Is she going to replace Stu? 

What was she talking about, all I remember is wind blown hair swirling…

(LOL just kidding, but maybe the younger males might listen a little more, but I am sure that some women would not listen regularly simply because she was pretty.)  But I must say that it is Very Unattractive for her to Mention Al Gore, but that would go for Any Woman Out There!!!

Can we keep her?  Please?

continue on please….

I sure hope that she is being paid fairly…workplace…unfair…labor…pay…and all of that….

     Her monologue grabbed me about a thousand times tighter than Obamass state of the Union address .  NUFF SAID  ! 

She’s adorable…reminds me of my granddaughter.

you had me at “I’d like to think that if I didnt dress…”

Maybe, just maybe, if she gave that presentation in front of the scientists who threaten the world with global warming, they would listen to some logic. Nah, most of thse scientists are tooObama’s teleprompter messages.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…no. 

This works 1000%
Because I will listen to her till my ears fall off and what ever she says has got to be true but that is a true example of a war on women so I say go for it and see 

LOL, had to watch twice to get the numbers she was talking about.  Well, at least part of them.

I was dubious, but dang! You were right, it WAS more interesting to have it spoken by a hot girl. 

I find it amusing that the word “beautiful” seems to, more often than not, be used for a blonde. And more often than that, it seems to always be a fake or overlightened blonde. I swear, it’s an epidemic.

Conservative women have always been and will always be much more attractive than any on the liberal progressive end of the spectrum.  Being that way just improves their outlook on life. 

That was soooo confusing…. Girl talking statistics, numbers, fractions. I couldn’t concentrate. Ouch

She is right about what she said.

I’m in tears!  The is the BEST!  Irony, juxtaposition, satire, science, sexy, effects, etc etc execution!  LMAO!

What did she say?

Glenn, make this a regular feature of your show.

Get this on You tube and all of the other new media sites that the ignorant Obamacolytes love.  this  should go “viral” and be followed up by a series of short (bear in mind the limited attention span of your target audience) clips.  Another suggestion: scroll links to websites documenting the factuality of the statements made by the babe.  Yet another suggestion: Do a version of these with a barechested macho man for the low-information female voters.

why would you rant against more eco-friendly cars? What kind of person takes an impassioned stand against vehicles trying to conserve the environment?!

why would you rant against more eco-friendly cars? What kind of person takes an impassioned stand against vehicles trying to conserve the environment?!

Very very nice girl–.

Because they really DON’T save the planet … yet.  Yes, we have been working on problem solvers for the last several decades, but haven’t improved very much.  Yes, we need to continue to try to replace fossil fuels … eventually, but not at the expense of the hard working tax payer. No, we are not contributing to global climate change (with the exception of liberals hot gasses).  Yes, our own Sun and Planet are the causes with solar heating, volcanoes, geothermal zones and wars/nuclear testing.  But, hey, we need to keep all of those PhD environmental scientist jobs so they won’t be at the corner greasy spoon flipping burgers.  Besides, the progressives need this issue to be able to complete the takeover of the USA and world with their commie beliefs.  Just ask old George Soros and his minions.

Because they really DON’T save the planet … yet.  Yes, we have been working on problem solvers for the last several decades, but haven’t improved very much.  Yes, we need to continue to try to replace fossil fuels … eventually, but not at the expense of the hard working tax payer. No, we are not contributing to global climate change (with the exception of liberals hot gasses).  Yes, our own Sun and Planet are the causes with solar heating, volcanoes, geothermal zones and wars/nuclear testing.  But, hey, we need to keep all of those PhD environmental scientist jobs so they won’t be at the corner greasy spoon flipping burgers.  Besides, the progressives need this issue to be able to complete the takeover of the USA and world with their commie beliefs.  Just ask old George Soros and his minions.

Party like its 1985! lol

The projected reductions are small relative to the change in temperature (1.8 – 4.8 ºC) and sea level rise (27 – 51 cm) from 1990 to 2100 from the MAGICC simulations for the GCAM reference case. However, this is to be expected given the magnitude of emissions reductions expected from the program in the context of global emissions. This is also taken from the document sited pg 8-109 http://www.nhtsa.gov/search?q=hybrid fuel efficiency&spell=1&site=nhthqnlas187_Pages&client=default_frontend&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&access=p

is the website for NHTSA or National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

search : ” hybrid fuel efficiency”

open pdf entitles, “final Rulemaking to Establish Green house Gas Emissions”

go to page 8-107

compare with http://www.nhtsa.gov/search?q=hybrid fuel efficiency&spell=1&site=nhthqnlas187_Pages&client=default_frontend&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&access=pWhich seems to suggest that the decress in emmisions under this program from now until then would result in the ‘low’ changes.What say you?

this is so fucking lame

Another vulgar Libtard puke.