So if the winter of 2012 is colder than normal will he he order pollution levels increased to 2006 levels?

When's he gonna make you put a scrubber on your chimney, Mitch?

Mitch said,

"I love Saint Paul. But you're doing your darnedest to create a city I don't want to live in."

And he is doing his darndest to create a city I would consider moving to.

Funny how it all balances out.

Don't the the door hit 'ya on the way out...

But Doug, if you lived in St. Paul you would have to commute to your job at Wal*Mart.

I wouldn't worry too much about it Mitch. Lefties sign these kind of resolutions all the time, but then ignore them. They're not meant to actually do anything. They're intended to prove their moral superiority. Though I think you have to drink the kool-aid before you believe high-minded resolutions you never follow through upon are something to boast about.

Meanwhile, the other side of the globe (Russia, eastern Europe) is having a near record cold winter. I missed the lecture in science class on how global warming can be localized to a single hemisphere.

Terry -- Nicely done.

Mitch,

The suburbs are calling.

Acres of green grass...people who have all their teeth...no beat-downs in schools...crack hard to get...homeless rounded up and dumped in Hopkins (where no one will notice)...somewhat less socialistic government...

No need to thank me.

To prove he's serious, I think he should force the superintendent of schools to trade in his Jaguar for a Prius, or bicycle.

Mitch, I really sympathize. You are just in your first cycle of a moron for mayor. In Minneapolis, we are in our second cycle and the damage is starting to show; increased crime, increased taxes, lost businesses.

I am amazed that the people of St. Paul forgot how bad it was under Latimer. Note that Coleman said that Latimer is his role model.

I love living in the City, But Rybak and Coleman make it very hard.

Kermit, I said I worked in retail now after leaving the corporate world. I also still have my own company which I started 8 years ago and manage to show a small profit in spite of this "booming" economy I keep hearing about.

I never said I work at Walmart - which I don't.

BUT, if I were laid-off, I wouldn't hesitate for one minute to work at a Walmart if it meant putting food on the table or paying my mortgage.

I'm not sure I would say the same for some others who visit this site...

Wal*Mart, Cub, whatever.

Doug strikes me as the usual irritating lefty, but I think he made a point in his last post about jobs....Just remember, though, Doug, Leftists don't expect welfare-ites to take just any old job...they should have jobs with dignity and lots of pay for zero skill....

I saw that someone alluded to Peebles and her Cadillac SUV (and the earlier superintendent who drove a Jaguar-and, I guess, how the St Paul superintendent does as well?). After reading about that in the Strib yesterday, I swear that is THE LAST frickin' time I will listen to anybody in this state whine about education dollars and how it's all for the "chilrun". What an absolute steamin' stinkin' load of crap.

Tracy said,

"In Minneapolis, we are in our second cycle and the damage is starting to show; increased crime, increased taxes, lost businesses."

Funny how Tracy holds the Mayor of Minneapolis responsible for the same thing that appears to be happening to most major metropolitian areas around the country...

In Minneapolis, the increase in crime is in robberies and aggravated assaults, auto thefts and commercial burglaries - crimes traditionally associated with difficult economic conditions. As for losing businesses, a large number of small businesses have closed or laid-off workers because they couldn't continue paying for healthcare for employees and because the business just isn't there anymore.

Of course, it must be the Mayors fault...

Doug, if you find yourself in "difficult economic conditions", I thought you said you would go to work at WalMart...not rob, assault and kill people. Hmmm...you sure don't expect much from others, do you?

Colleen said,

"Doug, Leftists don't expect welfare-ites to take just any old job...they should have jobs with dignity and lots of pay for zero skill..."

Colleen, show me an example that proves your assertion.

I have a friend who's husband has been unemployeed for a couple years. When his unemployment got close to running out, he accepted a job as a prison guard in Rush City or something like that. After a few days training, he quit because it was too stressful.

Because it was a county or state job, he got a small stipend even though he never actually got past the training.

He worked at a Home Depot prior to that but quit because he was "smarter than the Manager."

He is a graphic artist/wildlife artist by trade but refuses to accept a job where he would have to use computers because he insists he is too old to learn to use a computer. He's 54.

He finally got a job at a Lowes store but, according to his wife, he may leave because they are salaried and are required to work between 48 - 50 hours a week and this cuts into his personal time.

