Bernie Sanders Wrecks Republican Plans By Offering Climate Change Amendment To Keystone XL

bernie sanders budget committee

Senate Democrats and Independents are pushing back hard on Keystone XL. Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders has kicked off the Democratic counter by filing a climate change amendment to the bill authorizing the construction of the pipeline.

The Sanders amendment takes direct aim at Republican climate change deniers:

It is the sense of Congress that Congress is in agreement with the opinion of virtually the entire worldwide scientific community that—

(1) climate change is real;

(2) climate change is caused by human activities;

(3) climate change has already caused devastating problems in the United States and around the world;

Sen. Sanders said, “The American people need to know whether Congress is listening to the overwhelming majority of scientists when it comes to climate change. On this issue, the scientists have been virtually unanimous in saying that climate change is real, it is caused by human action, it is already causing devastating problems which will only get worse in the future and that we need to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel. Do members of Congress believe the scientists or not?”

Republicans will never admit that climate change is real and caused by human activities, but the Senate Democratic caucus is using the Republican obsession with Keystone XL to advance their agenda that is based on scientific facts. Democrats are going to be proposing a series of amendments to the Keystone XL bill that are designed to turn the Republican gift to the oil companies into a real jobs bill.

These amendments are also a test of Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s promise to run a more open Senate that will allow votes on amendments. Republicans are beholden to the special interests who are pushing climate changing denying propaganda, so it is doubtful that the Sanders climate change amendment will pass, but these amendments are important because they will force Republicans to debate and discuss issues that they don’t want to talk about.

Sen. Sanders (I-VT) and the Democratic caucus are already upsetting the plans of the Republican Senate majority. Republicans were under the impression that they were going to be able to pass legislation by rolling over Democrats. This has not happened. Congressional Democrats and the Independents who caucus with them have united with the president against the Republican plans.

The bill authorizing Keystone XL will eventually pass the Senate. It will be vetoed by President Obama, and Senate and House Democrats will make sure that his veto is sustained. Debates on climate change and presidential vetoes are examples of the new reality that is slapping Republicans in the face.

108 Replies to “Bernie Sanders Wrecks Republican Plans By Offering Climate Change Amendment To Keystone XL”

  1. The best thing that could happen to our nation and the world is swearing in Bernie Sanders as the 45th President of the United States of America on January 20, 2017.

  2. Bernie needs to be the one to lead this country out of the muck that’s been made by corrupt government and lobbyists.

  3. I say “no” to XL Pipeline regardless of what is amended to the bill. It’s a matter of principle at the this point in time. Corruption must be fought to the end. There is no way we should give in to these selfish, immoral people under any circumstances.

  4. I’m ashamed of the democrats that voted with the rethugs, I hope they get some strong criticism from their constituents, I know one was Warner from VA – what’s it to him, he is not in a state that could have the drinking water poisoned, or where the
    population could have their land grabbed by Canada.
    Also – why did those who have investments
    in the project get to vote?

  5. Now just throw in minimum wage raise, tax on wall street trades, family sick leave, unemployment insurance extension and it will look like the shit they pushed for 6 years. Oh and expansion of SS and medicare.

  6. The way I see it, Obama vetoing things these next 2 years would be a double edged sword. Should he veto all legislation that would only hurt the American economy and the American people, he will help prevent the devastation the corrupt congress would bring. However, in doing so he may very well hinder the likelihood of Democrats taking back congress and having a Democrat in the oval office 4 years from now.

    But if he lets them have their way for the next two years, the people will see exactly what they stand for and just how bad their policies are, essentially guaranteeing liberals taking back the house and senate and having a Democrat as our next president.

    The question is, are we willing to watch our world burn? Do the ends justify the means?

  7. I don’t believe President Obama will just veto anything that comes his way, I think he will, or at least I hope he will, veto any really damaging legislation that they will inevitably send to him.

    As far as people seeing Republicans for what they are, we already do, Democrats can’t stand them, and the Republican base loves what they are doing. The real trick is getting people off their lazy a**es and into the voting booths, IMO.

  8. The XL Pipleline is a Filthy project that will NEVER be good for the Country or EVER be more than a joke when it comes to jobs! Dont let Even Bernie tell you otherwise. Its a Catastrophic accident waiting to happen. Anyone who has followed this Pipeline issue ( I have from day one) Knows its a Foreign company asking Cart Blanche access to American farm lands, water sheds, Native lands and everyday neighborhoods to bring oil to Asian markets. JUST SAY NO to the XL once and for all and quit playing with our health and safety.

