Haven't seen any mention of former President Carter and his battle with Liver Cancer. Wish him and his Family the best but not looking good.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
Fair enough, but EVERYBODY involved in the climate debate should be investigated more.
I mean, are we really supposed to believe Al Gore?
What about the mining company that walked away and left this gigantic pool of toxic wast for someone else to worry about - what level of responsibility do you think they bare? Let's be clear the EPA didn't create these contaminates, their contractor was attempting to clean up the mess that was left. Negligence on the part of the contractor is a fair accusation but it's not like the government was purposely risking damage to the environment for some ulterior motive.
Agree, but if a private company had been paid to clean up the mess and did the exact same thing the EPA would crush them with fines to the point they would likely be put out of business. Who created the issue would be secondary and in no way would be an excusable defense in that case. Funny that they immediately use it to try to defend their screw up though.
If that mining company was in violation, hold them accountable.
The EPA didnt create the contaminates, but they released them. But for the EPAs negligence, these contaminates would not have been released into the environment. They should be held accountable as well. But theyre not.
Lols the mining company that walked away.....as in closed in 1928?
I'd make a joke about you wanting to tax/fine/jail the grandkids but I don't want to give you any ideas.
I'd make a joke about you wanting to tax/fine/jail the grandkids but I don't want to give you any ideas.
Mediaite
I agree. It needs to be addressed by people who are not influenced by corporations or personal gain. That's why I referenced people that I know in the scientific community. No one is paying them millions to show bias. Just looking at what we know and understand.
Once again: what the Christians need to do is a few high profile beheadings, and their image would mysteriously improve on the left......
Hey man, can you fix my quote to actually get my name right? -LEK- you forgot the dashes. TIA.
Johnson believes we need to cut spending by 43% across the board (including defense) to get the deficit under control, and while that is not going to happen any move in that direction would be good. Johnson also believes, unlike Rand Paul and a lot of Republicans who want to abolish it, that the EPA is a good program:
"When it comes to the environment, the Federal government’s responsibility is no different than in other aspects of our lives. It is simply to protect us from those who would do us harm and damage our property. There are bad actors who would pollute our water supplies and our air if allowed to do so, and we must have laws and regulations to protect innocent Americans from the harm those bad actors would do".
Dancing aside, 9% for any program for a Johnson supporter should be cool then. FYI 9 is way less than 43.
There is no movement to abolish the EPA, but it needs some accountability. Like the IRS, PP, NSA, VA, etc etc etc we continue to see the abuses of unchecked govt.
Your faith in the NSA was so outrageous FuzzyQ called you out on it...doesn't get much worse than that. I hope Johnson announces only to watch how you dance yourself out of this fake label for the next year+.
You really take it upon yourself to keep tabs on me, and that's fine.
And I do hope Johnson announces - I will promote him here if he does. Are you ready to say who your favorite is or are you playing that info close to the vest?
Al Gore For President
Supporters of Al Gore have begun a round of conversations among themselves and with the former vice president about his running for president in 2016, the latest sign that top Democrats have serious doubts that Hillary Clinton is a sure thing.
Gore, 67, won the popular vote in the 2000 election and has been mentioned as a possible candidate in every contested Democratic primary since then. He instead spent much of the 2000s focused on environmental campaigning and business ventures. He has largely slipped out of public view in more recent years.
But in recent days, “they’re getting the old gang together,” a senior Democrat told BuzzFeed News.
“They’re figuring out if there’s a path financially and politically,” the Democrat said. “It feels more real than it has in the past months.”
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczy...-out-if-theres-a-path-for-him-to-ru#.jt9vwVbx
I can just feel the excitement and the enthusiasm surging through Will4UK as he reads this!
Supporters of Al Gore have begun a round of conversations among themselves and with the former vice president about his running for president in 2016, the latest sign that top Democrats have serious doubts that Hillary Clinton is a sure thing.
Gore, 67, won the popular vote in the 2000 election and has been mentioned as a possible candidate in every contested Democratic primary since then. He instead spent much of the 2000s focused on environmental campaigning and business ventures. He has largely slipped out of public view in more recent years.