These people are die-hard Republicans Colleen and they are always the first to volunteer for Republican causes and events in the area.

Don't give me this Leftist crap. I'm a liberal and I expect that anyone who gets public assistance or aid do somthing to earn it and be able to give back into the system when they are back on their feet. The idea that we would support or endorse giving money to people who don't deserve or need it is an impression of liberals built on your own ignorance and prejudices.

Doug's theory: In Minneapolis, the increase in crime is in robberies and aggravated assaults, auto thefts and commercial burglaries - crimes traditionally associated with difficult economic conditions."

I would say they are more attributable to gang activity. Under Sharon Sayles-Belton (from Diversityville) the MPD had the CODEFOR program which kept the little rascals in check. But it was dumped when someone called it racist.

Colleen said,

"I thought you said you would go to work at WalMart...not rob, assault and kill people. Hmmm...you sure don't expect much from others, do you?"

That's about the most disconnected thing I've ever read...

It wouldn't normally merit a response except it was just so stupid, i just had to respond.

Where did I endorse robbing, assaulting or killing as alternative to working at a Walmart...?

That was just bizarre.

Colleen, your point reminds me of something I used to say as a kid.... Do you walk to school or carry your lunch?

No Doug, Colleen was reacting to your assertion that economic hardship causes crime. It's an old liberal saw that is not only unprovable but, as most liberal beliefs are, completely bass-ackwards.
In most cases crime causes poverty.

Kermit:

Honestly! You accuse Doug of making an uprovable assertion and follow it up by making your own similarly unprovable assertion.

Nice Logic.

I see Non-Monkey is going to drive out all the business and productive types and replace them with no growth type, crackheads and "hos" and dangerous street gangs.

Greenhouse gas law for St. Paul...whatta tool Coleman is.

The suburbs lie ahead Mitch. Get out while you can. I have been telling my friends to leave St. Paul while they can still find fools to buy the properties.

Once we are in the 'burbs, we can wall them off and they can soak in their own liberal/socialist juices.

Mitch, as President Reagan used to say, "vote with your feet."

The city is decidedly against your version of give out huge sums of money to corporate types, and Normy was frankly, abberational. Perhaps the city will go to hell in a handbasket, and candidly, Chris Coleman's desire here is ludicrous. St. Paul by itself can do nothing to affect climactic changes, but they only sound slightly less ridiculous than you do when you make comments like "neosoc" and "rule by actual adults". I'm sure you meant governance (as I know you don't subscribe to signing over all rights to the Boy King - or his regal bootlicker Normy), but those "neosoc" programs you hate so much are also the onese that have Minnesota at the top of the economic vitality list (you know, decent education, envigorated workforce, and up until Tim "I'm gonna piss everyone off and get nothing done" Pawlenty, we were working on actually IMPROVING the transportation infrastructure.

Now, I don't actually think Mitch should have to vote with his feet, because, just like the reaction to Father Reagan, that suggestion is both insensitive and suggests protest is bad, but Mitch, your posts tilt at self-made windmills in the desire to flatulate your own ego. They are also regurgitations of ideas that are old, really really old, and consequently, nearly always are shallow, show a lack of comprehension of the underlying issue, and worth less than the bandwidth you expend in distributing them. It is interesting that you are seemingly entirely incapable of criticizing this administration, while others, including NRO, talkers on 100.3, and nearly all other reasonable conservatives are capable of holding reasonable conversations without needing to always fall back into pure insult and invective. I called 100.3, talked with the two night show hosts, talked about Iraq, and interestingly, we agreed on nearly all points. They didn't feel the need to call me a traitor, say that I'm stupid, suggest that I'm not rational. They admitted mistakes by the administration, I admitted mistakes by the left, and strengths OF the administration. We didn't completely agree of course, I think we are the lightning rod, and the problem in Iraq isn't really Jihadists any longer, hell they're killing each other.. they thought our credibility is on the line (which it certainly is), and we can't leave.. the bottom line being I think staying and propping up a devisive government is hurting our credibility even more than would finding (paying) for someone else to be the "troops on the ground". See, that's called a debate about policy, rather than just constant insult about and accomplishing nothing.

