping their pieholes flapping

Just one of the things Bush will be remembered for.

Some of Britain's best loved beaches and coastline, from Golden Cap in Dorset to Formby Sands in Lancashire, are under threat from erosion and flooding, the National Trust said on Tuesday.

Rising sea levels could damage hundreds of miles of the English and Welsh coast over the next 100 years, according to a study commissioned by the conservation group.

Houses, farmland, lighthouses and sand dunes will be submerged as climate change and rising seas fuel the erosion, the "Shifting Shores" report says.

"The coast is a canary for climate change," the report said.

Yeah, funny.

They're laughing it up in New Orleans also.

A powerful storm and likely a tornado hit the New Orleans area early Tuesday, killing an elderly woman, injuring at least 15 other people, and damaging dozens of business and homes in a region still trying to recover from Hurricane Katrina.

An 86-year-old woman died in the city's Gentilly neighborhood, one of the areas hit hardest by Katrina 18 months earlier.

Another powerful storm cell hit south-central Louisiana, damaging buildings in New Iberia and on the outskirts of Breaux Bridge in St. Martin Parish, but there were no reports of injuries.

In the New Orleans area, FEMA trailers were tossed around, homes collapsed, and the wind tore the roof off a hotel across the river in Westwego. At least 10 structures were destroyed in New Orleans, said James Ross, a spokesman for Mayor Ray Nagin. Dozens of other homes and businesses were damaged in Westwego, Mayor Robert Billiot said.

Hey, only one person died -- so it's not as funny as the tragedies that lie ahead -- and there's no rush. There's still plenty of time to make global coldening jokes...

Lee, how in the hell could you blame that on Bush? As if the six years Bush has been in office are solely responsible for the rising sea levels and that industry and people in the U.S. are the only ones contributing to greenhouse gases. Funny indeed.

And that is leaving alone the whole idea that greenhouse gases are even the cause of the warming.

Lee you're the first person I've seen try to connect tornadoes to global warming.

Hey, only one person died -- so it's not as funny as the tragedies that lie ahead

Like the intense catastrophic hurricanes that we experienced as predicted for 2006? Oh wait...I can't seem to remember those.

The insurance industry is taking the matter seriously - what's wrong with those folks??? LOL! Don't they realize it's all Gore's fault?? Just get rid of him and the problem will go away...

LONDON, Feb 12 (Reuters) - Willis Group Holdings Ltd , the world's third-largest insurance broker, is teaming up with leading climate scientists to use one of the world's largest supercomputers to help insurers predict how climate change may lead to more and costlier natural catastrophes.
Over the next three years Willis will work with teams of researchers in Japan and the UK to use the Earth Simulator supercomputer to help insurers get a better understanding of a range of disasters, it said on Monday.

"It will allow us to model ... regional weather events that climate change may bring about, which is a huge step forward," said Rowan Douglas, chairman of the Willis Research Network.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the most authoritative group on global warming comprising 2,500 scientists from 130 nations, issued a report this month that predicted severe rains, melting glaciers, droughts, heat waves and rising sea levels as a result of rising world temperatures.

The insurance industry is among those at the forefront of research into climate change as around one third of its overall claims are from weather-related natural disasters.

It had a bill of over $83 billion from damages from U.S. hurricanes in 2005 and could pay out up to 8 billion euros ($10.39 billion) on the Kyrill windstorm that struck northern Europe last month.

What is Bush's (and the right's) "fault" is the denial that is still taking place on our country. Making jokes about Gore, while denying the severity of the problem, is emblematic of the disease that has overcome conservative America.

Gee, if only Pres Bush had directed everyone to switch over to florescent light bulbs that tornado in New Orleans wouldnt have happened. Its called WEATHER - you eco-idiots!

gc

"Lee you're the first person I've seen try to connect tornadoes to global warming."

I didn't connect global warming to tornadoes -- the fun part of the tornado story is the way in which the FEMA trailers were tossed about like shoe boxers. HEY! Didn't Gore visit New Orleans some months ago -- it mnust be Gore's fault -- HaHaHaHa....

