Well, it appears that BHO is on his way to a decisive victory.  Now, the pundits can play the blame game——it should be enlightening.  McCain’s handlers ran an inept disjointed campaign and the selection of Palin, while a short term boost, was an unmitigated disaster.  McCain’s selection of Palin was to achieve notoriety while solidifying the GOP base, when he should have been trying to sway Dem voters by keeping to his message of experience and selecting Romney as his VP.  The economy was always a factor and Romney’s business acumen would have given McCain a real advantage while mainataining experience as a factor——Palin changed all that.  But as they say “Hindsight is always 20/20”

I don’t know how a global warming/climate change thread fits in with this article, but what the Heck!  Global warming/climate change is more hype than fact and should it become a phenomena it is generally agreed among those that know that global warming will benefit more people than it hurts.  But back to the election.  McCain is right on nuclear energy——it is safe, efficient and non-polluting so to say.  Obama is wrong on coal——the USA has vast reserves of coal and with new technologies can be used quite effectively with virtually no pollution.

Once the USA is weaned off of oil and becomes energy self-sufficient then the electric/battery driven car becomes much more appealing.

Welcome to the New Feudalism

http://newsbusters.org/node/25829?q=blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.

I read that London, England had its earliest snow in 70 years. It is interesting to note that the word “global warming” is being changed to “climate change”.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/oct/29/weather-london

Parts of south-east England had more than an inch of snow last night while London experienced its first October snowfall in more than 70 years as winter conditions arrived early.

Football matches were postponed or abandoned at Luton, Northampton, Walsall and Wycombe.

Perhaps we should call CO2 an ice house gas in order to update the population with the latest bullsh*t. It is not really about saving the earth; it is about another tax to impoverish the industrial populations of the earth so that we will be equal in poverty. Something has to be fishy when both Newt Gingrich and Barak Obama think we should tax ourselves on a gas that trees and plant need for nourishment. Whether you area a liberal or a conservative you have to see this as a scam like the banker bailout bill. Otherwise we will all be unemployed and homeless as well as freezing cold in the winter.

I don’t support Nader, but I’m glad the writer and some posters do .... because they can articulate why, and it almost always has to do with his policies on the issues.  no one votes for Nader (that i know of) because of how he winks at the camera

it bothers me a little more when i hear (as you may have) things like ...

“I’m voting for Palin because she’s hot!!”

as if the voter would have his way with her if she wins election