packsaddle Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Well I read the whole thing and I saw nothing technical in it. It seems understandable to the lay person. Gold Winger's estimation of the intellect of the average Congressman must be a lot lower than mine. But what I don't get is why those parts were cut. They deal mostly with planning and response and don't seem at all controversial unless someone thinks the climate is NOT changing at all. Maybe there was simply a 1500 word limit for the written testimony? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Winger Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Watch C-Span and your opinion drop just like mine. Oh, they are smart but in lawyer-politician way. The questions that they ask after listening to testimony can be soooo stupid ("What do you mean by an "atom"?) and they spend much of their time chatting with their aides and waiting to pounce with their own questins. Maybe we need a system like they had on Krypton but they didn't listen either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packsaddle Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Heh, heh, and we know what happened to Krypton.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now