  9. This is just silly. The only real questions would be to ask all the scientists to sign off on this question.
    We keep hearing about some overwhelming consensus but there really is no evidence of it actually existing. Nobody cares what a bunch of uninformed politicians thinks, how about once and for all, demanding that the scientists actually put their names to the declaration.
    otherwise, this global warming movement is just another political or religious scheme.
    This bill means NOTHING.
    This senator is simple desperate to see his ideology take president.

  10. So, this is exactly what the GOP has done for 6 years, and all of a sudden its all about Bernie?

    I see you are just chuck full of cliches today

  11. You are the one being not only silly but ignorant
    Why Climate Deniers Have No Scientific Credibility: Only 1 of 9,136 Recent Peer-Reviewed Authors Rejects Global Warming

    There is an overwhelming level of scientific consensus on human-caused climate change. Over 95% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that the earth is warming and that human activity is the cause. In spite of this agreement, only about 50% the general public think that scientists have reached a consensus on human-caused climate change. Two sources of the discrepancy are the unbalanced portrayal of the situation in the media, and the Manufactured Doubt Industry.

  12. Needs slight typo correction. Great article though! Go Bernie 2016!

    Republicans will never admit that climate change is real and caused by human activities, but the Senate Democratic caucus is using the Republican obsession with Keystone XL to advance [[their advance]] their agenda that is based on scientific facts.

  13. i look forward to both Republicans and Democrats being forced to vote on these amendments. We think that all America knows what is really going on with Republican voters and the terrible 13 and their friends. We need to publicize every vote.

    Now, let’s get the DNC, and both the House and Senate funding operations putting ads in papers and on billboards announcing the votes and what the votes mean to every voter in every district.

  14. Dear Bernie,

    Before engaging in such a political stunt and wasting the time of US Senators, please elaborate what science, backed by observation and clean, un-tampered data proves that humans, more than nature, cause the earth to warm AND weather to become severe. Note: Citing “overwhelming majority of scientists” meme is not proof. Consensus is not science.

  15. Oh, and by the way, if your answer is: CO2 is rising, and temperature has risen, therefore CO2 causes temperature to rise, this logic makes about as much sense as saying God is good, lollipops are good, therefore God is a lollipop. Correlation does not prove causation!

  16. The majority of scientists is not a meme. The proof is in the hundreds of peer reviewed papers that substantiate their observations and opinions. That, my snide friend, is what science is all about.

  17. Alex,
    What makes you think that the “people” can see anything? They don’t vote. Republicans won the senate with about 18% of eligible voters voting. It’s criminal and the Democrat “people” have only themselves to blame.

  18. You are the one propagating BS. Say what you want. The storms are worse, the oceans are warming and the ice is melting. 100% of the people of the world can see that, why can’t you? You must be a paid shill for the fossil fuel industry.

  19. David: You are very well “not informed.” Spewing what you have heard in the mainstream media is not proof. You need to read, research and weigh out the evidence. Then a strong dose of common sense is a requirement before you can judge whether what is being put forward has any truth.

  20. tw: The old mercury / alcohol thermometers when compared to the new electrical thermometers clearly accounts for the so called 0.8 degrees C in warming experienced in the last 100 years or so. There is so much error and just plain fra*d in the global warming sc*m.

    A person with a very small mind would have to believe that we humans can truly have an affect on the long term climate. Yes, we can affect climate and temperatures locally (UHI) and yes we can polluted our immediate environment but beyond that, we humans can not affect such a huge system called climate.

    The entire climate system is made up of so many factors and the majority of them have yet to be either understood or discovered. Because we understand to some degree a few of the climate inputs, we think we know how we are affecting climate is really a big hearty laugh.

    CO2 driving temperature. Now that’s a joke. There is no scientific paper that conclusively proves this.

  21. The idea of Senator Sanders being elected president is nonsensical. Voters will not elect anyone labeled “socialist” and you know that to be true. As much as I like what Bernie Sanders has to say he will never be elected. He should, on the other hand, run in the primaries as a prod to Clinton to move herself left. As the nominee, however, Bernie Sanders would lose big time to Bush or Paul. He is an Israeli citizen. He has sworn allegiance to a foreign country. It would be the end of America as a world leader should an Israeli citizen be elected President of the United States.

