“I’m trying to learn [about greenhouse gases and global warming]. The more I learn, the bigger believer I become.”

That has nothing to do with global warming, Senator Graham; that simply provides further evidence that you're full of hot air.

I'd tell you to put a cork in it, but if your head swells much more you'll explode...

Look up oh wise evolving Senator, look up and you shall see the light. It's that nuclear furnace that is warming us, and when it decides to lower the thermostat, cooling us.

Wisdom is in the sky.

Greenhouse gas is what you find in the Senate.

From Newsweak 1975
The Cooling World
There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production– with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.

Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve. But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.

Jebus H. Chribist, why must we be plagued with these dumbasses? Aren't there any real Republicans out there?

I have always thought something wierd was going on with Lindsay Graham, even before.

I expect some "revealing" news from him soon.

Ahh..Lindsey "I want me some of that John McCain Cock...you know, like Chuck Hagel gets" Graham continues to evolve.

And evolve is the right word here. Does anyone really think that Graham could ever be confused with "intelligent design"?

I believe in global warming. I also believe in global cooling, the greenhouse effect, the oncoming shift of the magnetic poles, asteroids, solar flares and extraterrestrial life.

I just don't believe we need to f'ing bankrupt ourselves. After all, the same dipshits that are screaming for us to sign Kyoto are racking up hundreds of thousands of airline frequent flier miles, buying SUVs and protesting alternate energy sources like windmills off the coast of Martha's Vinyard and nuclear energy.

So, WTF? When someone figures out how to create energy from pyramid power, calibrated auras, Kabbala beads or multi-colored wristbands, I'm all ears. Until then, we're not committing economic suicide. Sorry.

The formerly conservative Senator Graham supported McCain-Feingold, threw in with the Gang of Fourteen, and 'evolved' on Global Warming because he has decided to hitch himself to John McCain's anti-Republican political star.

Wouldn't that be hitching a ride on a falling star since there are a lot of historically republican voting people out here that would vote for a dim-wit before they would vote for a hypocritical traitor like McCain?

Wouldn't the World be better off if we just quit cooking?

And it's something each of us can do, right now, without government doing a thing. Drive through any town, large or small, and you'll see houses. Houses with stoves and ovens and microwaves. These things don't run on love, either. Not only do they create heat, heat that IMMEDIATELY goes into the atmosphere they also use electricity or natural gas...maybe even propane.

Who says we can't be better off with natural, uncooked food? Oh, and buy another refrigerator, because they, like, make things colder. And you don't need the government to tell you to do the things you should. You just have to believe them.

Take care of the Earth. Buy a freezer!

Sounds like he's Supreme Court material.

Hi All,

I often wonder if it is not time now to start trying to oppose some of the least conservative so-called Republicans. Hagel is an embarrassment as well as Graham. I am not too happy with my local senator Smith in Oregon. He has been a disappointment.

Hey Oregonguy: I understand the joke, but freezers add to warming also (trivially obviously). The person who pointed to the nuclear furnace in the sky is the true scientist here. I am always amused at the fact that so many liberals are so afraid of nuclear energy, but irradiate themselves at tanning salons and at the beach with no qualms. What ignorant morons. Only a liberal would have faith in computer models which can't even reliably get next week's weather correct. Some problems are just too hard to model reliably. I would not trust some lefty Chicken-Little researcher about any global warming caused by us. I have never had a license to drive, and I rarely fly. Why is it that liberal "activists" expend so much energy when they claim it is destroying the environment? As nutty as the unabomber was obviously, at least he lived a minimally impacting life. Damn hypocrites! I did some research in physics, and I would not automatically trust results even in such a hard science. I remember a paper which tried to draw some conclusion from data that I analyzed. They used only one year of data, and there was nothing there. I had access to three years of data, and I got some decent results from that. The third year's data was limited, and there was an interesting story about a NASA failure as the cause. You always have to be skeptical of scientists of any sort these days. I find that sort of sad.

Mike

The problem with the whole "global warming" thing is that the people reporting about it in the media (and in this case Senators) aren't very intelligent on these matters and don't understand what they are talking about.

Is the world warming? Yes. Is it warmer than it was 100 years ago? Yes. Is it warmer than it was 60 years ago? No.

Notice, they always tell you that the Earth has warmed over the last 3 decades... yada yada. They don't tell you that for 2 decades before that the temperatures plunged and that for several decades before THAT it warmed (prior to 90% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions... go figure). They never tell you that the climate is still recovering from a "little Ice Age" about 300 years ago. They never mention that solar activity correlates almost perfectly to climatic warming/cooling trends. And I'm sure they didn't mention it to Lindsay Graham either.

Until they reproduce past climate trends using actual past input data with their computer models, they are worthless. That's what all of this is based upon... their crap computer models. They won't release the source code for their models... I wonder why?

They won't release the source code for their models... I wonder why?

All the profane comments about Bush would be embarrasing.

/*
Distort the data so the model makes that
#$%@& baby eating jew-loving, son of a bitch
who stole two elections, looks bad.
*/
float AddBusHitlerFactors(float gas_emissions)
{
gas_emissions += 9.9E4000;
return gas_emissions;
}

Wasn't Lindsey Graham one of the Congressmen leading the charge on Billy Jeff's impeachment? Now you can't tell where Hillary's ass stops and his face starts.
I know everyone likes to talk about how he worships McCain, but I think Hillary's got the goods on him and she's making him dance like Howdy Doody.

