Trump cheats at golf - the ONE and ONLY politics thread

I don't quite understand why OOP draws heat from all quarters for being nothing but a snarling attack dog, when Mr. S's whole schtick is to go all Don Rickles on posters.

 

Interesting news this morning that Ted Cruz believes Phil Gramm, one of the chief architects of the financial crisis, will make a terrific economic advisor.

Ted Cruz just named Phil Gramm his economic advisor. Here's Gramm's economic legacy.

Gramm played a key role in legislation that expanded the influence of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission over the objections and at the expense of the Securities and Exchange Commission when his wife, Wendy Lee Gramm, was the CFTC chair, a position she held from 1988 to 1993. Toward the end of her tenure, the agency exempted Enron's energy-swap derivatives from regulation. According to the watchdog group Public Citizen, her husband was one of the leading recipients of Enron campaign contributions in Congress, having collected nearly $100,000 since 1989. Five weeks after leaving the CFTC, Public Citizen reported, she joined the board of Enron, which paid her between $915,000 and $1.85 million in compensation from 1993 to 2001, when the company collapsed.

Enron was a beneficiary of measures Phil Gramm pushed at the Senate, where he served as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee in 1999-2001. The most important such measure was the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which ensured that over-the-counter, or OTC, financial derivatives would remain almost entirely unregulated and which was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in December 2000, just before he left the White House.

The instruments' potential for disaster was well understood by some regulators, notably Brooksley Born, who had been appointed CFTC chair in 1996 by Clinton. Born produced a recommendation to bring the instruments under her agency's oversight, but it was shot down by SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt, Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, and Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan.

 

Because Mr. S. is just funnin' with people, while OOP lectures everyone about how they aren't smart enough to grasp his arguments, and takes himself more seriously than Ted damn Cruz.

 

Well, OOP once liked one of my posts, so he's Aces with me.

 

Poor guy. It's a shame that work responsibilities are interfering with the Obama family spring break vacation:

 

Plus, there's that whole "last word" obsession, which turns a four-post pissing match into a 44-post pissing match. That's what kills discussions.

 

A salary cap would bring more parity to the pissing matches.

 

Is this the same poster who was goaded and mocked by another poster who didn't receive an immediate response I tbe midst of an argument?

A lot of posters have last word syndrome.

 

Not you though, thankfully.

You've declared "Bob's" "reporting" to be unquestionable, and left it at that. Kudos to you.

 

Sunshine isn't always funnin' with people, but at least he stands for something other than an obsessive need to be right.

 

There are hundreds of weather stations across the globe that measure the CO2 levels, and all report the same rising trend of CO2. That said, the most often cited data comes from the summit of Mauna Loa in Hawaii, where the NOAA has been monitoring global CO2 concentrations since the 1950s. The data is corrected for seasonal variances. The Mauna Loa data is used as a proxy for global concentrations because CO2 distributes evenly across the atmosphere. So any variances based on location are statistically insignificant.

For records prior to 1950, data is collected from ice core samples in Greenland and Antarctica. The CO2 concentrations in the ice cores are a permanent record of the paleoclimate, so whatever variance you think could be caused by using newer (better) instruments is negated by the fact that they are examining the same record of global CO2 concentrations. Ice cores in Antarctica are taken primarily from the same sites - Law Dome, Taylor Dome, Dome C and Vostok - though there a few other sites. They've been taking cores from the same areas since the 1950s and continue to do so today. The records stretch back 800,000 years. But, again, since CO2 distributes evenly across the atmosphere, the cores don't need to be taken in exactly the same place. Location doesn't affect the readings in any significant way.

The data and the science is all out there and available for peer review and study.

 

I'm not even bothered by that with OOP, although more than anyone on this board, he absolutely refuses to concede a point when he's absolutely, positively wrong about something.

But it's the ad hominem nonsense that just drives me up a wall:

"You lack reading comprehension ..."

"I'm glad that you admit that you were wrong about ..."

That stuff, particularly recharacterizing people's statements into concessions.