  22. Canadians have refused to allow this pipeline to cross Canada to their west coast so TransCanada has bought the conservatives in the US Congress to force this disaster across our breadbasket and watershed to our coast where the oil can be shipped to China where it has been sold. The Canadian pipeline has leaked disastrously and frequently. We don’t need the oil. We don’t need the 50 jobs. We don’t need the catastrophe it brings.

  23. If you believe in mmcc (man made climate change), what remedies would you suggest? What is the ideal climate for the earth? These questions need to be answered. More than that, what metrics have been met in determining the extent of global warming/climate change? The generalized responses need to be proven. Saying that the ice caps are melting is true, but are they disappearing? Has the northern passage been open year round? Get some real facts, not the talking points.

    Do some research on BOTH sides of the question.

  24. Those Dems are voting to protect themselves. Sometimes votes don’t make sense, but if we know their states is at least makes things more clear.

  25. What does it mean if democrats follow through and file an ammendment to the Keystone bill and the President vetoes it?

  26. It means there are still elements in the bill that are far to undesirable.

    But do you think any amendment of the Dems will get through?

  27. Even an idiot would know if they watched the weather. A tie bit of scientific comprehension would also be helpful, but that’s asking the impossible I know.

  28. The proposed amendments are suppose to show the Republicans are not willing to talk about Global warming and meant to who America that FACT. The Dems already know Obama has vowed to Veto the pipeline, but their is a system of checks and balances in our gov’t, all bills need to go through. The Republicans have been blocking bills from being voted on. Its a game to show America what is really going on!

  29. That’s what you think Maggie. People are tired of the Reich-Wing Repugnants and want a real change.

    Bernie is offering just such a change. Just because the Reich-Wingers will label him a “Socialist”, well that is not what he is. He is an Independent.

    Oh and if he does decide to run? This Independent will be campaigning for him.

  30. So if we believe the flat earthers it’s now 101 out of 9236… So you’re telling me there’s a 1.09% chance.

  31. This is one of his peer reviewed studies
    Possible impact of interplanetary and interstellar dust fluxes on the Earth’s climate
    The obtained results argue for the fact that the meteoric dust in the Earth’s atmosphere is potentially one of the important climate-forming agents. It is shown that the amount of interstellar dust in the Earth’s atmosphere is too small to have a considerable affect on atmospheric processes.

    Please tell me WTF are these Russians talking about?

  32. But Maggie:

    He could renounce his Israeli citizenship, like Senator Cruz did, and then it would be OK.

    As to America electing a “Socialist”, America will elect whomever the MSM tells them to

  33. The industrial revolution started about 100 years ago. I have no doubt that all the tall smokestacks created since that time have contributed to the disastrous climate change we are now experiencing.

    Climate change is REAL; it’s dangerous. Idiots that keep claiming that it’s not are just choosing to remain ignorant.

  34. Is Bernie Sanders willing to let the Senate vote on each of his 3 statements separately? If not, he is clearly a dishonest hack trying to get the GOP and conservatives to say yes or no to a set of different assertions; a tactic no reasonably intelligent person would accept in any debate. “Climate change” has always been real, but the causation and consequences are vigorously and properly disputed. You can chant “denier!” and “97% consensus!” till you are blue in the face, but you just establish yourself as uninformed.

  35. The globe has been mostly warming since the last major ice age when much of North America was covered by thick glaciers (When they finally receded, they left what became the U.S. Great Lakes.) Between them and now we have had the warming period in the Middle Ages (warmer than now) and the Little Ice Age during which the Thames River in London froze over, and ice fairs were possible on top of it. Yes, climate changes, always has; and interestingly, it seems we are in another cooling period. Note last year’s winter and the one we are enduring now. Anyone checked out the snow coverage in Europe right now? 15 years ago, we were supposed to be forgetting what snow was like. The Arctic and Antarctic have plenty if ice; global ice coverage is at a maximum. Did anyone note that the Northwest Passage did not open up any time recently? Ignorant, foolish people keep having to be rescued by helicopters and, or ice breakers. IMO, we all better buy more warm clothes!

  36. As usual, alarmists, like Bernie, appeal to the human aspect of climate change instead of science. We should NEVER listen to what ANY scientist or group of scientists say. Scientists are human and are, therefore, subject to bias. Data is not. Bernie, were he serious about science, would be telling people to look at the empirical data. If he did so, he would see that what alarmist scientists are telling him was agenda driven, not data driven. Bernie, being unable to evaluate the data on its merit, is simply a tool of radical environmentalism. Sad, but not surprising.

