ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Incredible, indeed. What is to be made of this, the leader of one of the largest material producers in the world, one with a industrial legacy with few comparisons making a visible public appearance in which the sentiment can be concluded: now that this regime is out of the picture, we expect the United States to reclaim a rightful and natural period of productivity, so much so that they will use our base products to produce many valuable and useful products of their own, possibly demanding our workforce to be increased by more than 25%, and resulting in subsequent increases in workforces as these high quality materials are implemented for damn good purposes by our customers and by theirs.

A long period of punishment is on the way for the unskilled and unwilling. If you are a young man approaching mid twenties who is lagging behind in preparation, whether through sloth or though the pursuit of academia with average or sub-average reward, you may soon find yourself regretting these years. Soon you will have friends with skills as electricians, pipe-fitters, millwrights, heavy equipment operators, etc. with nothing to do for the next decade and one-half but work, work, work, work, etc. . . the most important period of their lives (30s) will be enriched by an over-abundance of opportunity. I've known crane operators who made a quarter million in a year and took most of the fall and winter off to hunt and fish. not necessarily recently.

It is a woefully misguided generation on the rise, and it extends to persons now in their late 20s. Made to believe that success will be ensured if they comply with a popular set of beliefs or, better stated, "feelings". This catastrophic occurrence - Obama - has provided zero opportunities. He promoted this guilt tactic of "their fair share". Now, so many of this "deplorable" generation is left relegated with two choices: (1) to reject or (2) to develop a permanent sense of hostility toward separating persons from within their own generation as they steadily seize new opportunities and make choices to believe in themselves, and demand the right to do for themselves.

Excellent post, thanks for taking the time to write/post it. Am trying to decide whether or not to send it to my two daughters, 18-20 years of age.
 
I just really hope Trump doesn't blow this. He has an opportunity to be a very good POTUS.

It's going to be hilarious listening to the lefties try to spin how the jumpstart to the economy is actually due to Obama's policies finally kicking in after 8 years of blaming Bush for everything.
Imagine that: a non-politician being the best POTUS in decades.

Hope it happens and helps to put an end to career politicians.
 
Someone should ask Obama if the Russians are still "NOT A THREAT".

According to his own party, they cost them the election.
 
Un-fking believable. Woman is so decimated about Trump's victory that she decides she can't date anymore, and then feels compelled to share her pain with the rest of the World.

At what point will these people start looking into the mirror?

There is no room for dating in this place of grief. Dating means hope. I’ve lost that hope in seeing the words “President-elect Trump.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...or-a-partner/?utm_term=.86cf648dc26b#comments

stephanieland.png
 
Read that Foxs ratings have jumped through the roof since Tucker was hired. Damn, hes awesome. I've always liked him, but I didn't expect that he would be destroying libs like that in that fashion.
He was getting pretty rough on Schiff and told him he was using "weasel words". His popularity has emboldened him already and I think he will only become more fun as time goes on. Would love to see him get Joe Biden on there. Oh the things we would learn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: screwduke1
Would be problematic from a food security standpoint.

how so? Californians need those products also, not to mention if they actually intend to make a go of being independent they will most urgently need to use those domestic resources as bargaining chips, for "international" trade. Or perhaps you are meaning to infer that San Joaquin valley agriculture is dependent on Colorado river aqueduct supply. This is not the case, as that region of the state is supplied differently, by other resources, drainage patterns, natural run-offs, etc.

Still, would agricultural products from California become less available? Likely, but if you look at the waistline of our population exactly how much less do you think that would have to be before it ever became an legit problem?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: warrior-cat
Un-fking believable. Woman is so decimated about Trump's victory that she decides she can't date anymore, and then feels compelled to share her pain with the rest of the World.

At what point will these people start looking into the mirror?

There is no room for dating in this place of grief. Dating means hope. I’ve lost that hope in seeing the words “President-elect Trump.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...or-a-partner/?utm_term=.86cf648dc26b#comments

stephanieland.png

In other words, "until somebody like Obama or Hillary Clinton is back in office, I refuse to participate in the breeding process." GREATEST NEWS EVER! MAXIMUM VICTORY ACHIEVED!
 
A fairly simple article that hits the nail on the head with what's going on in our country. And key Dems starting to come to terms with reality. Or, at least some of them.

http://nypost.com/2016/12/07/even-anti-trump-working-class-voters-are-having-second-thoughts/


INDIANAPOLIS — Robert James stood outside the Carrier plant just before the president-elect addressed workers at the refrigeration and heating assembly plant.