And three years ago you'd be saying I was the first person you'd seen trying to make a connection between global warming and hurricanes.

To my knowledge no one can say definitively that there is or isn't a connection between global warming and tornadoes. Denying that there is anything worth studying, and denying that there aren't man-made causes contributing to increases in severe weather, is the disease that has been holding back research and study.

And that isn't Gore's fault - it's the fault of any Americans who stand behind President Bush in his denial and foot-dragging.

What is Bush's (and the right's) "fault" is the denial that is still taking place on our country.

Yeah, because denial is only taking place in the U.S.

Making jokes about Gore, while denying the severity of the problem

You mean the severity that lead to no hurricanes making U.S. landfall in 2006?

is the disease that has been holding back research and study.

Lee, you can't be that ignorant. Do you acutally think that research and study of global warming is somehow being held back? By whom? Bush. Research and study of this is the cause celeb right now. I would tend to think that the only thing being held back is the research and study of natural explanations for global warming.

Lee

Duh there are no increases in severe weather?? No Hurricanes last year remember?

Just the normal fluctuation of weather patterns.. Geez.

I am pretty confused about what the tornadoes have to do with this post. I didn't make a joke out of people losing everything or dying, nor did I try to use it to make a political point. Tornadoes and hurricanes are nothing new. Sadly, though, what is new is using such devastating weather events and the resulting human suffering as a political tool.

As for the subject of this post, the joke about cold weather following Gore, here is what I don't get. When weather is hotter than normal, record highs, etc., you see stories, or at the minimum references, at places like Good Morning America, that it is evidence of global warming. Yet when the weather is colder than normal, record lows, you don't hear anyone saying that is evidence that global warming is bunk.

Has Gore been in Chicago the past couple of weeks? Cause it's been evil cold here.

When weather is hotter than normal, record highs, etc., you see stories, or at the minimum references, at places like Good Morning America, that it is evidence of global warming. Yet when the weather is colder than normal, record lows, you don't hear anyone saying that is evidence that global warming is bunk.

That's what you get for depending on Good Morning America for scientific analysis.

You all must be aware, that in the last 6 years, Bush has personally damaged the environment more than anyone on the planet, including the the larg-ish country far to the east which happens to house a third of the entire world's population and which also happens to be industrializing very rapidly.

Unbreathable air in Tehran? Bush.

China's air pollution reaching california? Bush.

Tornados in New Orleans? Bush.

Well Lee, thanks for clearing that up. We can blame it all on one man.

I don't doubt we affect our environment unfavorably, but remember: We had WEATHER before Al Gore started his crusade...and we will continue to have weather.

There will be tornados, just like there were in 1453 in France...Hurricanes, like there were in 1906 in Nashua...and Volcanic eruptions like there were in Pompeii in 79AD.

The MSM is still referring to Hurricane Katrina as the worst hurrican to ever hit our shores. A category 3? Talk about bias. The hurricane did not damage NOLA, the dikes breaking did.

If lefties would fear and fight terrorists as much as they do global warming and Bush, we would all be safe. ww

"Well Lee, thanks for clearing that up. We can blame it all on one man."

We can blame Bush and the conservatives' repeated denial of the problem and commensurate foot-dragging that has taken place over the last decade - yes indeed we can.

The connection between air pollution in Tehran and Bush you cite is just another example of the disease. I read where the death rate in Tehran which is resulting from the horrendous air pollution there is quite high -- and certainly that would explain why Iran needs nuclear power.

Hahaha - Iranians dying - that's a good thing, right?!?!?

Hmm, now I wonder how Bush and the conservatives feel about air pollution-reducing nuclear energy in Iran -- especially in light of today's news that North Korea will now be able to proceed with its own nuclear energy program - despite the incessant whining we heard from Bush and the conservatives over that path all of last year.

NoKo had to threaten Japan and Hawaii with a nuclear holocaust in order to gain the right to develop (with assistance) their own "global warming-friendly" nuclear energy program - and we all know why they had to take those drastic steps.

Isn't that a riot? A nuke in Honolulu! Ohhhh, let me wipe the tears. I''m sure the Japanese and Hawaiians share in the laugh, too.