  37. Science, by its nature, has no side. It does not define right or wrong, good or bad. It simply is. In the case of climate change, it defines the reality of the biosphere. Nothing more. Good or bad is defined by emotional and/or greedy humans.

  38. So we should listen to you? Please list your credentials. Homeschooling and what preacher billy bob don’t count

  39. NASA | A Year in the Life of Earth’s CO2

    A blanket around the Earth
    Most climate scientists agree the main cause of the current global warming trend is human expansion of the “greenhouse effect”1 — warming that results when the atmosphere traps heat radiating from Earth toward space.

    Certain gases in the atmosphere block heat from escaping. Long-lived gases that remain semi-permanently in the atmosphere and do not respond physically or chemically to changes in temperature are described as “forcing” climate change. Gases, such as water vapor, which respond physically or chemically to changes in temperature are seen as “feedbacks.”

  40. If you could read, you would see that I said not to listen to ANY human regarding climate change. You should evaluate the empirical data. That you attack me personally and not the message shows an emotional, not scientific, approach to this issue. Again, not surprising among alarmists.

  41. Look you said we shouldn’t listen to the scientist who are trained in this field. Now if you have a degree in Climate science then present your data

  42. Under ideal conditions, true. But CO2 is not isolated in the atmosphere. It exists as one of many variables. If CO2 were the catastrophic forcing agent as you suggest, temp would have continued to rise over the past 10+ years as CO2 continued to rise. But it hasn’t. Anyone who regards the scientific method as the measure of a hypothesis’ validity can easily see that CO2 is NOT driving average global temp higher. Ergo, it is NOT a major forcing agent.

  43. According to an ongoing temperature analysis conducted by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) and shown in this series of maps, the average global temperature on Earth has increased by about 0.8°Celsius (1.4°Fahrenheit) since 1880. Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15-0.20°C per decade.

    But like you said we shouldn’t listen to the people who study this science. Oh snap I said a dirty word SCIENCE

  44. Gee, I guess you don’t REALLY evaluate the data personally but simply depend on your side to give you your opinion. I’ve engaged folks like you before. You either don’t understand or have no regard for the scientific method. Ergo, talking science is impossible. Read Feynman.

  45. You’re right I am not a scientist but if 97% of scientist say its real then I will go with the consensus instead of the 3% who are whores for the oil and Koch industries. And who the hell is this Feynman and in the future you want me to read something provide a link or you didn’t think that far ahead.

  46. Obviously, you have no idea where the 97% meme came from. If you did, you would not be so arrogant. And you do not know who Feynman is. Why am I not surprised.

  47. The people in your circle may be tired of Reich-wing Repugnants, but, don’t forget, the majority of voters voted them in. That leads me to believe that the majority of voters are climate change deniers, racists, misogynists, agree that the aged and disabled are too much of a burden on society and cost too much to care for, don’t want to pay taxes for their public services, don’t even want public services from the government, and want the rich to get richer. Either that, or the ballots were fixed, and nobody seems to care about that but me.

  48. You know I don’t post what I cant prove
    In 2004, as they correctly point out, Harvard science historian Naomi Oreskes published an essay in Science magazine in which she examined the abstracts of 928 articles on the subject of “global climate change” published in scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and “found that 75% supported the view that human activities are responsible for most of the observed warming over the previous 50 years while none directly dissented.”

    They correctly identify, as well, a 2009 survey of 3,146 earth scientists that asked the question, “Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?” Overall, 86 percent of the respondents answered in the affirmative, but the survey’s authors arrived at the 97.5 percent figure after deciding to include only the responses of climatologists who actively publish research on climate change — and those are the only ones whose scientific opinions are truly relevant to the matter at hand. Bast and Spencer leave out that first point and treat the second as a deficit: “Seventy-nine scientists,” they write, “does not a consensus make.”

    And please don’t bring up that rag Skeptical Science
    How to Determine the Scientific Consensus on Global Warming

    An academic feud swirls around how best or even whether to express the scientific consensus around climate change

  49. The article is based on the premise that President Obama will veto the Keystone XL pipeline if it is passed. I will only believe it when I see it. Until it happens, the veto is just rhetoric. Even so, if he vetoes it, the Republicans may twist arms and threaten the swing Democrats to vote in favor of overriding the veto.

    And if the other Democrat amendments are included in the bill, then it will pass due to pork. Most Democrats have no courage.

  50. “Climate change” is real. NO doubt, unless you deny such things as ice ages and seasonal changes.

