Quote :

"Republicans Plan to Form Counter-Delegation at Climate Conference FOXNews.com A GOP counter-delegation is forming to undermine the Obama administration's work on an international climate change agreement in Copenhagen, warning that the president is poised to make commitments he can't keep and drawing heightened attention to controversial leaked e-mails. At least a half-dozen Republican senators and representatives are planning to head to Denmark next week, as part of the overall U.S. congressional delegation, which includes plenty of Democrats as well. But the Republicans have a markedly different agenda. "Truth squad," is how Sen. Jim Inhofe spokesman Matt Dempsey described the GOP team. He called the Democratic visitors to the conference the "doom squad." "

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/09/republicans-plan-form-counter-delegation-climate-conference/

This strikes me as being very inappropriate. If I had the gumption, I could dig up a dozen quotes from top GOP officials explaining how wrong it is to criticize the President while abroad.

12/9/2009 2:55:34 PM

Boone agreed.

*ug* If there are any intelligent Senate Republicans left, they should ostracize these idiots and call them out for subversive jackasses they are.

12/9/2009 3:05:19 PM

^^ Fair enough. But if I read the report correctly, the Republicans plan to form a delegation to go to Copenhagen and disagree with Obama in a world forum.

If the Republicans are carping at Obama, however, while they're sitting in Washington or elsewhere in the United States and Obama is in Copenhagen, then they should not be doing this. It is another matter, however, to simply continue to disagree with global warming alarmism and the goals of the climate conference if this is one's position--it would seem to me that this is just intellectual consistency.

[Edited on December 9, 2009 at 3:08 PM. Reason : .]

12/9/2009 3:08:16 PM

Quote :

" It is another matter, however, to simply continue to disagree with global warming alarmism and the goals of the climate conference if this is one's position--it would seem to me that this is just intellectual consistency."

Doing this is not the same as just criticizing the sitting president.

12/9/2009 3:21:33 PM

Quote :

"This strikes me as being very inappropriate. If I had the gumption, I could dig up a dozen quotes from top GOP officials explaining how wrong it is to criticize the President while abroad."

And when they said that they were wrong, just as you are wrong now. It is never wrong to criticize your government, even in the presence of our allies. Our allies already understand how it works, I suspect it works similarly in their own countries, so I doubt any of them will perceive this as an insult.

12/9/2009 4:45:30 PM

I do not understand why this along with other issues always falls in party lines. You would think there would be some statistical variation among the many difference issues of today's society.

Not to often do you hear about a congressman being pro-life, climate change believing, anti-war, health care reform opponent.

Or a congressman being stricter gun regulations, big business friendly, relaxed drug law, climate change believer, anti-welfare.

12/9/2009 6:36:52 PM

^ They're called moderates. Unfortunately, being a moderate rarely gets you elected.

12/9/2009 7:45:45 PM

Quote :

"I do not understand why this along with other issues always falls in party lines."

no joke. just like gay marriage and whatever. there are gays on both parties. it's just that one has been called out b/c it has a section of it that happens to be mega-opposed to it. so instead of recognizing that it's an issue of both parties, one calls names at the other for when it finds a 'gay' one of the repubs like a bunch of 11 year olds.

this issue will ultimately be decided by the overall opinion of humanity and the survival of its species. humans have realized that for 1000's of years a 1-1 male female combo is the best chance to propogate a civilized/happy/ and intelligent future. gay and polygamy just aren't cutting it. but there will always be the 5% of society that gets mega pissed at it.

this is the same with the group in 'hopenhagen'
humanity will do what it must to ensure the survival of the species. if this shuts down jobs which in turn shuts down their ability to get food/shelter of their choice humanity will revolt.

12/9/2009 8:49:58 PM

It is never wrong to criticize your government. If Obama's abroad and they have beef with what he's saying or doing then they can yell as loudly as they want.

But they do NOT have the right to send a delegation to a conference of world leaders in a deliberate attempt to undermine the authority of the President. Ever since the Dems did it to Bush the Republicans have just been dying to try it out for themselves and seem to be doing it left and right now, despite how much they claimed to hate it when the Dems did it just a few years ago.

I vaguely recall talks of treason when the Dems were doing it, but that might have just been people spouting off and nobody important.

12/9/2009 8:51:30 PM

^ And why not? Undermining the authority of the President in an important feature of the American system of government.