Perhaps your job doing ergonomic analyses in Healthcare IT systems.. you know, not ACTUALLY working with patients, doctors, or clinicians of any sort (unlike your deceptive claim) is causing you lots of stress, and while I've never known you to be particularly "on the ball" regarding topical information, your blog has degraded to simply being one litany of cheap shot after another. Why is it that you cannot engage in any discussion that doesn't begin with.. "poor deluded, ignorant incipid, brain-fevered fool", which you then immediately follow with some simplistic generalization and move on to a topic not really even being argued?

It is posts like this, the meaninfulness of Coleman's conduct weighed against the obvious nature of global warming, where I find you most useless. Rather than engaging in a discussion of either a. whether global warming is attributable to man or b. what to do about it, you use your time to take a shot at a Mayor, and past mayors apparently out of spite. Apparently actually discussion on topics of value only can occur if you can frame them satisfactorily such that your myopic point is the focus, otherwise, it's pure hate, 24x7, and not too surprisingly, your hate filled toadies follow along (btw, I exclude Terry and a couple others - they actually seemed to be interested in talking). Anyay, more power to them, but after 6 months of reading the posts from pathetic in their strawman building edifications of your limited world-view, to the occassionally poignant, it is clear that your skill lies in crafting words together (which is estimable), not in crafting arguments of worth, and time is better spent talking with the well-reasoned AND articulate, rather than just articulate (which I've never claimed to be). My goal was to engage in discussion to show that reasonable arguments exist on both sides, to further discussion toward a jointly-held satisfactory conclusion.

Mitch (and many others) clearly believes take-no-prisoners stridency is the only approach, and so finds any reasonable argument MUCH more threatening than extremism from the other end, because it threatens to expose that he is, in fact, the extremist. As the old saying goes, the poles don't hate each other, they hate the middle.

I think it's time to spend some time with the sane. Is there a decent conservative blog out there anywhere?, this one has gone past being scripted toward only discussing things within a narrow prism, and nearly factless, to being infantile and devoid of decent content altogether.

PB

Joey! Crime is a choice. If you are in economic hardship there are multiple public and private entities happy to help you out. If you doubt, come on down to the NEAR foodshelf.
Business flees crime. Jobs follow. Poverty ensues.
It makes much more sense than the bigoted assumption that poor folk will turn to crime and abandon their morality.

So, we should only speak to PB if we accept "the obvious" canard about human-induced global warming?

That he would use such words at all disqualifies him from speaking of the subject. Sociology students use that word. Journalists use it. Serious people do not. The use of it in this context reflects not at all on the level of proof of the issue, or the commonality of belief amongst scientists in pertinent fields, but merely that one has decided that one will believe something, fervently, religiously. One who speaks in that manner likely believes that he can contribute to a "discussion" which will in some manner bring us to the truth. It's like using a calendar to find your way to Eagan.

So, please, PB, avoid criticizing Mitch on the basis that he starts with theses you don't hold.

Is this really the end for Peebman? Tune in tomorrow for another episode of Shot in the Dark to see if our leftist superhero--able to make monumental leaps of logic in a single bound--returns to fight another day or hangs up his keyboard for good. Same neocon blog, same neocon cabal.

Yet to see anything that man can create that will not even produce a boil on the backside of Mother Earth. Mount Pinatubo in the Phillipines produced more ash and greenhouse gases that anything Man could create and we should be in a glacial period or the armadillos should be heading north by now.

Junk science coupled with ideology is a no-go.

pb I have to politely disagree with you.

"I think it's time to spend some time with the sane."

What, again?

This is like the fourth time you've threatened to take your toys and leave the sandbox, dude.

Decide what you will. You are always welcome - because unlike you I DO value differences in opinion - but the suspense is NOT killing me.

Chrissy also all called for Saint Paulites to use mass transit instead of taking their cars to work. Does this mean that Chrissy will set the example by giving up his underground parking space at City Hall, his taxpayer-paid driver and the use of his car in order to take the bus to work?

Don't hold your breath for this to happen. Chrissy wants us to slog on the bus, taking our children to school and getting to work. But that stuff is not for him. No, no, no. He has important work to do, like signing important documents to make important statements, don't you know. You red-state wanabees will never understand.

Just another case of limousine liberals and their mantra: "Do as I say, not as I do."

Jack Bauer

P.S. PB should, BTW, hold his breath while waiting for Chrissy to take the bus to city hall. Oh, and PB, you stop calling Norm "Normy" and I'll stop calling Chris "Chrissy". How's that for reasoned dialogue?

Who caused that global warming that ended the Ice Age 10,000 years ago? Exxon?

The same thing that caused it between 900 and 1200 A.D. (C.E. for all you P.C. folks): Natural Cycles.

"Perhaps your job doing ergonomic analyses in Healthcare IT systems.. you know, not ACTUALLY working with patients, doctors, or clinicians of any sort (unlike your deceptive claim)"

Peeb?

You're wrong. I work with all of the above. Constantly.

In short, you're talking out your ass. You haven't the faintest clue what I do, and you're making it up as you go along.

Again.

Kermit, NO! It can't be! Surely it's a coincidence that Mars and Jupiter (and Triton and Pluto and ...) are all showing increased average temperatures at a time when the Sun's average output is increasing. (sarcasm off)

Can someone please explain, why you guys are so riled about reducing pollution? Is that such a despicable goal?

Also, to answer a question, "I missed the lecture in science class on how global warming can be localized to a single hemisphere." Global Warming (as the generic phrased is used), deals heavily with disrupting global weather "patterns," (for lack of a better word) - the disruptions of the jet stream and ocean currents, currents that keep England warm considering its relatively northern position.

Do Coleman's supporters really believe that the powers of the Mayor of St. Paul include the ability to alter global weather patterns?

"Can someone please explain, why you guys are so riled about reducing pollution?'

I'm not. I'm all for it.

However, much of what passes for "environmentalism" on the left has less to do with reducing pollution than attacking the free market.

Judging by history, only one thing causes a reduction in pollution, and does it precisely by making the environment a priority for everyone--higher than before. Wealth. Only wealthier countries have the extra time and the extra money to make their surroundings cleaner--to even worry about making their air and water cleaner. Poor countries have lots of other things to worry about. To support clean air and water, support education and free market capitalism. Then, in a democracy, the rest will take care of itself.

I would add to Mitch's last statement that what we get so "riled up about" on the subject is the blind acceptance that human activity is the cause. This is junk science.

Mitch said,

"much of what passes for "environmentalism" on the left has less to do with reducing pollution than attacking the free market."

But Mitch, what passes as "the free market" on the right has less to do with a free market than getting hand-outs, favors, exemptions, incentives, access to lawmakers to co-author legislation and buy and peddle influence.

I used to be a member of the Sierra Club, but somewhere in the 90s they went from being a nonpartisan environmental organization to just another wing of the Democratic party. The commitment to real environmental policy morfed into "activism" on a host of non-environmental issues when a set of leftists went in and took over the governing committee.

I still support a variety of environmental groups whose goal is really environmental improvement and support, but much of what passes for the "environmental movement" today is simply an antitechnology, antiprogress movement inspired by some very bad 60s-era sloganeering.

All that said, the ability of the Global Warming folks to justify the incredible cost of their crusade against something whose human cause is dubious is remarkably absent. Even at its best, the huge cost of Kyoto would do next to nothing to reduce Global Warming even by its proponents' estimates, while it would do an excellent job at demolishing the economies of those who actually would abide by it. It seems that it would be cheaper to mitigate the disruption of caused by Global Warming.

And today's Oscar for "Broadest Generalization" goes to...

[tympani roll]

...Doug, for "What Conservatives Want"!"

[Cut to clip]

"what passes as "the free market" on the right has less to do with a free market than getting hand-outs, favors, exemptions, incentives, access to lawmakers to co-author legislation and buy and peddle influence."

[Fanfare]

Mitch said,

"much of what passes for "environmentalism" on the left has less to do with reducing pollution than attacking the free market."

Yet he gives me the oscar for broadest generalization?

Thank you. I would just like to thank my mentor and role model Mitch for showing me the ropes. I couldn't have done it without your guidance.

God the irony...

Doug,

Buncombe.

Exhibit A: Kyoto. Entirely aimed at slowing down the capitalist west), to the benefit of the socialist/totalitarian third world and communist nations. Never mind that the West pollutes vastly *less* per unit of GDP than the rest of the world, and is actually in a position to *do* something about pollution, *because* of its wealth.

And yet it's precisely the thing thrown in conservatives' faces as an example of how we don't care about pollution!

Exhibit A: Kyoto. Entirely aimed at slowing down the capitalist west), to the benefit of the socialist/totalitarian third world and communist nations.

Mitch, do you really believe this or has the thorzine worn off?

I enjoy reading through your blog. KarlaX