Yeah, there is a definite connection between Bush and the conservatives, and these issues -- only some people can't see that, and those that are smart enough to see it seem to want use it as political fodder to get after their enemies like Al Gore.

I wish you people would guit making fun of old "pucker puss" (lee lee) (RTP) (RM). He might get mad and leave us. Then who would you laugh at ? (besides me -beat you p'p')

Lee:

We can blame Bush and the conservatives' repeated denial of the problem and commensurate foot-dragging that has taken place over the last decade - yes indeed we can.

Who was in office a decade ago?

The connection between air pollution in Tehran and Bush you cite is just another example of the disease.

What BDS? Yes, it was an example of that disease, though it was only satire, sorry.

I read where the death rate in Tehran which is resulting from the horrendous air pollution there is quite high -- and certainly that would explain why Iran needs nuclear power.

I agree, because once they get nuclear power, they will have nuclear powered cars...or not.

Furthermore, they would never weaponize it...because the whole wiping Israel off the map thing was just a joke.

And given that Iran is responsible for arming Hezbolllah, nuclear terrorism would never become a reality.

Ok. Think, Lee.

Why is it that other countries without nuclear power don't have cities with such horrible air pollution?

Hahaha - Iranians dying - that's a good thing, right?!?!?

I also must question why you felt the need to include it in your rebuttal, given the fact that my post would in no way imply that I felt it was a good thing.

especially in light of today's news that North Korea will now be able to proceed with its own nuclear energy program - despite the incessant whining we heard from Bush and the conservatives over that path all of last year.

Continuing with it's nuclear program? I guess that's what the deal saying that North Korea will shut down it's main nuclear plant and be supplied with foreign fuel until it shuts down the rest of it's program means...in your world.

NoKo had to threaten Japan and Hawaii with a nuclear holocaust in order to gain the right to develop (with assistance) their own "global warming-friendly" nuclear energy program - and we all know why they had to take those drastic steps.

Yes, Kim Il Jong wasn't blackmailing the world for aid to run his mismanaged communist hell-hole...he was fighting the good fight to produce an eco-friendly energy source because while his people are expendable worshippers that put him, a demigod, in power of North Korea; he realizes he must protect the earth because it is the noble thing to due.

Fortunately he just happened to have a few nuclear warheads that popped fully-formed from his peaceful reactors that he was able to threaten the earth-killing fascist American conservatives with.

Phew, that was a close one Lee...the good guys win again. Just like the environment won with Cherynobl.

Isn't that a riot? A nuke in Honolulu! Ohhhh, let me wipe the tears. I''m sure the Japanese and Hawaiians share in the laugh, too.

No, it's just you laughing, though I can't reason why.

Yeah, there is a definite connection between Bush and the conservatives, and these issues -- only some people can't see that, and those that are smart enough to see it seem to want use it as political fodder to get after their enemies like Al Gore.

And that's the main point of your post? You managed to blame receding coastlines in Britain specifically on Bush...and then you say conservatives want to use the issue as political fodder?

I can't wait to see your next post.

Hey--don't confuse Leee with facts. He's a leftist--they are ruled by their FEEEEELINGS, don't you know. They just KNOW Bush is behind all the things that go wrong. They just KNOW it...

It is painful to actually read and try to comprehend the contorted logic Lee uses to frame his arguments.

Who would have thought the Iran and North Korea were not actually rogue nations, but were actually leading the way to a better environment. That's right they are paving the way with with a forward-thinking eco-friendly nuclear power policy!!

J.R.

Your Timothy Ball turns out to be somewhat of a quack who is on the pay of the oil industry as well.

OTH You have, from the Great GOP GURU, Frank Luntz, an outline of what kind of tactics to use to deny the reality of Global Warming.

Luntz, who could have been the author of "no-speak" with this cynical advice presented to the Republic Party on how to keep the public in a state of confusion about global warminmg:

"The scientific debate is closing [against us] but is not yet closed."

and, therefore, the method for the members of the Republic Party to employ...

"The Scientific Debate Remains Open. Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate, and defer to scientists and other experts in the field."