McCain's biggest "skeleton in the closet" is the whitewash job John Kerry and he did on the Vietnam MIA issue so Mr. Bill could give Vietnam MFN trade status.

This single issue is the Chappaquiddick that will keep him from ever being president. If he ever gets seriously close, this will crawl out of the woodwork and sink him. Few people know about it, most will be sickened by it when they find out.

Good one, Tony, but I still wonder what Graham's "Chappaquidick" is. I just have this feeling, an intuition if you will, that Hillary's shock troops have got Lindsey by the short and curlies.

Actually, the solution to global warming is very simple: Nuclear winter. Anyone remember that scare? All we have to do is resume above-ground nuclear testing (something we should do anyway over Iran, Pakistan, Syria, Saudia Arabia, Gaza, etc) and the resultant dust clouds will cover the earth, block out the sun, and neatly balance out the greenhouse effect!

Seems we have several Republican presidential wannabes positioning themselves to lose the 2008 primaries. We've got John McCain-Feingold, or as Rush calls him, "President McCain." Then there's Chuck "Sheehan" Hagel who could write columns on Iraq for the New Yawk Times. Finally we have Lindsay Graham who seems to be "evolving" into Algore Lite. (My old man told me never to trust a guy named Lindsay.) With a little luck, these three buffoons will split the moderate vote so a real conservative can run against the Hildabeast in 2008.

As a South Carolinian, I find Lindsay to be an embarrassment. I do not want my Senator to be John McCain's hand puppet.

Sadly, he will be unopposed in the Republican primary most likely and the state Democratic Party doesn't have a remotely competent candidate to run against him,

Ugh.

I am also a SC resident, who is growing more and more tired of Lindsey McGraham.

There is a slight chance that Thomas Ravenal might challenge Lindsey. He has hinted at it a good bit, especially during the whole Gang of 14 media fawn fest. If Ravenal runs I would back him over Lindsey in a hearbeat - screw Republican establishment and all that.

The only thing I worry about would be a repeat of the Specter race in Pennsylvania, with Jim DeMint playing the Santorum role of screwing over someone he is more in line with to "help the party."

(For those who don't know - Ravenal finished third in the GOP Primary and once he dropped out of the race, immediately back DeMint, the one true conservative SC Senator. He and his family have been in state politics forever and they have very deep pockets.)

I expect some "revealing" news from him soon.

For me, I couldn't care less if the "rumors" are true, RWS, but I do mind that he's turned into a complete dumbass.

Well, Aaron, I do question how much the Republican powers-that-be around here would support Lindsay. Bush has a lot of sway with them and Graham is far more in McCain's corner than Bush's. There is a slim chance Bush will "sit out" entirely, which would be the same as not supporting.

And I forgot about Thomas Ravenel. He'd be a significantly better choice than Lindsay. I'd love to believe Bush learned from supporting Specter over Toomey the folly of protecting an incumbent who is of little benefit to you.

I doubt it, honestly, but I hope so.

Lindsay better watch out, Chuck's making a play for his boyfriend by demonstrating that he, too, is a "maverick" and would make a fine mate (running, that is).

Bush supporters: can a Republican be a good Republican and disagree with the Bush administration on any issue? I ask this because I see a lot of anger at Graham, Hagel and McCain and one of the things these men have in common is that they have disagreed with the Bush administration on some issues. In addition, I can't help but notice that all three are veterans of the armed forces. Why do Bush supporters seem so hostile to veterans.

All this hot air from the eco-freaks and the nut cases at GREENPEACE just what kind of weird stuff will they come up with? get the book by MICHEAL CHRITON A STATE OF FEAR its all about a plot by radical enviromentalists to convince us all that there is global warming

Bill, you've got it exactly backwards. The anger directed at Graham, Hagel and McCain is when they betray the things Republicans believe. The fact that Bush also believes many of these things is why he's popular on the right. But he's certainly not wildly, unanimously popular. One of the reasons Bush's poll numbers are low is on account of righties who don't think he's far enough to the right (which is why the left isn't picking up any traction from it). Don't believe me? See: immigration, illegal.

"can a Republican be a good Republican and disagree with the Bush administration on any issue"

If you went to an encyclopedia you couldn't find a better example of projection. The ideology of the left is so locked down as to be beyond debate. The perfect example, of course, is the abortion issue.

BrewFan, if you look at both parties, you find pro-choice and anti-choice positions. The Democrat running against Santorum is anti-choice. The party will support him. There are quite a few pro-choice Republicans that the party will support, so I don't see that as a good indicator of party discipline. If an American doesn't like abortions, he couldn't have done much better than Clinton. In Clinton's 8 years, the abortion rate dropped each year until it reached a 25-year low in 2000. It has risen each year under Bush to a point where it is now at pre-Clinton higher levels.

S.Weasil, don't you think part of Bush's poll problems with Republicans is the incompetent way he's run this war? An interesting historical question: has anyone ever run a war in a more incompetent way. Extra credit question: has any Commander in Chief ever given himself a 35-day leave in the middle of a shooting war?

Bush supporters: can a Republican be a good Republican and disagree with the Bush administration on any issue?

Politicians, republican and democrat alike, are all SlimeByDefinition™.

"good" is a term only a foolish trusting leftist would use in a discussion about politicians.

There are only three descriptors for politicians - Vile, Repulsive, and Inept. You get to chose two of the three when describing any pol. Note, that if you want a competent pol, they will wind up being Vile and Repulsive, but competent.