Is the Washington Times moving in on the NY Times turf?
By Loadmaster Posted in Life Issues — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
This morning, as I do every morning, with cup of coffee in hand I sat down and start reading ALL the print, that's fit to print. As Rush calls it, show prep.
This morning at the Washingtontimes my eye caught an article by Stephen Dinan - "Green crusades lot of talk". As I started reading the article by jaw just fell open. Mr. Dinan was complaining that none of the presidential nominee's were doing enough to cover their "carbon footprint" for all their travel's to get elected. Here's the meat of Mr. Dinan article.
"Campaign finance records for 2007 show that neither of the two leading presidential candidates has spent money to independently cover his campaign's "carbon footprint" — the amount of carbon emissions emitted by the planes and vehicles the candidates and their staffs use for travel, or by the computers and headquarters needed to run a presidential campaign."
Is this not a hoot? Where did the Washington Times get this guy? Was their a trade made that I was not aware of? Kristol for this guy Stephen Dinan. I'm sorry I don't buy this "carbon footprint" offset BS.
With the so called "housing" default crisis, let add misery to the pain by making everyone send in a monthly payment to cover their "carbon footprint" for just living and breathing. This could be the hidden agenda behind Obama "Global Poverty Act". Don't these "poor" country's have a carbon footprint? Someone has got to pay - right?
One can only assume that the Washington Times has bought into this Al Gore "get rich" scheme and trying to increase/decrease their circulation. I don't know but this article really is off the charts. Here's a link to the entire article. Smile when you read it because "it's so silly".
http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080219/NATION/57...
Jaded - thanks for reminding me that the Wash Times had brought in a ringer to level the playing field in the Washington market. I've got to take them off my "favorite" list.

I cancelled my subscription....
Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion