There seems to be the trend of blaming Bush for transportation issues. Madison Mayor Dave implied back in 2005 that since the government billions on wars (ie Bush), a financially poor investment in the Madison trolley car should be funded. Now, lefties are bashing Bush for the I35W bridge implosion because funding the Iraq War is taking away from funding domestic transportation needs. Poor logic anyone?
Are the hard questions being asked in terms of the possible costs and benefits of climate change rather than just the rhetoric of "renewable energy", "junk science", "global warming", etc. Has anyone thought about the costs of reducing carbon emissions by 80% in the US as some groups are suggesting or what are the costs to low-lying Pacific islands if sea levels do rise by 5-10 feet?
Equating a church's core beliefs to a church member's political beliefs makes absolutely no sense. It would be like saying the Missouri Synod Church believes in helping the poor so I (Tim Schulz) should believe that the US National Government should be helping the poor...this is absolutely what conservative commentator Jan Mickelson suggests in his interview with Mitt Romney on abortion. Pathetic.
When I've asked two completely unrelated self described "very liberal" friends, what issue they are the most conservative (or least liberal) on, they say answered both "abortion". Not that I disagree with them on this issue but this adds to the data of how completely statist our generation is.
Don't underestimate the peaceful and unconstrained effects of a morning walking commute. Pure bliss.