Lorie:

"Tim Blair has a hilarious post noting the effect Al Gore seems to have everywhere he goes."

Tim Blair:

Mainstream media folk are slowly becoming aware of the terrible connection between Al Gore and global coldening:

Days after Al Gore went to New York City last month to deliver a speech blasting the Bush administration's environmental policy and touting the dangers of global warming, the National Weather Service reported record low temperatures across the region.

WSCH-TV:

Upstate New York Towns Buried Under Six Feet Of Snow; 20 Now Dead

20 deaths are now being blamed on cold weather and roads left slippery by passing storms. Regions stretching from the northern Plains to the Northeast are caught in the grip of bitter cold weather.

Hilarious.

So using your logic Lee, we could conclude from this that those 20 deaths are Al Gore's fault?

Now Lee needs a geography lesson. New York City and upstate New York where this snow is falling are over 290 miles apart.

repuke,

You're right the science is settled. There is no debate anymore because the "concensus" out there says there is no debate to be had. If you don't believe them, your opinions are not allowed.

From your second link (your first about Tim Ball is just propaganda), they mention this about the IPCC:

That's what is happening today, and I think it's a disgrace. On one hand, you have the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the largest and most rigorously peer-reviewed scientific consensus in history, advising that:

climate change is real;
it is caused by human activity; and
it is threatening the planet in ways we can only begin to imagine.

Of course, the actual hard scientific data behind the report hasn't been revealed. You know that right? This was just a summary for policy makers. The data is now being reviewed so that it matches the summary report.

BTW, what policy changes do you think the U.S. should make?

Heralder: "I agree, because once they get nuclear power, they will have nuclear powered cars...or not."

Hahahaha! Oh man, you conservatives are a laugh-riot!

Tehran Pollution Kills 3,600 In A Month

A general view shows a residential area in Tehran covered with a layer of think smog 09 January. Air pollution has killed 3,600 people in just a month in the Iranian capital, according to an official who described the city's environmental situation as a "collective suicide".

Tehran (AFP) Jan 09, 2007

Air pollution has killed 3,600 people in just a month in the Iranian capital Tehran, an official said Tuesday, describing the city's environmental situation as a "collective suicide". "Pollution has directly or indirectly caused the deaths of 3,600 people in the month of Aban (October 23 to November 23)," said Mohammad Hadi Heydarzadeh, director of Tehran's clean air committee, quoted by Kargozaran newspaper.

He said that the deaths were caused by heart attacks brought on by the air pollution and that the smog was responsible for 80 percent of the fatal heart problems that month in Tehran, one of the world's most polluted cities.

Now why would a country like Iran feel the need to develop nuclear power? Don't they realize what Heralder already knows -- that nuclear powered cars are still decades away? They can continue to burn oil to produce electricity -- and when electric cars hit their market they can always just burn more oil to recharge them!

There's enough oil to last for centuries more, right Heralder?

3600 deaths per month = 43,000 deaths per year. Hey Tim Blair - Was Al Gore ever in Tehran?!?!?! Hahahaha

Tsk, tsk -- Threatening to develop nuclear weapons -- don't they have a sense of humor?

J.R. was linking to Timothy Ball? Rofl

Read up on Ball's madness.

I shouldn't say anymore about him though. He might sue me!

J.R.: "Now Lee needs a geography lesson. New York City and upstate New York where this snow is falling are over 290 miles apart."

Tim Blair: (emphasis mine)

Days after Al Gore went to New York City last month to deliver a speech blasting the Bush administration's environmental policy and touting the dangers of global warming, the National Weather Service reported record low temperatures across the region.

Ohhh, J.R. - you sure showed that libby!

20 dead - hilarious.

Lee,

I was hoping for a more comprehensive follow-up post.

Now why would a country like Iran feel the need to develop nuclear power?

Not sure...oh wait:

"That cursed Israel is trying to destroy al-Aqsa mosque...Nothing will work with Israel except for a nuclear bomb that wipes it out of existence." Mohamed el-Katatny of President Hosni Mubarak's National Democratic Party (NDP) told the Egyptian Parliament.

