He would flay Charlie Sykes for bastardizing discussion about anthropogenic global warming by telling his listeners that AGW is a "hoax"; that a coldsnap disproves AGW; that cow farts are an equivalent issue; that Copenhagen symps in Milwaukee are hypocritical by burning candles; that they are in fact "morons"; for saying the EPA will come for oxygen after it targets oxygen; basically for saying half the climagitprop he says on every show.
Instead Ese -- who is at pains not to deny the probability of AGW -- spends most of his timedebating this guy illusory tenant, who's routinely read by ... let's say fewer people than listen to Charlie Sykes.
I get that both Sykes and Ese are ideological companeros and may even knock back flagons of pinot noir at their respective tree-lined Mequon estates. But, I don't know, maybe the Reddess could call bullshit on Charlie the next time she calls in?
Generally speaking, the Brawler agrees with iT ... except iT has overl, perhapes dangerously, generous views of post 1973 albums by Lou Reed.
Perhaps you can help me promote the concept of the Esenberg Standard Contradictory Disclaimer™. It's the way every one of his posts contains a sentence or two that completely and utterly contradict everything else he's saying. I think his brain inserts them as a way to always cover his butt. We'll never be able to make definitive statements without him being able to point at the Standard Contradictory Disclaimer™ to claim that he indeed holds a view similar to his critics, and therefore in some small way, he is actually quite moderate in his views and that the rest of his argument must be right.
Posted by: John Foust | December 15, 2009 at 12:58 PM