But in recent days, “they’re getting the old gang together,” a senior Democrat told BuzzFeed News.
“They’re figuring out if there’s a path financially and politically,” the Democrat said. “It feels more real than it has in the past months.”
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczy...-out-if-theres-a-path-for-him-to-ru#.jt9vwVbx
I can just feel the excitement and the enthusiasm surging through Will4UK as he reads this!
Not hard, it jumps out when someone declares themselves a polar opposite of thousands of their posts.
No pick yet, not terribly fond of any of them. Our process is so jacked and electorate so ignorant that it is virtually impossible to produce valid leaders.
Im suggesting people be fired. The organization be reeled in. Funding not be increased to bail them out of their mess.
Accountability.
It's pretty weak for you to sit there and pick apart my beliefs as they relate to my choice of a candidate when you refuse to say who you support, IMO.
It's an epidemic and it's spreading to every mall in the country:
I choose to believe he meant "soles" as in, our individual selves. it was an esoteric use of the term. Don't feel bad for misunderstanding.
You're out of your element, Donny. If the problem was overburdening, then the EPA could not "just amend their protocol and re-enact the same rules," because those rules would impose the same burden. The EPA did assess the cost to the coal industry - after it decided to regulate. The SCOTUS opinion found that putting the cart before the horse was improper (or more specifically, found the agency's interpretation unreasonable and not worth of Chevron deference). That's a problem with how the EPA issues regulations, not the burden it places on industry. It's a subtle, but significant, difference in administrative law. SCOTUS didn't say you can't do that, they said you can't do that in that way. The end result, as you've correctly noted, is that going forward the EPA will have to conduct a cost-benefit analysis before enacted regulations under this particular statute. But where the cost-benefit analysis is in favor of regulation (guess where this one comes out?) it has no change in what can be, and is, regulated.
Watching Democrats and Republicans argue over which party is worse is an interesting thing. Neither one realize they support a giant bag of flaming poo, and are convinced team lib or team con is going to save the world from the evil bastards on the other side of the aisle. They're more similar than either side would care to admit.
Truth is, no matter who wins, life will go on and every gloom and doom scenario posed by supporters of the team that doesn't hold the White House will come to pass. All the rhetoric will continue. Go blue team/Go red team will still divide us. All the while, these bastards in Washington keep doing whatever it takes to hold on to their seats while pocketing obscene amounts of campaign cash.
The easiest thing to do is quit giving these people money. The corporations who also are people are going to buy everything anyway.
Truth is, no matter who wins, life will go on and every gloom and doom scenario posed by supporters of the team that doesn't hold the White House will come to pass. All the rhetoric will continue. Go blue team/Go red team will still divide us. All the while, these bastards in Washington keep doing whatever it takes to hold on to their seats while pocketing obscene amounts of campaign cash.
The easiest thing to do is quit giving these people money. The corporations who also are people are going to buy everything anyway.
It was overturned because the cost/benefit analysis wasnt performed to assess the collateral financial consequences.
Theyll fix this defect, by having a meeting or period of comment where they consider said financial consequences. Then theyll enact the same rules anyway.
I dont see how thats so hard to understand. Its a pretty easy fix. But thats assuming youre willing to be objective, which remains to be seen considering your denial of every fact in this discussion.
Thought this was an interesting point, posted on a blog I read by "a journalist who wished to remain anonymous":
"WHAT NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT BUT WHAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO WORRY ABOUT
Hillary will be totally blackmail-able if elected. Here’s the logic:
1. It’s safe to say that there were things on that server which could cause Hillary tremendous harm politically – which is why she destroyed the evidence that would have been exculpatory if you believed her explanation. In my mind, it’s also why she used a private server to begin with.
2. She is lying about what was on that server, potentially to include while under oath in her upcoming congressional testimony.
3. If someone had all the copies of her emails and those of her staff, they could readily blackmail her because of the above. They’d have proof of her wrongdoing and her lying about it.