--

"Israel is destined for destruction and will soon disappear"
Israel is "a contradiction to nature, we foresee its rapid disappearance and destruction." --Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

"The Zionist regime is an injustice and by its very nature a permanent threat. Whether you like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation. The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm." --Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

"Israel must be wiped off the map ... The establishment of a Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world . . . The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of the war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land." --Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

HEY! LET'S GIVE THEM SOME NUKES!

Don't they realize what Heralder already knows -- that nuclear powered cars are still decades away? They can continue to burn oil to produce electricity -- and when electric cars hit their market they can always just burn more oil to recharge them!

Thanks for linking Lee. I think it rather obvious I knew about the situation, however, since I was the one who brought it up.

My question from the last post remains: Why is it that other countries without nuclear power don't have cities with such horrible air pollution?

3600 deaths per month = 43,000 deaths per year. Hey Tim Blair - Was Al Gore ever in Tehran?!?!?! Hahahaha

Yeaahh, all this laughing at unfunny things is beginning to make your posts look very deranged. Let's stick with the debate.

Tsk, tsk -- Threatening to develop nuclear weapons -- don't they have a sense of humor?

I know! What's more fun than a nuclear exchange between Israel and Iran?

You're right Lee, across the region. You're so right. That evil Tim Blair, to actually make a joke referencing one city when another city 290 miles away is suffering from over 12 feet of snow.

Oh the humanity. /sarcasm

More twisted logic huh? It's not funny to joke about low temps in NYC because 20 people died in another town.

BTW, NYC and towns along Lake Ontario have vastly different weather patterns. So you wouldn't talk about those two regions together, at least sensible people would not.

"I know! What's more fun than a nuclear exchange between Israel and Iran?"

Helping Iran establish a peaceful nuclear program that allows them to get off the oil and reduce air pollution and the deaths that result, in exchange for a list of demands and restrictions we would place on them.

That's what we've decided to do with NoKo -- right after the world community told President George Bush to STFU and negotiate.

Or we can make jokes, and taunt Iran and laugh all the way to Armageddon - which seems to be George Bush's preferred plan.

"I think it rather obvious I knew about the situation, however, since I was the one who brought it up."

My reply was a sarcastic dig at you over the fact that nuclear energy will reduce automobile-generated pollution in Tehran because electric cars need to be recharged. The electricity to recharge them using nuclear power is cleaner than oil.

Lee:

Helping Iran establish a peaceful nuclear program that allows them to get off the oil and reduce air pollution and the deaths that result, in exchange for a list of demands and restrictions we would place on them.

It's good idea. However, I'm fairly doubtful that Iran would do this.

That's what we've decided to do with NoKo -- right after the world community told President George Bush to STFU and negotiate.

North Korea is not Iran. Iran doesn't receive most of their food or fuel through import that we could threaten to cut off. China and South Korea and Japan had a vested interest in this agreement, because not only were they responsible for helping to upkeep the state, they were also right in the path of anything launched back and forth between North Korea and the U.S.

I wish I could say this was the case with Iran.

My reply was a sarcastic dig at you over the fact that nuclear energy will reduce automobile-generated pollution in Tehran because electric cars need to be recharged. The electricity to recharge them using nuclear power is cleaner than oil.

All well and good, if they decide to use electric cars. You seem eager to paint a best case scenario for this country...which seems odd given it's behavior and rhetoric.

"All well and good, if they decide to use electric cars."

It's a given they will, imho -- although "how soon" is undefined. They want to reduce air pollution, so why wouldn't they?

I'm only doubtful because of who runs the country, i.e., Ahmadinejad and the mullahs.

The first item on thier agenda seems to veer significantly from reducing pollution in Tehran.

So, Heralder, you apparently believe the crap the administration is telling you about Iran?

JAKARTA, Indonesia - The top U.S. military officer said Tuesday the discovery that roadside bombs in Iraq contained material made in
Iran does not necessarily mean the Iranian government was involved in supplying insurgents.

The comments by Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called into question assertions by three senior U.S. military officials in Baghdad on Sunday who said the highest levels of Iranian government were responsible for arming Shiite militants in Iraq with the bombs, blamed for the deaths of more than 170 troops in the U.S.-led coalition.

Well, well well. It appears that this is a general who's not afraid to speak truth to power. It is certainly possible that one or more terrorist organizations inside of Iran may be involved, but that doesn't mean that attacking Iran is the answer.

We may be better served by gaining the cooperation of the Iranian government at this stage in finding out theese supply routes and shutting them down -- not threatening the entire country with annihilation -- but then, we all know the GWOT isn't about rooting out terrorists - it's about providing an excuse for the thugs in Washington to steam roll over whoever they feel like.

"The first item on thier agenda seems to veer significantly from reducing pollution in Tehran."

You base that on what the White House is telling you? Some people never learn...

Lee:

So, Heralder, you apparently believe the crap the administration is telling you about Iran?

What, this?

"Iran does *not necessarily* mean the Iranian government was involved in supplying insurgents."

Yeah, I believe that crap.

It is certainly possible that one or more terrorist organizations inside of Iran may be involved, but that doesn't mean that attacking Iran is the answer.

I agree. I don't think attacking Iran (openly) is the answer.

We may be better served by gaining the cooperation of the Iranian government at this stage in finding out theese supply routes and shutting them down

That is IF they're not involved directly with this...which circumstantial evidence would likely point to.

-- not threatening the entire country with annihilation --

I sort of recall Iran being the one threatening another nation's annihilation. When did we threaten Iran's annihilation?

but then, we all know the GWOT isn't about rooting out terrorists - it's about providing an excuse for the thugs in Washington to steam roll over whoever they feel like.

mmmm pure tripe, my favorite.

It's been fun talking, but I'll be off for the rest of the night. I'll check the thread tomorrow.

the man upstairs is getting the last laugh.

kinda like Nietche's famous "god is dead", the next year he himself died

its telling how idiotic and defensive leftist get over "global warming". more proof of the truth's in the bible, if Man doesn't worship God he will worship anything.

Lee: So, Heralder, you apparently believe the crap the administration is telling you about Iran?

Heralder: What, this? "Iran does *not necessarily* mean the Iranian government was involved in supplying insurgents." Yeah, I believe that crap.

Glad you do, but you're apparently confused. What you said you believe is what General Pace said, and what Pace said directly contradicts the administration's position.

Only one day after Administration officials briefed reporters on what they claimed was "evidence" of Iran's involvement with the Iraqi insurgency, the story may be turning into a PR nightmare for the Bush team. Today's Washington Post reports Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Peter Pace, during a visit to Australia, appeared to cast doubt on the Administration's message, telling the Voice of America that while "Iranians are involved, and it's clear that materials from Iran are involved," he "would not say...that the Iranian government clearly knows or is complicit." McClatchy says that "neither the White House nor the Pentagon responded to requests for an explanation of the apparent contradiction between the nation's highest-ranking military officer and his subordinates in Baghdad." Moreover, Pace's comment "could make it harder for the Bush administration, its credibility about Iran questioned because of its false pre-war claims about Saddam Hussein, to make its case that Iranian meddling in Iraq is fueling sectarian violence and causing US casualties."

No wonder conservatives are such a confused lot... They reflexively accept anything that they think is the administration's position -- even when it contradicts what they know to be the administration's position. But then, when you've been lied to as often as the Bush administration has lied to us -- conservatives are hoping that they can believe "something" they tell us.

Heralder believes General Pace instead. There may be hope for him yet.

Lee:

Glad you do, but you're apparently confused. What you said you believe is what General Pace said, and what Pace said directly contradicts the administration's position.

So? When did I ever say I had to toe the administration's line? I'm conservative, and I'm a republican and I can think for myself and make my own decisions.

All Pace is actually saying is "Well, I'm not sure, but don't rule it out." ...and I think that a more sensible stance.

What would also be nice to know is if Sadr left for Iran on his own, or the governement offered him asylum.
I was going to blockquote your last paragraph, but I invalidated part of the rant by removing the subject matter.

"So? When did I ever say I had to toe the administration's line? "

You said you agreed with the administration and then quoted Pace.