    “Climate change” causes damage. No doubt, unless you deny such things as tsunamis, earthquakes, storms, etc.

    The ONLY climate change issue is global warming. Everything else (bizarre weather such as droughts, floods, tornados, hurricanes, typhoons, etc.) has long since been debunked. The question: how much impact, if any, does human activity have on global warming?

    The answer can only be NONE, because there is no evidence.

    Furthermore the two “consensus” surveys have both been so dramatically debunked that anyone still using that as their basis is in bad need of a brain transplant; they have the IQ of a potted plant (at best).

  51. Given that the alarmist community actively worked to keep any scientist that questioned CAGW from publishing, I’m surprised Oreskes did not arrive at a much higher percentage. Funny, you didn’t mention that.

    And, in your 2009 study, the survey was sent to over 10,000 people who were considered qualified to respond. As you correctly say, only 3000 thought the survey was worth their time. So, from the start, 70% thought the questions, 2 questions, were not important enough to respond to. Funny, you didn’t mention that, either.

    And you left out the John Cook “study”, who also concluded a 97% agreement with CAGW. In his case, though, he classified articles according to a personally defined agree/disagree criteria. When his criteria were finally understood, it was difficult to find ANY article that could be included in his “agree” category.

    So, in the end, you’ve proven nothing except that you know how to ignore info relevant to a reader in order to reach an unbiased conclu…

  52. I did not leave out the John Cook study. Like I said when I post I provide links speaking of which who is this Feynman ?

  53. Don’t know where you get your information, but claiming that Bernie Sanders is an Israeli citizen is a lie. for another thing, Bernie Sanders knows that a person with foreign citizenship cannot run for POTUS. I doubt very much he would even attempt to run if he were not a U.S. citizen.

    “Bernie Sanders was born on September 8, 1941, in Brooklyn, New York, the son of Jewish immigrants, Dorothy (née Glassberg) and Eli Sanders.[8][9]” – Wikipedia

    I can get other references if you don’t believe Wikipedia. There are lots of them out there.

  54. There are thousands but this will do:

    Where his greatness lies, at it would apply to CAGW, is in this quote, “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.”

    THIS is the essence of the scientific method. CAGW, by definition, states that CO2 is a (if not THE) MAJOR forcing agent of global temp. As such, as CO2 rises, nothing should be able to prevent a rise in temp (ala the correlation between CO2 and temp as defined by the 197x-200x period). The last 10+ years of flat temp, however, show that the theory of CAGW is indeed false. And any serious student of science would follow the scientific method and question why temp is flat in the face of rising CO2. But you, brother, apparently do not question it. So one is left to wonder, are you really a student of science? The facts would say no.

  55. He was a physicist not a climate scientist. I was train to be a chef but that doesn’t mean I can make sushi

  56. Oh, good lord. The overwhelming majority of people you call “climate scientists” do not have a degree in climate science. That’s because the climate is so broad and deep that no one can know it all. So people get a degree in something like atmospheric physics to study how the atmosphere relates to climate. Or oceanography to study hoe the oceans relate to climate.

    You may not know how to prepare sushi but, as a chef, you should know the difference between an edible fish and one that has gone bad. This holds true for climate science as well. It helps to know how the data was collected but, even if you don’t, it’s easy to read a graph and see whether the data agrees with the theory. And, as I said, in the case of CAGW, experiment (empirical data) does NOT agree with theory (see Feynman).

    Anyone can find some data here or there that agrees with CAGW. But you cannot use just SOME data. You have to include it ALL. And, when this is done, the theory of CAGW falls apart.

  57. You are so wrong! The Republican House has voted on, and passed over 390 bills that are still sitting on the desk of the real obstructionist, Harry Reid. They are sitting there, waiting for old Harry to bring them to the Senate floor for a vote. He has not even let any of the over 390 bills, passed by the House, have an up/down or yes/no vote!!! Get your facts straight about just who the real obstructionists in our government are!! We Independents have had it with both of the two main parties!!!

  58. You cant name one of those so called bills and that’s what they count on, ignorant people like you who vote against their own interest because you are too stupid to research them

  59. Bernie would be an excellent choice for the White House job only if he would completely divorce himself from the Zionist Israel lobby AIPAC that controls Congress along with the Corporate Elite and places their desires first over and above the peoples needs and desires.

  60. “I do confess a degree of fascination with Poptech’s list…”
    – John Cook, Cartoonist at Skeptical Science
    A effing cartoonist. You cant make this shit up

  61. The really funny thing is that if President Obama denied climate change, hypothetically know what would happen. The GOP would be all up in arms..its a major crisis..there IS climate change..!!!..Just like Ebola.