12/9/2009 9:29:11 PM

Regarding the OP, I think the next time my boss is sitting in a meeting with some other industry leaders I will show up and discuss about what horrible ideas my boss has.

12/9/2009 9:48:03 PM

The President isn't the boss of Congress.

12/9/2009 9:56:54 PM

separation of powers ftw

12/9/2009 10:17:16 PM

Quote :

"The President isn't the boss of Congress."

He is the boss of foreign delegates.

12/9/2009 10:56:32 PM

Yea... Right... He's the boss sure:

12/9/2009 10:58:12 PM

Quote :

"And why not? Undermining the authority of the President in an important feature of the American system of government. "

Perhaps, but engaging in childish, unprofessional behavior which marginalizes your point of view and reduces the chance of anyone who might be associated with your point of view (read: everyone who doesn't "believe in change") of being taken seriously or even heard at all, is at best horribly irresponsible and at worst negligent and a dereliction of their elected duty to represent their constituents.

The democrats played by this book when Bush was president, and it bought them 4 more years of Bush (an amazing feat when you think about it). I really don't want to see 4 more years of Obama, and behavior like this isn't helping. These "representatives" are doing damage to their position, their constituents and their country, and they deserve to be derided and scolded like the children they are.

12/9/2009 11:05:16 PM

Quote :

"Yea... Right... He's the boss sure:"

It's the ex-commander and fag!

Quote :

"http://earthhopenetwork.net/bush_kisses_saudi_king.jpg"

Quote :

"The democrats played by this book when Bush was president, and it bought them 4 more years of Bush (an amazing feat when you think about it). I really don't want to see 4 more years of Obama, and behavior like this isn't helping. These "representatives" are doing damage to their position, their constituents and their country, and they deserve to be derided and scolded like the children they are."

When GOP mans up to the fact that they lost 2008, stops pouting, recognizes the failures of their party previously, ditches the new old party hacks (Cheney, rove, rush), tell Palin to stay in Alaska, and put together a moderate appealing platform; one that is not purely pandering to Big Oil, Big Business, and the relgious zealots, then they may have a chance in 2012.


[Edited on December 9, 2009 at 11:18 PM. Reason : a]

12/9/2009 11:11:56 PM

he held his hand b/c that dude is old and can barely walk on his own

wait i thought liberals violently supported the fag movement. so why are there issues with that pic again? you just look like a dumbass now.

[Edited on December 9, 2009 at 11:51 PM. Reason : d]

12/9/2009 11:51:10 PM

HUR isn't a "liberal"

if you paid attention to anything in TSB, you'd know that not everyone falls nice and neatly into one of your two preconceived labels. try to keep up.

and, if you could muster any semblance of intellectual honesty, you'd understand the point he was making.

[Edited on December 9, 2009 at 11:58 PM. Reason : .]

12/9/2009 11:57:14 PM

Quote :

"These "representatives" are doing damage to their position, their constituents and their country, and they deserve to be derided and scolded like the children they are."

How's that going to damage their image? They're over there protesting this climate change legislation, which you think would okay with the American people since over 50% in recent Pew and CNN polls don't believe it to be a concern. I.e. the majority.

12/10/2009 8:23:27 AM

Quote :

"wait i thought liberals violently supported the fag movement."

lol

Quote :

"How's that going to damage their image? They're over there protesting this climate change legislation, which you think would okay with the American people since over 50% in recent Pew and CNN polls don't believe it to be a concern. I.e. the majority. "

I think the issue is not rather it is right or wrong. The issue is that they are doing trying to do this in a public international forum. This would be like going to a dinner party with friends and getting into a fight with your wife. No one wants to see your dirty laundry and at the worst it shows our allies and potential enemies that we are divided making us look weak. I am surprised republicans would even do this from a national security point of view. Given that Bush gave the Kyoto conference a big fuck you within the last few years, I do not think the other world leaders believe everyone within the US has bought into the alarmist attitude being portrayed by Al Gore and some within the climate community.

12/10/2009 9:07:54 AM

don't let hur confuse any of you. i've followed his movements for years. dude is a liberal in many many ways esp when it ocmes to bush. don't lecture me about him.

12/10/2009 9:30:54 AM

Lol so not being 100% loyal to Fuher Bush means I am liberal lol.

Sounds like you are just a partisan hack.
pack_bryan

Quote :

"9/3/2009 (98.0 days ago)"

I do not even agree with a lot of the conclusions and action items discussed at the Copenhagen conference. Arguing and protesting the president, who is in charge of foreign policy, at an international conference is not the way to accomplish your goals. To me this seems like nothing more than a publicity stunt by over-zealous republicans to rally the flag waving, palin loving, drill baby drill, republican base. If I remember correctly only a few years ago ardent Bush Republican supporters were complaining about democrats being unloyal for not "following the president" even though they disagreed with his policies. I guess they should have said "stick by the president only if he's republican.

[Edited on December 10, 2009 at 10:41 AM. Reason : a]

12/10/2009 10:30:21 AM

Quote :

"Given that Bush gave the Kyoto conference a big fuck you within the last few years"

Quit talking out of your ass. Bush did the exact same thing that Clinton did with the Kyoto Protocol. That being, didn't submit it to the Senate for ratification.

12/10/2009 10:58:46 AM

^ It's like gay marriage--only Republicans get bashed in any meaningful fashion for not supporting it.

12/10/2009 11:02:35 AM

Quote :

"Bush did the exact same thing that Clinton did with the Kyoto Protocol"

Honestly I do not give a shit. I never said Clinton did it. In my opinion, even though we need to aware of the possibly of AGW, the Kyoto protocol was to aggresive and would be have a negative impact on our economy. Regardless of if you think we should or should not have signed on the line, essentially bush AND clinton gave it a big middle finger. What's your point? Trying play partisan hack again?

Quote :

"It's like gay marriage--only Republicans get bashed in any meaningful fashion for not supporting "

Trollsaw please find ANY response i made bashing republicans for not supporting gay marriage. If you looked you would probably find the opposite.

[Edited on December 10, 2009 at 11:42 AM. Reason : a]

12/10/2009 11:40:40 AM

hur sucks the liberal p33n and he loves. he can't wait for hillary to take down obama.

12/10/2009 5:43:27 PM

Quote :

"^ It's like gay marriage--only Republicans get bashed in any meaningful fashion for not supporting it."

That is only true in your pea-sized brain.

I very rarely see anyone only bash Republicans when it comes to that particular issue. I see them attack the position on the issue. You just take it as an affront on all Conservatives because you can't separate issue from overall ideology.

[Edited on December 10, 2009 at 5:44 PM. Reason : x]

12/10/2009 5:44:39 PM

Quote :

"It's like gay marriage--only Republicans get bashed in any meaningful fashion for not supporting it."

Perhaps that's because conservatives are the loudest voices in opposition to gay marriage rights. One doesn't have to look very hard to find self-identified "christian conservatives" that proudly say that two men that love each other deserve less rights than a man and a woman.

Quote :

"hur sucks the liberal p33n and he loves. he can't wait for hillary to take down obama."

That contributes absolutely zero to the conversation. Do you plan to grow up, or continue acting like an immature brat?

[Edited on December 10, 2009 at 6:41 PM. Reason : brat]

12/10/2009 6:39:56 PM

he's just being a troll

12/10/2009 8:29:33 PM

Quote :

"In my opinion, even though we need to aware of the possibly of AGW, the Kyoto protocol was to[sic] aggresive and would be have a negative impact on our economy."

O RLY? Because while the Kyoto Protocol would have had a negative impact on our economy, even if every nation had accepted it (and abided by it) its effect on global temperature would have been too small to notice.

And in your opinion it was too aggressive? Then clearly you haven't followed anything leading up to the Copenhagen Summit b/c what they're pushing for this time around is way way waaaaaaaaay more aggressive than Kyoto.

And I don't care who you are, no American should feel comfortable about our gov't possibly agreeing to an international body being formed to regulate and monitor energy consumption. That's a violation of our sovereignty.

[Edited on December 11, 2009 at 9:00 AM. Reason : last statement not directed to anyone in particular]

12/11/2009 9:00:04 AM

Quote :

"no American should feel comfortable about our gov't possibly agreeing to an international body being formed to regulate and monitor energy consumption. That's a violation of our sovereignty."

No, it wouldn't be. Because we would have AGREED to it.

