Mitch McConnell: We're going to have a "full-throated" debate on energy. Voice: Will that include a plan for dealing with climate change? (McConnell is silent) Voice: Something stuck in your throat?
Of course it will include a plan for dealing with climate change — if the climate ever changes, which we all know it hasn’t. And won’t. And if it does or did, it was all natural and not caused by man. And even if it was, it’s too late to do anything about it now.
Now give him a minute to clear his throat. It will include a plan to reduce reduce taxes on energy companies, to enable them to explore new drilling sites.
And now the Pope begins to speak out on climate change. But not to worry. Mankind are too foolish to actually do anything to save themselves or their children. Business as usual will continue and in a century the whole planet with blame us for their problems. But again, we don’t have to worry about that, because we’ll all be dead by then!
@Doughfoot: Roger that. In the alleged name of not leaving future generations with more debt (beyond that already run up by right-wing Republican Presidents), we are going to leave them with even worse problems to deal with. Namely a Great Depression Redux and a flood of biblical proportions. Amen, brother!
“Full throated debate” is a euphemism. It means “yell at people until they give in, regardless.”There is not the chance of an ice sculpture in Hades that this GOP will even discuss climate change, except to express their doubts in a FACT that durn near every climate scientist and every major scientific association in the WORLD has endorsed…
“I’m not a scientist, so I don’t know. And I know that scientists do think something, but I have no reason to find out. Because I’m not a scientist. Next question.”
I truly wish McConnell a long life…long enough to live to see the consequences, for his and all our grandchildren, of his head-in-the sand approach to science.
And if there is justice in the afterlife, there will be special place in Hell for people like Mitch.
There is a major difference between accepting scientific conclusions as absolute and unchanging and believing in science and scientific conclusions. No one, especially scientists, will argue that the more we know, the more accurate our conclusions. But one should not deny any science simply because we will know more in the future. And those who do refuse to accept any scientific conclusions do so at their peril, and if they purport to represent others, they do it at others’ peril, as well.
The height of arrogance to think that mere man can change the course of the universe. Meanwhile, I have a plan: I will wear jeans and sweaters in the winter, jeans and tee shirts in the spring, shorts and tee shirts in the summer, and jeans and tee shirts in the fall. The records of the 1930s still stand; most of the records of the 1950s still stand — at least in my corner of the world. The earth’s temperature has not increased in the past 15 years, and the increase before that was nominal. The ice caps expand and recede, and yet, life goes on. There are more polar bears and deer now than before. I could go on, but I sense the steam spewing forth from the liberals as they are about to explode over the fact that not everyone — including scientists — agree with their doomsday visions.
Alexander the Good Enough over 9 years ago
“Huh? Don’t (want to) know what you’re talking about.”
Ironic Eggbeater over 9 years ago
Yeah! Campaign bribes from the coal and oil industries. That’d fill his throat.
braindead Premium Member over 9 years ago
Of course it will include a plan for dealing with climate change — if the climate ever changes, which we all know it hasn’t. And won’t. And if it does or did, it was all natural and not caused by man. And even if it was, it’s too late to do anything about it now.
moosemin over 9 years ago
Now give him a minute to clear his throat. It will include a plan to reduce reduce taxes on energy companies, to enable them to explore new drilling sites.
Jason Allen over 9 years ago
Is it just me, or does “full throated debate” sound like a euphemism for a sex act?
Doughfoot over 9 years ago
And now the Pope begins to speak out on climate change. But not to worry. Mankind are too foolish to actually do anything to save themselves or their children. Business as usual will continue and in a century the whole planet with blame us for their problems. But again, we don’t have to worry about that, because we’ll all be dead by then!
Liverlips McCracken Premium Member over 9 years ago
@Doughfoot: Roger that. In the alleged name of not leaving future generations with more debt (beyond that already run up by right-wing Republican Presidents), we are going to leave them with even worse problems to deal with. Namely a Great Depression Redux and a flood of biblical proportions. Amen, brother!
Motivemagus over 9 years ago
“Full throated debate” is a euphemism. It means “yell at people until they give in, regardless.”There is not the chance of an ice sculpture in Hades that this GOP will even discuss climate change, except to express their doubts in a FACT that durn near every climate scientist and every major scientific association in the WORLD has endorsed…
I Play One On TV over 9 years ago
“I’m not a scientist, so I don’t know. And I know that scientists do think something, but I have no reason to find out. Because I’m not a scientist. Next question.”
manteo16nc over 9 years ago
The cartoonist is assuming ‘global climate warmy disrupterization’ is still a thing. It’s a myth and millions know that.
Godfreydaniel over 9 years ago
If only every politician had laryngitis stuck in his throat—permanently!
dardas over 9 years ago
I truly wish McConnell a long life…long enough to live to see the consequences, for his and all our grandchildren, of his head-in-the sand approach to science.
And if there is justice in the afterlife, there will be special place in Hell for people like Mitch.
I Play One On TV over 9 years ago
There is a major difference between accepting scientific conclusions as absolute and unchanging and believing in science and scientific conclusions. No one, especially scientists, will argue that the more we know, the more accurate our conclusions. But one should not deny any science simply because we will know more in the future. And those who do refuse to accept any scientific conclusions do so at their peril, and if they purport to represent others, they do it at others’ peril, as well.
oneoldhat over 9 years ago
how are we going to stop global freezing?
Kim0158 Premium Member over 9 years ago
The height of arrogance to think that mere man can change the course of the universe. Meanwhile, I have a plan: I will wear jeans and sweaters in the winter, jeans and tee shirts in the spring, shorts and tee shirts in the summer, and jeans and tee shirts in the fall. The records of the 1930s still stand; most of the records of the 1950s still stand — at least in my corner of the world. The earth’s temperature has not increased in the past 15 years, and the increase before that was nominal. The ice caps expand and recede, and yet, life goes on. There are more polar bears and deer now than before. I could go on, but I sense the steam spewing forth from the liberals as they are about to explode over the fact that not everyone — including scientists — agree with their doomsday visions.