    They don’t govern, they create lies and chaos. Climate change is real.

  62. Actually the proposed climate change amendment is a start, but its format is unacceptable. A proper legislative amendment would read like this:

    Whereas, The extent of global sea ice is at or above historical averages;

    Whereas, The populations of polar bears are generally growing;

    Whereas, The sea levels have been slowly rising at the same rate since the Little Ice Age ended 150 years ago;

    Whereas, The oceans will not become acidic due to buffering from extensive mineral deposits and marine life is well adapted to pH fluctuations that do occur;

    Whereas, Extreme weather events have not increased in recent decades and such events are more associated to periods of cooling rather than warming;

    Whereas, Cold spells, not heat waves, are the greater threat to human life and prosperity;

    Therefore, This chamber agrees that climate is variable and prudent public officials should plan for future periods both colder and warmer than the present.

  63. I commend you for your civil tone. Your statements of fact are somewhat wanting. Nonetheless, periods of cold should be prepared for, as sea-ice melt and the release of impoundments of freshly-melted glacial water have both caused unseasonably cold periods of years.

    The precipitate melting of pack ice can disturb the Gulf Stream/ North Atlantic Drift, pushing it away from the British Isles and the Atlantic coast of Europe. If you want to know what that means, look at a globe or Mercator projection. Britain is on the same latitude as Labrador, and the Riviera as Boston. The tropical waters of the Gulf Stream are the only reason palm trees grow on the Scilly Isles or the southern Irish Coast. The release of waters from Glacial Lake Agassiz caused (if memory serves me) the Younger Dryas, and that release substantially reduced the size of Florida in a very short time.

    Human survived the brutishly cold Pleistocene glaciations. Who inhabits the dry Sahara and Rub al-Khali? Very few.

  64. Science, dj. The intent of introducing you to Feynman was to help you grasp the meaning of the scientific method. Obviously, you can’t. Sad.

  65. He said there is a difference between data and theory. I provided you with data from NASA and the NOAA. You provided jack shit like all deniers. Now provide with data and not your asinine theory

  66. Go to Greenland. Oh I forgot, you are a denier so facts have a liberal bias. So tell me how old is the Earth again?

  67. There’s a reason why only 6% of all US Scientists are Republican: conservative dogma is the antithesis of rational thinking.

  68. I’ll tell you the same thing Gavin Schmidt (you know, you head of NASA GISS) told me several years ago, “Go do you your own homework.” I did. I read the papers, ALL of them, from every qualified source. Unlike you, I came to an educated conclusion based on the scientific method. Not one that agreed with my politics. Your insults reveal your true lack of dedication to science. Since you have no science background, beyond what your politics allows you to ingest, please do not attempt to lecture those of us who DO have a science background and understand the meaning of the scientific method.

  69. Evidently you didn’t take his advice. I ask you yesterday what were your qualifications and having a science background does not compute. So again what is your degree in again?

  70. Check the CO2 vs temp graph. CO2 has continued to rise while temp has been flat for 10+ years. Oh, I forgot, empirical data and the scientific method mean nothing to alarmists.

  71. That may be true in the government sector, which produces relatively nothing. But in the truly public and private sector, where money spent has to actually produce something of value to society, it’s hardly the case.

  72. Global surface temperatures have risen by almost a degree in the last century. Sea levels have risen, while snow and ice cover has dropped significantly. Coral reefs are being destroyed and weather patterns are becoming wilder and less predictable. And the major cause of this climatic mayhem is now clear. It is the work of humans, who are burning ever increasing amounts of fossil fuel and have raised carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere by 40% in the past 250 years.

    The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years.

    The problem with you people is you don’t take the long term effects into account. I guess that’s why you still think trickle down economics work. The Iraq war was a success. And since there is no slavery we live in a post racial society

  73. Hey dumbass I direct you to the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Interstate Highway system, the Space Program, the Erie canal, the railroad system, public education, which you failed at, the Homestead act, Building our transportation infrastructure such as airports and one last thing, the internet which allows you to post your drivel. Then again maybe that was a bad thing

  74. Exactly… That is after all what happened in 2008 and 2012, the American people voted for the worst President in history.

  75. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE make him run…. I will even donate to the cause. Because, if he did, even a moderate like Romney or Jeb could win in a landslide against old man Sanders.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.