12/11/2009 9:12:29 AM

So if a few government officials "agree" to give away, say, our right to vote, would we still have our sovereignty?

12/11/2009 9:39:33 AM

That's the dumbest strawman I've ever read on TWW. That's really saying something. Nicely done.

Full disclosure: I couldn't give two shits about the Copenhagen Climate Conference or any other alliterative get together on global warming. I just wanted to point out illogical conclusion TKE came to re: international agreements.

12/11/2009 9:47:57 AM

It's not a strawman. The point is that just because we sign a treaty doesn't mean our sovereignty hasn't been violated. We've signed many bad treaties before, and we will sign many bad treaties in the future.

12/11/2009 10:08:57 AM

you made your "point" by arguing against a completely made up scenario that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

that's the definition of a strawman.

12/11/2009 10:12:47 AM

It's just a comparison. I'm not at all trying to misrepresent your position. I know you people love to throw out strawman at every opportunity.

By your reasoning, as long as our government signs and agrees to something, it isn't a violation of our sovereignty. I set up a scenario in which our ability to govern this country would very clearly be violated through agreeing to something. It follows that just because our government agrees to something doesn't mean our sovereignty hasn't been violated. If you don't understand that, I don't know what else to say.

[Edited on December 11, 2009 at 10:23 AM. Reason : ]

12/11/2009 10:23:09 AM

It's not a violation of our sovereignty until a foreign body forces us to do something against our will. Just because we sign a climate agreement doesn't mean we can't renounce it any time we like.

Quote :

"I'm not at all trying to misrepresent your position"

Quote :

"you people"

classic

12/11/2009 10:38:20 AM

^^and i can make a huge leap of logic and say that every single fucking thing a government does is a violation of my sovereignty. The government tells me killing someone is illegal? That's clearly a violation of my sovereignty.

ITT, we're talking about some stupid climate agreement between nations. Hardly any reason to fear for the very sovereignty of our nation.

12/11/2009 10:56:59 AM

thank you, i apologize.

12/11/2009 11:13:59 AM

Perhaps Jim Inhofe has just stopping in Copenhagen while on his way to Uganda to further his involvement in the "Kill the Gays" legislation going on there.

[Edited on December 11, 2009 at 11:19 AM. Reason : .]

12/11/2009 11:18:37 AM

Quote :

"And in your opinion it was too aggressive? Then clearly you haven't followed anything leading up to the Copenhagen Summit b/c what they're pushing for this time around is way way waaaaaaaaay more aggressive than Kyoto."

So i was agreeing with you and the past presidents for rejected the Kyoto protocol and you still find some reason to bitch about my argue that you wrote a rebuttal for. Good job, that takes hard work.

12/11/2009 12:48:24 PM

where in this thread were you agreeing with me. Go troll somewhere else.

12/11/2009 12:58:55 PM

touche' sir patrick

12/11/2009 1:15:55 PM

stupid earth. i mean this dumb fucking planet produces naturally via evolution some creatures that are going to end up killing it. ha

better luck next time universe!!!!!!1111

12/11/2009 1:47:41 PM

I don't think anyone is worried about Earth existing. It's definitely here to stay, at least for a while. There's no guarantee that it will continue to be human-friendly, though.

12/11/2009 1:49:15 PM

Or friendly to other animals and plants thanks to humans.

12/11/2009 11:35:09 PM

Boone, were you lurking on TWW when Speaker Pelosi went to Syria? I know you joined before that, yet I don't see any criticisms of her back in 2007 when she decided she was going to add the foreign policy merit badge for her sash.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander?

I didn't like it when she did it.

I think the Republicans need to go to let the other countries know that not everyone in Uhmerika is in denial about what issues the climate cover-up emails bring to light.

I know it's biased, but I am.

12/15/2009 9:35:15 PM

I don't recall Bush even going to Syria. Let alone Pelosi going while Bush was there, in direct opposition to Bush's objectives.

So the two scenarios aren't even comparable.


But while double-checking that, I found this:

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55067

nice

12/15/2009 9:53:30 PM

So much for the "Truth Squad". More like Truther(er?) +1. It turns out that Mountain Inhofe's grand adventure in an attempt to challenge the president on an international stage was scrapped at the last minute and was merely Inhofe and an aid. Go get 'em Republicans! You're so tough!

12/18/2009 2:54:53 AM