“I feel a great swing of emotions that go from disbelief to satisfaction that this is happening in our community. An area like this can go from a stable middle-class area to foreclosures and urban blight in the blink of an eye,” he said.

James would never dream of voting Republican: “For all of my life the Democrats have been the party of the working guy, had my back. But if I am being really honest, and this is tough to admit, but I can’t remember the last time they did anything to improve the dignity and value of my job” — a point that didn’t really crystalize for him until it became personal: Until his job was saved. By a Republican.

James, wearing a United Steelworkers jacket on that brisk afternoon, was in no way saying he’s found political religion in the Republicans. But the 57-year-old, African-American longtime Carrier employee did share the sentiment of many of his fellow co-workers, Democrats who didn’t vote for Trump but felt their party was disconnected from their lives.
 
Un-fking believable. Woman is so decimated about Trump's victory that she decides she can't date anymore, and then feels compelled to share her pain with the rest of the World.

At what point will these people start looking into the mirror?

There is no room for dating in this place of grief. Dating means hope. I’ve lost that hope in seeing the words “President-elect Trump.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...or-a-partner/?utm_term=.86cf648dc26b#comments

stephanieland.png

I’ve lost the desire to attempt the courtship phase. The future is uncertain. I am not the optimistic person I was on the morning of Nov. 8, wearing a T-shirt with “Nasty Woman” written inside a red heart.

[roll]
 
  • Like
Reactions: YourPublicEnemy
It was hard to find the fake news that shined a dim light on Hillary. You had to look for it. Meanwhile, Trump was vilified at every turn by our msm and accused of multiple rapes and sexual assaults. He was said to be a friend of Putin and have Russian ties and business interests. His wife was drug through the mud and I believe I read a story that insinuated that she may be a Russian spy. Where are the rape cases now? Why didn't these women follow up on their claims? We've known for years now where "fake news" originated. It was long before there was any such thing as the internet. It started when someone realized they could put pen to paper and sway the thoughts and opinions of others.
 
AG Scott Pruitt head of the EPA. I love it. I know coal won't come back like it was, but it's future can be greatly improved and I think Trump and Pruitt will do it.

All these military guys, people with a backbone that you can count on, great choices. I can't remember when I have been more proud to be an American. Go Trump. Go Cats.

Agree on Tucker, he's great. You could tell that liberal chick wanted to claw his eyes out.
 
Un-fking believable. Woman is so decimated about Trump's victory that she decides she can't date anymore, and then feels compelled to share her pain with the rest of the World.

At what point will these people start looking into the mirror?

There is no room for dating in this place of grief. Dating means hope. I’ve lost that hope in seeing the words “President-elect Trump.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...or-a-partner/?utm_term=.86cf648dc26b#comments

stephanieland.png
Prediction: no change.
 
Yeah, Scott Pruitt was a direct F You to O'bama.

I'm all for clean air and water, as a child of the 60's I remember how bad the air was in Louisville, but the EPA overreached its authority many years ago. Too many regulations that do more fiscal harm than environmental good.

Good to see that actual science and not consensus science will be the order of the day going forward. DiCaprio can now fly all over the world in his private jet and motor around in his diesel powered yacht to warn us all of the dangers of burning fossil fuels with a renewed vigor. Congratulations Leo.
 
Tucker has to be careful how hard he smacks the Dems around. Part of why the media wants everyone to be PC and play nice is because it's how they have to operate to get the most controversial interviews to want to come back.

You burn some bridges and get a rep as to rough and Dems will never give him the time of day and at that point he is just a talking head.
 
In other words, "until somebody like Obama or Hillary Clinton is back in office, I refuse to participate in the breeding process." GREATEST NEWS EVER! MAXIMUM VICTORY ACHIEVED!
[banana]:cool2::smiley::okay:[thumb2]:clap:[cheers] Let the celebrations begin. Hopefully, Cardkilla, Albany and a few others on here follow her lead.
 
Tucker has to be careful how hard he smacks the Dems around. Part of why the media wants everyone to be PC and play nice is because it's how they have to operate to get the most controversial interviews to want to come back.

