?

My question is: what specific dissenting scientific arguments did you feel played the biggest role in trumping the findings of the rest of the scientific community in your deciding that man made global climate change is not occurring? I have read the dissenting arguments extensively, and then researched the studies done that counter those dissenting views, and have found the dissenting views are soundly refuted. I am lead to wonder if folks actually have scientific reasons (as opposed to political reasons) to disagree with the well researched scientific findings of climate scientists. Thank you.

Defamation cases, especially ones against celebrities, are notoriously difficult to win. Ventura won handily. Does this bother American Sniper fans in the least? Having read all I could find about the case, it seems the only reason we are even talking about Chris Kyle is because of the publicity spike his book received after outing the identity of Ventura in his book, and the ensuring movie deal that followed. With the increased sales of the book (now with the infamous Ventura references that brought secured its success removed) following the films quarter of a billion dollar box office sales - in the first month alone - it would seem the Kyle estate looks to be making untold tens of millions of dollars all due to what a federal court has deemed a lie... and yet the court of public opinion has vilified Ventura, siding largely with Kyle's story (a proven falsification). Ventura's views certainly place him outside of the norm for most people, but how does he even remotely deserve such treatment? Kyle's widow has been made to be the victim in the situation, yet the wealth she stands to own inherit is immense - wealth triggered by what has been proven to be a falsehood.

How does that not sully Kyle's hero status? People are fawning over the guy at the moment, when several glaring indicators point to him being an incredibly dishonest opportunist, off the battlefield.

From the first time I heard the quip about good dancers being good in bed, I've wondered just how true that is. I am a third generation drummer, so keeping the beat has been second nature to me since as far back as I can remember. In the past few years I' ve worked with experimental musicians whose fields didn't require the same type of locked in groove regular music does, and they reminded me of the old adage of good dancers being good lovers...

I know this is a personal question, but given the anonymity of the internet, i am hoping some of you would be open to sharing your thoughts and experiences. Thanks in advance!

... why were a record number of filibusters filled those two years by Republicans?-

How/why does one file a filibuster against a filibuster proof super majority?

...and this is why: The Tea Party, the Birthers, the obstructionists in Congress, Fox "News",

Karl Rove, the Koch brothers... the list goes one...

Look, the guy inherited the worst economy since the great depression, brought on DIRECTLY

by many of the choices made by the previous administration. This right wing held belief that

no one is supposed to even reference that is ABSOLUTE INSANITY and utterly devoid of any

meaningful explanation. Yet, from the day one Obama was attacked attacked attacked. ANYTHING

he did in hopes of helping the economy was immediately lampooned by the right. Sorry, guys,

you had your cake, ate it and sent country the bill, the least you could do is take a step back

and allow the man to clean up your mess. I feel like the country has been slipped crazy pills by the

right. I am all for checks and balances of power, but the kind of obstructionism we've seen these

past four years in the face of the problems that need to be fixed has been sickening to watch.

That said, my question is for all Democrats/Obama supporters:

is it even worth re-electing the man? What chance would he have accomplishing ANYTHING given

the ever increasingly intense and hostile environment fostered against him? The Republicans have shown time and again they have no shame in placing their party before our country. I don't necessarily see this view as defeatist so much as a real politik take on the brazen bullying the country as a whole receives from a political party whose central goal seems to be to make us all say "uncle".

Thank you.

Romney repeats the refrain "this is the slowest recovery since the Great Depression" in regards to

the economy under Obama - I find this line of reasoning wanting for a number of reasons:

1) This would technically be the first great recovery of equal size since the Great Depression, so it being the slowest is the same as it being the fastest in that it is the only one of relative size to compare with it.

2) The country was losing 750k+ jobs a month at the beginning of Obama's term, NOTHING short of a miracle would turn that around on a dime.

3) While there is plenty of blame to go around for Congresses lack of action, all of it is placed on Obama when the Republicans uniformly and repeatedly blocked job creation bills by unanimous votes.

Having your cake and eating it doesn't rebuild the economy, fellas.

4) Why wouldn't a gradual recovery be preferable to a quick bounce back?

...other then saying "no it didn't" or "milk before meat" or "you're an apostate, what do you know?".

This is a glaring red flag in my understanding of how the LDS church was established. How could Joesph Smith claim this to be the most correct book ever written if even a single aspect of it was in question, much less this very important, and easily verifiable, charge of plagiarism?