We aren't talking about toeing the line, but you appear to support anything that has "according to the Bush administration" tied to it, at the same time you see the reasonableness of statements that directly contradict administration positions.

"All Pace is actually saying is "Well, I'm not sure, but don't rule it out." ...and I think that a more sensible stance."

Yes, it is. and it contradicts statements made by the administration which left little room for this kind of "sensibility", and yet both are correct?

The administration says:

"Iran is involved."

Pace says:

"Iranians are involved, Iran may well be involved."

Yes, there's an enormous gulf between those two statements...

...or, not so much.

I favor Pace on his wording because I think it brash to point a finger at this point. Whatever is actually known, I think we benefit more from it by saying little and acting covertly rather than announcing it and acting overtly.

As much as the media wants to trump this up as a "a PR nightmare for the Bush administration", it's not. It's a slight difference in wording...one more cautious than the other.

Two sides of the same coin, there's no divided loyalty or contradiction in supporting Pace's wiser comments and believing the administration's overall conclusion.

"I favor Pace on his wording because I think it brash to point a finger at this point. Whatever is actually known, I think we benefit more from it by saying little and acting covertly rather than announcing it and acting overtly."

Then you'll love today's news

You need a scorecard, and weather vane, to see which way the wind is blowing on this...

President Bush said Wednesday he's certain the Iranian government is supplying deadly weapons used by fighters in Iraq against U.S. troops, even if he can't prove that the orders came from top Iranian leaders.

More important, Bush said in his first news conference of the year, is the need to protect American forces against the new weapons and technology, including sophisticated new roadside bombs.

"I'm going to do something about it," Bush pledged, displaying apparent irritation at being repeatedly asked about mixed administration signals on who was behind the weaponry.

"To say it is provoking Iran is just a wrong way to characterize the commander in chief's decision to do what is necessary to protect our soldiers in harm's way," Bush said."

I hope no one laughed out loud when he said this.

This sure is confidence inspiring, knowing that the brash (your word) jackasses (my choice) in Washington are right on top of this issue, and no political posturing is involved...

Interesting. It'll get more so if Pace can offer evidence that the weapons weren't directly sanctioned and/or supplied by the Iranian government.

Something tells me he can't, however.

We'll see. Would you be surprised if the administration reported and displayed evidence of Iran's complicity in this Lee?

"Interesting. It'll get more so if Pace can offer evidence that the weapons weren't directly sanctioned and/or supplied by the Iranian government. Something tells me he can't, however."

So Pace has to prove a negative. Nicely set logic trap... but it won't fly, Orville.

Bush has already admitted that he can't prove that the top echelon of the Iranian government is involved, so far at least.

That alone is reason enough to stop us from invading Iran. Pace doesn't have to prove we shouldn't invade, George Bush has to prove we should, for crying out loud.

You see, Heralder -- George could decide (he is the decider you know) that New Zealand was involved, and decide to invade them. You would require that Pace prove New Zealand wasn't involved? Heh.

I would find it hard to accept any evidence presented by President Bush, and I know I'm not the only American to feel that way.

So Pace has to prove a negative. Nicely set logic trap... but it won't fly, Orville.

No, that's not what I meant. Both need to prove their cases since they're contrary to one another.

So far neither have.

That alone is reason enough to stop us from invading Iran. Pace doesn't have to prove we shouldn't invade, George Bush has to prove we should, for crying out loud.

Maybe it's how I've been reading the news, but I didn't think anyone was trying to prove anything to justify an invasion...just prove culpability.

I would find it hard to accept any evidence presented by President Bush, and I know I'm not the only American to feel that way.

It will need to be extremely convincing. It's not difficult to believe that the Iranian government would be playing proxy with the Iraqi militias, but that doesn't mean we don't need hard, clear cut evidence of such.

"Maybe it's how I've been reading the news, but I didn't think anyone was trying to prove anything to justify an invasion...just prove culpability."

and the reason to prove culpability would be to.... what? Embarrass them?

George is itching to launch another invasion before Congress grows the huevos to shut him down - that's my view.