You burn some bridges and get a rep as to rough and Dems will never give him the time of day and at that point he is just a talking head.
I know what you're saying. Might be a while before he gets another congressman to come on his show. They can't afford for people to see how duplicitous they really are. Folks like that chick will still line up though. They come about their duplicity the honest way, they're just dumbasses who actually believe they're right.
 
He was getting pretty rough on Schiff and told him he was using "weasel words". His popularity has emboldened him already and I think he will only become more fun as time goes on. Would love to see him get Joe Biden on there. Oh the things we would learn.
When Meghan Kelly jumps ship and shows her true colors I think they move Tucker to the 9 spot. Kelly has become unbearable. She goes after both sides, but her "feminist" spin recently going after Aires and Hannity/Orielly has shined her in a negative light. Not to mention her piggy backing Trump to increase her popularity.
 
Looks like Puzder will be the labor pick. Libs going crazy because he's against the notion of a $15 minimum wage.

Good.
 
Yeah, Scott Pruitt was a direct F You to O'bama.

I'm all for clean air and water, as a child of the 60's I remember how bad the air was in Louisville, but the EPA overreached its authority many years ago. Too many regulations that do more fiscal harm than environmental good.


Coming from an occupational health professional perspective I'm not sure most people really understand how important clean air and water are to the overall health of individuals and additionally the cost impact that pollution creates. I could cite estimated health costs of polluted air and water all day but I know no one here is that interested... Does the EPA have some specific regulations that are not effective and are overly burdensome to business, perhaps, and if so they should be dropped. However, do you want someone to take away legitimate protections just based on what the gas and coal companies want? For instance, to get around the clean water act, which did not allow companies to dump into navigable rivers and streams, companies started dumping into smaller streams or ditches that lead into the navigable rivers and streams. A new regulation was issued recently that stopped this practice. This is a regulation that the industry/Pruitt is trying to fight. The regulation increases costs for business but decreases health costs and the cost to things like the fishing/tourist industry which are greatly affected by pollution. Where does the increased health care costs land?.... The taxpayer. As with everything a balance should be struck and I hope this is not all about business and the health and welfare of the taxpayer is given priority.
 
I agree with yall saying Tucker should get the 9pm spot. If Fox wants to stick with a female, they could go save Tomi Lahren from that nutjob Glenn Beck. Shes basically a female Tucker, and shes hot as f***. Either one of those two would be great picks for the 9pm slot IMO.
 
I could cite estimated health costs of polluted air and water all day but I know no one here is that interested...

True, no one here is interested. Especially the "estimated" costs as we are all to familiar with how certain self-interested parties either make up and/or inflate numbers. Such as the following, which is actually true:

"the cost of kangaroo flatulence could be upwards of $47 billion a year"

Key words, "could be." Well, yes--it could be. But it's probably more like $3.54/year. But it could be the higher number which makes the sentence true.
 
True, no one here is interested. Especially the "estimated" costs as we are all to familiar with how certain self-interested parties either make up and/or inflate numbers. Such as the following, which is actually true:

"the cost of kangaroo flatulence could be upwards of $47 billion a year"

Key words, "could be." Well, yes--it could be. But it's probably more like $3.54/year. But it could be the higher number which makes the sentence true.

I'm not sure about Kangaroo flatulence but extrapolation of the increase incidents of respiratory related hospital visits near power plants or polluted areas versus the incidents where the air/water is tested and not as polluted certainly seems a little easier to estimate. For instance, if a lake is polluted and there is an increase in hospital visits related to water born disease. You may remember a couple of years ago there were blooms of algae on Lake Erie which were related to farm run off. This caused businesses in that area to close costing approx.3-4 million in just one weekend (just a small example). So while I'll agree that there are most likely some conflated figures there are also fairly concrete figures to support clean air and clean water.
 
I'm not sure about Kangaroo flatulence but extrapolation of the increase incidents of respiratory related hospital visits near power plants or polluted areas versus the incidents where the air/water is tested and not as polluted certainly seems a little easier to estimate. For instance, if a lake is polluted and there is an increase in hospital visits related to water born disease. You may remember a couple of years ago there were blooms of algae on Lake Erie which were related to farm run off. This caused businesses in that area to close costing approx.3-4 million in just one weekend (just a small example). So while I'll agree that there are most likely some conflated figures there are also fairly concrete figures to support clean air and clean water.

nkyphatcat, I'm not trying to be a dick and this isn't personal. But....look at the bolded words in your reply and try to understand why so many people no longer put a lot of faith in "estimated" numbers supplied by self-interested parties. Just way too many instances of falsified reporting, extreme extrapolations, ifs, buts, etc.

