Guthrie

teach Iranians, or any other terrorist country's population, about nuclear winter and I guarantee, the nuclear threat will immediately be reduced

This is true, however, if there was a threat to Iran they would rally with the rest of their country. They want to fight for a democracy themselves their way not have someone's idea of a democracy literally forced upon them. let me interject here, the ones in Iran, Afganistan and even in Tianneman Square, who seek democracy, were all young people who posessed one thing in common --- education --- they go hand in hand, education and democracy - if you want to spread Democracy, start by spreading knowledge -- it's the only thing that works and the only thing the reactionary right dismisses out of hand - fools

Okay, well how would you spell doggie do? That's what I was referring to. in America, we spell it d-o-g s-h-i-t - as far as I'm concerned, Joe stepped in it sufficiently about 15 years ago when he let an unqualified, immoral and totally inapropriate slug pass thru the gate to the bench of the SCOTUS no, Joe, I think you have some nice qualities but you won't get my vote - you're too big a member of the old boys network - we need a new direction

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.....hook's em every time! Thank the god of carbon dioxide that Gore never became president. hook's em ???? - so it was your intention to proffer a smarmy lie? how sad for you

The U.S. could literally bomb them back into the stone age in 2 weeks. Oh wait, they're already IN the stone age. That is the kind of flippant bigotry I don't care for.

lies die hard in that ring of hell where dwell the ignorant right Al Gore never claimed to have invented the internet --- just another pile of freeper bullroar but his book and film have helped tremendously in getting the truth about global warming out into the mainstream -- naybe it's why Exxon finally gave up their swift boat effort against science

since the Iranians have been taught to spread their nuclear efforts out among multiple sites, it is generally agreed that an air strike would not significantly damage it

except it was Prescott Bush doing business with Hitler and seeking to make America his ally and, of course, Neville Chamberlain was another upper crust Conservative, not a leftist so, all in all, you are wrong all the way around -- and BTW, just FYI the real quote was, 'Peace for our time' - and as stupid conservative suck up effort as the world will ever remember

it is even more likely that Georgia, Russia or N Korea will pass along nuke materials -- it would make absolutely no sense to attack Iran for fear of nuclear weapons --- but certainly, the current US administration is very big on peddling fear as a way of getting the masses to sign up to their otherwise dubious adventure schemes

there was a time, back in the 50's and 60's when television news considered itself, without giggling, to be genuine journalism --- with the constraints of real journalism, fact checking, double checking sources and being confident a story is true before releasing it, there was, in fact, a liberal bias seen -- however, it was the bias towards the truth, which liberals have always been very attached to and the reactionaries have always considered a foe, RE: "Facts are stupid things." -- Ronald Reagan, 1988

The Buschistas will be brought down the same way Nixon and his CREEPS were. Death by a thousand cuts. and the blades are out

But one has to look far and wide to find a leader whose power to cause trouble is nearly as great as his cluelessness

The Dodo went extinct in the 1600's

CSMonitor once again, while the right wing toady apologists are blaming, 'the left(?)' for silencing the corporate pseudoscience fairy tale writers --- the reality comes bursting out. The reality of Global Warming is recognized by all scientists with an unbiased opinion. The Buschistas are trying to prevent the truth from coming out and using bureaucrats to do it. the sad part is, you guys are just such pathetic suckers - you don't even realize what it is you are supporting

it's a little like the old joke, 'Why are lawyers better lab animals than rats?'

So, you have a point but not a claim. How did you manage that? and Global Warming was made up by the religion of, 'the left?' and you're not on antipsychotic drugs? and if the Oil Companies want to create their own science, that's ok because they can spend their money any way they want?

is it your choice to claim one can be both, 'well educated,' and, 'a bigot?' because, none of your anecdotes mean anything to me over this question --- any, 'well educated,' person, in today's world, knows that such divisions are nonsense - that is the bottom line, there is no wiggle room for hate mongers to come in and claim to be well educated -

Often, but history is full of well educated bigots. It's just that, an observation and one that may or may not have an effect on the outcome. It has nothing to do with his qualifications or ability, other than his ability to get elected, nothing more. "Well educated bigots?" - No, there is no such thing. Educated, perhaps but not, well educated.

you have no point, your claim is false

Bigotry manifests itself in many ways that are far worse than this and in many cases it may not even be bigotry, just ignorance. It will be interesting to watch this play out. I just don't see it as being a plus if you are trying to get elected President. "Bigotry manifests itself in many ways that are far worse than this ..." I disagree completely. Deciding a persons qualifications for presidency based on his middle name? No, one can NOT be more bigotted than that. "... many cases it may not even be bigotry, just ignorance..." Ignorance is a prerequisite for bigotry and not a defense against it. So arguing ignorance is offering support for claiming bigotry. "I just don't see it as being a plus if you are trying to get elected President." -- I guess I agree to this observation but I am wondering how the observation applies to anything?

is indefensible. where any of that first applies to Global warming is just here: "As a body of knowledge grows and a particular hypothesis or theory repeatedly brings predictable results, confidence in the hypothesis or theory increases." Thus we see, the body of knowledge on Global warming has begun bringing predictability and confidence --- it is at that same place that science was at after the return of Columbus --- the evidence for a round earth was there and all but incontravertable --- all that's left is clearing out the last of the flat earthers --- and of course, over 500 years later, there are still flat earthers, just as there are Global Warming deniers Given that there is plenty of SCIENCE and evidence that the earth has continually warmed and cooled for thousands of years IN THE ABSENCE of any help from humans, I'd say your comparison to "flat earthers" is, at best, a big stretch, and at worst, another obvious attempt to demonize anyone who presents an alternative viewpoint - a technique commonly used in dictatorships and cults. how does evidence that the earth has, "continually warmed and cooled for thousands of years," help the GW denials? whereas this - CNN Tech argues strongly that the flat earthers are already joined by the GW apologists

as bombastic a crock of crud as one might imagine --- the quote describing scientific method is quite accurate but then the jump to: is indefensible. where any of that first applies to Global warming is just here: "As a body of knowledge grows and a particular hypothesis or theory repeatedly brings predictable results, confidence in the hypothesis or theory increases." Thus we see, the body of knowledge on Global warming has begun bringing predictability and confidence --- it is at that same place that science was at after the return of Columbus --- the evidence for a round earth was there and all but incontravertable --- all that's left is clearing out the last of the flat earthers --- and of course, over 500 years later, there are still flat earthers, just as there are Global Warming deniers

anyone who thinks troops can be added to Iraq without negatively affecting troop levels in Afganistan, has his head up his hind end

Call it pragmatism then. Not hateful at all. I have nothing against the guy. He may be the best out there. It's just the way I see it the situation and of course, I could be wrong. No, hateful is correct. So is bleak. --- of course I agree with your last two admissions, "It's just the way I see it the situation and of course, I could be wrong." let's hope your picture of the lowest and worst kind of bigotry really is wrong --- let's hope America is better than that

this was offered as a sad sarcastic joke about bigotry??? It was offered as reality. your reality is a little hateful and bleak meanwhile... in Ho-o-llywood Gore is nominated again!!!! this time, for an Oscar -- the Motion Picture Academy has nominated Gore's movie - 'An Inconvenient Truth'