Did you actually read that story? Or are you being purposefully disingenuous? FACTS: The author of the report that is purportedly being “suppressed” is NOT a climate scientist and he does NOT do climate research. And, not surprisingly, the report itself is NOT a scientific report. By the author’s own admission his report is about his own VIEWS and OPINIONS on climate change, which I would hope even he would not claim to be a credible piece of scientific research. Apparently the EPA people who wrote the final EPA recommendation had access to his report and treated it for what it was.

Now there are a lot of unanswered questions from the story about how his report was handled internally….I find the story woefully incomplete…but I will agree with you that any policially motivated supression of his “views” should be addressed. But, for anybody to compare, as the story itself tried to, this incident with the supression of real scientific reports by politically appointed aparatchiks in the Bush administration, is absolutely ludicrous.

One final thought Stephen: I have IN NO WAY insulted your faith. Again, please show me where I have done so. Your claim that I have done this is just, to me, further evidence of your rightwing reactionaryism. For example, my challenge to you to review your policial “beliefs” in the light of Christ’s teachings was done from a Christian viewpoint. My own opinion that your political views show you to be a moron or retarded, or both, is not in the least a slight on your religion. In fact, I have been taught that Christ loves all, morons and retards and rightwingers alike.

Yeah, we’re both mouth pieces who know nothing, never pay attention to anything but Fox News and Talk Radio, pull numbers out of our asses and are the reason for society being as bad as it is now. We are hypnotized by Fox News as part of a global Right Wing Conspiracy started by Nazis who fled to Argentina in 1945 in their attempt to create the ‘Fourth Reich.’ I’m impressed that the far left has figured out this carefully orchestrated plan.

Multiple witnesses noted people were yelling ‘abort Sarah Palin’ at counter-rallies next to her rallies, and as for that ‘kill him’ comment, only one person heard that, and that wasn’t Sarah so she had nothing to report.

As for ‘wanting Bush to fail,’ you apparently had never watched any media outlet for that was the tone of all the messages with regard to the Iraq war, as there was hope that it would fail so Bush could have been booted from office in complete discrase, however those hops were dashed with the improved conditions in Iraq following 2005. Bush was able to screw things up at home enough in 2007-2008 to leave office little better off. Other things which the left ‘wanted to fail’ were the Social Security privatization attempt (which did fail, and which was originally proposed under Clinton) as well as attempts to reign in Freddy Mack and Fanny Mae in 2003 and 2005(which also failed thanks to Barny Frank).

It seems your charges of hypocrisy are unfounded. Please quit being among the sheep of society that watch the news, believe everything reporters say and do no research of your own. People who live like that are the reason why Nazism and Communism were able to grow and dominate governments.

As for those business tax cuts – they helped a lot of small businesses, you know so that they could buy more equipment & supplies for their businesses, which in turn, what? Oh, helped other businesses make money, which helped the state make money through sales tax and the federal government through income taxes.

“EPA May Have Suppressed Report Skeptical Of Global Warming”

For the record, I was poor and a single parent. Not that I’m rich now, but I’ve WORKED my way out of it, so for you to say that I am anti-poor just proves that you are more than willing to resort to baseless name-calling unlike the “adult” you have claimed to be.

Again, give me solid proof about climate change (that is caused by man) and why I should trust a lawyer’s word over a scientist and I will believe you.

And the fact that your BELIEFS do not need to be researched because they are already established proves that indeed, I am not the fool here. Remember when it was established that the Earth was flat? No research needed.

Real conservatives also realize that life is not fair, not everyone is going to have the same. That’s called communism and it hasn’t worked yet.

You are a fool because if you really do think you are politically independent, your comments on here prove you to be deluded. You might have disagreed with Bush and his [R] lemmings on an issue here and there, but like Mr. O’Reilly, it is abjectly disingenuous for you to think that makes you an “independent thinker”. You spout the rightwing mantra on here quite consistently; you’ve made it quite clear that you are anti-tax, anti-Al Gore, anti-poor, anti-global warming….pray-tell is there anything of significance that you are anti- that the [R] side of the house holds dear?

Now you wish me to back-up my BELIEFS: but truth be told there is little in what I’ve said that needs research, because it is established, if not obvious, fact: e.g. the economy in the Clinton years, the economy during the Bush years, climate change……my friend, these are FACTS not BELIEFS. But you on the other hand do have some “backing up” to do: for example, please show me a budgeted line item for “global warming money”. Or maybe Stephen can show us real evidence that “organizations such as the EPA, IPCC and Greenpeace do whatever they can to silence” credible research that does not fit the global warming mold.

This kind of bait-and-switch with the facts and self-serving psuedo-analysis that you neo-pups are infamous for illustrates the VERY reason why it is such a joke that you label yourselves “conservative”. Real conservatives do not pull such reactionary shenanigans with logic and made-up “facts”. Real conservatives are grounded in the real world, grounded in the very conservative process of science, and not in some make-believe world for rightwing drama queens. I’ll take “real” conservatives over Sarah’s “real” Americans any day.

““global warming money”? “history as the standard and evaluating tool for all of my stances”? “organizations such as the EPA, IPCC and Greenpeace do whatever they can to silence them”? “they are just as likely to be bias as those funded in part or fully by oil companies”? This is what I call rightwing drivel, just utter solid waste. Where is YOUR proof of any of these neo-fairytales and conspiracy theories?”

Firstly, where is your proof that there is no bias in the openly environmentalist-funded organizations? It is only natural to suspect that any scientist associated with a special interest group would have bias in the group’s favor. What evidence do you have that they would refrain from lying to further their careers, blind faith aside.

As for Man-Made Global Warming, have you even looked into the research presented by both sides? Or have you simply been a ’sheep’ and simply followed whatever any ‘expert said? As for me, I initially approached the subject believing that it was both possible and probable. However in a college paper a few years ago when you were to choose two sides of an argument, analyze them and then decide who had the better argument I chose Global Warming, as I was interested to learn more about it. The more I read (two 30+ page papers, one being from the IPCC) the more holes I saw in the theory, especially when I found out about the massive role of Water Vapor and the minuscule amount of CO2 which is man-made. Following that I have kept track of announcements via the internet news (not Fox, something I only started to watch within the past year) and have found out so much about the sun-spot cycles and variations, the long term hurricane cycles, oceanic cycles and so fourth, ultimately siding with the solar osculation or ’sunspot’ theory as the most logical for the main driver of the recent climate change, with long-term Ocean Cycles and Cosmic Rays being the other major components.

As for you, what proof do you have that the the theory of Man-Made Global Warming is true? You have linked me nothing and have only said that there ‘is a consensus’, which is meaningless. There was a consensus that the earth’s landscapes were formed by the ’shriveling apple effect,’ that bloodletting promoted health, that taking baths caused colds, that the earth is the center of the universe, that the world economy couldn’t survive without slavery, that appeasement and disarmament were the correct way to prevent war….I can go on and on about historical consensus all of which have failed. Indeed, every scientific theory which has been disproved was at one time a ‘consensus.’

With regard to history, what other reliable standard would anyone else use? What other reliable standard is there for that matter, as wanting something to work one way is by no means a substitute for historical evidence that it works the other.

And finally with your insults against me…I have addressed this numerous times before, it’s crude and rude, especially with regard to my faith. Btw, here is some food for thought:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730

The US would be a far better place if the Christian Community was supported and encouraged to expand with regard to charitable donations, as the NYT and ABC articles above show.