4. Hillary Clinton, as both a future Presidential candidate and a sitting Sec. of State would have been one of the Top 100 intelligence targets in the world and probably one of the top 10.
5. It’s thus certain that the Chinese and Russians would each have had a team focused on accessing her communications.
6. Every security expert I know of has said it’s a virtual certainty the Chinese and Russians both gained access to her server and all her emails. From what I know about their capabilities, I’d agree.
There are probably a bunch of folks in China and Russia who are praying (even if they’re atheists) for Hillary to be elected. If she wins, they own the President of the United States. I can just imagine in a meeting with Putin, Hillary being told to back off supporting Ukraine or he’ll release her emails (as he hands her a folder containing the most damaging ones for her to peruse). Put in that position, would Hillary fall on her sword or sacrifice a country like Ukraine? I don’t know, but I wouldn’t want to be living in Ukraine…
Someone with that kind of vulnerability to blackmail shouldn’t be allowed to sweep the floors of the NSA, much less run our country."
"WHAT NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT BUT WHAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO WORRY ABOUT
Hillary will be totally blackmail-able if elected. Here’s the logic:
1. It’s safe to say that there were things on that server which could cause Hillary tremendous harm politically – which is why she destroyed the evidence that would have been exculpatory if you believed her explanation. In my mind, it’s also why she used a private server to begin with.
2. She is lying about what was on that server, potentially to include while under oath in her upcoming congressional testimony.
3. If someone had all the copies of her emails and those of her staff, they could readily blackmail her because of the above. They’d have proof of her wrongdoing and her lying about it.
4. Hillary Clinton, as both a future Presidential candidate and a sitting Sec. of State would have been one of the Top 100 intelligence targets in the world and probably one of the top 10.
5. It’s thus certain that the Chinese and Russians would each have had a team focused on accessing her communications.
6. Every security expert I know of has said it’s a virtual certainty the Chinese and Russians both gained access to her server and all her emails. From what I know about their capabilities, I’d agree.
There are probably a bunch of folks in China and Russia who are praying (even if they’re atheists) for Hillary to be elected. If she wins, they own the President of the United States. I can just imagine in a meeting with Putin, Hillary being told to back off supporting Ukraine or he’ll release her emails (as he hands her a folder containing the most damaging ones for her to peruse). Put in that position, would Hillary fall on her sword or sacrifice a country like Ukraine? I don’t know, but I wouldn’t want to be living in Ukraine…
Someone with that kind of vulnerability to blackmail shouldn’t be allowed to sweep the floors of the NSA, much less run our country."
Putin: Are you sure you want to do that Hilary
[Hands her a folder containing pictures of her dick]
Hilary: You can have the Ukraine
[Hands her a folder containing pictures of her dick]
Hilary: You can have the Ukraine
If greed is a deal breaker for you then why in the hell are you a Republican?
That's a whole lot of "ifs and probablys" but one thing is certain and that is she used extraordinarily bad judgement in setting up this private server and using if for the most important communication the country engages in, and that alone makes her not a good choice to serve as president. We need someone in the Oval office that makes good decisions and doesn't jeopardize situations.
If she, by some miracle, wins the nomination, I hope Kasich is the Republican's choice as I could comfortably vote for him and sleep good at night.
Had the Pubs cut the EPA further, perhaps they wouldn't have been at the site to screw it up. Of course the EPA didn't produce the chemicals that were in a stable spot. They produce nothing but regulations.
You're right, at 90 he has nothing else to contribute to the world or look forward to as a human.
Maybe they just don't enjoy having their social security taken away to pay for Johnny Crackhead's medical insurance.
I'm not on either side of the aisle, but I can't see how anyone can be a fiscal liberal unless they don't want to work.
I agree with Liveblue. I don't associate myself with either Dem/Rep. Both have completely ran this country into the ground financially.
Not to mention that neither party represents anything close to what they originally did.
Not to mention that neither party represents anything close to what they originally did.
Similar threads