No one wants to pollute our lakes, rivers and oceans. No one wants to senselessly harm animals or ourselves. But some degree of reason has to be applied and that's not happened in the last 8 years.

And as Rahm Emmanuel so famously said, "F'em, we got the votes"
 
I'm not sure about Kangaroo flatulence but extrapolation of the increase incidents of respiratory related hospital visits near power plants or polluted areas versus the incidents where the air/water is tested and not as polluted certainly seems a little easier to estimate. For instance, if a lake is polluted and there is an increase in hospital visits related to water born disease. You may remember a couple of years ago there were blooms of algae on Lake Erie which were related to farm run off. This caused businesses in that area to close costing approx.3-4 million in just one weekend (just a small example). So while I'll agree that there are most likely some conflated figures there are also fairly concrete figures to support clean air and clean water.

LMAO
 
Coming from an occupational health professional perspective I'm not sure most people really understand how important clean air and water are to the overall health of individuals and additionally the cost impact that pollution creates.

We are aware that clean air and water are important. Show us where someone advocates for dirty air and water.


I could cite estimated health costs of polluted air and water all day but I know no one here is that interested...

Not because you're not interesting though, it's because we are all capable of making up our own numbers.


Does the EPA have some specific regulations that are not effective and are overly burdensome to business, perhaps, and if so they should be dropped. However, do you want someone to take away legitimate protections just based on what the gas and coal companies want? For instance, to get around the clean water act, which did not allow companies to dump into navigable rivers and streams, companies started dumping into smaller streams or ditches that lead into the navigable rivers and streams. A new regulation was issued recently that stopped this practice.

Go ahead and cite one of these instances that wasn't an accidental spill.

This is a regulation that the industry/Pruitt is trying to fight.

Cite this as well.

The regulation increases costs for business but decreases health costs and the cost to things like the fishing/tourist industry which are greatly affected by pollution. Where does the increased health care costs land?.... The taxpayer. As with everything a balance should be struck and I hope this is not all about business and the health and welfare of the taxpayer is given priority.

I'm not sure about Kangaroo flatulence but extrapolation of the increase incidents of respiratory related hospital visits near power plants or polluted areas versus the incidents where the air/water is tested and not as polluted certainly seems a little easier to estimate.

Do you also estimate the life habits of people who are fortunate enough to live next to a power plant or polluted areas? What is their educational level? How many smoke in the home? What is their diet? Who do you compare them to, to say there is an increase in incidents?


For instance, if a lake is polluted and there is an increase in hospital visits related to water born disease. You may remember a couple of years ago there were blooms of algae on Lake Erie which were related to farm run off. This caused businesses in that area to close costing approx.3-4 million in just one weekend (just a small example). So while I'll agree that there are most likely some conflated figures there are also fairly concrete figures to support clean air and clean water.

Do you honestly believe Pruitt doesn't support clean air and water? He is against the EPA enacting rules that are essentially laws and bypassing congress to do so. Argue the argument at hand and don't create a different argument based on your own parameters and metrics.
 
Coming from an occupational health professional perspective I'm not sure most people really understand how important clean air and water are to the overall health of individuals and additionally the cost impact that pollution creates. I could cite estimated health costs of polluted air and water all day but I know no one here is that interested... Does the EPA have some specific regulations that are not effective and are overly burdensome to business, perhaps, and if so they should be dropped. However, do you want someone to take away legitimate protections just based on what the gas and coal companies want? For instance, to get around the clean water act, which did not allow companies to dump into navigable rivers and streams, companies started dumping into smaller streams or ditches that lead into the navigable rivers and streams. A new regulation was issued recently that stopped this practice. This is a regulation that the industry/Pruitt is trying to fight. The regulation increases costs for business but decreases health costs and the cost to things like the fishing/tourist industry which are greatly affected by pollution. Where does the increased health care costs land?.... The taxpayer. As with everything a balance should be struck and I hope this is not all about business and the health and welfare of the taxpayer is given priority.


Nobody is saying dump ALL regulations. But EPA making ranchers spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to monitor cow farts is a bit extreme. And that is just one example, take off your Liberal shades and few the world with common sense for once.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT